I feel that there is a whole group of people who have come to see the insanity of the direction we are headed in who still hold Ron Paul at arm’s length. This is too bad, and frankly ignorant.
It's been a long journey, but Samsung's managed to build out a compelling camera lineup that has something for everyone. Pros can get the high-end NX30; cameraphone addicts can pick up the Galaxy K Zoom; and selfie fanatics will probably go for the...
Pocket has long been one of our favorite services for saving articles and reading them later. Beneath the surface, though, you can use Pocket for a lot more than just snatching up the occasional long read. Here's how to use Pocket like a pro.
Today, the aging barns enjoy a cult following of nostalgic “barnstormers” who travel the country cataloguing these fading relics of an earlier time. One of these devoted fans of the Mail Pouch barns is a West Virginian named Greg Puckett, who, by day, happens to be the director of Community Connections, a nonprofit substance abuse prevention organization in Princeton, W.Va.
The breast cancer awareness barn from the nearby road. / Courtesy Community Connections.
“As a communications guy, I just found that to be a phenomenal campaign,” said Puckett.
He started brainstorming about ways of pairing the old Mail Pouch aesthetic with anti-tobacco message, and after months of pestering the state’s Division of Tobacco Prevention, Puckett finally wrangled a grant in 2009. It funded what he believes to be the country’s first barn advertisement for quitting chewing tobacco, in Monroe County, W.Va.
A celebration of the breast cancer awareness barn. / Courtesy Community Connections.
It went over well, and in the years since, Puckett’s organization has painted one or two barns each year in different parts of the state. Most include the slogan “Treat Yourself to Health” – a riff on Mail Pouch’s exhortation to “Treat Yourself to the Best” – and a phone number for the state’s tobacco quitline. More recently, they’ve done two pink breast cancer-awareness barns.
‘If I could just save my two kids from chewing the daggone stuff, hopefully some other parents will take notice.’
The latest barn to join the anti-tobacco collection is the largest one yet, perfectly situated for visibility along a highway in Hampshire County, W.Va., and completed in the fall of 2013. When approached by Community Connections, owner Pete Peacemaker was happy to support the cause. Peacemaker has chewed tobacco since he was a boy, and, after multiple attempts to quit, is eager to keep his own twin boys and their peers from ever starting.
“If I could just save my two kids from chewing the daggone stuff, hopefully some other parents will take notice,” said Peacemaker, who recently fell off the wagon after a two-year period when he thought he’d finally licked the habit. “I know a lot of teenagers chew that stuff.”
All of the anti-tobacco barns in West Virginia have been painted by Scott Hagan, who bills himself The Barn Artist. Hagan grew up in Ohio and got his start by painting his dad’s barn in homage to the Ohio State Buckeyes. Soon thereafter, as his barn painting career began taking off, he sought advice from an elderly man who lived nearby named Harley Warrick, who painted or re-painted more than 20,000 Mail Pouch barns between 1946 and 1991. Warrick, who died in 2000, bequeathed Hagan some painting wisdom along with some old equipment, which Hagan continues to use today.
Painting the new advertisement onto the barn. / Courtesy Community Connections.
Hagan himself has re-painted about a dozen Mail Pouch barns, and isn’t too ideological about the specifics of his barn commissions. He doesn’t use tobacco, and says his worst habit is sweet tea.
“I think it’s a good program. It’s a good way to get the message out,” he said, on his work with Puckett on the anti-tobacco barns. “[But] to me, Mail Pouch is … iconic. It’s a historical landmark.”
Puckett agrees, seeing a place for his contemporary public health message alongside historical preservation on barns across the Mountain State. This fall, he’s having Hagan paint one or two more anti-tobacco barns, bringing the total up close to 10, and plans to keep doing more and more.
The inauguration of the quit spit tobacco barn. / Courtesy Community Connections.
The state’s aging collection of Mail Pouch barns are headed in the opposite direction, fading, peeling and falling down. Last year, four were lost, says Puckett, who may be the only anti-tobacco crusader around who’s concerned about disappearing tobacco advertising.
“I don’t want to lose the Mail Pouch barns either,” he said. “Even though I don’t believe in the message, I believe that they’re culturally significant to the state of West Virginia.”
“At the farmers markets, we got together with other women producers or couples farming, and the topic of tools constantly came up,” says Adams. Women farmers said they felt they were too weak to work with certain tools and regularly expressed frustration with everything from roto-tillers to tractor hitches. But Adams and Brensinger decided weakness wasn’t the problem. “Some of the tools didn’t work because they were designed for men,” Adams adds. “We saw a need for a place where women could go for tools that work for their bodies.”
And as a result, they founded Green Heron Tools in 2008 — to find and develop farming and gardening tools designed to work with the strengths of the female body.
It seemed like a market opportunity dying for attention. After all, in the past 30 years, the number of farms in the U.S. operated by women has nearly tripled. According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, women operated five percent of the nation’s farms in 1978. By 2007, they owned 14 percent. While women-owned operations tend to be smaller (most have annual sales of less than $10,000), their numbers and their revenue are growing. Some 2,000 female producers have sales of $1 million or more.
As the engineers began videotaping women farmers shoveling, they discovered women use tools very differently.
And women who are not sole owners are still a significant force in agricultural labor. While 300,000 women own their own farms, about one million qualify as “farm operators,” often running an agricultural operation alongside a spouse.
And while any producer knows how physically demanding farm labor is, most accept back and muscle injuries as part and parcel of lifting and maneuvering heavy equipment or contending with tough farm labor like repeated digging. But Adams and Brensinger felt it didn’t have to be this way, for women or men. “What we discovered was a gaping niche,” explains Brensinger. “We understood the link between tools and equipment and health and safety.”
To get their business idea up and running, the partners applied for an $80,000 Phase I Small Business Innovation Research grant through the U.S. Department of Agriculture. “We held focus groups with women throughout the country and conducted an online survey,” Adams explains. “We received a lot of feedback from women on what they liked and didn’t like about tools and which ones they most wanted to see redesigned.”
Feedback in hand, Adams and Brensinger applied for a Phase II SBIR grant, this time in the amount of $400,000, to actually develop the equipment women farmers said they were lacking. They hired an agricultural engineer in the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Department at Penn State University, an industrial engineer specializing in ergonomics, an occupational therapist and a Ph.D. candidate at Penn State to help them create women-focused tools.
As the engineers began videotaping women farmers shoveling, for example, they discovered women use tools very differently. They put shovels into the ground at an angle to take advantage of lower body strength, rather than straight down as men do. “Women’s strength is in their lower body,” Adams explains, “so we decided to create a shovel that capitalized on how women put shovels in the ground.”
For two years, the partners and their researchers pulled shovels off the shelf at places like Lowe’s and Home Depot and sent women into the fields with them to monitor how they used them, including measuring the CO2 exchange in their breathing to determine the calorie burn required of different shovel types. They ultimately designed a shovel with a large definition, angled blade, and large D-handle (available in three sizes) that weighs only four pounds. “Our shovel required the least energy to use,” Adams remarks. “There was real science behind it.”
‘Everything we sell has particular characteristics that make them ideal for women’
Called the HERS™ Shovel, it is the world’s first ever ergonomically designed shovel for women. The shovel is their best-selling tool and so far the only one they’ve developed themselves that they’ve brought to market (the other ergonomically-designed items now for sale were developed by outside sources). Currently, Adams and Brensinger and their research team are finishing up a three-year project to design and develop a new lightweight, battery-powered roto-tiller.
“Instead of using rotary tines, it uses coiled, conical blades that look like augers,” Brensinger explains. “They dig as well as help propel the machine forward.” She says because it’s battery-powered, the Green Heron tiller doesn’t vibrate or throw the operator around either, nor does it pulverize the soil as traditional roto-tillers do. “It’s gentler on both the operator and the soil,” she adds.
The tiller also allows users to adjust the handlebar height and the depth of the till. The tiller is patented but not yet available for sale.
Green Heron also sells a variety of hand tools, from soil knifes to hand plows, developed by companies that have paid special attention to ergonomics. “Everything we sell has particular characteristics that make them ideal for women,” Brensinger says. They’ve discovered many of the tools through feedback from their own customers.
“Women play a critical role in producing food,” she says. “Our philosophy is to build on the strengths of women.”
A Swedish World Champion logger shows us how to properly fell a tree with a chainsaw. All you need is some confidence, the right safety gear, and (perhaps) some plaid fleece.
If you'll permit me a bit of drive-by cross-linking, this is part of what I was talking about earlier with the "Takers who are also Makers" post. Part of the dependency process is convincing people that they "deserve" far more than they earn, which makes them resent the people who already have those things... and fills them with rage at anyone who suggests they should work hard to get what they want.
