American heroes are everywhere. They have jobs, they have families, spouses, children and grandchildren. They take out the trash, throw the Frisbee for the dog, complain about the unusually cold spring and change the oil in their daughter's car. An entire generation of WWII veterans have grown accustomed to a conventional lifestyle, while harboring memories of harrowing experiences-- the conventional soldier's lifestyle-- and every so often, the rest of us get to peek through the window and see America's greatness.
In the Wall Street Journal's weekend edition, historical author James D. Hornfischer shared memories of his intimate encounters with WWII veterans while researching for his books.
"Bob Hagen knew the worst of the battle while serving on destroyers in the Pacific during World War II. He saw action at Guadalcanal. He was the gunnery officer on the USS Johnston when it was hit hard in the Battle Of Samar near the Philippines on October 25, 1944. For two hours he directed the ship's main guns, firing gamely at an overwhelming enemy. A Japanese shell turned two two officers standing on the flying bridge, 10 feet below his station, into a pink mist. When the order to abandon ship came across, Hagen found himself floating in shark-infested waters watching the Johnston sink. His best friend, the ship's doctor, Robert Browne, was still aboard, refusing to seek safety until all the wounded had been evacuated. Hagen saw Browne re-entering the wardroom when a large shell from a Japanese warship followed him inside. At that moment, the war crystallized as a hard-to-discuss horror.
Hagen was a hard man, and proud. Even 60 years out, he was still a bit curmudgeonly talking about the dramatic naval history he had been part of. But recounting Browne's death to me in 2001, a man who had fought heroically in a suicidal defense of a small U.S. carrier task unit supporting the invasion of Levte could only swallow back his sadness. That look in his eye and break in his voice took me past the veneer of his ever-ready chagrin and bravado. They took me to the things that have never left him.
Bob Hagen died in 2009, and the rest of his generation is soon going where we all must go. About 1.8 million World War II veterans remain alive today."
Hornfischer explains the power of these in-person encounters:
"For those of us who have never served in uniform, it's easy to see World War II as a grand, sweeping drama, featuring actors large and small driven by a sense of overriding mission, all sins and failings vindicated by victory. Yet for the veterans I meet, the war is often about something else entirely. Any talk bring them back to a single, pervasive memory sequence: a moment of impossible decision or helplessness when, through their action or inaction, they believe, a comrade paid the eternal price. They can't talk about the war without reliving their powerlessness to influence its predations, without revealing how it changed them."
Their stories change us as well:
"Otto Schwartz served on the USS Houston in the early days of World War II. The heavy cruiser was sunk off Java on February 28, 1942, and Schwarz spent more than three years in Japanese prisoner-of-war camps. When he returned to New Jersey in 1945 he was a different man than the one who had enlisted in January 1941 to escape an abusive home life. I met him in 2004; his eyes were blind, but he could still clearly see Penn Station on the day he came back. 'It was the loneliest moment of my life. I absolutely didn't know what to do. Even though I was going home to my family, I had just left my family that had kept each other alive for so long.'
A taxicab left Schwarz outside his house in Newark, and he stood on the nighttime street, watching the silhouette of his mother in a lighted window. He hesitated to knock on the door. The life that lay behind it was unrecognizable to him. It was a foreign country. Schwarz is gone now-- he died in 2006-- but I won't soon forget his sightless eyes projecting this vivid personal landscape."
Hornfischer describes the most powerful interview he ever did:
"[It] lasted about three hours with a man who began by saying that he was not willing to talk to me. James F. "Bud" Comet had harbored bitter grudges for six decades.
He was a 19-year old enlisted sailor on the USS Samuel B. Roberts when it was sunk in battle in 1944-- in the same engagement that claimed Bob Hagen's USS Johnston. Death came for the Roberts in the form of a 1,500-pound shell from a Japanese battleship. It opened a hole in her side large enough to fit a tractor-trailer, and the surviving crew piled into life rafts. Mr. Comet's raft was a few hundred yards from the ship when he turned and saw a surviving crewman stuck in the jagged wreckage of the ship's cavernous open wound.
The young officer who had seniority in the raft refused to return and save the man. But Mr. Comet aggressively pressed his case and prevailed on the group. They paddled back to the sinking ship, and Mr. Comet entered the hold to make the rescue. Heroic though his actions were, they seemed to upset his captain. Mr. Comet, after all, had breached the chain of command. The skipper offered him a medal but declined to acknowledge the dramatic particulars that underlay it. 'We weren't a perfect crew,' he told me, 'but we were a good crew.' Mr. Comet refused the medal. He wanted something more valuable still: simple recognition by his skipper of what had happened. He never got that, and it kept him from attending reunions for years...When Mr. Comet told me he still wondered whether his deceased father, somewhere in the beyond, was pleased with the way he'd conducted himself that day in 1944, I knew he deserved to have the last words in my first book."
