AN OLD NEWNESS
> By Thomas Sowell
> Tuesday, April 29, 2008
>
> Many years ago, a great hitter named Paul Waner was nearing the end of
> his long career. He entered a ballgame with 2,999 hits -- one hit away
> from the landmark total of 3,000, which so many hitters want to reach,
> but which relatively few actually do reach.
>
> Waner hit a ball that the fielder did not handle cleanly but the
> official scorer called it a hit, making it Waner's 3,000th. Paul Waner
> then sent word to the official scorer that he did not want that
> questionable hit to be the one that put him over the top.
>
> The official scorer reversed himself and called it an error. Later
> Paul Waner got a clean hit for number 3,000.
>
> What reminded me of this is the great fervor that many seem to feel
> over the prospect of the first black President of the United States .
>
> No doubt it is only a matter of time before there is a black
> president, just as it was only a matter of time before Paul Waner got
> his 3,000th hit. The issue is whether we want to reach that landmark
> so badly that we are willing to overlook how questionably that
> landmark is reached.
>
> Paul Waner had too much pride to accept a scratch hit. Choosing a
> President of the United States is a lot more momentous than a
> baseball record. We the voters need to have far more concern about who
> we put in that office that holds the destiny of a nation and of
> generations yet unborn.
>
> There is no reason why someone as arrogant, foolishly clever and
> ultimately dangerous as Barack Obama should become president --
> especially not at a time when the threa t of international terrorists
> with nuclear weapons looms over 300 million Americans.
>
> Many people seem to regard elections as occasions for venting
> emotions, like cheering for your favorite team or choosing a
> Homecoming Queen.
>
> The three leading candidates for their party's nomination are being
> discussed in terms of their demographics -- race, sex and age -- as if
> that is what the job is about.
>
> One of the painful aspects of studying great catastrophes of the past
> is discovering how many times people were preoccupied with
> trivialities when they were teetering on the edge of doom. The
> demographics of the presidency are far less important than the
> momentous weight of responsibility that office carries.
>
> Just the power to nominate federal judges to trial courts and
> appellate courts across the country, including the Supreme Court, can
> have an enormous impact for decades to come. There is no point feeling
> outraged by things done by federal judges, if you vote on t he basis
> of emotion for those who appoint them.
>
> Barack Obama has already indicated that he wants judges who make
> social policy instead of just applying the law. He has already tried
> to stop young violent criminals from being tried as adults.
>
> Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new
> things -- using the mantra of "change" endlessly -- the cold fact is
> that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight
> out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy
> is straight out of the 1930s.
>
> Protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government
> spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on
> people who are productive and subsidizing those who are not -- all
> this is a re-run of the 1960s.
>
> We paid a terrible price for such 1960s notions in the years that
> followed, in the form of soaring crime rates, double-digit inflation
> and double-digit unemployment. During the 1960s, ghet t oes across the
> countries were ravaged by riots from which many have not fully
> recovered to this day.
>
> The violence and destruction were concentrated not where there was the
> greatest poverty or injustice but where there were the most liberal
> politicians, promoting grievances and hamstringing the police.
>
> Internationally, the approach that Senator Obama proposes -- including
> the media magic of meetings between heads of state -- was tried during
> the 1930s. That approach, in the name of peace, is what led to the
> most catastrophic war in human history.
>
> Everything seems new to those too young to remember the old and too
> ignorant of history to have heard about it.
>
> Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author
> of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
> Hoover institute = right wing think-tank at Stanford U.
Gee, a partisan piece on Obama from a Republican? Who woulda thought? Not only is he a conservative, so his opinions are not surprising, he's also wrong. There have been 43 Presidents, but only 27 men who have amassed 3,000 hits. So the 3,000 hit mark is more momentous. Everyone has an right to an opinion...Yes I was too young to know/history only repeats itself regardless to who's in control......Blessings Yahoo |
