I was dismayed to hear that Rush Limbaugh was taken to the hospital with chest pains. However, with all of the medical advances with heart problems (if that is the diagnosis), I hope that he will be out and back with his show soon. I have been listening to his guests hosts (I love Mark Steyn) and while they are good, there is no substitute for Rush.
Update: Rush had an angiogram yesterday and nothing was found to be wrong with his heart. Hopefully, he'll be back at work soon.
Do blogs drive public perception of a business?
You bet they do. A reader emailed me a post on social media and reputation management that featured my post entitled, "All Men are Pigs" that discussed my negative experience at a health food store. The former post makes clear how important it is for businesses to monitor their online reputation:
I must say that I have been very impressed with some of the social media people who have stopped by here and other blogs to comment and offer help or apologies. For example, I just wrote about my experience with Comcast and heard from their Customer Service Center in the comments. I emailed Melissa Mendoza to tell her my complaints and she said she would have someone call me from the local Comcast office to see what can be done. My phone rang and a professional Comcast customer service person listened to my complaints but said that I would have to pay the extra charges, downgrade my service, or bundle all my services together to get a reduction in price. Nice gesture, but nothing was accomplished.
Perhaps bloggers should offer more praise when things go right with businesses. For example, my local Walgreens was awesome today in helping me to get the drug Tikosyn that I take for my heart rhythm problems, even though there is a shortage currently. They called me promptly when there was a problem and helped to resolve it.
Do you think that it is important that businesses monitor their online reputation and respond to bloggers and readers who criticize them?
An online dialogue about your goods, services or business practices can be the sharpest of double-edged swords: everyone�s either a critic or an advocate. But mostly a critic. When�s the last time you blogged about how glad you are that your morning soda wasn�t stale, or that your roof didn�t cave in today? After all, we�re more likely to tickle a keyboard in frustration than praise. It�s human nature. And due to the social networking explosion, there�s a lot of human nature out there for your current and prospective clients to see. If William Congreve thought scorned women were bad news, he would have been even more disturbed by what a disgruntled customer can do to a business� reputation over the Internet.
Which begs, nay screams, the question: are you managing your online reputation?
I must say that I have been very impressed with some of the social media people who have stopped by here and other blogs to comment and offer help or apologies. For example, I just wrote about my experience with Comcast and heard from their Customer Service Center in the comments. I emailed Melissa Mendoza to tell her my complaints and she said she would have someone call me from the local Comcast office to see what can be done. My phone rang and a professional Comcast customer service person listened to my complaints but said that I would have to pay the extra charges, downgrade my service, or bundle all my services together to get a reduction in price. Nice gesture, but nothing was accomplished.
Perhaps bloggers should offer more praise when things go right with businesses. For example, my local Walgreens was awesome today in helping me to get the drug Tikosyn that I take for my heart rhythm problems, even though there is a shortage currently. They called me promptly when there was a problem and helped to resolve it.
Do you think that it is important that businesses monitor their online reputation and respond to bloggers and readers who criticize them?
"The men eager to self-detonate on infidel airliners are not goatherds from the caves of Waziristan but educated middle-class Muslims"
Great point by Mark Steyn:
So once again we see the foolishness of complaceniks who drone the fatuous cliches about how "in this struggle, scholarships will be far more important than smart bombs". The men eager to self-detonate on infidel airliners are not goatherds from the caves of Waziristan but educated middle-class Muslims who have had the most exposure to the western world and could be pulling down six-figure salaries almost anywhere on the planet. And don't look to "assimilation" to work its magic, either. We're witnessing a process of generational de-assimilation: In this family, yet again, the dad is an entirely assimilated member of the transnational elite. His son wants a global caliphate run on Wahhabist lines.
Can eating carbs make you thin?
So, with people feeling fat after the holidays and New Year's resolutions being considered, the typical glut of diet books seem to be circulating. We received one in the mail the other day so I picked it up as the title made the diet sound a little different from the normal fare. The Serotonin Power Diet: Eat Carbs--Nature's Own Appetite Suppressant--to Stop Emotional Overeating and Halt Antidepressant-Associated Weight Gain
was written by two experts who founded a weight loss center.
They start the book by explaining that carbs are not the enemy. From what I gathered from the first chapter, eating carbs helps the brain to produce serotonin (the brain's natural "feel good" chemical and appetite suppressant) which in turn keeps a person happy, stabilizes his or her mood, and results in less stress eating. Eating protein alone, on the other hand, results in less serotonin getting to the brain and may produce a lack of energy and binge-eating of carbs. So, the way to quit binge eating carbs is to eat carbs in a more controlled manner with snacks and foods that feed the brain serotonin.
It seems to me this is all rather intuitive, so who needs a whole book about it? If I don't eat carbs for even one day, I am grumpy and in search of them the next. But the book is worth a read if you want some good examples and details of how to eat carbs in a controlled and sensible manner. It has a kitchen list for meals for those who don't want to cook and basic meals that lay out what to eat and when. They are also a big fan of snacking and have you eat three carb snacks daily during the first phase of the diet. This phases out over time. But the snacks look decent and include low-fat biscotti, Fig Newtons, marshmallows, and pretzels.
The book also contains good information on how to help yourself if you are on antidepressant drugs and are gaining weight. Overall, it seems to be pretty decent and based on some good research.
was written by two experts who founded a weight loss center. They start the book by explaining that carbs are not the enemy. From what I gathered from the first chapter, eating carbs helps the brain to produce serotonin (the brain's natural "feel good" chemical and appetite suppressant) which in turn keeps a person happy, stabilizes his or her mood, and results in less stress eating. Eating protein alone, on the other hand, results in less serotonin getting to the brain and may produce a lack of energy and binge-eating of carbs. So, the way to quit binge eating carbs is to eat carbs in a more controlled manner with snacks and foods that feed the brain serotonin.
It seems to me this is all rather intuitive, so who needs a whole book about it? If I don't eat carbs for even one day, I am grumpy and in search of them the next. But the book is worth a read if you want some good examples and details of how to eat carbs in a controlled and sensible manner. It has a kitchen list for meals for those who don't want to cook and basic meals that lay out what to eat and when. They are also a big fan of snacking and have you eat three carb snacks daily during the first phase of the diet. This phases out over time. But the snacks look decent and include low-fat biscotti, Fig Newtons, marshmallows, and pretzels.
The book also contains good information on how to help yourself if you are on antidepressant drugs and are gaining weight. Overall, it seems to be pretty decent and based on some good research.
Is cable worth it?
Every six months I have to get into it with Comcast, my cable company who doubles or this month almost tripled my bill when a "promotion" ran out. I have been calling and getting the promotions for over 4 years now but this time pretty much ran into a brick wall when the customer service representative just kind of shrugged and gave me simply a ridiculous number instead of an over-the-top one.
One thing I really hate about Comcast in Knoxville is that if you want to quit, they will not cut your bill off immediately. Instead, you have to pack up the equipment and drive it across town to some out of the way building in a far away location. I assume they do this on purpose-- knowing full well that many people do not have the time to get the equipment back quickly and either forget it or take weeks to return it. What do you do if you are a single person who is disabled and wants to cut off service? Perhaps you have no way to get the equipment back.
I hate to quit cable altogether as I use it for work, ideas for blogging, and I like HGTV. But I can't stand the stress of wheeling and dealing with Comcast.
Does anyone have any suggestions?
Update: Comcast Customer Service responds in the comments:
Hello all!
I just wanted to drop a line here for Dr. Helen and anyone else who may be interested in our team's assistance. Feel free to email our team at the address below with your billing or service concerns. Our team is always happy to help.
Kind Regards,
Melissa Mendoza
Comcast Customer Connect
National Customer Operations
We_Can_Help@comcast.com
@ComcastMelissa
Update II: I emailed Melissa Mendoza to tell her my complaints and she said she would have someone call me from the local Comcast office to see what can be done. My phone rang and a professional Comcast customer service person listened to my complaints but said that I would have to pay the extra charges, downgrade my service, or bundle all my services together to get a reduction in price. Nice gesture, but nothing was accomplished.
One thing I really hate about Comcast in Knoxville is that if you want to quit, they will not cut your bill off immediately. Instead, you have to pack up the equipment and drive it across town to some out of the way building in a far away location. I assume they do this on purpose-- knowing full well that many people do not have the time to get the equipment back quickly and either forget it or take weeks to return it. What do you do if you are a single person who is disabled and wants to cut off service? Perhaps you have no way to get the equipment back.
I hate to quit cable altogether as I use it for work, ideas for blogging, and I like HGTV. But I can't stand the stress of wheeling and dealing with Comcast.
Does anyone have any suggestions?
Update: Comcast Customer Service responds in the comments:
Hello all!
I just wanted to drop a line here for Dr. Helen and anyone else who may be interested in our team's assistance. Feel free to email our team at the address below with your billing or service concerns. Our team is always happy to help.
Kind Regards,
Melissa Mendoza
Comcast Customer Connect
National Customer Operations
We_Can_Help@comcast.com
@ComcastMelissa
Update II: I emailed Melissa Mendoza to tell her my complaints and she said she would have someone call me from the local Comcast office to see what can be done. My phone rang and a professional Comcast customer service person listened to my complaints but said that I would have to pay the extra charges, downgrade my service, or bundle all my services together to get a reduction in price. Nice gesture, but nothing was accomplished.
Women's violence against men is really dangerous
Ann Althouse makes a good point in response to an article that reports Elin Nordegren hit Tiger Woods with a golf club to wake him from an Ambien-induced sleep. Her response is to a commenter who thought that hitting a man with a golf club wasn't attempted murder, but a wake up call:
I'll add this: it doesn't matter if Nordegren knew Woods was in an Ambien-induced sleep. A spouse has no right to hit his or her partner with a golf club for cheating, regardless of the reason. Yell? Yes. Cry? Yes. Tell him to leave? Sure. Leave herself? Of course.
But to use a weapon to whack him and run him out to the car to escape, if this is what really happened, is not the way to resolve a problem like this, nor should it be legal for a male or female to beat their spouse with a weapon for cheating. It is very dangerous in this case, because, as a man, Woods probably had no other recourse than to get in the car and get away, or face being put in jail for defending himself.
AllenS wrote: "Nonsense, it was a wake up call." Now, I was going to use a "wake-up call" wisecrack in the original post. Why did I reject it? Because it would signal that women's violence against men isn't really dangerous, isn't really a crime. It would say that when a woman has a righteous reason to be angry at her man, what would otherwise be a crime is not a crime. Think about how ugly it is to hit someone with a golf club while he is asleep. Did she know it was an Ambien-induced sleep � from which it will be very difficult to wake up and defend himself? How hard a swing did she take at him? It seems it was scary enough to make him run out of the house and attempt to drive � quickly � when he was in no condition to drive.
