Where's the Beef?

Watching the Dems attempting to wrest control of these town halls from screaming geriatric mobs, I am struck by the dearth of details about this plan. While they accuse the opposition of spreading misinformation, they provide little of the details, that well-known habitation of the devil. It's the details that are telling. The President assures us that there are no "death panels." I believe him. But given the huge amounts of money involved, you can bet that there will be some mechanism to tamp costs down, else the country goes bankrupt. One man's review committee is another's death panel. Much of the discussion such as it is seems a tad disingenuous.

Then there are the angry ones. One senator, attempting to control the crowd, asks whether they think they are persuading anyone. The point she misses is that this is not about persuasion; it is about being heard. Healthcare reform is just the catalyst for voicing the growing disaffection of many. I'd venture to guess that a lot of people are very nervous about the huge amounts of deficit spending and the seeming incompetence of the present Congress. They have no voice, however. Dems seem hell bent on pursuing their agenda, constituents be damned. The media chooses to ignore or belittle those who don't agree with the present administration. Is it any wonder that there is frustration?

Yes, elections have consequences, but no administration gets everything it wants. In fact, one could argue that it is because of the scope of what they have rushed through up until now that there is resistance to having an amorphous blob of a thousand page bill rammed through. The great plans of Presidents are subject to the will of the people. The people are worried. Some are even angry. Does anyone even know what's in this bill? Or is the public being asked to accept another pig in a poke?

Low Human Being of the Month Award: Updated

For years I've watched Bono's philanthropic efforts with suspicion, waiting for the shoe to drop. Well, last week the recording superstar demonstrated his true caliber. Good thing I stopped listening to U2 since The Joshua Tree. That he should have differences with President Bush and seek to avoid his overtures discreetly is, I guess, within the pale. One has to wonder given Bono's ostensible devotion to Africa why he would turn his back on the President who has done the most for that benighted continent. But then if he were a brain surgeon, he wouldn't be a rock star. That he should feel the need to demonstrate how cool he is by showing off about the slight is petty and base. What, are we in high school?

You can say whatever you want about George Bush, but the man has class, which is more than you can say about the majority of his detractors.

Update: Got a hold of the YouTube of the original interview. Although he calls himself a coward for dodging the Bush hug and acknowledges what Bush did, I leave it for you to decide. It's interesting to see the variation in how this story was reported in the different media outlets.

Meanderings: The Lady or the Tiger

I've been toying with the notion of posting on the brouhaha over the arrest of the Harvard professor of color and the President's unwise foray into the melee. Let's start with the initial incident. Do read some of the reports as to the specifics. "You don't know who you're dealing with" Harvard professor indicates to responding policeman in all his erudite glory, that "Yo momma" is going to go outside to speak to same officer. Now anyone past the age of puberty can tell you that reference to an officer of the law's progenitrix is a sure invitation to the pokey.

Since, affirmative action or not, a Harvard academic is presumably intelligent, one can only suppose that Gates was so irate that his valor overcame his discretion. In short, he lost it. So far I've been having a bit of fun, but it bears thinking on. What is it that would affect him so? To the professor's mind, this situation was but a variant of the "driving while black," a phenomenon occurring just often enough to keep it in the back of every African-American mind. For it is the sad truth, whether discrimination or probability, every law abiding person of color is subject to false assumptions in a way his or her white brother is not.

Members of minority groups can be hypersensitive when it comes to a perceived slight, but at the same time, in some cases perception is reality. I can remember my parents with their Hispanic names and accents at the bank where they would be forced to provide all sorts of identification. Of course, they would ascribe it to discrimination. I used to think they were being hypersensitive until I noticed that when I went alone, I wasn't asked for anything of the sort.

All of this rambling leads me to my own brush with the sometime arbitrary exercise of police power, or the time when I was stopped for "driving while in a white Escort." So there I was, middle-aged friend in tow, driving in my little white Ford Escort when I was pulled over by flashing lights, etc... "What did I do?" I asked the officer with the sunglasses, doubtless affected to look cool but which looked more like he had cut them out of cellophane. I received no answer but was instead required to provide all of my papers. All this while the partner leaning over the passenger window was shaking his head and stifling a giggle. Me, I was horrified. I knew I hadn't done anything. Was there a mass murderer, drug dealer, or even teenage thief, even now making his getaway in a stolen white Ford Escort? Nah.

