The Savage Republican

Crime and (what) Punishment?

Both the Star Tribune and the Pioneer Press are (finally?) reporting about the increase in serious crime in our fair cities, something Rambix has been sounding the alarm on for many months. While the Strib's sub-headline talks about a meager 13% and 6% increase for Minneapolis and St. Paul respectively, the article buries the fact that aggrevated assualt and robberies rose by a staggering 23 and 22 percent respectively! The Strib actually interviewed (gasp!) police officials in trying to "understand" how this could possibly happen in their progressive utopia!

"You're never going to get a grip on everything and hope that crime goes away," Assistant Chief Tim Dolan said. "The harder you push on narcotics, you're going to see a growth somewhere else."

Gee, that's positive...get used to it Minneapolis...with people like this in charge of catching the criminals, it's going to get worse.

What is even better is how the Strib spins the numbers.

"The real important thing to realize is that if you're 40 or younger, we're enjoying some of the lowest crime rates of our lifetimes," said Christopher Uggen, a University of Minnesota sociology professor. "These are the good times."
Minneapolis, which as of Monday had logged 49 homicides this year, down from 55 last year, compares favorably with any large city, said criminologist Jack Levin, director of the Brudnick Center on Conflict and Violence at Northeastern University in Boston.
"Boston and Minneapolis have about the rosiest murder statistics in the U.S. for big cities," he said. "Minneapolis has always enjoyed a relatively low rate of crime."

Well either Mr. Levin has forgotten "Murderapolis" or he is ignorant of the history of Minneapolis. Things were so bad here in 1995 that the NY Times dubbed us "Murderapolis" - because gangs were taking over the poorest neighborhoods and were allowed to roam freely doing what gangs do. Fast forward to 2002 where 11 year old Tyesha Edwards was killed in her own home by gang crossfire! Fast forward again to 2005 where in the spring a 15 year old was pulled off of a Minneapolis City Bus by a gang of thugs who mistook him for a rival and beat him nearly to death. Fast forward again to December 21 where another teen was brutally beaten near a city bus stop for the crime of being white.

So what is the solution to this problem? According to the PiPress article, the Minneapolis Police seem to think that installing security camera's will do the trick! Here is a radical thought...why not arrest the wrong doers and put them in jail!!!!

The truly frightening thing is that when these crimials are finally caught by the Minneapolis Police Department, they are being released by the Hennepin County Court system! Rabix again is the definative site for all of the details, but the reason I bring this up is the 2006 Senatorial election. Amy Klobuchar, the current Hennepin County Attorney, is running for the DFL nomination for the Senate seat that Mark Dayton is vacating. Anyone who is interested in their safety really need to be wary of a candidate Klobuchar. Will Senator Klobuchar make the hard choices in order to make sure that they American people are safe? No one knows for sure, although Andy from Residual Forces and KvM is certainly trying to find out. It's a pity that the local press won't do their job and get those answers for us.

The man who would be Senator

The January 2006 Mpls St Paul magazine (not available on line) has an article on Al Franken and his possible 2008 Senate run. The article offered some interesting insights into the man that would be Senator.

According to the article, Franken won't decide whether he will run or not until 2007, however there are several indications that it is more of a when, not an if. First indicator is (of course) the Minneapolis condominium that he and his wife bought last spring. Also, the nationally syndicated "Al Franken Show" will begin broadcasting from the Twin Cities in January. Then the article talks about a "letter written to his imaginary grandchildren, Barack, Hillary and Joe III" in which he speaks of his "victorious 2008 Senate race".

Al speaks about the impetus for his run. The Republicans "criminally cynical exploitation" of the Wellstone memorial service/campaign rally. I'm sorry Al, the only criminal cynical exploitation came from the people running the memorial service. They began the exploitation when they turned it into a campaign rally. If it had truly been a memorial service, speakers would not have been exhorting Republican politicans in attendence to vote for Walter Mondale in order to "honor Paul".

A couple of things are mentioned in the article that Republican activists and the Party need to take note of. This is not a whim. Al Franken is a progressive true believer. He loves the limelight and is quite comfortable in it. He also has hundreds of wealthy, influential friends in politics. He can (and no doubt will) bring in a cadre of entertainment and media friends to raise and donate money for the campaign. He also has a growing stack of IOU's within the state DFL. Another thing the DFL is looking to use against Senator Coleman (and Congressman Kennedy in 2006) is the unpopularity of President Bush. They intend to paint Senator Coleman as a "white, male suit who has voted consistently with George Bush". Franken is an attraction and a money magnet and the local media is already salivating over another "celebrity" candidate. However, even Al conceeds that could be detrimental to his campaign. He told the interviewer "Besides, Minnesotans may be willing to vote outside the box, but their last experience was not so hot, so they may be less willing to do it again..." GOP consultant, Sarah Janacek, is quoted as saying "People are tired of screeds from either the left or the right" and that Franken's "big city liberalism" will not play well in red suburbs like Eden Prairie and Rosemont. I hope she is correct.

