Used, for example, in this news header today in a story about food shortages: As a brutal convergence of events hits an unprepared global market, and grain prices go sky high, the worlds poor suffer most.
Really? The poor suffering the most? Its hard to imagine. Because, you know, usually when theres a major global crisis of any sort, its the poor sitting there on the sidelines, going whew, dodged that bullet. How strange that the people the least economically, socially and educationally able to deal with wrenching change should suffer the most. How odd that the rich should so often be able to shield themselves from the ravages of events. Its almost as if they have some advantage over poor people, although off the top of my head what it might be escapes me.
Which is not to say that the rich always get off scot free: who among us can forget The Great Davos Lobster Bisque Inconvenience of 04, in which the victims, none with a net worth of less than $15 million, suffered a small amount of gastric distress due to too much heavy cream in the soup? . . .
A tip for news writers: itll be news when the poor dont suffer the most. As the mysterious Billionaires Virus decimates Aspen, the worlds stinkin rich suffer the most. Thats a news head worth writing.
Posted by: Mike ||
04/28/2008 14:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
when there was a huge earthquake in Taiwan a few years ago, there was a shortage of RAM. No one then said "the poor suffer the most". Every once in a while theres a shortage of some luxury good, and then the poor dont suffer the most. A food shortage is distinctive, as the poor spend a higher % of their income on food, and of that, a higher % on grain.
#4
"Brutal convergence of events" > wel-l-l, we already know from the Russia and Chinese, ala Year 2018 and Anti-US "WAR NOT ONLY POSSIBLE BUT DESIRED", and Other(s) on the Net-MSM, that the bulk/most of you-know-what-hitting the-fan ISN'T SCHEDULED UNTIL AFTER 2010.
#5
You mean white men, the ones with all the guns and anger? They can see their limit to what they can endure racing towards them at ever faster, even breakneck speeds. We are running a pressure cooker on high, and the cook is passed out drunk on the couch.
#6
And don't forget that bunnies, fluffy kittens, and baby ducks suffer, too. Often far worse than the poor. But you never hear about them, nooooooooo, until the MSM morons who cheered Rev em up Wright get bored about writing about the sufferings of poor people, minorities, women, chilluns, n' infinks.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/28/2008 23:26 Comments ||
Top||
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, explaining this morning why he had waited so long before breaking his silence about his incendiary sermons, offered a paraphrase from Proverbs: "It is better to be quiet and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
Barack Obama's pastor would have been wise to continue to heed that wisdom.
Should it become necessary in the months from now to identify the moment that doomed Obama's presidential aspirations, attention is likely to focus on the hour between nine and ten this morning at the National Press Club. It was then that Wright, Obama's longtime pastor, reignited a controversy about race from which Obama had only recently recovered - and added lighter fuel.
Speaking before an audience that included Marion Barry, Cornel West, Malik Zulu Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam official Jamil Muhammad, Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks ("God damn America") and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America.
In front of 30 television cameras, Wright's audience cheered him on as the minister mocked the media and, at one point, did a little victory dance on the podium. It seemed as if Wright, jokingly offering himself as Obama's vice president, was actually trying to doom Obama; a member of the head table, American Urban Radio's April Ryan, confirmed that Wright's security was provided by bodyguards from Farrakhan's Nation of Islam.
Wright suggested that Obama was insincere in distancing himself from his pastor. "He didn't distance himself," Wright announced. "He had to distance himself, because he's a politician, from what the media was saying I had said, which was anti-American."
Explaining further, Wright said friends had written to him and said, "We both know that if Senator Obama did not say what he said, he would never get elected." The minister continued: "Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls."
Wright also argued, at least four times over the course of the hour, that he was speaking not for himself but for the black church.
"This is not an attack on Jeremiah Wright," the minister said. "It is an attack on the black church." He positioned himself as a mainstream voice of African American religious traditions. "Why am I speaking out now?" he asked. "If you think I'm going to let you talk about my mama and her religious tradition, and my daddy and his religious tradition and my grandma, you got another thing coming."
That significantly complicates Obama's job as he contemplates how to extinguish Wright's latest incendiary device. Now, he needs to do more than express disagreement with his former pastor's view; he needs to refute his former pastor's suggestion that Obama privately agrees with him.
Wright seemed aggrieved that his inflammatory quotations were out of the full "context" of his sermons -- yet he repeated many of the same accusations in the context of a half-hour Q&A session this morning.
His claim that the September 11 attacks mean "America's chickens are coming home to roost"?
Wright defended it: "Jesus said, 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you. Those are biblical principles, not Jeremiah Wright bombastic divisive principles."
His views on Farrakhan and Israel? "Louis said 20 years ago that Zionism, not Judaism, was a gutter religion. He was talking about the same thing United Nations resolutions say, the same thing now that President Carter's being vilified for and Bishop Tutu's being vilified for. And everybody wants to paint me as if I'm anti-Semitic because of what Louis Farrakhan said 20 years ago. He is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century; that's what I think about him. . . . Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains, he did not put me in slavery, and he didn't make me this color."