I'll add this: it doesn't matter if Nordegren knew Woods was in an Ambien-induced sleep. A spouse has no right to hit his or her partner with a golf club for cheating, regardless of the reason. Yell? Yes. Cry? Yes. Tell him to leave? Sure. Leave herself? Of course.
But to use a weapon to whack him and run him out to the car to escape, if this is what really happened, is not the way to resolve a problem like this, nor should it be legal for a male or female to beat their spouse with a weapon for cheating. It is very dangerous in this case, because, as a man, Woods probably had no other recourse than to get in the car and get away, or face being put in jail for defending himself.
Learned helplessness or learned optimism? You decide.
A reader emailed me today to ask if the American people were experiencing a kind of learned helplessness in response to our current government, much like the dogs in psychologist Martin Seligman's studies. For those of you unfamiliar with learned helplessness--it is a technical term that "means a condition of a human being or an animal in which it has learned to behave helplessly, even when the opportunity is restored for it to help itself by avoiding an unpleasant or harmful circumstance to which it has been subjected."
Are people fed up and ready to give up in the face of overwhelming obstacles such as the health care bill debacle? Perhaps some, but I pointed out to this reader that one third of the dogs in the learned helplessness studies never gave up or became helpless:
Like the more resilient dogs, those of us who love freedom, believe in making our own health care choices and know to our very core that the government does not own us must never become helpless but must continue to find ways out of an unpleasant situation, and look forward with optimism, knowing that no condition is permanent.
Update: Stuart Schneiderman has some additional thoughts.
Are people fed up and ready to give up in the face of overwhelming obstacles such as the health care bill debacle? Perhaps some, but I pointed out to this reader that one third of the dogs in the learned helplessness studies never gave up or became helpless:
However, not all of the dogs in Seligman's experiments became helpless. Of the roughly 150 dogs in experiments in the latter half of the 1960s, about one-third did not become helpless, but instead managed to find a way out of the unpleasant situation despite their past experience with it. The corresponding characteristic in humans has been found to correlate highly with optimism; however, not a na�ve Polyannaish optimism, but an explanatory style that views the situation as other than personal, pervasive, or permanent. This distinction between people who adapt and those who break down under long-term psychological pressure was also studied in the 1950s in the context of brainwashing.
Like the more resilient dogs, those of us who love freedom, believe in making our own health care choices and know to our very core that the government does not own us must never become helpless but must continue to find ways out of an unpleasant situation, and look forward with optimism, knowing that no condition is permanent.
Update: Stuart Schneiderman has some additional thoughts.
More Serial Killers.....
on Biography. This one is a French serial killer by the name of Michael Fourniret. You can watch me on this show as an expert tonight, Friday, December 18 @ 8 pm ET on the Biography channel. Here is a description of the show:
You can see more about the show here.
He's known worldwide as the "Ogre of the Ardennes." Frenchman Michel Fourniret's exploits terrorized Europe in the 1980s and '90s as he kidnapped, raped and murdered nine young women in a reign of terror across France and Belgium. When he attempted to kidnap his 10th victim, his wife refused to conceal his sickness any longer. She went to authorities. Fourniret was arrested, convicted and sentenced to life in prison where he remains today.
You can see more about the show here.
What's wrong with Christmas sweaters?
Whenever I read about fashion (which is rare as I don't really care, unless I have to dress up for work), I see tips like this one made by Amy Alkon:
Okay, I can understand not wanting to wear a Christmas sweater like this one
but is this one
so bad? I think it is festive and nice. I admit having given something similar to someone for a gift years ago. Am I a bad person for doing so? Yes, according to Manolo, the shoe blogger, who says:
Do you wear Christmas clothing--sweaters, sweatshirts etc.? Or, do you consider it a fashion faux pas like so many others?
Avoid Christmas sweaters at all cost. If you have one, burn it, so you can ensure that you will never be drunk enough to put it on. Oh, sorry -- considering what they're usually made of, make that "melt it in a well-ventilated area."
Okay, I can understand not wanting to wear a Christmas sweater like this one
but is this one so bad? I think it is festive and nice. I admit having given something similar to someone for a gift years ago. Am I a bad person for doing so? Yes, according to Manolo, the shoe blogger, who says:So, listen to the advice of the Manolo, and make this the season of joy by giving your holiday sweaters to the garbage man.
Do you wear Christmas clothing--sweaters, sweatshirts etc.? Or, do you consider it a fashion faux pas like so many others?
PJTV: Amy Alkon on Rude People
Amy Alkon talks with me about her new book, I See Rude People: One woman's battle to beat some manners into impolite society.
She has advice for everyone who has ever encountered an internet troll, violent girls with no empathy for others, underparented kids and more.You can watch here.
Serial Killers on Biography
If you get the Biography channel on cable, you can watch me as an expert on a show about serial killer Robert Pickton, a pig farmer charged with killing 27 women in Canada. Here is the description:
The show airs at 8:00 eastern time tonight, Dec. llth.
Update: If you are a night owl and don't mind having nightmares, you can watch it again tonight, Dec. 12th at 12:am.
Between 1995 and 2001, serial killer Robert "Willie" Pickton killed at least six Canadian women. All the women were known drug addicts or prostitutes from "Low Track"--Vancouver's gritty Downtown Eastside neighborhood. Pickton picked up his victims from the street and took them back to his pig farm in Port Coquitlam. There, Pickton would strangle or shoot each woman before mercilessly cutting her up in his slaughterhouse. By the time police caught up with Pickton, more than sixty women were missing from Low Track. After the most extensive forensic investigation in Canadian history, Pickton was charged with murdering 27 women. He was finally convicted on six counts of second-degree murder. He is currently appealing those charges, and is yet to stand trial for a further 20 murders.
The show airs at 8:00 eastern time tonight, Dec. llth.
Update: If you are a night owl and don't mind having nightmares, you can watch it again tonight, Dec. 12th at 12:am.
"Of course even pretty young girls can kill."
Double X blog has an article entitled, "Lady Killers and Why We Are Fascinated by Them" that is worth a read. As part of the story, they have a picture of Tiger Wood's wife, Elin Nordegren (along with Amanda Knox, who actually was convicted of killing another woman) which is a bit unfair, given that she may have engaged in domestic violence but is hardly a killer. However, I suppose she fits into the mold of how the public wants to believe that women, especially good-looking ones are always trying to help, rather than hurt others. The article makes a good point:
In her book, When She Was Bad...: Violent Women and the Myth of Innocence,
Patricia Pearson has a chapter that addresses this topic called "Maybe You Mistook me for an Angel." She states:
Pearson points out that women are still receiving preferential treatment in the justice system; for example, one study found that men were 11 percent more likely to be incarcerated than women for violent crime. Perhaps, this is why people think women are less violent than they are. They do not receive much, if any punishment, and thus, are seen as innocent. It also shows up in the stats as a lesser crime or none at all.
What needs to change is our perception in the culture that women are not violent, for to do so encourages violence as there are no or few consequences for it on the part of women. Women do not get the help they need in order to change their behavior before it escalates. In addition, to pretend that women are not capable of real violence is to take away their autonomy and deny that they are capable of the full range of human behavior and emotions, and how sexist is that?
...most people are deeply uncomfortable with the idea that a woman�especially a fresh-faced young woman like Amanda�could be a violent criminal, they must create a more palatable narrative. Generally this involves a predictable twist: first normalize, then demonize.
In her book, When She Was Bad...: Violent Women and the Myth of Innocence,
Patricia Pearson has a chapter that addresses this topic called "Maybe You Mistook me for an Angel." She states:Clearly, chivalry justice will continue to operate as long as the justice system has a host of exonerative excuses for female behavior and a highly simplistic vocabulary of motive.
Pearson points out that women are still receiving preferential treatment in the justice system; for example, one study found that men were 11 percent more likely to be incarcerated than women for violent crime. Perhaps, this is why people think women are less violent than they are. They do not receive much, if any punishment, and thus, are seen as innocent. It also shows up in the stats as a lesser crime or none at all.
What needs to change is our perception in the culture that women are not violent, for to do so encourages violence as there are no or few consequences for it on the part of women. Women do not get the help they need in order to change their behavior before it escalates. In addition, to pretend that women are not capable of real violence is to take away their autonomy and deny that they are capable of the full range of human behavior and emotions, and how sexist is that?
Interesting stats on divorce
I thought readers might be interested in these divorce figures (via Maggies Farm):
I thought this was also worth noting:
The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%
I thought this was also worth noting:
The divorce rate in America for childless couples and couples with children
According to discovery channel, couples with children have a slightly lower rate of divorce than childless couples.
Sociologists believe that childlessness is also a common cause of divorce. The absence of children leads to loneliness and weariness and even in the United States, at least 66 per cent of all divorced couples are childless.
Is there anything Glenn Beck can't do?
It seems like everywhere you look, you see Glenn Beck--either on television or in print. But instead of one of his political books, I received his new book The Christmas Sweater: A Picture Book
(yes, the book was free and no, I was not paid in any way to write about this book, nor do I ever take money to write reviews about products) in the mail today and read over it in one sitting. It is a cute kid's book about a boy who wants a new bike and receives a handmade sweater instead. The illustrations by Brandon Dorman are terrific and the story is really sweet. It is about a boy who learns that a gift given with love and spending time with family is more important than a really cool gift.
That's good, because I have a feeling that all those kids hoping for the big toy this season, the Zhu Zhu Pet Hamster
will be disappointed when they find out that it hard to get and possibly should be recalled due to toxins.
Anyway, back to Beck, I don't watch him with any regularity but I must admit that he is a one-man show with all of the books, radio, tv and now kid's books that he does. Love him or hate him, you have to give him credit for being a jack of all trades.
(yes, the book was free and no, I was not paid in any way to write about this book, nor do I ever take money to write reviews about products) in the mail today and read over it in one sitting. It is a cute kid's book about a boy who wants a new bike and receives a handmade sweater instead. The illustrations by Brandon Dorman are terrific and the story is really sweet. It is about a boy who learns that a gift given with love and spending time with family is more important than a really cool gift. That's good, because I have a feeling that all those kids hoping for the big toy this season, the Zhu Zhu Pet Hamster
will be disappointed when they find out that it hard to get and possibly should be recalled due to toxins.Anyway, back to Beck, I don't watch him with any regularity but I must admit that he is a one-man show with all of the books, radio, tv and now kid's books that he does. Love him or hate him, you have to give him credit for being a jack of all trades.
