Two similarities and one huge difference

Michael Medved has a long list of what Governor Palin brings to the ticket, and specifically addresses the experience of her and Obama, emphasizing that "ready to lead" should refer to issues, not years. He does address the charisma feature; I liked these points.

It begins to close the energy gap. The biggest problem for the GOP this year is that Obama devotees were vastly more energized than McCain supporters. Even though polling looked close, the other side was more excited about their candidate. The Palin pick will help Republicans to catch up, exciting the party’s base – particularly religious conservatives.

Palin allows Republicans to compete on the novelty front. One of Barack’s biggest advantages has been the widespread sense of wonderment he inspires: “I can’t believe we can really elect a black guy on a national ticket!” Now McCainiacs can claim a miracle of our own, as we pinch our delirious selves: “I can’t believe we can really elect a woman on a national ticket – and a conservative woman at that!”

Black voters have admitted that they never thought they'd see a black man or woman in the White House in their life time and are 97% behind him (but that's not racism according to Civil Rights leaders). But they are probably no more surprised than conservatives that a real conservative might get there! I don't think she'll attract any PUMAS, but she might draw some back from the libertarian candidates who had despaired at the McCain candidacy and in a race this close really matter.

What she doesn't bring to the ticket are heaps, loads, and swamps of white guilt. Occasionally guilt is an energizer, but mostly it's a stand in for actually doing something. Conservatives just don't feel that strongly about the gender issue. Most don't support abortion, which when women's topics are raised among Democrats, it is always at the top, and often they don't get to point 2. Occasionally feminists mention elder care since that usually falls to daughters, but eventually, abortion will take care of that too--elderly, retired career women will have no off-spring to look after their needs. They'll be able to hire government workers from government agencies with their generous government pension. Or maybe the elder care worker will be assigned. I'm not sure the Obamanation have looked that far ahead.

Like fraternity hazing

"Mrs. Palin now must clear a daunting hurdle -- first the media, then public opinion. Since the press is unfamiliar with her, she will be treated as a target for aggressive scrutiny. In the past, surprise picks like Mrs. Palin have faltered in the face of a media onslaught and never recovered. Mrs. Ferraro, though more familiar, became an albatross for Mr. Mondale. In 1988, Dan Quayle was quickly turned into a joke for late-night comics."

I've been appalled by the bizarre, crude, rude, ungratious, sexist, hateful remarks about her--not her politics--but her body, her hair (no hair plugs), her choice not to kill her baby, all by the left, that appeared within minutes of the announcement. Of course, I'm reading comments on the internet. They could be the mind of 13 year old boys stuck between the legs of a 60 year old guy. They are really scared. The Obama campaign sneered first, leading the way, then realized how stupid they looked (especially after dissing Hillary), and eventually and belatedly, Obama congratulated her.

The best blog was two photos juxtaposed--Obama wearing a helmet on a bicycle, and Palin on a Harley. Vroom, vroom. Can't wait for the debates.

Lakeside 2008--The end of summer

Golden August Sunset at Lakeside
We got here on July 5 after our lovely tour of Italy, and my brief stay in the hospital from a gastrointestinal bug which required lots of IVs and bedrest. But from that week on, we’ve had a wonderful stay at our summer home, particularly enjoying the many arts activities and seminars. Here’s a brief run down. I didn’t attend a lot of these, of course, since I needed a little time to paint, draw, read, visit friends, entertain, walk along the lake, and ride my 40 year old no-gear bike. Lakeside pulpit and programming leans a little too far toward liberal guilt (been there done that in my 30s and 40s) for my tastes--peace and justice, removal of Indians, global health--but I was still able to pick and choose some very interesting topics, especially local Ohio history. Over all, our Director of Education, Gretchen Curtis, did a fabulous job, and yesterday she reported over 9,000 in attendance at the daytime programming during the summer of 2008.

Week 1: June 23-25 Lives & Legacies of Charles & John Wesley
June 26-27 Religious Environmentalism in the U.S.

Week 2: Jun 30-July 3 Health & Wellness Week (with Nursing CE credit)

Week 3: July 7-11 U.S. Presidential Elections: Then and Now (10:30 a.m.)
Spiritual Biography (1:30 p.m.)

