American Daughter - Multimedia journalism with articles,pictures and graphics, podcast audio and video,slide presentations, live-blogging of events, and webcasting
California Chronicle - Published daily The California Chronicle brings you the top news and commentary of the day throughout the Central Coast, the State and the Nation.
Real Clear Politics - One of America’s premier independent political web sites. Updated every morning and throughout the day, RCP culls and publishes the best commentary, news, polling data, and links to important resources from all points of the political compass and coveri
TownHall - Townhall.com is designed to amplify conservative voices in America’s political debates just as the 2006 and 2008 election cycles begin to heat up.
Working Senior - The National Association of Working Seniors
Americans seem to set great store in public apologies. And, it sometimes seems as if we just can’t make people grovel enough for their transgressions or saying the wrong thing at the wrong time,
How about not doing bad things in the first place.
This is really two issues: Apologizing when it is really not necessary and apologizing when we should.
Americans are a fickle lot. We love to build people up to a stature that is often unrealistic, then proceed to tear them down, especially the mainstream media. This tendency has become so common that it is almost a given, especially in politics. Entertainers and athletes seem to be somewhat exempt, but not business types and politicians.
Although Mark Sanford, Virginia’s governor, owned up about his true love in Latin America, he was unable to reclaim any of the respect he was previously accorded, including the support of his wife, who filed for divorce.
Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Eric Felton observed: “The past couple of weeks have been a sorry spectacle. Serena Williams offered apologies for a vulgar and threatening tirade she had unleashed on a line judge at the U.S. Open. Rapper Kanye West delivered a stunned mea culpa for a stunt that misfired at a music awards show. And, of course, Rep. Joe Wilson, having interrupted Barack Obama with the short and ugly word, called the president to apologize for his rudeness…Though Mr. Wilson publicly acknowledged his private apology, he was deemed insufficiently contrite by a majority of congressmen, who voted this week to express their disdain at his outburst. But would a more elaborate act of self-mortification really have been preferable? The gaudy parade of guilt, with all its meretricious remorse, has grown tiresome. It’s time we eighty-sixed the carnival of contrition.”
Eric Felton also commented: “We’ve grown similarly cynical about the power of our own sort of public declarations to make any difference in the way people behave. I suspect that if anything is going to make Serena Williams think twice about screaming invective at a line judge, it will be the memory of losing match point on a penalty. The apology itself was a nothing-burger by contrast—a bit of text placed on her Web site (an electronic handbill) and a follow-up interview on ABC. Appearing on ‘Good Morning America,’ Ms. Williams got in a few sorrys but quickly turned to promoting her new book. She also speculated that the outrage at her outburst may itself have been invidious, a “gender-based” double standard that allows men to be abusive on the court but not women. Some contrition.”
Tiger Woods’ apologies for his extramarital affairs has not shut down the torrent of criticism that has been leveled at him, including the loss of large chunks of his income as sponsors cancelled their contracts.
Watching the media coverage of the Masters in Augusta set me to wondering what people in the golf industry think of Tiger Woods. So, I emailed a note to a friend who is part owner (and manager) of a country club in Florida and asked him.
He responded as follows:
“Good morning Harris - Great Masters!!!! (Here are) My thoughts and others that we correspond with in the media very close to the situation:
“Start with Tiger is not a good person. His father was not a good person. It started out idealistic and egos grew and took over. Fabrications abound.
“Tiger never lived in a black world much like OJ did not live in a black world. Tiger had all the advantages because he was black.
“To market goody two shoes and be the world’s biggest whore monger is off the carts wrong.
“His manager????? Everyone knew what was going on.
“Tiger controlled the media, the tour, Finchem, the (PGA Tour) Commissioner.
Tiger for the game of golf and the business of golf is “to big to fail”, however, this is not $$$$$$$$, it is morals, conscience, family values, disadvantaged individuals, his foundation, etc. Billions were put into his image and he did not give a damn.
“There is a deep seated moral flaw in his character.
“I had been telling everyone he was going to change and respect the game, his fans, etc. His actions betray his hollow words.
“I do not think the tour is afraid of Tiger anymore, and when he leaves the confines of Augusta and truly meets the public, I think he will pay for his past actions with his fans, the press, sponsors other than Nike and EA Sports that are completely tied to him financially.
“He may win and be adored as a golfer but I do not think as a human being.”
My sense is that there are limits to the public’s patience with people in the public eye who hide behind a public persona that is not real.
