Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, December 04, 2006
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Flickering signs
by Thomas Sowell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Despite years of getting a steady diet of "non-judgmental" attitudes from our educational system and the media, we have not yet lost all sense of right and wrong.

Our elites may have, which might explain how anyone could have thought that O.J. Simpson's book about the murder of his ex-wife and her friend would be accepted by the public. Apparently the clever people who put this deal together thought that a few glib words would defuse any serious objections and perhaps the few voices of outrage would be just enough to create more free publicity for the book.

We have been imposed on so often that it is understandable how some would think that we had reached the point where we would stand for anything.

After all, parents have come to accept the idea that schools have taken over the task of introducing their children to sex -- at whatever age and in whatever way, often crude, might be fashionable in education circles.

As taxpayers, we have quietly accepted the fact that our taxes will be spent to pay big bucks for all sorts of ugly, twisted metal to be displayed in front of or inside government buildings, in the name of "art" -- art that was obviously never meant to give the public any enjoyment and often represented a thumbing of the artist's nose at the public.

We have bowed to the little totalitarians like the so-called American Civil Liberties Union who try each year to stamp out more symbols of Christmas. They have even intimidated many schools and businesses into changing the name of their "Christmas vacation" to the "winter holiday." Some stores have been intimidated into dropping the phrase "Merry Christmas."

Yet now and then we sheep rebel. The issue may be large or small but in any event we let the clever folks know that we won't always buy their cleverness.

For years, the non-judgmental sophisticates argued that Pete Rose should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Whatever rules he may have violated, his record on the field was all that mattered -- or so they said.

By this reasoning, Shoeless Joe Jackson should also be in the Baseball Hall of Fame, despite his role in throwing the 1919 World Series. After all, Shoeless Joe hit .408 at his peak and had a lifetime batting average of .356. Those are Hall of Fame numbers.

Mark McGwire, with his 70 home runs in 1998, had a greater season than Pete Rose ever did, so you might think that the baseball writers who vote on such things would be all in favor of putting him in the Baseball Hall of Fame as well, despite the steroid scandal and McGwire's taking the Fifth Amendment when questioned in Congress about whether he used steroids.

But nearly three-quarters of the writers polled say that they will not vote for him, even though nothing was proved against him. Nothing was proved in court against the players accused of throwing the 1919 World Series but they were all banned from baseball for life anyway.

The fact that everyone is presumed to be innocent in a court of law until proven guilty does not mean that those of us who are not in a court of law have to make that same presumption. It is part of the mindless repetition of words in our time that so many people cannot make that basic distinction.

Congressman Alcee L. Hastings was not convicted in a court of law of taking bribes when he was a federal judge back in the 1980s. But his fellow judges raised that suspicion, his fellow Democrats in the House of Representatives impeached him and Democrats who controlled the Senate removed him from the federal bench.

What Members of Congress were voting on was not whether to send Alcee L. Hastings to jail but whether he was too big a risk to be left with all the powers of a federal judge.

Apparently future House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was willing to risk putting this man with his checkered past in charge of the intelligence committee in the House of Representatives. But outrage among the public, including some in the liberal media, showed that the "non-judgmental" attitude has not yet eliminated common sense and common decency.

There are still flickering signs of hope.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Housing Boom and Bust.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Thomas Sowell and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Sheeps Being lead to the Slaughter
When mankind deceides that they will go with the flow, man does not become kind, he becomes a thoughtless, heartless and anohter kind of a being. Not able or willing to stand firm on truth and principals, morals and self-discipline. Others, even the sick and weak will be used, abused and even killed. Innocence of children will be robbed and destroyed. Human kindness and gentleness will be abandoned. And a new kind of evil is born. Stop and take notice of the increasing crime and evil doers, stop and take action, least it be too late and ureconizeable. Lost forever, those gentle souls, like sheeps being lead to the slaughter.

The Truth
As usual, articles as this have such common sense it makes one wonder what others are 'thinking'... "outrage among the public, including some in the liberal media, showed that the "non-judgmental" attitude has not yet eliminated common sense and common decency. There are still flickering signs of hope.