Most interesting (and telling) were some anonymous DFLers who were quoted in the article. "He talks too much. He gets going on something and he doesn't know when to stop...I don't know if you can learn self control at his age." says one well placed DFL'er. "I believe in professional politicians" (ed - that what is wrong with the DFL), people who have spent their careers learning how the process works...I don't know if Al is skilled enough in the process to either get the nomination or win the election." says another. "What does Al bring to the party as a candidate? I mean, what is his defining charactaristic? That he's funny? I don't know if that's the defining quality I'm looking for in either a candidate or a Senator" said a third. OUCH!

The big thing that will hurt Franken's campaign with the progressive base is his stance on the use of the military. While he is opposed to the President's use of force in Iraq, he is not calling for the immediate pull out or even of setting a timetable for withdrawal. Granted, this could be a moot point in 2008, but given the reality of modern campaigning, he is going to need to get these people on board (for campaign contributions) today and that could hurt him badly.

I don't know which way this will play yet, but this I do know. The Republican Party can not take candidate Al lightly or they risk loosing the seat.

Just a follow up to my post last night on the "smokers tax"...

I was listening to the Laura Ingraham show this morning on my way into the office. Larry Mareno (guest host) was interviewing the owner of a health services company that has instituted a program designed to reduce the company's heath care costs by prohibiting (as a condition of employment) company employees from smoking. Not on the job, not after hours -NEVER. If you want to work here you must not smoke! Several employess quit and two were fired as a result of their breaking the terms of employment.

Now, as an ex-smoker and as a conservative, I think that what this gentleman did was ok. He is excercising his private property rights and his rights as a business owner, as long as it is not against the law (which I understand it is not according to the interview) he can hire who he wants - or at least that is how it is supposed to be....

What upset me about the segment was a caller. This caller stated that this action should be mandatory for all business owners! That in the name of "heath care" all businesses should be forced to test their employees for cigarette use. Regardless of the fact that mandatory testing for ILLEGAL drugs is considered an "invasion of privacy" this moron wants business owners to test for LEGAL substance use. What's next? Making Big Mac consumption a reason to terminate employment?

The big argument against municipal smoking bans is that the bans infringe on the property rights of the business (bar and restaurant) owner to do with his property as he sees fit. Maybe we need to take these smoking bans to court. If it is legal for employers to mandate their business to be no smoking areas, there certainly is no reason why a business owner couldn't be within their rights to do the opposite, is there?

Handing it to the veterans again...

My husband is a veteran. He served in the military during the 1980's. We have many friends who are veterans as well. One, has been a caretaker at the Minnesota Veterans Camp on Big Island (Lake Minnetonka) for a few years. The Vets Camp is fairly run down, because the governing board that runs it has not put much money into it for quite some time. Our friend has put a lot of time and some personal money into the camp so that it can be used. We have had many discussions about the fate of the camp over the last couple of years.

Today, I saw this article in the Star Tribune. It appears my friend has someone else who is fighting for the camp's survival.

Maj. Mike Erickson served in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he still may not have been ready for the Battle of Big Island on Lake Minnetonka.

A little history on the camp...

In 1923 the Legislature leased land on Big Island as a living memorial to veterans. The property, according to the suit filed by Erickson's group, was to be used "as a respite for disabled and war-weary veterans and their families."

Here is the gist of the article....where the vets get the shaft...

But the camp's board of directors had already voted to sell the property to the city of Orono for $5.7 million. The deal, which included a $2 million state grant and $1.9 million in city bonds, was scheduled to close on Dec. 14.
A week ago, a Hennepin County district judge gave Erickson and his group until today to avoid dismissal of their lawsuit by posting a $238,000 bond. "We don't have it," a discouraged Erickson said.

Now a lot of veterans, my friend included, have challenged the legitimacy of the sale.

Bill Anderson, a former member of the board of directors, said he lost his seat because he did not agree with the decision to sell the camp. "In the public's eye," said Anderson, a Korean War veteran, " ... No, the pawns voted to sell it -- the shills."

You may ask why I am writing about this, when according to the article today was the last day for the vets to get the bond to stop the sale. It is my hope that maybe some of my good readers would be able to come to the aid of these fine veterans or at the least someone can help them find a way to bring an equitable resolution to this issue. If not that, to at least bring to the attention of the people, that our defenders of freedom are loosing, yet again, another promise that we made to them. We owe our troops better than broken promises and being shoved off of their campground for the sake of private developers.....