The testimonies of these war veterans, as Hornfischer explains, is "like trying to squeeze water from a stone, [but] if you stay with it you can tap something deeply revealing." Bud Comet told him during the interview, "The thing that comes out of it is, if you survive, there's a purpose...You see why you survived. I feel like maybe God had other purposes for me." Hornfischer then concluded, "There was nothing trite in the manner of his expression. This was the considered conclusion of years, the product of the horror of survival at sea."
Another story comes from Hornfischer's interview of Robert Graff, a young officer on the light cruiser USS Atlanta, that sunk in action off Guadalcanal on November 13, 1942. After 65 years of silence, Mr. Graff opened up, and Hornfischer recalled Graff's memories of fellow shipmates:
"The USS Atlanta was a part of a 13-ship task force led by a revered naval hero, Rear Adm. Daniel J. Callaghan. His flagship, the USS San Francisco, was heavily hit in that battle. One of the last veterans still alive who witnessed Callaghan's words and actions is Eugene Tarrant, a black cook who worked virtually invisibly in the San Francisco's wardroom. As Mr. Tarrant told me in a 2007 interview, he heard, through a dumbwaiter door to the galley, Callaghan speaking in low, grave tones about the battle plan he would use that night off Guadalcanal. The task force's prospect against the powerful enemy squadron sounded grim, and Mr. Tarrant ventured to ask Callaghan whether the coming fight really was, as the admiral had said, suicide. 'Yes, it may be that,' replied Callaghan, who would die in action, 'but we are going in.'"
Sharing their memories must be convalescing for some. Across the country, Memorial Day tributes and veteran reunions bring together the men who remember each other as 18-year old sailors and soldiers. And after years of attending such events, Hornfischer reminds us of a sober reality:
"Some time in the far 2030s, when the World War II generation is gone altogether, the veterans will be available to us only at a certain distance-- via the finite record they left in life. Whatever materials the museums and libraries hold will offer a pale semblance of the energy that attended their living presence. At that point, we will all be in the shoes Otto Schwarz, the USS Houston survivor, standing on the curb outside his house at night, looking in. So close, but unable to go home."
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Monday, May 2, 2011
Not until I read 1776 by David McCullough did I learn that America's first leaders had the ability to look at the world providentially, ignoring thoughts of self preservation and creeping ascendancy that ruined every other civilization.
How far we've come.
Then news broke that Usama Bin Laden was killed. Instantaneous celebrations broke out around the world. News reports continually confirmed details about the elite special forces, Department of Defense, CIA, and the Obama White House that worked together to end 10 years of dead man walking. This military operation, a shining example of leadership readily celebrated by all Americans, came at a good time.
The Heritage Foundation released a gruesome look at our fiscal situation. Our public education system has been systematically destroyed by socialist ideologues. Our domestic energy policy has gone to rabid dogs determined to undermine principles of energy independence. American culture continues to slide towards moral relativism and away from our intended characteristics of virtue, morality, and good character. We need leadership. Desperately.
But we need a leader in the truest form. We need a leader who can quell a military insurrection with gray hairs and near blindness. In 1775, George Washington accepted the command of America's armed forces (refusing the salary), but led the weary, underpaid and untrained military through a series of divine victories for eight years. As the war began to wind down, congressional neglect of the army increased:
"Washington's troops urged him to seize power from the politicians, but he repudiated every such suggestion. On March 15, 1783, Washington met his unhappy and rebellious officers at Newburgh, New York, to discourage them from marching on Congress over back pay, but the speech he had prepared proved unpersuasive. Washington decided to read a letter that he had received from a congressman. As he reached into his coat for his glasses, he said to his troops, 'Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray, but almost blind, in the service of my country.' In that single moment of sheer vulnerability, Washington's men were deeply moved, even shamed, and many were quickly in tears, now looking with great affection at this aging man who had led them through so much. Washington read the remainder of the letter, then left without saying a word, realizing their sentiments. His officers then cast a unanimous vote, essentially agreeing to the rule of Congress. Thus, the civilian government was preserved and the experiment of America continued."
No consideration for his own well being, Washington preserved the American experiment which has developed into a 235-year, unmatched, undefeated, uncompromising civilization. And last week, our assiduous military demonstrated once again that we are not a country that succumbs to forces pulling at the strings of self-indulgence. As Usama's body dissolves in the salty sea, we can celebrate this victory, thankful for true leadership, determined to bring that same courage and virtue back to the White House next year.
How far we've come.