A question for Jessica Ashley, a proponent of violence against men
It seems that Shine staff columnist Jessica Ashley feels sorry for Elin, the wife of Tiger Woods (via Instapundit):
Gee, Jessica, have you ever read Newsweek? It seems that American women lead secret lives that are not so secret to many people, if they would just open their eyes:
So my question to this proponent of violence against men is this: Given that women's marital infidelity is approaching that of men (who are catting around just like Tiger), should their husbands feel free to take the tool of his wife's trade and smash in her car and perhaps her face? Because that is what you are advocating. Cheaters get beaten and their property trashed. I don't agree.
Or maybe what you are really saying is that you are for female privilege. If so, just say it out loud so everyone can know where you and your fellow sadistic "crowd" stands, not for equality between the sexes, but as a proponent of violence against men.
I am not going to opine about whether Elin should or should not stick with her husband (although early reports are saying she's planning to stand by him, after a revision of the prenup). Instead, I say that she should do whatever it is she has to do. If that is taking the tool of her husband's trade to smash the window of his Cadillac Escalade, so be it (my emphasis).If that is combing through his phone and dialing up any suspicious numbers, go to it. If that is trying to work through it (hopefully, with help of a professional), then help yourself. If that is to handle it behind closed doors, then do that.
Although none of us is in the relationship with Tiger and Elin, many of us certainly have been in that situation. If this statistic is right, that 1 in 4.6 married or cohabitating men have been unfaithful, then big crowds of us can understand any of the choices Elin might make (my emphais).
While there will certainly be an audience waiting with bated breath to criticize whether Elin stays with Tiger or walks away, I think we should stand by Elin instead. And if she needs a friend to go at the rest of the windows, pass the golf clubs, Elin. I've got your back.
Gee, Jessica, have you ever read Newsweek? It seems that American women lead secret lives that are not so secret to many people, if they would just open their eyes:
Just how many married women have had sex with people who are not their husbands? It's hard to say for sure, because people lie to pollsters when they talk about sex, and studies vary wildly. (Men, not surprisingly, amplify their sexual experience, while women diminish it.) Couples therapists estimate that among their clientele, the number is close to 30 to 40 percent, compared with 50 percent of men, and the gap is almost certainly closing. In 1991, the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago asked married women if they'd ever had sex outside their marriage, and 10 percent said yes. When the same pollsters asked the same question in 2002, the "yes" responses rose to 15 percent, while the number of men stayed flat at about 22 percent. The best interpretation of the data: the cheating rate for women is approaching that of men, says Tom Smith, author of the NORC's reports on sexual behavior. When Michele Weiner-Davis, a marriage counselor and founder of the Divorce Busting Center in Woodstock, Ill., started practicing 20 years ago, just 10 percent of the infidelity she knew of was committed by women. Now, she believes, it's closer to 50 percent. "Women have suddenly begun to give themselves the same permission to step over the boundary the way that men have."
So my question to this proponent of violence against men is this: Given that women's marital infidelity is approaching that of men (who are catting around just like Tiger), should their husbands feel free to take the tool of his wife's trade and smash in her car and perhaps her face? Because that is what you are advocating. Cheaters get beaten and their property trashed. I don't agree.
Or maybe what you are really saying is that you are for female privilege. If so, just say it out loud so everyone can know where you and your fellow sadistic "crowd" stands, not for equality between the sexes, but as a proponent of violence against men.
Will Obama donors, academics and Union leaders lead to job growth?
I somehow doubt it. I wonder how jobs will grow when many of the people going to Obama's White House jobs summit today are either academics, Union executives or Obama donors or a combination? Few of these people know how to run a small business where jobs are created, or their politics are such that they may hinder growth by sucking up to bad policies to keep on Obama's good side. The only CEO on the list thus far that looked promising to me was Fred Smith (though the list is not exhaustive and there may be more):
I am glad to see that only one CEO donated to Obama. But it seems to me if you want to promote job growth, it would help to have small business owners or those who represent them more fully present, and to take their ideas into consideration. The regime uncertainly of this administration is certainly stifling job growth. Businesses are scared to hire because they don't know what to expect next. Maybe lessening the tax burden and regulations on small business would be a step in the right direction for job growth. I imagine this job summit is more for show, however, so I won't hold my breath waiting for any sensible policies to emerge. I hope I am wrong...
Of the several award-winning economists slated to attend, some are academics who donated hefty amounts to candidate Obama, like Joe Stiglitz of Columbia University, an early supporter who doled out more than $4,000 for his presidential run.
Of the 29 known attendees, only one CEO -- Eric Schmidt of Google -- donated to Obama. Schmidt gave $25,000 in personal contributions to the president's inaugural celebration last January. Employees from Google Inc. doled out a whopping $803,436 for Obama's presidential campaign -- the fifth highest of any organization to donate to his record-shattering campaign bounty.
One other CEO slated to attend, Frederick Smith of Federal Express, gave money during the 2008 presidential campaign -- but not to Obama. Smith contributed $2,300 to Republican presidential nominee John McCain and served on the Republican's "kitchen cabinet" of campaign advisers.
I am glad to see that only one CEO donated to Obama. But it seems to me if you want to promote job growth, it would help to have small business owners or those who represent them more fully present, and to take their ideas into consideration. The regime uncertainly of this administration is certainly stifling job growth. Businesses are scared to hire because they don't know what to expect next. Maybe lessening the tax burden and regulations on small business would be a step in the right direction for job growth. I imagine this job summit is more for show, however, so I won't hold my breath waiting for any sensible policies to emerge. I hope I am wrong...
Toys for boys
If you are looking for gifts for boys, here are some of my favorite suggestions:
First are the Snap Circuits SC-300
which is good for the budding 8-14 year old engineer on your list that loves electronic projects. Another good toy for this age group is the Air Hogs Havoc Heli 
which is described as "the Smallest and Lightest Micro R/C Helicopter in the World." A number of guys seem to like this LEGO Mindstorms NXT 2.0 
which is a building kit (though a bit pricey) that lets a kid construct robots that see, speak, feel, and move. And finally, for boys, there is always the old standby, The Dangerous Book for Boys.
You can hear our interview with the author, Conn Iggulden, here.
If you have other holiday gift suggestions for boys, drop them in the comments.
First are the Snap Circuits SC-300
which is good for the budding 8-14 year old engineer on your list that loves electronic projects. Another good toy for this age group is the Air Hogs Havoc Heli which is described as "the Smallest and Lightest Micro R/C Helicopter in the World." A number of guys seem to like this LEGO Mindstorms NXT 2.0 which is a building kit (though a bit pricey) that lets a kid construct robots that see, speak, feel, and move. And finally, for boys, there is always the old standby, The Dangerous Book for Boys. You can hear our interview with the author, Conn Iggulden, here. If you have other holiday gift suggestions for boys, drop them in the comments.
Good news about porn
Many of you may have already seen the study saying that porn does not change men's perception of women or their relationship (via instapundit). The professor who oversaw the study had this to say:
I have often known women who seem very ill at ease if their husband or boyfriend viewed porn. Perhaps they should read this study and realize that viewing porn for most guys is not harmful (not that this should matter, I think guys should be free to view porn as long as there is no abuse or underage kids). This study might help those women realize that porn use is normal, so much so that the researchers couldn't find any guys in their twenties who had not viewed it.
Lajeunesse believes the early findings of the study cast significant doubt on the common perception that pornography dramatically changes the sexual behavior of those who view it.
�If pornography had the impact that many claim it has, you would just have to show heterosexual films to a homosexual to change his sexual orientation,� he says.
I have often known women who seem very ill at ease if their husband or boyfriend viewed porn. Perhaps they should read this study and realize that viewing porn for most guys is not harmful (not that this should matter, I think guys should be free to view porn as long as there is no abuse or underage kids). This study might help those women realize that porn use is normal, so much so that the researchers couldn't find any guys in their twenties who had not viewed it.
David Harsanyi:...as Climategate proves, a bit of skepticism will rarely steer you wrong. In fact, it's one of the key elements of rational thinking.
What would Milton Friedman say?
Stephen Moore, senior economics writer at the WSJ, speculates about Friedman's response to the current economic crisis in his new book, How Barack Obama is Bankrupting the U.S. Economy:
As Friedman said in his book, Capitalism and Freedom,
"freedom is a rare and delicate plant."
Yes, it is.
At times like this, I become more nostalgic for the indispensable missing voice in this debate: Milton Friedman's. No one could slice and dice the sophistry of the left's government-market interventions better than Friedman. Imagine what he would have to say about the arrogance of the U.S. government of owning and operating the car companies or managing the $2 trillion health-care industry. "Why not?" I can almost hear him ask. "After all, they've done such a wonderful job of delivering the mail..."
"I've been thinking a lot lately about one of my last conversations with Friedman, when he warned that "even though socialism is a discredited economic model and capitalism is raising standards to new heights, the left intellectuals continue to push for bigger government everywhere I look." He predicted that people would be seduced by collectivist ideas again. He was right.
As Friedman said in his book, Capitalism and Freedom,
"freedom is a rare and delicate plant." Yes, it is.
I wonder if Tiger Woods will get the same treatment Rihanna got when it came to domestic violence? Somehow, I doubt Diane Sawyer will be interviewing him on Good Morning America about his injuries--at least, not with any sympathy.
"...a warm greeting to a would-be robber eliminates psychological 'trigger points' "
I was reading an article in Forbes magazine today about the decline in bank robberies during the current recession. The reason: Wal-mart-sytle greetings:
I had noticed a warmer reception at banks lately. I just thought bankers had gotten friendlier but I guess they are just hoping you won't rob the place.
Since 1979 the average number of bank robberies in the U.S. has been a dismaying 11 per 100 commercial bank branches. But in the past year, despite the recession, bank robberies are down to only 6 per 100. The industry gives lots of the credit to those overly friendly greeters who many banks have seemingly poached from Wal-Mart ( WMT - news - people ) stores.
Branches are now pressing guards, tellers and even branch managers to say hello and look every entering customer in the face. It makes customers feel welcome and crooks a bit intimidated. "The last thing a bank robber wants is to be noticed," says W. Douglas Johnson, head of security policy analysis at the American Bankers Association.
Using greeters to spook potential bank robbers has spread quickly since 2006, when a Seattle FBI agent, Lawrence Carr, included the idea in a widely disseminated program taught to bank security officers called SafeCatch. Carr, who spent five years studying bank robberies and interviewing crooks, argues that a warm greeting to a would-be robber eliminates psychological "trigger points"--confidence, anonymity, control over his fear--that the robber needs to go ahead with the crime.
