The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/75751
OPINION clude the ability to make the absurd sound not only plausible, but inspiring and pro- found. His latest verbal triumph was to say on Barack Obama's great rhetorical gifts in- July 13th, "if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own." As an exam- ple, "Somebody invested in roads and bridg- es. If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." Let's stop and think, even though the whole purpose of much political rhetoric is to keep us from thinking, and stir our emo- tions instead. Even if we were to assume, just for the sake of argument, that 90 percent of what a successful person has achieved was due to the government, what follows from that? dangerous dead end Dodd-Frank: since President Obama signed the Wall Street- reform bill that has come to be known as Dodd- Frank. So has it succeed- ed in creating "safer and more modern rules of the road for the financial in- dustry," as Treasury Sec- retary Timothy Geithner claims? Good question. To a It's been two years By Ed Feulner branches of government, yet administrative agen- cies and vast bureau- cracies operate in prac- tice as a headless fourth branch," Heritage Foun- dation scholar Matthew Spalding writes in his new book Changing America's Course. But don't assume, just large extent, we real- ly can't answer, even though a full 24 months has elapsed since Dodd- Frank became law. Why? Because many of the rules remain unwritten, creat- ing tremendous uncer- tainty among affected firms and consumers. Dodd-Frank didn't so much create new rules as create the institutions that would set up the rules. And most of those rules don't yet exist. According to Jona- than Macey of Yale Law School, "Dodd-Frank is not directed at people. It is an outline directed at bureaucrats and it in- structs them to make still more regulations and to create more bureaucra- cies." In essence, Con- gress punted. Lawmak- ers outsourced their con- stitutional duties—and on an important issue that af- fects millions of people. What happens, then, to accountability? To the rule of law? "The Con- stitution creates three because we haven't felt the full effect of Dodd- Frank, that it's causing no harm now. The un- certainty caused by fear over what the bureau- crats may or may not do is hardly helping an econ- omy struggling its way through a fragile recov- ery still rife with unem- ployment. Plus the rules that the legislation did actual- ly spell out have hardly been helpful to consum- ers. Consider bank fees, to take one of the most obvious examples. Dodd- Frank included a provi- sion that put the federal government in charge of setting the "interchange" fees that retailers pay the banks for processing deb- it-card transactions, even though such fees had nothing to do with what caused the financial cri- sis of 2008. So the Feder- al Reserve last year dic- tated limiting what banks can charge for process- ing debit-card purchases, from an average rate of 44 cents a transaction, to sev- en to 12 cents—a drop of Continued on page 3 Wednesday, July 25, 2012 The Press-Dispatch Observations by Thomas Sowell Obama's rhetoric That politicians will make better decisions than individual citi- zens, that politicians will spend the wealth of the country better than those who created it? That doesn't follow logically—and cer- tainly not empirically. Does anyone doubt that most people owe a C-2 lot to the parents who raised them? But what follows from that? That they should never be- come adults who make their own decisions? The whole point of the collectivist mindset is to concentrate power in the hands of the collectivists—which is to say, to take away our freedom. They do this in stages, start- Continued on page 3 Running on empty The no-spin zone—by Bill O'Reilly decided to revisit another iconic group: Crosby, Stills and Nash. Sadly, the re- sults were much darker than with the Good Vibrations crew. Back in 1969, CSN played at Wood- of my jaunt down memory lane with The Beach Boys, I Fresh of f he was going to sell furniture to the crowd. At first, the folks loved the liberal old stock and immediately became a coun- terculture sensation. Their anti-estab- lishment anthem "Ohio" defined the Vietnam era for many Americans. While The Beach Boys were surfin' the days away, CSN was agitating for societal change using soaring harmo- nies and relevant lyrics. Along the way, the guys became mil- lionaires, and David Crosby perpetrat- ed a series of bizarre drug-fueled inci- dents. He only survived his excess by receiving a liver transplant. But there he was on stage still sound- timers. They opened with "Carry On" and played a few more of their classic hits. But then, as so often happens in concert land, the group began playing stuff nobody ever heard of—and the crowd grew restless. The low point of the concert arrived ing on. It was certainly a far cry from "tin soldiers and Nixon coming." There is something to be said for re- when CSN sang a protest song about alleged traitor Army Pvt. Bradley Man- ning. He is charged with leaking clas- sified information to the anti-Ameri- can website WikiLeaks. If the charg- es are true, Manning put many of his fellow soldiers fighting in Afghanistan