Let's hope the signs are emmerging..."common sense", or as my mother used to say, "Horse sense" seems to have alluded many in our great country. Again, thanks ,Dr.Sowell for being the voice of reason. Keep it up. It gives ME hope. Merry Christmas.

Fatty Arbuckle
never worked again, under his own name. He wasn't guilty of an actual crime. But he was there, and he was untrue to his public image. Fat clowns should not be cavorting with prostitutes. Especially murdered prostitutes. So there you go, then.

There may not be so much wisdom, in the particular, in public opinion. Yet we depend on it to preserve some semblance of civilization. How odd -- the mobile vulgus standing against anarchy.

So when the barbarian hoard is an individual -- OJ, or a cheating athlete, or a corrupt official -- it does seem to be the collected mass of little guys whose outrage saves the day.

There is much to be said, for the lost tool of social scorn. There is much wisdom in the biblical, and puritanical, idea of shunning. Some laws, especially pertaining to decency, remain unwritten. They come into play erratically. But without them, this would be Europe.

J
http://forgottenprophets.blogspot.com/

Right on Dr. Sowell..
The biggest problem is that we *Sheep* have been tolerant of these idiotic Liberals way to long for whatever reason! We have stood by and watched them turn our culture into a cesspool! We must stand together and beat back this insane Liberal agenda!

Let them resort to every tool and name calling they want! Just consider where it's coming from and why.

Nancy couldn't help being Nancy!
Every now and then, we the sheeple wake up and roar. Less often, the wolves listen. Keep sounding the alarm Dr Sowell, those that know do not believe that you are simply crying "wolf".

The Uncommonest Virtue
...is "common sense."

Yes, public sentiment could well have been the preventative that thwarted the elevation of Alcee Hastings. But it was mobilized with unusual swiftness and effectiveness. The forces dedicated to the perpetuation of the status quo were caught off guard by the surge, among conservatives and decent liberals, that brought popular attention to this outrage-in-embryo. Had the Old Media had more time to work, the result might have been quite different. Especially with the Dishonorable Mr. Hastings being black.

We cannot trust to "common sense" to operate without being goosed in its morally sensitive parts. As the Left and the Old Media are resolved to anesthetize those parts, I expect the chore to become ever more difficult with time.

While common sense
is not completely lost in our society, it does seem to take ever-increasing levels of egregiousness for it to kick in.

Just like cooking a frog.
One must raise the water temp gradually AFTER the frog is in the water. Our society decays by degrees.

Remember that out of wedlock births were a social stigma just two generations ago? Now they are more than half of all births.

What next?
I can hardly wait to see what Pelosi et al will offer to do to save us from ourselves in January!

FDR4Rushmore
I have read your ramblings on many threads here on Townhall, and am constantly amazed at what can only be either ignorance or disingenuousness. You state that Townhall.com is "mainstream," that Coulter, Novak, Beck, Hewitt, and Limbaugh are THE voices of the media, and that Media Matters and MoveOn are conservative.

Which ist F4R? Are you dumb or dishonest?

Interesting that Dr. Sowell
would bring up baseball as one of the "flickering signs" since his precise point was discussed on ESPN's "Sports Reporters" yesterday. Sports reporters like most other reporters, lean heavily to the left. But all four, including two blacks, one of whom was host John Saunders, indicated they would not vote for Mark McGwire in the upcoming vote, nor would they vote for Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, or Raphael Palmeiro (sp?) in future voting because each tried to, in a negative way, fundamentally change the game of baseball.

Hmmm...sports reporters demanding integrity? Can the NY Times be far behind?...Yes, eons!


FDR
With all apologies, you call the "left wing media bias...a complete fabrication." Are you kidding? I'm 22 years old, and I can remember Dan Rather's "reports" that were completely false and directed at damaging conservatives. I remember EVERY news outlet declaring Al Gore the winner of the election despite the polls not yet being closed and the votes not yet being counted. I believe the media Sowell is referring to is the kind on the television, because while there are many like you and me who read political columns, there are far more who care little about politics and just go by what they see on the television.