I decided the guy was a horse's ass. I, following operative rule number one while dealing with an officer of the law with equine tendencies, refrained from pointing out this fact. Later my friend and I decided he pulled us over thinking we were two little chippies. So while I never got any satisfaction, neither did he.

So Sad

When the Congressional Black Caucus took its junket to Cuba earlier this year, they were criticised by Conservative pundits for failing to include a visit to the prison cell of Oscar Elias Biscet in their itinerary. The Capos in Havana are quite good at hiding the true face of their regime from the rest of the world. The case of Dr. Biscet, however, is one that speaks volumes about the true nature of their crimes.

Jailed as a threat to the government, sentenced to 25 years in a hell hole, Biscet's crime was to believe in the dignity of the human being and to demand that the government respect that dignity. For this crime, he has been jailed since 2003. Recently, Rudy Mayor over at The Politics of Freedom has posted some of a letter written by Dr. Biscet. Those words speak volumes about the man:

"Today, on the eve of my 48th birthday, I write these lines from prison cell #1232. If this testimony from the box where I have been unjustly forced to live for almost 10 years now is of some interest to mankind, then publish it.

When I began advocating the philosophies of Gandhi and Thoreau, I remember those who commented that I would soon begin walking through the streets of Havana in a loincloth like Gandhi. Upon hearing these insults, I'd simply smile, as surely I would soon be subjected to this condition -- not in the streets of Havana, but in the indefinite confinement that I would face for such advocacy. Those that resorted to such insults, seeking to humiliate me, would not be mistaken after all, but it is through the humiliation of a man in loincloth that human dignity is reflected over barbarism.

When you ask me how I am doing, and I tell you that I am resisting, it is because the environment I find myself in is too brutal for any civilized man imprisoned for promoting ideas of love, the respect for human rights and the defense of life. Yet, I thank God as I awake every day, for in this dark and lonely cell, I know He is with me."

- Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, Cuban pro-democracy leader and Amnesty International prisoner of conscience serving a 25-year sentence, in a letter to his wife and the world.

Tomorrow students in Washington DC will be doing their part to help. Read about it here.

h/t Jose at Cubanology

Monday Morning Miscellanea

Facts and Figures. In this WSJ article, Mort Zuckerman- a man I respect- informs us that things are worse than they seem. Aside from backing up Biden's assessment of the economy, he sees the need for a real stimulus, one that consists of infrastructure projects. You decide.

Fact and Fallacy. Bill O'Reilly takes on Palin critics over at Townhall, arguing that the attacks are meant to marginalize Palin, but more importantly to neutralize growing criticism of the growing government takeover of everything. I know he didn't just realize it's a left/media braintrust at work. I suspect he was trying to be fair to the new administration, but he's a little late to the fair, nonetheless. Read it here.

Fact and Feature. Over at National Review, David Kahane presents a series of comparisons that range from Entourage to Gone With The Wind, culminating in a parallel between the One and Evita of "Don't cry for me, Argentina" fame as the basis for a remake of the original show. Somewhere in "their," he manages a few well-aimed swipes at Sotomayor. Most notable for the prodigious number of modifiers. Silly, but point well-taken.

Fact and Fancy. Looking for something to do? Hop on a plane to Afghanistan, take a dangerous 7 hour car ride, and visit the Bamiyan, the site of the blown up Buddhas. Kid you not, according to FoxNews here, the government is gearing up, hoping to lure tourists the well-known site. They've got something there, but one can't help thinking they may have jumped the gun a bit.

Fact and Freak. It's alive! Yup, a mysterious blob up in Arctic waters, which stretches for miles, has turned out to be living, a massive bloom of algae. Read about it at Time. Also of interest is the nugget that the Maine coastline has been besieged by Red Tide, another algal bloom, one I know something about.

Fact and Factoid. Reading McCourt's obit, I came across this list of "100 all-Time Best Novels." For once, I've read a fair number of them. My vote for one and two positions, All The King's Men and Crime and Punishment. I'm pretty catholic in my tastes. (This last is an allusion to one of my favorite plays.) Tata.

