Now, granted, the Daily Universe (BYU's student newspaper) is not the most intellectually astute publication. Of course, I'm not sure that the category "our best and brightest" ever was meant to apply to journalists. So, it may be that no newspaper can properly be called an intellectually astute publication. The point is, the editorial board at the Daily Universe may have gotten what I'm about to bring up completely wrong.
In their editorial from the February 22, 2008 issue, the board talks about political correctness. They make this incredible assertion: "political correctness has among its central objectives to affirm the right to self-esteem."
Please, please, please tell me that no one actually believes that we should have a right to self-esteem. Even if it were just an uncommon belief...if anyone can show me that this is a highly uncommon belief, please do it. Quickly!
I'm sure all of you who will read this have already thought of these things, but just to be clear, let me point out a couple of problems with a right to self-esteem: sports, as we know them, would be rendered unconstitutional. You might actually see this lawsuit: "Patriots Sue Giants, Claim Right to Self-Esteem Violated in Super Bowl Loss." Comedy Central, all late night talk show hosts, and Bill O'Reilly would be in a great deal of trouble. Middle schoolers the country over would never talk.
I think political correctness has its place, though I think it's rather a small one. Certainly it's proper for me to alter my natural speech so as not to grossly affront ethnic groups, minorities, homosexuals, etc. But that alteration is not proper because those groups/people have a right to self-esteem. It is proper because it is respectful and kind. Asserting a right to self-esteem cheapens other rights that our fathers fought and died for. Those who do so should be ashamed of themselves.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Obama's Source of Power
Can anyone beat Barack Obama? He's so motivating, so hopeful, and so eloquent. While most of the nation sees the multitude of problems our nation faces and despairs, or at least is entirely confused, Barack Obama stands strong, telling us that "Yes, we can!"
Observe (fast forward to the 10:00 mark):
Well. A word about that slogan.
As it turns out, Obama isn't the first to champion the "Yes, we can!" mantra. Nor is he the first to bask in the euphoria that mantra creates. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Barack Obama's inspiration: Bob the Builder.
Observe (fast forward to the 10:00 mark):
Well. A word about that slogan.
As it turns out, Obama isn't the first to champion the "Yes, we can!" mantra. Nor is he the first to bask in the euphoria that mantra creates. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Barack Obama's inspiration: Bob the Builder.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Conservatives are Irrelevant?
On CNN today, in the "Situation Room" (I'm sure the name was originally intended to make the program sound serious, but when you spend a good part of every day in the "Situation Room," doesn't it become the living room? The den maybe?), a panel of experts was discussing recent developments in the presidential race.
The panel noted that 14.4 million Democrats voted in the Super Tuesday primaries yesterday, while only 8.7 million Republicans came out to vote. Further, they pointed out that John McCain has all but secured the Republican nomination despite conservative pundits' best efforts to convince Republicans that McCain is not their man.
One of the experts offered the following analysis: "Conservatives are simply not relevant to what's happening in the United States today."
I thought I might examine that claim.
If Republicans = Conservatives, it seems odd to say they are irrelevant. After all, Republicans comprised 38% of those who voted on Super Tuesday. Certainly they were not the majority, but I was under the impression that the minority was not irrelevant in America. At least not to Democrats, right? Perhaps that's not the case when you disagree with the minority, or when the minority doesn't vote for you?
On the other hand, McCain's success in the Republican primaries despite conservative pundits' militancy against him seems to indicate either that Republican does not mean conservative or that conservatives are not heeding the advice of conservative pundits in this case.
If Republican does not mean conservative, then the CNN analyst could, but need not be, correct. It could be that there simply aren't many conservatives anymore, even among Republicans. In that case, they have become irrelevant in the sense that they are no longer a powerful political voice (although even then, the above comments about minorities still apply). However, it could also be that many conservatives simply did not vote in the Super Tuesday primaries, discouraged by the lack of a candidate that compels them. If that is true, it remains to be seen whether they will be irrelevant or not; conservatives would then be an untapped force in politics, still potent enough to affect the results of the primaries still to come, not to mention the general election.
Unless there are other plausible alternatives I have failed to consider, it seems the CNN analyst must have assumed that there are no longer many conservatives out there. He assumes that Republicans have become something other than conservatives--a new base, a different party with different priorities. These new Republicans are choosing John McCain.