Big Government's favorite clients have been told they can't work hard enough to get the American Dream. That article you cited is essentially telling lower-middle-class folk that the American Dream has been moved completely outside of their reach. They can't earn enough to buy a $275,000 house with all the trimmings. Conclusion: America is unfair, the "dream" has been stolen by greedy rich SOBs, and it's time to rally behind socialists who will punish the "thieves" and redistribute their ill-gotten loot.
You make a great point that the American Dream has always been more about the journey than the destination. It's not something that has a specific price tag. But to the extent that it can be expressed in material terms, I feel safe in saying that the "working poor" can afford a lifestyle vastly superior to what the upper-middle-class enjoyed just a generation or two ago, including luxuries that simply did not exist back then. Drop luxuries from the equation, and there's no question the necessities of life are more readily available than ever.
But none of that matters to people who have been convinced that life in this country is a game rigged permanently against them. The Left can only get so far with a dependency class that views itself as dependents. What they really need to win this game is control over the productive - a sense that even hard-working people need some government cheddar just to make ends meet.
For added fun, we could run down USA Today's American Dream shopping list and talk about how the government distorts the price of virtually everything on it...
The weather is expected to be great in Atlanta throughout the Fourth of July holiday weekend. Might be time to check out some of what Zagat says are the city’s “11 Hottest Rooftop Restaurants and Bars.”
The list includes:
*5 Seasons Westside (Marietta Street)
*Six Feet Under (Grant Park or Westside)
*Shout (Peachtree Road)
*Skylounge (Marietta Street)
*Wetbar (Atop W Downtown)
Click here to view Zagat’s complete list and to view a slideshow. The list includes addresses, suggested menu…
When the ancient Inuit first took to their craft along the shores of Greenland their paddles were already influenced by generations of previous paddle carvers. The Inuit migrations from the east and west bought traditions and techniques developed along the shores of the northern Atlantic and Pacific nations. Predominately double bladed, the Inuit’s paddles evolution had been heavily influenced by the stealth and speed necessary for hunting. Modern paddlers’ needs have changed, and there are few left who subsistence hunt, so it is not surprising that the shape of their paddles has continued to evolve.
The Greenland paddle is a powerful tool. Many people seem only to associate them with kayak rolling. This stereotyping is probably exacerbated by people like me publishing rolling videos and there being few published articles on the use of the paddle for that at which it really excels; paddling forward and maneuvering the kayak. Many long distance paddling records have been set using Greenland paddles; remember the speed record set by Jo O’Blenis circumnavigating Vancouver Island? That was set with a Greenland paddle. Remember James Manke’s trip down the Grand Canyon last year? That was completed exclusively with a Greenland Paddle. When using the appropriate size and style of Greenland paddle for the conditions, and with the appropriate training, the Greenland paddle can excel in nearly all environments and conditions. Is it perfect? That is up to you to determine. What I hope to do is to make sure you appreciate the nuances of the Greenland paddle design, and hence help you on your quest for the perfect paddle. A selection of my collection of paddles from the following paddle makers; Sipke Deboer, Adanac Paddles, Lumpy Paddles, TandJ Paddles, Joe O’ Paddles, Northern Light Paddlesports, Superior Paddles, Gear Labs, Novorca. (Many paddles are missing from the picture as they were on loan, that is part of the reason why i own so many, to allow others to experience them. You can experience them by coming to a clinic.)
Much has been written about the principle that Greenland Paddles are sized based upon a set of anthropomorphic rules. These rules are well documented on many of the Traditional paddling websites. Length, width, Loom size, shoulder position etc. are all specified based upon the paddler’s body. One point that is frequently overlooked is that traditionally one’s kayak was also constructed using a set of anthropomorphic rules so not only did the paddle match the paddler, but the paddle also matched the kayak. Unless one is custom building a skin-on-frame kayak using the traditional measurement practices, it is very unlikely that the modern sea kayaker is paddling a kayak of similar proportions. Most modern kayaks are wider, flatter bottomed, shorter, and higher decked. The paddler is generally sitting raised up on a comfy foam or fiberglass seat, a stark contrast to sitting on a layer of animal pelts to protect your bottom from the cold water pressing the qajaq ribs into you. These changes in kayak design have resulted in corresponding changes in paddle design. We have also changed what we are doing in our kayaks. Rock hopping, surfing, river running, kayak camping, rolling competitions and racing have all evolved as kayaking has moved from a subsistence life skill to a sport and recreation. As our use of the kayaks has changed so too have the paddles we use.
If you look closely at the archives of most major paddling forums you will find plenty of raging debates questioning if the Greenland paddle is better than a Euro-blade paddle, arguing which is the “Proper paddle” for different tasks etc. My favorite remarks usually involve people hurling comments at Greenland paddlers asking when was the last time they hunted for seals. I am sure these discussions will go on for as long as there are such different designs of paddles in common use.
Rather than debate the merits let’s just assume for the rest of this article that you are one of those people who have decided, for whatever reason, that you are going to paddle with a Greenland paddle.
If you are interested in building a replica of an ancient paddle design used by the Inuit to hunt seals there are many great books published containing the surveys of all the critical dimensions of paddles that have been recovered by historians, my favorite is Kayaks of Greenland by Harvey Golden. Just as building a replica skin-on-frame hunting kayak will not necessarily result in a suitable kayak to fit you, so too building a replica paddle will not necessarily result in the perfect paddle for you. For many the point is not to build perfection: it is that recreating history can be a fun and rewarding task.
The remainder of this article is written to help those readers amongst us who want to pay homage to the origins of our paddling sport and use a traditional Greenland paddle, but wish to make it a practical, efficient and comfortable tool. Size meets purpose and craft
Reduced to its most simple elements there are perhaps three absolutely critical design measurements on a Greenland paddle; overall length, blade width, loom length.Currently I like to paddle with three different length paddles, 84” 86” and 90”. Each paddle has a very different mix of dimensions, and each paddle has its own specialization.
Three of my favorite paddles: 84″ x 3.5″, 86″ x 3.125″, 90″ x 2.875″
When surfing or rock hopping I like to have a paddle that is shorter and wider (84” length x 3.5” width) than the paddles I use to travel long distances. When in the rocks the extra width creates a greater bite to the paddle earlier in the stroke, requiring less depth of water, or immersion into the water and enabling faster turns due to the increased leverage. Later I will discuss the blade shape that also helps achieve this greater power. In surf two factors become increasingly important. One is the ability to accelerate rapidly and the other is to transfer the paddle rapidly across the kayak. The acceleration is aided by a wider blade tip. A shorter paddle is easier to transition between sides due to the decreased momentum of the shorter overall length and the earlier release from the water as you raise the paddle. A longer paddle will be held captive for longer as you have to lever the paddle upwards to remove it from a wave. One challenge that shortening the paddle can create is a decrease in the power of a stern ruder, a common surfing tool. Every change is a compromise, so balancing the power you need for turning with the speed you want to be able to transition is necessary to find your perfect paddle.
When paddling long distances I prefer to switch to a longer narrower paddle (90” length x 2.875” width). The narrower blade softens the paddles “catch” as it enters the water, and this in turn eases any shock on the shoulders with each stroke. The additional length causes the blade to submerge deeper, and this ensures sufficient surface area is submerged to create the power necessary to sustain the forward stroke efficiency.
My everyday paddle is also my favorite rolling paddle (86” length x 3.125” width).I have found this size to be very versatile. When learning to roll, a wide long paddle may help people feel like they can roll better, but this is really misleading as good rolling does not rely on the paddle’s surface area for support. I prefer to roll with my regular paddle as it will quickly show me if I am overusing the paddle, as the smaller surface area makes it sink quicker if I do start heaving on it.
Before sizing a paddle length it is useful to determine the loom width. Loom width was usually determined by the paddler’s hips width plus hand size. I have found that kayak width must also be accommodated if a wider than traditionally dimensioned kayak is being paddled. As the kayak gets wider the loom needs to grow to accommodate it. Traditional Greenland kayaks were only a couple of inches wider than the hips so adjust accordingly. My preferred (average) loom size is 20 inches, and this works for my Greenland and British kayaks, which vary in width from 19” – 21.25”. If you want to feel the difference grab a short broom handle, sit in your kayak and just perform a fluid paddling stroke motion with your hands set at different widths, and see how they feel for you. Find your sweet spot and measure it. Generally the loom width is the distance between your first and second knuckles on each hand.
I initially sized the length of my paddle by sitting in my kayak with a broom handle and moving as If I was about to start a forward stroke (using the loom width I had previously identified). I wanted a blade length that was poised to enter at the point where my power arm was fully extended forward, my core was rotated slightly and my upper hand was in its natural stroke position and height. When trying this yourself you need to determine the type of paddle stroke angle you intend to use. A high or low angle stroke will substantially vary the height of the upper hand which in turn affects the angle of the catch phase which in turn affects the optimum length paddle.