Then news broke that Usama Bin Laden was killed. Instantaneous celebrations broke out around the world. News reports continually confirmed details about the elite special forces, Department of Defense, CIA, and the Obama White House that worked together to end 10 years of dead man walking. This military operation, a shining example of leadership readily celebrated by all Americans, came at a good time.
The Heritage Foundation released a gruesome look at our fiscal situation. Our public education system has been systematically destroyed by socialist ideologues. Our domestic energy policy has gone to rabid dogs determined to undermine principles of energy independence. American culture continues to slide towards moral relativism and away from our intended characteristics of virtue, morality, and good character. We need leadership. Desperately.
But we need a leader in the truest form. We need a leader who can quell a military insurrection with gray hairs and near blindness. In 1775, George Washington accepted the command of America's armed forces (refusing the salary), but led the weary, underpaid and untrained military through a series of divine victories for eight years. As the war began to wind down, congressional neglect of the army increased:
"Washington's troops urged him to seize power from the politicians, but he repudiated every such suggestion. On March 15, 1783, Washington met his unhappy and rebellious officers at Newburgh, New York, to discourage them from marching on Congress over back pay, but the speech he had prepared proved unpersuasive. Washington decided to read a letter that he had received from a congressman. As he reached into his coat for his glasses, he said to his troops, 'Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray, but almost blind, in the service of my country.' In that single moment of sheer vulnerability, Washington's men were deeply moved, even shamed, and many were quickly in tears, now looking with great affection at this aging man who had led them through so much. Washington read the remainder of the letter, then left without saying a word, realizing their sentiments. His officers then cast a unanimous vote, essentially agreeing to the rule of Congress. Thus, the civilian government was preserved and the experiment of America continued."
No consideration for his own well being, Washington preserved the American experiment which has developed into a 235-year, unmatched, undefeated, uncompromising civilization. And last week, our assiduous military demonstrated once again that we are not a country that succumbs to forces pulling at the strings of self-indulgence. As Usama's body dissolves in the salty sea, we can celebrate this victory, thankful for true leadership, determined to bring that same courage and virtue back to the White House next year.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Eldridge Cleaver, leading member of the Black Panther Party (BPP) during the 1960s, came to fame because of his ability to organize black Americans and garner national attention for his radical views promoting a black socialist government. He was convicted on rape and drug possession charges as a teenager in 1957 and spent time in jail where he read the works of Karl Marx, Thomas Paine, Lenin and William Du Bois. Only one year after his release from jail, he once again found himself on the wrong side of the law and spent his second incarceration studying civil rights and the writings of Malcolm X. His personal pursuit of "the truth" set the stage for a radical national movement.
During his second incarceration he wrote a memoir, later published in 1968, called Soul on Ice. In his book he admits to raping black women, which were only "practice," before he moved on to raping white women, which was "an insurrectionary act." This book established him as one of the most significant political figures amongst the radical African American community, and the New York Times claimed his book "had a tremendous impact on an intellectual community radicalized by the civil rights movement, urban riots, the war in Vietnam and campus rebellions," and further hailed this work "as an authentic voice of black rage in a white-ruled world."
Maxwell Geismar, a radical writer who wrote the foreword to Soul On Ice explains Cleaver as a man who dissected "the deepest and most cherished notions of our personal and social behavior" with a level of courage few had, and that this "soul of a black folk" became the best mirror for which to view white Americans.
After his release from prison, he established the Black House in San Francisco, a "cultural center" for local black radicals including Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, co-founders of the Black Panther Party. Cleaver soon became the Minister of Information for the BPP, an organization that espoused communist and Black Nationalist ideology, participated in brutality against law enforcement and confrontational and militant practices. With the help of Cleaver, the BPP established the "Ten Point Program," a list of rules that all BPP members had to abide by. Such ideas included the notion that the black community will never enjoy freedom until they fully control all the institutions in their local communities, and that the federal government is responsible to provide every black American full employment and income, housing, free education, free health care and required the release of all black Americans from the entire penal system.
In 1967, Huey Newton killed Oakland police officer John Frey, and during the height of the BPP, reports claim 15 police officers and BPP members were killed during their conflicts. In 1968, Cleaver taught an experimental course at the University of California at Berkeley and married Kathleen Neal, who later became an American teacher as well.
After a police ambush in 1968 that killed 17-year old BPP member Bobby Hutton, Elderidge surrendered to the Oakland police and returned to prison on attempted murder charges. While on bail, he fled to Cuba and Algeria, countries that espoused the communist ideology and third world liberation ideology he spent years studying and preaching. During his triumphant tour, he broke ties with the BPP and established the Revolutionary's People Communication Network in part because he wanted the BPP to continue down a path of escalated armed resistance, whereas Newton desired more pragmatic socialistic changes that would welcome in the non-violent black community.
