The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for December 23rd, 2008

Good News: Obama’s Staff Declares Themselves Innocent in Blago Probe – Elite Media Says That’s Good Enough for Us – UPDATED

Posted by iusbvision on December 23, 2008

Media Still Laughingly in the Tank for Obama

Where are all the tough comments and slanted questions begging the question against a self serving report like the one issued by the Obama campaign clearing itself of any wrongdoing in regards to bribes for Senate seats? What would the reaction be if Republicans published a similar report?

National Review said it before I did, but come on, tell me that this thought didn’t enter your mind the moment you heard it:

Case Closed by Peter Kirsanow

Today’s AP story about Obama’s internal review of his staff’s contacts with Blagojevich is headlined as follows:

“Biden: Report to Clear Obama Aides in Gov. Probe.”

Well that settles it. Why didn’t the Bush administration commission these kinds of reports? I recognize Biden’s got way more credibility and gravitas than Cheney, but c’mon.

Obviously massive sarcasm there, but sarcasm with a point. HERE is the report for all that it is worth. It is basically a five page PDF that says “yup we are innocent”.

Hotair.com has a more interesting analysis questioning the accuracy of this report HERE. It is well worth the read.

UPDATE: Looks like Politico.com is not buying Obama’s report – details HERE and HERE.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Journalism Is Dead, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Profiles in Stupid: California Court Shuts Down “Good Samaritan Law”

Posted by iusbvision on December 23, 2008

The “good samaritan law”. Most of us have heard of it. It means that if you see a terrible accident or a medical emergency you may take “reasonable action” to help preserve life and limb without fear of being sued for not being able to give top notch medical care in the middle of a crisis.

In most states the good samaritan law is written in statute, but has always been considered a part of “equity law”. That means that judges would protect such people who acted reasonably in the interests of justice.

In California this is no more. A good samaritan who pulled a crash victim out of a likely burning car can be successfully sued for damages an idiotic California court has ruled:

The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a young woman who pulled a co-worker from a crashed vehicle isn’t immune from civil liability because the care she rendered wasn’t medical.

The divided high court appeared to signal that rescue efforts are the responsibility of trained professionals. It was also thought to be the first ruling by the court that someone who intervened in an accident in good faith could be sued.

Lisa Torti of Northridge allegedly worsened the injuries suffered by Alexandra Van Horn by yanking her “like a rag doll” from the wrecked car on Topanga Canyon Boulevard.

Torti now faces possible liability for injuries suffered by Van Horn, a fellow department store cosmetician who was rendered a paraplegic in the accident that ended a night of Halloween revelry in 2004.

Hotair.com comments:

The court has sent a signal to the people of California: don’t get involved. If someone’s drowning, don’t jump in the lake and save them. If someone’s trapped in a car that’s about to explode, sit there and watch the show. Just make a phone call, and who cares that it might be several minutes before an EMS team can make it to the scene? If you sit on your hands, no one can sue you for all you’re worth.

Now if the woman pulled the victim out in a state of panic or acted carelessly then the care given was “not reasonable” and she should pay, which may be the case, but to take the “good samaritan” rule and trash it goes beyond all good sense and is just plain stupid.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Health Law, Stuck on Stupid | Leave a Comment »

Canada Shutting Down Free Speech Again

Posted by iusbvision on December 23, 2008

This time it is courts declaring bloggers guilty of  “libel” for merely linking to published news stories and commenting on them as almost every blogger in the world does.

Regular readers of the IUSB Vision may remember that in these “Canadian Civil Rights Tribunals” they are calling libel and rights violations against people who say politically incorrect things and they made it clear that “truth was no defense”. Until recently everyone charges by these little Canadian star chambers has been found “guilty”. Famed writer Mark Steyn recently was the first to beat such a claim but likely only because in createrd international outrage at Canada’s misconduct.

Recently the American Political Science Association (APSA) proposed a resolution against Canadian censorship.

