Fire Steve Spurrier

He may have been a good coach at Florida. He is no longer a good coach.

Fire him.

How to reduce the number of uninsured Americans by at least 45%...

. . . without the Federal government having to do anything at all.

Politicians aren't in the business of telling us what we need to hear, they're in the business of telling us what we want to hear. You're not going to get as many votes telling people you need to change your life, you need to fix your problems on your own, as you're going to get saying to people we're going to solve your problems for you.

In our humble opinion, there are some serious problems with the current health care system--problems that need to be addressed. Perhaps the solutions to those problems require some intervention by the federal government, although we aren't convinced that is the de facto answer.

One reason is that the problem is not as big as some folks in Washington make it out to be. For instance, as this video suggests, the number of uninsured Americans (generally suggested to be around 47 million) is not entirely accurate. Many people qualify for preexisting government plans, but don't take advantage of it.

More disturbing are the number of folks who could afford simple health insurance but choose not to pay for it. That's their prerogative, and we would never support a government plan that would force those people to purchase health insurance against their will. Is it anymore fair for the government to force the rest of us to pay for a plan those folks have chosen not to purchase themselves?

How to Win the Nobel Peace Prize In 12 Days

Tommy De Seno at Justified Right posted a great piece about how to win the Nobel Peace Prize in 12 days. After outlining Obama's schedule for his first 12 days in office, De Seno concludes:

So there you have it. The short path to the Nobel Peace Prize: Party, go to meetings, skip church, release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries, party some more.

Geez. We do more than that during the 12 days of Christmas.

Detroit Lions, Tigers, and these people--Oh My!

Evidently, having a terrible football franchise and a baseball team that just had the ultimate sports "choke" actually gets a city something - like a $15 million stimulus grant. Detroit just announced that its residents could fill out applications to receive stimulus money--the result is that 35,000+ people have lined up the last few days to get their shot at the Obamalottery. You can get the full story here.

As if the fact that the feds are literally just giving away millions of dollars to residents of a dying city where Obama and Co. already own the means of production (see, e.g., General Motors) isn't sickening enough, try listening to the people who are hoping to cash in on this "stimulus" plan. Here are two interviews, conducted by a local news reporter, of folks standing in line to fill out the appropriate paperwork: the first is of a lady who thinks that the President can just make money on command, while the second is of a few ladies who voted for Obama because he has a secret stash of money that he is now generously giving away for free.

First, this shows you something about the type of people who voted for our current president. It's reminiscent of the woman who was convinced that Obama was going to pay her mortgage and buy gasoline for her car.

Second, this illustrates how people getting money from the government rarely stop to think where the money came from. Well, allow us to let you in on a little secret, ladies standing in line--THE MONEY COMES FROM US, TAXPAYING CITIZENS WHO ARE ACTUALLY WORKING TO EARN A LIVING. Apparently they forgot to teach you that in school--we guess they were too busy proselytizing and propagandizing you with their cool hip hop tunes.

Our President: the Leader of the Free World

Muammar Gaddafi, the dictatorial leader of Libya, the "mad dog of the Middle East," advocate of Islamic Socialism, who gave a hero's welcome to the man convicted for the Pan Am Flight 103 tragedy, just told the United Nations that "We are glad to have a Son of Africa as president of the United States. We would be content to have President of Obama be president of American forever."

Meanwhile, President Obama apologized to the United Nations for his country, and naively delivered the United States over to the whims, demands, and control of the UN.

Oh yeah, and did we mention that Congress just voted NOT to require Senators to read the proposed healthcare legislation, NOT to publish a brief synopsis of the legislation for Americans to read, and NOT to publish the estimated costs of the proposed healthcare bill?

Wake up, America.

Blackstone/ADF's new headquarters

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Arizona State Capitol Building For Sale
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Healthcare Protests

Our New Favorite Band

If you like a little bluegrass, some amazingly unique harmonies, and a lot of energy, you need to check out the Avett Brothers - live and the studio version. We're big fans:

Is There Something in the Water in South Carolina? Yeah -- it's called red clay.

Stephen Conn has posted what amounts to yet another one of those "historical" pieces about South Carolina; ironically, it's stereotyping of South Carolina is itself a stereotype of the self-righteous rhetoric that many historians publish under the guise of historical analysis when it comes to Southern history and culture (although I'm sure he's just giddy over how brilliantly original he thinks he is).

Mr. Conn is a history professor at Ohio State University, and his little essay was published by the History News Service, self-described as "an informal syndicate of professional historians who seek to improve the public's understanding of current events by setting these events in their historical contexts." Unfortunately, it's not the thought that counts when it comes to historical research, and Mr. Conn's piece does little to improve the public's understanding of current events, but is more to serve as a soapbox for his personal political preferences.

Consider some of his more humorous statements:

Joe Wilson's recent outburst is just the "latest in [South Carolina's] long, distinguished history of not-quite-ready-for-democracy political behavior."

We're not quite sure what one must do to become "ready for democracy". Perhaps Mr. Conn thinks that Joe Wilson's comments were a little too commonplace and have no place in the civilized halls of Congress. Then again, isn't democracy nothing more than government by the people--the common people? And isn't Congressman Wilson's comment an echo of the many outburts made by citizens around the country at the numerous town halls that have been held in recent weeks. Perhaps Mr. Conn thinks those passionate Americans are not quite ready for democracy either.

In his recounting of the infamous Brooks-Sumner Affair, he asserts that "This is why it's apparently so important that people be allowed to carry firearms: to prevent good Samaritans from intervening when your friend wants to beat someone up. Keitt was censured by Congress, which is probably one reason the NRA was founded."