On another note, I like your moniker. I'm a big FDR fan, and I, personally, would much rater see his face on the side of a mountain than his cousin's. As much as I respect that Teddy was a good president, I'm not sold on his worthiness of being on Mount Rushmore.

FDR4...
A bit early to be nippin' the Johnny Walker, ain't it?

FDR4Rushmore
Sorry but the lists you provide are of political commentators with political leanings that they openly espouse. I do not believe anyone really has a problem with this, you may disagree but, you know what your getting with them. The problem with the MSM is they hide their agendas by putting up selected news items that reinforce their views or make up news altogether. The NYTs and 60 minutes have been doing this for years. There have also been plenty of studies backing this up. Still the vast majority of people get there news and commentary from the MSM and unless they are into politics like the people that come to these sites they think they are getting good honest news and commentary when in actuality they are getting just the news that is sensational and supports their view of the world and in some cases they are getting total fabrication of news, also the commentary is heavily stilted left which wouldn't be so bad if they were honest and upfront about it to begin with.

Matthew
I must agree about their intellect, It is hard to tell if they are just being stupid or liberal it is almost interchangeable.

The problem with your statement is that they make these kind of stupid mistakes constantly and predictably. You always know what's going to happen with news if it is a corrupt conservative they will be demonized and held up for ridicule whether there are facts to support it or not. If it is a lib, the formula changes, either it will get cursory lip service and dropped or we will have to examine the deeper causes as to why it happened because of course a lib cant be corrupt, even if he/she is guilty there must be mitigating circumstances.

The formula plays out all the time with the MSM. I am not talking about local news that nobody really sees.

KEEP DEBATING EVERYONE
But keep a close eye on the ACLU. If there was ever was a reason for Americans to unite and force an issue, that issue would be the anti-American ways of the ACLU. There very well may be "flickering signs" of hope, but unless the ACLU is challenged by Americans, that flickering ray of hope for America will be completely snuffed out by a group that is no more pro American then the monkey leaders of third world countries.

hntr admin
http://www.headsneedtoroll.org

FDR
You mean people actually don't like FDR? Good grief...he is, in my opinion, one of the two greatest presidents ever to be in office (the other is Reagan, and they are co-number ones on my list). His "New Deal" organizations did wonders to bring the country out of the Great Depression, and WWII was probably the best managed war in US history. How could Americans not like him?

As for the election, you're right that it's just bad reporting...I was just trying to think of specific examples and the combination of not being fully awake and rushing to type it out before I had to go to class (I'm a student at Auburn University) kinda limited me. I'm not saying I was right to accuse the media of being liberal because of it, I'm just explaining my lapse in logic.

The Rather issue I mentioned was the thing about a memo that questioned President Bush's military record. Basically, the memo was a bunch of hogwash. Again, it could be attributed to shabby reporting, but it could also be a case of jumping on something that slanders a conservative simply for the sake of slandering the conservative. Who knows? I've gotten to the point of reading the news instead of watching it, because reading makes it easy to skip the BS and just get an overview of the actual story. The comic strip Mallard Fillmore is great about pointing out hypocrisy in the media and in pretty much every aspect of politics, and the writer of that comic obviously has problems with the GOP as well as democrats...Mallard claims to be conservative but not republican.

And there is at least one liberal with a political talk show, if that's what a "talking head" is (I'm not really sure to whom the description applies, to be honest). I don't remember his name, but his show is on HBO, and I have problems with that show because his rule is that he gets the last word, no matter what. He's good at twisting words and making them fit his own agenda (as are many conservatives, I'm not saying that liberals have the monopoly on that), and in having the last word, he can distort a viewer's opinion by jumbling the facts. But it's his show, he can do what he wants to.

FDR4Rushmore
You evidently do not understand;
"MSM" is short for Main Stream Media!

As for the NYT NOT supporting the WOT;
The NYT IS AN ENEMY PROPAGANDA ARM!
They do everything in their power to help the ENEMY kill U.S. troops!

And what busisnss do YOU have meddling in U.S. matters politic?
Don't you think that is a rude thing for a guest to do?