Having found a loom width and overall length the next major dimension is the blade width. We usually talk about blade width at the widest point. Knowing where and what type of paddling activities you will be doing will help you to determine the blade width. As I previously discussed I use multiple widths to suit the differing environments. Don’t expect to find one size that does all. When considering rolling with a Greenland paddle it is important to ensure that the blade comfortably fits across your palm between thumb and fingers to allow the high and low brace (layback and forward) rolls to be completed in comfort. If the paddle is too wide you will end up gripping the edge which can cause the blade to dive during rolls. Optimum control is maintained when the blade width comfortably matches your grip. Blade Perimeter Shape
Greenland Paddles taper from the tip to the loom, some in a straight line, some with a concave curve and some with a convex curve. Paddle power under acceleration is substantially affected by the rate of growth of surface area as the paddle is submerged. To maximize acceleration in the surf and turning power in rock gardens many people, myself included, like to keep the first 6 – 8” of the blade the same width, and then taper in a convex shape down to the loom shoulders. For my long distance paddle where I am trying to minimize shock and make the catch more gentle I like the paddle to taper in nearly a straight line. Tip shape
Just like the many faces of religion there are many tip shapes. From semi-circular to square and everything in between. The tip shape seems to have various affects; it changes the noise the paddle makes when entering the water, it slightly varies the surface area, and it affects the way the water flows around the paddle during the power phase of the stroke. Some people claim tip shape can also affect paddle flutter, but I think the overall blade profile has a bigger impact on flutter. There are also aesthetic impacts. Personally I like a rounded tip unless I am looking for maximum power, and then I will go for a square tip with rounded corners. Blade Profile
The blade profile generally varies along the length of the blade. A flatter profile at the tip seems to allow the paddle to enter the water quietly and efficiently. A diamond shape near the loom’s shoulders helps make the blade angle (or cant) when gripped, which helps maintain the traditional strokes especially for beginners. When carving in wood it is important to ensure there is sufficient wood along the length of the blade to maintain its strength. Thin blade profiles can be more vulnerable to being bashed on rocks so again you may need to change your design to suit the conditions.
When paddled the way most Inuit seem to have used the paddles the blade is canted. The blade slices through the water so it would seem to make the most sense to create a foil like cross-section to maintain laminar flow over the blade during the stroke, as with a wing paddle. The paddle blades are symmetrical in cross section so that limits the ability to create a foil, but creating a hydro-dynamically efficient shape can have a great deal of impact on how the paddle feels.
The angle of attack of the paddle’s power face will affect the angle that the paddle needs to be held at during the power phase of the stroke. When people using a new paddle describe it as fluttering it usually means they are holding it at an angle that it was not designed to accommodate. By trying a few paddles of different cross section you will be able to find the shape that works well at the angle you like to hold the paddle. Shoulder Shape
The shoulders of the paddle affect the comfort of the paddle as well as the angle at which you hold it. You should not have any pressure points when paddling. Under normal conditions blisters should not appear on your fingers or palms. Many paddle makers have become renowned for their ability to create soft comfortable shoulders. The value of these builders’ experience should not be underestimated. Poor shoulders can ruin a paddle.
Another option to consider as you use Greenland paddles is to have no shoulders. I like paddling with shoulderless paddles as it allows for rapid transition between sides in surf and allows me to change to a sliding stroke very easily. Some people, especially when learning, prefer the solid feel shoulders give them as it removes any doubt about where they are holding the paddle and when it is correctly located for their strokes or rolls. Loom cross section
Looms generally come in three shapes; square, oval and round. Square and oval looms tend to cause the paddle to sit at an angle in your hands when you grip it which can provide directional stability to the blades. Round looms tend to have no stabilizing effect, but they can be comfortable at any angle. The loom cross section should be sized so that your thumb and forefinger can comfortably circle the shaft and your little finger is not strained. Some square shafts can be uncomfortable if you are not paddling with a canted stroke so make sure you know how you are going to paddle before you pick the loom shape. Material
Wood and bone are the traditional materials used to make paddles. For the average amateur the material of choice is wood. Nice tight grain cedar with no knots is my preference but many other woods have been used successfully. Spruce has been used to make some very strong paddles. Cedar is used to make very light paddles. They are always a compromise between the availability of materials and the desired design. Many people either fit hardwood tips to replace the traditional bone, and some dip the paddle tips in epoxy or other materials to reinforce them. I prefer just to sand the raw ends of the paddle if they get beat up, and rub some Tung oil into them to keep them looking beautiful and repel the water.
There are many commercial makers of Greenland paddles, and the predominant materials they use are wood and Carbon Fiber. Carbon fiber is now being used by commercial paddle manufacturers to construct light strong paddles. The advances in carbon fiber technology allow paddles to be made that cannot be reliably constructed in wood. Ultra-fine thin blades preferred by some racers would quickly become damaged if made of wood but the strength of carbon and epoxy allows for some very elegant designs. The Carbon fiber paddles are generally very consistent due to their molding process. The paddles’ flexibility can also be changed by altering the carbon composition, allowing them to flex in a similar fashion to wood or to be as rigid as steel. You can now choose. Engineering diagram courtesy Novorca, for 86″ x 3.25″ X2 design paddle. Note the lenticular cross section near the loom and the powerful tip design.
Buying a paddle
I have met many people who think they have their perfect paddle. Many of these people have never had the luxury of trying and experimenting with paddles to understand the impact of the design shapes and sizes, and how they can make the difference between a good paddle and a great paddle.
Prior to investing in a commercial paddle I recommend you either try making a few paddles to understand what size and shape suits you, your paddling and your kayak, or borrow as many paddles as you can from different paddlers and find out how they feel when you put them to use. Simply picking up a Greenland paddle off a rack at a store or on a website and expecting it to be awesome is unlikely to result in you being happy together in the long term.
The quality of commercial paddles both wood and carbon varies considerably. Some manufacturers take great pride in creating works of art. Some craftspeople are highly skilled at timber selection, a vital part of the wooden paddle building process. Some are low cost, some are expensive. Some come in a whole range of sizes, some vary very little. Each is a compromise. Ask amongst your paddling friends and online network for recommendations, and read online reviews (I have published many). There are some true crafts people out there who are able to make very special paddles, maybe even your perfect paddle.
If an illegal alien has a child on American soil, the Constitution does not require the child be granted American citizenship. Congress can give citizenship to anyone it wants, but the Fourteenth Amendment only commands citizenship to persons born on U.S. soil to parents who are not citizens of a foreign country.
Part of the chaos on America’s southern border is driven by illegal aliens seeking to have “anchor babies.” Under the current Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), if an illegal alien has a baby on U.S. soil, that baby is an American citizen.
Since all citizens have a right to be here, the illegal adult then cites the need to keep families together as justifying the parents' staying in the U.S. for the rest of their lives, and “family reunification” is cited as grounds for bringing the rest of the family to the United States.
However, Congress could change that law any time, because it goes far beyond what the Constitution commands. Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment begins, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
While many erroneously claim that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born on American soil, the reality is that is not the law and has never been the law. Current immigration law—found at 8 U.S.C. § 1401(a)—specifies that a baby born on American soil to (1) a foreign ambassador, (2) head of state, or (3) foreign military prisoner is not an American citizen.
But if the view promoted by the Left that citizenship is automatic (and parroted by many in the middle and even on the Right who have not seriously studied the issue) is correct, then those three exceptions would be unconstitutional. The debate over birthright citizenship turns on what the Citizenship Clause means by the words “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
Every provision of the Constitution has a fixed meaning. Because only “We the People” can adopt a constitutional provision—all 27 amendments in the Constitution were proposed by two-thirds of the House and Senate, then ratified by three-fourths of the states—the only legitimate way to interpret the Constitution is in accordance with the original meaning of those terms.
So the question becomes: What was the meaning of the Jurisdiction Clause in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified? One of the best tools for determining that is looking at the Civil Rights Act of 1866, enacted the same year that the Fourteenth Amendment was written by Congress.
As anyone who has seen the award-winning (and historically accurate) movie Lincoln understands, the Thirteenth Amendment—which ended slavery—barely passed Congress because many Democrats supported slavery, and it was only through the political genius and unwavering resolve of Republican President Abraham Lincoln that the Great Emancipator succeeded in getting the proposed amendment through Congress and to the states for ratification.
As my coauthor Ken Blackwell and I explain in more detail in our 2011 book Resurgent, the Civil Rights Act was first enacted by citing Section Two of the Thirteenth Amendment, which authorized Congress to implement the amendment through appropriate legislation.
The Civil Rights Act included a provision to define American citizenship to secure it for former slaves. It read, “All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”
But some supporters of racial equality were concerned that the Thirteenth Amendment didn’t authorize legislation that went beyond eliminating various aspects of slavery and even voted against the bill because they regarded it as unconstitutional. Led by one of the best constitutional lawyers in Congress, Rep. John Bingham (R-OH), they wrote what would be ratified in 1868 as the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, including the Citizenship Clause and its Jurisdiction Clause.