Frank McCourt: Sad News

News is that Frank McCourt, author of Angela's Ashes, has passed away. I can still remember the God awful scenes in the book when his father would wake up the children in the middle of the night upon his return from the local pub and make them sing the Irish National Anthem or some such. I remember my mother, who read the book twice before she died, saying that it seemed like fiction, the way one calamity after another would befall the family.

May he be in heaven a half an hour before the devil knows he's dead.

Quote for the Evening

This one in which he describes his an encounter with Walter Cronkite from Kevin D Williamson in the National Review Media Blog.

It was the sort of experience that is tediously familiar to conservatives: You meet somebody who starts ranting in the most intemperate fashion about conservatives and/or Republicans, and it is clear that they cannot imagine that they might be speaking to one. (Harry Stein has a book out about this curious phenomenon.) Mr. Cronkite took it for granted that his opinions were shared, and shared because they were self-evidently true, and that seems to me to be the main defect of the media culture that holds him up as a hero.

Meanderings: On Elitism

So the hubster and I are watching O'Reilly being hosted by Laura Ingraham when there is a Special News Bulletin, the kind they have when an airplane goes down or Jacko bites the big one. This time, however, the interruption is due to the death, hardly surprising, of a 92 year old Walter Cronkite. Fox now launches into long and lauditory coverage.

Only the press thinks that the death of one of their own merits the kind of coverage given to, say, assasinated presidents. As for me, I remember my Cuban-American father who absolutely loathed the man, saw him as emblematic of the reason we lost in Vietnam. This much is sure: at some point during those years, the objective stance of the reporter began to shift. The results are all too obvious today. But that's old news. So just before hubby, cursing, changed the channel to Modern Marvels or some such, I caught an interesting tidbit: Cronkite only did two years of college. What?

Coming at the end of a week of Sotomayor hearings when we were supposed to prostrate ourselves before the altars of Princeton and Yale Law, which in and of itself echoed the required response to Obama's academic pedigree, it seemed paradoxical. The question is natural. Would Cronkite have stood a chance at a journalism career today without that journalism degree, or some variety of previously established celebrity?

The answer leads to all sorts of ruminations. There is at present on the airwaves a near veneration of the Ivy degree. The extension of this academic worship is that no one without that particular variant of sheepskin is to be taken seriously, a view that might be true if there were enough seats and scholarships for the truly deserving in these institutions.

Each year, these bastions of higher learning turn down thousands of valedictorians who do not need to perfect their English and who can actually write a serious, meaty thesis, and who might not be near Olympic swimmers with B averages, or serious ballerinas. They are, however, no less intellectually gifted than those invited into the inner sanctum.

So while I take nothing away from Sotomayor, or Obama for that matter- both have ably demonstrated their intellectual gifts- they were lucky. For those who are born into families without connections, this is about the only way to gain entree into elite circles. That the possession of a degree from Harvard or Yale or Princeton, etc. is the only indicator of a superior intellect, I reject. The pervasiveness of the belief itself is yet another example of the ossification of our society.

Think of a past in which you could start out sweeping in the newsroom and work your way up, or you could finish your novel and dash it off to a publisher who would actually read it, or better yet start off as a haberdasher and rise to the presidency. Do these scenarios seem likely in the present? How would Abe Lincoln fare?

What is That Smell?

We're all familiar with the army of operatives that swarmed Alaska when Palin was first nominated. We witnessed the savaging of Joe the Plumber last summer. The latest victim was to be Frank Ricci, one of the plaintiffs in the New Haven firefighter case. Not that Ricci could add that much, but his sheer presence, along with that of his fully uniformed fellow firefighters, is itself a rebuke, legal ruling made flesh.

Now let's ratchet up the analysis a notch. Not to be one of the lone gunmen, those flaky conspiracy theorists on the X Files, recent developments in the news do seem rather- how shall we say- interesting. Pelosi says she was not briefed about waterboarding. She further intimates the CIA lies all the time. The CIA says she was and they don't. Former Vice President Dick Cheney goes on a media offensive criticising Obamian policy and gains traction. Then last week, Pelosi proxies raise a hue and cry over a now defunct, never-made-it-out-of-the-starting-gate program, about which they were never briefed. Then accusations are made that it was Cheney who directed the CIA not to inform congress. Two foes at one blow? Call me crazy, but it all smells of payback to me. Of course, the program in question which was classified and discussed in a closed meeting has been front page stuff for days. Gotta love it.

