|
|
|
Jewish World Review July 15, 2011 / 13 Tamuz, 5771 Goings On By Greg Crosby
Item number one: Reporting on the death of former first lady Betty Ford last week it was both enlightening and typical to read the slant that the newspapers took. "Outspoken first lady admired for openness," read one headline. The first sentence in the story began, "Betty Ford said things that first ladies just don't say, even today. And 1970's America loved her for it." In the view of the press that was what made her soooo lovable. And what did she say that the media found so very adorable? Back in the 70's Mrs. Ford said her young children probably had smoked marijuana and if she were their age, she'd try it too. In an interview on "60 Minutes" she said she wouldn't be surprised to learn that her youngest, 18 year-old Susan, was in a sexual relationship (this statement so embarrassed the daughter that she issued a denial). Mrs. Ford commented that living together before marriage might be wise; she thought women should be drafted into the military if men were; and she spoke up strongly for abortion rights and was an ardent supporter of the Equal Rights Amendment. She also was a backer for federal funding of the performing arts. No wonder the media loved her! She was espousing all the liberal causes that they believe in, and what made it even more delicious - she was taking positions that conflicted with those of her husband. Oh, man! Isn't she great? I really don't mind the headline on that obit; I just wish they had finished the sentence. The headline should have read, "Outspoken first lady admired for openness…by the media." Next item: The headline reads, "Texas Governor defends execution of Mexican." Well, there you go…just another racist Texan out to kill a poor Mexican, right? Hmmm, not exactly. If you read the story and not just the headline you find out that to begin with, the Mexican was in this country illegally. Oh, and another little thing, the Mexican was arrested and convicted of murdering a San Antonio teenager. "If you commit the most heinous of crimes in Texas, you can expect to face the ultimate penalty under our laws," Perry's spokeswoman said. That sounds reasonable to me. So the convicted murderer was put to death - the end, right? No, that's not the end of the story. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, along with that esteemed humanitarian assemblage, the United Nations, sided with the killer's lawyers who claim he was not informed that he could have sought help from the Mexican government. What? Excuse me, but if that's true, then why didn't the murderer's lawyers inform him of that information themselves at trial? And by the way, if Mexico lets its murderers sneak into this country illegally and kill people, we have every right to give them a fair trial, and if found guilty, execute them. Period. Once again, the headline wasn't completed. It should have read: "Governor defends execution of Mexican Murderer." Item three: Just what the people of California need most; another tax increase (excuse me, I mean fee). Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a $150 annual "wildfire protection fee" for property owners in rural areas of the state. The fee is supposed to generate $50 million in the first year and another $200 million annually in the future. That's nice. People have less money to spend, prices are up on most necessities, unemployment is up, and Brown implements yet another "fee." This "fee" is one of two fees the Legislature's Democratic majority approved as part of the state budget. The other one is a $12 hike to the vehicle registration fee. By the way, these fees have been imposed without the two-thirds vote required for tax increases. That's how they get around the law, you see, by simply calling a tax, a "fee." Thanks, guys. I'm sure you can cure California's economic problems if you just implement enough "fees." Gripe number four: In its war on incandescent light bulbs, the federal government's Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the following when asked for his response to the millions of Americans who don't want to be forced to buy the more expensive fluorescent, halogen, and LED alternatives; "We are taking away a choice that continues to let people waste their own money." There you go, that's the liberal mentality. What he's saying in essence is, "you people are too stupid to make the right choices, so we at the government will make those choices for you." Then it becomes, you people are too stupid to choose the right food to eat, so the government will tell you what you can eat. We'll determine how you can heat your homes, we'll determine how much you should weigh, where you can smoke, if at all, what surgeries you are allowed to have, on and on. It doesn't stop until the nanny state takes over our entire lives. I've got much more to grouse about, but I've run out of space. Lucky you.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
© 2008, Greg Crosby |
Arnold Ahlert | |||||||||||||
