Nike vs. Betsy Ross

            By now everyone should have heard or read about Nike’s recall of sneakers featuring the Betsy Ross flag on the heel. The recall was in reaction to former NFL player Colin Kaepernick’s objection to what he said was a symbol of oppression.

            Nike said in a statement that “it pulled the shoe based on concerns that it could unintentionally offend and detract from the nation’s patriotic holiday.”

            What utter garbage. The only people the shoe might offend are America-haters like Kaepernick. The real offense was to the vast majority of people who love America and resent Nike’s insult to patriots everywhere.

            Actually, Nike did us all a favor by reminding us that there are America-haters all around us: in the media, in academia, and even in Congress. When Alexandria Ocasio Cortez spews lies about concentration camps on our southern border filled with women forced to drink out of toilets, she speaks for the haters. When Kamala Harris calls President Trump a predator and John Brennan calls him a traitor, they speak for the haters. When media talking heads ridicule and denigrate Independence Day celebrations like the one led by President Trump, they speak for the haters.

            The Betsy Ross flag speaks of freedom and of triumph over tyranny; it speaks for the heroism of our Founders who pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to the struggle for liberty; it speaks not of oppression, but of the great nation America would become.

           

           

           

           

Who's Stupid?

            “It’s the economy, stupid.” That was Bill Clinton’s election campaign mantra. It reminds us how important the country’s financial well-being is when voters go to the polls. This presents a dilemma for Democratic candidates for the Oval Office.

            Democrats have only one basic argument. They have to persuade voters that President Trump’s management of the economy has been a disaster for everybody but the rich, and that a socialist government is the only way to narrow the gap between the wealthy and everybody else. To sell this proposition they have to lie; they have to convince the electorate that the facts are not the facts.

            President Trump, for all his character faults and debatable policies on trade and other matters, is singularly responsible for the robust growth of the economy since his inauguration. He was absolutely right in seeing that tax reduction and deregulation were the keys to not just an economic expansion, but also narrowing income inequality.

            What is the evidence? First, job creation. Contrary to dire predictions from Democrats, the economy continues to grow and add jobs, more jobs than there are workers to fill them in many sectors. Workforce participation is up, and unemployment is at historic lows, especially for minorities.

            Second, wages for the lowest-paid workers have increased at a higher rate than for the highest-paid, a sure sign of an increased competition for workers. Coincidentally, the Congressional Budget Office reports that the proportion of income going to the poorest fifth of Americans has risen dramatically, while it has dropped for the wealthiest one-fifth.  

            Income inequality is not growing, as socialist paragon Bernie Sanders would have us believe: it is narrowing. The way to reverse this trend is to put a socialist in the White House, which can only happen if the electorate buys the lies and ignores the facts.

            As Bill Clinton might say again today, “It’s the economy, stupid.” But who would he be talking to?

Pandering for Diversity

            As we move into the debate phase of presidential election politics, Democrat aspirants to the Oval Office are honing their vote-getting skills, particularly their ability to pander to every voting group.  Pandering becomes identity politics in action. It’s what you do when you have no positive ideas: you stoke the envy of every group that does not enjoy the advantages of social, cultural or financial privilege.

            Listen to Bernie Sanders as his promises of equality drip with contempt for the “rich.”  Was Beto O’Rourke’s switch to Spanish at the debates anything but a transparent appeal to Hispanic voters? And what's the latest count of candidates who have done a pilgrimage to New York to kiss Pope Al Sharpton's ring?

            Identity politics has infected academia as well. Harvard administrators are under fire for adjusting SAT scores in its pursuit of a “diverse” student body. In the process it has clearly discriminated against Asian applicants whose SAT scores are consistently higher than applicants from favored groups.

            While an overwhelming percentage of Americans say that college admissions should not be based on race or ethnicity, colleges are using “adversity scores” to boost admissions for applicants from poor or crime-ridden neighborhoods, thus devaluing the academic achievement of students with higher SATs. All in the name of diversity.

            Virginia Tech this year held separate graduation achievement celebrations for Jews, Muslims, American Indians, Blacks, Hispanics, and LGBT.  Am I the only one who thinks this is taking diversity a little too far?  What exactly does academia seek to achieve by pandering to diverse groups? Politicians at least have a clear objective: votes.

Eugenics in Practice

            In Indiana two years ago, then Governor Mike Pence signed a bill banning abortions for reasons of sex, race, or disability. For example, a woman would have been prohibited from aborting a fetus because it has Down Syndrome. But a federal appeals court sided with abortion rights advocates and ruled against the bill. It was then bumped up to the Supreme Court, which has put off ruling on it.

            Justice Clarence Thomas commented that the court, having created a right to abortion (in Roe vs. Wade) is going to have to rule on the its scope eventually. In the meantime, he accused opponents of the Indiana law of hypocrisy, insisting that aborting a baby because it has Down Syndrome smacks of eugenics.