He denounced those who "can worship God on Sunday morning, wearing a black clergy robe, and kill others on Sunday evening, wearing a white Klan robe." He praised the communist Sandinista regime of Nicaragua. He renewed his belief that the government created AIDS as a means of genocide against people of color ("I believe our government is capable of doing anything").
And he vigorously renewed demands for an apology for slavery: "Britain has apologized to Africans. But this country's leaders have refused to apologize. So until that apology comes, I'm not going to keep stepping on your foot and asking you, does this hurt, do you forgive me for stepping on your foot, if I'm still stepping on your foot. Understand that? Capisce?"
Capisce, reverend. All too well.
Posted by: ed ||
04/28/2008 17:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
FOX NEWS AM > WRIGHT - claims that attacks on his character are actually attacks on "THE BLACK CHURCH", which I interprete as meaning AFRICAN-AMER/BLACK LIBERATION CHRISTIANITY IN USA??? Also inferred that iff OBAMA becomes POTUS, he Wright as Pastor will not be afraid to criticize his protege' = "go after" Obama????
#2
As long as Senator Obama gives his support and endorsement to Queen Hillary; I'll support her. If he holds it like Gore and Edwards, my little pinky could just as easily flick to the right!! See, it is ok!!
#4
As long as Senator Obama gives his support and endorsement to Queen Hillary; I'll support her. If he holds it like Gore and Edwards, my little pinky could just as easily flick to the right!! See, it is ok!!
#1
This is great info. Hussein is not just far, far left. He is a committed commie in Ayre's footsteps. What is truly amazing is that the Dummocrats just can't get used to the free flow of info brought about by the Net and video tape. Neither Barry nor Billary can comprehend that it is now easy to fact check their fabrications and backrounds and expose them for the cheap liars that they are. Most of Barry's BS in his famous books are fabrications and alliterations made up to support his fairy tales. More to come. Karl, I hope you're still digging. That must be a pit, not just a hole, by now.
#4
If McCain just admitted that the law was a bad idea and promised to work to repeal it, he would win hands down. Instead, he is acting elitist and pissing off the very people he needs to win by wooing the left. All he really needs to do this election is to point to his experience and shut the fuck up. That's it. He can't even pull that one off.
February 20, 2006 proved to be an eventful day for the Muslim Students Association (MSA) at The Ohio State University. Not only did that date mark the conclusion of their weekend-long Leaders of Tomorrow conference, but that was also the day that their conference sponsor, Kindhearts, was raided by federal law enforcement and closed by order of the Department of the Treasury for financing terrorism, freezing its assets.
According to the US government, Kindhearts, which was established following the closure of the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation, was not only engaged in providing millions for HAMAS in Lebanon and the West Bank, it had hired as a fundraising specialist the man identified by HAMAS head Khaled Mishal as the designated HAMAS bag man in the US, Mohammed El-Mezain. (For additional background on Kindhearts and its multiple connections to the international terrorism finance network, see Joe Kaufmans FrontPage article, The Black Hearts of Kindhearts)
Kindhearts, however, was not the only terror-connected sponsor of the OSU MSA conference. Also supporting the MSAs conference was its local parent organization, Masjid Omar Ibn El-Khattab, known affectionately in the Central Ohio area as Masjid Al-Qaeda. The mosque nearby the OSU campus was home to the largest known Al-Qaeda cell in the US since 9/11, with two former members Iyman Faris and Nuradin Abdi already convicted and serving prison terms for their participation, and another cell member Christopher Paul currently awaiting trial.
The third identified sponsor of the MSA conference, Ilmquest Productions, is the media arm of the Al-Maghrib Institute (profiled last year here at FrontPage, Jihad U). Ilmquest not only publishes and markets DVDs and CDs of Al-Maghrib scholars, but also a long-line of other extremist speakers, including Bilal Philips, Khalid Yasin, and Yemeni Al-Qaeda cleric Anwar Al-Aulaqi.
As noted recently here at FrontPage, the Ohio State MSA is no stranger to controversy. Three months after 9/11, the Associated Press reported that the OSU MSA was under federal investigation for its MSA News email list that regularly published news releases by a whole host of Islamic terrorist organizations, and also for encouraging readers to purchase videos from a terrorist support website:
Ohio State University's Muslim Student Association produces and distributes MSA NEWS, which publicizes events featuring controversial speakers and has included news releases from terrorist groups such as the Algerian Armed Islamic Group, which is on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations Americans are forbidden to support or finance, and the Islamic Salvation Front, a fundamentalist political party banned in Algeria.
During last year's Ramadan fast, MSA-NEWS urged campus groups to purchase a videotape called The Martyrs of Bosnia and show it to Muslim-only gatherings. The video was sold by London-based Azzam Productions, which featured articles on its Web site like "Taliban: Allah's Blessing on Afghanistan," and solicited funds there for the Taliban rulers in Afghanistan. The site, and a related German site, were shut down by the British and German governments as part of their Sept. 11 response.
Two years later, the OSU MSA played a critical role in hosting the Third National Conference on Palestinian Solidarity, whose keynote speaker was none other than now-convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader and former University of South Florida professor, Sami Al-Arian.
