Category Archives: Affirmative Action

The New South African Airways

Affirmative Action, Africa, Crime, South-Africa

South African Airways used to be one of the better airlines–that is before it was turned over to drug smugglers: the affirmatively appointed crew. The airline is now regularly used to further the New South Africa’s drug trade:

“The latest arrests follow a similar incident on January 21, when a 15-member crew from the same airline was arrested after cocaine and cannabis worth £310,000 was found on their flight.

50kg of cannabis, with a street value of £150,000, and 4kg of cocaine, worth £160,000, was found in bags when the flight landed at Heathrow.”

[SNIP]

The Daily Mail keeps its report neutral, saying not a thing about what the transition to mobocracy has meant for the country’s flagship airline:

“An aircrew arrested after £250,000 of cocaine was discovered in baggage on a plane have been released on bail.

The 15 South African Airways employees were arrested after UK Border Agency officers found 5kg of the class A drug when their flight from Johannesburg arrived at Heathrow yesterday.

The nine men and six women were interviewed by customs officers and bailed to return to Heathrow Police Station in April.
Two times: A South African Airways crew has been arrested for drug smuggling twice in the space of a month

Two times: A South African Airways crew has been arrested for drug smuggling twice in the space of a month

Bob Gaiger, HM Revenue & Customs Heathrow spokesman, said: ‘Crew members are subject to the same customs checks as any other person when entering the UK.

‘HMRC together with UKBA play a vital role in the fight to prevent illegal drugs from entering the UK and in protecting our communities from the violence and corruption that always accompany this hideous trade.’ …

The crew was released on unconditional bail, and was due to report back to HMRC investigators at Heathrow Police Station on March 23.

South African Airways (SAA) spokeswoman Robyn Chalmers said: ‘Following yesterday’s incident, the airline is again co-operating fully with the British authorities in an investigation that is currently under way.

‘An investigation in Johannesburg, involving SAA Aviation Security and the South African Police Service Crime Intelligence Unit, is also under way to establish how security procedures were breached.

‘SAA remains committed to a zero-tolerance approach towards the use of the airline’s services for any criminal activity and will continue to closely monitor the situation.'”

Part II: American Newspapers Dying Of Self-Inflicted Wounds. Good.

Affirmative Action, English, Internet, Journalism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media

Why is the newspaper industry moribund and, we hope, beyond resuscitation? Veteran journalist William Murchison tells the story “of a profession invaded and subjugated by a type of journalist far less like the average reader than like, well, the members of a political science seminar at an upscale Eastern or West Coast university. That’s irrespective of whether such journalists ever caught sight of a college seminar room.”

“They tended to see journalism as a platform for identifying, investigating, exposing, and addressing social and political grievances: such grievances as often enough the customers didn’t see for themselves, but here was a new breed of newsmen to show them what they had missed.”

“The old-style newspaperman whom I came to know face to face in the ’60s was a differently colored nag. He — he usually was that — had far likelier attended a state school than Yale or Harvard or Berkeley, assuming he went to college at all. He was jocular and irreverent in a newspaperly sort of way. Never slugged down a drink of whiskey he didn’t like. Dressed with minimal attention to fashion.”

[SNIP]

I know exactly of what Murchison speaks. Back when I attended journalism school, my lecturers were tough, middle-aged, ex-army men (no women, mercifully). They smoked, drank, and dressed in rugged jeans. They taught you how to write a mean lead (or “lede”). If it didn’t spell out the Who, Where, What, When, and How of the story—well, you heard about it. If the superlatives flowed and your prose was flowery instead of succinct—you were mocked. You were taught a craft, not an ideology—although it was well understood that the richness of your frame of reference would enhance your writing.

“After Watergate,” continues Murchison, “the paradigmatic reporter was a man — or, now, a woman — with a high-minded mission; namely to instruct society concerning its tastes and habits; to improve things. No problem there — a little improvement never hurt anyone. Problems arose only when the bearer of news arrived at the home of the recipient of news with the look of a doctor preparing a rabies injection.”

The complete, American-Spectator story is “Authors of Their Own Doom.”

Part I of the post: “American Newspapers Dying Of Self-Inflicted Wounds. Good.”

The Bush Affirmative Action Mortgage Program

Affirmative Action, Bush, Constitution, Economy, Founding Fathers, Private Property, Ron Paul, Socialism

I began this thread, “NO Small ‘r’ republicans In The House,” with a visceral response to Republican Fred Thompson’s sudden discovery of the principles of fiscal responsibility—principles he said very little about during his bid for the nomination of his party.

More accurately, if Fred had spoken about spending and the Republican Party losing its way—the cliché those charlatans adopted—it was in the vaguest of terms, never confessing to the specific policy catastrophes he regretted and would reverse. War, the thing that propelled the country into debt, was just dandy, and “let’s have more of it.”