I had noticed a warmer reception at banks lately. I just thought bankers had gotten friendlier but I guess they are just hoping you won't rob the place.
Darn it: I'm getting a mammogram
I wasn't going to get one this year. I am in my forties and started getting mammograms in my thirties, thanks to a family history of cancer. But it's been awhile and I was going to put it off this year but I figure with all that is going on in the healthcare debate, mammograms might be rationed or just not available for many of us.
And, contrarian that I am, I figured that by going against the just released recommendations, I'm going get all the healthcare I desire, cause, at this point, I can. So to all you contrarians like me out there who were thinking of putting off a mammogram, I say, schedule that appointment ASAP. For who knows how long before ObamaCare makes this medical test a thing of the past?
And, contrarian that I am, I figured that by going against the just released recommendations, I'm going get all the healthcare I desire, cause, at this point, I can. So to all you contrarians like me out there who were thinking of putting off a mammogram, I say, schedule that appointment ASAP. For who knows how long before ObamaCare makes this medical test a thing of the past?
"Your right to bring your screaming child on a plane ends where the rest of our ears begin."
Amy Alkon, author of I See Rude People: One woman's battle to beat some manners into impolite society, has an op-ed out in the LA Times about screaming kids on planes:
I tend to have some sympathy for parents who have crying kids. Those of us who are parents as well as others who are not understand that kids cry sometimes. What I don't have sympathy for are parents who in no way discipline their children while out in public. While I understand that parent's rights to discipline are limited given that the state interferes at times when a parent does discipline, I don't think the solution is to do nothing. I have seen parents who allow kids to do very harmful and terrible things in public and then wonder why the kid turns out to be such an ass when he or she gets older. If a kid does not understand how to act in certain settings, teach him or her or don't put them in that setting until they are older. The world will be a better (and quieter) place.
What do you think, screaming kids allowed on planes or not? I would also love to hear any stories you have about kids who have acted up in public and whether or not you said or did anything.
has an op-ed out in the LA Times about screaming kids on planes:More and more, we're all victims of these many small muggings every day. Our perp doesn't wear a ski mask or carry a gun; he wears Dockers and shouts into his iPhone in the line behind us at Starbucks, streaming his dull life into our brains, never considering for a moment whether our attention belongs to him. These little acts of social thuggery are inconsequential in and of themselves, but they add up -- wearing away at our patience and good nature and making our daily lives feel like one big wrestling smackdown.
Southwest sent the right message in yanking Root and her screaming boy off the plane. Unfortunately, it lacked the corporate courage to stand its ground, probably fearing a public relations nightmare from the Mommy Mafia. Yet, almost every day, I encounter parents who need to get the same message Root initially did. Trust me -- should I long to hear screaming children, I'll zip right past my favorite coffeehouse and go read my morning paper at Chuck E. Cheese.
I tend to have some sympathy for parents who have crying kids. Those of us who are parents as well as others who are not understand that kids cry sometimes. What I don't have sympathy for are parents who in no way discipline their children while out in public. While I understand that parent's rights to discipline are limited given that the state interferes at times when a parent does discipline, I don't think the solution is to do nothing. I have seen parents who allow kids to do very harmful and terrible things in public and then wonder why the kid turns out to be such an ass when he or she gets older. If a kid does not understand how to act in certain settings, teach him or her or don't put them in that setting until they are older. The world will be a better (and quieter) place.
What do you think, screaming kids allowed on planes or not? I would also love to hear any stories you have about kids who have acted up in public and whether or not you said or did anything.
I was just reading about Black Friday on CNBC and it seems that many people have less interest in shopping that day:
I was never a big fan of Black Friday and can't imagine fighting crowds to get a few gifts. I've already done most of my shopping online. What about you?
A survey by Persuadable Research for online shopping guide dealnews.com, however, found just 46 percent of respondents plan to �definitely� shop on Black Friday this year, a 12 percent drop from those who took to the stores in 2008....
The survey by Persuadable Research found a majority of shoppers (59 percent) say they would rather shop online for Black Friday deals this year than fight the crowds.
I was never a big fan of Black Friday and can't imagine fighting crowds to get a few gifts. I've already done most of my shopping online. What about you?
PJTV: Fighting for Political Diversity
Today, I talk with Policy Analyst Jessica Custer who is ?North Carolina State Chair of the Network of Enlightened Women (NeW), a group that is standing up to anti-male bias and anti-conservative messages that are rampant on college campuses across the US. This group of conservative women believe that women are not victims, men are not oppressors and (shock) that most men are decent guys.
Think you're dreaming--is it possible that women are actually standing up to the biased feminism in colleges these days? It's reality. Watch the show and meet Ms. Custer, who has some really interesting things to say about women, feminism, the hook-up culture and fighting for political diversity. And how conservative men can get a date.
You can watch here.
"Democrats and Unaffiliateds More Likely To Be Unemployed Than Republicans"
This is interesting:
Data from Rasmussen Reports national telephone surveys shows that 15.0% of Democrats in the workforce are currently unemployed and looking for a job. Among adults not affiliated with either major party, that number is 15.6% while just 9.9% of Republicans are in the same situation.
"I was abused by a woman and it haunts me every day "
This story is an important one:
The psychology of men is so much more complex when it comes to abuse than we realize. Read the article and let me know what you think.
It seems unthinkable, but ChildLine says calls from boys abused by women have doubled in a year. This deeply disturbing investigation reveals the terrible impact of a crime that society has never dared to confront.
The psychology of men is so much more complex when it comes to abuse than we realize. Read the article and let me know what you think.
Twenty-six percent (26%) of employed adults say they have seriously thought that someone in their workplace was capable of mass violence...
I read this poll over at Rasmussen and wasn't surprised:
A few thoughts about this. First, why do so many government workers think their co-workers want to commit mass violence? Could it be that there are just so many government workers that some may seem or act in a way that makes people think they are violent? Could it be that government workers are more suspicious of their co-workers, or could it be that the government does a poor job of screening and hires people who have behavior that is unstable, and never gets rid of them?
Second, are men just more suspicious of people or better at sensing dangerous behavior than women? And finally, with 26% of respondents to this poll thinking that their co-worker is the next mass murderer, it is reassuring to know that there are only about 1000 people murdered at work each year. But, less reassuring is 1.5 million are assaulted in the workplace each year.
A good book that I use if you are looking for one on the topic is Preventing Workplace Violence: A Guide for Employers and Practitioners.
Twenty-six percent (26%) of employed adults say they have seriously thought that someone in their workplace was capable of mass violence, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
Most working adults (64%), however, say they have not seriously thought a co-worker would be capable of such violence. Another 11% are undecided.
One-in-three men (33%) say they have held that thought before, compared to only 17% of women.
Forty-three percent (43%) of government workers say they have felt a fellow employee was capable of mass violence, more than double the number among those who work for private companies.
A few thoughts about this. First, why do so many government workers think their co-workers want to commit mass violence? Could it be that there are just so many government workers that some may seem or act in a way that makes people think they are violent? Could it be that government workers are more suspicious of their co-workers, or could it be that the government does a poor job of screening and hires people who have behavior that is unstable, and never gets rid of them?
Second, are men just more suspicious of people or better at sensing dangerous behavior than women? And finally, with 26% of respondents to this poll thinking that their co-worker is the next mass murderer, it is reassuring to know that there are only about 1000 people murdered at work each year. But, less reassuring is 1.5 million are assaulted in the workplace each year.
A good book that I use if you are looking for one on the topic is Preventing Workplace Violence: A Guide for Employers and Practitioners.
Even the dog gets better treatment.....
I came across an article in Time magazine entitled, "Spendthrift Spouses Could Hurt Holiday Shopping" that looked kind of interesting:
But here is what caught my eye:
Great, so a dog is more likely than a husband to get a gift at Christmas? The article doesn't say but I wonder if husbands would dare give a gift to a dog rather than to their wife? If I was a guy and Fido received a gift and I got none, I would be really pissed. Would you?
What might be the driving factor that lowers holiday retail sales and stalls a much-anticipated economic recovery? Stingy spouses with children. According to a new survey from America's Research Group, a retail-consulting firm, 50.1% of parents plan on cutting back on gifts to each other this year. That figure is up from 44.4% last year, a surprising jump considering that the U.S. was in the depths of the financial crisis during the previous holiday season. "Parents want to maintain gift-spending levels for their kids, so they are showing more willingness to trim on each other," says Britt Beemer, founder and chairman of America's Research Group.
But here is what caught my eye:
Even the pooch may be getting better treatment than Pops. In a separate Consumer Reports survey, 22% of women who expected to reduce their holiday spending said they would be cutting back on gifts for their spouse. Only 14% said they would cut back on gifts for their pets. Ruff.
Great, so a dog is more likely than a husband to get a gift at Christmas? The article doesn't say but I wonder if husbands would dare give a gift to a dog rather than to their wife? If I was a guy and Fido received a gift and I got none, I would be really pissed. Would you?
"I see Rude People"
Advice Columnist Amy Alkon has a new book that just came out, I See Rude People: One woman's battle to beat some manners into impolite society, which is terrific. She is featured in a New York Times article on people fighting back against rudeness:
It depends how people are rude as to whether I would say anything. If they say something in a way that tries to restrict freedom or that puts an entire group down, I might speak up. You know, like when store clerks yell "All men are pigs!" Guys or gals on cells phones, not so much.
What about you? If someone is rude in public, do you say anything?
which is terrific. She is featured in a New York Times article on people fighting back against rudeness:Ms. Alkon, the advice columnist, shares this philosophy. Extreme shaming can work, she said, adding that the next time she saw Barry, the guy from Starbucks, he was talking on his cellphone outside the store rather than in it. She likes to think she had something to do with that.
�There are people in this world who just don�t care about you or anyone else,� said Ms. Alkon, the author of �I See Rude People� (McGraw-Hill Companies) coming out this month. �They are going to inflict themselves on you, and the only way to stop them is to show them there�s a cost.�
It depends how people are rude as to whether I would say anything. If they say something in a way that tries to restrict freedom or that puts an entire group down, I might speak up. You know, like when store clerks yell "All men are pigs!" Guys or gals on cells phones, not so much.
What about you? If someone is rude in public, do you say anything?
MSNBC: Teacher shortage has given way to teacher glut (via Newsalert):
Since last fall, school systems, state education agencies, technical schools and colleges have shed about 125,000 jobs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
At the same time, many teachers who had planned to retire or switch jobs are staying on because of the recession, and many people who have been laid off in other fields are trying to carve out second careers as teachers or applying to work as substitutes to make ends meet....