Week 4: July 14-18 Four Gospels with Tim Grannon (10:30 am)
The Great Lakes (1:30 pm)

Week 5: July 21-23 Historic Chautauqua
July 25 Historic Building Design and Preservation

Week 6: July 28-Aug 1 Middle East Foreign Affairs (10:30 am)
Global Health Challenges (1:30 pm)

Week 7: Aug 4-8 22nd Annual Peace with Justice Week

Week 8: Aug 11-15 Interfaith Week

Week 9: Aug 18-22 5th Annual Civil War Week

Week 10: Aug 25-27 Indian Removal from Ohio (Senior Venture Week)
Aug 28-29 Lakeside Neighbors

Thur 10:30 a.m. History of Camp Perry: 1907 to Now
SSG Josh Mann, Historian, Ohio Army National Guard
Thur 1:30 p.m. History and Operation of the Marblehead Limestone Quarry
Ted Dress, Night Supervisor, LaFarge Quarry, Marblehead OH
Fri 10:30 a.m. Bus Tour of LaFarge Quarry
Fri 1:30 p.m. Celebrating Chocolate: Sweet Ending to Lakeside’s 135th Season
Gretchen S. Curtis, Lakeside’s Director of Education

Also there were 3:30 seminars for book reviews, nutrition programs and Foreign Affairs Forum; Sunday history lectures; and week-day walking tours, tree identification walks and herb classes. Week-end events of plein air art, boat and auto shows, ice cream social, craft fair, and quilt show brought in thousands from outside the grounds.

The final week, Senior Venture Week, was open to all Lakesiders this year (in the past I think we had to pay a fee on top of our gate pass). Last week's archeological tour of Johnson's Island and this week's tour of the Marblehead Quarry were really some of the most interesting local events I've attended. A homeschooler from Port Clinton brought her 2 children for Ohio history credit. Wasn't that smart? Thursday and Friday I was very busy, and it was topped off with a delicious offering of CHOCOLATE!

Gretchen lectured on and served chocolate

The Women's Wage Myth--2004 campaign redux

Equal pay for equal work? Or equal experience? Or equal risk? Or equal degrees? Or equal professional contributions? Ah, the feminists are going after John McCain because in spite of all the laws, regulations and law suits of the last 35 years, they still complain about women's work. Here's what I wrote in 2004 during that misinformation mess by Kerry.

The Women's Wage Myth

George W. Bush has freed millions of women in Afghanistan and Iraq, although feminist groups have been pretty silent about that. And John Kerry continues to promote the myth of the gender wage gap--I think he said $.76 to $1.00, but they haven't been silent about that. Actually he's wrong. There are many reasons women earn less. I stopped working from 1968 - 1978, then worked only part time until 1986. And I was in a low-paid, female dominated profession. Any profession with a large number of women has depressed wages. And even with all the laws and law suits, we still have women putting home and family before careers.

“. . . most studies of pay discrimination don’t weigh in such factors as experience and the desire of many married women with children to work shorter hours, and even seek less demanding jobs, so they can spend more time at home with their families. Studies that do account for those factors have concluded that across the board, the pay of unmarried men and unmarried women doing the same work are just about equal.” Independent Women’s Forum*

During the 1990s two OSU librarians wrote an article that showed that male librarians really don't make more than female librarians--they publish more and relocate more often and are more likely to accept the more challenging jobs. That translates into better pay. If anything, the higher pay that male librarians are willing to go after pulls up the median. The women indirectly benefit from having more men in the field. See Bradigan, Pamela S. and Carol A. Mularski. "Evaluation of Academic Librarians' Publications for Tenure and Initial Promotion" The Journal of Academic Librarianship, v. 22 September 1996 pp. 360-365.