But after a growing conflict between the Algerian government and Cleaver's entourage, Cleaver later wrote, "I had heard so much rhetoric about their glorious leaders and their incredible revolutionary spirit that even to this very angry and disgruntled American, it was absurd and unreal." He left Algeria and moved his family to France where he claims he converted to Christianity. In 1977, he returned to America and surrendered to the FBI, pleading guilty to assault charges from the shootout with police that killed Hutton.
After his return to America, Cleaver led a colorful life: a "born again" Christian, a professed Mormon and LDS church member, a business owner (inventing the "Cleaver sleeve" for men's dress pants), further run-ins with the law for cocaine possession, Bible school teacher, a Republican Party member, self-avowed conservative and an unsuccessful candidate for a California senate seat. Once a hero to radicals, he became a joke and an afterthought to the advancing socialist organizations of the 1980s.
Late in his life during a Berkeley City Council meeting, he demanded that the group recite the Pledge of Allegiance, a practice abandoned years prior by the council.
"Shut up, Eldridge," Mayor Gus Newport snapped, "or we'll have you removed."
Eldridge Cleaver died in 1988, reportedly due to a losing battle with diabetes and prostate cancer.
The left wants to portray his political conversion something akin to a hallucinogenic breakdown. The right wants to portray his transformation as the prodigal son returning to American principles. I believe he fell somewhere in between, but whether his transformation was genuine or not eclipses the larger point. He tested his years of political intellectualism in the real world, and he chose to return to America. Somewhere overseas he decided he would rather be a prisoner in America than continue a prisoner of communist rule.
Cleaver once stated, "You're either part of the problem or part of the solution." He represented both. And the brilliance of American citizenship is the right to be both. Years of communist promulgation underneath the protections of the constitution eventually led Eldridge Cleaver to return to the basic principles often taken for granted and overshadowed by "enlightened" thinking. He realized, as I hope the rest of us will, that we got it right the first time.
During his second incarceration he wrote a memoir, later published in 1968, called Soul on Ice. In his book he admits to raping black women, which were only "practice," before he moved on to raping white women, which was "an insurrectionary act." This book established him as one of the most significant political figures amongst the radical African American community, and the New York Times claimed his book "had a tremendous impact on an intellectual community radicalized by the civil rights movement, urban riots, the war in Vietnam and campus rebellions," and further hailed this work "as an authentic voice of black rage in a white-ruled world."
Maxwell Geismar, a radical writer who wrote the foreword to Soul On Ice explains Cleaver as a man who dissected "the deepest and most cherished notions of our personal and social behavior" with a level of courage few had, and that this "soul of a black folk" became the best mirror for which to view white Americans.
After his release from prison, he established the Black House in San Francisco, a "cultural center" for local black radicals including Huey Newton and Bobby Seale, co-founders of the Black Panther Party. Cleaver soon became the Minister of Information for the BPP, an organization that espoused communist and Black Nationalist ideology, participated in brutality against law enforcement and confrontational and militant practices. With the help of Cleaver, the BPP established the "Ten Point Program," a list of rules that all BPP members had to abide by. Such ideas included the notion that the black community will never enjoy freedom until they fully control all the institutions in their local communities, and that the federal government is responsible to provide every black American full employment and income, housing, free education, free health care and required the release of all black Americans from the entire penal system.
In 1967, Huey Newton killed Oakland police officer John Frey, and during the height of the BPP, reports claim 15 police officers and BPP members were killed during their conflicts. In 1968, Cleaver taught an experimental course at the University of California at Berkeley and married Kathleen Neal, who later became an American teacher as well.
After a police ambush in 1968 that killed 17-year old BPP member Bobby Hutton, Elderidge surrendered to the Oakland police and returned to prison on attempted murder charges. While on bail, he fled to Cuba and Algeria, countries that espoused the communist ideology and third world liberation ideology he spent years studying and preaching. During his triumphant tour, he broke ties with the BPP and established the Revolutionary's People Communication Network in part because he wanted the BPP to continue down a path of escalated armed resistance, whereas Newton desired more pragmatic socialistic changes that would welcome in the non-violent black community.
But after a growing conflict between the Algerian government and Cleaver's entourage, Cleaver later wrote, "I had heard so much rhetoric about their glorious leaders and their incredible revolutionary spirit that even to this very angry and disgruntled American, it was absurd and unreal." He left Algeria and moved his family to France where he claims he converted to Christianity. In 1977, he returned to America and surrendered to the FBI, pleading guilty to assault charges from the shootout with police that killed Hutton.
After his return to America, Cleaver led a colorful life: a "born again" Christian, a professed Mormon and LDS church member, a business owner (inventing the "Cleaver sleeve" for men's dress pants), further run-ins with the law for cocaine possession, Bible school teacher, a Republican Party member, self-avowed conservative and an unsuccessful candidate for a California senate seat. Once a hero to radicals, he became a joke and an afterthought to the advancing socialist organizations of the 1980s.