But the nationwide demand for teachers in 60 out of 61 subjects has declined from a year earlier, according to an annual report issued this week by the American Association for Employment in Education. Only one subject � math � was listed as having an extreme shortage of teachers. In recent years, more than a dozen subjects had extreme shortages.
Why is it so easy to fire this man for saying something politically incorrect and so hard to even investigate this man who writes emails to the enemy, readily discusses his leanings toward faith-inspired violence at work and in seminars and encourages patients to convert to Islam?
"They said Hasan also once tried to convert a patient to Islam and that he received a verbal warning."
Drudge linked to a story at NPR entitled, "Answers Sought On Fort Hood Suspect's Link To Imam." Within the story was this:
Well, at least Hasan wasn't trying to convert his patients from gay to straight. Now that would definitely have led to an investigation.
The officials also dismissed the significance of reports that Hasan's colleagues complained about his religious and political views. One official said they get thousands of complaints every year, some of which lead to investigations, while others do not.
Two psychiatrists who worked with Hasan at Walter Reed and asked not to be identified told NPR that during the six years he worked there, he was frequently distracted and often late for work. They said Hasan also once tried to convert a patient to Islam and that he received a verbal warning.
At one point, the psychiatrists said, some co-workers actively sought to have Hasan removed from the Walter Reed program. He was later reassigned to Fort Hood.
Well, at least Hasan wasn't trying to convert his patients from gay to straight. Now that would definitely have led to an investigation.
Signs of the times...
Have people become so unwilling to buy music that musicians have resorted to this? It's sad.
Glenn and I went to Asheville, N.C. this week where I held the camera and he interviewed grassroots activists for PJTV from all over the country who had gathered for a conference of the free market, state-focused think tank community (SPN).
You can watch here.
You can watch here.
Brain Lock
Do you or someone you know have Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and don't know where to turn for help? A good place to start is with the book, Brain Lock: Free Yourself from Obsessive-Compulsive Behavior.
This self-help book is written by Jeffrey Schwartz, a psychiatrist at UCLA School of Medicine who says that OCD is related to a biochemical imbalance in the brain, rather than due specifically to emotional factors.
Schwartz states in bold letters that "we have scientific evidence that cognitive-behavioral therapy alone actually causes chemical changes in the brains of people with OCD." In the book, he teaches the person with OCD to change their brain chemistry.
He does this by focusing on a Four Step Program: Relabel, Reattribute, Refocus, and Revalue. "Relabel" is when you call the intrusive thought or urge to do a troublesome compulsive behavior exactly what it is in order learn the difference between OCD and reality. "Reattribute" is when you answer the question, "Why does this keep bothering me?" and remind yourself that you have the symptoms of a medical problem and take action, "What can I do about it?" "Refocus" is learning to turn your attention to more constructive behaviors. Finally, "Revalue" is learning to view OCD symptoms as the useless garbage they really are.
I have read other books on OCD in the past but had not read this one until today. I recommend it if you would like to know more about OCD or how to help yourself or someone else take action to change his or her behavior. For those with OCD frequently live very inhibited and restricted lives full of internal suffering, though often, they look okay to the outside world.
Do you have or know anyone with OCD? If so, share your experience or thoughts in the comments.
This self-help book is written by Jeffrey Schwartz, a psychiatrist at UCLA School of Medicine who says that OCD is related to a biochemical imbalance in the brain, rather than due specifically to emotional factors. Schwartz states in bold letters that "we have scientific evidence that cognitive-behavioral therapy alone actually causes chemical changes in the brains of people with OCD." In the book, he teaches the person with OCD to change their brain chemistry.
He does this by focusing on a Four Step Program: Relabel, Reattribute, Refocus, and Revalue. "Relabel" is when you call the intrusive thought or urge to do a troublesome compulsive behavior exactly what it is in order learn the difference between OCD and reality. "Reattribute" is when you answer the question, "Why does this keep bothering me?" and remind yourself that you have the symptoms of a medical problem and take action, "What can I do about it?" "Refocus" is learning to turn your attention to more constructive behaviors. Finally, "Revalue" is learning to view OCD symptoms as the useless garbage they really are.
I have read other books on OCD in the past but had not read this one until today. I recommend it if you would like to know more about OCD or how to help yourself or someone else take action to change his or her behavior. For those with OCD frequently live very inhibited and restricted lives full of internal suffering, though often, they look okay to the outside world.
Do you have or know anyone with OCD? If so, share your experience or thoughts in the comments.
"Anger is an energy"
I read this line from a Johnny Rotten (the Sex Pistols) song on Gateway Pundit from a commenter (comment #62) in response to the passing of the Democrat's Healthcare bill last night.
The commenters at Gateway Pundit are debating whether or not there is anything that can be done to stop the Dems from passing this bill. Rotten's line is a good one as a metaphor for the fight against a statist government that desires to take over our liberty, our economy, and even our very lives. Often, I hear Republicans and conservatives say that we are "doomed." This negative cognitive self-talk is pathetic. It is crippling. Don't engage in it.
You are never doomed until you are dead. There is always something that can be done. The anger of the American public is only just beginning. It is an energy that will be needed in the coming days, weeks and months to protest, stand up, debate, argue and get in the face of every government official, public figure and others who support a bill that leads us down The Road to Serfdom.
And even if the bill passes, we can continue the fight, for they have won only a cultural battle, not the culture war. Culture changes politics, not the other way around. I will be fighting back against a culture that leads to less individual autonomy in every way I know how. Will you?
The commenters at Gateway Pundit are debating whether or not there is anything that can be done to stop the Dems from passing this bill. Rotten's line is a good one as a metaphor for the fight against a statist government that desires to take over our liberty, our economy, and even our very lives. Often, I hear Republicans and conservatives say that we are "doomed." This negative cognitive self-talk is pathetic. It is crippling. Don't engage in it.
You are never doomed until you are dead. There is always something that can be done. The anger of the American public is only just beginning. It is an energy that will be needed in the coming days, weeks and months to protest, stand up, debate, argue and get in the face of every government official, public figure and others who support a bill that leads us down The Road to Serfdom.
And even if the bill passes, we can continue the fight, for they have won only a cultural battle, not the culture war. Culture changes politics, not the other way around. I will be fighting back against a culture that leads to less individual autonomy in every way I know how. Will you?
Affirmative action for men?
A reader (thanks!) sent me a WSJ article entitled, "The Lost Boys" written by Richard Whitmire, author of a forthcoming book, Why Boys Fail: Saving Our Sons from an Educational System That's Leaving Them Behind.
The article discusses universities admitting men with lower qualifications than women, and why guys might need these preferences:
What is a mystery to me is why so many schools and colleges don't "get" that they are anti-male, pro-female (liberal only) and designed to teach in ways that are not conducive to attracting men but that is another post. This one is on affirmative action for men.
Typically, I would not be for any type of affirmative action. I think people who are qualified, regardless of race and gender, should be admitted to these universities, end of story. But in today's PC world, that is not possible. If we admit people based on their gender and race, then we must do it in an equitable way. Men should be represented at colleges in equal numbers to women since they comprise roughly half (a little less these days) of the population.
What do you think?
The article discusses universities admitting men with lower qualifications than women, and why guys might need these preferences:This week, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights announced that it will investigate whether colleges discriminate against women by admitting less qualified men. It will strike many as odd to think that American men would need such a leg up. From the men-only basketball games at the White House to the testosterone club on Wall Street, we seem surrounded by male dominance....
In theory, the surge in the number of educated women should make up for male shortcomings when we're looking at the overall prospects for the economy. But men and women are not the same. At the same levels of education, women remain less inclined to roll the dice on risky business start-ups or to grind out careers in isolated tech labs. Revenue generated by women-owned businesses remains less than 5% of all revenue. And while the number of women taking on economically important majors is rising, women still earn only a fifth of the bachelor's degrees granted in physics, computer science and engineering.
Why males don't seem to "get" the importance of a college education is a mystery, especially considering the current collapse of jobs that traditionally don't require post-high-school study.
What is a mystery to me is why so many schools and colleges don't "get" that they are anti-male, pro-female (liberal only) and designed to teach in ways that are not conducive to attracting men but that is another post. This one is on affirmative action for men.
Typically, I would not be for any type of affirmative action. I think people who are qualified, regardless of race and gender, should be admitted to these universities, end of story. But in today's PC world, that is not possible. If we admit people based on their gender and race, then we must do it in an equitable way. Men should be represented at colleges in equal numbers to women since they comprise roughly half (a little less these days) of the population.
What do you think?
Why wasn't Hasan Investigated?
After reading about the horrific Ft. Hood shootings, I was rather puzzled when I read the following:
This man was being entrusted with the mental health of soldiers, and no one could be bothered to take the time to find out if he was mentally stable himself? After a poor review, remarks that make you wonder which side this guy was on, and possible writings on a web posting that are troubling, he was not investigated?
Was it political correctness and concern for his Muslim heritage that kept officials from looking further into his mental health? Was the army so desperate for a psychiatrist (there is always a shortage) they didn't dare do anything?
The public deserves an explanation.
Update: AllahPundit at Hot Air has much more on the topic.
Federal law enforcement officials told the Associated Press that Hasan had come to their attention at least six months ago because of Internet postings that discussed homicide bombings and other threats. The officials said they are still trying to confirm that he was the author.
One of the Web postings that authorities reviewed is a blog that equates homicide bombers with a soldier throwing himself on a grenade to save the lives of his comrades.
"To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause," said the Internet posting. "Scholars have paralled (sic) this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers."
They say an official investigation was not opened.
Hasan was working with soldiers at Darnall Army Medical Center on Fort Hood after being transferred in July from Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where he had worked for six years before recently receiving a poor review.
This man was being entrusted with the mental health of soldiers, and no one could be bothered to take the time to find out if he was mentally stable himself? After a poor review, remarks that make you wonder which side this guy was on, and possible writings on a web posting that are troubling, he was not investigated?
Was it political correctness and concern for his Muslim heritage that kept officials from looking further into his mental health? Was the army so desperate for a psychiatrist (there is always a shortage) they didn't dare do anything?
The public deserves an explanation.
Update: AllahPundit at Hot Air has much more on the topic.
Scared of Flying? There's an App for That
This is kind of cool:
I could use that. Or if you are like me and don't have an iPhone, you can get the book with the same name, Flying Without Fear 101 questions answered.
People scared of flying can now press a button on their iPhone to help them deal with their panic.
