THE TWO BANKERS WHO BROKE THE WORLD
Re: James Srodes’s The National Socialism of Obamanomics:
Just one quick remark — your “four man” thesis is in complete contradiction with the story of the 1927 meeting at Long Island as described in “America’s Great Depression” by Murray Rothbard. In his book, Rothbard argues that both Schacht and Rist (representing “Banque de France”) were against the suggestions coming from Strong and Montagu Norman regarding the interest rates and a concerted four-countries inflationary policies.
I am not sufficiently knowledgeable about the subject to know who is right based on the study of historical sources, but I certainly think that Rothbard was a very competent economist and historian.
So who is right and how can we check it?
— Jerzy Strzelecki
Re: Quin Hillyer’s Obama the Destroyer:
The tone of this article reminds me of how my wife gets when she is beyond all reason with anger at me — full of exaggeration, generalization, selective attention, distortion and catastrophization. I’ve learned there is no reasoning with someone in this condition, i.e., unfortunately, the conservatives in this country at this time.
From a logical proof point of view this editorial is just silly and amateurish, again, unfortunately, representative of the conservatives in this country at this time.
I’ve learned that what my wife is doing in this condition is voicing her fears, projecting them onto me and finding “proof” of them through exaggeration, generalization, etc.
It’s very difficult to convince someone in this condition that they are doing this, but you might want to think about it.
— Steve Kilner
Walnut Creek, California
I think you have got it partly right, but I think you should include all liberal Democrats and Republicans.
Why doesn’t someone do a report on the first Trade Center bombing. The FBI was putting agents in the radical muslim organizations to find out who the radicals were, and the liberal lawmakers raised a big media stink. And that led to the 9/11 Trade Center destruction. Now we have the same thing all over again. Who were these liberals who interfered with our law enforcement?
Under the rules that the liberals are trying to use against the past administration, shouldn’t the liberals that weakened our law enforcement agencies be tried for murder of all the people who were murdered in the last Trade Center bombing?
THE DARK SIDE
Re: Max Schulz’s Greenpeace Un-Moored:
When Senator Arlen Specter jumps sides, he is hailed by the left as a patriot and welcomed with open arms. But when Mr. Moore does the same, he becomes enemy number one and labeled as a traitor and fascist. Further, the Watermelon Brigade (Green on the outside and Red on the inside) pull Stalinist shenanigans and write him out of history (and “Holy 1984, Batman!”) delete him from historical pictures.
Mr. Moore stands by his principles and where scientific inquiry leads him. He offers further proof that where a man starts his life is less important that where he takes it.
— Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York
Re: W. James Antle, III’s Having a Ball in the Hudson Valley:
Google these: “Greg Ball” and “Courage Cup.”
You might think that you are supporting a conservative, but what you are supporting is a self-promoting political opportunist. He destroys any one that opposes him; he is a poser and a fraud. Ball took on a 12 year incumbent, the state assembly minority pro-tempore, a guy that actually was able to advance conservative and Republican values, and turned him out of office, on a platform of “illegal immigration is illegal.” Hmmm…last I knew the NY state Assembly was two-thirds Democrat. Outside of that, the state has no ability to enforce federal laws related to immigration. Ball, now after 3 years, and no accomplishments in the assembly, much less the private sector, is going to be our Godsend.
As a conservative and a patriot, I would never, ever, pull the lever for a man like Ball. I know what he has done, and, not done.
THE EXPENSIVE MARKET
Re: Eric Peters’s Outsourcing the Bailout:
Wow! God Bless Eric Peters for the courage and clarity in this article. Free market conservatives have drunk their own cool aid on the globalization issue to the detriment of all U.S. citizens. Free trade as currently practiced is exactly labor arbitrage. What we need is a worker’s capitalism!
— Darrell Judd
With the government takeover of the US auto companies, doesn’t that make their employees now government employees? If they are government employees, are they not restricted from contributing as an entity (the UAW) to political candidates? Does that not also mean the UAW cannot form Political Action Committees to support candidates and proposed legislation or regulations? Does that not restrict the UAW from lobbying for the “card registration” on unionizing votes?