The far left has gotten their way in Canada to a much larger degree than here in the United States.  They dare call themselves liberals when truly, there is nothing liberal about them.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Good News: Obama’s New Science Advisor is One of Those “Population Control” Nut Cases

Posted by iusbvision on December 23, 2008

From our friends at National Review:

Obama’s Science Advisor

It looks like president-elect Obama will name John P. Holdren as his science advisor. Holdren is a professor of environmental policy at Harvard and former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. As Ron Bailey points out, he has been an activist on the ecological left and no friend of free markets. Perhaps more striking is his activism well beyond his own academic specialty, arguing, for instance, that scientists have a responsibility to advance the cause of the elimination of all nuclear weapons and seeking controls on population growth. And he didn’t say all this in the 1970s either—have a good look at the speech he delivered when he assumed the leadership of the AAAS in 2006. It describes a fundamentally activist liberal mentality about the very purpose of science and its place in our kind of society. My favorite part of that speech is his call for ending population growth which, in the published text of the speech, is accompanied by this footnote:

This was the key insight in Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb (Ballantine, New York, 1968), as well as one of those in Harrison Brown’s prescient earlier book, The Challenge of Man’s Future (Viking, New York, 1954). The elementary but discomfiting truth of it may account for the vast amount of ink, paper, and angry energy that has been expended trying in vain to refute it.

The Population Bomb was the book in which Ehrlich predicted that “in the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death,” because all the world’s resources were running out while population was growing out of control, and there was simply no way we could sustain our civilization at modern levels of consumption and growth. Just about every one of the book’s predictions has proven wrong, and its empirical claims and methods have not held up well under later scholarly scrutiny. It certainly made a useful political point for the left, though.

I wonder if all those who complained about the supposed “politicization of science” by the Bush administration will raise worries about Holdren…don’t you?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzNlODRkYjk3MzU3MmJjNTRmYTg2NmU3Zjg4ZWE5NDQ=

Posted in Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

Do Attempts by Academia’s Nutty Left to Find Racism Under Every Stone Actually Create Real Racism?

Posted by iusbvision on December 23, 2008

Do attempts by academia’s nutty left to find racism under every stone actually create real racism? This is the question explored by Dr. Adams in his latest article. IUPUI declared that a student was a racist because he was reading a book that celebrated the defeat of Klan. To the IUPUI AAO the student was guilty because he was white and that was all the evidence they needed. There are also many documented “racist incidents” that when investigated, were actually performed by nutty left professors or students so they could “keep racism alive” as an issue for them to exploit.

To people with such radical ideologies, they NEED racism alive and well to employ the Hegelian Dialectic; just as when 88 professors at Duke University insisted that the three men on the Lacrosse Team had to be guilty of raping a poor black girl, because after all they were rich, white and male. You see for people mired in such a dialectic, they cannot see outside of the hoax.

The following is one of the most brilliant yet provocative columns I have encountered in some time and it has great educational value. The liberals that Dr. Adams is referring to are not your garden variety liberals or traditional classic liberals, but rather the neo-marxist ridiculous ones that are commonplace on the college campus today. I stopped referring to them as liberals a long time ago because genuinely, there is nothing liberal about them. They have become manipulative leftists and often bitter ones at that. – editor

Primary and Secondary Racism
Dr. Mike S. Adams
Monday, December 22, 2008

Ann Coulter was right when she said the essence of being a liberal is having one set of rules for oneself and an entirely different set of rules for other people. Similarly, it could be asserted that the essence of liberal arts education is developing one set of theories that apply only to other people. Few better examples can be found than in the case of labeling theory, which derives from the pseudo-science of sociology.

Frank Tannenbaum had a number of valid points when, in the 1930s, he established some basic premises of labeling theory. He argued that, as a juvenile, everyone engages in some form of delinquent behavior. And he correctly pointed out that not everyone who engages in delinquency is caught and, therefore, labeled “delinquent.”

Tannenbaum was also correct in saying that parents, teachers, and peers sometimes over-react to juveniles caught in an act of delinquency. He was again on firm ground in asserting that these occasional over-reactions could actually produce more delinquency.

Surely, those who are labeled delinquent are less likely to be invited to associate with those who haven’t. And ostracism from conformists can lead to delinquent associations where the strengthening of deviant tendencies can occur.

Writing just a few years after Tannenbaum, Edwin Lemert did a lot to shape labeling theory into its present form. It is a form popular with progressives everywhere.

Lemert argued that people can engage in delinquency for any number of biological, sociological, or psychological reasons. Delinquency produced by any of these broad (categories of) factors is called “primary deviance.” But Lemert’s real contribution to various progressive causes (and socialist policies) flows from his explanation of a form of delinquency known as “secondary deviance.”

Lemert believed that if an individual was caught in an act of primary deviance, he was likely to be placed under greater subsequent scrutiny by parents, teachers, and various agents of social control. This, of course, meant the child was more likely to be caught engaging in delinquency again. Adopting Lemert’s premises, it is easy to understand how a vicious cycle could develop.

At some point, of course, the child might internalize the notion that he is a “deviant,” a “delinquent,” or just generally “bad.” This could lead to higher rates of delinquency. When it does, according to Lemert, “secondary deviance” has occurred. Many of us have come to dub this process, perhaps somewhat simplistically, as the “self-fulfilling prophecy.”