The movie Lincoln vividly portrays the political environment in 1865, illustrating why more expansive language—such as for citizenship, due process, equal protection, or voting rights—would have doomed the Thirteenth Amendment. All those had to wait for the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.
Conventional wisdom says that the Fourteenth Amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes from citizenship those who have diplomatic immunity or who are agents of a foreign country, explaining the three exemptions in federal law (ambassadors, heads of state, and foreign soldiers).
But the Civil Rights Act’s parallel language, “and not subject to any foreign power,” instead shows the Jurisdiction Clause excludes all citizens of any foreign country. The Citizenship Clause was intended to overrule the most infamous Supreme Court case in American history—the 1857 Dred Scott case—and ensure free blacks born in America could not be denied citizenship. It was never designed to make a citizen of every child born to a foreigner.
The Supreme Court expressly took note of this originating language of the Civil Rights Act in the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins. The Court acknowledged that Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment was condensed and rephrased from the Civil Rights Act and therefore that courts can look to that federal statute to resolve ambiguities in the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.
This came up again in the 1898 case U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, when the federal government attempted to deny permanent residence to an American citizen born to two Chinese noncitizens. The Supreme Court held that the Citizenship Clause guaranteed citizenship for “all children here born of resident aliens.”
While that decision is incorrect in light of the Civil Rights Act, even Wong Kim Ark nonetheless would not secure citizenship for the children of illegal aliens. The only Supreme Court support for birthright citizenship is Plyler v. Doe, a 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision written by ultra-liberal Justice William Brennan, which claimed that “no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment ‘jurisdiction’ can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.”
In that case, the Supreme Court held that states were required to pay for the public school education of children of illegal aliens. Conservative and moderate justices dissented from Plyler. It was wrongly decided and poorly reasoned and should be overruled.
While some conservative lawyers believe the Fourteenth Amendment requires birthright citizenship, many conservative giants like Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General Ed Meese support the originalist interpretation of the Jurisdiction Clause part of the Citizenship Clause. Leading conservative scholars like Professor John Eastman—a former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas—agree.
Even some who flatly reject conservatism agree. One example is Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Although a Reagan appointee, Posner’s hallmark is making decisions in accordance with what he regards as producing good public policy outcomes, rather than strictly following the clear meaning of the words in the law.
On this topic, Posner wrote in 2003 in Ofoji v. Ashcroft:
We should not be encouraging foreigners to come to the United States solely to enable them to confer U.S. citizenship on their future children. But the way to stop that abuse of hospitality is to remove the incentive by changing the rule on citizenship…
A constitutional amendment may be required to change the rule whereby birth in this country automatically confers U.S. citizenship, but I doubt it…
The purpose of the rule was to grant citizenship to the recently freed slaves, and the exception for children of foreign diplomats and heads of state shows that Congress did not read the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment literally. Congress would not be flouting the Constitution if it amended the Immigration and Nationality Act to put an end to the nonsense.
If a constitutional conservative Republican wins the White House, and Republicans control both the House and Senate, then as part of finally dealing with immigration Congress could enact this change.
First must be a statute that effectively secures the border. A second statute should address citizenship. Then a third could be a statute creating a broad and generous guest-worker program.
Each bill would save the United States billions of dollars per year. Consequently, each could be passed in the Senate through what is called “reconciliation,” and therefore could not be filibustered and instead passed with 51 votes. With 218 House members, 50 senators (plus the vice president), and a willing president, all this could become law in 2017.
Congress could specify that children of illegal aliens are not citizens or could go more broadly to include some or all legal temporary residents. It would certainly help garner conservative votes for follow-up legislation for a broad guest worker program if federal law specified that any children born to those guest workers would not be citizens and thus not anchor babies.
Such a law would provoke a lawsuit from parents of a child who does not receive citizenship due to the new law. It is not certain how the Supreme Court would rule on this question today, especially since it may require overruling Plyler. But there is a good chance it would succeed, and given how far out of control the border is, many would argue we must try everything possible.
Thank goodness for Netflix, for it is there that you can be treated to a 1966 televised adaptation of Henrik Ibsen’s must-see 1882 play, An Enemy of the People.
The play both reflects, and predicts, what happens when a Liberal majority takes hold of society.
The play’s conceit is simple. A small Norwegian village is about to become a world-class resort as it opens its therapeutic natural springs. However, scientist Dr. Thomas Stockmann discovers the water is being poisoned by runoff from the local tannery. He initially finds support to shut the springs down, yet the idealistic scientist is later ostracized, and his family destroyed by the town – primarily the crony capitalist mayor and the radical media.
Sound familiar?
The unfolding of the drama provides for crackerjack storytelling. Ibsen presents us with a scientist dedicated to facts. He spent many years penniless in the north, providing physician services to remote villages. He has a devoted wife, a daughter who teaches at the school, and two young boys. He now lives a comfortable, if not extravagant, life. He has a distant relationship with his brother, Peter, the town’s mayor.
When Stockmann discovers the springs are poisoned and must be shut down, he initially receives support from the town’s newspaper. We learn its editor is a radical, devoted to sticking it to the town’s fat cats. The paper’s publisher is a moderate, and represents the town’s small businessmen and homeowners. He’s most concerned with not upsetting anyone.
Ah, but then the Mayor gets involved. The report must be suppressed. Repairing the springs will mean raising taxes, which the homeowners won’t like. If the paper prints the report, the people will stop buying the publication. So both the Publisher and Editor back down.
Stockmann announces he’ll give a lecture, but nobody will rent him a hall. A neutral party – the town’s ship captain – offers his home. Yet that night, the Mayor usurps the lecture, turns it into a meeting, and Stockmann is shouted down. The next day, Stockmann loses his job, so does his daughter, his kids are beaten up, and his home vandalized. He is formally proclaimed “an enemy of the people.”
The play’s parallels to American society under the Obama Administration are striking. Crony capitalism. Radical media. The Establishment that just wants to hold on to what little they have. And of course, not only does the truth get shouted down, it is literally proclaimed an enemy.
Even the neutral sailor is punished – just for holding the meeting. He loses his ship, and cannot even sail the Stockmann family to safety in America. It is ultimately the tyranny of the majority that Ibsen is criticizing, with all parties save Stockmann held at their mercy. When that majority rejects the truth, it is the individual that is crushed.
The original play even makes a point that the radical paper is dependent upon the “masses that are not freethinkers,” and that freethinkers can rarely act on their opinions because the majority will not permit it.
However, in a remarkable parallel to the late Andrew Breitbart, the defiant Dr. Stockmann chooses to remain in the town. He embraces his title, “enemy of the people,” and proclaims in the play’s famous final line, “The strongest man in the world is the one who stands most alone.”
HOUSTON, Texas--Early in July it was revealed that doctors and nurses were allegedly threatened with arrest if they disclosed any information about the diseases discovered in federal housing facilities for illegal immigrants. Many on the left have claimed that by speaking out about their work at the facilities, medical personnel would be violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which "protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information." But Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet--an experienced physician and nationally recognized speaker--told Breitbart Texas that under the law nurses and doctors are free to speak out.
"It is not a violation of HIPAA for a doctor or nurse to speak out about a public health concern and not mention a patient's name," Vliet said. "Medical personnel should be free to be interviewed and speak about the kinds of diseases they are seeing and the frequency of them. This would serve the public good and safety--again, it is not a violation of HIPAA."
So far a slew of sicknesses have been brought into the U.S. by the recent tidal wave of illegal immigrants. Breitbart Texas recently reported on an outbreak of scabies in one housing facility for unaccompanied border minors--the infestation was contracted by numerous Border Patrol agents. Other additional illnesses have also been noted. "We are starting to see chickenpox, MRSA staph infections, we are starting to see different viruses," Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol agent Chris Cabrera told ABC 15.
At this point, it is somewhat unclear how or when the migrants are being checked for illnesses. Omar Zamora of the Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Sector previously told Breitbart Texas, "We don't screen for diseases. All we are is a processing center, so we don't do that."
Most of the border minors are being kept in overcrowded facilities ridden with poor hygiene; according to Dr. Vliet, this is the ideal condition for a viral outbreak.
She said, "Many people are trying to diminish the seriousness of this. They say, 'We have these diseases in the U.S.' Well yes, we do, but they've been well controlled, we have good hygiene, and most of our parents keep children home when they're sick. ... It's a very real risk. It could get out of hand very quickly; but since these are common disease that people have heard of, the risk isn't necessarily taken seriously."
Vliet mentioned that chickenpox--one of the illnesses identified within the migrant population--can be deadly and has the potential to spread to the general public. She said, "Chickenpox is highly contagious. What's worse about that is that it's much more severe when adults get it--in older people, it can cause death. It's very serious."
In Vliet's view, nurses and doctors in facilities have the right to speak out about medical dangers--and they should, she said, in order to decrease the chance of illnesses being contracted by the general public.