Demonstrating once again that discrimination continues to be a hot political issue, California legislators passed a bipartisan resolution to “express regret for past discriminatory laws and constitutional provisions.”
The Sacramento Bee noted that this isn’t mere symbolism, that the debate itself has been valuable: “The reality is that California and the nation are embroiled in heated discussions about immigration – but they can learn from Chinese immigrant experience. We need to understand it, confront it and not fall into the same traps that ensnared earlier generations of Californians.”
For a century, California went out of its way to enshrine anti-Chinese sentiment in law. Even The Sacramento Bee promoted that disgraceful agenda.
So why not just let history go and move on?
Americans seem to have a penchant for self-flagellation over matters involving race, continually pointing out that various groups have suffered discrimination, each in their turn, blacks, Mexicans, Jews, Catholics, Christians, Asians, Poles, Czechs, gays, the handicapped (physically challenged) - and passing legislation that’s intended to level the playing field for everyone.
Unfortunately that will never happen, because legislation is not the answer to eliminating prejudice. Passing laws against discrimination may provide some relief for some individuals or groups but it does not change hearts and minds, and that’s where the problem exists, in the hearts and minds of the beholders.
The latest attempt to legislate prejudice out of existence is the expanded Hate Crimes bill recently passed by Congress. However, I believe that such laws are counterproductive. What they actually accomplish is to drive people underground, creating a sort of pressure cooker situation that ultimately explodes when the pressure builds.
History is replete with examples of prejudice, repression and persecution of individuals, groups or entire societies. It’s an ugly story and makes one wonder at the cruelty and inhumanity of mankind. Following are just some of the groups that have experienced persecution by others: The Armenians, The Spanish Inquisition, Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Native Americans, Tibetans, Armenians, Gypsies, Irish, Poles, Italians, Blacks, and Mongolians, among others.
No one is exempt. Throughout history, just about every group of any denomination or ethnic background has experienced prejudice and/or persecution. Kermit The Frog expressed it well in his song, “It Ain’t Easy Being Green”:
How hard it is
Know what I mean
It ain’t easy being green
I’m a king without a queen
The hard times I’ve seen
Skin color shouldn’t matter
It’s just a gene
I hope I wake up and it’s all a dream
I’m on the never blend in when scene
It ain’t easy being green
One of the problems in America is that many individuals and groups have made race the central theme of their politics.
Deneen Borelli of the national black leadership network Project 21 made the following observations about race: “There they go again. Now Jimmy Carter has joined House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel, Texas Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, New York Governor David Paterson, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd and others on the left in claiming racism is behind criticism of President Obama’s big-spending policies…President Obama was not elected only with black votes. Are those who cry ‘racism’ saying the American people suddenly woke up and said, ‘oh, he’s black so I don’t like him anymore’? That makes no sense. The criticism of Obama’s policies is about the policies — the stimulus, the growth of government, cap-and-trade, the health care bills, the overspending…It’s damaging because when everything is racist, then nothing is. Those who cry racism without evidence will cause people to tune out in cases in which there is evidence…Prejudice also exists within specific ethnic groups and may be based on a wide range of differences that cover the complete spectrum of characteristics: physical, intellectual, regional customs, etc.”
Racism always seems to be in the eye of the beholder, never in the mind of the accused. When people are accused of being racist, they usually hotly deny it. After all, who really thinks they are racist? But, what about the accuser? They are often racist themselves and use the charge against others to intimidate, usually for political purposes or to gain some advantage. Two prime examples who come to mind are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, but there are countless others - in every society.
Entire cultures are often racist: Muslims vs Hindus in India, Muslims vs Jews in the Middle East, Sunni vs Shia Muslims in Iraq and Iran, Hutu vs Tutsi tribes in Zimbabwe, Whites vs Blacks in South Africa, etc. Prejudice and bigotry exist everywhere, without limit.
Laws are passed and social pressures are brought to bear - in an effort to change attitudes, or at least control them. But, the ugly head of prejudice continues to pop up everywhere throughout the world. No matter how we try, it’s always “there,” lurking just beneath the surface, waiting to take root and sprout.
Prejudice and bigotry are not innate characteristics from birth, but are taught, either directly or by the example of parents, teachers, religious leaders or others. People are not born bigots. They are taught to hate. This is clearly seen in the Wahhabi religious schools around the world, where Muslim children are taught to hate Infidels who do not embrace the Islamic faith. An egregious example of this is seen in Palestine, where children as young as three and four are taught that Jews are pigs and monkeys and to embrace the idea that becoming a suicide bomber is an honorable and lofty goal.