MyOpine
I may not agree with everything FDR4Rushmore says, but your argument is asinine. You're right, MSM stands for Mainstream Media, but why would he not understand that? Media is defined as any source of news, and isn't Ann Coulter a source of news? And he didn't say the New York Times is supporting the war on terror, he said they supported the decision to invade Iraq back when it was made.

I'm guessing that last paragraph is asking why he has a right to question U.S. politics, and you call him a guest. Why is he a guest? Is he not an American? If he isn't, I didn't see his proclamation thereof. And if he is, then he has every right to "meddle" in them: we are governed "for the people, by the people, and of the people." It is not just his right to question politics in America, but also his duty. Had the founding fathers not "meddled" in the politics of the governing body, then we'd still be governed by the British.

Webster
As Secretary of the Navy, FDR spent a lot of time abord various ships. He got used to being with the men and did not feel any need for bodyguards. He is probably the only man who ever used a BATTLESHIP, (USS Idaho), for a fishing boat!

Oh, what I said about FDR
I was giving my opinion of it and expressing my surprise that anyone would abuse you for the use of that moniker. My problem is not with you, it's with understanding how anyone could have a problem with FDR4Rushmore. What kinds of things do they say?

As for the hangover, yeah, well, I had a weekend full of drinking. I usually don't drink a whole lot (I drink frequently but not in large quantities), and I probably went through three cases of beer over the past three nights. Beer Pong is just fun, and I played for hours this weekend. But as for being up so early, I have a 9 o'clock class, and somehow I was thinking I needed to be there at 8, so I rode the transit earlier than I needed to. I'm now back at my apartment, but then I was at the school computer lab trying to kill time before class.

Mr. Sowell says:
"But outrage among the public, including some in the liberal media, showed that the "non-judgmental" attitude has not yet eliminated common sense and common decency.
There are still flickering signs of hope."

Yes, and I believe that the "usual and normal epithets" applied to any American who wishes to cry outrage do not work any longer.

Hate words bantered about by liberals and ACLU apologists, such as "racist" do not work any longer to keep people from speaking out.

The American people know the game that MSM, ACLU, and other liberal leaning individuals have been playing.

The game no longer works. Therefore, there is still hope.

Ahh
I didn't realize you were British, but it doesn't particularly bother me. I understand now why MyOpine called you a guest, but while I don't necessarily agree with your opinions, I agree with the way you came about them. I get sick and tired of listening to my friends talk about things they know nothing about, but that they think they fully understand because their favorite politician/religious leader said this or that. It's on both sides, and it really gets old...I have friends who think I'm liberal because of the way I challenge their conservative beliefs, but in truth I do the same things with my liberal friends. I am conservative (not republican), but I prefer to let people make up their own minds about things. If someone has liberal viewpoints, that's fine, so long as they understand the full ramifications of those liberal views. And, of course, the same goes for conservatives.

FDR not popular?
What? I never noticed any of that. Was MyOpine saying that his exploits as Secretary of the Navy were a bad thing? That doesn't make the least bit of sense. What did FDR do to make people not like him? If being amiable enough to spend time around ordinary soldiers is a bad thing, then I'd like to know what good is.

Flickers of hope
Dr. Sowell and his many admirers may also be interested in hearing that in western New York there is a movement afoot to remove O.J. Simpson's name from the "Wall of Fame" at Ralph Wilson Stadium, where the Buffalo Bills play football. Mr. Wilson, the team owner, is in favor of not making the change, but a groundswell of support could influence him. At least people are talking about it, and the tone of the discussion suggests that many are aware of the difference between throwing the world series, betting on games, taking steroids, and killing two people.

Rushmore
Even the MSM is starting to achknowledge its own bias. Perhaps that admission is to lure back the escaping readers, but in any event they are admitting it. Remember when Evan Thomas acknowledged that media support for a democratic candidate was worth 15 points. Remember recent polls showing the overwhelming percentage of newspeople who voted for Gore or who are registered democrats? How about the cbs reporter who acknowledged the anti-military bias that runs through the newsrooms. I could go on but you see the point.