What, then, are new Republicans' priorities? Are there enough new Republicans to effectively oppose the Democrats? Where will the remaining conservatives cast their voice? If the analyst was wrong, all of these questions are more irrelevant than conservatives. If he wasn't, what does the future hold for American politics?
The panel noted that 14.4 million Democrats voted in the Super Tuesday primaries yesterday, while only 8.7 million Republicans came out to vote. Further, they pointed out that John McCain has all but secured the Republican nomination despite conservative pundits' best efforts to convince Republicans that McCain is not their man.
One of the experts offered the following analysis: "Conservatives are simply not relevant to what's happening in the United States today."
I thought I might examine that claim.
If Republicans = Conservatives, it seems odd to say they are irrelevant. After all, Republicans comprised 38% of those who voted on Super Tuesday. Certainly they were not the majority, but I was under the impression that the minority was not irrelevant in America. At least not to Democrats, right? Perhaps that's not the case when you disagree with the minority, or when the minority doesn't vote for you?
On the other hand, McCain's success in the Republican primaries despite conservative pundits' militancy against him seems to indicate either that Republican does not mean conservative or that conservatives are not heeding the advice of conservative pundits in this case.
If Republican does not mean conservative, then the CNN analyst could, but need not be, correct. It could be that there simply aren't many conservatives anymore, even among Republicans. In that case, they have become irrelevant in the sense that they are no longer a powerful political voice (although even then, the above comments about minorities still apply). However, it could also be that many conservatives simply did not vote in the Super Tuesday primaries, discouraged by the lack of a candidate that compels them. If that is true, it remains to be seen whether they will be irrelevant or not; conservatives would then be an untapped force in politics, still potent enough to affect the results of the primaries still to come, not to mention the general election.
Unless there are other plausible alternatives I have failed to consider, it seems the CNN analyst must have assumed that there are no longer many conservatives out there. He assumes that Republicans have become something other than conservatives--a new base, a different party with different priorities. These new Republicans are choosing John McCain.
What, then, are new Republicans' priorities? Are there enough new Republicans to effectively oppose the Democrats? Where will the remaining conservatives cast their voice? If the analyst was wrong, all of these questions are more irrelevant than conservatives. If he wasn't, what does the future hold for American politics?
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
I've experienced some great triumphs in my life. I've scored spectacular goals in soccer games. I got an A in my Metalogic class. I beat Becki Johnson at Rummikub (twice).
Today I experienced the antithesis of triumph. I began the morning by leaving my phone and keys in my room. My roommate was going snowboarding, so no one would be home for the day. I realized this while walking to school, but wasn't overly perturbed because I had all the books I'd need for the day. By the time I walked home at 5 pm, there would be someone there.
A marketing class and a devotional later, at noon, I was walking home. Yes, five hours early. No, I didn't remember that I didn't have my keys. After the twenty minute walk, I tried to walk in the door, and as my shoulder hit the wood, my mind cleared. And I bowed my head in shame.
All the way back up to campus, I tried to think of something that made it ok--something I could appreciate about the extra walking. The mountains are pretty, I guess. Whatever. I'm just lucky I didn't let my mind wander so much that I stepped in front of a car.
Today I experienced the antithesis of triumph. I began the morning by leaving my phone and keys in my room. My roommate was going snowboarding, so no one would be home for the day. I realized this while walking to school, but wasn't overly perturbed because I had all the books I'd need for the day. By the time I walked home at 5 pm, there would be someone there.
A marketing class and a devotional later, at noon, I was walking home. Yes, five hours early. No, I didn't remember that I didn't have my keys. After the twenty minute walk, I tried to walk in the door, and as my shoulder hit the wood, my mind cleared. And I bowed my head in shame.
All the way back up to campus, I tried to think of something that made it ok--something I could appreciate about the extra walking. The mountains are pretty, I guess. Whatever. I'm just lucky I didn't let my mind wander so much that I stepped in front of a car.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Battle at Kruger
Occasionally, there will be exciting things in this blog, like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM
Life is good when you're a water buffalo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM
Life is good when you're a water buffalo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)