President Eisenhower Comment in Farewell Address

As we peer into society's future, we must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without asking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow. -President Eisenhower, Farewell Address

Of course, the Farewell Address is far better known for its reference to a military industrial complex, but I think this statement from the moderate to conservative President deserves attention as well. David Stokes (January 16, 2011) notes that when he began his first term in 1953, the national debt was 260 billion dollars. By the time he died in 1969, it had grown to 353 billion, the peak of the Vietnam War. Today, of course, the debt is over 14 Trillion Dollars.

One million seconds is about 11 1/2 days. A billion seconds is32 years. A trillion seconds is 32,000 years.

I hope it does not take the political class a trillion seconds to figure out how much trouble they have gotten us into.

Pondering Mental Illness in the Light of Arizona Shootings

An article Mona Charen (January 14, 2011) suggests that Americans need to re-consider treatment of the mentally ill in light of the shootings in Tucson, Arizona. She refers to Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, writing with a combination of compassion for the mentally ill and concern for the general public. He has analyzed the failure of our system for dealing with mental illness in The Insanity Offense: How America's Failure to Treat the Seriously Mentally Ill Endangers Its Citizens. She thinks anyone who is serious about preventing the next Tucson massacre should read this book.

In 1955, when the U.S. population stood at 164 million, 558,000 people were living in mental institutions. Over the course of the next 30 years, nearly all would be released as deinstitutionalization swept the nation. The mental hospitals were closed, leaving former residents to make do on the streets and (increasingly) in the prisons. I want to stress that today, roughly 4 million Americans suffer from serious mental illnesses and only about 1 percent of them, 40,000 individuals, are violent. Although that is a lot of people, we should not be afraid of every mentally ill person. 

He suggests that deinstitutionalization began not as a money-saving measure but as an idea. Psychiatrists like Thomas Szasz ("The Myth of Mental Illness") and sociologists like Erving Goffman ("Asylums") argued that symptoms of mental illness like raving, hearing voices, and paranoia were actually responses to being institutionalized. Asylums, claimed lawyer Bruce Ennis, were places "where sick people get sicker and sane people go mad." Szasz even denied that mental illness was real, preferring to see inmates as nonconformists.

Such were the '60s. Charen suggests that maybe now, when so many say they want bipartisanship, Democrats and Republicans can summon the humility to recognize that this disaster was a bipartisan one. Politicians of both parties agreed that subjecting people to psychiatric treatment against their will was immoral and un-American. The result was that a flood of deeply impaired human beings was loosed on American society. Numerous studies have found that about one-third of homeless men and two-thirds of homeless women have serious mental illnesses. Among the "hardcore homeless" or "permanent street dwellers," close to 100 percent are mentally ill.

As Charen points out, on the streets, the homeless have been granted the freedom to be assaulted, to "sleep under bridges," as Anatole France once mocked in another context, to freeze to death, to be robbed and raped, to be lit on fire, and killed. They rummage through trash bins for food and park their filthy shopping carts under highways.

Autonomy and individual liberty are cherished ideals -- achievements of Western civilization. But there can be no true autonomy for those with unsound minds. To insist upon the right of the mentally ill to refuse treatment is cruelty masquerading as respect.

Workable alternatives are available. Torrey recommends a national database that would track the most problematic patients, alerting emergency-room physicians and gun sellers. Programs to force compliance with treatment by withholding SSI payments, for example, or on pain of imprisonment, have been effective. Torrey's book overflows with common sense reforms.

The best that we could do to honor the memories of Christina Taylor Green and the other Tucson victims would be to address our shameful and disastrous mental health policies.

Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Monday, Jan. 17, 2011

One of the things I have done for the past several years is that on or around Martin Luther King Jr. Day, I have simply read the text of his famous "I Have a Dream" speech. Whenever I read it, I am reminded of the core vision of Dr. King, one I shared I time, even from my little town of Austin, MN., and in opposition to my father. When I think of those days, I think of how far this nation has come in respecting the rights and dignity of others, and of course, how much better can be at it. For ease of reflection, here is the text of the speech.
I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.
But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. So we have come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.
In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this check — a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quick sands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.
It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.
But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.
We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.
As we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied, as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating "For Whites Only". We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.
I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.
Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.
I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.
This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring."
And if America is to be a great nation this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!
Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!
Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California!
But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia!
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee!
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.
And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Pondering Arizona Shooting January 2011