Late in his life during a Berkeley City Council meeting, he demanded that the group recite the Pledge of Allegiance, a practice abandoned years prior by the council.
"Shut up, Eldridge," Mayor Gus Newport snapped, "or we'll have you removed."
Eldridge Cleaver died in 1988, reportedly due to a losing battle with diabetes and prostate cancer.
The left wants to portray his political conversion something akin to a hallucinogenic breakdown. The right wants to portray his transformation as the prodigal son returning to American principles. I believe he fell somewhere in between, but whether his transformation was genuine or not eclipses the larger point. He tested his years of political intellectualism in the real world, and he chose to return to America. Somewhere overseas he decided he would rather be a prisoner in America than continue a prisoner of communist rule.
Cleaver once stated, "You're either part of the problem or part of the solution." He represented both. And the brilliance of American citizenship is the right to be both. Years of communist promulgation underneath the protections of the constitution eventually led Eldridge Cleaver to return to the basic principles often taken for granted and overshadowed by "enlightened" thinking. He realized, as I hope the rest of us will, that we got it right the first time.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Yuval Levin wrote one of the best articles I've read in a long, long time in The Weekly Standard. This article dissects Paul Ryan's Republican budget proposal for 2012, and what it offers, as a comparison to the Democrat's agnostic approach to addressing our country's fiscal crisis. Levin writes, "The plan is surely a departure from the status quo, but that status quo is itself a radical departure from the American experience." That line sums up perfectly what we've been saying on this blog. Read the article here.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
By Scott Gold, Richard Winton and Maria L. La Ganga, Los Angeles Times
April 5, 2011
Reporting from Los Angeles and San Francisco— For a long time, for all the heroes and the heroics, the Koufaxes and Garveys and hobbled home run trots, the experience of going to a Los Angeles Dodgers game was largely about beating traffic.
Fans arrived late, left early and — at least in the eyes of rivals — didn't seem terribly concerned with what happened in the intervening hours.
But over time, being a Dodgers fan became an almost tribal identity to some. That helped to rebuild a fervent base of support for the team — but brought in, too, an unsettling pattern of fan abuse and boorish behavior that hit another low last week when a Giants fan was severely beaten on opening day.
The violence left even the truest blue Dodgers fans saying something has to change. "It's not right," said Tommy Lasorda, the Hall of Fame former Dodgers manager and, for many years, the face of the organization. "It's just a baseball game."
Brian Stow, 42, a Santa Cruz paramedic, a father of two and a Giants fan, was walking through the Dodger Stadium parking lot with two friends after the Dodgers' 2-1 victory over San Francisco. Stow was wearing Giants apparel, police said, and two young men began taunting him. One of the assailants then cursed the Giants and blindsided Stow with blows to the back and head, police said.
The two assailants repeatedly kicked and punched Stow while he was on the ground. Stow's friends attempted to help, and were also punched and kicked before the attackers fled in a car driven by a woman. Police said it appears there was also a 10-year-old boy in the car.
Stow has a brain injury and is in a medically induced coma at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center. He remained in critical condition on Monday.
Part of Stow's skull has been removed to reduce the pressure on his brain, said Rebecca Mackowiak, his colleague at a paramedic service. Even if he recovers physically, she said, "he won't be the same person again."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Where are the Rick Mondays?
Let's take a break from politics today. Turn off the TV. Put down the remote. If you've been looking for the greatest play so far this year in the newly started baseball season you are in luck.
You've seen the top contenders - the most athletic leap, the most golden glove move, most clutch hit, whatever.....but I've found the greatest overall play of all time for you. It will give you and your friends something to talk about. The day was April 25th, 1976. Dodger stadium.
Coincidentally, Dodger stadium is also where an off-duty paramedic was recently put into a coma as described in the above news story. Watch the video.
After watching the video, I don't know about what comes to mind for you, but for me the initial reaction was to wonder, 'where are the Rick Mondays'? After reflecting some, I've come to the conclusion that there is no time to ponder where they are. The only thing to do is to decide if you are one. And, to prepare your mind and heart for that moment when you may be the difference in recognizing a developing situation by immediate involvement; by taking action. However obvious, simply recognizing that his example speaks volumes is excellent, but only gets you half way there. If you can realize that he didn't have time to ponder anything that day, you've arrived at the destination.
Let's get our head on straight. We know what is right. And what is wrong. Talk with someone today about indifference and what it allows. Talk about Rick Monday. Your Monday moment may be just around the corner.