Wow
Franklin Delano Roosevelt is a hero of mine...it saddens me that people would call him a socialist. The programs he started have now become something bordering socialism, but, if they were managed properly and if people didn't abuse them, it'd still be as good a system as it was in the 30s. Granted, the people factor kinda screws it all up...

Oh, and as for the beer, don't worry, I'm not letting up. I'll be sober for the next week or so, but only because finals are coming up. And this weekend I'll probably still have one night of fun before descending into the hell that is finals week.

Webster
YOU evidently don't know what MSM means either.
Try ABC CBS CNN, etc. That is MSM, not Coulter or Rush Linbaugh.

FDR4Rushmore
You certainly DO post here but I think you have a lot of gaul trying to influence something you don't have ANY stake in and do NOT have to live with.
AND you don't know enough about America to form an intelligent opinion, even IF YOU WERE CAPABLE!

Why don't you try telling us about something YOU DO know about?
Tell us how superior you medical system is?
Tell us how much lower your TAXES are, etc.

Everyone receives all of the returns on
Only with regard to the sports examples and steroids: I was aware of the use of anabolic steroids for both rapid recovery from injury and strain, and rapid gains from weight training in 1962 as a college freshman, and could get them prescribed at the university health clinic (After a skiing injury, in my case.) Perhaps few used them, but most atheles knew about them. Because of this lowest-tier presence amongst athletes, the use of steroids at the professional level before 1962 may have been significant, because any injury could end a career. This was the “Jack Kennedy Vitamin B-12 booster-shot” era, after all. My point is that there is often a long “learning period” before we start branding an action or choice unacceptable, and it’s a slippery slope.

I’m less generous about professional Liberals et al. Ziplocs after walkies. Actions DO count for more than intents.

A few rules need to be recognized here: #1- Everyone receives all of the returns on their investments (Most will ultimately be surprised about this.) #2- The vast majority of communication is intended to influence to the communicant’s point of view. 90% of the rest is prattle. Study history with an eye for the “opinion” line, then select your sources of opinions openly presented as such, but read a selection of both. #3- Always ask yourself “What is the business they are in, and what is the product that they sell?” (Themselves? Red flags here!) #4- “News” is a self-serving rough draft of history commonly presented by whores. #5- It’s a matrix. The “common threads” are near-infinite, but the reality is not subjective. Corollary: It’s all politics.

&F4R
You might mention the price of petrol in GB.

You have me at a serious disadvantage in badmouthing our American Presidents.

People like Churchill, Thatcher, Blair, I hold in the higest regard as great leaders but what do I know?

MyOpine
You are the one who quite obviously doesn't know what "mainstream media" means. It means media that is in the mainstream. Considering the hits that Ann Coulter gets, don't you think she belongs there? I understand that people generally talk about those networks you mentioned as the MSM, but how does that affect the phrase's meaning? If you'll do just a little bit of reading, you'll notice that I replied to his comments about the mainstream media by pointing out that Sowell was probably referring to the television media.

FDR
"The media owners are overwhelmingly conservative" !?!?

Is this a poor attempt at satire or sarcasm? Let's forget the individual journalists for a minute. The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Times are the only 2 major newspapers in the US that could remotely be labeled "conservative".

Are you trying to say Pinch Sulzberger, Ted Turner, the Disney Corp, Time-Warner, the CBS Corp, etc. are "overwhelmingly conservative"?

I know the drug laws in England are lax in some areas (i.e. Kings Cross), but you should use a little more restraint.

re: Rather
He and his producer jumped all over faked information to attack President Bush, while ignoring real proof that Kerry had received less than an honorable discharge.

Clyde9

Webster
FDR could have been Clinton's grandfather. He was a very charismatic leader who had the ability to inspire the people with his fireside chats, but he had his dark side too e.g. packing the Supreme Court, internment camps for US citizens who were unfortunate enough to have Japanese heritage.
Before you finish school, take aa class in the economic history of the US, you'll find that in the late 30's after FDR's programs had been in effect for a few years, the economy turned South and headed straight for the Dumper. Any honest historian will tell you that it was WW II that caused the end of the Great Depression. Look it up.