Being government employees of course does not disenfranchise UAW members as voters. But it seems to me the UAW can no longer dump all that cash into the coffers of Democrat candidates. Perhaps the UAW will no longer be able to claim that “they elected the President.” Have thereby the Democrats not shot themselves in the foot again? Is this not another case of Obama’s “inadequate vetting” of proposed actions?
Do we not have another example of the Law of Unintended Consequences (LUC) relating to precipitous government economic planning or social engineering actions?
Perhaps it will also be seen as a bit of LUC for Conservatives?
— Larry M. Southwick
TO THE HILTON
Re: George Neumayr’s My Left Breast: The Carrie Prejean Story:
The aspect that has not been pointed out enough about the “Carrie Prejean National Crisis” is that the pageant has only itself to blame. Miss California did not bring up the subject of “gay marriage.” It was Perez Hilton who opened that door. It was disingenuous and graceless for Hilton to ask the question, hear an answer shared by a majority of Americans, and then go into hyperventilating outrage.
Years ago, an attempt was made to render any expression of pro-life views bad manners. “Well, of course, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, my dear. But one just doesn’t express them in polite company. You might hurt someone’s feelings. What if a lady present had had an abortion sometime earlier in her life? She shouldn’t be made to feel bad.”
So it is with the “gay marriage” issue. One isn’t supposed to offend those who would take offence. Even though a congregation holds that homosexual behavior is clearly condemned by Scripture and tradition, our denominational leaders at headquarters would have us keep silent about the matter so that gay visitors would not be made to feel “unwelcome.”
There will always be contentious issues of the day. When it is deemed that expression of only one side is permitted, this has nothing to do with classical liberalism. It is repression. Among gentlemen and ladies of good will, one’s opponent is treated with generosity and respect. “Gay marriage” is an open question, yet many feel perfectly justified to attack Miss Prejean. Prior to Hilton’s self-serving question, Miss Prejean was just a pretty, young woman in a bikini to the public. After Hilton’s question, she was supposed to be a black-hearted social pariah.
Make no mistake: Carrie Prejean was abused not for breast implants or running around in her panties. She was personally attacked precisely because she gave an answer many did not want to hear.
— Mike Dooley
THE DARK KNIGHT OF MALTA
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s McAuliffe’s Mischief:
Further to your column, and illustrating your point, you may not be aware that McAuliffe announced in an interview on the Hewitt radio show about two years ago that he was “up for Malta.” Actually, there were indeed two bozos in the Knights of Malta who had sponsored this pro-abortion character’s proposed membership. When word thus got out to the membership, there were outraged calls to the Washington office (Federal Association, one of three for Malta in the US) and the application was “withdrawn.” Subsequently, the office manager at Malta (Joe Dempsey), with whom you can perhaps verify this episode, denied that McAuliffe was ever an official candidate for membership.
— Charles Molineaux, KM
BEATING AROUND BUSH
Re: David N. Bass Don’t Divorce the Marriage Issue:
You are correct in your assumptions about the GOP demise, it’s not traditional marriage. Maybe it has more to do with uncontrolled spending by Republicans, or starting a war in Iraq. Maybe it was enabling the mass exodus of jobs too China, where are the Reagan Democrats going to work now? I’ll bet the trillions of dollars lost in the Stock Market crash caused in part by inept regulators had an effect. Maybe some were offended by reluctance of Bush to control the borders. Heck, I’ll bet without much trouble I can find another dozen reasons. The bottom line is Bush will go down in History as The Worst President, even exceeding Jimmy Carter.
The worst part of this sad story is that I wrote many emails to the WH and my Senators imploring them not to go down the road too Iraq and spelled out the consequences in some detail back in the fall of 2002.
— Dennis Homerick
OH TO BE AN EAST TEXAS RANCHER
Re: Beverly Gunn’s letter (under “Far from the Madding Crowd”) in Reader Mail’s The (Same) Sex Issue:
Ben Stein wrote that he rarely has found, in his travels, any part of America to be unlikable. I’m sure Mr. Stein would find Mrs. Gunn’s East Texas an agreeable place. I know I wish that Mrs. Gunn and I were neighbors.
— Dan Martin
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.