Long-haul airline Virgin Atlantic Airways has launched an application, or app, for its Flying Without Fear course which boasts a success rate of over 98 percent....
A spokesman from Mental Workout said an estimated one in every three adults were scared of flying.
The Flying Without Fear app has an introduction by Branson, a video-based in-flight explanation of a flight, frequently asked questions, relaxation exercises and a fear attack button for emergencies with breathing exercises.
I could use that. Or if you are like me and don't have an iPhone, you can get the book with the same name, Flying Without Fear 101 questions answered.
Gambling with our health care system
I saw that Dr. David Gratzer's new book, Why Obama's Government Takeover of Health Care Will Be a Disaster 
is now out. Glenn received a copy last week and I read it in one sitting as it is small, compact and full of great information on free-market health care reform. He is also the author of The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care
that I read when it came out last year.
Gratzer, a psychiatrist, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He uses examples from his experience with the failures of the Canadian system to show why socialized medicine doesn't work. He was born and raised in Canada and at one point, believed that government health care was "compassionate and equitable." He soon learned that this was a crock, after a relative and other patients couldn't get the care they needed and were left to suffer.
Most notable about his current book is that he disputes many of the arguments in favor of government-controlled health care and uses facts to back up his statements. For example, Gratzer points out that "some argue that countries with government-run health care have found a way to tame the health-inflation problem. They claim that while costs spiral up in the US, there countries are doing better." He found that the cost of health care in socialized-care countries like France, Canada, and Ireland is growing at roughly the same rate as in the United States. "Between 2000 and 2006, the OECD average real annual growth rate for health spending was 4.9 percent; the US rate was 4.95 percent. Despite the rationing and central government control, these countries haven't stopped the trend of rising costs."
The book is quite good if you want a handy, compact book that succinctly makes the argument against universal health care and for free-market reform. I have used it several times in discussions with others on the topic. But if you want more detail, I suggest you read Gratzer's book, "The Cure."
is now out. Glenn received a copy last week and I read it in one sitting as it is small, compact and full of great information on free-market health care reform. He is also the author of The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care that I read when it came out last year.Gratzer, a psychiatrist, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He uses examples from his experience with the failures of the Canadian system to show why socialized medicine doesn't work. He was born and raised in Canada and at one point, believed that government health care was "compassionate and equitable." He soon learned that this was a crock, after a relative and other patients couldn't get the care they needed and were left to suffer.
Most notable about his current book is that he disputes many of the arguments in favor of government-controlled health care and uses facts to back up his statements. For example, Gratzer points out that "some argue that countries with government-run health care have found a way to tame the health-inflation problem. They claim that while costs spiral up in the US, there countries are doing better." He found that the cost of health care in socialized-care countries like France, Canada, and Ireland is growing at roughly the same rate as in the United States. "Between 2000 and 2006, the OECD average real annual growth rate for health spending was 4.9 percent; the US rate was 4.95 percent. Despite the rationing and central government control, these countries haven't stopped the trend of rising costs."
The book is quite good if you want a handy, compact book that succinctly makes the argument against universal health care and for free-market reform. I have used it several times in discussions with others on the topic. But if you want more detail, I suggest you read Gratzer's book, "The Cure."
WSJ: The New Art of Alimony:
Long viewed as payment for life, divorce settlements are facing strict new limits as some ex-spouses�primarily men�protest the endless support of a former partner. For richer, for poorer, forever?
Amy Alkon: on Mira Sorvino's Stinky T-Shirt:
Amy lets the writer of the email in on a little secret (sure, one that everyone should know, but pretend not to)--her stats are false. See Amy's response here.
On a superficial note, I am not a "gal pal," nor do I have "gal pals," and if I did, I'd be too busy throwing up to have much contact with them. Got this icky-toned e-mail last month, and I was a bit behind due to book-related stuff, so I'm only posting it now:
Subject: Re: Mira Sorvino Wants You To Tell a Gal P.A.L.
In a message dated 9/30/09 3:40:25 PM, Jamie.Dammrich@zenogroup.com writes:
Hi Amy,
As gal pals, we talk about everything. Yet there's one subject that often goes unsaid - domestic violence. Did you know that one in four women reports being abused by a husband or partner in her lifetime?....
Amy lets the writer of the email in on a little secret (sure, one that everyone should know, but pretend not to)--her stats are false. See Amy's response here.
"...the only way to assert your human dignity is to walk away."
Stuart Schneiderman: Is America Going John Galt?:
They do not know and do not care that the productive human beings who make the economy run are about to walk away from it all. They are not seeing things in terms of human beings and in terms of policies that might or might not work. They are seeing a golden opportunity to right what they perceive as a decades-old wrong. They are not going to miss the chance.
So,the new governing class is constantly attacking the productive class, vilifying them, disrespecting them, doing everything possible to lower their status. When someone is taking away the fruits of your labor and using you as their whipping boy the only way to assert your human dignity is to walk away.
Maybe men "should take back the night"
I found it sort of (okay, really) ironic after reading a news article about University of Tennessee women at a "Take back the night" rally to highlight violence against women that two of the stories linked to this story were about....women's violence against men.
In the first story, a teacher is arrested with the statutory rape of a male student:
In the second news story, a woman is just now serving time (not much) for shooting her boyfriend through the head in 2005:
This murderer will have to serve only 35 percent of the 10 year prison sentence. I understand this is due to a technicality but 10 years wasn't much to begin with. And I wonder how this murder was counted? As a woman murdering a man? As some lesser crime due to it being voluntary manslaughter? Was it entered in the national data base at all as a woman killing a man?
Maybe it's time men who have been affected by female sexual and physical violence to"take back the night" but that will never happen. Men will rarely stand up for themselves and society sees their lives as expendable, especially when taken by a woman. Men will continue to be abused and will suffer or die in silence, or with the frequent sneer that "he deserved it."
Update: Here is yet another story linked from the same news site (WVLT) about a woman who killed her boyfriend (Good grief, how many are there?). Naturally, she again got only voluntary manslaughter and here is what she served:
In May 2008, the defendant pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in that case and was sentenced to three years in prison as a standard offender. According to her sentencing report, she was to serve 120 days in the county jail in 20-day increments -- with the remainder of her sentence as supervised probation.
Women just say the word, "domestic violence" and they are given a pass for killing, as in this case. When women's groups shout non-stop about domestic violence and violence against women, they plant the seeds in the culture that men are never victims. This is not true but people listen, despite evidence to the contrary.
Update II: DADvocate points out another case where a woman stabbed her husband 193 times, gets 25 years and has the verdict overturned (via Althouse blog). The case sounded familiar and I realized it was that of Susan Wright, one of the women profiled on the Oxygen show "Snapped" that I was on as an expert in 2004. The show is coming to the Biography channel soon according to a promo. That's the thing about cable. The shows are recycled forever.
In the first story, a teacher is arrested with the statutory rape of a male student:
FENTRESS COUNTY, Tenn. (WVLT) -- The Fentress County Grand Jury has indicted a high school teacher for allegedly having sex with a 16-year-old student.
Lindsey Seymour, 27 of Allardt turned herself in to Fentress County authorities on Thursday afternoon. She was officially charged with eight counts of statutory rape.
Seymour allegedly had the sexual encounters with the male student between June 2009 and September 2009. In late September, the teen�s parents complained to the district attorney about the contact.
In the second news story, a woman is just now serving time (not much) for shooting her boyfriend through the head in 2005:
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (WVLT) � The Blount County woman who gunned down her live-in boyfriend in June 2005 will begin serving her sentence on Monday.
April Jennifer Warren, 38 pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter on April 8th, 2008. According to police, she killed Charles Russell, 32 with a single shotgun blast to his head following an argument in their home on June 13th, 2005. Court records indicated she was performing CPR on Russell when police arrived on the scene.
Warren was sentenced to 10 years in prison on May 28th, 2008, but later appealed when it came out that Judge Mike Meares had contacted the family of the victim about the verdict. After sentencing Warren, Judge Meares apparently told Russell�s family that he gave her the maximum penalty with them in mind and asked that they support him in his upcoming election.
This murderer will have to serve only 35 percent of the 10 year prison sentence. I understand this is due to a technicality but 10 years wasn't much to begin with. And I wonder how this murder was counted? As a woman murdering a man? As some lesser crime due to it being voluntary manslaughter? Was it entered in the national data base at all as a woman killing a man?
Maybe it's time men who have been affected by female sexual and physical violence to"take back the night" but that will never happen. Men will rarely stand up for themselves and society sees their lives as expendable, especially when taken by a woman. Men will continue to be abused and will suffer or die in silence, or with the frequent sneer that "he deserved it."
Update: Here is yet another story linked from the same news site (WVLT) about a woman who killed her boyfriend (Good grief, how many are there?). Naturally, she again got only voluntary manslaughter and here is what she served:
In May 2008, the defendant pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in that case and was sentenced to three years in prison as a standard offender. According to her sentencing report, she was to serve 120 days in the county jail in 20-day increments -- with the remainder of her sentence as supervised probation.
Women just say the word, "domestic violence" and they are given a pass for killing, as in this case. When women's groups shout non-stop about domestic violence and violence against women, they plant the seeds in the culture that men are never victims. This is not true but people listen, despite evidence to the contrary.
Update II: DADvocate points out another case where a woman stabbed her husband 193 times, gets 25 years and has the verdict overturned (via Althouse blog). The case sounded familiar and I realized it was that of Susan Wright, one of the women profiled on the Oxygen show "Snapped" that I was on as an expert in 2004. The show is coming to the Biography channel soon according to a promo. That's the thing about cable. The shows are recycled forever.
I talked to WVLT-TV here in Knoxville about the Christian/Newsom case and what it might feel like to be a father in that court room.
You can see the video here. Or below.
You can see the video here. Or below.
PJM column: Obama and His Good Ol� Boys
I have a column up at PJM about Obama's all-male athletic outings:
You can read it here.
Golf without women present? Alert the media!
You can read it here.
John Hawkins has an interview up with Robert Spencer, the author of a new book, The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran.
Kids and pop culture, men's issues and domestic violence
I talked about all of these issues today on George Korda's show "State Your Case" on NewsTalk 100 WNOX in Knoxville from 12:00 until 1:00. Callers called in to talk about the unfairness of the courts, their divorce and/or the treatment of men in the media. It made for an interesting afternoon and made me realize how many more resources are needed out there to provide men with a platform for some of their concerns.
Obama to tax ICDs, pacemakers
I just read this story over at The Hill:
Funny, I just now finished reading physician David Gratzer's new book,Why Obama's Government Takeover of Health Care Will Be a Disaster which states that if Barack Obama has his way, the American health care system is headed for a train wreck. The train wreck is here, folks, and if we don't continue to fight back, those of us with severe medical problems will pay the price.