People tend to associate with others with whom they feel comfortable. This is especially true among various ethnic, religious and racial groups. They have common interests, values, beliefs, customs and attitudes, which makes it easy for them to get along. For example, I don’t imagine there is much socializing between Muslims and Hindus in India, Sunni or Shia Muslims in the Middle East, or Jews and Arabs in Israel, which has about one million Arab residents. And, I doubt that there is much if any socializing between Muslims and Christians in Europe or America.
The bottom line is that everyone is prejudiced - to a greater or lesser degree. People generally don’t acknowledge that they have prejudices, but it’s inescapable, everyone does, here in America and in every other society around the world.
Talking recently with another CPA who is about 55, she was quite surprised to learn that when I started working in public accounting in the 1960s, it was illegal for accountants and lawyers to advertise and, needless to say, it was considered unethical. Advertising by attorneys was considered a form of ambulance chasing.
As time progressed, it became legal for professionals to advertise, but it was still considered unethical by many practitioners. Fast forward to today and, of course, it’s no holds barred. Professionals can advertise as much as they want, and they can say just about anything they like about their services.
One of the more glaring examples of advertising by professionals is the T.V. campaign of a law firm that prospects for clients who have Mesothelioma, a rare type of cancer that afflicts people who work with asbestos, in shipyards, in construction jobs, etc. The T.V. commercials note that 3,000 new cases of this deadly disease are reported every year.
The commercials invite viewers to contact the law firm if they or anyone in their family is suffering with this form of cancer. Seeing these commercials repeatedly on T.V. eventually started me wondering about the size of the potential market that’s’ available to be mined by lawyers. The scope of the advertising campaign appears to be national, which would make it quite costly.
National T.V. advertising campaigns generally cost between $50,000 and $750,000 for design and production plus media costs of between $35,000 and $2 million per 30 second spot.
So, given that 3,000 new cases of Mesothelioma occur annually, coupled with the high cost of advertising to attract clients, the average potential recovery must be pretty big. For example, assuming that the average case is worth about a million dollars, the size of the market would be about $3 billion, which makes it worth going after. The Maune Raichle Law Firm, notes on its website a schedule of settlements that its clients have received, which range from $1.8 million to $6.0 million.
We have now arrived at the point where lawyers are free to aggressively tout their skills and the financial gains that hapless consumers can realize by hiring them. T.V. commercials soliciting clients who may have been harmed in some way by various medications are now part of the daily fare on T.V. And, we also see aggressive advertising by tax professionals, such as H&R Block.
When I started practicing public accounting in the 1960s, we were generally clear about what ethical professional conduct was and was not. However, today the issues that routinely confront practitioners have become so involved and complex that the profession has concluded it is necessary to require CPAs to pass an ethics exam every two years as part of an 80-hour semi-annual continuing education (CE) requirement.
The president of the California Board of Accountancy (CBA), which currently regulates more than 81,000 licensees, said that “the regulation changes are part of an increased focus by the CBA on ethics and education, both as a way to increase consumer protection and restore public confidence.”
The continuing education requirement for California attorneys is 25 hours every three years, which must include 4 hours of Legal Ethics training.
And, the almost 100,000 doctors in California must renew their licenses every two years and are required to complete 50 hours of continuing medical education (CME). The Medical Board of California website notes that all CME must include “courses that directly relate to one of the following: patient care, community or public health, preventive medicine, quality assurance or improvement, risk management, health facility standards, the legal aspects of clinical medicine, bioethics, professional ethics, or improvement of the physician-patient relationship.”
The continuing education requirements for these three professions clearly reflect how much more complex life in general is today than it was 50 years ago. However, that said, my own take is that ambulance chasing is still ambulance chasing. Professionals may now be free to advertise and solicit for clients, but they don’t have to do it in a way that is excessively aggressive.
Here are some questions I have been asking myself. Some philosophical, some practical, some merely rhetorical, perhaps some even a bit naïve:
Are Americans so immature and self-centered that we really can’t see what is happening to us?
Have we become too soft and self-centered to survive? Do we really care, or are we more concerned about personal advantage and profit than solving problems?
