Letter to the editor

In today's Cavalier Daily, there was a letter published in response to my last political column on oil prices. Liz Dubats combines several arguments in a way that is misleading and inaccurate. She first argues, "Increasing consumption tax on fossil fuels is a highly effective way to provide the disincentive for consumption needed to make our nation more self-sufficient." Well, obviously increasing the gas consumption tax will decrease consumption in the long run, but it is more complex than that. There would have to be a severe increase in the tax for a significant decrease in consumption. This breaking point was not reached over the past year, and increasing this tax is not something that Republicans or even Democrats favored. (If you remember, politicians on both sides of the aisle wanted gas rebate checks and various other forms of monetary relief to ease the price spike heading into the spring.) So, we need to operate in the realm of reality, and increasing taxes is not politically feasible and will not occur in the forseeable future. Additionally, just increasing the tax doesn't necessarily guarantee an increase in self-sufficiency. Other factors, such as the price of oil and the cost of alternative energy solutions will contribute to people's consumption decisions. Also, our nation might still be dependent on other nations for these alternative energy solutions (e.g. hybrid cars).

Dubats continues:

"Tax revenue could be invested in public transit, live-where-you-work tax incentives, and even programs to cushion the potential economic blow of higher automobile fuel efficiency standards."

Public transit can always be improved, yes, but only in highly populated urban areas where it makes economic and environmental sense to invest in the infrastructure. What about the millions of people who live in smaller suburban and rural areas? Not to mention the fact that building infrastructure for public transportation is just as bad (if not worse) than building more roads, as it necessitates more environmental destruction and pollution.

Live-where-you-work tax incentives have been proposed in several cities and really haven't taken off in most of them, since they come with their own set of problems, including increased populations in already heavily populated areas, urban sprawl, potential harm to small and local businesses, and higher costs of living (which still are not offset by the incentive).

The "potential" economic blow of higher automobile fuel efficiency standards is no longer "potential." As I discussed in my column, it's already over the top:

"...the oil industry has invested $89 billion over the past 13 years in order to comply with stringent regulations. Refinery capacity has severely declined as a result; about 150 refineries exist in the United States today, while more than 300 were around in 1980. Additionally, overzealous regulations that vary from state to state exacerbate local supply shortages."

So, we should tax people who are already burdened by the economic impact of regulations and then use that money to "cushion" the effect on citizens? Why don't we just let them keep the money in the first place?

Dubats then implies that the "extreme environmentalists" I "vilified" proposed the nonsensical solutions she did (they don't), and that they have better long-term solutions for solving the energy conundrum. I singled out Greenpeace for opposing drilling in ANWR. Here are Greenpeace's solutions listed on their Web site:

1) Put big fans in the ocean. Greenpeace supports wind power, opposed by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. (Greenpeace admits to a "love affair" with Kennedy and promises to "take him back" if he changes his mind on the Nantucket Sound wind project.)
2) Go after big oil. Apparently Exxon Mobil makes the devil look like an angel.
3) Give everyone a battery-free solar refrigerator.

While they're tinkering with ways to make the fridge more eco-friendly, maybe they should come up with a way to deal with the cow flatulence that is affecting air quality and significantly contributing to greenhouse gas emissions to the extent that the EU considered imposing a flatulence quota and some countries wanted to invest millions to investigate the problem.

Dubats concludes, "We cannot de-regulate or drill our way out of this situation, as Blake would like us all to think. " Well, deregulation and increased domestic production (ideas actually debated in Congress and written about by columnists wiser than I) would go a lot further than any of the aforementioned suggestions.

Also, kudos to Brendan Sorem for his letter responding to Prof. Wende E. Marshall's quote on the living wage sit-in: "For the first time ever. I am very proud to be a part of this University." If you recall, Marshall was arrested on the first day of the sit-in for trespassing.

And just for fun...I discovered this really neat tool from Google that allows you to copy/paste content from the Internet into a single browser. It's great for compiling research in a single location. Okay, I'll stop being a dork now :-P.

Odds and Ends

First, a Happy Father's Day to all of the dads out there.

Second, thanks to the kind bloggers/commentators on Commonwealth Conservative for their vote of confidence. To respond to "Another Hoo," I wish my shoe size was a seven; the other day I went to buy sneakers in the kids' department (size 1.5, I'm really not kidding).