It is apparent, however, that the federal government is attempting to hide certain aspects of the border crisis. In June Breitbart Texas reported that Border Patrol agents were threatened with criminal charges for speaking to the press. And one month earlier, in May, Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) ordered agents not to speak to reporters regarding the 36,000 convicted criminal illegal immigrants that were released onto U.S. soil.
"We were given specific instructions not to comment on that report," Greg Palmore, a Texas-based ICE spokesman, told Breitbart Texas. He was referring to the report by the Center for Immigration Studies that outlined the criminals' release.
Trying to quell a controversy over a $225,000 speaking fee at UNLV, Hillary Clinton told ABC News Friday that all her speaking fees from colleges were "donated" to the family's Clinton Foundation. It naturally didn't occur to ABC News to ask whether Hillary deducted this "pass-through" from her taxes, as would likely be legal under the tax code.
“All of the fees have been donated to the Clinton Foundation for it to continue its life-changing and life-saving work. So it goes from a foundation at a university to another foundation,” Clinton told ABC.
The Clinton Foundation is a 501(c)3 tax-exempt organizations. All donations to it are deductible from the donors taxes. If Hillary "donated" the speaking fee as she claims, she would be able to deduct that donation from her gross income, lowering her tax bill considerably.
The Washington Post estimates that Hillary will deliver 8 speeches at universities this fall. The Washington Examiner calculates that she would earn at least $1.8 million from these speeches, based on some publicly released speaking fees.
If she donated that entire sum to the family foundation, she could save hundreds of thousands of dollars on her taxes. Even if the speaking fees were paid by the universities directly to the foundation, her speeches would likely be an in-kind contribution to the foundation, as she doesn't appear to be an officer or employee of the organization.
The Clinton Foundation has grown to a non-profit behemoth, with over $225 million in assets. It isn't entirely clear what the foundation actually does. Reading a summary of its activities filed with its annual 990 reads like a Clinton State of the Union address. With over $50 million in annual donations, Hillary's speaking fees would be a very small part of its operations.
Hillary says it does "life-changing and like-saving work," but it pays twice as much in salaries as it gives out in grants. It stands astride the nexus between government, big business and mega-wealthy individuals. The potential conflict of interest between its work and a Hillary presidential term would ordinarily invite thorough media scrutiny and vetting.
What's the point of a little "scrutiny", though, when "history" is in the making.
Tim Jenison, Founder of NewTek and star of Tim’s Vermeer, a critically acclaimed documentary about his discovery of a possible tool used by hyper-realist painters throughout history, takes us behind the curtain this week to see what tools made this investigation possible.
“A lot of people start out wanting to learn a language and then they realize it’s a lot of work, but the emphasis of this book is how to teach yourself a language, not to go to school but how to do it yourself and he’s got a step by step plan that actually works. Can’t recommend the book enough. ”
“It’s just a bunch of tiny little color pictures so if you can’t communicate with somebody you whip this out and point at a picture. There’s so many pictures in it that you always get the idea across. ”
“You just drop the papers in and push the button. There’s really no software to mess with. It just scans them in, both sides of the sheet if it is double sided, in color and it’ll turn it into a PDF or anything else you want.”
“You can drag any kind of material to it and it automatically shows up on all your computers and a local copy is kept on your computers. On your iOS or Android device it keeps the index and downloads things as you need them, but everything in synced constantly. ”
Superfocus Eyeglasses (No Longer Sold)
“Right now I’m looking at my computer screen and it’s about fourteen inches away from my eyes, but the whole thing is in perfect focus. Now, if I was wearing bifocals I’d have to tip my head back and try to find the part of the lens that works…There are other people making variable focus glasses, but nothing as good as this, so I really hope somebody takes over and starts making them again. ”
“You get incredible battery life because it’s always defaulting to low brightness and you can hold it in your teeth. It’s really small and it’s really handy. As I said, I’ve been through a lot of flashlights and this is currently the cream of the crop.”
“Ham radio is kind of a niche. I just had to mention it because I use the thing every day and it’s just a totally different experience to knob turning Ham radio. ”
“Y’know it’s amazing how much time has been saved by everybody having a multi-tool in their pocket because you’ve gotta run and rummage around this toolbox and that’s what we always used to do, but it’s a new world.”
“…there’s one tool that a nerd cannot be without and that is the “Green Tweaker,” the Xcelite R3322, which is a tiny little flat-blade screwdriver that every tech head has to have to make adjustments on things. Actually, the 3/32″, 3″ is the better one to have because it’s a bit longer. ”
“This extremely simple elegant device, it’s just a mirror on a stick and you have to put the mirror in exactly the right spot. If you spend enough time, you end up with a hyper-real photographic-looking painting.” (In the podcast, Tim shares some building tips that were not included in the documentary.)
Fracking has led to a greater reduction in carbon emissions than all the world’s wind turbines and solar panels put together, the Council of Europe heard last week.
Speaking at a meeting of the council, which promotes co-operation between all European nations, Chris Faulkner, chief executive of Breitling Energy, explained how shale gas has led the way in reducing carbon emissions in the U.S.:
"Fracking has succeeded where Kyoto and carbon taxes have failed. Due to the shale boom in the US, the use of clean burning natural gas has replaced much more polluting coal by ten per cent. In 2012, the shift to gas has managed to reduce CO₂ emissions by about 300 megatonnes (Mt).
"Compare this to the fact that all the wind turbines and solar panels in the world reduce CO₂ emissions, at a maximum, by 275 Mt. In other words, the US shale gas revolution has by itself reduced global emissions more than all the well-intentioned solar and wind in the world."
Oil and Gas Onlinereports that Faulker also called on Europe to follow America’s lead, saying that if other nations are serious about reducing carbon emissions, they should look beyond renewable energy:
"Many countries in Europe, and across the world, have similar opportunities to reduce their carbon footprint, and to experience the same economic benefits."
"These are not opportunities governments should overlook, or discount, as carbon reduction targets will not be achieved through renewables or any other current energy generation technology.
Faulkner also criticised opponents of fracking, saying that their criticisms are not based in fact:
"Opponents of fracking and shale exploitations cite various risks. Yet a million and a half wells have been fracked in the US since 1947 and 95 per cent of all wells in the US are fracked today. It is a very safe method of exploration and production. Fracking occurs at several thousand feet below freshwater aquifers. It is virtually impossible for any of the fracking fluid to climb back up through the rock formations between the shale gas deposits and the aquifer."
He then went on the praise the UK, which he said was the only European country to take shale exploration seriously, although he criticised shale industry for failing to sell itself correctly and engage with local communities to assuage any fears they may have.
"The UK is the only country in Europe which is progressing with shale exploration," added Chris Faulkner. "The rest of Europe is watching the UK very closely to see what happens.
"The UK government is making every effort to get this right, albeit without much help from the shale industry which has spectacularly failed to properly engage with governments and, more importantly, with the public at large.
"The handful of companies operating in the field have not made any real effort to engage with local communities around sites, enter into proper discussions with local councils, or discussed fracking with environmentalists, allowing them free range to influence public perceptions using inaccurate, misinterpreted or exaggerated information mainly from the US experience.
"The industry has also failed to come forward with any suggestions for compensating landowners and local communities, seemingly leaving it to government to regulate."
Several fracking areas in the UK have become sites for protests by environmental groups who remained convinced that shale exploration is dangerous. In May, it was alleged that protestors at the Daneshill drilling site in Nottinghamshire had turned to violence, including physically attacking staff working at the site.
A 58-year-old woman was arrested in connection with an assault on the site manager. Another female protestor allegedly screamed at a security guard: "We are going to kill you!"
John McGoldrick, chief executive of exploration firm Dart Energy, said: "We have recently witnessed an escalation in non-peaceful protest. Site personnel have been threatened with violence – death in one case – verbal abuse, racial abuse and now physical abuse.
"There is no way that the protest movement can claim it is making a peaceful protest. These abuses are despicable and cowardly."
Here in Boone, NC, the most perfect and beautiful spot in all of America (and therefore the universe), the sky is blue and the air is cool and dry. For that reason, a movie festival is probably not on my agenda this holiday weekend. But for those of you stuck inside, what better way is there to celebrate the 4th of July than with a movie binge that takes you through the history of this great country of ours.
My list is not perfect. Lists never are. It's a starting point. Feel free to make your own recommendations.
Enough with the preliminaries, I have slabs of fear to fry and illegal fireworks to light…
Oh, no, right away he's cheating -- "John Adams" isn't a movie, it's a television miniseries!
Whatever.
HBO poured $100 million dollars and none of its own politics into this 7-episode, 8 hour adaptation of David McCullough's Pulitzer Prize winning historical biography of the same name.
The result is absolute perfection.
I've read McCullough's book twice now. It's one of those reads you'll never live long enough to take in as much as you would like. Producer Tom Hanks, director Tom Hooper, and stars Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney not only do McCullough's masterwork justice, they do America justice.