in even more danger. He is currently being held at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and, if convicted, could be sentenced to life in prison. Nevertheless, Crosby, Stills and ing pretty good. Graham Nash can al- so hit most of his notes. Stephen Stills, however, has trouble replicating the voice we know from the old tunes. He also looks like an Amish guy. I thought Nash believe Manning is a political pris- oner who has been brutalized by the U.S. military. So they sang a song la- menting that. The folks who paid good money to savor old memories mostly listened in silence. My bet is that many in the crowd had no idea what was go- maining consistent in your values, so I am not down on CSN for their leftist sensibilities. I simply believe that their sympathies are misguided and that pro- test songs about an obscure man who may have committed treason are use- less. Despite their righteous indigna- tion, the truth is that Crosby, Stills and Nash have no idea what Manning did or did not do. Also, there is irony in the fact that the trio is comprised of 1 percenters who live very well. Crosby bunks in tony Santa Barbara, Stills in Bel-Air right near Nancy Reagan, and Nash on the lush island of Kauai. Nothing wrong with that; those guys earned their af- fluence. But a system that allows them to profit from protest might be one to applaud. Hey, guys, how about a song on that theme? In the end, I was disappointed by the CSN concert. At one time, their voic- es soared both musically and socially. Now, they are just shadows of a time long gone. Points to ponder—by Rev. Ford Bond The Modern column in the Huffington Post had an interesting by- line; "One Night Stands: 8 Reasons to Have Them." She fancies herself as the Pied Piper for modern women whom she assumes is sophis- ticated, educated, chic, and sexually uninhibited. She writes, "sex really Jill Di Donato in a recent Primordial Woman what you want and need, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that." Di Donato ridicules the set. • Guilt is a waste of en- doesn't always have to be about a meaningful and in- timate connection; some- times it's about doing what feels good in the moment . . . In some circumstances, hav- ing sex one time with some- one you never plan to sleep with again can be exactly notion that a woman's sexu- ality is something she needs to guard: "There is a lot to be learned about yourself through purely physical- based encounters, especial- ly for women who are taught that sex is this precious gift that is only to be given away in the most idyllic circum- stances." In brief, here are her rea- sons for having one-night stands. The brief synopsis is sufficient to understand her deluded and erroneous thinking. • Healthy sex is a mind- A woman's perspective—by Mona Charen Conservatives and the court conservatives, who have looked to the courts to implement their policy pref- erences. Whether it was racial and sex preferences, abortion, gay marriage, capital punishment or the "rights" of illegal aliens, liberals have attempted to move the country left by judicial fiat. Judges, after all, are It has traditionally been liberals, not highly educated elites. The political views of people with advanced degrees tend to be liberal. It's far easier to seduce a few robed law- yers to issue congenial rul- ings than it is to undertake the hard and lengthy work of persuading millions of voters to elect people who agree with you. Conservatives have been so battered litical speech. Was a decision putting limits on the infinite expansion of Com- merce Clause power by Congress so unthinkable? The case seemed incredibly strong. If, as Justice Kennedy put it during oral argument, Congress can compel par- ticipation in commerce in order to reg- ulate it, what becomes of the idea of a government of limit- ed and enumerated powers? If the Commerce Clause per- mits this, it permits anything. It seemed that the Obama by adverse court decisions over the years that we'd become anti-courtists— toying with ideas to reduce the judi- ciary's scope (as Newt Gingrich men- tioned during the primaries), empha- sizing the antidemocratic nature of judi- cial usurpation of legislative functions and stressing the importance of judi- cial restraint. But Supreme Court rulings in the past few years—since John Roberts became chief justice—had suddenly seemed to open up sunlit vistas of con- servative victories on important con- stitutional questions. Not that conser- vatives longed to make school prayer mandatory or the government share of gross domestic product above 20 per- cent unconstitutional. Conservatives simply long for a return to judicial mod- esty and constitutionalism. In the gun control decision, the court affirmed that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to gun ownership. In Citizens United, the court upheld First Amendment protections on po- gress's taxing power. A mandate to pur- chase a product clearly is not. The ad- ministration had contradicted and em- barrassed itself by arguing first that the mandate was not a tax and then that it was. So it was shocking to see Justice Rob- administration, by attempt- ing to sneak a new tax past the public by disguising it as a mandate, had outsmarted itself. A