Is there really a connection between today’s decisions and future events? Seems obvious, doesn’t it, but all too often people behave as if their words and actions don’t have any consequences.
Why are we debating tactics as if the judgment of every citizen should be taken into account about how we conduct a war? Who should be in charge and make the major decisions about conducting the wars we fight: politicians, professional military or the general public?
Can America ever win another war? Not a battle but a war?
Is mankind destined to destroy himself?
Why is loyalty to one’s political party considered a greater virtue than loyalty to the country?
Where are the “statesmen” of our times, men like Churchill, Fulbright, Eisenhower and George Marshall?
Where are the political leaders with true courage, such as the Founding Fathers, Abe Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan?
Why do we continue to tolerate young people who deface their bodies in such a way as to make themselves not just unattractive but repulsive? Who on earth would want to hire them, except for the most menial jobs, such as washing cars, busing dishes, etc.?
Why does our society continue to tolerate such crimes as child abuse and molestation?
How is it that our government is so infused with fraud, corruption and misrepresentation and that no one really seems to care?
How did we manage to allow our government employees to reach the position where the taxpaying public is actually working for them and their generous pensions rather than the other way around? What, if anything, can be done about it?
Why do we tolerate a political system that has made “public service” a lifetime career, with pay and perks that far exceed those of the average American?
Doesn’t anyone do anything any more just because it’s “right,” not because they get something out of it?
What makes people who have little or no qualifications think they suddenly become instant experts on just about any subject immediately after they have been elected to public office? Fighting wars and managing the economy are good examples.
Why do so many people seem to think that out-screeching or preventing others from speaking makes for a convincing argument? Screeching types obviously don’t understand or care that tirades don’t help their cause or convince anyone of anything, except of course those who may already agree with them.
We are constantly being told that the public wants comity and consensus from our political types, so why do we so rarely see either?
The answers to these questions are obvious, you might say. But if they are, why are we talking everything to death? And, why aren’t the people we elect doing their jobs instead of playing politics with every issue that arises?
I sometimes become so befuddled by the endless cacophony of contention and contradiction that continuously swirls around us that I’ve started to wonder if it isn’t some sort of punishment visited on us by G-d for our many transgressions. It makes me think of the Tower of Babel, when, according to the Bible (Genesis 11:1-9), He disrupted work on the Tower by “so confusing the language of the workers that they could no longer understand one another. The city was never completed, and the people were dispersed over the face of the earth.” Is that what’s going on now? Are we being tested or punished in some way?
The asylum is being run by the inmates, but the real problem is that we are letting them get away with it. How the hell did this happen?
I’m sick of listening to the endless stupid and vapid discussions and arguments that bludgeon our senses nonstop. Much of it isn’t even interesting or informative, just confrontational. And far too much of it is about people who are airheads with no special abilities or talent that makes them worth listening to or learning about. Anna Nicole Smith, Paris Hilton and Britney Spears come to mind, but there are many others. Too many. It’s no wonder people are so turned off and tuned out.
My experience has been that if you try to please everyone, you please no one, and that making important decisions necessarily involves having some people dislike, even hate you. Decision-making is not a popularity contest, nor should it be.
Why is it that so many average citizens seem to think our leaders should cater to them (translation: do as I say or want) when it comes to making decisions concerning matters about which the public in general has little or no knowledge, training or background?
I don’t know about you, but I certainly don’t want my spouse being the national decider about how we should be handling situations like Iraq, Iran or North Korea. And, I’m confident she feels the same way about me. How about you and yours?
I’m beginning to feel a little like a hamster, endlessly running on a wheel, going nowhere and never getting there.
Guest Commentary byNancy Matthis American Daughter March 27, 2010
Remember when Obama said he wanted a “national security force”? Not the National Guard, but a civilian one that has not sworn to uphold the Constitution? On July 2, 2008 in a speech in Colorado Springs, Barack Obama called for a police state.
Remember that first alarming glimpse of what that army might look like? Notice how much these “Hitler youth” type young men talk about health care!
Obama just got his private army…
…And no one seems to have noticed. It is buried in the Senate revisions to the health care bill.
Subtitle C–Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce
Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds.
Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program.
Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs.
Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs.
Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps.
Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics.
Sec. 5209. Elimination of cap on commissioned corps.
Sec. 5210. Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps.
Subtitle D–Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training
Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT–
(1) IN GENERAL.–here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.
(2) REQUIREMENT.–All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.
