People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

McCain's At It Again

Senator John McCain, darling of the Democratic party, particularly its mainstream media wing, is going to propose that we scale back our economy in order to save us from ourselves.

What a guy.
Gassy senators
Rich Lowry, wrting for Townhall.com

The U.S. Senate can barely agree to hold up-or-down votes to confirm judges, but no worries — it is about to save the planet. At least that's the conceit of Republican senators proposing to institute caps on emissions of greenhouse gases.

If the U.S. had ratified the Kyoto treaty, it would have had to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by 2012. Bipartisan opposition sank the treaty, and it wasn't even mentioned in the Democrats' 2004 platform — although its demise is always attributed in the press to the work of President Bush alone. With Kyoto itself off the table, senators have been busy trying to forge a Kyoto-lite.

John McCain is promoting a bill that mandates emissions be cut to 2000 levels by 2010.

The point of all this is to — insert senatorial furrowed brow here — address the "crisis" of global warming. (link)

For this we could have kept Crazy Al Gore around.

Eeeeeek. Big Bird Is Being Murdered!

The Roanoke Times gives the citizenry a heads-up on what might become the news on its news page today. Blatant advocacy is so unbecoming. Especially when its poorly done.

Public broadcasting on chopping block
Pete Dybdahl, Roanoke Times

Roanoke's public TV and radio stations could lose a combined $397,920 in yearly funding.

Proposed cuts in federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting could mean a loss of close to $400,000 for Roanoke's public radio and television stations.

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives are scheduled to vote Thursday on a spending bill that would cut 2006 fiscal year spending for CPB - a private organization created by Congress to support and fund public broadcasting - from $400 million to $300 million, with additional grants for public broadcasters to be slashed or eliminated. (
As I read the article, I kept muttering, "Mention Big Bird. They're trying to kill Big Bird."

But no. Only goofy quotes from people who think that, since the government funds everything, it should fund public broadcasting as well, ... er, more than it intends to.

Can't we finally kill it? A publically funded broadcasting entity made sense several decades ago when there were three for-profit network television channels. But there are literally hundreds of cable channels available to the public today. We don't need to provide tax dollars to an effete, snobbish, left-wing network that only America-haters and the well-to-do ever watch (they still have ABC, NBC, and CBS, after all).

O course there are the Big Bird watchers. But I'll bet, if they had the chance, executives at Nickelodeon would jump at the chance to have all the tiny-tyke birdwatchers migrate over to their channel to watch their big feathered friend. Not one child would then be deprived.

It'll never happen but we should de-fund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

And As Luck Would Have It

After reading the news in the Roanoke Times that there might be news forthcoming regarding Congress' intention to reduce the funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, I turned to the op/ed page and darned if there wasn't an editorial on the same subject. What a coincidence.

Of course, the editorialists still didn't mention Big Bird - always a good ploy when trying to convince the weak of mind that cutting funding is tantamount to destroying the world as we know it. But they did bring up those evil Republicans. That'll work almost as well.

Putting PBS to the sword
What is essentially a fight for conservative media control
threatens a crucial resource for communities in Western Virginia.

Targeted for its supposed ideological sins - one of which is its public money - PBS is under attack by conservatives determined to tilt its content to the right and gut its federal funding. The first goal would stifle its intellectual independence and vigor. The second would cripple PBS stations - especially those such as BRPTV that serve small markets and rural areas - by cutting money that makes many of their services possible.

PBS is too valuable to Western Virginia and the nation to be sacrificed for ideology and politics. (link)

Let's get a few things straight. For those of you who don't ever watch Blue Ridge Public Television, and that would include most everyone, it is boring to tears. It has no vitality. It is plodding. Its offerings are mediocre and hackneyed. On those occasions when BRPTV televises something that's actually of interest - always in the middle of an annoying fund drive - they interrupt - frequently - the telecast and make a never-ending plea for us to call in and make a pledge. How many times have I simply hit the remote when it seemed that they were never going to get back to the show.

Secondly, conservatives only wish to balance PBS' left-wing advocacy with more moderate offerings because we pay for the damn thing. There is nothing that rankles more than to be forced to pay for Bill Moyers' ranting about my being lowlife scum because I support the war in Iraq, capitalism, God, and democracy. I sometimes feel like that freshman pledge to a fraternity after having been swatted across the backside with a 2 X 4. "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" If you enjoyed Moyers' lunacy, you are encouraged to pay for it. I shouldn't have to.

Last, as I stated in the previous post, there is nothing broadcast on PBS that you can't find elsewhere on the tube. You want to tune in to someone denouncing conservatives? I encourage you to watch NBC Nightly News. And get a subscription to the Roanoke Times.

Give an Inch ...

My reaction, when I read the story about Wachovia's lame apology for its non-participation in the slave trade a few centuries ago, was one of, "Do they honestly think this will appease the new slave traders out there?" And who are the new slave traders? They are the people around the country who will try to convince you that they are still suffering the effects of the lash and the pain of the shackles. And want compensation for their suffering. I knew Wachovia's lame apology was only going to embolden these people. They don't want an apology, you see. They want money. Billions. And now they sense weakness on the part of Wachovia management.

Corporate Cowardice Backfires
By John, Carlisle, American Spectator

Wachovia Corporation's ridiculous apology for its alleged ties to slavery has backfired.

Chicago City Council aldermen are vowing to strip from Wachovia a $9.4 million loan to build affordable housing units as punishment for the bank's supposed failure to disclose that its predecessor banks were involved in slave-related business deals.

This serves as a warning to other companies that believe they can buy peace with the slave reparations movement. Wachovia thought it would be good for business to cave in to the demands of reparations activists. Now, not only is the company out of a multi-million dollar contract, it has made itself a fat new target for lawsuits and shakedowns. (link)
My guess is Wachovia executives are prepared to shell out a few token millions to this bunch to buy them off. Like that will stop them. It will only feed their greed.

Watch for this story to get ugly.

Durbin Apologizes

Senator Dick Durbin has decided that maybe it would be best to try to put his shameful attack on our troops behind us by offering an apology, with tears aflowing, of course.
Durbin finally says he's sorry
By James G. Lakely and Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times

Sen. Richard J. Durbin yesterday said he was "sorry" after parsing words for a week about his remarks comparing U.S. interrogators at Guantanamo Bay to those of Nazi and Soviet regimes. He apologized on the Senate floor.

"I'm sorry if anything that I said caused any offense or pain to those who have such bitter memories of the Holocaust, the greatest moral tragedy of our time," said Mr. Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate.

"I'm also sorry if anything I said in any way cast a negative light on our fine men and women in the military. I went to Iraq just a few months ago," he said, pausing and appearing to tear up at one point during the five-minute speech. (link)
I have to say, having watched the sorry spectacle on the news last night, he timed the tears perfectly.

But they don't change anything. Dick Durbin, posterboy for the looney, angry left, slandered our troops in time of war. He should resign. For starters.