*Didn't link to article, try this

We report; you decide

That's what I like about Fox. It drives liberals crazy because if they don't hear their own off-key choir in their own reverb echo chamber, it's bias. However, facial expressions, voice and adjectives go a long way. And today, Fox did show an enthusiastic news corp over McCain's choice. I watched reporters on ABC and Fox discuss Sarah Palin. The ABC news dude first interviewed a Democrat (that is standard--sometimes only Democrats are interviewed), then a Republican whom he literally attacked and interrupted each time he tried to say something positive. By contrast, on Fox a female reporter who had been following the Minnesota governor closely thinking he might be the choice, was interviewed about reactions to the Palin choice. She practically bubbled with enthusiasm while reporting her "absolutely amazing personal story." The ABC guy twice demanded to know how a special needs baby was going to affect her campaigning. Then there's that NYT stalker-feminist (a brunette Ann Coulter) who has already smeared Palin, but Cokie Roberts was interviewed to balance that (on ABC) noting that her appeal wasn't her "female plumbing" as the accuser suggested, but her conservative core beliefs.

Liberal Fascism

A really unfortunate title choice for an excellent book, says Albert Mohler, who writes some of the best book reviews on the web. Liberal Fascism: the secret of the American left from Mussolini to the politics of meaning by Jonah Goldberg also contains one of the words I hate to see in a book title, "secret." But surprise! My public library, UAPL, actually owns four copies of this title, all currently in use, so perhaps I won't need to buy it! Just from the following excerpt this sounds like a title wafflers and fence sitters need to read in the months coming up to the election. It's not your grandfather's party.

An excerpt: "American liberalism is a totalitarian political religion, but not necessarily an Orwellian one. It is nice, not brutal. Nannying, not bullying. But it is definitely totalitarian -- or "holistic," if you prefer -- in that liberalism today sees no realm of human life that is beyond political significance, from what you eat to what you smoke to what you say. Sex is political. Food is political. Sports, entertainment, your inner motives and outer appearance, all have political salience for liberal fascists. Liberals place their faith in priestly experts who know better, who plan, exhort, badger, and scold. They try to use science to discredit traditional notions of religion and faith, but they speak the language of pluralism and spirituality to defend "nontraditional" beliefs."

Reinvigorated Republicans

To shake things up, Sarah Palin might not have been my first choice (i.e., a black woman, or a GOP ex-senator, cabinet level) but then what do you do to counter a media-made messiah, long on glamor and short on substance and finally get some attention? So I've been browsing the columns, pundits and a few conservative bloggers to see what Sarah Palin brings to the ticket. No sense wasting time watching the news anchors, although I did last night just to raise my blood pressure (it's always low). They dug as deep as these surfacers know how, even the PBS foots-asleep folks whom I watch even less than broadcast. So I found this at Hugh Hewitt, who gives 6 reasons, but I thought this summed it up well.

"The long run of Congressional power drained a lot of the energy from the GOP when it came to the battle of ideas, and Palin is a representative of the non-Beltway GOP that wants very much to get back into that fray. Winning the war remains the first priority, and Supreme Court justices after that, but on a host of key issues Governor Palin represents the Reagan wing of the party, and that's a great thing." Hugh Hewitt Aug 29 2008

So we've got 2 old guys who've been in Washington forever, and two-forty somethings, handsome and articulate, with no Beltway ties, one of whom is so independent she has no federal or foreign experience and the other beholden to all sorts of muck-stuck pols, both the traditional Chicago back room boys and the anarchist lefties. Let's hope Sarah gives Republicans a reason to go to the polls, and that she's a really fast learner!

Sarah Palin on energy--some hope and change with specifics instead of hype.

Michael Medved on Sarah Palin's experience record

Shut up George

Charlie broke away from Sarah Palin's speech, one of the best I've heard this entire campaign, to interview George Stephana- stepa- stupa-, well you know, the former Clinton aide with all the hair. Then George S. announced that if Gustave hits NOLA, McCain should scale back the Republican convention and go to Louisiana, the "site of GWB's disaster." No, George, that was a Democratic city with a Democratic governor. With Democrat disaster plans. Republican states fared much better. The failure was theirs. And Charlie? Thanks for nothing. We had to switch to radio to hear the rest of her speech.

McCain Palin ticket

Another history making event--not a woman as a VP choice, because we’ve had that, but a parent of a special needs child. Her youngest child has Downs Syndrome; the parents knew, and chose to give him life and lots of love. Unless you are pro-life, you probably don’t know that statistically, births of Downs Syndrome babies are down. Not because fewer are conceived--the age of women giving birth is going up and that’s a serious risk factor. But prenatal testing has given parents the choice of not carrying a disabled child to term. There are also many couples who choose to adopt Downs babies.