By focusing on the long, troubled, and incredible life of one amazing but very flawed man, we witness the birth of an extraordinary country that began with the seed of a crazy idea:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
"John Adams" is about the history of our founding. Better yet, though, it is about the idea of our founding, and the sacrifices so many made to turn a wild experiment into mankind's only hope.
As much myth as it is movie, by focusing on the true story of the first American Civil War Army unit made up of only black troops, Edward Zwick's "Glory" is a potent reminder that even those horribly wronged by America's flaws still believed that the potential of our country was something worth fighting and dying for.
The first of director John Ford's trilogy of cavalry films, "Fort Apache" is a mature, reasoned, and honest look at the long, bloody and tragic war to settle the American West.
Ford's undying love for American tradition, family, song and most especially the everyday soldier just doing his duty, is only matched by the director's respect for the Apache Indian. If all men were as honorable as these men, Ford's film screams, what a world it would be.
But in life there is always a Colonel Owen Thursday (Henry Fonda), a vain arrogant and stupid bureaucrat empowered by a vain, arrogant, and stupid federal government.
Thursday (an obvious stand-in for Custer) eventually gets what he deserves. But nothing good comes from it. Honorable soldiers needlessly die with him and the twisting of the story of Thursday's death will be used against the Apache until they are no more.
Yes, I know director Lewis Milestone's Oscar winner has nothing to do with America or the American soldier. Still, 84 years later, this uncompromising story of a German schoolboy seeking glory and finding only horror, is still one of the best and most harrowing movies about war -- any war -- ever made.
Furthermore, the anti-war themes and depictions of the trench warfare that defined the War to End All Wars, are universal.
Don't make the mistake some have in believing "All Quiet On the Western Front" is a pacifist film that says wars should never be fought for any reason.
Keep in mind that the characters turned into idealistic cannon fodder are victims of a dishonest government, specifically a dishonest government bureaucrat (a schoolteacher). Erich Maria Remarque, the author of the novel the film is based on, disputed the notion his work was pacifist. He also published his 1929 masterwork in his home country of Germany.
His novel was one of the first the Nazis burned.
"All Quiet on the Western Front" is about knowing who the real enemy is.
Director John Ford makes his second appearance on this list with 1940's "Grapes of Wrath," a remarkable adaption of John Steinbeck's Pulitzer Prize winning novel about an Oklahoma family battered to pieces by an economic Depression and the Dust Bowl.
Produced in 1939-1940, when the Depression was in full-effect and WWII was still two years away, Ford, producer Daryl Zanuck, and screenwriter Nunnally Johnson made a calculated risk to make a film that is ultimately optimistic and hopeful about the future.
Whereas as Steinbeck's novel is almost oppressively bleak, the filmmakers had not yet lost faith that America wouldn’t come back, and they certainly hadn't lost faith in the indomitable strength of the American family.
Ford doesn't shy away from the Hell on Earth the Joad family -- a symbol for millions -- faced. He's just not ready to throw in the towel.
"The Grapes of Wrath" and the overall story of the Depression and Dust Bowl is also good to share with Global Warming Truthers. Compared to 1929, our current climate is a Garden of Eden.
Though there are four credited directors, "The Longest Day" is really a producer's picture and that producer was Daryl F. Zanuck.
Starting with the agonizing days in the lead up to D-Day and ending with the moment when the Allied forces had finally secured territory in France (and therefore secured victory), "The Longest Day" has it all -- a story that focuses on the everyday soldier, the commanders (straight up to General Eisenhower), the civilians living under Nazi tyranny, the Nazi high command, and the brave resistance fighters.
"The Longest Day" is about how we fought, why we fought, who fought, and who we fought for.
It is also about a day that, without hyperbole, can accurately be described as the most important and consequential of the 20th Century.
Director Spike Lee's controversial and brilliant biographical epic of Malcolm X, the firebrand Muslim street preacher assassinated in 1965, is not only one of the best films of the 1990s and a look at the Civil Rights era from a point of view that involves no one white, it's also a reminder of how America really is a kind of Shangri-la where you can reinvent yourself again and again.
Malcolm X was born Malcolm Little in 1925. In 1946, the street hustler and drug addict was thrown in prison for burglary. After his release in 1952, he reinvented himself as a leader in the Nation of Islam, a black supremacist group that lashed out at the injustice of racism and segregation. In 1964, a disillusioned Malcolm X left the Nation, saw the evil of his own racism, and sought to reinvent himself again before being gunned down by a member of the Nation.
Lee's movie is broke into those three sections, and like its subject is unsparing in its condemnation and depictions of government-approved and enforced racism.
There's no white liberal hero here. Just black men no longer willing to accept injustice at the hands of the American government.
"If you don't listen to Martin Luther King," Malcolm X seemed to say, "Then you are going to have to deal with me."
Director Philip Kaufman's adaptation of Tom Wolfe's bestseller looks at America's race to beat the Russians into space from the point of view of the Mercury Seven astronauts and their godfather, legendary test pilot Chuck Yeager (Sam Shepard).
Sporting a who's-who cast that would go on to enjoy careers that extend to this very day, the film is perfectly quirky, laugh-out-loud hilarious, inspiring, and unforgettable.
The political and cultural battles here at home are not what the Vietnam War was about. The war was about the people of Southeast Asia, millions of innocents who fought and died by our side to save themselves from the horrors of tyranny.
America won that war. The South Vietnamese won their right to self-determination. There was an uneasy peace that could still be in place to this day. But…
America's Democrats lost that war after announcing they would stop giving our Vietnamese allies the funding and supplies necessary to defend themselves and keep that peace in place.
Saigon fell, and so did dominos called Cambodia and Laos.
Director Roland Joffe's "The Killing Fields" is the real history of the Vietnam War -- the holocaust that didn't need to happen. Millions of innocent lives were needlessly lost but the American Left see them as only necessary sacrifices to The Cause of undermining America.
Currently, Obama's one inept, uncaring, and un-American decision away from ensuring there's a sequel set in the countries of Iraq and Afghanistan.
A look at Watergate from the angle of what's right about America -- or was right.
Seeing "All the President's Men" as a ten year-old blew my mind. Until then my head had been filled with movies about evil and powerful men who would murder, maim, and kill anyone who threatened their power.
But here was a true story about two nobody reporters taking down an American president without a shot being fired.
Director John McTiernan's brilliant Cold War thriller is based on Tom Clancy's fictional novel, but its themes are what ring true.
The stakes in the Cold War were not only real, they were existential. But we were right, they were wrong, God was on our side, and we kicked their commie asses.
Iraq, Afghanistan, 9/11, Benghazi… Director Peter Berg's outstanding retelling of Marcus Luttrell's non-fiction book, encapsulates the overall War on Terror unlike any film so far released.
The valor of our troops - check.
The subhuman savagery of our totalitarian enemy - check.
The humanity of our allies in Iraq and Afghanistan who face unspeakable horrors should our government (enabled by the media) cut and run - check.
"Lone Survivor" is a story of four men over the course of a few days in a remote part of Afghanistan, but it is really about something much, much bigger.
AUSTIN, Texas--Two sources with knowledge of these matters say University of Texas president Bill Powers has been given a choice: resign by the end of the day July 4, or be fired next week. The order comes as a whistleblower has allegedly stepped forward with information tying Powers directly to a growing admissions scandal. The sources tell Breitbart Texas that the decision to axe Powers came early Thursday, with the ultimatum handed down by UT Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa and Board of Regents chairman Paul Foster.
Earlier this week, within days of an investigation being launched into allegations under-qualified students were being admitted into Texas’ flagship institution based on their political ties and relationships, the director of admissions announced she was leaving her job. This new investigation by Cigarroa comes on the heels of a cursory review by the UT System which found examples of inappropriate swaying the admissions process at the Austin campus.
Those allegations have been at the center of an unprecedented impeachment effort -- with lawmakers trying to silence the regent who first brought the problems to light. UT Regent Wallace Hall, an appointee of Gov. Rick Perry, has been under fire from Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Speaker Straus and other lawmakers friendly with Powers. They are upset that he has been conducting an investigation into legislative clout being used to sway the admissions process and other issues with UT's governance.
According to two sources with knowledge of these matters, a whistleblower from within the university has stepped forward early this week with information that appears to have tipped the scales against Powers.
If Powers decides to resign, according to a source personally familiar with the unfolding situation, he would be allowed to remain on the job for several more months. Otherwise, according to Breitbart Texas' sources, Powers would be terminated next week.
The UT Board of Regents is scheduled to meet next week.
This would not be the first time Cigarroa has asked for Powers' resignation. It was widely reported this spring that last summer the chancellor asked Powers to resign, only to have Powers stay put after marshaling support from a select group of moderate and liberal legislators and high-profile donors.
The UT president has had a rocky relationship with the Board of Regents, but has developed an extensive group of high-profile supporters through a public relations program known as the "Texas Coalition for Excellence in Higher Education," which has been spearheaded by Powers loyalists. Among those behind the group is Karen Hughes, a media strategist closely aligned with House Speaker Joe Straus.