April 5, 2011
Reporting from Los Angeles and San Francisco— For a long time, for all the heroes and the heroics, the Koufaxes and Garveys and hobbled home run trots, the experience of going to a Los Angeles Dodgers game was largely about beating traffic.
Fans arrived late, left early and — at least in the eyes of rivals — didn't seem terribly concerned with what happened in the intervening hours.
But over time, being a Dodgers fan became an almost tribal identity to some. That helped to rebuild a fervent base of support for the team — but brought in, too, an unsettling pattern of fan abuse and boorish behavior that hit another low last week when a Giants fan was severely beaten on opening day.
The violence left even the truest blue Dodgers fans saying something has to change. "It's not right," said Tommy Lasorda, the Hall of Fame former Dodgers manager and, for many years, the face of the organization. "It's just a baseball game."
Brian Stow, 42, a Santa Cruz paramedic, a father of two and a Giants fan, was walking through the Dodger Stadium parking lot with two friends after the Dodgers' 2-1 victory over San Francisco. Stow was wearing Giants apparel, police said, and two young men began taunting him. One of the assailants then cursed the Giants and blindsided Stow with blows to the back and head, police said.
The two assailants repeatedly kicked and punched Stow while he was on the ground. Stow's friends attempted to help, and were also punched and kicked before the attackers fled in a car driven by a woman. Police said it appears there was also a 10-year-old boy in the car.
Stow has a brain injury and is in a medically induced coma at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center. He remained in critical condition on Monday.
Part of Stow's skull has been removed to reduce the pressure on his brain, said Rebecca Mackowiak, his colleague at a paramedic service. Even if he recovers physically, she said, "he won't be the same person again."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Where are the Rick Mondays?
Let's take a break from politics today. Turn off the TV. Put down the remote. If you've been looking for the greatest play so far this year in the newly started baseball season you are in luck.
You've seen the top contenders - the most athletic leap, the most golden glove move, most clutch hit, whatever.....but I've found the greatest overall play of all time for you. It will give you and your friends something to talk about. The day was April 25th, 1976. Dodger stadium.
Coincidentally, Dodger stadium is also where an off-duty paramedic was recently put into a coma as described in the above news story. Watch the video.
After watching the video, I don't know about what comes to mind for you, but for me the initial reaction was to wonder, 'where are the Rick Mondays'? After reflecting some, I've come to the conclusion that there is no time to ponder where they are. The only thing to do is to decide if you are one. And, to prepare your mind and heart for that moment when you may be the difference in recognizing a developing situation by immediate involvement; by taking action. However obvious, simply recognizing that his example speaks volumes is excellent, but only gets you half way there. If you can realize that he didn't have time to ponder anything that day, you've arrived at the destination.
Let's get our head on straight. We know what is right. And what is wrong. Talk with someone today about indifference and what it allows. Talk about Rick Monday. Your Monday moment may be just around the corner.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
On April 1st, supporters of Stalin spoke at New York University's "Academic Freedom in the 1960s" conference. Ellen Schrecker, a Yeshiva University Professor and author delivered the keynote address. She wrote The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History With Documents in which she explains that anti-communism in the United States was created by "[z]ealous partisans who often made the eradication of the so-called Communist menace a full-time career," and goes on to say that "in some respects they were the mirror image of the Communists they fought." She also explains that conservatives have a tradition of harboring "characteristic paranoia" that aims to subdue minority groups in an effort to infiltrate their economic and social ideology throughout America. What a gem. (Interestingly enough, this "esteemed" professor has taught numerous courses on American Colonial History, Civil War History, The United States and American Politics.)
Schrecker shared the stage with Rutgers University Newark Professor and author H. Bruce Franklin, who holds to the belief that “[Stalin is] one of the greatest heroes of modern history.” In his introductory essay for his book The Essential Stalin, Franklin writes: “I used to think of Joseph Stalin as a tyrant and a butcher … but, to about a billion people today, Stalin is the opposite of what we in the capitalist world have been programmed to believe.”
I'm not a history buff by any means, so I did a quick online fact check about Joesph Stalin. Under his regime, the death toll is estimated at around 20 million (although some claim the number is closer to 40 million) due to organized poverty, starvation, labor camps, executions, torture, and other sadistic acts. Stalin killed many talented and gifted Soviets during the Purges of the 1930s because he felt anyone with unique abilities posed a threat to his regime.
Additionally, Stalin's forced labor camps, or gulags, incarcerated political dissidents and innocent Soviets for such heinous crimes as showing up late for work (a three-year sentence), telling a joke about a government official (up to 25 years) or committing petty theft and other minor crimes (up to 10 years). No, he certainly wasn't a tyrant and a butcher. Just a misunderstood man with a rough childhood, much like my neighbor. Count me out as one of his billion Facebook fans.