When is a fee a tax????

I wrote about our governor's ill-conceived tax, excuse me - "health impact fee" on tobacco products in this post about unintended consequences. Given the news of the last few days, the tax - er...fee - needs to be readdressed.

Recently a Ramsey County judge struck down the legality of the governor's "health impact fee" ruling that the $.75 per pack (of cigarettes) fee violated the terms of the states tobacco lawsuit settlement! Bravo Judge - you got the right answer. The Governor vowed to fight it. When I heard that I was stunned. The Governor has been taking lots of flack about this and other "compromises" from his base. The ouster of his ally (and chief cheerleader) Ron Eibensteiner from the Party chair should have been his wake up call. Then again, maybe it was. Yesterday's Star Tribune reports that the Governor will drop the fee if the appeal fails! Alleluia!

However some, including Republican Minnesota, has asked how can the governor forego the "millions" that the fee will bring in...well considering that the state is looking at a $1B budget surplus I don't think that will be that big of an issue.

The bottom line is that the state can not be balancing the budget on the backs of smokers. As I said back in August, smokers will go elsewhere to get their cigarettes or they will quit smoking. If the Governor were to ask for my solution to the budget issues, I would have a simple 2 word answer for him. REDUCE SPENDING!

Update: I just heard on Fox News that the American Cancer Society (and a coalition of heath care providers) is pushing to get a ballot initiative in California that will increase the cigarette tax $2.60 per pack. I am not a smoker, but if the smokers of America were to rise up in rebellion, I would be right there with them. Here is a link to the story.

Cookies where the kids can get them...

I've always liked Dr. Walter E. Williams. He has a great, dry sense of humor. Plus, he makes the complex simple.
In his recent column( article ) ,once again, he makes the complex simple:
"Private property would solve the smoking issue. Suppose you owned a restaurant, and you didn't wish to permit smoking. How would you like it if people used the political system to enact laws that forced you to permit smoking? I'm sure you'd consider it tyranny, and I'd agree. But there's symmetry. It's just as much tyranny to use the political system to enact laws to force a restaurant owner who wished to permit smoking to ban smoking. The liberty-oriented solution might be to post a sign saying you don't permit smoking, and customers wishing otherwise wouldn't enter. The same principle would apply to restaurant owners who wished to permit smoking."
Try telling your left wing friends this and see how they respond.
Reminds me of a quote I heard from JFK: "What's mine is mine. What's yours is negotiable."
And interestingly enough, I found that the whole quote is: " The freedom of the city is not negotiable. We cannot negotiate with those who say, "What's mine is mine and what's yours is negotiable." It came from an address to the people of the United States regarding the crisis in Berlin that eventually lead to the erection of the Berlin Wall a few months later ( article )(I remember seeing live TV of an East German soldier stringing concertina wire across an intersection that Sunday in August 1961) . JFK was telling the citizens of America that we could not negotiate with those who have the perspective of tyrants and despots.
Well, I certainly agree with him. I have no desire to negotiate with those who want to force me to give what I wish not to give and they are not entitled to.
It's called liberty.

Snippets of truth

I don't know about you, but as I get older, I've been discovering certain things about truth:
1. It's usually pretty simple. Now, I don't ever confuse simple with easy. As an example I was asking a group of young Bible students what was the 2nd highest mountain in the world (these kids are pretty smart, so I wanted to plumb the depths of their knowledge). They were a bit stumped, so I told them it was K2. I then asked how does one get to the top? One young lady said "Climb". Now, I was heading for "put one foot in front of another until you're at the top". But her comment was, well, simpler. So I then asked them if climbing the to the top of the 2nd highest mountain in the world was easy? They all replied no. But I told them it was simple. Never confuse the two.
2. The truth is usually fairly straightforward, direct. No shilly shallying.
3. It is resolute. It is unchanging. Beliefs may change. The truth doesn't.
4. As a consequence of #3:Truth is usually hard and not too uncommonly painful. It destroys all that is flung against it and therefore causes pain as reality takes over the fiction or the lie or closely held belief.
5. However painful,it is also liberating. Realization may be painful, and liberation also is usually found to be painful.
6.Because of this pain, very few people ever really seek the truth. Oh, they say they do. If asked the question "If you were wrong, would you want to know?" everyone would say yes. But were that the truth, there would be no left wingers. And no RINO's. As a very good friend of mine once said "You can not be well informed and intellectually honest AND be a left winger".
7. I usually find that when I discover a truth, it suddenly is so apparent, like I did know or at least should have known it all along.
And number 7 brings me to why I wrote this blog piece.
I was doing an internet search and came across an article from Kentucky about the fact that gun buy-ups don't work. And preceding the main point of the article I came across this small piece of truth:
"The natural assumption among adults living in this Commonwealth is that when we formulate public policy that affects the lives of all our citizens we'll be guided by facts and knowledge as adults should be, and NOT by emotions or childish fears. This is, after all, what adults are supposed to do." (Article here ).
And as I read it, it occurred to me that this was the truth. Simple, direct, to the point.