A Must Read: Palin as President?

I don't know how I dropped this one yesterday. David Harsanyi does a masterful job visualizing the objections to a Palin presidency. Watch for the twist at the end.

A Literary Reminder

Remember "The Hangman" by Ogden Nash? Read the excerpt (complete text here); feel the vibrations.

Into our town the hangman came,

smelling of gold and blood and flame.

He paced our bricks with a different air,

and built his frame on the courthouse square.



The scaffold stood by the courthouse side,

only as wide as the door was wide

with a frame as tall, or a little more,

than the capping sill of the courthouse door.



And we wondered whenever we had the time,

Who the criminal? What the crime?

The hangman judged with the yellow twist

of knotted hemp in his busy fist.



And innocent though we were with dread,

we passed those eyes of buckshot lead.

Till one cried, "Hangman, who is he,

for whom you raised the gallows-tree?"



Then a twinkle grew in his buckshot eye

and he gave a riddle instead of reply.

"He who serves me best," said he

"Shall earn the rope on the gallows-tree."



And he stepped down and laid his hand

on a man who came from another land.

And we breathed again, for anothers grief

at the hangmans hand, was our relief.



And the gallows frame on the courthouse lawn

by tomorrow's sun would be struck and gone.

So we gave him way and no one spoke

out of respect for his hangmans cloak.



The next day's sun looked mildly down

on roof and street in our quiet town;

and stark and black in the morning air

the gallows-tree on the courthouse square.



And the hangman stood at his usual stand

with the yellow hemp in his busy hand.

With his buckshot eye and his jaw like a pike,

and his air so knowing and business-like.



And we cried, "Hangman, have you not done,

yesterday with the alien one?"

Then we fell silent and stood amazed.

"Oh, not for him was the gallows raised."

Late Edition

Better Late.... Thank you, Republicans for lambasting our dearly elected leader for labeling events in Honduras a coup, thereby aligning himself on the side not of angels but of Chavez, Ortega, Castro(2), et al. Secondly, designating the Honduran military action, undertaken under orders from the Honduran Supreme Court to the approbation of the Honduran legislature, as such obscures the illegal actions of the former Honduran President which brought about the crisis in the first place. Read it at Breitbart.

Lagging Indicators. Christian Solidarity Worldwide has mildly denounced the sentencing of Cuban Pastor Omar Gude Perez to six years imprisonment. The CSW sees the conviction as a result of his leadership position in a Christian movement, and not on either the original human trafficking charges, nor the "counterrevolutionary conduct and attitudes" on which he was convicted. Meanwhile, Pastors (Posers?) for peace continues their traveling show on the way to Cuba to support the same government that sentenced Gude Perez. Read about it.

Equine Arrears. According to Newsweek- which I predict will have to fold if it keeps printing this tripe- against President Obama's wishes, Ag Holder absolutely must investigate the Bush atrocities. (Psst. Wanna buy a bridge?) Coming as it does in the middle of a dismal news cycle and skidding approval ratings, the timing smells.

Arrested Development. Floored yesterday at this one. There is talk of banning tobacco in the military, even in combat situations. Yessirree, you can get blown to smithereens for your country, but don't light up. Kinda gives the lie to fighting for freedom. Ludicrous.

Left Behind. It's that time of year again. The ubiquitous summer reading lists. Here's the NRO version, ponderous in the main. I can confess that few of these titles will find their way into my beachbag. Of course, none of Oprah's are going to be in there either.

