The Hillsdale Forum - Winter 2006-07

8/14/2019 The Hillsdale Forum - Winter 2006-07

1/12

hillsdalethe forumWinter 2007

Volume IV, Issue II

Oh dear...

As both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama declare their

candidacy for the 2008 election, a nation is left to wonder,

who will be our leader? Full Story Page 3


2/12

Oh dear...

the crawler Winter 20072its everthing you ever needed to know...and some things you didnt

January 2007 February 2007Making a noteworthy come-

back, the Dixie Chicks take

home five Grammy awards,

including album and song of the

year.

Sir Richard Branson, owner of

Virgin Group Ltd., announced

that he will award a twenty-five

million dollar prize to the first

scientist(s) who devise a way

to suck greenhouse gasses from

the atmosphere.

Steve Jobs announces Applesplan to unveil its new iphone in

June. It will retail for $499 and

is only available with service

from Cingular.

University of Michigan students

are wearing surgical masks in

a study aimed at tracking the

spread of influenza.

Al Gore is among this years

167 nominees for a Nobel

Peace Prize for his movie An

Inconvient Truth

Accoring to the Ku Klux Klan,

illegal imigration is helping

drive their membership to lev-

els not seen since the 1960s

Texas Governer Rick Perry

is under fire for his propsed

measure that all sixth grade girls

recieve the new HPV vaccine.

Oil prices dropped to $49.90 per

barrel early in the month before

freezing weather nation-wide

sent prices soaring once again.

President Bush focuses his State

of the Union Speech on his plans

for Iraq, energy reform, and

immigration.

Ladies and Gentlemen, your

tax dollars at work: after los-

ing a bet to Florida Senator Bill

Nelson, Ohio Senator Sherrod

Brown did fifty-five pushupsin Nelsons office. (And just in

case you were trapped in a box

during the BCS championship,

the Florida Gators beat the Ohio

State Buckeyes 41-14.)

Both the Senate and House have

passed a measure that increases

the national minimum wage

$2.10 over the course of two

years. The Senate grouped the

bill with a series of tax-breaks

for small businesses and taxincreases for cooperations.

Democrats announce that the

2008 Democratic National Con-

vention will be held in Denver,

Colorado. In other news, the

Rocky Mountains crumble at

thought of Howard Deans yell.

Bushs new plans for Iraq in-

clude a troop surge of just over

20,000 soldiers sent to defend

two of the nations most resiliantareas.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Congress promise to work five

day weeks is interrupted early,

as lawmakers request their firstday of work off to attend a

college football game.

Barbra Striesand has agreed to

give the largest donations al-

lowed by law to the three demo-

cratic frontrunners of 2008.

Super Bowl Once Again Most

Scandelous Game on TelevisionbyEmilia Huneke-Bergquist

Just as we were all forgetting Janet

Jacksons unfortunate slip at the 2004

Super Bowl, game number forty-one

arrived. Not to worry, the unusually

demure Prince had nothing to do with

it; this time, it was advertisers who

malfunctioned.

With a thirty-second spot during thegame running just over 2.6 million

dollars, it is understandable that,

according to a ComScore poll, 48

percent of viewers watch the game

solely for the commercials. Each year,

corporations work for months and pay

millions to impress consumers during

Americas most watched television

program. This years bowl boasted an

impressive 93 million viewers, making

it the third most watched program

in television history, just after Super

Bowl XXX and the M*A*S*H finale,

and with so many millions of viewers

living in todays hypersensitive society,

it is no surprise that this years game

was not without controversy.

Less than twenty-four hours after the

first commercials had aired, several gay

rights groups, including the Gay and

Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation

(GLADD), filed formal complaints

against the Masterfoods USA

cooperation for a Snickers advertisement

that aired during this years Super

Bowl. The commercial showed two

mechanics sharing a candy bar, almost

kissing, then doing something manly

to try and compensate. According to

Masterfoods, consumer feedback was

generally positive, but Neil Giuliano,

president of GLADD, released astatement saying, That Snickers,

Mars, and the NFL would promote and

endorse this kind of prejudice is simply

inexcusable. Masterfoods quickly

pulled their commercial from the air,

releasing an apology to everyone

offended. However, they were not the

only ones to be hit with post-bowl

complaints.

General Motorss advertisement

featuring a robot who dreams it is

pulled from the assembly line before

throwing itself from a bridge has drawn

sharp criticisms from mental health

organizations, who claim it belittles

the tragedy of suicide. Originally, GM

agreed to keep the commercial on the

air unedited, but the corporation has

now decided to edit the bridge scene

before it airs again during this years

Academy Awards.

Both controversies come after the

premature release of a commercial

featuring Kevin Federlinewho later

apologized for angering Americas fast

food workers after his portrayal of one.

In todays society, all of the apologies

and pulled ads are no surprise, and

the consumer and political strength of

such groups is quite notable. Yet, as the

majority of people who felt no offense,

nor prejudice, while viewing the Super

Bowl we, too, are responsible forvoicing our opinions. As the men in

the snickers commercial ripped their

hairwe laughed, as the robot fellwe

cringed, and as K-Fed rappedwell,

we did a little bit of both. At no point

were the commercials anti-gay, pro-

suicide, or demoralizing. They were

entertaining and creative, and should

these ridiculous complaints continue, it

is not likely we will be seeing either of

those things during next years SuperBowl.

GUN: $250

AMMUNITION: $50

DIAPERS: $10

BEING AGE TWO, AND USING ALL THREE:

hforumPRICELESS

Support the

conservative

state of mind...

donate to

The Hillsdale

Forum today!


3/12

Hillsdaletheforum

Emilia Huneke-Bergquist Editor-in-Chief

Julie Robison Copy Editor

Samantha COnn Business Editor

Mary Kate Cavazos

Subscription ManagerBrian JohnstonStohn NishinoG. Stolyarov II Staff WritersThomas LeonardKate MartinAnthony Mocny

Roger PattisonScott RozellHeather Shell Contributing Writers

The Hillsdale Forum is a

student publication distributed

four times throughout the school

year.

Questions?Comments?Submissions?

