Sarah Palin 'Unnerves' NewsWeek Elitist Sam Harris; An Atheist Responds

Sam Harris Doesn't Speak for Me
The Crack Emcee
The Macho Response




Response from an Atheist

[NOTE: An interesting rebuke of Newsweek's Sam Harris and his opinion piece, "When Atheists Attack".

Harris wrote that he was 'unnerved' when he heard Palin speak at the Republican Convention. Harris reveals much more about himself than Sarah Palin. Newsweek subheaded the Harris piece, "A noted provocateur rips Sarah Palin—and defends elitism." Of course, readers of Newsweek know that a writer need be neither a "provocateur" nor "noted" to attack Sarah Palin.

But then, readers of Newsweek, largely a cult following these days, might be unnerved by the "news" magazine's declining subscription base.]

I got a call today from one of my best friends, asking me if I'd read Newsweek magazine recently; specifically Sam Harris's article on Sarah Palin called, "When Atheists Attack". I told him no; that though I am an atheist, I'm not a fan of Sam Harris, and don't trust the stance he's taken in the dialogue on atheism - because he's another angry Buddhist - which I regard as a spiritual con, beyond weird, a sign of elitist liberalism, and - as practiced in the West - part of the NewAge (rhymes with sewage) movement that I despise.

My friend, who sits on the fence in regards to a lot of political and theological arguments, read me a few of Harris's paragraphs about Palin that he found troubling. But, while doing so, my friend also gave me further reason to dislike the elitist Harris even more.

Let me explain:

See, I'm not like other atheists in a number of ways: though born an atheist, I've always considered the battle, and taken-offense, over "In God We Trust" on money (or the phrase "Under God" in the Pledge Of Allegiance) to be silly. For me, God is not "dead" but merely outgrown his usefulness. I understand why, mostly as a response to communism, presidents say "God bless America", and why these gestures were made historically, so they don't bother me a bit. They're nothing to rail against. They're anachronisms, kitschy, and (though I'm loathe to admit it) touching, threatening my atheism not one iota. I guess I'm saying I find many atheists, and the planks they stand on, petty, laughable, and weak, and that's also how I feel about Harris's critique of Palin as well.

Harris starts off with the confession that he "was genuinely unnerved by Sarah Palin's performance at the Republican convention" because it was "the most effective political communication" he'd ever seen. Considering how much we in the general public knew about Palin at that juncture, what was Harris afraid of? Why wasn't this man, who I suspect is a feminist, overjoyed to see this "sexy" woman (Harris's word) break the glass ceiling of presidential politics? He claims it was because "if anyone could make Christian theocracy smell like apple pie, Sarah Palin could", but I suspect - as the early, and hypocritical, attacks on Palin indicated - it was mostly because this married mother of five clearly wasn't a card-carrying member of the so-called "progressive" movement. Some elitists, who appear outwardly reasonable, have even gone so far as to declare she isn't even a woman.

Ladies and gentlemen (especially the gentlemen) I ask you: is Sarah Palin not a woman?

Whatever the case for his anxiety, Harris wasn't giving this new face on our national stage a fair break, as he indicates while discussing her Charles Gibson interview.

Harris says he was "relieved to discover, as many were, that Palin's luster can be much diminished by the absence of a teleprompter" - without uttering a word on how elitist Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's celebrated stumbling without a teleprompter affected his mood. Harris adds that he "didn't much care that she did not know the meaning of the phrase 'Bush doctrine'", but as Charles Krathammer (the man who coined the term) has pointed out, that great "gotcha" moment apparently hasn't yet registered with "progressives" like Harris - or even the New York Times - as Charles Gibson's gaffe - not Palin's - three weeks later.

Continue reading: Sam Harris Doesn't Speak for Me



by The Crack Emcee
image: The Macho Response
Source: Sam Harris Doesn't Speak for Me

The Baby Bust and Falling Fertility: Europe on Life-Support

People Power

Family Feud

"When [Rocco] Falivena took office in 2002 for his second stint as mayor [of Laviano, Italy], two numbers caught his attention. Four: that was how many babies were born in the town the year before. And five: the number of children enrolled in first grade at the school, never mind that the school served two additional communities as well. “I knew what was my first job, to try to save the school,” Falivena told me. “Because a village that does not have a school is a dead village.” He racked his brain and came up with a desperate idea: pay women to have babies…"
--NY Times: No Babies?

Red Planet Cartoons' latest theme is one that will surprise Eco-Weenies: Western Civilization's baby bust.

While eco-warriors are preaching the many ill-effects that humans have on Mother Earth, RPC demonstrates that Earth Firsters might have too many trees in front of them to see a barren, Western Civ forest.

Around the time that President Kennedy went to Germany and gave his “Ich bin ein Berliner” speech, Europe represented 12.5 percent of the world’s population. Today it is 7.2 percent, and if current trends continue, by 2050 only 5 percent of the world will be European.

As Mark Steyn, the Paul Revere of Western Demographic Decline, points out in recent Wall Street Journal article, It's the Demography, Stupid, "In 1970, the developed world had twice as big a share of the global population as the Muslim world: 30% to 15%. By 2000, they were the same: each had about 20%."

Can these trends continue for another 30 years without having consequences? Europe by the end of this century will be a continent after the neutron bomb: The grand buildings will still be standing, but the people who built them will be gone. We are living through a remarkable period: the self-extinction of the races who, for good or ill, shaped the modern world.

Though Steyn is best-known for his chronicling the abysmally-low fertility rates of Western Europe in 2005's best-seller, America Alone, he was not the first.

Phillip Longman's 2004 article for Foreign Affairs, The Global Baby Bust, put the problem in front of many readers for the first time. In it, Longman documents falling fertility, not only in Europe, but also other countries traditionally associated with high birth rates.