Heads Up: Article About Palin's Resignation

The Alaska governor's resignation seem to come out of nowhere. It was surprising that after enduring a brutal series of attacks during the campaign, Palin would cave now. A new article by Matthew Continetti over at The Weekly Standard provides an insight into what went in to her decision and makes it all more understandable:

The attacks did not stop when McCain and Palin lost the election. To the contrary: They shifted location and emphasis. Palin returned to a changed Alaska. Her first year in office had been remarkably successful because she governed with an ad hoc legislative coalition of Democrats and antiestablishment Republicans. That coalition broke down the moment Palin became a force in national politics and the most famous woman (probably the most famous person) in the Republican party. The Democrats in the legislature defected en masse. Compounding the problem: Because she had unseated it, the GOP establishment never liked Palin and wanted her to go away.

Suddenly "people were confronted with policy differences with the governor," Alaska state senator and Palin ally Gene Therriault told me. "The call went out from the national Democratic party to take her down. Some of the Democrats who worked with her previously took their marching orders." Gridlock ensued. Bipartisan comity was no more.

Anybody who had the opportunity to score political points against Palin took a shot. The Alaska judicial council, a body that recommends jurists to the governor, forced the pro-life Palin to appoint a pro-choice judge to the state supreme court. The legislature rejected Palin's choice for state attorney general. The governor and the legislature fought protracted battles over the replacement for Democratic state senator Kim Elton (appointed to the Obama administration) and stimulus money from the federal government. Civility with the legislature became untenable. John Coale, the Washington, D.C.-based Democratic lawyer who set up Palin's political action committee and legal defense fund, told me, "Something had to change."

Read the whole thing. It's worth it.

Read: Coming Soon

Some of my very favorite authors:

Rain Gods by James Lee Burke circa July 13. Just watched Electric Mist over the weekend, based on Burke's In the Electric Mist with the Confederate Dead. Hate to say it, but I wasn't crazy about Tommy Lee's portrayal. Best Burke-based movie I've seen starred Alec Baldwin(?) and Eric Roberts. Just my opinion.

The Defector by Daniel Silva on July 20 or so. This one is purportedly a sequel to Moscow Rules and also features Israeli operative/art restorer Gabriel Allon.

Also on July 20 comes Fire and Ice, the newest entry in the Joanna Brady series, the 14th. Rumor has it that it will also involve JA Jance's other sleuth, JP Beaumont.

South of Broad by Pat Conroy sometime in August. Excited about this one, his first in many years. To give you an idea, I once forced the family into vacationing on Daufuskie Island, SC, setting of The Water is Wide, or Conrack in the film version with Jon Voight. The daughter got food poisoning, insists she was cured by a ghostly witchy woman in a nightmare, and has never let me live it down.

Finally, one to keep an eye out for in August is Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman. It's by Jon Krakauer who's written some good stuff. My favorite: Into Thin Air.

A Quote for Today

Right intention, transparency, and the search for positive results are mutually compatible and must never be detached from one another. If love is wise, it can find ways of working in accordance with provident and just expediency, as is illustrated in a significant way by much of the experience of credit unions.

from Charity in Truth by Pope Benedict

Another Quarter Heard From

Yesterday the Pope weighed in on the economic morass. On Fox Business, the encyclical was treated as if it inveighed against capitalism. Not true. Read the text. The Holy Father goes out of his way to establish that markets in and of themselves are not bad things. It is the lack of ethics, according to the prelate, which is the problem. I ask you, what is wrong with the head of a Church urging that we exercise morality in our commercial dealings? Nothing. It was an eminently reasonable argument. Reaction to it does expose the edges of a pervasive, usually hidden, prejudice against Catholicism that exists in many elite circles.

Meanderings: There ain't no winnin'

I started my day with a call to United Healthcare which runs the medical plan at my company.

"Hey," I said, "I'm calling because there's got to be some mistake here. I went for my annual Gyn exam, and it cost me six hundred dollars."

"It sure does sound like there's something off." the lady on the other end replies.

"Well, when I got to the doctor," I tell her, "I found out my doctor doesn't take your insurance. But heck, I'm really quite attached to her, so I figured I'd pay out of pocket. But then she sent me for a mammogram which was in network, but I get a bill from the hospital. So I figure that's that. But it's not, 'cause then I get another bill from the guy who read the mammogram."

"Did the hospital charge you the agreed upon amount?" she asks.

"What's that?"

"95 dollars. And I see the radiologist charged 54. But don't worry because it all goes to your 300 dollar deductible."