Contact The Hillsdale Forum:

[email protected]

newshforum 3

hforumIn the Running*

OfficiallyBarack Obama-D-ILHilary Clinton-D-NYJohn Edwards-D-NC

Christopher Dodd-D-CTDennis Kucinich-D-OH

-Sam Brownback-R-KS

John H. Cox-R-ILMitt Romney-R-MA

Duncan Hunter-R-CA-

Steve Cubby-L-CAChristine Smith-L-CO

George Phillies-L-MA

Un-OfficiallyBill Richardson-D-NM

-Rudy Giuliani-R-NYJohn McCain-R-AZ

Tom Tancredo-R-CO

Ron Paul-R-TXJim Gilmore-R-VA

-Doug Stanhope-L-AZRobert Milnes-L-NJ

-*Canidates listed as Official have filed

formal papers with the Federal Elec-tion Commission, whereas Un-official

canidates have only formed exploratorycommitties

Last month saw two groundbreaking

bids for the Democratic Presidential

Nomination for 2008. Hillary Clin-

ton and Barack Obama have emerged

as the two frontrunners in the Dem-

ocratic race for the presidency. Al-

though they share a party label, thereis a striking difference in their perso-

nas and perspectives. As they con-

tinue to establish themselves through

their campaigns, they polarize their

party and set the stage for an intense

and potentially dividing competition.

Sen. Clinton is an established figure

in the world of politics. She boasts un-

paralleled name recognition and over

two decades worth of experience inthe political spotlight. After serving

a term as first lady, she became the

first presidential wife to strike out

on her own in politics, spending six

years in the Senate before announc-

ing her bid for presidential candida-

cy. In addition to name recognition,

Clintons Democratic domination is

aided by her already substantial bank

account and her knack for fund-rais-ing. Her political advantage is fur-

ther solidified by the support of one

of the greatest political maneuverers

of our time, her husband, Bill Clinton.

However, this particular familial tie is

not wholly advantageous. A portion

of her name recognition is no doubt

tied to the highly publicized scandals

of Bill Clintons presidency. Clinton

celebrates a long tenure in Washing-ton, but suffers from the inevitable

effects of muckraking and staleness

that comes from so much time in the

public eye. This widespread famil-

iarity that could dilute the potency

of other politicians, is combated by

an exceptionally powerful personal-

ity and a reputation for being tough

and tenacious. However these traits

can often work to her disadvantage

-Tug of War-Why The power struggle between Clinton and Obama may

just be the Republicans ticket to 2008

as well. Her unwavering and reso-

lute nature serves as a divisive factor

even among her own party. People

either love Clinton or they hate her.

Sen. Clintons quest for candidacy

comes as no surprise, but this po-

litical powerhouse may not have the

preeminent political advantage that

her celebrity status would suggest.Sen. Barack Obama is a much newer

face in the political scene. A total of

only two years in the Senate provides

him with a freshness and intrigue that

his more established colleagues lack,

but also raises the question of his ex-

perience and preparedness for such a

demanding and complex role as Pres-

ident of the United States. He cuts a

figure of the common man, yet his dy-namic personality has been enough to

overshadow his rookie status and con-

vince thousands of Americans of his

political abilities. Part of his popular

appeal is due to his liberality of ideas.

He has stated his desire to obscure the

line between blue and red and to fos-

ter a new unification of the American

people. This brand of idealism is a

direct throwback to such presidential

greats as Abraham Lincoln and John

F. Kennedy. As he declared his can-

didacy, he declared that the ways of

Washington have to change in his

endeavor to build a more hopeful

America. Although the David verses

Goliath setup of this candidacy campaign is certainly to his advantage,

it just may not be enough to over-

come his glaring lack of experience

and prestige in the political arena.

One of the hardest things for any

candidate in a primary is the neces-

sity of securing the votes needed

within the party. In addition, the

candidate needs to have the ability to

make a move towards the middle inthe hopes of swinging more hesitant

votes. It is clear from Sen. Clintons

stances on many of the issues that

she has already done that. Clinton

is very positive about the work the

troops are doing in Iraq, but hesi-

tates to discuss the direction of the

continued on page 9

byKate Martin &

Heather SHell


4/12

debate Winter 20074

In 2003, Californians made history by

recalling a governor who had raised taxes,

compromised the borders sovereignty,

and turned off their electricity. He did

so within a relatively short amount of

time, and it soon became clear after his

reelection that a continuation of his

regimes time in Sacramento would be

detrimental to the general welfare of the

Golden State.A few big-name Republicans got on

board with a movement to exercise

the right of the people to petition for

a recall election. People responded

enthusiastically, collecting signature after

signature in order to throw off an unjust

government and remove Governor Gray

Davis from power and replace him with

a more capable individ

ual in

whom the people could place

their trust. Enter Arnold

Schwarzenegger, an Austrian-

American actor who made his

career by fighting bad guysand blowing everything from

aliens to murderous cyborgs

to clones into oblivion on the

big screen. He announced

his candidacy on the TonightShow with Jay Leno, and pledged to

campaign against the special interest

groups holding the interests of thepeople hostage in Sacramento.

California elected him to serve the

remainder of Gray Daviss term and then

stand for reelection in 2006. The people

were tired of the status quo, and when an

outsider who pledged to terminate the

tyranny of timidity trying their patience

in the state capital showed up, giving him

a chance seemed like a good idea at the

time.

It has been four years now since the recall

revolution took place on the Left Coast,and we are now in a place wherein we can

look retrospectively at what has happened.

Gray Davis tripled the car tax (a measure

which Arnold repealed), tried to give

drivers licenses to illegal immigrants (a

move which Arnold stopped in its tracks),

and handled the power crisis about as well

as Jimmy Carter handled the incidents that

transpired in Iran 28 years ago.

Spending was out of control, big

government labor unions and other interestgroups had a plethora of friends in the

legislature, and the people of California

elected Arnold to bring an end to it all.

Things did not look good in those days,

and The Governator was supposed to

make it all better. Californians are now

in a place to genuinely question whether

or not he has done the job he was elected

to do (or whether he has even tried). Has

Schwarzenegger succeeded where Davis

failed?