Reverend David Smith, Catholic priest and full-time professor with Emeritus status at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota, spoke recently at a rally outside the state capitol in protest of the United State's support of the nation of Israel. He has been very busy recently at St. Thomas researching, writing, and working to strengthen "peace studies." During this time, he traveled with the Michigan Peace Team to the West Bank and Gaza, living in Beit Sahour near Bethlehem. "He helped Palestinian farmers pick their olives, slept in tents and caves with farmers threatened by Jewish settlers, and joined Palestinian nonviolent demonstrators protesting Israeli-only roads and the separation barrier."
In his long professorship, he has created many courses for St. Thomas in which he linked the Scriptures with justice issues (red flag, anyone?). Eric Foner, professor of American History at Columbia University, was interviewed by bigthink.com in 2009 and spoke about his favorite figures in American history, which include critics, radicals and fridge socialist figures who have "stood outside the accepted political boundaries." He goes on to say that "without the socialists, you would not have had an era where the government took responsibility for the economy," and that "the driving force for the change of good" in our country has been those "people at the margins."
All across the country, professors are teaching young adults about World and American history. What are they teaching them? Valid question. When those of us choose to ask this question and speak up about the ideology of our "academic elite," we often hear one common rebuttal: free speech. Those professors have free speech, the students have free speech, and what takes place in the classroom is a healthy dialog of alternate viewpoints. This rebuttal is a red herring. The issue is not whether professors have a right to free speech, thus students have a right to hear the drivelings of free speech. The issue is why do these professors hold these beliefs. Why do we have American professors who are "big fans" of Stalin, Chavez and Mao Tse Tung? Why do we have American professors who turn taciturn about honest history, including the faith of our Founding Fathers, Israel's right to defend itself, and how socialism is not a "failed experiment" that deserves another opportunity?
Do not let the liberals continue to use rhetorical tactics to avoid the items of significance. We are not debating the merits of free speech. The argument cannot be whether or not professors have a right to speak about such radical, liberal beliefs. The argument must be why they hold those beliefs. Call them out. Call them all out.
Just like an iceberg, we cannot debate what is seen above water, because the issues we are facing begin far below the surface.
Schrecker shared the stage with Rutgers University Newark Professor and author H. Bruce Franklin, who holds to the belief that “[Stalin is] one of the greatest heroes of modern history.” In his introductory essay for his book The Essential Stalin, Franklin writes: “I used to think of Joseph Stalin as a tyrant and a butcher … but, to about a billion people today, Stalin is the opposite of what we in the capitalist world have been programmed to believe.”
I'm not a history buff by any means, so I did a quick online fact check about Joesph Stalin. Under his regime, the death toll is estimated at around 20 million (although some claim the number is closer to 40 million) due to organized poverty, starvation, labor camps, executions, torture, and other sadistic acts. Stalin killed many talented and gifted Soviets during the Purges of the 1930s because he felt anyone with unique abilities posed a threat to his regime.
Additionally, Stalin's forced labor camps, or gulags, incarcerated political dissidents and innocent Soviets for such heinous crimes as showing up late for work (a three-year sentence), telling a joke about a government official (up to 25 years) or committing petty theft and other minor crimes (up to 10 years). No, he certainly wasn't a tyrant and a butcher. Just a misunderstood man with a rough childhood, much like my neighbor. Count me out as one of his billion Facebook fans.
Reverend David Smith, Catholic priest and full-time professor with Emeritus status at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota, spoke recently at a rally outside the state capitol in protest of the United State's support of the nation of Israel. He has been very busy recently at St. Thomas researching, writing, and working to strengthen "peace studies." During this time, he traveled with the Michigan Peace Team to the West Bank and Gaza, living in Beit Sahour near Bethlehem. "He helped Palestinian farmers pick their olives, slept in tents and caves with farmers threatened by Jewish settlers, and joined Palestinian nonviolent demonstrators protesting Israeli-only roads and the separation barrier."
In his long professorship, he has created many courses for St. Thomas in which he linked the Scriptures with justice issues (red flag, anyone?). Eric Foner, professor of American History at Columbia University, was interviewed by bigthink.com in 2009 and spoke about his favorite figures in American history, which include critics, radicals and fridge socialist figures who have "stood outside the accepted political boundaries." He goes on to say that "without the socialists, you would not have had an era where the government took responsibility for the economy," and that "the driving force for the change of good" in our country has been those "people at the margins."