That said, I actually believe a woman with 5 children ought to take some time off to raise them. Call me a reactionary, but that's a huge job and I think kids need their mother around, not just high paid nannies. (Please, no Queen Victoria stories.) I wouldn't vote against McCain for that reason, but I believe women have a different career track than men. You can do and have it all, but not all at the same time. The vice president, whether Biden or Palin, is a heart beat away from the oval office. She better have some outstanding executive qualities (she's Governor of Alaska) or this could be called one up(wo)manship.

Of the four running for the White House, Biden has been in Washington the longest, which makes Obama's complaints about business as usual and need for change sort of silly, and Palin is a first term Governor with many reforms to her credit, which makes McCain's criticism of Obama as inexperienced fall flat.

Well, she's still the youngest and prettiest (former beauty queen) of the four.
Update: And she gives the best speech of the four (Dayton, OH, August 29, 2008)if content counts.

Voting with Bush?

Is it really true that John McCain voted with President Bush 90% of the time as a recent Obama speech claimed? Yes! After all, we do have a two party system, and they belong to the same party, although neither is particularly "conservative" on many issues. McCain portrays himself as a maverick and one who reaches across the aisle (Obama sounds like he's lifted some of McCain's phrases). In 2007 McCain voted with the President 95% of the time. Obama votes along party lines 97% of the time. So?

. . . consider that Obama's votes were in line with the president's position 40 percent of the time in 2007. That shouldn't be terribly surprising. Even the Senate's Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, voted with Bush 39 percent of the time last year, according to the way Congressional Quarterly rates the votes.

The McCain campaign points out that Obama told a local TV interviewer recently that "the only bills that I voted for, for the most part, since I've been in the Senate were introduced by Republicans with George Bush." Obama was actually wrong about that. In 2006 he voted alongside the president 49 percent of the time, and in 2005, the year before Democrats took control of the Senate, Obama voted with the president only 33 percent of the time.

Also, Obama voted in line with fellow Senate Democrats 97 percent of the time in 2007 and 2005, and 96 percent of the time in 2006, according to CQ. FactCheck.org

The future of conservative books

I've often written about my frustration with the collection policies at my public library, UAPL. It's very difficult for a conservative author to get a review in PW or LJ, and many librarians seek no other source. Like many liberals in the information and education fields, they wear blinders.

Conservatives can’t help but be flooded with “the other side” in information, essays, editorials, opinions and library shelves full of liberal and leftist views. Actually, we benefit from that exchange. We are the “liberals” in the truest sense (we also protect the weakest in society with our anti-abortion stance) because the willingness to take into consideration multiple viewpoints should be the hallmark of liberalism. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work the other direction. Liberals don’t read or review conservative books or magazines, watch conservative shows, and their minds suffer from lack of light and new ideas as a result. And film? Don't even go there. The media--broadcast, cable, newspapers, publishing and the public libraries’ review Bibles, Publisher’s Weekly and Library Journal (owned by the same conglomerate)--are overwhelmingly left wing, but don‘t even see it, because they speak, write and read in an echo chamber. The academy, both private and tax supported, is so packed with liberals in university administrations and faculties that conservatives not only have a problems getting hired and promoted, they probably can’t find advisors for the PhD theses that will mentor and advocate for them so they can even get in the job pool.

About five years ago, some major publishers started their own conservative imprints when they saw how successful some conservative political books were put out by a small, fringe house, Regnery. These imprints such as Sentinel, Crown Forum and Threshold were dedicated to publishing conservative authors (kind of like keeping the funny uncle in a closet off-site). But their titles aren’t well promoted or reviewed and the conservative publishing houses that remained independent are still better for the conservative author than the siren call of the more established liberal houses.