By some estimates, the world's fertility will fall below replacement levels by 2050, if present trends continue.

Which ought to send Al Gore into a fit of ecstasy: with less drivers, there will be less pollution from less cars.

And less people to notice any difference.

by Mondoreb
image: Red Planet Cartoons
Source:
* People Power

America's Economy: Resilient or Declining?

Is America in Economic Decline?



America in economic decline?

Everyday, it seems there is a new economic statistic about a weakening US economy or a news report about the US$ dropping in value against other currencies.

My answer is: NO.

Maybe right now the dollar is at a low level and portions of the American economy could be better, but the overall economy is solid and the dollar weakness is temporary. If you read history, it seems to be a good rule to never underestimate the American people or our economy. In fact, i think some of the nation's best economic times lie ahead.

I'm writing this mostly because I'm a member of a very popular website called Little Green Footballs (www.littlegreenfootballs.com). Due to my online name (chicagodudewhotrades) I get asked a lot of stock market and economic questions by my fellow LGF'ers. Writing this I hope will help my LGF friends out. This is my first attempt at writing something like this, so don't beat me up too bad!!!

I'm also writing this because I get tired of the mostly negative coverage of the economy by the national media. This is my small attempt to try and convince my fellow Americans that the economy isn't as bad as portrayed.

What gives me the right to write about economic issues? In a word: Nothing. I'm not a economist or a CEO of a business. I don't have a Ph.D in Economics or International Finance. The bulk of my professional trading experience comes from several years spent working as a clerk in the trading pits of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. However, I have been able to make a decent living from day-trading the last few years. Day-trading is a very brutal, Darwinian profession. You either make money at this or go bankrupt. I'm still doing this, so I figure my ideas and advice have some credibility.

I think the best way to explain why I believe America's best economic days are ahead of us is to run down what is happening in the world and what I think may happen in the future.

ALSO at DBKP.com: * The Mainstream Media's Shifting Economic Definitions: A Reflection of MSM's Woes * The Mainstream Media's Recession Obsession

Europe

The European Union has become a huge entity whose member states have a combined population of nearly 500 Million (1). However, I have come to believe that they are too big, too slow ,and most damaging, too bureaucratic.

Yes, right now the Euro is doing well against the Dollar. However, people seem to forget that a few years ago, the euro was trading at a record low of 82 cents against the dollar. (2)

Inflation is above the European Central Bank's public goal of 2% and rising (3). Western Europe has also always had systematic higher unemployment historically than the US. Eventually, economic fundamentals like these will catch up to the Euro.

You may read a lot about the grim future of Social Security. That is true. Basically, starting in a few years, more money will start being taken out of the program than going into it. However, Europe faces the same demographic issue. The big difference is that the working-age population of Europe is declining while America's is increasing.

Asia

Today when you think of Asia, one country comes to mind: China. China is a huge country with a huge population. Because of low wages, China has become the manufacturing center of the world. All that manufacturing has brought huge sums of wealth into China.

But China has many issues. All that manufacturing has lead to huge environmental problems (4). Thanks to China's brutal 1-child policy and a Asian cultural preference for male babies, China has demographic imbalances in their youngest generations. How can a nation be successful with a demographic imbalance like that? China's biggest problem however, may be it's own Communist government. Folks, I don't know any other way to say it.: Communism , Socialism, etc, just doesn't work.. Eventually, China will pay a huge price because of their system of government. Free, democratic, open market economies work, nothing else comes close. It is truly that simple and basic.



Africa

It is hard to write off a entire continent, but unfortunately that is what I'm basically doing with Africa. I don't think Africa has moved beyond a tribal identity yet. They will not grow or be economically successful until the people of Africa start thinking in terms of national identities and not just tribal.

Middle East

Currently the Middle East is doing well because of high oil prices that bring huge amounts of wealth into their nations. Historically, however nations with commodity-dependent economies do not succeed in the long run. There is a theory in economic circles called the "commodity curse" . The theory states that commodity-dependent nations get politically and economically lazy because of the easy money pouring into their economy. I think this will happen in the Middle East someday. The Mid-East has one principle export: oil. What happens when that export runs out? There are questions about the true proven reserves of both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (5). Back in the late 1990's when oil prices were low. Saudi government bonds were rated "junk" status. This will give you a idea of what happens to the economic prospects of the region when the wells run dry.


Latin America

Latin America seems to be taken a turn for the worse lately. A couple governments seem to be going back down the Socialist path. Once again, democratic free market economies work, everything else doesn't come close. Democratic open market Brazil and Colombia are doing well. The ones going down the socialist path like Venezuela and Bolivia will have problems.

I see some parallels between the Middle East of today and the Japan of the 1980's. Remember how everyone thought back then that "Japan, Inc." was going to be the world's largest economy and how they would be the globe's dominant economic power? How did that work out for Japan? I do think that the sub-prime mess and resulting housing price slump will continue to hurt the American economy.But this is a incredibly flexible economy that will survive this mess. In fact, i think the sub-prime problem will hurt other economies worse than ours just because our national economy is so resilient and others aren't.

by Chicagodudewhotrades
images: thetropics; caglecartoons
Sources:
1. Website of the European Union www.europa.eu
2. Wikipedia's entry for the Euro Currency
3. Website of the European Central Bank www.ecb.eu
4. Financial Times article. China Report. Environment: 'Devasting price to pay for rampant growth' By Jamil Anderlini. Published: 9 Oct 2007
5. Reuters. "Kuwait oil reserves only half official estimate-PIW" . Published 20 Jan 2006
Also posted at:
* Guest Post: Is America in Economic Decline?
* The News of America's Economic Death is Greatly Exaggerated


DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page