And more recently, the OSU MSA jointly sponsored an event to counter last Octobers Islamofascism Awareness Week featuring notorious wife-beating advocate and Muslim Brotherhood leader Jamal Badawi, Interfaith Relations A Muslim Perspective. The event was paid for by the university through student fees. As I reported here at FrontPage, Fatwa Fraud, Badawi was one of the featured speakers and an honored guest last July at a terrorist confab in Doha, Qatar honoring HAMAS spiritual leader Yousef Al-Qaradawi and attended by HAMAS head Khaled Mishal.
College students and administrators would do well to consider that Islamic terrorism and extremism are not phenomena distant and far removed from American college campuses (even though Ohio State professor John Mueller contends there is no threat from Islamic terrorists).
In fact, Islamic terrorism and extremism might be closer than they would ever realize as close as the nearest Muslim Student Association.
#1
Ohio State is the largest public university in the country. Whatever one wants to find is there, is active, and is noisy. It's also very athletic and very much a party school; I shouldn't want to try to cause trouble there -- I'm sure the students don't take kindly to bullies.
Are all white males really so monolithically repugnant and predictable?
By Kathleen Parker
In the days leading up to Pennsylvanias primary, white males those knuckle-dragging, chaw-chompin, beer-swillin bitter troglodytes were suddenly the debutantes delight.
How were the Democrats to woo these crucial swing voters, known in other circles as the Republican-party base?
Political commentators brains grew new crevices as they pondered the imponderable: Would white males go for the woman or the black? Or as Nora Ephron more pointedly posed the question: Whom do white men hate more women or blacks?
By Ephrons calculus, if a white male votes for a black man, it couldnt possibly be because he finds the man a more suitable candidate. He simply hates women more.
And if he votes for the woman, hes probably got his nutty uncles white-sheet ensemble stashed upstairs in an attic trunk just in case cross burning enjoys a revival. He couldnt possibly deem any woman superior to any man. He simply hates blacks more.
Are all white males really so monolithically repugnant and predictable?
Race and gender do matter, of course. They enter into the human equations to varying degrees, subconsciously if not consciously, in any transaction. We have certain expectations and are all guilty of stereotyping, much as we insist otherwise. Its nature, and its not always wrong.
To what extent race and gender matter in elections, were only now beginning to find out. A year ago, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that voters were less concerned about race and gender than they were about age. While 58 percent said theyd be less likely to vote for a candidate older than 72, only 13 percent said theyd be less likely to support a woman, and just 6 percent felt less inclined to vote for a black candidate.
In Pennsylvania on Tuesday, exit polls found 19 percent of Democrats saying that the race of a candidate played a role in their vote. But what does that mean? That it matters a little or a lot or that race is a deal-breaker?
Clinton beat Obama by a 10-point margin in part because of WECM white ethnic Catholic men.
Pollster John Zogby says that WECM, who tend to be conservative, werent sure they were going to vote at all. And though they didnt particularly like Clinton, they werent going to vote for Obama.
Are ethnic Catholics necessarily racist? Or were they responding to something else when they voted against Obama? Perhaps his more liberal voting record? Or, just possibly, recent comments that were perceived as insulting and out of touch?
In fact, the groups that favored Clinton over Obama included people 45 and over, working-class and union folks, as well as voters in the suburbs, small towns and in rural areas those embittered Americans Obama recently described as clinging to their guns and religion out of frustration. Also among those Obama lost to Clinton were weekly churchgoers and, yes, gun owners by 63 percent to 37 percent.
So, yes, some percentage of Americans (or Turks or Greeks or Swedes) will always take race and gender into consideration at the polls. But Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama may not provide a clear picture as to how those issues play out in politics. Each brings too many confounding factors that distort the picture.
Clinton isnt just any woman, needless to say. People like and dislike her often for the same reason because shes the wife of Bill. In either case, its not only that shes A Woman, but that shes That Particular Woman.
And Obama isnt just any black man. Those who like or dislike him dont necessarily base those opinions on his skin color or ethnic heritage, except to the extent that they are tied to differences that are also cultural.
Clinton may not be Everywoman, no matter how unflinchingly she downs a tumbler of Crown Royal. But she is a more familiar entity than someone like Obama, who, having grown up in Hawaii and Indonesia, doesnt share the life experiences of the groups that voted against him on Tuesday.
Do they hate blacks, as the Ephron School insists? Or do they prefer a familiar individual who sees the world essentially as they do? Are white males misogynistic and racist? Or are they weary of being the only group in America that is fair game for contempt, insult, and blame?
Bottom line: Its hard to woo people you dont really love.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Really? The poor suffering the most? Its hard to imagine. Because, you know, usually when theres a major global crisis of any sort, its the poor sitting there on the sidelines, going whew, dodged that bullet. How strange that the people the least economically, socially and educationally able to deal with wrenching change should suffer the most. How odd that the rich should so often be able to shield themselves from the ravages of events. Its almost as if they have some advantage over poor people, although off the top of my head what it might be escapes me.
By Patrick Poole
