1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Please Stop Helping Us

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jul 30, 2014 2:06 PM
kmassey Wrote: "You enjoy his writing because he tells you what you want to hear." Can anyone tell me what this means? Is there no objective standard by which to judge anything anymore? Is what Professor Williams writes true or untrue, kmassey? Is his argument flawed? Are there historical factors that he overlooks? Your comment is utter nonsense, and I don't understand the point of it. You have accomplished nothing except to embarrass yourself. Are you grownup or child? Just curious.
In response to:

Cease the Cease-Fires

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jul 30, 2014 1:11 PM
The thing you miss, tsimitpo, is that there are human beings of every level of intelligence and experience, on a bell curve distribution. What needs to happen is for the best and brightest to help those of lesser ability to see obvious truth. When you don't even engage with the profound thoughts offered by a giant intellect like Thomas Sowell you contribute to whatever any "detractors" might be saying. Read the same thing in the Wall Street Journal, and some other periodicals with a tradition of real research, reasoning and great writing. Obama and Kerry are contributing to the problem, not solving it. Just quickly, to address your non-argument today, even if your comment is accurate it's non sequitur. But it is actually false, by reason of being off-point. Looking at everything through a cynical, political lens will never yield the answer you pretend to be looking for that might help us end this or any conflict. As the Wall Street Journal has argued, Kerry and Obama have given both sides reason to keep fighting--Israel because they fear loss of support from the civilized world in the near future, and Hamas because they know they have us buffaloed, and that there will be few, if any, consequences for their uncivilized behavior.
In response to:

Cease the Cease-Fires

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jul 30, 2014 8:58 AM
tsimitpo proves once again that there is a segment of humanity completely impervious to the most compelling, sound reasoning, the most unassailable logic. If I were he (she/it), I would be careful about taking on an intellect like that of Thomas Sowell. For those with a strong prejudice, like the conspiracy paranoia of tsimitpo, there is no amount of logical argument that will prevail. So once again I'm left shaking my head, forced to accept the most pessimistic version of the end of our world and species because there is no progress toward an ability to live in peace. Despite enormous gains in technology, the manifestation of those gains in the realm of international relations is more efficient ways we kill each other. And tsimitpo bleats on...
In response to:

Do Blacks Need Favors?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jul 23, 2014 10:43 AM
It's all been said. Williams is brilliant. If only common sense could be recognized by those who can no longer see the forest for the trees in spite of high IQs and a lot of education. The ability to take complex things and make them clear, as Prof. Williams does for us on a regular basis, requires a higher intelligence than that possessed by many of the leading thinkers of our age. But the very ability to make things clear is derided as over-simplifying, simplistic, etc. It's tragic. The culture problem hasn't infected only blacks. Many people of all stripes won't recognize truth even when it smacks them right in the face.
In response to:

Supply Side Contraceptives

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jul 12, 2014 8:18 AM
"Paul Krugman and others on the left routinely sneer at the idea that you can actually increase government revenues by cutting tax rates. (Turns out most of the time you can’t, but in some cases you can.)" Mr. Goodman, this is a gratuitous opening, irrelevant to the discussion of healthcare. And it is misleading. "...most of the time you can't..."? Over what period have you studied this? Next tax year? Next five tax years? At a time when our economy is being suffocated by government, I wish you would think about this statement, and give it some more study before making a comment like this one.
The mere fact that Kerwick has us scratching our heads and commenting means that he has written a worthwhile column. I haven't read the Goldberg column because I've been away for a couple of weeks, but I have thoughts about this column: 1) American exceptionalism and "American Exceptionalism (AE)" are two different things. The idea that the U.S. is exceptional has value, just as the idea that the Judeo-Christian ethic has value. Children thrive in families with both a mother and father. Individuals thrive when they follow the many little chestnuts in "Poor Richard's Almanac." And we appear to be heading to hell in a handbasket as we abandon some of the time-tested principles that make us exceptional. 2) As an anthropologist, as opposed to a historian, I probably take a more generic view of the discussion than does Kerwick. But he seems to me to have virtually set up a straw man by italicizing AE into something ideological, and then alleging that it is an ideology. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. 3) To the extent that the U.S. has succeeded in providing a moral example to the world (and the success has clearly been mixed), we should recognize the contribution in our historical analysis. We would certainly not agree with Obama that American exceptionalism exists only to the same extent that it exists with respect to every other country on the planet. No, Mr. President, that's not true. We have used our good example and military and economic power and influence as forces for good against evil, hokey as that might sound to you and your fellow Ivy-covered, elitist (dare I say progressive) travelers. If the concept has been coopted by neo-cons, or anyone else, what else is new? How about religious freedom being coopted by atheists? Arguments made by the coopting political interests should simply be exposed in our writing as the logical fallacies that they inevitably are.
In response to:

The Education Establishment's Success

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 25, 2014 8:44 AM
I can see the eyes rolling on MSNBC. But Professor Williams is exactly right. This was an overt strategy that has succeeded beyond anyone's wildest imaginings. Five minutes on the Internet reading about Bill Ayers will enlighten anyone who doubts the absolute truth of this. I just hope that as the world devolves into chaos, anarchy and violence, Ayers and his cohort are satisfied with the result. I can't imagine what kind of sickness explains doing this to one's children. I've said before in TH.com comments, it is as unlikely that another United States of America would evolve to lead the world out of this chaos as it is that life would evolve from primordial soup into human beings again if we became extinct.
In response to:

A Bitter After-Taste

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 18, 2014 8:36 AM
And, Corbett, if you come back here and read what I wrote I understand that you may pretend you haven't. Or you may simply blow back with some more nonsense from the U.N. inspection process, the most toothless process known to mankind. If you want to engage in a discussion of the real issues, please do as I suggest and read the Senate Intelligence Committee report.
In response to:

A Bitter After-Taste

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 18, 2014 8:28 AM
Corbett Wrote: "Kenneth: In case you have trouble understanding what the UN inspectors said, I'll translate it: Bush lied -- people died." Corbett, thank you for your response. And vesuvius, your contribution is appreciated, also. Corbett, you may think that you have proven a point of some kind, but I doubt it. You are perpetrating a fraud. I mentioned the Senate Select Committee report, a post facto report that takes into account the feckless efforts and political rambling of the U.N. This is obvious if you simply recall the process: our intelligence made a finding, we presented it to the U.N. and the U.N. authorized action. Then our internal process was concluded, which, again, included the support of Clinton, Edwards, Biden, et al. If you look at the specific issue of yellow cake purchases, and Joe Wilson's willful change of position and confusion of the timing, you know that it was not at all certain that Hussein did not present a clear and present security threat. Hindsight is 20/20, but the only guy that got it right from the start was Lincoln Chaffee (and how ironic is that?!?). You are completely wrong. Calling our president a liar was then and is now a gross injustice, and is a disservice to the country.
In response to:

A Bitter After-Taste

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 17, 2014 3:52 PM
Corbett Wrote: "We know he had WMD at one time because WE sold them to him. We even sold him weaponized anthrax. But we also know he destroyed them and we knew that BEFORE we invaded." I'm calling you on this one, Corbett, if you come back. What is your reference, your "TINY amount of research"? My recollection of events is that you are completely wrong. Hilary Clinton and John Edwards both went to contacts in the "intelligence community" and reported that the intelligence was sound. And the whole Joe Wilson fiasco pointed out clearly that the intelligence did not change until after the State of the Union Speech. I suggest you read the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on this whole episode again. The "Bush lied, people died" is one of the most egregious falsehoods in my lifetime. You are repeating a tired old falsehood, debunked many times, and the only reason you can continue to believe it is because the so-called "mainstream" media has never bothered to report the plain truth about the WMD issue.
1 - 10 Next