If out-of-control

spending was a

voters reason

for ousting

Davis, one

cannot honestly

contend that

Schwarzenegger has successfully

redressed his grievances. According to

California State Senator Tom McClintock,

California spending is growing faster

than it did under Gray Davis, the stateis now running the biggest deficit in its

history, and the only way it can pay its

bills is because of massive borrowing

carried over from 2004, contributing to a

doubling of the states debt burden in just

three years.

While he has brought some of what

Senator McClintock calls long-overdue

spending reforms, Arnold has done no

better than Davis in curbing the growth of

the budget, and the states wallet has been

bleeding profusely for years with few

signs of recovery in the near future.

In addition to spending, another failure

of Daviss was his inability to remain

popular with the electorate while offering

Californians a big-government fiasco that

compromises the integrity of Americas

southern border. Davis sought to triple car

taxes and permit illegal aliens to obtain

drivers licenses, which is something that

is considered

valid proof ofcitizenship at

the US/Mexico

border. These

attempts to

change policy

drove his poll

ratings down

like nothing else

could.

Schwarzenegger,

on the other hand,

is now seekingto raise taxes

on doctors and

other medical

businesses to

provide free

healthcare to all

Californians and citizens of other countries

residing within California, although this is

a violation of state and federal law.

This socialized medical plan, which

imitates the Canadian healthcare would be detrimental to the medical field.

Americas healthcare, although the most

expensive, is also one of the best in the

world; if one socializes healthcare, it

takes away the peoples right to choose

different healthcare options, the incentives

and the ability for medical companies to

be innovative with drugs, techniques, and

create new tools. When one caps profit,

it does not give people many incentives

to be a doctor because they would not be

reimbursed well for all their years of hard

work and effort. Socialized medicine

is limiting and is not able to meet the

growing needs of the country.

Schwarzeneggers healthcare plan

wont treat the problem by providing

a substantive solution. In fact, it will

most likely make the problem worse.

According to a Heritage Foundations

summary of the plan, the Governors

proposed health plan is a mlange of

bad health policy (including subsidies toillegal aliens), unwise tax increases, and

missed opportunities.

There are indeed some promising

provisions: a state-wide pool for the

purchase of private health insurance; direct

assistance to low-income Californians

to help them buy coverage; and a proper

alignment between the state and federal tax

treatment of health savings accounts. On

the whole, however, the proposal is a great

leap forward for bigger government and

increased bureaucratic decision-making

and control. Even with the promising provisions of the Schwarzenegger

plan, it involves a greater role for the

government.

The Governators plan also involves

the taxation of doctors and hospitals.

Ironically, the justification for this new

tax is that it is meant to help alleviate

costs for doctors and hospitals. As the

Heritage study details, his proposed

plan will involve additional payment to

doctors and hospitals serving the statesMediCaid program, MediCal. However,

providers would also face new taxes,

thus diminishing the effect of increased

government payments. Doctors and other

medical professionals would be required

to pay a 2 percent tax and hospitals a 4

percent tax to help pay for the Governors

proposal. While such bureaucratic

nonsense may have been the modus

operandi of the Davis administration,

Schwarzenegger should know better.

Arnold Schwarzenegger has until 2010to build his legacy as the man elected

in Californias historic recall, but with

proposals like these, he has not gotten

off to a good start. They didnt elect his

left-wing opponent last fall for a reason,

the reason being that Californians believe

in fiscal responsibility and a government

which takes the taxpayers trust into

account when writing its checks.

While one shouldnt throw Arnold under

the bus for a single bad proposal, he alsoshouldnt get too confident in his agenda;

Californians have removed governors who

had failed them by bloating the budget,

raising taxes, and compromising border

security by catering to illegal immigrants

and replaced him with the Governator.

Lets hope the robot doesnt malfunction.

1) McClintock, Tom. A Fantastic Budget. California State

Senate. .

2) Moffit, Dr. Robert E.. The Schwarzenegger Health Plan:

A Great Leap Forward for Bigger Government. Heritage

Foundation. .

Paging Dr. Arh-noldSchwarzeneggers new California health plan has doctors wondering if this is the beginning of the end for medicine

byAnthony Mocny


5/12

spotlighthforum 5

above all the unity of a nations

spirit and will are worth far more

than the freedom of the spirit and

will of an individual By this we

understand only the individuals

capacity to make sacrifices for

the community, for his fellow men

The -------- people must march for-

ward as a trained and loyal

army willing to sacrifice for

the good of a common discipline

...moral law, binding together

individual and the generations

into a tradition and a mission, sup-

pressing the instinct for a lifeenclosed within the brief round

of pleasure in order to restore

within duty a higher life free

from the limits of time and space

Lets Begin by playing a game... Can you

match these

quotes to

their famous

speakers?A

B

C

Need a Hint?1.) Adolf Hitler

2.) Benito Mussolini

3.) Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Franklin Delano Roosevelt indeed

had a vast ideological basis in common

with the fascists he ended up fighting

against during World War II. Roos-

evelt, who was the Assistant Secretary

of the Navy during Woodrow Wilsons

administration, was obsessed with

Wilsonianism and the statist reign of

terror and brutal suppression of dissent

that occurred in the United States dur-

ing the World War I era. Thus, seeking

to establish a peacetime statist regime

similar to Wilsons emergency regu-

latory state, he got what he wantedduring the New Deal and World War II.

What is most fr ightening about FDRs

presidency is the degree of fanaticism

the government deliberately and ac-

tively elicited from the masses. Upon

passage of the (unconstitutional) Na-

tional Industrial Recovery Act and its

component National Recovery Ad-

ministration, a rally of millions was

orchestrated in New York, with onebootlicking man stating that he thought

his marriage day was the high point of

his life until he heard of the National

Recovery Administration. Then about

ten thousand schoolchildren were ar-

ranged into the shape of the NRA ea-

gle. One is instantly reminded of imag-

es from the 1936 Berlin Olympics, in

which Hitler orchestrated similar dis-

plays of leader/government worship.

Roosevelts reference to an entire

people marching forward as a loyal

army invokes images of Nazi columns

stomping through the streets of Paris.