Jared Lee Loughner has gotten a name for himself. Rachel Alexander (January 10, 2011) has an article in which we learn some important things about this young man. A former high school classmate of Loughner has described him as “…left wing, quite liberal...a pot head and into rock, like Hendrix, The Doors, Anti-Flag.” Loughner’s list of favorite books on his MySpace page includes The Communist Manifesto, Hitler’s Mein Kampf, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Two YouTube videos he posted include numerous rants about the government and mind control, and reveal he does not believe in God. In one video he states, “No! I won’t trust in God!” Another of his 'favorite' videos shows a masked man burning the American flag. He seems to believe in mind control and “conscience dreaming.” He was convinced he would become the treasurer of a new currency. Most likely the real story is that Loughner is a seriously disturbed individual who fits the profile of a psychopath and was motivated by a number of factors. Since her article, we have discovered that he has no political agenda.

Further, we do not know why Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was the focus. I have not seen much about this in the press yet, but she was a faithful, practicing Jew. Given that the shooter liked Hitler’s book, given a connection with “American Renaissance,” which appears to have some anti-Jewish sentiments, we cannot rule out this dimension of the attack.

Of course, this story will bring out acts of heroism. The people who eventually took down Jared were courageous, of course. Those who responded with emergency procedures on the ground were heroic in their way. The surgeons stepped up with Congresswoman. I am confident that over time, the community and families will be “overwhelmed” by an outpouring of love, care, and compassion. In any tragedy or disaster, it seems to inspire humanity at its best.

Understandably, much focus has been on the member of Congress involved, but six people have died, including a federal judge and a nine-year-old girl, taken to this event to see how government works. Others have been injured. The lives of people have been dramatically changed. What was, and still is, needed is time to grieve and reflect upon what happened. President Obama got it right. He said the nation remains "grieving and in shock" over the shooting of 20 people in Arizona over the weekend, the courage shown by people who ran into the line of fire "speaks to the best of America." John Boehner got it right. He suspended House of Representatives work. Due to the death of the Congressowman’s aide, he had the flags flying at half-mast. He focused on grieving the loss of those taken from us. He then said, “An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serves. Such acts of violence have no place in our society.” He referred to her faith by encouraging members of Congress on the Sabbath. He concluded: “Public service is a high honor. But these tragic events remind us that all of us, in our roles in service to our fellow citizens, comes with a risk. This inhuman act should not, and will not, deter us from our calling to represent our constituents and to fulfill our oaths of office. No act, no matter how heinous, must be allowed to stop us from our duty. " Sarah Palin also got it right. “My sincere condolences are offered to the family of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the other victims of today's tragic shooting in Arizona. On behalf of Todd and my family, we all pray for the victims and their families, and for peace and justice.” One would think that we as a nation could stay close to this type of experience for at least a little while. 

Sadly, some people have sought political advantage, and they did so quickly. Already, many such original statements seem to be withdrawing, but the divisive nature of the attempts to place the shooter in a political context was not only pre-mature, but of a questionable moral character.

One quite obvious example the Democrat Sheriff of Pima County, Clarence Dupnik, who sought to advance his political views by using this tragedy to tarnish his political opposition. He admits that what he shares is just his opinion. Yet, as a sheriff, he has a responsibility to calm the public and stick to facts. Yet, in doing so, he copies Bill Clinton, who sought to tarnish his political opposition on conservative talk radio after the Oklahoma bombing. The sheriff is a partisan who has long fought with conservatives over enforcing illegal immigration laws, implied Saturday that the actions of Loughner were akin to Arizona’s stance on SB 1070 and illegal immigration. "We have become the capital, the mecca for prejudice and bigotry," Dupnik told reporters. He also said some of the anti-government sentiments in the media might have influenced Loughner. Other Left-wing groups like the Huffington Post blamed Sarah Palin, Tea Parties, and the Second Amendment supporters. Yet, everything we know about the shooter suggests an opposite set of ideas, to the extent he had them, to these political ideas. Further, military images abound in political discourse. It was not hard to find Sarah Palin using the image of “targeting” members of Congress for defeat in the past election. The fact that Arizona Democrat Congressman Harry Mitchell ran a campaign ad against JD Hayworth in a 2006 campaign featuring Hayworth in the crosshairs of a rifle does not matter to these persons. The fact that the Democrat Leadership Council featured a similar graphics did not matter. To my knowledge, Congresswoman Giffords complained about the “targeted” map, but did not have the same complaint about her own party’s “targeting.” Jim Winkler of the Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church joined this chorus, calling for an end to “vicious language in political discourse, even metaphorically.” He also used the occasion to urge strict gun control legislation. The New York Times is also using this tragedy in order to promote its liberal agenda and to seek to silence opposing voices. Thus, Timothy Egan, as part of the Opinionator section, “Tombstone Politics,” (January 9, 2011), is quite willing to say that metaphors used in public political debate encourage the type of horrible behavior that Jared exhibited. He then lists examples, all from the conservative position, of course. What I find instructive here is that Egan has an objective, namely, that conservative voices be silent. Had he desired to truly wanted civil public discourse, he would have pointed to the many examples from the political Left as well, including just a few years ago a book and movie about how to assassinate President George W. Bush. Egan also, of course, adds his voice to gun control.