But no matter what happens to those imprints, conservative publishing will certainly survive—and thrive. If liberals continue to ignore the power of conservative books, moreover, the losers will not be conservatives—who cannot help but be endlessly exposed to left-wing views through the networks and leading newspapers—but liberals themselves, complacent in their ignorance of the other side. “There’s always another side, that’s a classically liberal argument,” observes [Adam] Bellow with a laugh. “The problem for contemporary liberals is that they really don’t understand it applies to them.”

Read the whole story
The future of conservative books

Lakeside bumps on a log--mystery sculptures

The date on my photos says July 31, but I'm not really sure when I took these. That's probably close. From time to time someone creates an arrangement of stones on the lakefront. These were cute and must have required a lot of patience. The first is looking west over the dock with Mouse Island in view; the second to the east with Kelley's Island in the background; the third is a close-up.

Sportsmen for Obama?

A “Lifelong Republican” Tony Dean isn’t. Chad Baus must have watched BO’s speech last night (I didn’t). He says in an e-mail, “Obama just mentioned gun owners in Ohio in his "big speech", so he's obviously got us on the brain.” He knows Ohio is a key state--I think he was planning a visit to Toledo this week. According to Chad, Dean was mentioned a few years ago as a possible Democratic candidate for Congress and has supported anti-gun Democrats in the past according to this source

“For Tony Dean to have "switch[ed] parties to head a Sportsmen for Obama group" he would have to have done so at least two years before Obama was even elected to Senate, and five years prior to when he announced his presidential bid. Indeed, it appears the word "lifelong" is as difficult for Dean and the Obama campaign to define as the word "is" is to Bill Clinton.

Dean is quoted by the Dallas News as saying he's "99 percent sure a President Obama isn't going to infringe on gun rights." But seeing as Mr. Dean - who one blogger has dubbed 'South Dakota's Al Gore' because of his fervent belief in human-caused global warming - describes himself as a "moderate on the gun issue" who "opposes the NRA on most gun issues," his assurances about Obama aren't likely to be much consolation to pro-gun voters.

On his website, Dean has castigated the NRA for having "done little to protect gun ownership" and for having differing views on conservation issues, even while posting op-eds from the likes of Humane Society of the United States Executive Director Wayne Pacelle, who has been quoted as saying "we are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States...We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state."“

A politician who lies about his core beliefs, friends and associates? This is change and hope? I could call myself a life-long Democrat, as long as I don’t count the last 8 years, or the 4 years before that when I couldn’t find a single Democrat to support for any office local or national, or the 4 years before that when I was waking up after voting for Clinton. Surely, even life-long Democrats who have worked their buns to the bones for this empty suit Obama must be getting tired of this “change” mantra.

The 8 hour day and 5 day work week

This entry at Hispanic Pundit is 3 years old, but it's a good read any time, on how the desire for profitability works in our favor.

So, who gave us the 5 day, 8 hours per day, work week? Was it really the unions, was it really higher regulations? No, the historical answer is that it was Heny Ford who gave us the 5 day, 8 hours per day, work week. Ford was tired of continuously losing good employees, he was trying to increase employee retention and at the same time increase profits, so he basically doubled wages and implemented a 5-day work week, and in the process effectively invented the modern weekend. It is Henry Ford who is widely credited with contributing to the creation of a middle class in the United States.

In addition, if you look at why Henry Ford did this, you will see that his reasons had nothing to do with charity, and everything to do with increasing profits and dealing with the forces of competition.

It was also a profit motive that gave us health care through our employers (sort of a form of indentured servitude if you ever want to change jobs). After WWII, offering health insurance was a way to attract better workers in a tight job market. Of course, only the biggest firms could do it, so in the long run it was not good for competition or the worker.

What does Health Care Obamanation mean to you?

We've seen the ads. Is there anything in them that actually tell us what the state of health in the U.S. is? What do we really know about the uninsured, and if we knew, would it make any difference to the politicians or to the voters?