FDR was a populist demagogue, not

a genuine sympathizer with the com-mon man. He realized that brain-

washing the less educated citizens

who may not have been exposed to

the idea that initiation of force is im-

moralwas a key to gaining power of

the sort he desired. He did so through

similar propaganda schemes to those

used by other statists of his time. Hit-

ler and Stalin loved to be filmed pet-

ting little children; they were known

in the propaganda pamphlets as Un-cle Adolf and Grandfather Stalin.

In this spiritand in that of his at-

tention-mongering cousin, Theodore

RooseveltFDR stated once that a

scene with his granddaughter observed

by the press was more important po-

litically than an elaborate oratory.

I wonder what would have occurred

in the United States had FDR sur-

vived World War II; by his ideologi-cal inclinations, I would expect his

policies to even more closely mir-

ror those of the Hitler whom FDRs

coercively and immorally con-

scripted loyal army helped defeat.

Americans should not consider a

quasi-fascist President as one of their

historys best. Rather, they should

recognize FDRs ideas as antitheti-

cal to American liberty, individual-

ism, free markets, and rationality.

byG. Stolyarov II

Hitler, Mussolini, and Roosevelt...Oh My!

*Dontworry!Wewouldneverpromiseyouanswersandthenforget!QuoteAisHitlers,BbelongstoRoos-

evelt,andCisallMussolini.

Answers below*


6/12

IRAQIt leads the news nearly every day, except for when someone really important, like Anna Nicole Smith,

isnt a headline, it is something that will have a profound effect on our future. As young citizens, we ar

the benefits and consquences of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and to that end, it is imperitive that we are

are currently facing.

open6

Several weeks ago, while watching

President Bush give his address on his

new plan for Iraq, I noticed something

different about him. Coupled with the

reality that the voters had recently voted

the Republicans out of the majority in both

houses of Congress, the problems we have

had in Iraq made him look dejected and

defeated. For the first time, it looked to

me like he had lost confidence in himself.

There is no question that nearly four yearsafter first invading Iraq, things are not going

the way they should be. Sure, there may be

new schools, businesses, water supplies,

etc. that the mainstream media is refusing

to acknowledge, but even

the most loyal defenders of

Bushs policies in Iraq have

to admit that the amount

of violence is not slowing

down at an appreciable rate,

if at all. It does not matter what

is being built over there or whattype of government they establish

if the people are not safe.

This includes American soldiers. The

vast majority of Americans fail to see how

Bushs new plan, which includes sending

more troops, is going to make the situation

any better. In fact, in doing this, we will be

going in the wrong direction. Not only is

sending more Americans the wrong thing to

do, but perhaps the time has come when we

must seriously develop a plan to leave Iraq.

Now, I am not one of those who think thatall war is bad and that President Bush is

the second coming of Hitler. When we first

invaded Iraq, I was in 100% support of the

decision. There is no question that when

America is attacked, we must respond quickly

and forcefully. And I do not believe that

President Bush purposely lied about WMDs

or anything else leading up to the war. My

argument is that we have done basically all

we can. We overthrew a tyrannical regime

led by a ruthless dictator. We have overseen

the development of a new type of governmentwhile at the same time eliminating

numerous terrorists and their resources.What more can we do? Those who still

defend Bushs Iraq policy say that we must

stay there until the job is done. But how

long is that going to take? It certainly is not

going to happen any time in the foreseeable

future. If we stayed in Iraq until every terrorist

is eliminated and every aspect of Iraqs

new liberal democracy is fully functional,

it is impossible to say when we can leave.

Probably not at least for a few decades, if ever.

While much of the reason we are in Iraq is for

our own defense, we are also there in order toestablish an American-style democracy in the

Middle East. One question that is frequently

asked is whether this is possible in a region

known for its perpetual violence. I do not

want to say that this is impossible, but we

must consider how rarely such governments

have been successful anywhere in the world

historically. But what is government itself but

the greatest of all reflections on human nature?

If men were angels, no government would

be necessary, James Madison remarked

in Federalist 51. The Founders frequently

acknowledged that what they were attempting

was unprecedented in history, and even theyadmitted at the time that the Constitution

they decided on was far from perfection.

President Bushs foreign policy is based on

the idea that freedom and democracy are on

an inevitable march at this time in history

and that it is the responsibility of the United

States to combat those who forcefully oppose

it. Woodrow Wilson famously said that World

War I would be the war to end all wars

and fought in order to make the world safe

for democracy. In the aftermath of the war

Wilson thought that he, as President of theUnited States, could negotiate an everlasting

peace. He was one of many people in the first

part of the 20th century who believed that

the world was moving towards perfection,

but another Great War came just twenty

years later, while innumerable other wars

around the world have been going on since.

In the same manner, President Bush seems

to think that the United States can lead a

movement to spread liberal democracy all

around the world. While a stable democratic

Iraq is certainly in our best interest, can

any nation, even one as powerful and

fundamentally good as the United States,

ensure this will happen? The reality is that

there must come a point at which the Iraqis

will have to run their own government and

ensure their own safety. Whether they can

truly do this on their own once we

leave is questionable, but we

simply have no choice. And

let us not forget that Iraq is

only one country; there are

still many other dangerous

regimes out there that allow

terrorist activity to exist

within its borders. Are we

prepared to make the same

sacrifices for the sake of all

those other countries too?

Whether it was right of us to

invade Iraq in the first place

is irrelevant at this point. All

military strategy aside, sending

more troops into Iraq sends the

wrong message. After occupying

Iraq for nearly four years, we

would be saying that we have

no intention of leaving any time

soon. The time must come, sooner

rather that later, that we make the

Iraqis realize that a safe, stable

regime cannot survive there

long term unless they take on

the responsibility themselves.

An even greater American

commitment will make it even

more difficult for us to leave.

byBrian Johnston

If we stay in Iraq until every ter-

rorist is eliminated and every as-

pect of Iraqs new liberal de-

mocracy is fully functional, it is

impossible to say when we can leave.

are we sending the wrong message?BUSHS NEW PLAN FOR IRAQ IS SENDING 20,000 MORE TROOPS TO THE FRONT LINES, BUT

Cartoon courtsey o

(the steps to a better Iraq, as brThe Twelve F

1.) Hand over

sovereign Ira

2.) Help esta

3.) Rebuild Iraq

4.) Encourage int

5.) Hold a nationa

bring new lea


7/12

dies. But even when it

the ones who will reap

ware of the situation we

orum Winter 2007

On the Machiavelli Hill of Washington D.C.,

truth has been watered-down and distorted.