Notions such as “secondary deviance” and “self-fulfilling prophecy” have done much to undermine the integrity of public education in this country. If you learned to read in first grade in the 1970s, you remember the “yellowbirds,” “redbirds,” and “bluebirds” reading groups. Labeling theorists thought it would be better to call a child a “yellowbird” than to call him “slow.”

(Author’s Note: I was a “yellowbird” in first grade and we all knew we were slow. We just contented ourselves with beating up the “bluebirds” during recess. Fortunately, due to the kindness of my favorite teacher Elsie Stephenson, I eventually became a “redbird.”).

Regrettably, all of this emphasis on self-esteem and negative labeling has resulted in many schools doing away with letter grades altogether. And when the kids play games at recess they are often forbidden from keeping score. They don’t want anyone to suffer the emotional trauma that results from being labeled a “loser” – even if for a day.

Liberal progressives have spent years taking a theory from sociology and applying it increasingly to the field of education. These progressives have shown a clear interest in the question of whether negative labels (e.g., “criminal,” “dumb”) are more frequently applied to blacks and other historically victimized groups.

But, curiously, one area of research remains unexplored: What impact does labeling someone a “racist” have on his self-image – and his propensity for future acts of racism?

Frank Tannenbaum, if he were alive today, might argue that everyone engages in some form of racist behavior. And he might point out that not everyone who engages in racism is caught and labeled “racist.”

Tannenbaum might also say that parents, teachers, and peers sometimes over-react to juveniles caught in an act of racial insensitivity. He would be on firm ground in asserting that these occasional over-reactions could actually produce more racial insensitivity.

Surely, those who are labeled “racist” are less likely to be invited to associate with those who haven’t. And ostracism from non-racists can lead to racist associations where the strengthening of racist tendencies can occur.

Lemert might agree that people can engage in racism for any number of biological, sociological, or psychological reasons. Racism produced by any of these broad (categories of) factors could be called “primary racism.”

Lemert might also agree that if an individual is caught in an act of primary racism, he is likely to be placed under greater subsequent scrutiny by parents, teachers, and various agents of social control. This, of course, means the child is more likely to be caught engaging in racial insensitivity again. Adopting Lemert’s premises, it is easy to understand how a vicious cycle could develop.

At some point, of course, the child might internalize the notion that he is a “racist” or just generally “bigoted.” This could lead to higher rates of bigotry. When it does, one might say that “secondary racism” has occurred. Many of us might call this a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”

We all know that liberals often manufacture cases of racism in order to keep liberalism alive. But we need more research in the pseudo-science of sociology in order to determine how reckless accusations of racism are actually creating more real racism in America. The research can be used to test whether liberals really believe in labeling theory and whether they are willing to apply it to their own conduct.

If liberals really do believe in labeling theory, they should reconsider their own careless accusations of racism. If not, they should fess up, assign grades, and let children keep score during recess.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Other Links | Leave a Comment »

FRAUD: Minnesota Senate Race Being Stolen

Posted by iusbvision on December 23, 2008

The canvassing board in Minnesota is using clear and obvious double standards in judging ballots to help Al Franken get elected over Norm Coleman. The link below has the details with clear examples from actual ballots to show just how bad this is.

This is the level of dishonesty public officials will go to folks. I hope that Coleman files a lawsuit. I don’t like these things going to the courts, but this is such an injustice that it must be fought.

Dr. John Lott shows you this glaring injustice at this link.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,470892,00.html

The only commonality among these seemingly arbitrary decisions is that they benefit Franken.

Take that canvassing board to court Senator Coleman.

UPDATE – It gets better….. The Hill Magazine weigh’s in:

Election-recount officials in Minnesota have denied a request by Sen. Norm Coleman’s (R) legal team to reconsider 16 challenged ballots that went in Democrat Al Franken’s favor.

Coleman’s lawyers argued that the ballots were decided inconsistently, when compared with other similar ballots reviewed by the state canvassing board.

Officials were resistant to the Coleman team’s request to rehash rulings on challenged ballots that the board has already decided. After recessing briefly to pull the individual ballots and others with which to compare them, the board decided not to reconsider them.

The result is not official, as the state canvassing board still has to consider clerical challenges to its current totals.

Coleman’s campaign has also alleged that 34 withdrawn challenges considered by the board were improperly allocated.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/panel-nixes-coleman-effort-to-rehash-challenges-2008-12-23.html

Posted in Other Links | 1 Comment »