(3) APPOINTMENT.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(4) ACTIVE DUTY.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.
(5) WARRANT OFFICERS.–Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service.
(b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS.—Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps.
[Note here that those personally appointed by BO -- without advice and consent of the Senate -- automatically become a part of the Regular Corps. Ed.]
(c) PURPOSE AND USE OF READY RESERVE.–
(1) PURPOSE.–The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed service’s reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions.
(2) USES.–The Ready Reserve Corps shall–
(A) participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps;
(B) be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel;
(C) be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and
(D) be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically underserved communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services.
(d) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the Commissioned Corps under this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Office of the Surgeon General for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014. Funds appropriated under this subsection shall be used for recruitment and training of Commissioned Corps Officers.
How many of you, dear readers, were aware of the fact that the health care bill created another army?
While shopping in Sears recently, my wife and I saw an amazing display of inexpensive watches, which included various versions of the Mickey Mouse timepiece. We both have Mickey Mouse wrist watches and always find newer versions of interest. Mine is over 40 years old and was a gift from a friend who worked at Disney Studios. It’s the real deal, a bit worn, but it still works and keeps fairly accurate time.
I love Mickey and Minnie Mouse, and as I waited while my wife tried on some clothes, I began to wonder just what has happened to Mickey’s image. As his appearance progressed from his early beginnings as Steamboat Willie to the popular figure that is so familiar to us today, he has played an important role in the lives of pretty much everyone in America as they were growing up.
Mickey has always been loveable, and he seems to have universal appeal. Mickey Mouse characters cavorting at Disney Land and Disney World, entertaining crowds of all ages, and the Mickey Mouse Club that was the launching pad for young entertainers in the 70s, are all part of his persona.
Following are some interesting facts about Mickey Mouse (from Jan’s Mickey Mouse Page):
“Plane Crazy” was Mickey Mouse’s first cartoon appearance – on May 15, 1928 – a silent cartoon.
Mickey first appeared in his signature white gloves in 1929, in “The Opry House,” a musical short.
“Steamboat Willie,” released in 1928, was the first Mickey Mouse sound cartoon.
Mickey Mouse spoke his first words – “Hot dogs” – in the 1929 short, “The Karnival
Kid.” Walt Disney was the original voice.
Mickey first appeared in a comic strip in the New York Daily Mirror in 1930.
Mickey’s sister is Amelia Fieldmouse. She has two children, Morty and Ferdie Fieldmouse, Mickey’s nephews.
Mickey was the first non-human to win an Oscar – in 1932.
In 1934, the Encyclopedia Britannica gave Mickey his own entry.
In 1935, Mickey was awarded a medal as an ambassador of good will by the League of Nations.
The shape of Mickey’s body was redesigned in 1939, when “his body became more pear-shaped and pupils were added to his eyes to increase his range of expression.”
“Walt Disney was afraid of mice.”
During World War II, the code word of Allied Forces on D-day was “Mickey Mouse.”
“In 1978, in honor of his 50th anniversary, Mickey Mouse was awarded a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame,” between Elton John and Jack Nicholson.
One of Mickey’s favorite quotes is “There has to be a wienie at the end of every street.”
So, how did the use of Mickey’s name morph into an expression that means too easy or incompetent, as in a Mickey Mouse organization or enterprise? There doesn’t seem to be a clear answer to this, but some sources think it is related to the poor quality of Mickey Mouse watches. Others believe it started with the college students of the late 1950s, who describe an easy course as “a Mickey Mouse course.” Another possibility relates the derogatory use of the term started during World War II, when soldiers referred to “absurd army routine as ‘Mickey Mouse.’”
Another possibility is a belief that is related to the music world of jazz, when the term meant “small and worthless,” particularly a mediocre dance-band music, which was “a put-down based on the type of tunes played as background in cartoon films…”However the use of Mickey Mouse as a derogatory term may have come about, it’s unfortunate that poor Mickey has become the fall guy for the failings of various organizations and groups.
Apparently poor Mickey never had a chance to defend himself.
usa online gambling? Play Online Blackjack For Money Usa online casinos accepting mastercard usa e wallet express casinos 25.
online spades gambling Australia Gambling online blackjack in usa
play online casino!
usa online gambling? Roulette Software Usa online casinos accepting mastercard usa e wallet express casinos 25.
online spades gambling Gambling In Michigan online blackjack in usa
play online casino! Playtech Bingo