The percent of uninsured rose a bit in the U.S. during the Clinton years, dipped slightly in early 2000s (probably from SCHIP, a new program of the late 90s) and now rests at about 14-16% of the population (virtually unchanged in 20 years), depending on which source you use, the U.S. Census CPS and SIPP reports being the most accurate with the longest record. The actual numbers are up because the population has increased, so that's what will be cited in political ads and speeches. No politician will stand at a podium and say, "Despite all our promises and all the taxes you've paid, we're no further along on this than we were 30 years ago because we're inefficient, pork-fed pols who need poor people in order to get elected." However, only about half of that small group are uninsured for a whole year, and the Congressional Budget Office estimates about 16% of the uninsured go for 24 months without insurance. If it’s your family and you’re paying out $1000 a month to COBRA to your new plan, even one month is too long. It’s a bit like rejoicing that military deaths are far lower today than 20 years ago when there was no war. If it’s your son or daughter who died in Iraq, that’s not much comfort.

Who is uninsured? Actually, it’s the youngest (19-24, who also tend to be the people with “it will never happen to me” attitude), better educated, married, and higher income people who are more likely to go without insurance. Some people who claim to be uninsured on surveys actually have it through a government program (Medicaid or SCHIP), and some people who are eligible, don’t apply, and some who could have it through their employment, don’t choose it because they don’t want the co-payment.

Also, being uninsured does NOT mean a person gets no health care. If you've ever been to the ER, you know that. We all wait together. The uninsured may not seek care as early as they should, however, and that might cause problems down the road. Most of the political ads I’ve seen about health care actually involved people who had insurance (like Obama’s mother, or Hillary’s examples), but they were brought up as examples of the need for it to be “universal,” lessening what you and I have, and increasing what others have.

Still, with a new hurricane approaching New Orleans and all the reminders of stranded people, drowning buses, a racist mayor wanting a chocolate town, and a woman governor who didn’t know when to say “help,” I really can’t imagine that we want to FEMA-tize our health care.

What's going on in Spotsylvania County?

Its school conduct code is 40 pages! I haven't checked Upper Arlington's, so maybe they are all having this much trouble. I looked at the first page, which really seemed sufficient.

a. attend school regularly;
b. arrive at school ready to participate in learning activities;
c. accept responsibility for one's own behavior;
d. cooperate with school personnel and fellow students;
e. abide by all school regulations;
f. abide by all laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia;
g. complete all assignments fully and in a timely manner;
h. cooperate with school officials in the investigation of any violation
of school rules;
i. refrain from any action which hinders other students' safety,
welfare, peace of mind or achievement;
j. respect the right of teachers to teach and students to learn; and
k. assist the principal and faculty in the operation of the school as a
safe place for all students to learn and to develop socially.

Sounds reasonable to me. This doesn't--no one (parents and students, I assume) is allowed to link to the school web sites without permission, according to the code (p. 32, #14).

The school web site has all sorts of interesting things that I suppose bloggers or complainers could use. You can even find the nutritional value of the cafeteria meals on the school web site which seem to be 2 days Mexican and 2 days Italian with a meat/potatoes, or Asian or Jamaican item the 5th day, and a Grab 'n Go selection of salads or sandwiches.

Seen at James Taranto, WSJ, Best of the Web, who received the school link from a parent in the district who needed to hide her identity to pass along the information because she signed the code of conduct.

So what's in your school's code?

The stealth candidate

And I thought Clinton was Slick Willy and Nixon Tricky Dick. Obama has them both beat because even his most ardent, naive supporters know very little about him. You can't judge a man by his character if you don't have a clue who he is.

"Time and again, the man who draws so openly on King's legacy refuses to sacrifice an iota of possible political support by taking a principled stand on matters of racial justice that King said are matters of right and wrong. Instead, Obama makes cryptic or general comments that leave his position on important racial issues ambiguous or unknown." Juan Williams in today's WSJ

Unfortunately, I think we'll be finding out who he really is very soon. Republicans have contributed to this by choosing a candidate whose biggest attraction seems to be he's not as far left as Obama and will be tough on national security and doesn't advocate killing helpless babies. I wish there were more.

Do children need day-care or daddy-care?

If Democrats want to wag a finger this week, get all the men in a room and demand that they mentor and cajole young men about their responsibilities and to marry the mother of their children. And if you are divorced and can't take care of your first family, don't start a second. Even if the new wife or girlfriend nags. Barack Obama essentially did this during the primaries, and so did several other black leaders. I may not like his politics but he is a good role model for young men. But when the numbers are crunched, it will show that women contribute to poverty when they don't marry the fathers of their children and have babies before finishing high school. Feminists on the left need to report this instead of blaming President Bush, or men in general. Birth control? Just Say No, my sister.