The more the fiscal details of the healthcare bills emerge, the more appalling they seem. The Senate Finance Committee bill includes a broad provision taxing all manner of medical devices. This tax includes such frivolous luxuries as pacemakers, stents, artificial heart valves, defibrillators, automated wheelchairs, mechanized artificial limbs, replacement hips and knees, surgical gurneys, laparoscopic equipment and the like.
Funny, I just now finished reading physician David Gratzer's new book,Why Obama's Government Takeover of Health Care Will Be a Disaster
which states that if Barack Obama has his way, the American health care system is headed for a train wreck. The train wreck is here, folks, and if we don't continue to fight back, those of us with severe medical problems will pay the price.
Is shouting the new spanking?
The New York Times has an article about shouting being the new spanking (via Instapundit):
Call in the troops, 88% of parents in a study dared to shout or yell at a kid at least once in a previous year. Does anyone out there find the extreme concern over this behavior by parents concerning itself? While yelling or shouting in an inconsistent manner is not a good way to discipline, yelling to show displeasure once in a while is hardly a sin. Screaming just to scream is not helpful but asking in an angry tone why a child did something wrong seems, well...normal. A parent's displeasure can sometimes teach little Jane or Johnnie how to act--and sometimes, gasp! that might call for a displeased tone.
Spanking is considered child abuse, now shouting is frowned upon. Is there anything parents can do to correct their child that places like the New York Times don't despise, besides timeout which merely teaches a child that hitting his or her sibling gets the same lame punishment as making a mess on the floor?
Update: The Last Psychiatrist has more on Shouting vs. Spanking.
One study that did take a look at the topic � a paper on the �psychological aggression by American parents� published in the Journal of Marriage and Family in 2003 � found that parental yelling was a near-universal occurrence. Of 991 families interviewed, in 88 percent of them a parent acknowledged shouting, screaming or yelling at the kids at least once (though it didn�t specify how many did it more often) in the previous year.
�We are so accustomed to this that we just think parents get carried away and that it�s not harmful,� said one of the study�s lead authors, Murray A. Straus, a sociologist who is a director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire. �But it affects a child. If someone yelled at you at work, you�d find that pretty jarring. We don�t apply that standard to children.�
Call in the troops, 88% of parents in a study dared to shout or yell at a kid at least once in a previous year. Does anyone out there find the extreme concern over this behavior by parents concerning itself? While yelling or shouting in an inconsistent manner is not a good way to discipline, yelling to show displeasure once in a while is hardly a sin. Screaming just to scream is not helpful but asking in an angry tone why a child did something wrong seems, well...normal. A parent's displeasure can sometimes teach little Jane or Johnnie how to act--and sometimes, gasp! that might call for a displeased tone.
Spanking is considered child abuse, now shouting is frowned upon. Is there anything parents can do to correct their child that places like the New York Times don't despise, besides timeout which merely teaches a child that hitting his or her sibling gets the same lame punishment as making a mess on the floor?
Update: The Last Psychiatrist has more on Shouting vs. Spanking.
Some good news...
Trudy Schuett: Shreveport Times recognizes domestic violence is not a gender issue.
David Harsanyi: "...if this administration can't handle one cable station's opposition, what does that tell the American people about its mettle on issues that matter?"
Is modern man a wimp?
That's a resounding "yes" according to Australian anthropologist Peter McAllister:
It seems to me that living longer and developing the technology to lead a better life than a Neanderthal means that modern humans are hardly wimps. It depends how one defines the term.
LONDON (Reuters) - Many prehistoric Australian aboriginals could have outrun world 100 and 200 meters record holder Usain Bolt in modern conditions.
Some Tutsi men in Rwanda exceeded the current world high jump record of 2.45 meters during initiation ceremonies in which they had to jump at least their own height to progress to manhood.
Any Neanderthal woman could have beaten former bodybuilder and current California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in an arm wrestle.
These and other eye-catching claims are detailed in a book by Australian anthropologist Peter McAllister entitled "Manthropology" and provocatively sub-titled "The Science of the Inadequate Modern Male."
It seems to me that living longer and developing the technology to lead a better life than a Neanderthal means that modern humans are hardly wimps. It depends how one defines the term.
Would you show up to support prostate cancer?
Jeff Jarvis talks about what it is like to have prostate cancer (via Althouse):
Honestly, I don't think it's too much information (TMI). I think men don't talk about these health issues and they get overlooked. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.
I recently was in a local spa and they were raving about doing services for breast cancer awareness week that were donated to that cause. I applauded them but asked if they would be doing anything for prostate cancer. "Sure!" said the owner. Just let us know when." The problem is that no one takes up much of a cause for prostate cancer but I think it is partly because men wouldn't show up. Women all over had organized the spa event and made it a success. I realize that men would need something more than a spa event.
What would it take to get you to show up and help support the cause?
You may not want to read this post. It defines TMI. But in the interest of continuing to chronicle the saga of my prostate cancer � for the benefit, I hope, of those who follow � the time has come to write about my penis. Specifically, what it doesn�t do.
Incontinence and impotence are two frightening words for a grown man but they are the side-effects of removing the prostate and its cancer with it. Worth the price, or at least that�s the calculation one makes beforehand: Cancer or erections? Cancer or dry underwear? Cancer loses.
Honestly, I don't think it's too much information (TMI). I think men don't talk about these health issues and they get overlooked. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.
I recently was in a local spa and they were raving about doing services for breast cancer awareness week that were donated to that cause. I applauded them but asked if they would be doing anything for prostate cancer. "Sure!" said the owner. Just let us know when." The problem is that no one takes up much of a cause for prostate cancer but I think it is partly because men wouldn't show up. Women all over had organized the spa event and made it a success. I realize that men would need something more than a spa event.
What would it take to get you to show up and help support the cause?
How important is charisma?
This morning, I started reading a new book, The Presentation Secrets of Steve Jobs: How to Be Insanely Great in Front of Any Audience
after noticing the title. The book is written by Carmine Gallow, a columnist at Businessweek.com. I like reading anything that improves my communication skills, so I thought I would give it a try.
But rather than sifting through the book to learn how to give a better presentation, I focused on one paragraph describing "charisma" and I decided to share my thoughts (more like free associations) with you. The paragraph is as follows:
I have been thinking about the quality of "charisma" lately and I really have more questions than answers. What sets some people apart from others? What is it about some people that commands better treatment, more people listening to them and a higher level of social status? Is it charisma or some other trait or appearance?
But more importantly, why do some people attribute others with charisma with supernatural or superhuman powers when they are only....human? I believe it is dangerous to attribute human beings with exceptional powers, for none are deserving of this. It's great that Jobs develops so many great products that help the world but that only makes him a human being who makes good products, not a god.
My husband says that perhaps this trait, to see people as superhuman and charismatic is genetic and like all things genetic, there are variations. But then how do we break those people who see political leaders and others as godlike when they are anything but? Sure, charisma can sometimes be a positive force, but it can also be a very dangerous one, getting people to go along with a con artist, a narcissist, or a psychopath. What if some people can't tell the difference?
after noticing the title. The book is written by Carmine Gallow, a columnist at Businessweek.com. I like reading anything that improves my communication skills, so I thought I would give it a try.But rather than sifting through the book to learn how to give a better presentation, I focused on one paragraph describing "charisma" and I decided to share my thoughts (more like free associations) with you. The paragraph is as follows:
What you'll learn is that Jobs is a magnetic pitchman who sells his ideas with a flair that turns prospects into customers and customers into evangelists. He has charisma, defined by the German sociologist, Max Weber as "a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary people and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities." Jobs has become superhuman among his most loyal fans. But Weber got one thing wrong. Weber believed that charisma was not "accessible to the ordinary person." Once you learn exactly how Jobs crafts and delivers one of his famous presentations, you will realize that these exceptional powers are available to you as well....
I have been thinking about the quality of "charisma" lately and I really have more questions than answers. What sets some people apart from others? What is it about some people that commands better treatment, more people listening to them and a higher level of social status? Is it charisma or some other trait or appearance?
But more importantly, why do some people attribute others with charisma with supernatural or superhuman powers when they are only....human? I believe it is dangerous to attribute human beings with exceptional powers, for none are deserving of this. It's great that Jobs develops so many great products that help the world but that only makes him a human being who makes good products, not a god.
My husband says that perhaps this trait, to see people as superhuman and charismatic is genetic and like all things genetic, there are variations. But then how do we break those people who see political leaders and others as godlike when they are anything but? Sure, charisma can sometimes be a positive force, but it can also be a very dangerous one, getting people to go along with a con artist, a narcissist, or a psychopath. What if some people can't tell the difference?
"Human nature does not reform itself via such milquetoast and good intentions."
Binky over at the Free Canuckistan! blog has an insightful post on schools and "pointy dangerous owwies" (scroll down). Here is what he tells his kids about the real world:
PC types often forget that the real world is different from the utopia that they envision. We can wish that the world was full of ponies and pretty flowers (actually, I don't, that sounds really boring), but the reality is, someone who wants to do harm others will not be stopped by all the PC nonsense. In fact, it will be seen by those who are potentially dangerous as hypocrisy and stupidity. Maybe teaching kids how to be responsible for their actions by demonstrating that adults are responsible for theirs would be a start.
Update: Thanks to the commenters who pointed out that I incorrectly attributed the above post to Mark Steyn rather than the blogger who writes the Free Canuckistan!blog. It's now corrected.
I tell them to defend themselves and others as needed, and to hit back, ask questions later. The bizarro world of the 2009 politically correct school-yard means you get anti-bullying lectures and pledges and coloured rubber bracelets.. but look out in the schoolyard, because you�ll still get you�re ass kicked when the teachers are out of view. Human nature does not reform itself via such milquetoast and good intentions. It�s 'The Dangerous Book for Boys,'
PC types often forget that the real world is different from the utopia that they envision. We can wish that the world was full of ponies and pretty flowers (actually, I don't, that sounds really boring), but the reality is, someone who wants to do harm others will not be stopped by all the PC nonsense. In fact, it will be seen by those who are potentially dangerous as hypocrisy and stupidity. Maybe teaching kids how to be responsible for their actions by demonstrating that adults are responsible for theirs would be a start.
Update: Thanks to the commenters who pointed out that I incorrectly attributed the above post to Mark Steyn rather than the blogger who writes the Free Canuckistan!blog. It's now corrected.