All across the country, professors are teaching young adults about World and American history. What are they teaching them? Valid question. When those of us choose to ask this question and speak up about the ideology of our "academic elite," we often hear one common rebuttal: free speech. Those professors have free speech, the students have free speech, and what takes place in the classroom is a healthy dialog of alternate viewpoints. This rebuttal is a red herring. The issue is not whether professors have a right to free speech, thus students have a right to hear the drivelings of free speech. The issue is why do these professors hold these beliefs. Why do we have American professors who are "big fans" of Stalin, Chavez and Mao Tse Tung? Why do we have American professors who turn taciturn about honest history, including the faith of our Founding Fathers, Israel's right to defend itself, and how socialism is not a "failed experiment" that deserves another opportunity?
Do not let the liberals continue to use rhetorical tactics to avoid the items of significance. We are not debating the merits of free speech. The argument cannot be whether or not professors have a right to speak about such radical, liberal beliefs. The argument must be why they hold those beliefs. Call them out. Call them all out.
Just like an iceberg, we cannot debate what is seen above water, because the issues we are facing begin far below the surface.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Yahoo News: Rep. Allen West slams military diversity report
Caroline May - The Daily Caller Caroline May - The Daily Caller – Fri Mar 11, 12:19 am ET
The Military Leadership Diversity Commission’s (MLDC) conclusion this week that there are too many white men in senior positions in the military “is a slap in the face” to those minorities who have achieved seniority, according to retired Lt. Colonel and Florida Republican Rep. Allen West.
According to the MLDC’s report, released Monday, 77 percent of active duty senior officers are white, 8 percent are black, 5 percent are Hispanic and 16 percent are women. The report suggested the lack of minorities in military leadership is something that needs to change. To that end, the commission’s report includes 20 recommendations on how to increase the proportion of minority officers in the military in order to create a fighting force that better represents the make up of the population it defends.
In an interview with The Daily Caller, West, who is black, was not pleased with the report, saying that the military is not a social experiment for outside groups to impose their theories. Rather, he said, it is a merit based organization where anybody can succeed.
“Everyone that comes into the military has an equal opportunity to get promoted to the next level. It is not about outside entities trying to engineer and design results and outcomes or create a sense of equal achievement and when some military diversity group writes a report saying there are too many white men on top,” West said. “It is kind of a slap in the face to those who have risen through the ranks such as four star General [Lloyd] Austin, [General] Kip Ward, many others. We don’t need these outside entities trying to design or shape a military.”
West continued by noting that many confuse privileges with rights. To West, it is a privilege to serve in the military. He also said it is not an institution with which outsiders should tinker, especially while engaged in conflicts abroad.
“I think that when you look at these groups and other liberal special interest groups that keep trying to chip away at the military,” he said. “We are engaged with a very vicious enemy in two combat areas and who knows what is going to happen in North Africa and the Middle East and now is not the time for us to stop and start sensitivity training.”
West suspects that the military as an institution is targeted by liberals because of the things it represents.
“The military stands for things that liberals don’t care for: standards, discipline, honor, character. And those are things they don’t like because they believe everyone should be equal…that is not what the military is all about.”
The Military Leadership Diversity Commission’s (MLDC) conclusion this week that there are too many white men in senior positions in the military “is a slap in the face” to those minorities who have achieved seniority, according to retired Lt. Colonel and Florida Republican Rep. Allen West.
According to the MLDC’s report, released Monday, 77 percent of active duty senior officers are white, 8 percent are black, 5 percent are Hispanic and 16 percent are women. The report suggested the lack of minorities in military leadership is something that needs to change. To that end, the commission’s report includes 20 recommendations on how to increase the proportion of minority officers in the military in order to create a fighting force that better represents the make up of the population it defends.
In an interview with The Daily Caller, West, who is black, was not pleased with the report, saying that the military is not a social experiment for outside groups to impose their theories. Rather, he said, it is a merit based organization where anybody can succeed.
“Everyone that comes into the military has an equal opportunity to get promoted to the next level. It is not about outside entities trying to engineer and design results and outcomes or create a sense of equal achievement and when some military diversity group writes a report saying there are too many white men on top,” West said. “It is kind of a slap in the face to those who have risen through the ranks such as four star General [Lloyd] Austin, [General] Kip Ward, many others. We don’t need these outside entities trying to design or shape a military.”
West continued by noting that many confuse privileges with rights. To West, it is a privilege to serve in the military. He also said it is not an institution with which outsiders should tinker, especially while engaged in conflicts abroad.
“I think that when you look at these groups and other liberal special interest groups that keep trying to chip away at the military,” he said. “We are engaged with a very vicious enemy in two combat areas and who knows what is going to happen in North Africa and the Middle East and now is not the time for us to stop and start sensitivity training.”
West suspects that the military as an institution is targeted by liberals because of the things it represents.
“The military stands for things that liberals don’t care for: standards, discipline, honor, character. And those are things they don’t like because they believe everyone should be equal…that is not what the military is all about.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)