These media poverty stories never change. Even though we can all look around and see an incredible difference between 2008 and 1988 or 1958, in the news it is always the same--doom and gloom. No opportunity. No jobs. Hunger. Hopelessness. It's extremely political, and if I were a Democrat, I'd be ashamed that none of the "hope and change" programs we promised in the past have made any difference. Except that one in the mid-1990s under President Clinton, when welfare was cleaned up. Oops. He was forced into that one by Republicans, and the left was fighting mad. But that is his legacy. Millions of women grabbed hold and became energized tax payers, developed a back bone and showed that old American spirit. Obama will try to change that if he becomes President by sneaking in reinforcements to keep women with a step-daddy in the house named "Uncle Sam." Universal pre-school? One more way to get more taxes and more control and show no gains. Universal pre-school will create more feel-good programs, a demand for more taxes to fight poverty, more low-income jobs to be administered by educators, and more reasons for mothers to get into the labor force. Head Start is over 40 years old--no gains beyond the early years of elementary school.

Take away: The poverty gap is no longer racial, it is marital.

Toledo's poverty statistics

Just in time for the convention, we're getting "new" stories on poverty and minorities. In Toledo ABC Channel 13 is pulling stats from the latest census report. 22.6% Toledo residents in poverty (family of 4) compared to 12.3% nationally. And 41.3% of those in poverty in Toledo are black. Instead of tracking the story by race, they should report it by marital status, because that's what causes poverty among women and children. No father in the home.

How is an unmarried woman with children going to show the same economic gains as a married woman and man with children, when counting "households?" That's two incomes against one. A four person household can be a woman with 3 children, or a husband and wife with 2 children, or two gay lawyers and their adopted children. Plus, now that boomers are retiring, the MSM should be reporting that incomes fall after retirement, even if "wealth" hasn't changed at all. But that doesn't play well in speeches and poverty stories.

Toledo Blade: "Overall, the Census found 37.3 million people living in poverty in 2007, of which 13.3 million were children. The poverty level for a four-person family in 2007 was $21,203. Among age groups, seniors had the lowest poverty rate at 9.7 percent, while children had the highest at 18 percent. The poverty rate for 2006 was 12.3 percent, but the change in 2007 was not statistically significant."

Apparently all our poverty programs put in place in the last 30 years have failed. According to a 1987 article in the NYT, “In 1980, Census Bureau figures show the country's overall poverty rate was 11 percent while it was 32 percent for blacks, 25 percent for Hispanic people and 10 percent for whites.” Poverty pimps will find ways to show it is higher now even if the poor own their own home, have an automobile, cable TV and cell phones. If you point out how poverty has decreased in cities (decreased around 50% in Toledo and Columbus by 2000), the Democrats will just tell you that's because the poor moved to the suburbs! Maybe all the "urban development" didn't help the poor? Perhaps all those environmental regulations pushed out industry so the working class have moved to retail and service industries?

Also, in reporting what's happened to gas prices under a Democratic Congress, let's also ignore the gains made during the Bush administration. The median household income in Lucas County, Ohio rose from $40,348 in 2005 to $42,296 in 2006. The percentage of people below the poverty level dropped to 16.8 percent in 2006 from 17.4 percent in 2005.

Smack down for Nancy

The most powerful woman in Washington needs to go back to catechism class.

“After Mr. Tom Brokaw, the interviewer, pointed out that the Catholic Church feels strongly that life begins at conception, she replied, 'I understand. And this is, like, maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the church, this [when life begins] is an issue of controversy,' " the release said.

[Archbishop Donald W.] Wuerl strongly disagrees.

He said, "We respect the right of elected officials such as Speaker Pelosi to address matters of public policy that are before them, but the interpretation of Catholic faith has rightfully been entrusted to the Catholic bishops. Given this responsibility to teach, it is important to make this correction for the record."

Wuerl pointed out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear, and has been clear for 2,000 years. He cited Catechism language that reads, "Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception … Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.”