"Okay, but I'm not finished. Then I get a bill for 142 dollars for my pap smear. Lady, I am 51 years old. In all my life, I've never paid more than 25 dollars for a pap smear. I thought it was like a rule that a yearly mammogram and pap smear was part of a health insurance policy. You know, all that bullshit about preventative medicine and all. Are you telling me that 142 dollars is the discount price you negotiated? We're not talking about brain surgery here, you know."

"Well, that's the policy your company arranged. And as I said, it does go toward the deductible." Now she's not sounding quite as nice. You might even say she sounds a bit exasperated.

"All right," I counter. "That's why I sent in an out of network claim for the doctor."

"Oh, that's the one for 200 dollars. We were missing some information. Let me transfer you to someone who can help you with that."

My next customer service rep is Christina. "Oh," she tells me, "There was some information missing."

"What was missing?" I ask.

"The doctor's name, address..."

"Wait a minute, I attached her pre-printed receipt as instructed."

"Well, we need the codes."

"Ma'am, it was all on the receipt. I saw it."

"Was the the doctor's taxpayer ID on the receipt?" Christina's getting a little defensive. "We need it to pay the claim."

"Lady," now I'm losing it, " You don't need her number. You have to pay me, and you have my number."

"It's a federal law."

"It's federal law that you need her tax id to pay me? Okay, what do I need to do? After all, I should satisfy the 400 dollar out of network deductible and get some money back."

"Oh no," she informs me, "that's a separate deductible. You have to spend 400 dollars with the out of network doctor."

" You gotta be kidding. Well, I'm going to complain to my company. Better yet, I'm going to write to your CEO. Scams like this are exactly why we are going to wind up with Obamacare. And you know what, Christina you ain't gonna have a job."

The moral of the story: check your insurance before you go to the doctor.

My morning entertainment done, I spend the rest of my day off attempting to quit smoking. Of course, since I'm trying to quit for the umpteenth time, I smoke double. Here's a primer. Before the bleeding heart Democrats got in power, I paid 2.69 for a pack of cigarettes. Today, thanks to them and the other misbegotten offspring of randomly copulating camels who call themselves the Florida legislature, I pay $5.35. Let me 'splain. At a pack a day, that comes out roughly to $160.00 a month. At two packs, that's $320.00 So at my house that translates to about $600.00 a month. Since I can't afford that, but I can't quit, I am freaking.

But they don't care about me. Even worse the prating hypocrite Dems don't care about the poor. It is the poor who smoke. These cigarette increases represent what is surely the most regressive tax ever passed. What was that Mr. Obama about not raising taxes on those earning less than 200 thou? Unfuckingbelievable.

I console myself. As I was on the beach at Manatee County over the weekend, where I go because the upscale elitists who run Sarasota want the beach all to their nonsmoking selves, I was struck by a thought. It is an observation I first made as I sat in the waiting room at the hospital where my mother was dying and where smoking was not allowed on the grounds of the entire campus. If there were ever a time for a cigarette.... I was looking at the photos of the ladies who run the hospital, each more porcine than the other, as if vying for the Petunia Pig award.

Well, the beach yesterday was full of fat, white flesh. And they're coming for you next, baby. And you know what, I ain't gonna give a damn. What was that Shirley Jackson story? See ya.

Monday Briefs

The Honduras controversy continues. Despite the threats of real economic harm, the interim Honduran government has sent the OAS packing. They also sent the once and would be future President Zelayas packing again. Read about it here.

There is a second controversy here, namely the domestic response to our government's strident denunciations. Perhaps taking their cue from the numbers of Hondurans who have written the media in support of the military's actions, some major names have taken up the cudgels. First out of the lists is Patrick Buchanan who points out in addition to the hypocrisy of the OAS that there is something wrong when we find ourselves with such bedfellows as Hugo Chavez, the ruling military junta in Cuba, and Nicaragua's Ortega. Additional voices against the Obamian condemnations include Michelle Malkin and Mary Anastasia O'Grady here.

This week saw the dollar a pack increase for cigarettes imposed by the Florida Legislature. Sarasota Herald Tribune article here. The Herald also published a spot on column by Tom Lyons about the whole situation, most notably to me- how the move amounts to a shakedown of smokers.