It says a great deal, I think, about the person making such charges. They desperately want the charges to be true. More than that, they want to paint their political opposition as evil, deserving of being shut up, rather than as a political opposition with whom you need to make rational arguments. My suspicion is that the sheriff, the Huffington Post, Jim Winkler, The New York Times, and others on the Left, are willing to do anything, even smearing the opposition with responsibility for such an act, in order to advance their own political agenda. I might go so far as to say that the willingness to go this far, using a tragedy like this for political gain, reveals an intense hatred of any opposition to their agenda. Thus, Sarah Palin is clearly “targeted” and “in the crosshairs” of the political Left of this country to the point that they are quite willing, quickly, to place the actions of this disturbed individual at the feet of Sarah. If anything, such charges reveal the rather intense hatred that the political Left has of Sarah, the tea party, and the tradition of gun ownership in this country.

I would invite any reader to explore the history of political discourse in this country. It has never been civil. I am not opposed to civility, of course, and I seek to practice it. I want this article to exhibit it. Yet, vigorous public debate is necessary for a democracy to work. Yes, political discourse is heated at times. I would prefer that people lose all analogies of their opposition to Hitler, for example, but do not want the power to stop it. I do not want someone else to have the power to stop it.

Here is the problem. All efforts to place political discourse into question because of what occurred in Arizona this week are premature. In particular, with what we know so far, the efforts of the political Left ignore facts on the ground concerning Jared’s political leaning. Jared was scoping out this Congresswoman since 2007, long before Sarah Palin was on the scene. He was clearly unstable. One can hope that Carol Platt Liebau (January 10, 2011) is right when she says that Americans have become skeptical of cynical efforts to stigmatize entire ideologies based only on the actions of lone, clearly deranged criminals.

Pondering Islam: Who is hijacking Whom?

Jonah Goldberg (January 7, 2011) says that for years we have been hearing about how the peaceful religion of Islam has been hijacked by extremists. What if it is the other way around? Worse, what if the peaceful hijackers are losing their bid to take over the religion? He points to the example of what occurred in Pakistan recently. Salman Taseer, a popular Pakistani governor, was assassinated early in January of 2011 because he was critical of Pakistan's blasphemy law. Specifically, Taseer was supportive of a Christian woman, Asia Bibi, who has been sentenced to death for "insulting Muhammad." Bibi had offered some fellow farm laborers some water. They refused to drink it because Christian hands apparently make water unclean. An argument followed. She defended her faith, which they took as synonymous with attacking theirs. Later, she says, a mob of her accusers raped her. Naturally, a Pakistani judge sentenced her to hang for blasphemy. And Governor Taseer, who bravely visited her and sympathized with her plight, had 40 bullets pumped into him by one of his own bodyguards. "Salmaan Taseer is a blasphemer and this is the punishment for a blasphemer," Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri said to the television cameras even as he was being arrested. The conclusion Goldberg reaches is that it is hard to say who is the hijacker and who is the hijackee. After all, Taseer the moderate was a prominent politician, Qadri a mere bodyguard. Goldberg’s point, of course, is that the moderate Taseer who was trying to change the status of quo for the punishment in an Islamic State of one who “blasphemes” Islam by adhering to another faith. This example seems to show that “moderates” are trying to “hijack” an extremist  religion. In fact, a group of more than 500 leading Muslim scholars, representing what the Associated Press describes a "moderate school of Islam" and the British Guardian calls the "mainstream religious organizations" in Pakistan not only celebrated the murder, but also warned that no Muslim should mourn Taseer's murder or pray for him.