We appreciate his sarcastic humor--clearly he's an NRA fan--and by no means condone Preston Brooks' actions. But Conn (or is it Con?) conveniently ignores any sort of discussion of what precipitated this incident, or the history of: The Duel (pronounced Doo Ell). While our modern minds may find dueling a bit barbaric (in fact, dueling was falling out of favor even by this point in history, and Brooks' would have broken South Carolina law and been stripped of political office had he participated in a duel with Sumner), dueling had long had a place in American culture, and Brooks was merely following the protocol of the Code of Dueling. The fact that the House of Representatives voted not to expel Brooks after this incident indicates that his actions were not that uncommon--in their historical context (remember the History New Services' stated purposes??).

"The reason Sumner deserved his beating, as far as the good folks from the Palmetto State were concerned, was that Sumner was an abolitionist and he went to Harvard."

No, the reason Sumner deserved his beating was because he had publicly ridiculed Brook's relative, Andrew Butler. But we suppose it's more fun to portray South Carolinians as ignorant Yankee-hating racists.

NB: Sumner's long diatribe against Butler took place in the Senate Chambers, lasting over 3 hours, during which he made fun of Butler's stroke-created physical impairments. Compare that with Wilson's two-word outburst, challenging the accuracy of Obama's statement, not a physical disability--you tell us which is "not quite ready for democracy."

South Carolinians so loved their slave system that they were the very first to secede from the Union.

Thousands of books, theses, dissertations by as many historical scholars and you've reduced the many nuances of the Civil War to this? This is sloppy at best, Professor Conn, and it's the kind of broad generalizations we expect to see in a 3rd grade essay.

The most beloved South Carolina politician of the more recent past was Strom Thurmond, segregationist, bigot, and all-around standard-bearer for South Carolina.

For all of his shortcomings (and he certainly had them), Senator Thurmond is perhaps one of the clearest individual examples of America's evolution as a nation--particularly with regard to race relations. Again, one would have hoped you could put Thurmond in his historical context, noting how his views on blacks, integration, etc. evolved along with the rest of the country. A Dixiecrat, yes, but also a Democrat, and then a Republican. Opposing the Civil Rights Act, yes, but wasn't it Abraham Lincoln who said that he never intended the social and political equality of blacks and whites--including making "negroes" voters? Maybe this is why Thurmond is such a standard-bearer: he progressed, rather than remaining stuck in his ways.

Re: Mark Sanford: "Even in South Carolina's illustrious political history, one is hard pressed to think of another politician who combines self-indulgence with sanctimoniousness in such generous portions."

We're sorry, was this a historical piece or a New York Times op-ed? Sanford's affair is a sad tale, and he should have handled things in the aftermath differently than he did. But we can appreciate his honesty (as public and ill-advised as it was). Even Prof. Conn recognized that it "took a particular kind of moral and political courage." Which cannot be said of his sorry excuse for a historical piece.

Perhaps the type of courage the Conn Man is looking for is best illustrated by a Congressman from HIS home state of Ohio, former Rep. James Traficant. We're sure we don't need to remind you, Mr. Conn, that Mr. Trficant (of Ohio) was just last week released from federal prison after serving a 7 year terms for racketeering, bribery, and other corrupt activities. Ah, the all-around standard bearer for Ohio. We're sure you also remember that the Congressman (from Ohio) WAS expelled from the House of Representatives (i.e. his conduct was actually considered reprehensible--in it's historical context). Mr. Traficant (D-OH) said this:

"I will take with me a file, chisel and a knife. I'll try to get some major explosives to fight my way out. Then when I get out, I'll grab a sword like Maximus Meridius and as a gladiator, I'll stab people in the crotch."

Now that's democracy!!

Mr. Conn, we have a degree in History--just like you. And Mr. Conn, we often voice our political ideologies and preference--just like you. The difference is, we don't parade our opinions about as historical scholarship under the auspices of a History News Network. And the only reason we even take the time to mention your recent article is because, as an historian, "legal scholarship" like this is an embarrassment and disgrace to our noble profession.

Maybe your dislike for the South is also a product of history--the history of your university's sorry excuse for a football team that can't win a game against decent competition, including the last few times it played the University of South Carolina, or Upper Georgia, or whatever. Or maybe you're just jealous of our way of life. You wouldn't be the first: there must be a mass exodus of Ohioans coming to South Carolina to warrant something like this.

On second thought, maybe we shouldn't be too harsh on the OSU football team, or Mr. Conn--it could just be something in their water.

Fidel Castro, one of the brightest leaders we know

People, you cannot make this stuff up:

Is this woman from the same America that we are?

A Glimpse Into Yesteryear, Second Installment

If dreams are like movies, then memories are films about ghosts. And if our college experience had a soundtrack for every scene in that multi-act production, then this would surely make the album:



If you think we're kidding, think again.

Indentured Grandchildren

The promise of our Founders, which we the People of the United States have made as well, is to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."

Yet as G. Tracy Mehan, III writes over at American Spectator, with the ever-growing bipartisan spending that has taken place in recent years, we (through our elected Congress) have made our Posterity (read: grandchildren) our "very own indentured servants.

Indeed, where previous generations made huge sacrifices in order to leave a legacy of promise, hope, and liberty for future Americans, the legacy we are creating for ourselves is nothing more than securing the Blessings of a National Credit Card: "we buy now, you pay later." This is a raw deal for future generations of Americans, and a far cry from the promise of opportunity and freedom that has always made American exceptional and the American dream possible.

Single Ladies