Webster, YOU STILL DON'T GET IT!
Your handle is Webster?
Is that a fact or a personal opinion?
I am discussing FACT,not your personal choice!


YOU HISTORY RIVISIONESTS WHO HAVE NEVER KNOWN HUNGER;
FDR brought this country out of the worst depression history ever recorded.
People were STARVING!
Our monetary system had collapsed.
The banks were BROKE and could not loan money to start industry.
For a bunch of whossies who have never known hardship and dispair and do not have personal knowledge of the man or the time to come along 70 years after the fact and badmouth FDR are without personal ethics.
FDR was anti-Communist and NOTHING LIKE the bunch who have taken over the Democratic Party today.
He was a VERY strong President and would not tolerate this crap from Iran or N. Korea for one second!
He was more like a Dictator than a President.

MSM

MyOpine
Dude~

If your the largest cable news channel, like Fox, if you have most of the market share, like Fox, then you ARE mainstream media!

Japanese internment;
Japanese were interned for two reasons.
First, for their own safety because there was much resentment for them.
Second, because many were caught spying and some tried to sabatage an oil refinery.
The Pacific war was running against us at the time and news of Japanese artocities was reaching the mainland.

There was not as much hatred for Germans and Italians so they only had to wear identifying arm bands, obey a kerfew and stay out of restricted areas.

naked pagan
NOT YET
But soon I hope!
Fewer people are duped by MSM each day.
That is why FOX has a larger audience than any single member of MSM but combined, they are still MSM.

just a reminder
rathergate 2004 - before he went on the air with the report that questioned George Bush's service record rather was told by his fact checkers that they COULD NOT VOUCH FOR THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE DOCUMENTS ON WHICH THE REPORT WAS BASED. IOW there was a good chance that the documents were bogus. rather ignored them and went on the air with the report. Within 2 hours after the broadcast it had been blown to bits by bloggers, one of whom began by saying "I am not a supporter of George Bush" or words to that effect. I cannot recall the original quote but that was the gist of it.

At the time of the incident Ann Coulter came up with the phrase C BS. I like that.


Prime Offender: Thomas Sowell
Thomas, you are in the business of writing political columns. But where is your "sense of right and wrong" regarding your own professional work?

Your own work is frequently characterized by slapdash thinking, slovenly writing, and settling for easy targets. I think at one time you operated as a capable and passionate intellect, but I currently detect barely a "flicker" of intellectual energy from you.

A couple of examples from your present article:

[1] Consider this from the paragraph on ugly public art:

... art that was obviously never meant to
give the public any enjoyment and often
represented a thumbing of the artist's nose
at the public.

Did you research this "finding"? I doubt it. Doing some quick research myself, the reality appears to be as follows: [a] There is plenty of ugly public art. [b] There are also provocative/offensive art works. However there is little overlap between [a] and [b]. I.e., artists in category [a] are typically focused on getting a commission, not on offending; and artists in category [b] are typically "marketing" to galleries, collectors, avant-garde museums (the private sector). *OF COURSE* if I am wrong, kindly post your footnotes, Thomas.

[2] If you believe that there are "flickering signs of hope" from us "sheep", it would be most interesting for you to explore the forces which may be at work behind this development. The examples in your article are hit-and-miss. How about some real analysis, Thomas? Too much work?!?

***

In writing the above, I have a very serious purpose. In think that as a public intellect, your poor work has the effect of causing a certain amount of demoralization and confusion among us sheep. As a public intellect, you owe it to the public to provide quality and leadership. If you can't do that, make room for others who can.




ItTakesAHeadToGetAHead
Your arrogant blather does not show me any intellect.
If you think you are so good, why don't you get a Blog here and show us something more coherent?
Do you have anything to offer other than sarcasm?