When I read cases like the one in the New York Times about six year old Zachary being suspended and now facing 45 days in the district�s reform school, I no longer blink an eye. It's not that I don't care. It's just that the truth is that no one really gives a damn about school violence and focuses instead on innocent kids like Zachary who did nothing wrong. The authorities will use the Zacharys of the world to show that they are doing something about violence when in reality, they are doing anything but.
I learned a long time ago in working with hundreds of troubled kids and their schools that school authorities do not want to be responsible for the real trouble-makers and do not want to take the time to teach kids about consequences. Instead, they trot out "zero tolerance" so they don't have to think. Teaching kids how to be decent human beings is hard and requires long periods of time and dedication. Zero tolerance is easy and mostly, ineffective. In a bureaucracy where no one wants to take responsibility and make decisions they may be held accountable for, guess which path they take?
Update: As one of the commenters pointed out, Zachary is back in school.
I learned a long time ago in working with hundreds of troubled kids and their schools that school authorities do not want to be responsible for the real trouble-makers and do not want to take the time to teach kids about consequences. Instead, they trot out "zero tolerance" so they don't have to think. Teaching kids how to be decent human beings is hard and requires long periods of time and dedication. Zero tolerance is easy and mostly, ineffective. In a bureaucracy where no one wants to take responsibility and make decisions they may be held accountable for, guess which path they take?
Update: As one of the commenters pointed out, Zachary is back in school.
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh just now and he said he does not like giving speeches. He is not scared, he says, he just thinks so quickly that it is hard to put all of his thoughts on paper and he simply does not feel that he can do as good a job as the audience might expect. I have seen Rush Limbaugh give a speech and he has nothing to worry about.
However, for those out there who may, like me, feel nervous about giving speeches, it's kind of comforting to know we are not alone and that even those being paid for speaking, have a bit of trouble. The other interesting tidbit Limbaugh also threw out was that he does not take a dime for giving talks to groups. Have you noticed that those accused of being the most heartless, are usually the most generous?
However, for those out there who may, like me, feel nervous about giving speeches, it's kind of comforting to know we are not alone and that even those being paid for speaking, have a bit of trouble. The other interesting tidbit Limbaugh also threw out was that he does not take a dime for giving talks to groups. Have you noticed that those accused of being the most heartless, are usually the most generous?
Working class men, freedom and Tea Parties
CNBC had an article (by Reuters) I read yesterday on working class men who (gasp!) may blame Democrats for the recession:
A perplexing situation? Not really--it's just that many working class men understand better than the government that when the government "bites the hand that feeds them," they are not better off. If the government puts a stranglehold on business, the businesses in turn can't hire them. Unlike the "perplexed" Democrats who have no concept, (or choose not to) of how business works, the working class men themselves understand simple economics.
And finally, I love this misinterpretation by a political scientist of why working-class men go to Tea parties:
Sure, that's why the Tea Parties are often held on the weekend, because everyone is out of a job and is desperate. Most of the parties I have seen or attended are filled with many freedom-loving men (and women) who have jobs and can't get the day off during the week. And many of those without a job are retired.
When it comes to the Tea Parties, the MSM wants to make the participants out to be a bunch of white jobless men ready to proclaim allegiance to the KKK with just a bit of coaxing. What they don't understand or pretend not to, is that the Tea Parties are a symbol of hard-working Americans who still believe (perhaps naively) that they have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, without excessive government interference. Michael Patrick Leahy, in his book Rules for Conservative Radicals,
captures the reason of many who go to the Tea Parties: "As a nation, we've lost our way, not because we can't see the path, but because we've allowed a small group in the political class to usurp the natural rights assigned for us in the Constitution."
When this administration and its useful idiots realize that the right to run their own lives is more important to working-class men than government hand-outs, then maybe they will have something to talk to these men about. In the meantime, let the Tea Partying continue.
Working-class males have been among the biggest U.S. losers in this recession.
Does that mean that President Barack Obama's Democratic Party will be the big loser in the 2010 congressional elections? Some analysts say yes, even though blue-collar white males have been leaning Republican for decades and have been a shrinking percentage of the U.S. electorate....
The male unemployment rate rose to 11 percent in September from 6.8 percent in the same month last year, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor. The overall rate has gone to 9.8 percent from 6.2 percent over the same 12 months.
For white men over the age of 20 unemployment has almost doubled over that period to 9.6 percent from 5.5 percent....
White working-class males have been turning their backs on the Democratic Party for decades�a perplexing situation in the eyes of some as a vote for the pro-business Republican Party is seen as a vote against their economic interests.
A perplexing situation? Not really--it's just that many working class men understand better than the government that when the government "bites the hand that feeds them," they are not better off. If the government puts a stranglehold on business, the businesses in turn can't hire them. Unlike the "perplexed" Democrats who have no concept, (or choose not to) of how business works, the working class men themselves understand simple economics.
And finally, I love this misinterpretation by a political scientist of why working-class men go to Tea parties:
"Many have lost jobs and working-class white men have difficulty doing things they saw their fathers do which they cannot do and so it is easy to go swing sign at a Tea Party," said Jillson.
Sure, that's why the Tea Parties are often held on the weekend, because everyone is out of a job and is desperate. Most of the parties I have seen or attended are filled with many freedom-loving men (and women) who have jobs and can't get the day off during the week. And many of those without a job are retired.
When it comes to the Tea Parties, the MSM wants to make the participants out to be a bunch of white jobless men ready to proclaim allegiance to the KKK with just a bit of coaxing. What they don't understand or pretend not to, is that the Tea Parties are a symbol of hard-working Americans who still believe (perhaps naively) that they have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, without excessive government interference. Michael Patrick Leahy, in his book Rules for Conservative Radicals,
captures the reason of many who go to the Tea Parties: "As a nation, we've lost our way, not because we can't see the path, but because we've allowed a small group in the political class to usurp the natural rights assigned for us in the Constitution." When this administration and its useful idiots realize that the right to run their own lives is more important to working-class men than government hand-outs, then maybe they will have something to talk to these men about. In the meantime, let the Tea Partying continue.
Surviving the Economic Collapse
So I started reading a new book last night by survivalist Fernando Aguirre entitled, The Modern Survival Manual: Surviving the Economic Collapse.
The book is based on his first-hand experience of the 2001 economic collapse in Argentina and I must say, it's been an interesting read. {Disclosure: Glenn bought the book from Amazon.com and if you follow the above link and buy it, I get a small commission--around 6-8%. I know, FTC rules don't start until Dec. but I am getting started early. There is also an Amazon ad in my sidebar that has been there for years that should tip readers off that I am an Amazon affiliate}.
Anyway, the first thing that caught my eye is that the book is not edited much and English is the author's second language. Some might be put off by this but I found it refreshing and it made the book more authentic. In a section on "What to Expect from this Book," Aguirre states that "if it's quality literature that you want, this is not it." He points out that his book is free from filtering and the book is self published. "The only editor that showed any interest in publishing said that the book was 'too aggressive' for their target readers."
I did not find the book particularly "aggressive," whatever that means. The author basically tells you to stop being a wimp and learn to think through what you would do physically and psychologically should the "shit hit the fan" (what he refers to as SHTF). He starts by explaining what happened in Argentina after December of 2001 with the economic collapse and the ensuing crisis leading to high unemployment, high crime, poverty and a (short) period of anarchy. What do you do? How do you survive in these conditions?
Aguirre gives tips on where to live (hint: the country may not be the best place as it is easier to rob or get away with a home invasion there. He says a small town or community is best), home security (think like a burglar, install security lights etc.), how to identify threats (don't look for action movie "stereotypes" of bad guys. Look instead for people who are out of place or people who look nervous) and even has advice on cars and how to drive defensively. For example, when buying a car, "Don't think fancy, think common, inexpensive, and readily available." That way, if you need it fixed in an economic collapse, there will be more mechanics who will know the model and brand and parts will be easier and cheaper to find. He also notes that "A guy in an expensive car is still in danger not because of his car, but because the bad guys may think he is rich and kidnap him."
The book is chock-full of a number of helpful tips, and if nothing else, really gets your mind set to thinking about solving problems that are less salient than an economic collapse in your own life. One thing Aguirre points out is that if you are not up to thinking in this manner emotionally and the thought of thinking through these issues keeps you up at night, it's best to let it go. But for those of us who find that a lack of preparation keeps us up at night, this book, along with practice and forethought, might just help us sleep more soundly.
The book is based on his first-hand experience of the 2001 economic collapse in Argentina and I must say, it's been an interesting read. {Disclosure: Glenn bought the book from Amazon.com and if you follow the above link and buy it, I get a small commission--around 6-8%. I know, FTC rules don't start until Dec. but I am getting started early. There is also an Amazon ad in my sidebar that has been there for years that should tip readers off that I am an Amazon affiliate}.Anyway, the first thing that caught my eye is that the book is not edited much and English is the author's second language. Some might be put off by this but I found it refreshing and it made the book more authentic. In a section on "What to Expect from this Book," Aguirre states that "if it's quality literature that you want, this is not it." He points out that his book is free from filtering and the book is self published. "The only editor that showed any interest in publishing said that the book was 'too aggressive' for their target readers."
I did not find the book particularly "aggressive," whatever that means. The author basically tells you to stop being a wimp and learn to think through what you would do physically and psychologically should the "shit hit the fan" (what he refers to as SHTF). He starts by explaining what happened in Argentina after December of 2001 with the economic collapse and the ensuing crisis leading to high unemployment, high crime, poverty and a (short) period of anarchy. What do you do? How do you survive in these conditions?
Aguirre gives tips on where to live (hint: the country may not be the best place as it is easier to rob or get away with a home invasion there. He says a small town or community is best), home security (think like a burglar, install security lights etc.), how to identify threats (don't look for action movie "stereotypes" of bad guys. Look instead for people who are out of place or people who look nervous) and even has advice on cars and how to drive defensively. For example, when buying a car, "Don't think fancy, think common, inexpensive, and readily available." That way, if you need it fixed in an economic collapse, there will be more mechanics who will know the model and brand and parts will be easier and cheaper to find. He also notes that "A guy in an expensive car is still in danger not because of his car, but because the bad guys may think he is rich and kidnap him."
The book is chock-full of a number of helpful tips, and if nothing else, really gets your mind set to thinking about solving problems that are less salient than an economic collapse in your own life. One thing Aguirre points out is that if you are not up to thinking in this manner emotionally and the thought of thinking through these issues keeps you up at night, it's best to let it go. But for those of us who find that a lack of preparation keeps us up at night, this book, along with practice and forethought, might just help us sleep more soundly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)