The concept of truth today is far different from

the concept that held 230 years ago. In most

of todays cases, the formerly black and white

truths are shaded gray by relativism and political

correctness. To speak in terms of absolute truth

is dangerousand clarity is rarely achieved.

Should the media decide that truth is false,

the potential of a political future and legacy

are placed in serious jeopardy. Fortunately,

President George W. Bush believes in the

truths written by our founding fathers that man

has certain unalienable rights. It is the truth

that Saddam Hussein was oppressing the Iraqi

people and raping them of theirunalienable

rights. Operation Iraqi Freedom is a just war,

one worth fighting.

The objective of Operation Iraqi Freedom

was to remove Saddam from power and give

the Iraqi people the opportunity to create a

new, diplomatic government; the United States

is a country of opportunity, right? Removing

Saddam from power would eliminate support for

terror organizations and his access to weapons

of mass destruction, or WMDs. In June of

2006, the National Ground Intelligence Center

declassified a report clarifying

that, Since 2003, Coalition forces

have recovered approximately 500

weapon munitions which contain

degraded sarin or mustard nerve

agent. We have recovered WMDs

from Iraq, a fact the mass media

would like to ignore, and removed

Saddam from power. Now, we are

in the midst of trying to complete

the second objective, the more

important objective. The military

action is called Operation Iraqi

Freedom, not Operation Get

WMDs nor Operation Sons

Revenge.

Do not get me wrong, I am not

saying that Bush is infallible and

made no mistakes, he did. Our

government is slow to move, as

it should be, and can pose many

obstacles for military action, as it

should. I believe many mistakes

were made in the process from

September 11, 2001 to March

20, 2003, but where are mistakes

not made in any government or

human action? However, despite

the mistakes, the President stood

for what he knows to be absolutely

true. That military action was the

only way to remove Saddam and give the Iraqi

people the opportunity for democracy.

Never before in history has a nation been so

blessed with the prosperity of the United States.

Our Judeo-Christian society and government

stands as a beacon of democracy, setting

an example for the world. However, this

prosperity comes with an obligation to give.

Left wing Hollywood activists, like George

Clooney, Brad Pitt, Bono, and Angelina

Jolie, claim that the United States is selfish

and the people do not give the crumbs off

their table, when in reality, the American

people give more to charity than any other

entity on Earth. Yet there is something else

these activists fail to see, the greatest gift our

country gives, opportunity. American troops in

Iraq are paying the ultimate price to give the

Iraqi people the opportunity for political and

economic freedom. Denouncing the war and

the President, left wing philanthropists fail to

see this. Where does this buck of blame stop, at

the man courageous to give something greater

than money, to say the war is right, justified in

the truths of our founding.

Many say that we need to bring our troops

home, that we need to remove our presence

in Iraq. I wish that could be. Unfortunately, to

secure the Iraqi peoples chances for democratic

opportuni ty, our troops must stay. Soldiers

today are the unsung heroes of our nation and

continue to strive securing opportunity for the

Iraqi people with honor, integrity, and pride.

The word hero is used too lightly today. Real

heroes are defenders of our freedom and truth,

those who volunteer to serve our country and

its ideals. Those who do not get the credit they

deserve. Hollywood glorifies tree-huggers and

rehab clinics, singing of relativism. The troops

in Iraq fight for absolutes and the foundations of

our country, yet, are not praised as they should

be and that is a shame. Should we vacate Iraq

now, all they have fought for will be lost to

Islamic radical corruption and a new dictator

will be installed.

It is not the responsibility of the United States

to cure the worlds problems or overthrow

every government that does not align with

ours. It is the right of the people to stand up

for themselves, their obligation. When the

people are being murdered by the hundreds and

thousands, when corruption and oppression

run unchecked through a government, when

a man hell-bent on the destruction of the

United States and Western culture orchestrates

a reign of terror, it is the responsibility of the

United States to take action. We must defend

our nation, we must defend our rights, and we

must fight for the absolute truths our country

was founded upon.

byScott Rozell

Show SomeSupport for Our

Troops!There are dozens of organiza-

tions eager to connect the Amer-

ican people with our troops

overseas, get involved with one

of them and bring a smile to a

soldiers face.

USOAfter the tragedy of September

11th, the USO banded together

with a mission-send packages

to troops. For a $25 tax-deduc-

table donation you can spono-

sor a care package full of the

items our soldiers need most.

www.operationcarepackage.org

Any SoldierAdopting soldiers is easy! This

site, founded by the mother

and father of a soldier serving

in Iraq helps people looking

to send care packages to sol-

diers in specific brances of the

military.

www.anysoldier.com

Adopt-A-PlatoonThis organization allows pen-

pal corrospondence as well as

soldier adoption. They ask that

an adopter send a weekly let-

ter, and monthy care package.

Other means of support are also

listed on their website.

www.adoptaplatoon.org

Operation Support Our TroopsStarted after a soldier com-

plained that only the anti-war

protesters were making the

nightly news, this group seeks

to show the troops overseas that

the American people have not

forgotten them.

www.operation-support-our-

troops.org

f USBCI

Staying the Course

ught to you by President Bush)ive Step Plan

authority to a

i government

lish security

s infrastructure

rnational support

election that will

ership to Iraq


8/12

viewpointhforum 9

In conservative camps outside the

warm confines of Hillsdale College,

it is not uncommon to hear the

words America is the best, quickly

followed by garish descriptions of

military might, the American dream,

and story or two about an ancestor.

Now, at Hillsdale, we know better

than that.

We must first compare our America

with the regimes of the FertileCrescent, Egypt, and Alexander the

Great on relative power, and then

Biblical Israel on spiritual grounds,

before moving on to later eras. We

are a continuation of the Western

Heritage, as I found on my first day

with Dr. Stewart, and that is a lot to

look up to.