            Eugenics is the science of improving the genetic quality of the human population. Selective breeding, if you will. The Nazis practiced it in trying to achieve a purified Germanic race. So did China when it forced the abortion of girl babies.

            Abortionists are up in arms, saying they oppose eugenics. But Thomas has a point. The termination rate for babies with Down Syndrome is already estimated to be around 67% in this country. In the UK the rate is 90%, in Denmark 98%, and in Iceland 100%. In fact, Iceland allows abortion after 16 weeks of any fetus with a deformity. This sounds very much like eugenics to me. Is this where we’re headed?

A Safe Space Invasion

            I have criticized institutions of higher learning for creating safe spaces to protect sensitive students from ideas or speech that they might find offensive. Snowflakes, I’ve called these fragile souls. Well, I’m afraid I need my safe spaces, too, because I am offended by the pervasive immorality of our entertainment industry.

            Two seasons ago I began watching a show called “Designated Survivor,” a series about a good man who becomes president of the United States after the Administration and Congress are wiped out by a terrorist act. I thought it was a good show. I watched the second series as well, although it lacked the drama of the first. I thought the third, which I started watching last week, would be better. I was wrong. I was not only disappointed—I was offended.

            The third season of “Designated Survivor” had become Hollywood’s latest propaganda for non-judgmental tolerance of moral depravity. By the end of the third episode, viewers had been treated to a wide range of fornication: between a Chief of Staff and his mistress, between a female campaign manager and a gigolo, plus a Vice-Presidential candidate two-timing his live-in girlfriend with a White House staffer, To top it off, the show lingered on the orgasmic coupling of two black gay men. I shut off the TV and will never watch another episode.

            Call me a prude, a racist, and a homophobe, if you will. But I was disgusted by what I saw and upset with myself for allowing such garbage to pollute my safe space.

           

Three Anniversaries

            This week marks anniversaries of two momentous events. June 6 was the 75^th anniversary of D-Day, and June 3^rd the 30^th anniversary of Tiananmen Square. On both days thousands of lives were lost, sacrificed for freedom from repressive regimes, one Nazi and the other Communist. One succeeded, the other failed. The heroism of one was celebrated, the sacrifices of the other met with enforced silence.

            I have walked the sands of Omaha Beach and I have also stood where thousands of Chinese protestors were murdered under the enormous portrait of Chairman Mao.

            In Normandy, caravans of buses disgorge hordes of tourists every day. They come to stand on the beach to visualize American soldiers coming ashore and climbing the cliffs under enemy fire. They also pay their respects to the dead interred below the endless rows of crosses above the cliffs. Few emerge from the experience with dry eyes. I can personally attest to that.

            Hordes of tourists also visit Tiananmen Square. But they will see no evidence of the slaughter that took place there. As many as a million people had gathered in that enormous space in the days preceding the massacre to call for democratic reforms. In response, the government mowed them down with tanks and machine guns.

            When I stood in that square some years ago, I did not see tears on the faces of the tourists or the local population. There were no signs to remind them of the atrocities committed there by the Chinese authorities against their own people, except perhaps for the presence of armed patrols who were there to enforce the public’s oblivion. Today, the brutal reality of that event has been blotted out, eradicated from history books, and forbidden from mention.

            Later this year we will mark the 30^th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, an event surely not forgotten by China’s communist dictators. They must know that the desire for freedom is part of human nature, and that their repressive regime must also fall…eventually. I hope to still be alive see it.

           

The Haters of Santa Barbara

            On May 27^th, the day the whole country was honoring the soldiers who gave their lives in defense of this country, we saw American flags proudly hoisted on flag poles, and displayed outside our homes, along the roadways, and in our cemeteries. Memorial Day was a day of reverence, a day that spoke of love of country. Yet, on this day I read of an incredible dishonor to our flag by a school in California and, by extension, to every man and woman who have ever fought under it.

            The Board of Trustees of Santa Barbara City College announced that the school would discontinue saying the Pledge of Allegiance in its classrooms. When questioned about the decision, the president of the Board said that it was because the flag was rooted in racism, white nationalism, and nativism. Think about that.

            When soldiers returned from the fighting in Vietnam, many were spat upon by war protesters. Little has changed since then among those who despise America, who denigrate the values that make this country great, who are consumed by hate, who spit on our flag. Sadly, many educators like the ones in Santa Barbara are teaching our children to become haters like themselves.

            We must be wary of those who would corrupt our children. If we allow the haters to poison the minds of the young and innocent, all will be lost. We already are seeing the signs: the toppling of statues, the removal of portraits of historic figures, the character assassinations of our Founding Fathers, and now the desecration of our flag. For over 200 years our soldiers have fought the enemy abroad. Now we must all become soldiers fighting the enemy within.