Here's a bunch of recent articles and interviews I thought might be of interest:

-Terry Pennington, father of a Marine being held in shackles in solitary confinement without charges at Camp Pendelton, appeared on Hannity & Colmes after calling into Sean Hannity's radio show. You can see the interview here. His son, along with six other Marines and one Navy corpsman have been allegedly linked to (but not formally charged with) the death of an Iraqi civilian in April in the town of Hamdaniya. The father's statements on his son's living conditions and the interrogation procedure he endured, if true, are outrageous. Where's the International Red Cross and all of the human rights organizations fighting for the detainees in Guantanamo?

-LA Times editorial chastising those for pointing out the ridiculous items purchased with FEMA funds in the wake of hurricane Katrina, including: "A Caribbean vacation. Pro football tickets. "Girls Gone Wild" videos. Fees for a divorce lawyer. A diamond ring. A sex-change operation."
The editorial states,

"The aim of the $2,000 cards was to give individuals immediate aid to be spent according to his or her judgment, rather than earmarking items that the government guessed would be of greatest assistance."

It concludes, "obsessing about the spending habits of refugees comes perilously close to blaming the victim." Yeah, that really makes a whole lot of sense, considering the people using the money fraudulently weren't exactly victims.

-Al Gore's new movie about global warming (anyone see it yet?) is undermined in this piece by climate experts. His claims of correlation between CO2 levels and temperature of the Earth, massive glacier collapse and meltdown, and alarming worldwide temperature increases are all deconstructed in this article in an intricate but comprehensible way.

-Interview on Hannity & Colmes of a principal at a magnet school in Connecticut who's taking a page from Bill Cosby's handbook. I'd like to hear him go up against Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton.

Going out into the real world

Sorry for the long hiatus; it's been a busy month. Graduation pictures are posted here. It was a wonderful ceremony, and I'm proud to have spent the last three years at "Mr. Jefferson's University." Thanks to those of you who've made the experience a blast. I wrote a final column which appeared in the graduation issue. It's not posted online, so I've included it below. I'll be blogging the next few weeks while I'm home recovering from jaw surgery, but in July I start a yearlong fellowship at The Weekly Standard.

"Engaging the University"
May 21, 2006
Copyright 2006 The Cavalier Daily

I’ll never forget the day I found out I was selected to be an Opinion columnist. I was elated beyond words. Three years and almost 75 columns later, I sit back and reflect over the incredible experience and the lightning speed at which this final column has approached.
The opportunity to write a weekly column has been a blessing, and it is one that I will always cherish. From covering University events, guest speakers, national politics and elections in Richmond to writing about race, diversity, the environment, the economy, religion, higher education, political correctness and many other topics, I have found each week to be a mini-adventure - a chance to learn something new, stumble upon a surprising discovery and satiate a never-ending curiosity.
As a conservative in the midst of an elite academic setting, people often ask what kind of response I get from the University community. I do get hate mail, and I’ve even been accosted on Grounds by some looking to blow off some steam. I consider all the critical letters to be a badge of honor. While it’s always entertaining to make liberals’ blood pressure skyrocket, I don’t write to provoke and irritate for the sake of annoying the Left. I may be young and idealistic (yes, even conservatives can possess those characteristics), but I truly believe in the value of intellectual debate and exchange of ideas.
I pen a column each week in hopes that someone will read it and stop a moment to mull over the substance of my argument. Whether or not people agree with me, I’ve strived to trigger a conscious action – contemplative thought – that encourages everyone to examine their own set of beliefs and question why they identify with a particular view. Those who have written me have performed the same service, and I am sincerely grateful. Engagement in this mental exercise preserves the democratic principle of a healthy and rigorous deliberation and consideration of a multiplicity of views that is the essence of a classical liberal education.
With that said, I would like to thank a few outstanding individuals who’ve made my college experience interesting, memorable, and fulfilling:
To all the left leaning groups/diversity offices/hippie campaigns on Grounds: Thanks for providing good column material.
To all the professors, administrators and CIO presidents who have responded to my requests for quotes: I truly appreciate your time and expertise in contributing a unique depth of knowledge.
To Professor Paul Freedman, Professor Robert Turner, Professor Steven Rhoads, Professor Lee Coppock and Professor Ken Elzinga: Thank you all for your tireless dedication and commitment to educating, advising and mentoring your students.
To the Cavalier Daily staff: From Final Roll parties and Opinion mixers to fun times in the basement to “the penalty of sanction” and “Density over Verbosity,” I’ve enjoyed every minute of it all. I’m honored to have been associated with such a talented and fun group. Brian, Chris, Becky, Pat, Maggie, Mike, Elliot, Herb, Adam and Elizabeth – thanks for demanding excellence and offering constructive criticism. Elizabeth and Marta, I’m really glad I got to spend some time with you. Marta, we’re waiting for the libertarian epiphany. Sarah, sitting next to you in history and hanging out has been great. Eric, my fellow “minority” on the Opinion page, thanks for breaking the Dubya bedtime for late night movies.
To my awesome roommates: Jordan and Meredith, it has been a blast living with you this year. Cheney’s Angels has had many laughs and unforgettable moments: campaign trips, NYC and Yusef, peanut butter cup ice cream, shopping, the infamous quote board and Extreme Home Makeover.
To Chad, Ben, Herb and Sara: I’m indebted to each of you for the insights and wisdom you’ve imparted to me in the classroom and beyond.
To Kristin, Jenn, Karin, Christa and the rest of the NeW ladies: From the moment a baby-popping, cookie-baking homemaker graced the cover of The Dec, we knew we struck a nerve. I’ll always remember Christina Hoff Sommers, the Berlin Wall, the Richmond trip and never-ending conspiracies in a certain Lawn room.
To the Fox News Washington, D.C. bureau: thanks for an amazing summer internship experience, and special thanks to stage manager Mary Pat, Leader of all that is Cool, for making sure I cut loose and had some fun my fourth year.
And, last but certainly not least, to my family: your love, prayers, guidance and encouragement to achieve my dreams have made all the difference in the world. Mom, thanks for always lending a listening ear, giving me topic ideas and reading my columns; you’re my best friend and the best sounding board and editor I could ever ask for.
To everyone else, never take for granted the wonderful privilege to attend an exceptional institution. Absorb all the knowledge you can, invest in friendships that will last a lifetime, and pursue your passions with abandon.

