Archives

On behalf of the sane people inhabiting New York City, please accept our sincerest apologies for the recent comments by Mayor Michael Bloomberg concerning your recent legislation to protect your border and to arrest those who are here illegally, and our respectful request that you not judge us by the rantings of our resident loon.

The remarks I refer to are those made by Monsieur Bloomberg on or about 28 April when he said “This is not good for the country. I don’t agree with it. We love immigrants here.” These moronic comments imply that Arizonans, in contrast, do not love immigrants when nothing could be further from the truth. Arizonans, as do most Americans, simply want them here legally. That Bloomberg would make such callous and irresponsible comments is, sadly, evidence of a person who is incapable of independent and critical thinking.

Sadly, there is ample evidence supporting this conclusion. To our considerable embarrassment, Bloomberg was quoted in a 2005 article in Rolling Stone magazine that he believed that the American people were too “freaked out” over terrorism, that there were other serious concerns “such as smoking.” That any elected official in New York could so trivialize terrorism, especially after a mere four years following the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, is appalling and embarrassing. In 2008, when so many consumers were reeling over four-dollar-per-gallon gasoline and when Republican presidential candidate John McCain advocated for a moratorium on the collection of Federal gasoline sales taxes Bloomberg opposed such a moratorium on the grounds that “we” should “discourage driving.” Finally, given that both New York City and New York State governments impose income and other taxes so draconian that there is an exodus of people leaving the City and State, and given the horrible state of the economy, Mr. Bloomberg has deemed fit to focus considerable attention on the health hazards presented by --- table salt.

That’s right. Table salt.

So please, dear Arizonans and fellow Americans, please don’t judge all of us by the public rantings of Monsieur Bloomberg. He is, after all, a quintessential liberal and, I suspect (to borrow from the British comedy Blackadder), he has a peanut for a brain.

Sincerely,

John L. Overland, Jr.

NYC, 2 May 2010

Educated” or Merely Indoctrinated?

I’m reading a printout of a New York Times commentary by David Brooks entitled “The Tea Party Teens” (5 January 2010). This commentary, which is in essence a commentary on the caliber of people who are members of what is popularly referred to as the “Tea Party Movement”, is to say the least very condescending. A sample follows:

“The educated class believes in global warming, so public skepticism about global warming is on the rise. The educated class supports abortion rights, so public opinion is shifting against them. The educated class supports gun control, so opposition to gun control is mounting.”

Well, now. Don’t all of us who oppose such things feel chastised now?

In his book, When I Was a Kid, This Was a Free Country Gordon Liddy defined “being educated” as being able to think critically. Inasmuch as there are many people who are very well educated who do not share such positions as Monsieur Brooks (let’s see, to name a few Mr. Liddy, Professor Walter E. Williams, Larry Elder, again just to name a few --- and for the record I have had at least some schooling so I’m not exactly a dummy myself), it is obvious that Monsieur Brooks has forgotten that it is possible for people to be educated and who reasonably disagree with these positions. He has, in short, forgotten the distinction between those people who are educated, and those who have simply been indoctrinated.

John L. Overland, Jr.

NYC

9 Jan 2010