Finally, in the once a teacher, always a teacher department. Bill O'Reilly complains of the hackneyed words and phrases that have taken over our public discourse. I say, "Keep on truckin', Bill!"

The Death of My America

It seems fitting somehow that this year there is no barbeque, no celebration around here, for I cannot remember a time when I have been so pessimistic. I was brought up to love this country. To my child eyes, it was a magical place, a place of wonder, of perfection even, a ready contrast to the long night of repression already falling on the country of my fathers.

The United States stood as a beacon of freedom and opportunity. I watched my parents, their friends, arrive with barely the clothes on their backs, wash dishes, bus tables, work in factories, start little businesses and rise- move out to the suburbs, send their children to college, and in essence achieve the American Dream. There was no affirmative action for them. No one provided scholarships to Yale or Harvard, which wouldn't have let them mow the lawn let alone enter their hallowed halls- no matter what intelligence or ability their maker had given them. No, they achieved what they did through the sweat of their brow, by dint of countless hours of work and careful use of their resources.

Although I long ago realized that my country is not faultless, I have never wavered in my belief that the United States represents the best that the government of men has to offer. So it is with a heavy heart that I see the country in which I grew up evaporating before my eyes. We grovel in front of those who would hurt us, apologize where no apology is required, align ourselves with the forces of repression in some cases and kowtow in others. Our Congress is pestilential, awash in a tide of corruption practiced with impunity; our ship of state is navigated by fools and scoundrels.

Soon we are to be told what we can ingest, what we can drive, when we can sell our homes. All of these fiats will be enforced with all the might and power, through legislation and tax policy, of the government. Candidate Obama once complained of the Constitution that it was a document of negatives when it came to the powers of the government, as if it were a failing on the part of the founding fathers and not an intentional omission. Those far-sighted men did not offer supplemental income, tuition, health insurance. They promised nothing but life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. One can only imagine what they would think of the nonsmoking, bran-eating, seatbelt wearing, New York Times reading public potentates who would decree how the rest of us should live.

On the Horns of a Honduran Dilemma

Yesterday practically dawned with news that the military in Honduras had staged a bloodless coup and exiled President Manuel Zelaya. Within 24 hours, the denunciations of the same came fast and furious. Demands for the deposed president's reinstatement came from the US, UN, and Venezuela among others, including ironically the OAS, that defender of democracy which just voted to reinstate an illegitimate regime in Cuba which has never been elected in a fair and open plebiscite, which has kept the jackboot solidly balanced on the Cuban population for half a century. It seems pretty obvious that the equation is "democratically elected, good; military coup, bad... although some coups are more equal than others."

But there are some pesky details here. It seems that Honduran Presidents are limited to a single term. Mr. Zelaya, who was on his way out, took a page from the Chavez playbook and attempted to hold a referendum to change the law. Unfortunately for Mr. Zelaya, the Honduran Supreme Court went against him. The military informed him that they would not support him. Undaunted, the once and wouldbe future president, proceeded with plans to hold the referendum anyway. It was this process the military stopped.

I cannot blame them. They have witnessed in Venezuela, somewhat in Bolivia, how antidemocratic forces have learned to use the machinery of democracy to quash it. Even as Hugo Chavez threatened to invade Honduras, crowds marched in Caracas in an attempt to save the lone opposition media voice. It is in order to avoid this fate, the military acted.

And how did they proceed after the coup? They announced that the elections scheduled for January would proceed. The leader of congress assumed the presidency. The former president was deposited in Costa Rica. The ruling of the Supreme Court upheld. And what should they have done? Stood idly by while Zelaya flouted the Supreme Court? The military? Congress? His own party? Who are we to demand that Zelaya be returned? Talk about American arrogance.

The lesson to be learned here is how the left has subverted the process. Chavez complained that you can't "change the rules of the game." The game is that you get yourself elected, then change the precise rules that allowed you to gain power with a witches brew of electoral machination, exercise of executive power, the threat of force, and most importantly the appearance of democracy.

I suggest that Mr Obama begin work on a new apology, one to the Honduran people for demanding they go meekly into night. If only the administration had shown the same reticence to get involved that they demonstrated toward Iran. Incredible.