tax would be clearly constitutional under the Con- erts side with the liberals in uphold- ing the individual mandate as constitu- tional. It was an odd straddle. Roberts ruled that critics of the law were cor- rect: The Commerce Clause does not justify compelling economic activity so as to regulate it. "Allowing Congress to justify federal regulation by pointing to the effect of inaction on commerce would bring countless decisions an in- dividual could potentially make with- in the scope of federal regulation. . . . That is not the country the Framers of our constitution envisioned." The opinion is direct and unequivo- sufficient authority. It was everything a conservative could wish for. But then the chief justice (with the votes of the court's four liberals) reached for an alternative. If you call the mandate a tax, Roberts wrote, it falls within Con- gress's taxing authority. While shredding the government's case that the Commerce Clause grant- ed sweeping authority to regulate even nonactivity, the majority opinion viti- ated all of that beautiful reasoning by permitting the law to stand as a tax. It doesn't even require Congress to pay heed, in future, to truth in labeling. If the Congress passes a new law that as- serts unprecedented power, it needn't bother to call it a tax (and risk the vot- ers' wrath), as the court will find a way to call it a tax later. Roberts bent over backwards to find the law constitutional, most likely be- cause he was loath to see the court at- tacked. His written explanation was a conservative one: "Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess nei- ther the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those de- cisions are entrusted to our Nation's elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices." True enough, but the court is tasked cal that the government's claim of au- thority under the Commerce Clause was unconstitutional, and it gave the back of its hand to the claim that the Necessary and Proper Clause granted with protecting the Constitution and clearly failed to do so here. A key pil- lar upholding limited government has been kicked away. If the practical re- sult is to energize opposition to Presi- dent Obama's re-election, it may turn out to a proverbial blessing in disguise. But there is no point in denying the damage. ergy. • Anonymous sex is pure. • One night stands can be emotionally less drain- ing than repeat casual sex. • They get the job done without wasting your time. • One night stands are perfect revenge sex. • Life doesn't always have to have a plot. • The more you know your- self, the better the sex you will have. I have con- al/biological/transcendent. Casual sex skews the emo- tional stability and mindset of the person. • One-night stands are billed as a physical release. But sex is tied to procre- ation and the continuation of humanity. Sex for phys- ical gratification short-cir- cuits the process and reduces sex below an animal- istic craving. • Sex for re- structed my own list that I enti- tled "One Night Stands: 8 Rea- sons NOT To Have Them." • Healthy sex begins in the mind and emotions. Sex is given by God and is meta- physical. The husband and wife become one through the transcendent actions of marriage. • Guilt arises in the con- science and is there to re- mind us that fornication is a sin of the body and the only one committed by the body. Guilt cannot be overcome, one has to sear their con- science. • Anonymous sex is not regret it. Sex is not a weapon and to use it as such invites marital and emotional insta- bility and chaos among the children. • Life has a plot. Males and females are made in the image of God and can attain great achievements for hu- manity. The genders comple- ment one another when they are together as one. There is no oneness in one-night stands. Aimless sex is aim- less sex. • To know thyself through pure and harms the psyche. • It is a misnomer that one night stands are emotionally less draining than casual sex with a buddy. Sex is emotion- MR. AND MRS. FRANK HEURING, PUBLISHERS ANDREW G. HEURING, EDITOR The Press- Dispatch JOHN B. HEURING, ADVERTISING MANAGER Wednesday, July 25, 2012 Entered at the Post Office in Petersburg, Indiana for trans- mission through the mails as Periodical Mail, Postage paid at Petersburg, Indiana. Published weekly. will please give old address as well as new one along with phone number. We cannot guarantee prompt change unless this is done. Postmaster: send changes to Post Office Box 68, Petersburg, Indiana 47567-0068. Change of Address—Subscribers changing addresses P.O. BOX 68, PETERSBURG, INDIANA 47567 E-mail—news@pressdispatch.net (604-340) Phone 354-8500 • FAX—354-2014 Pike and Surrounding Cos. ......$ 10.00 $15.00 $25.00 $45.00 Elsewhere in Indiana ................ 14.00 Outside Indiana ............................18.00 19.00 28.00 27.00 43.00 SUBSCRIPTION RATES 3 mos. 6 mos. 1 year 2 years 49.00 75.00 unencumbered sex is akin to knowing thyself through drugs and alcohol. Sex is not something to experience; it is part of male/female rec- Continued on page 3 venge? The Mau- ry Povich and Dr. Phil TV shows along with Ann Lander's column are full of people who got back at their mates with a sex partner for his/her affair and