On the other hand, we have classes

such as Constitution and Political

Economy to remind us of all the

freedoms we have. Yet, in the end,one has to wonder if their really is a

ruler to measure Americas greatness.

If there is, we have to wonder if it can plumb the depths of our collective

ego.

That is a good question, but until

its answer is found, I shall try to toss

out my version of this measurement

of American greatness. We often

hear those across the pond decry

our boastful decisions and our more

traditional morals. At the same time,

Middle Eastern countries (with a lot

more talk and violence than us) dare

call Americans heathens and infidels.I would like to draw comparisons

from my experiences across the other

pond.

Spending this summer teaching

English in a Taiwanese vocational-

college was an experience that is

impossible to cover in such an article.

Nevertheless, I observed a certain

materialism and entrepreneurial

reminiscent of the US in the 1950s.

The bright lights and the industrial

growth literally bursting at its seams(although some manufacturing has

moved mainland) are coupled with

bytHOMAS lEONARD

AMERICA the GREATEST

war. When pushed, she takes a stand

in the middle: open-ended support

is not the solution, so troops must

slowly pull out, allowing the Iraqis

to establish their own government.

When it comes to Education, she be-lieves that the federal government is

deserving of a larger role. She dem-

onstrates this through her support of

programs like the Direct Loan Pro-

gram, and the introduction of the

Student Borrowers Bill of Rights.

Both of these pieces of legislation

encourage the further entangling of

higher education and the federal gov-

ernment. Sen. Clinton continues toendorse to the No Child Left Behind

Act, a program associated with the

backing of the Bush Administration.

Clinton has already begun her move

to the middle, as she looks beyond

the primary into the general election.

Despite Sen. Obamas reputation

as a man willing to blur party lines,

many of his stances fall more firmly

on the left than Sen. Clintons. Oneof Obamas strongest footholds is his

policy regarding Iraq. He has spoken

out, saying that the war was misman-

aged and the only people capable of

solving the problem are the Iraqis,

making American involvement un-

necessary. Last month, Sen. Obama

introduced the Iraq War De-escala-

tion Act, a bill calling for complete

removal from Iraq by March 31st,

2008. This plan represents the ide-

als of Obamas party, and he proves

himself to be a man unafraid of the

burden his view may bring. In terms

of Education policies, Sen. Obama

shares Sen. Clintons view on the

importance of federal government

within Americas educational system.While Clinton hopes to address the

issue through fairer loan agreements,

Senator Obama holds that increas-

ing the amount of money available

through Pell Grants would be one of

the best ways to help those students

seeking higher education. He also

maintains that colleges and univer-

sities have the duty to keep costs as

low as possible, in order to providemore accessibility for the students.

Obamas educational concern seems

to be more distanced from the No

Child Left Behind Act, as he chooses

to involve himself in other educa-

tional programs. Sen. Obamas more

leftist stance may be helpful as he ze-

ros in on the primaries, but he must

be careful not to polarize many of the

critical middle-of-the-road voters.

The Democratic Party has a choice

to make and it is interesting just how

different their options are. With the

emergence of the first strong female

presidential candidate and the first

African-American presidential can-

didate in the same year, one would

think that the campaigns would be

fraught with minority and civil rights

issues, but they are surprisingly void

of any such claims at this point. By

not playing the minority card, the can-

didates are forcing their party to make

a judgment based solely on their poli-

tics and personal qualifications. The

race between Sen. Clinton and Sen.

Obama looks to lead to one of the most

exciting presidential nominations in

the history of the Democratic Party.

a public infatuated by the latesttechnologies, from pocket translators

to music videos on cab drives. Not

only was this present in the big cities,

but in the sticks where I was living

as well. This rural area, replete with

hog and chicken farms and small plots

of sugar cane and mangos, could rival

many of our cities for population

density.

What makes this vibrancy alarming

is that they look up to South Korea,

Hong Kong and Japan as nationsfrom which to gain technology and

the latest fashions. If Taiwan is

somewhere lower down on the Asian

economic rung, it is hard to imagine

the pursuit of wealth that reportedly

takes Japanese businessmen to their

suicides. Hong Kong and Singapore

respectively take places one and

two in the Heritage Foundations

2007Index of Economic Freedom,

while of the 157 nations included, the

United States takes fourth, Japan 18th,Taiwan 26th, and Korea 36th.

This relatively low scoring reminds

one of the stories of governmentcorruption and the inexplicable

inefficiencies that allowed for raw

sewage to flow in open gutters (though

I only saw it once). So, Taiwan has a

long way to go, but it seemed to me that

the average rural Taiwanese teenager

had the same amount of technology as

a white suburbanite American.

Yet at the same time, the Taiwanese

also took America as another example

of capitalist power: the only real

influence from the West wasAmerican. Basketball and baseball

were THE two sports, even the World

Cup held little interest beyond the

stars seen on Pepsi commercials.

Most American cultural influence

finds its way into Taiwan, and any

county, through the big screen.

Yet somehow, we also have an

unprecedented influence on the

progress of economics and technolog y.

While Japan and Singapore and Hong

Kong may have money rivaling theQatars and Monacos of the rest of the

world, they do not have the immensity

of population and land. Russia, China

and Canada may have more land than

the US, but they do not have the

infrastructure or population that we

do. Somehow, we are able to get the

best of both worlds.

It makes sense that a country so

different, almost an invented country,

should live at the top of the world when

their Islamic neighbors overrun all theold giants of the west. A country a

mere 230 years old with almost no

native people group left and a capital

city that was drawn from scratch like

the government itself.

In his Notes on the State of Virginia,

Thomas Jefferson questions, can

the liberties of a nation be thought

secure when we have removed their

only firm basis, a conviction in the

minds of the people that these liberties

are a gift of God? It is the convictionsof our countrymen that should worry

us, not our economic status. While it

is debatable if our country beats the

worlds best, there is no doubt we will

not remain a giant forever. We can

pursue our economic championship

title that India and China threaten to

take away, and ultimately we may

lose, but it is imperative that the

quality of the individual in America is

preserved.

tug of war from Page 3


9/12


10/12

election Winter 200710

Like what you see? Well, then lets kill some trees!

