Friday, November 20, 2009
Warning: Could Induce Severe Eye-Rolling
Stories like this that make it so hard at times to parody the left even while it screams for a South Park episode:
Young heirs grapple with wealth of ambivalence
“One night in Adams Morgan, the sons and daughters of lawyers and corporate executives padded into a friend's rowhouse for a kind of group therapy session about their families' wealth.
“They are young people who have inherited or stand to inherit big money, and they are spending their post-college years living modestly and working to address the needs of the poor, hungry and politically disadvantaged.”
[Ed. Note: Politically disadvantaged? In DC? You mean, like conservative Republicans?]
We are then treated to some heart-wrenching anecdotes about young people with access to money; money they sometimes take advantage of for their own benefit. Apparently, this produces an inner turmoil the likes of the gainfully employed amongst us will probably never understand.
Courageously, though, not all of them succumb to the lure of easy money:
“Janelle Treibitz, 28, a part-time waitress who performs with the Puppet Underground performance group, which raises money for grass-roots organizations, could relate.
"In Vermont [this year], I broke my finger and didn't have insurance," said Treibitz, whose father is chief executive of a Colorado company that designs visual presentations for court trials. "I got my X-ray and gave [the hospital] a fake name and walked out. Is that okay that I am doing that -- taking up resources because I am refusing to take money from my parents?"
She has to ask?? (Unfortunately, the article doesn’t give the consensus answer.)
In fact, despite Post writer Ian Shapira’s generally sympathetic tone toward these shining lights, I am suspicious as to the article’s purpose. Being as these deep thinkers are the best walking, breathing argument FOR a punitive Estate Tax, I suspect the Post is again editorializing under the guise of a news story.
Young heirs grapple with wealth of ambivalence
“One night in Adams Morgan, the sons and daughters of lawyers and corporate executives padded into a friend's rowhouse for a kind of group therapy session about their families' wealth.
“They are young people who have inherited or stand to inherit big money, and they are spending their post-college years living modestly and working to address the needs of the poor, hungry and politically disadvantaged.”
[Ed. Note: Politically disadvantaged? In DC? You mean, like conservative Republicans?]
We are then treated to some heart-wrenching anecdotes about young people with access to money; money they sometimes take advantage of for their own benefit. Apparently, this produces an inner turmoil the likes of the gainfully employed amongst us will probably never understand.
Courageously, though, not all of them succumb to the lure of easy money:
“Janelle Treibitz, 28, a part-time waitress who performs with the Puppet Underground performance group, which raises money for grass-roots organizations, could relate.
"In Vermont [this year], I broke my finger and didn't have insurance," said Treibitz, whose father is chief executive of a Colorado company that designs visual presentations for court trials. "I got my X-ray and gave [the hospital] a fake name and walked out. Is that okay that I am doing that -- taking up resources because I am refusing to take money from my parents?"
She has to ask?? (Unfortunately, the article doesn’t give the consensus answer.)
In fact, despite Post writer Ian Shapira’s generally sympathetic tone toward these shining lights, I am suspicious as to the article’s purpose. Being as these deep thinkers are the best walking, breathing argument FOR a punitive Estate Tax, I suspect the Post is again editorializing under the guise of a news story.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Our President In China
As you probably know, our President has been visiting the Red Chinese these last few days. On the bright side, no indication that he has apologized for the hateful things we’ve said about communists in the past. Otherwise,…
The Washington Post has helpfully provided an analysis of the trip: Obama's China trip stands in stark contrast to those of past presidents
I just bring it up so that I can take some cheap shots:
“…the United States may offer a target for carbon-emission cuts to boost climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month if China offers its own proposal…”
Post writers Andrew Higgins and Anne E. Kornblut describe this as the “one concrete advance [that] emerged” from the trip....Let’s all be glad they’re not building inspectors instead.
"The president dealt with every issue on his agenda in a very direct way and pulled no punches," [Michael Froman, economic adviser on the National Security Council] said.”
Of course he pulled no punches; there were no punches to be pulled. China isn’t Honduras. The bully act on China would garner no useful worldwide press to be basked in. Instead, China itself is a significant part of the global population – which at times seems to be our President’s target constituency.
“[President Obama] also urged China to resume talks with representatives of the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader.”
Do you think he was intentionally being ironic? Obama Snubs the Dalai Lama - WSJ.com
“Furthermore, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, the administration had not expected "that the waters would part and everything would change over our almost 2 1/2 -day trip to China."
Well maybe the rest of the administration didn’t expect it…but the President?
The Washington Post has helpfully provided an analysis of the trip: Obama's China trip stands in stark contrast to those of past presidents
I just bring it up so that I can take some cheap shots:
“…the United States may offer a target for carbon-emission cuts to boost climate negotiations in Copenhagen next month if China offers its own proposal…”
Post writers Andrew Higgins and Anne E. Kornblut describe this as the “one concrete advance [that] emerged” from the trip....Let’s all be glad they’re not building inspectors instead.
"The president dealt with every issue on his agenda in a very direct way and pulled no punches," [Michael Froman, economic adviser on the National Security Council] said.”
Of course he pulled no punches; there were no punches to be pulled. China isn’t Honduras. The bully act on China would garner no useful worldwide press to be basked in. Instead, China itself is a significant part of the global population – which at times seems to be our President’s target constituency.
“[President Obama] also urged China to resume talks with representatives of the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader.”
Do you think he was intentionally being ironic? Obama Snubs the Dalai Lama - WSJ.com
“Furthermore, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, the administration had not expected "that the waters would part and everything would change over our almost 2 1/2 -day trip to China."
Well maybe the rest of the administration didn’t expect it…but the President?