Straus’ hand-picked committee, co-chaired by his allies Dan Flynn (R-Van) and Carol Alverado (D-Houston), spent the last six months investigating Hall rather than the financial and operational abuses he uncovered. Flynn, Alverado and their committee voted last month to proceed with developing impeachment charges, saying only that Hall should not have been investigating the issues as doggedly as he had been.
Perry has stood by Hall, saying the regent "should be commended," not impeached, for "asking tough questions, gathering facts and searching for the truth."
Even though the House committee has been dismissive of allegations that lawmakers were bullying the admissions process, a report by the UT System found undue influence may haver been at work. A second, more comprehensive, investigation was announced by Chancellor Cigarroa earlier this week.
Up until now most of the public allegations of clout abuse have centered around admissions at the UT Law School (of which Powers was once the dean), yet Cigarroa’s call for a more expansive investigation would indicate a more wide-spread problem.
Reporter Jon Cassidy of the non-profit news site watchdog.org has also done a great deal of original investigative reporting on the law school admissions. Cassidy has found that several children and staff of legislators were admitted to the law school but took three or more times to pass the state bar exam — a highly unusual circumstance.
Calls this morning to the offices of Cigarroa and Powers were not answered. Via email, a spokesman for UT told Breitbart Texas he would inquire about the resignation request.
Follow Michael Quinn Sullivan on Twitter @MQSullivan.
On July 4, 1939, Lou Gehrig retired, giving a speech to fans at home plate after the New York Yankees played the Washington Senators.
The retirement celebration came just two weeks after Gehrig's disease had been made public.
More Gehrig says those who attended to support Gehrig's farewell, most notably, were Gehrig's parents, his wife [and] "all the 1939 Yankees with manager Joe McCarthy." Others who attended were "Bob Meusel, Bob Shawkey, Herb Pennock, Waite Hoyt, Joe Dugan, Mark Koenig, Benny Bengough, Tony Lazzeri, Arthur Fletcher, Earle Combs ... [and] Babe Ruth," among many others.
When Gehrig sheepishly stepped to home plate to speak, he held up his hand to silence the applause and said:
Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about a bad break I got. Yet today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth. I have been in ballparks for 17 years and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans.
He looked at those who had gathered to honor him and said, "Look at these grand men. Which of you wouldn't consider it the highlight of his career just to associate with them for even one day?"
Gehrig talked about how great his fellow Yankees were, how wonderful his family was, and the honor of having the New York Giants--"a team you would give your right arm to beat"--send him a retirement present.
He ended the speech by saying, "So I close in saying that I might have had a tough break, but I have an awful lot to live for."
He thanked the crowd, who then erupted in applause that continued for close to two minutes.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
On May 10, 2011, President Barack Obama spoke about immigration reform at Chamizal National Memorial Park in El Paso, TX. In that speech he vowed to "keep up the fight" to pass comprehensive reform though Congress.
"Sometimes when I talk to immigration advocates, they wish I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself, but that’s not how a democracy works," Obama said. "What we really need to do is to keep up the fight to pass genuine, comprehensive reform. That is the ultimate solution to this problem. That's what I'm committed to doing."
Monday from the White House rose garden Obama vowed to do everything with his power to bypass congress on immigration law saying he was starting “a new effort to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress.”
This week Obama also directed his cabinet members "to be creative" while figuring out ways to bypass congress on immigration law.
Organizations concerned with public policy have a
habit of hyping developments that relate to their concerns. When
the Supreme Court ruled that some corporations are exempt from
paying for employees' contraceptive coverage under Obamacare, both
sides loudly trumpeted its importance.
The right celebrated the verdict as a stinging defeat for an
administration at war with religion, while the left decried it as
the latest offensive in the conservative war on women. There was no
one to say the decision is not a terribly big deal. So let me say:
It's not a terribly big deal.
In the first place, the number of companies who will demand or
qualify for the exemption is small. University of Virginia
constitutional scholar Douglas Laycock told me that religious
liberty claims by businesses like those here "almost never arise.
These were cases where the owners unanimously agree on the
religious commitments of the business and have demonstrated that
over time." That doesn't happen very often, and regulations that
genuinely conflict with those commitments are rare.
Critics claim the ruling will allow countless companies to
deprive female workers of health insurance coverage for birth
control. It doesn't. In fact, one major reason the court was
willing to provide this accommodation to Hobby Lobby and other
closely held corporations is that the administration can easily
assure coverage for those women.
Some religious universities and hospitals had also objected to
being compelled to pay for contraception. So the Department of
Health and Human Services devised an alternative to spare them
having to do so.
If an institution objects to providing the coverage, its
insurance company has to provide it separately to employees, at no
extra cost. Writing for the court, Justice Samuel Alito said, "HHS
has provided no reason why the same system cannot be made available
when the owners of for-profit corporations have similar religious
objections."
If it were made available, he noted, the effect "on the women
employed by Hobby Lobby and the other companies involved in these
cases would be precisely zero. Under that accommodation, these
women would still be entitled to all FDA-approved contraceptives
without cost sharing."
That doesn't sound like the court is waging a merciless War on
Women. It also doesn't sound like Christian conservatives have a
lot to cheer about. In giving them a victory in this case, the
justices pretty well doused their hopes in related cases.
Those cases involve religious institutions that object not only
to being required to provide contraceptive coverage, but also to
the HHS alternative. The University of Notre Dame has sued,
claiming that having to notify the feds of its objection violates
its religious freedom. So has Wheaton College. An order of nuns
called Little Sisters of the Poor is also challenging the
procedure.
Their argument was always a reach. Filling out a form claiming
an exemption is not much trouble. Nor does it make these
institutions complicit in sin: The insurers have to provide the
coverage even if they don't fill out the forms.
In this instance, Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit Court
of Appeals said in ruling against Notre Dame, the odd thing is that
"the beneficiaries of the religious exemption are claiming that the
exemption process itself imposes a substantial burden on their
faith." He compared it to a conscientious objector asking out of
the draft while insisting that the government not draft anyone else
instead.
But the way the court framed the Hobby Lobby opinion makes it
even less likely to succeed. The justices in the majority, who
stressed that the government can use an alternative means of
providing contraception, are not likely to turn around and say the
alternative is illegal.
The conservative alarms about the alleged threats to religious
freedom are way overblown. But there is something to be said for
government policies that let people of strongly held opposing views
go their separate ways.
Religion has always been an emotional topic with great potential
to provoke conflict among people of different faiths. The genius of
our system is that it allows them to coexist, even if they deeply
detest each other, by giving every group the space in which to
follow one god or many gods or no god.
The ultimate resolution of the contraception issue in Obamacare
will probably leave everyone dissatisfied. You could call that a
curse. Or you could call it a blessing.
It's no secret that
one-percenters have occupied more than their share of Manhattan's
rent-controlled apartments. High profile freeloaders of the past
include New Yorker editor William Shawn, singers Carly
Simon and Cyndi Lauper, TV personality Alistair Cooke, Metropolitan
Museum of Art Director Philippe de Montebello, former Kennedy
speechwriter Ted Sorensen, screenwriter Nora Ephron, Mick Jagger's
ex, Bianca, and Mayor
Ed Koch (D). Manhattan Congressman Charlie Rangel
(D-13th District) famously
pigged out on four rent-controlled pads—three to live in and
one for his campaign office.
Fans of Woody Allen's film Hannah and Her Sisters
(1986) may recall the 11-room apartment where Elliot and Hannah
reside. That's actress Mia Farrow's
actual rent-controlled apartment, passed down from her
parents—and did I mention that it's on 73rd Street
overlooking Central Park? Even free-market heavyweights Murray
Rothbard and Robert Nozick partook in the spoils of a law that
made housing artificially cheap through state coercion. (A
disclosure: I grew up in a way below-market rent-controlled home on
Manhattan's Upper West Side with four bedrooms and panoramic views
of the Hudson River in a building filled with upper middle class
professionals with similar deals.)
Rent control laws[*] were intended to
protect poor New Yorkers from rapacious landlords, but in practice
they disproportionately benefit the well-to-do, who are more likely
than the poor to remain for decades in apartments that become
increasingly underpriced as the years go by.
A similar dynamic has taken hold
of the latest fad in real estate market interference, "affordable
housing," an arrangement in which developers receive substantial
government subsidies, mainly through a complex array of tax
gimmicks, and in return agree to rent (or sell) apartments at
below-market prices. In May, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D)
unveiled a plan to build 80,000 new affordable housing units,
"marshaling every corner of government and the private sector," he
boasted, "in an unprecedented response" to the city's "crisis
of affordability."
De Blasio, who ran on a promise to reduce inequality, is now
enabling upper middle class New Yorkers to tap into these subsidies
to serve their housing needs. In a city in which
one in five households lives below the poverty line, spending
limited government dollars so professionals earning six figures
don't have to leave their favored neighborhoods is
obscene.