"High tech" mass transit

I have had this in my "pending" file since before Christmas.

The Minneapolis City Council, rather than tackling crime in their fair city (see Rambix for all the stories) has dedicated $300,000 in order to "study" whether a streetcar line would be a useful form of mass transit. The thing that got me was the first line of the article. The reporter gave the readers an unintended (I think) insight into the city council's mindset when she wrote:

"Minneapolis has a desire named streetcar."

The reporter continued to gush about the history of streetcars in Minneapolis and quoted Mayor Ryback:

"We're looking to add more energy to our main streets," Rybak said Wednesday. "It puts us on the cutting edge of American cities, but ironically it also grows out of the city's history. Minneapolis grew along streetcar lines, and that's part of what created the charm of our neighborhood commercial districts."

What the Mayor forgets though, is that trolleys would run (according to the city's plans) on streets that are already over croweded with car, bus, pedestrian and (in a couple of places) light rail traffic. Adding more vehicles to already crowded streets is a recipe for disaster. Since the day that the light rail trains started running, we have had several train/car accidents that have resulted in many deaths. Remember, we are talking about a mindset where people drive their cars out on to thin ice because they "didn't want to walk that far".

The last thing the City of Minneapolis needs is trolley cars fighting for space on Washington Avenue or Lake Street Mayor Ryback. Instead, let's focus on getting the petty thieves off of the streets of Minneapolis so that the suburban residents who work and visit in your city aren't afraid to meet the same fate as this person, this person and this person.

Where is NOW?????

Now our friends over at Anti-Strib have cornered the market on the dark side of Islam, which is one reason why I have stayed away from the subject, but there was a side to this story, that I didn't know if the men over there would pick up on which is why I decided to post on it.

"And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.

A few months earlier, in Copenhagen, Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi created uproar when – like his peer in Australia – he stated that women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.

And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, “For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.”

I only have one thing to say.... WHERE ARE THE CRIES OF OUTRAGE FROM THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN????? Their silence on this speaks volumes about the American left.....

Update - Sequel over at Anti-Strib has a post this morning on this Times Online story...

"a Sharia judge who has ordered the punishment of women for not wearing headscarves, was uncompromising: “The tsunami was because of the sins of the people of Aceh.”

The silence you hear is the response of the American left....Womens rights???? What womens rights????

Now what are they going to do with it?

I found this story to be very interesting and heartening all at once. Couple that with this study and you have to wonder - is academia really coming to a realization about itself? Could the day actually be here when academia admits what conservative parents and students have been saying for several years now....that there is a decidedly leftist lean to academic America?

According to the Klein/Stern Study, the estimated ratio of Democratic leaning professors to Republican leaning professors in the social studies/humanities faculty (across America) is a stunning 8:1! Now this ratio is smaller is certain fields (mathematics and economics for example) but face it parents, your kids have to take social studies and humanities in college - they are going to be exposed to this in the classroom!

What's that you say? Surely the teachers don't bring their personal bias into the classroom? Not according to "a survey of students at 50 top universities showed that nearly half the students feel faculty use the classroom to present their personal political views, and that political discussions seem 'totally one-sided'."

Some other gems from the San Francisco Chronicle article:

-- Moderate U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander -- a former university president and one-time Secretary of Education -- told the Commission on the Future of Higher Education that the greatest threat to broader public support and increased funding for higher education is a "growing political one-sidedness which has infected most campuses."
-- The American Council of Trustees and Alumni, in its recent report "Intellectual Diversity: Time for Action," said "the most serious challenge for higher education today is the lack of intellectual diversity."
-- Earlier this year, the broad-based American Council on Education issued a statement, supported by 30 higher education organizations, acknowledging the growing concern about "intellectual pluralism" and the "free exchange of ideas" on campuses.

The self proclaimed bastions of diversity are any BUT diverse when it comes to thought. The consumers of education (read - students and their tuition paying parents) have got to start holding these universities and professors accountable.

It will be interesting to see what (if anything) academia does with this information. If they truly care about diversity (of race, creed, color etc) then they need to care about diversity of thought. Can they do it????? We'll see. If they do, it will finally be nice to see the elites practice what they preach!

The Savage Republican

Local Attractions

Favorite Links

Previous Posts

Archives

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Crime and (what) Punishment?

Friday, December 30, 2005