Myron has forwarded me Rep. Paul’s splendid response to the legislation known as the “American Dream Downpayment Act. “HR 1276” has exacerbated what Steve Sailer has termed the current “Diversity Recession.” Before I excerpt the entire thing, I’d like to make the following point:

This is not about Ron Paul getting it right on this one issue. Paul has been responding in the House in exactly this fashion for decades. He has never wavered; has always been morally and politically true and correct, always gone straight to the marrow of the argument; articulating what the Constitution and the Founders provided.

Unlike Fred, Paul responded in the heat of the debate, not after the fact; and for the benefit of the People, not for political expediency.

Now over to Ron Paul, and his rapid-fire response to the Bush affirmative action mortgage program:

“The American dream, as conceived by the nation’s founders, has little in common with H.R. 1276, the so-called American Dream Downpayment Act. In the original version of the American dream, individuals earned the money to purchase a house through their own efforts, oftentimes sacrificing other goods to save for their first downpayment. According to the sponsors of H.R. 1276, that old American dream has been replaced by a new dream of having the federal government force your fellow citizens to hand you the money for a downpayment.

H.R. 1276 not only warps the true meaning of the American dream, but also exceeds Congress’ constitutional boundaries and interferes with and distorts the operation of the free market. Instead of expanding unconstitutional federal power, Congress should focus its energies on dismantling the federal housing bureaucracy so the America people can control housing resources and use the free market to meet their demands for affordable housing.

As the great economist Ludwig Von Mises pointed out, questions of the proper allocation of resources for housing and other goods should be determined by consumer preference in the free market. Resources removed from the market and distributed according to the preferences of government politicians and bureaucrats are not devoted to their highest-valued use. Thus, government interference in the economy results in a loss of economic efficiency and, more importantly, a lower standard of living for all citizens.

H.R. 1276 takes resources away from private citizens, through confiscatory taxation, and uses them for the politically favored cause of expanding home ownership. Government subsidization of housing leads to an excessive allocation of resources to the housing market. Thus, thanks to government policy, resources that would have been devoted to education, transportation, or some other good desired by consumers, will instead be devoted to housing. Proponents of this bill ignore the socially beneficial uses the monies devoted to housing might have been put to had those resources been left in the hands of
private citizens.

Finally, while I know this argument is unlikely to have much effect on my colleagues, I must point out that Congress has no constitutional authority to take money from one American and redistribute it to another. Legislation such as H.R. 1276, which takes tax money from some Americans to give to others whom Congress has determined are worthy, is thus blatantly unconstitutional.

I hope no one confuses my opposition to this bill as opposition to any congressional actions to ensure more Americans have access to affordable housing. After all, one reason many Americans lack affordable housing is because taxes and regulations have made it impossible for builders to provide housing at a price that could be afforded by many lower-income Americans. Therefore, Congress should cut taxes and regulations. A good start would be generous housing tax credits. Congress should also consider tax credits and regulatory relief for developers who provide housing for those with low incomes. For example, I am cosponsoring H.R. 839, the Renewing the Dream Tax Credit Act, which provides a tax credit to developers who construct or rehabilitate low-income housing.

H.R. 1276 distorts the economy and violates constitutional prohibitions on income redistribution. A better way of guaranteeing an efficient housing market where everyone could meet their own needs for housing would be for Congress to repeal taxes and programs that burden the housing industry and allow housing needs to be met by the free market. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and instead develop housing policies consistent with constitutional principles, the laws of economics, and respect for individual rights.”

Updated: Uncivil Agenda

Affirmative Action, Barack Obama, Business, Gender, Individual Rights, Private Property, Race

One can only hope that the Obama Administration’s commitment to further curtail freedom of contract, speech, and religion; and the already severely delimited right to associate and dissociate at will–that these go the way of his tax hikes on those who’ve accrued more riches than others. (The update consists of links to the better perspective.)

Since my wish is not His command, please apprise yourselves of what’s ahead. Read through Obama’s “Civil Rights” program (I’ve posted half of it). I do, however, support his efforts to reduce drug-use prosecutions, but not through coerced “treatment”:

* Combat Employment Discrimination: President Obama and Vice President Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that curtails racial minorities’ and women’s ability to challenge pay discrimination. They will also pass the Fair Pay Act, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work, and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.
* Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: President Obama and Vice President Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice’s Criminal Section.
* End Deceptive Voting Practices: President Obama will sign into law his legislation that establishes harsh penalties for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote.
* End Racial Profiling: President Obama and Vice President Biden will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.
* Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: President Obama and Vice President Biden will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.
* Eliminate Sentencing Disparities: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.
* Expand Use of Drug Courts: President Obama and Vice President Biden will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

Read on.