Take Manhattan's 606 West 57th Street, a 1,025-unit
building to be put up by developer TF Cornerstone. In exchange for
setting aside 220 of those apartments for "lower income" tenants,
the developer will get a local real estate tax exemption,
tax-exempt financing, Low Income Housing Tax Credits (in which
banks kick in equity in exchange for a tax rebate), and permission
to build a larger building than the zoning code would otherwise
allow.
The kicker is that some of these "lower income" families are
wealthy by most standards. The 220 affordable apartments will be
split up among households of four earning no less than $50,300 and
no more than $193,000 per year—or nearly four times
New York City's median household income, which was $50,895 in
2012.
City Council Member Helen Rosenthal (D-6th District),
a liberal from Manhattan's Upper West Side, negotiated with TF
Cornerstone to increase the income eligibility limits
(i.e. keep the poorer people out) in exchange for a promise to
build a preschool and to add 15 more affordable units. Ryan
Hutchins of Capital New York
recently interviewed Rosenthal about the deal, which she
defended on the grounds that "we need more affordable housing—more
affordable housing for everyone." According to Rosenthal,
"part of the role of the Upper
West Side, is to serve as a gateway to the middle—to the American
aspiration."
"You know, from my perspective, what makes the Upper West Side
the Upper West Side is that, 20, 30 years ago, a bunch of sort of
lower-middle income families and individuals took a risk on the
Upper West Side, settled this community and made it the community
that it is today," Rosenthal said. "And the city, I think, has an
obligation to find a way for these people to stay on the Upper West
Side and not let it turn into a community that's very wealthy."
Rosenthal's comments remind me of the great 2008 article in
The Onion,
"Nation's Gentrified Neighborhoods Threatened by
Aristocratization," which quotes a fictitious housing expert
named Maureen Kennedy: "When you have a bejeweled, buckle-shoed
duke willing to pay 11 or 12 times the asking price for a block of
renovated brownstones—and usually up front with satchels of solid
gold guineas—hardworking white-collar people who only make a few
hundred thousand dollars a year simply cannot compete…"
Affordable
housing for the six-figured isn't limited to Manhattan's "gateway
to the middle." Last week, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and Mayor
de Blasio struck a deal with developer Forest City Ratner to
expedite the building of two "affordable" buildings at Brooklyn's
Atlantic Yards, the crony capitalist oasis that used the threat of
eminent domain for land acquisition. (See
"The Great Basketball Swindle,"Reason, October 2011.)
The deal stipulates 300 of the 600 new apartments in the two
buildings will go to families of four earning up to $142,000.
Journalist Norman Oder, the
tireless watchdog who has devoted the last eight years to
dissecting every buried detail and broken promise at Atlantic
Yards,
points out that housing for families that make up to $142,000 a
year isn't what was sold to the public back in 2005, when the
low-income advocacy group ACORN was rallying support for the
project on the grounds that Atlantic Yards would help poor families
stay put in a rapidly gentrifying area.
Oder also dug up this gem from Mayor de Blasio's days as a city
council member:
In an interview in
2007, when asked if those earning six figures should get subsidized
housing, [then Council Member] de Blasio responded, "Definitely
below six figures. Absolutely below six figures. Over eighty
[thousand] I don't think is what I'm thinking about, although there
may be some exceptions."
De Blasio is a longtime supporter of Atlantic Yards, and his
wife just selected the project's developer Bruce Ratner to be on
the board of the Mayor's Fund to Advance New York City, where he'll
be well positioned to ask for special favors down the line.
In the posh Manhattan neighborhood of Chelsea, developer Related
Companies is building 529 West 29th Street, a 139-unit
affordable housing development, 70 percent of which will be awarded
to New Yorkers who work in the "performing arts." The maximum
household earnings for families of four will be capped at around
$51,000, while singles can make no more than $36,000 a year—figures
that roughly match New York's median salaries.
Why is it in the nation's interest to spend federal dollars so
arts industry folks can reside in one of the world's most expensive
neighborhoods? Why don't affordable housing set-asides ever go to
back-kitchen restaurant workers, house cleaners, or car wash
employees? The answer: Those jobs aren't a stepping stone to more
lucrative employment, so they don't appeal to
college-educated elites.
The Chelsea building will be subsidized through both tax-exempt
bonds and Section 8, a federal program intended to help the poor.
The building's financing is modeled after that of Manhattan Plaza,
a Section 8 affordable housing development in midtown that's also
for employees of New York's performing arts industry. (Manhattan
Plaza is best known as former home to Seinfeld creator and
comedian Larry David, who lived across the hall from an oddball
named Kenny Kramer.)
Last year, according to information obtained through a Freedom
of Information Act request, the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) paid Related Companies $31.8 million to
subsidize the rent of 1,355 apartments at Manhattan Plaza, which
works out to $24,000 per unit annually.
To those "young white professionals" with only "modest trust
funds" feeling priced out of "the nation's gentrified area" by
"powder-wigged aristocrats," (again I'm quoting that great
piece in The Onion) I feel your pain. But leave the
affordable housing subsides for people who are actually poor.
[*] I'm using rent control as a blanket to term
to include the more prevalent "rent stabilization laws" that took
effect in 1969.
An earlier version of this article stated incorrectly that
two buildings at Atlantic Yards will go to households of four
earning more than $142,000. Those units have been
set aside for households making up to
$142,000.
It's been a long journey, but Samsung's managed to build out a compelling camera lineup that has something for everyone. Pros can get the high-end NX30; cameraphone addicts can pick up the Galaxy K Zoom; and selfie fanatics will probably go for the...
The weather is expected to be great in Atlanta throughout the Fourth of July holiday weekend. Might be time to check out some of what Zagat says are the city’s “11 Hottest Rooftop Restaurants and Bars.”
The list includes:
*5 Seasons Westside (Marietta Street)
*Six Feet Under (Grant Park or Westside)
*Shout (Peachtree Road)
*Skylounge (Marietta Street)
*Wetbar (Atop W Downtown)
Click here to view Zagat’s complete list and to view a slideshow. The list includes addresses, suggested menu…
A selection of my collection of paddles from the following paddle makers; Sipke Deboer, Adanac Paddles, Lumpy Paddles, TandJ Paddles, Joe O’ Paddles, Northern Light Paddlesports, Superior Paddles, Gear Labs, Novorca. (Many paddles are missing from the picture as they were on loan, that is part of the reason why i own so many, to allow others to experience them. You can experience them by coming to a clinic.)
Organizations concerned with public policy have a
habit of hyping developments that relate to their concerns. When
the Supreme Court ruled that some corporations are exempt from
paying for employees' contraceptive coverage under Obamacare, both
sides loudly trumpeted its importance.
It's no secret that
one-percenters have occupied more than their share of Manhattan's
rent-controlled apartments. High profile freeloaders of the past
include New Yorker editor William Shawn, singers Carly
Simon and Cyndi Lauper, TV personality Alistair Cooke, Metropolitan
Museum of Art Director Philippe de Montebello, former Kennedy
speechwriter Ted Sorensen, screenwriter Nora Ephron, Mick Jagger's
ex, Bianca, and Mayor
Ed Koch (D). Manhattan Congressman Charlie Rangel
(D-13th District) famously
pigged out on four rent-controlled pads—three to live in and
one for his campaign office.
A similar dynamic has taken hold
of the latest fad in real estate market interference, "affordable
housing," an arrangement in which developers receive substantial
government subsidies, mainly through a complex array of tax
gimmicks, and in return agree to rent (or sell) apartments at
below-market prices. In May, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D)
unveiled a plan to build 80,000 new affordable housing units,
"marshaling every corner of government and the private sector," he
boasted, "in an unprecedented response" to the city's "crisis
of affordability."
code would otherwise
allow.
art of the role of the Upper
West Side, is to serve as a gateway to the middle—to the American
aspiration."
Affordable
housing for the six-figured isn't limited to Manhattan's "gateway
to the middle." Last week, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and Mayor
de Blasio struck a deal with developer Forest City Ratner to
expedite the building of two "affordable" buildings at Brooklyn's
Atlantic Yards, the crony capitalist oasis that used the threat of
eminent domain for land acquisition. (See
"The Great Basketball Swindle," Reason, October 2011.)
The deal stipulates 300 of the 600 new apartments in the two
buildings will go to families of four earning up to $142,000.
Journalist Norman Oder, the
tireless watchdog who has devoted the last eight years to
dissecting every buried detail and broken promise at Atlantic
Yards,
points out that housing for families that make up to $142,000 a
year isn't what was sold to the public back in 2005, when the
low-income advocacy group ACORN was rallying support for the
project on the grounds that Atlantic Yards would help poor families
stay put in a rapidly gentrifying area.
employment, so they don't appeal to
college-educated elites.