Help us spread The Hilsldale Forumaround the nation! We will

send an issue to your five favorite people, but we need you

to send us their addresses... [email protected].

President Gerald Ford was the presi-

dent the Founding Fathers had imag-

ined when they formed the govern-

ment. He was a leader in the military,

emphasized civic duty and virtue, was

an active member of the legislature,

and, while he was in office, worked

for the benefit of the

people. He was an

American first and fore-

most; he strove for na-tional unity, especially

during the crisis of the

Vietnam War and in the

aftermath of Watergate.

Watergate and the Viet-

nam War often over-

shadow President Fords

term. However, his in-

fluence on the country

has been immense. Pres-

ident Ford, in addition to

his national unifying policies and pro-cedures, established special education

with the Education for All Handicapped

Children Act and appointed John Paul

Stevens to the Supreme Court. He

had his trials as well; Ford faced two

assassination attempts within three

weeks of each other. The Ford Admin-

istration also saw the final withdrawal

of American personnel from Vietnam.

With the exceptions of history en-

thusiasts, Fords contribution to

America tends to become belittledamidst a sea of Presidential greats.

Its true that he didnt win

the Pulitzer Prize, like Ken-

nedys Profiles in Courage.

Fords policies didnt compare to John-

sons Great Society when it comes to the

internal improvements of the country.

He wasnt The Great Communica-

tor like Reagan, nor did he redeem

his presidency through his post-

presidency activities to the extent of

Carter in regards to his peacekeep-ing and other humanitarian efforts.

Ford was just a man; a man who did

the best he could in the situation he

was in; he was the only man to reach

the presidency without having been

elected by the American people, a po-

sition he acknowledged but never used

as a crutch. He was a man who want-

ed to make a difference in his world.

Ford played football for the Univer-

sity of Michigan and was offered con-

tracts from the Green Bay Packers andDetroit Lions, both of which he turned

Heres to you, President Forddown in favor of Yale Law School.

After law school and passing the bar,

Ford started up his practice as an at-

torney but, when his country called

for arms during World War II, Ford

enlisted in the Navy. There he thrived

and earned many honorary stars

and medals for his service, as well

as an honorable discharge in 1946.

Two year later, he

married his wife Bet-

ty, with whom he had

four children. He be-came active in local

Republican politics,

entering the public

domain in 1948. Dur-

ing his long involve-

ment in American

politics, he held many

prestigious positions

including being a

member of the House

of Representatives for

over twenty years and was selected Mi-nority Leader of the Republican Party.

In 1973, President Richard Nixons

vice president Spiro Agnew resigned

after being charged with tax eva-

sion. Ford was chosen

as Nixons new vice

president. Little did he

know that a year later,

President Nixon would

also resign, handing

Ford the presidency.

Less than a month intohis presidency, Presi-

dent Ford gave Presi-

dent Nixon a full and

absolute pardon. He

also issued conditional

pardons to draft dodgers

who left the country in

order to escape service

for the Vietnam War.

A presidents term can

oft be defined by one de-

cision. President Fordmade the conscious de-

cision not to focus and

scapegoat President

Nixons blunder as the

cause of Americas prob-

lems but rather focused

on moving forward and

heal a hurting nation.

In Henry Wadsworth

Longfellows poem, A

Psalm of Life, he wrote

Lives of great menall remind us/ We can

make our lives sublime/ And, depart-ing, leave behind us/ Footprints on the

sand of time. President Fords life

and actions should lead one to won-

der how they are going to be defined

in their own life. While not everyone

will go on to be recruited for profes-

sional athletics, attend law school or

become the president of the United

States, this does not mean that all can-

not make a difference in their world.

The defining characteristic of an ad-

mirable president, as well as a person,is the way a person responds and acts

in their environment, as well as the

difference these actions make in oth-

ers peoples lives. This is what made

Ford different. He took the environ-

ment around him and turned it around

for the better. Great actions are the

accumulation of small achievements;

it is paying attention to the details that

count. For example, President Ford,

in his first election campaign for State

Representative, promised the farmersof Michigan he would visit their farms

and milk their cows if he won. He

did win and he did milk those cows.

byJulie Robison

President Ford died on December

26, 2006. He was the 38th President

of the United States. He was also the

longest-living president at 93 years

and 165 days, passing President Rea-

gan by 45 days. The legacy Presi-

dent Ford left behind will not soon

be forgotten. President George W.

Bush remarked in President Fordseulogy that in President Ford, the

world saw the best of America -- and

America found a man whose charac-

ter and leadership would bring calm

and healing to one of the most divisive

moments in our nations history.

Gerald Ford upheld the Founding

Fatherss idealism with his sense of

patriotic duty by responding to the

country when America needed him

most. He gave this country an idealto strive for and served as a model of

excellence for generations to come.


11/12

profilehforum 11

Cartoon courtsey of USBCI

Although it is widely understood

that secondhand smoke has det-

rimental health effects, health-

conscious citizens have the right

to choose whether or not to avoid

smoking friendly establishments.

If the citizens choose not to sup-

port an establishment that permits

smoking, then that establishment

has to make the decision whether

to allow smoking or to lose that

business. The freedom of choice

is still there as is the change de-

sired by citizens. Therefore, the

overall question is if we dont

agree on an issue should we use

legislation to restrict the choices

of others or should we use our

own ability to choose, without

the interference of government,

to support a business or not?

Whether or not we support an is-

sue such as state smoking bans,

we have a responsibility to com-

prehend, fully, the consequences

of our votes and the implications

of more government control in our

lives. We must not fall in the trap of

suppressing the rights of others in

order to further our own agendas.

Smoking from Page 8

businesses in Nevada. Own-

ers and workers of billiards and

bowling allies in Carson City

have reported a significant de-

crease in customers and the

customers themselves express

their discontent with the new law

quite frequently. However, since

this bill just recently came into

effect last December, it is difficultfor anyone to determine whether

this is a negative short term ef-

fect or if Nevadas economy will

be injured in the long run. Taking

an example from Canadian legis-

lation, which this bill resembles,

we can see that smoking bans

arent quite the best regulations

to implement. As a result of On-

tarios smoking bans that took ef-fect in June, Casino Windsor had

to lay off hundreds of workers

and suffered a 20 percent drop

in revenues. Aside from the al-

most painfully apparent negative

implications this bill has on the

economy, it is more than a regu-

lation against business prosper-

ity. It is a regulation against the

private sectors right to choose.

