1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition

Kenneth L. Wrote: 18 hours ago (9:42 PM)
Just like "Global Warming," the argument about same-sex marriage is about many things. If climate change were being studied quietly in college computer labs, nobody would even be aware. But because the alarmists are proposing destructive public policy that will keep people in poverty around the world, increase hunger and disease, and lower our standard of living in the U.S., they have people's attention. Same-sex marriage, likewise, has consequences. The easiest to identify and use in rational discussion are the financial implications for health insurance, pensions, and Social Security. But we should not pretend that there aren't social consequences, as well. The most obvious, again, are those affecting the well-being of children. But normalizing same-sex marriage will change the basic cornerstone of our society, the family. It's not a thing that should be done in haste, or taken lightly.
In response to:

Militarization of Police II

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 31, 2014 1:54 PM
Frisco, I'm not sure that you don't make some good points. But why don't you rebut my points if you disagree with me? And Kerwick's? Especially if you're a lawyer I would think you might be capable of that. How do you define "military grade"? How would you determine what arms a police force needs? You might prefer that they be restricted to sticks but I believe we need to consider their mission, and base the equipment on need. I would not be pleased if I were a shopkeeper in Ferguson whose shop was looted. What history are you suggesting we ignore? Police officers may have been armed with 38s against the Tommy guns of Al Capone, yes. Are you suggesting this was sufficient armament, and that the police succeeded in protecting citizens against his kind of organized criminal enterprise?
In response to:

Has Hillary Ever Been Right?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 30, 2014 9:01 AM
Corbett, I would like you to seriously consider the possibility that you are a "black/white" thinker. My problem with Ron Paul, whether you like to call him "isolationist," or not (a semantic question), is that he looks at the world through a black/white lens of war or no war. Carrying a big stick, enforcing red lines, bombing the hell out of something (like Ghaddafi's compound), stopping an incursion (as in the Falklands), etc., are measured steps that help avoid war. If we simply withdraw from the international scene we will invite wars everywhere which will eventually, inevitably require us to be involved (refer to WWI and WWII). Calling our efforts defending an "empire" don't make it so. As the moral and human rights example to the world, the U.S. projecting military power has been of great benefit to ourselves and the entire planet.
In response to:

Militarization of Police II

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 30, 2014 8:47 AM
It is obviously regrettable that police are "becoming" "military-like." They don't make a pretty picture advancing down Main Street in armored vehicles against a mob that is "becoming" more "terrorist-like." But Kerwick's arguments are perfectly logical, misgivings and objections notwithstanding. There is no specific point at which a unit can be defined as military versus non-military based solely on equipment, and it's been many years since the 38 caliber revolver was sufficient fire-power for an American police officer. My suggestion is that we abandon the quibbling over semantics and appearances and discuss the social pathologies that have led to the discussion. As Kerwick says (and Eric Holder might say), this will take courage in this age of political correctness in which appearances (politics) are supreme. But the silly objections being raised about appearances are not merely a distraction, but a counter-productive distraction which could ultimately put our police officers at unnecessary risk as they try to defend us against those abusing their advantages under the ideals of this country.
In response to:

Another Bad War in Iraq

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 11:14 AM
Last time (i.e., 9/11) the people sneaking into the U.S. to kill us by the thousands came mainly from Saudi Arabia. Now we are dealing with ISIS which has recruits from 50 countries, including the U.S. So let's ignore them. They'll probably go away. But that's not even the worst weakness in the thinking of Chapman and Buchanan. The worst, most obvious shortcoming is tunnel vision. Looking at this in isolation is may well seem that it is not an "imminent threat," but over time, and in the context of Russia, Libya, Tunisia, Turkey, Egypt, Gaza, Pakistan, et al, as well as Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran, of course, it's obvious to most that our feckless foreign policy has put us in danger. The fact that anyone, even the likes of Steve Chapman, fails to see this is amazing.
In response to:

Democracy and Ferguson

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 23, 2014 1:41 PM
The allegation of a voter suppression motive, and a racist explanation for the motive, is itself a racist assumption. The most notorious, blatant thefts of elections have been perpetrated by organized crime. This is hardly a secret. And when I say this, I mean to include not only the large numbers of dead people voting, etc., but the money. Both the Citizens United and Koch brothers rhetoric used by Schumer, Reid, et al, and the wild accusations of racist motives behind Republican efforts to curb voter fraud are the worst kind of straw man attempts to distract the low information voters from the obvious, long-standing truth about election fraud committed by Democrats in league with unions and criminals. But I repeat myself.
In response to:

Democracy and Ferguson

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 23, 2014 1:26 PM
Thank you for the suggestion, arpiem. I may be reaching the same point you have. One last thought for Mr. Chapman. It's a hint: the reason for disenfranchisement in Rhode Island and Chicago is that voter ID has been a crime committed by organized criminals, not ID-lacking minorities. Please, Mr. Chapman, respond to that obvious fact, a well-known part of the popular culture referred to in movies and paperback novels. Unfortunately, in the aforementioned Rhode Island and Chicago, the cronies of these criminals are mainly Democrats. Wouldn't be shocked to learn this was the case elsewhere, as well.
In response to:

Democracy and Ferguson

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 23, 2014 12:57 PM
I apologize in advance for my impatience with Mr. Chapman, but I begin to feel about him the same way I feel about flattus, or esseffarr. How about responding to some of the objections, here, Mr. Chapman, and engaging with your readers? 1) The assumption that voter ID disenfranchises anyone is blatantly racist, ageist, sexist...whatever group you claim is disenfranched. As has been pointed out many times, need for an ID is almost universal, for banking, dealing with the government, etc. Something I don't think anyone mentioned yet here is that, in addition to these points, experience in Georgia and Indiana shows no decline in voting by any of the groups that Democrats pretend to be concerned about. 2) The "studies" that show no "voter impersonation fraud" are a fraud themselves. Narrowing the focus of the study while ignoring the bad odor in this fashion is simply an exercise in self-deception. Mr. Chapman, I would like to you address in a future column the election of Al Franken, wherein an important precinct reported a number of votes that exceeded the number of registered voters. How is that explained away? Perhaps I'm just being obtuse. You could also explain why an African-American in Rhode Island led the group sponsoring legislation to require an ID to vote, in order to protect his diverse, mostly minority constituency, from disenfranchisement. Finally, as a proud Chicagoan, I wonder about your view of the election of JFK. Let's hear from you. If we don't, I join the others calling for your removal from TH.com. I enjoy diverse views, but not dishonest demagoguery.
In response to:

Is the Criminal Justice System Racist?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Aug 18, 2014 10:33 AM
Use of disparate impact is an evil because, even if causation explains a correlation, in whole or in part, it doesn't suggest an action or solution. Saying that there are too many blacks in jail is to say nothing. It's like saying the corn isn't high enough on July 19th. Why are the young black males in jail? Why isn't the corn higher? Is there anything that could be done to remedy the aspects of the situation that need to be changed? Does the observed statistic suggest that fewer young male blacks should be in jail, or that more of them should be in jail in order to make a long-term change for the better in the communities they prey upon? Obviously I'm being provocative. But the point is (and I believe this is one of the perhaps too-subtle Goodman's points) that a statistic alone suggests nothing.
"...Blacks Live in a Different America." Steve, this makes me want to cry. You pretend to be libertarian, but you spout meaningless nonsense that excites feelings of deprivation and resentment. What do you suggest we do to remedy this situation? Maybe knock out a few Asian kids at random to take them down a peg? We all live in the same America, Steve. I hate to give you the bad news. Sometimes it rains here and sometimes the sun shines. Those who refuse to make the best of their circumstances will lose, like it or not. Your bleating today amounts to profiteering, writing the most transparent pandering to the most helpless among us in this one America.
1 - 10 Next