Flickering signs - ThomasSowell
I think you all need a dose of this:
The best episode is John 3:16.
All you have to do to get saved is pray a prayer somewhat like this:
Dear Lord Jesus Christ, I know that I am a sinner, and I deserve to go to hell. I know that I need Your forgiveness. I do believe Jesus died for my sin. I do believe He rose again from the dead, proving You accepted His sacrifice. I do believe the Bible is true. The best I know how, right here and now I want to turn from my sinful life, and put my faith and trust in Jesus Christ and His shed blood on the cross of Calvary as payment for all my sin. Thank-you, Jesus, for loving me, forgiving me, and saving me. In Your name, Amen.

PERHAPS YOU ARE WONDERING, "Is that ALL I have to do?" Friend, all you need to remember is that you have His promise on it:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:" (John 1:12).

"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’ (Rom. 10:13)

If you repented of your sin, and trusted Christ as your Saviour, perhaps expressing those truths to God in a prayer like the one above, then according to the Word of God you are now a Child of God!

ItTakesAHeadToGetAHead
Why don't you go down to Amazon.com and pick up some of his books before you continue making yourself look like the very intellectual vaccuum you accuse other of?

It should be clear that there isn't the space in a more-than-weekly column to list all his sources, but if its sources you want, you should check something a bit longer. I think he's earned the right to give us his educated opinion without providing all of the possible back-track.

Regarding the public display of art: "[a] There is plenty of ugly public art. [b] There are also provocative/offensive art works."

Of course there is. But WHY is it that taxpayers need to foot the bill for ugly and/or offensive artwork?

It hardly matters whether the artist *intends* to insult his benefactor, or just *happens* to do so. If you're using *your* money to buy artwork, and the artist presents you with something that insults *you*, don't you have the right to refuse funding? Why should taxpayers be any different?

FDR4Rushmore
First, I have to congratulate you. You are a gifted journalist. You work the leftist victim thing well, condescendingly spewing invective and ad hominem and then getting your panties in a wad when someone calls you on it.

The fact is I did re-read your original post several times. I was not "thrown" by your mention of leftist sites at all. I saw your intent and understood it. The fact is, your point is that conservatism is the mainstream media bias and by listing MoveOn and MM with the conservatives, your clear implication (whether intended or not) was to group MO and MM with conservatives. Perhaps you threw yourself.

But whatever your intention (and I will admit I missed your real point), the fact is that your arguments are still way off base. In fact, how you worded the MO and MM statement is incorrect. MoveOn and Media Matters are the mainstream, not Townhall.

I know you cite the number of hits Townhall (and AnnCoulter.org) get(s) as evidence of conservatism being "mainstream," but those large numbers of hits come from conservatives starved for opinion that makes sense. We are tired of the liberal drivel that pervades the "news reporting" of the AP, Reuters, NYT, WaPo, LAT, CBS, ABC, PBS, NBC (and all its little cable lackeys), and CNN. Foxnews does have the largest audience on cable, but its ratings are still dwarfed by all the afforementioned (put together). You cite pundits, who are unabashed about their being commentators with agendas, but are silent about leftist reporters, who tailor the "news" to their agendas and deny their bias.

Lastly, you state that large corporations own the media, which you imply to mean that conservatives control them. That is incorrect and wrong. And I suppose you know it.

My question to you was whether you are ignorant or disingenuous. To be honest, I never doubted your intellect or knowledge. My question was, therefore, rhetorical.

And you have only further proven your disingenuousness with each post since.

Prime Offender: Thomas Sowell
UncaAlby, MyOpine:

Very simply, Thomas Sowell is not doing his job.
My specific previous observations are easy enough to confirm. Plus, you can critique his articles independently of me.

The serious questions include these: What do you (and other readers) think of the quality of Sowell's articles? Shouldn't we demand "the best" from Sowell?

All that I want is Sowell's best, whatever it takes for him to provide it. (Perhaps he needs a couple of assistants to critique and fix his articles before he publishes them.) If he is unwilling or unable to do outstanding work, perhaps he should retire. There are other political writers - left, right, center - who are contributing excellent work.

I definitely do not want to be the center of attention. However I want to assure you that I have "done my homework" and that I have not hidden agenda.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.