Early in the morning of Nov. 16, 2006, at the

age of 94, Milton Friedman passed away. Fried-

man was the great economist

of our time, who more than

anyone saved the econom-

ics profession from dogma.

There was Keynesian

dogma, which justified in-

creased government spend-

ing as a full employment pol-

icy; Phillips Curve dogma,which specified trade-offs

between inflation and em-

ployment; and market fail-

ure dogma, which justified

inefficient government in-

terventions and regulations.

Friedman pointed out to

the Keynesians that deficit

spending would not in-

crease total demand unless

the central bank accommo-

dated the deficit by increas-ing the money supply. Otherwise, the rise in the

governments spending would be offset by the

decline in spending by the bond purchasers.

In making this point, Friedman arrived at the

conclusion reached earlier by Michael Polanyi in

Full Employment and Free Trade (1945). Po-

lanyi had taken the point to its logical conclusion

and wrote that it was nonsensical for government

to incur interest charges by selling bonds when

the point was to increase the money supply.

Friedman was skeptical of Phillips Curve

trade-offs between employment and inflation.He addressed the issue as more inflation, more

unemployment. But it was supply-side econo-

mists who explained stagflation as the conse-quence of a wrong policy mix that pumped up

demand with easy money, while restraining real

output with high marginal tax rates. The long

economic expansions

of the 1980s and 1990s

were the results of the re-

versal of the Keynesian

policy mix by supply-

side economists in the

Reagan administration.

Friedman won the No-

bel Prize in 1976 for his permanent income hy-

pothesis (1957), a nec-

essary correction to the

Keynesian consumption

function. But his most

important work was

Monetary History of the

United States (1963),

co-authored with Anna

Schwartz, especially the

section explaining the

collapse of the moneysupply during the 1930s as the result of per-

verse monetary policy by the Federal Reserve.

Economists had come to the conclusion that

the Great Depression in the United States was

caused by insufficient aggregate demand to sup-

port full employment. However, economists

had no convincing explanation for the cause of

inadequate demand. Friedman and Schwartz

showed that the Federal Reserve had reduced

the supply of money by one-third and that this

dramatic contraction was the cause of insuf-

ficient demand to maintain full employment.The Great Depression and mistaken explana-

tions of its cause gave us the New Deal and

its assaults on the Constitution, in particularthe New Deal assault on the principle that the

lawmaking power of Congress cannot be del-

egated to regulatory agencies in the execu-

tive branch. Since the time of the New Deal,

laws passed by Congress are simply autho-

rizations for executive branch agencies to leg-

islate by writing the regulations that interpret

and implement the acts passed by Congress.

It was the failure of the Federal Reserves

monetary policy in the 1930s that caused the

Great Depression and the enormous growth

of central government power. Despite Fried-mans work, this story is still so little known

that Lawrence Stratton and I addressed it anew

in The Feds Depression and the Birth of the

New Deal (Policy Review, No. 108, 2001).

Contrary to New Deal historians, the Great De-

pression was not a failure of the old order. It was

the failure of the new order that had just begun.

Friedman was an insightful economist, and

his theoretical gifts did not prevent him from

being a real-world economist who could ad-

dress the public. Friedman regarded this task

as one of his functions as an economist. In his book Capitalism and Freedom, and in his

television series, Free to Choose, Friedman

reminded people, who had been taught to look

to the government for protection from economic

dislocation and exploitation, that historically

government was the threat to social and politi-

cal freedom. Friedman, thus, did what he could

to correct the change in the American outlook

toward government that resulted from the

Feds mistaken monetary policy in the 1930s.

Friedman never grew arrogant or inacces-

sible from his fame. He was a friend to youngerscholars with inquiring minds and respected the

efforts of others to arrive at the truth. Small of

stature, he was a giant of intellect and character.

To find out more about Paul Craig Roberts, and

read features by other Creators Syndicate writers

and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web

page at www.creators.com

COPYRIGHT 2006 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.

byPaul Craig ROberts

Guest COlumnist

MILTON FRIEDMAN IN MEMORIAM

Milton Friendman 1912-2006


12/12

the back page Winter 200712

The Hillsdale Forum

305 Hillsdale Street

Hillsdale, Michigan

49242

I mean, you got the first mainstreamAfrican-American who is articulate and

bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.

I mean, thats a storybook, man.--Presidential hopeful Joe Biden (D-DE),on presidential hopeful Barack Obama

You still have to vote for us causemy opponent is a slug, and theyre

going to tax you into the poor-house. On the way to the poor-

house, youll meet a terrorist on ev-ery street corner. And when you try

to run away from that terrorist, youwill trip over an illegal immigrant.--Former President Bill Clinton, onthe Republicans 2006 campaign

formula

As the hobbits are going up Mount

Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawnsomewhere else.... Its being drawn to

Iraq and its not being drawn to the U.S.You know what? I want to keep it on

Iraq. I dont want the Eye to come backhere to the United States. --Sen. RickSantorum (R-PA), comparing the Iraq

war to the Lord of the Rings

Helen, will you stop heckling and let me conduct apress conference... Well no, Im making an argument,

and youre, youre pestering the teacher. --WhiteHouse Press Secretary Tony Snow, to veteran reporter

Helen Thomas

I think with a lifetime appointment tothe Supreme Court, you cant play, youknow, hide the salami, or whatever its

called. --Howard Dean

George Bush givingtax cuts is like JimJones giving Kool-

Aid. It tastes goodbut itll kill you.

--Rev. Al Sharpton

We have a voice now,and were not using it,and women have so

much to lose. I mean,we could lose the right

to our bodies. Wecould lo--if you thinkthat rape should be

legal, then dont vote.--Cameron Diaz

You can tell a lot about a fellas character bywhether he picks out all of one color or justgrabs a handful. Ronald Reagan explainingwhy he liked to have a jar of jelly beans on

hand for important meetings

Documents

The Hillsdale Forum - Winter 2006-07