Quoted on living wage issue

I was interviewed last week for a piece featured in the Augusta Free Press on Thursday by reporter Chris Graham in light of my column on the living wage. Former Cav Daily columnist and Living Wage Campaign organizer Todd Rosenbaum was also interviewed. Mr. Graham did a good job of maintaining objectivity and presenting both sides fairly.

A badge of honor

I always say that hatemail is a badge of honor, and this is even better. The Declaration, the University's "alternative" student newspaper, featured a list of 21 students and organizations that "sew [sic] chaos, dissent, and apathy." Yep, that's me. Well, I don't know about the apathy part, since I've managed to provoke many to sit down and type out strings of four-letter words in response to my columns... but I'm proud to upset the apple cart and challenge the liberal status quo on Grounds.

Confirmed: Tony Snow is new press secretary

Alan Colmes just announced a minute ago that Tony Snow is definitely the new White House press secretary, replacing Scott McClellan. His radio commentary will be missed, but his briefings are sure to be entertaining. I'd like to see him go head to head with Helen Thomas and David Gregory.

Column linked on Salon.com

My latest column, "Dubious disenfranchisement," was mentioned in a post in response to an article on Salon.com.

A letter to the editor appeared in The Cavalier Daily last Friday. Here's my favorite part:

Blake has chosen to attack civil rights leaders working feverishly to ensure those they serve are treated fairly after a catastrophic storm and an equally disastrous governmental response.

It is their job and stated goal to play the race card when need be. Blake highlights Maryland Democratic politicking as endemic to the party when she should have recognized political gaming of the electoral process is endemic to the system.

I guess "playing the race card" is something civil rights leaders like Jackson and Sharpton should be proud of.

Anti-living wage = pro-slavery

Here's a ridiculous e-mail in response to my column on the living wage. I actually got a handful of e-mails in support of my position from University students (gasp!) As for this e-mail... I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Ms. Blake puts forth some astonishingly sound and logical principles that bear thinking about. But I think that she stops short of the real issue.

For instance, Ms. Blake claims that "an employer doesn't have the inherent responsibility to provide a minimum threshold income to its workers." I couldn't have put it better myself. But this bears thinking about. If an employer is free to pay its employees less than they need to sustain a family in the area, then the employees must then be free to hold strikes (or as I like to call them, "entitlement rallies"). Obviously, that solution is unacceptable, as workers should never be vocally unhappy with their working conditions. The problem seems to be that Blake leaves too many doors open for worker action. Unfortunately, we can't just make it illegal to strike (imagine the cries of the bleeding-hearts then). But there is a solution.

As I see it, we have two main issues: employees want to live here, and the University can't possibly pay them enough to afford housing in Charlottesville. But suppose we hit two birds with one stone. Why not provide housing for employees? Granted, we certainly don't have enough to give a family more than a room and a bed or two, but we can at least provide basic shelter. And food, of course; can't forget food. Now, we won't be providing banquets each night, but Americans overeat anyway. Of course, the University can't afford to pay standard wages anymore, but what more could employees need outside of room and board? They could even stay with their families. That way we could make sure they never have to leave Grounds, and they would be able to live close to work. UVA saves by not paying wages, and the workers are happy- they get free room and board!

In fact, this seems to be the perfect marriage of tradition and progressive thought. After all, not only are we moving the workforce forward into a new era where they don't have to worry about petty details like "Living Wage", but we're also adhering to the original work ethic of University employees. Mr. Jefferson worked this idea out to its full fruition, both at home and at this august institution. Why shouldn't we follow in his footsteps? fter all, if we have to worry about all these "freedoms" and "living concerns", we won't have time to spend our money in other, more valuable
areas. Like land acquisition. We should look into that some more.

So hats off to Ms. Blake for providing the impetus for this system. With any luck, University administrators will see the light at the end of the tunnel and remember what Mr. Jefferson would have wanted. After all, are they really obligated to do anything more?

Catching up on hate mail

For your sheer entertainment, here's some mail in response to columns from the past few weeks. I'll post some more e-mails in another entry.

Ending neo-con stereotypes

I read your article on the presentation given by Latasha Levy. I found it rather hilarious the way you twisted and misconstrued her words. You seem to be somewhat skilled in the journalistic art of lying. Your article epitomizes the problem with America, and that is the problem of blaming the victim. It's not surprising you concluded your article with a mention of the mythical notion of "black racism". You further proved the need for UVA to implement a course on racism as a general requirement. You need to think critically about racism and distinguish it from prejudice. Everyone, it is true, harbors prejudice beliefs, but racism is the concrete ability to implement prejudice in public policy. Racism is manifested through institutions!

You seem to be taking you leadership from Fox news, as your writing is clearly slanted and biased. Whatever happened to true journalism? Your work reveals less about the event than it does about your own beliefs. You simply weaved soundbites from Levy's presentations into your own polemical position. This is far from journalism. If you really wanted to counteract her work, you should have systematically laid out reasons why the figures she named are not problematic, but this would have required more intellect than parroting.

Your work also reveals your own personal confusion, in terms of identity politics. Judging from your writing I would guess that you feel indebted to white people and white interests some how or in some way. It is evident that you probably grew up in an all-white community. You epitomize another problem with America and that is the refusal to listen--whether it is to Black America, Iraq or any other group that America finds time to oppress.

There are some things you should begin to think about as a journalist representing "minority" people. How does what I am saying affect "minorities"? Whose views am I representing? Am I supposed to reveal my position or simply convey the position of my subject? Why have Black people been enslaved in this country longer than they have been free? And who is responsible? Does America have enough wealth to end poverty? And if they do, why don't they? And lastly, this is the most important question: How did I get so confused?

And here's an excerpt from another e-mail:

Your article expressed astonishment that Ms. Levy stated that Blacks could not be “racist” due to lack of power. Dr. McIntosh provides you with the answer why this is so.

The social rules of the U.S., as dictated by White societal practice (i.e. White superiority) [Nota bene: this is the reason why it is hard to talk about race]:

If you are White, you are all right
If you are Brown, stick around, and
If you are Black, step back!

Therefore, Ms. LaTasha Levy is correct in everything that you reported that she stated at her speech about the traitorous black neoconservatives. These traitorous black neoconservatives (chief among them Clarence Thomas and Wardell Connerly) betray Black people, to get succor, money, or both from White foundations (Bradley, Olin, Scaife, Walton, Coors, et. al.). These foundations sole purpose is to keep Black people down. See http://www.blackcommentator.com/52/52_connerly.html which discusses Wardell Connerly and his White foundation paymasters. These black neoconservatives have no support in the Black community. These black neoconservatives know that the Black community disfavors their opinions. These traitors also do not show up in places where other Black people can challenge their so-called conservative views.

The United States’ White institutionalized society is plagued with a hatred of Blacks. This involves White persons of all ages believing that they have the power and right as the “superior” race to tell Black persons (because Whites deem us as the “inferior” race) how to think, act, and feel.

Your article inherently holds this view. You feel that you have the power to approve of disapprove how we Blacks conduct our political affairs within the Black community. Frankly, how we choose to conduct our politics is our business alone as it affects not one White person.

No Black person chooses to be degraded or placed in an inferior position, but the White societal rules described above dictate that Blacks are to be held down so that Whites can rule the society. Notice that there has never been a Black United States President. There is not a single Black state governor in the United States.

Gotta love liberal tolerance for opposing views, right?