• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Reverend Jesse Jackson Contributes to Forced Equality

My good conservative friend, Lisa Rich, emailed me the following news about Jesse Jackson’s unexpected turn for “hands on”   forced equality politics which has become so popular with the administration presently running Washington:

“While Rev. Jackson was busy marching and telling his “green jobs” fairy tale, he was also contributing to the local economy in a very personal way. The good Reverend’s fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly Cadillac Escalade was stolen by local entrepreneurs who removed the wheels from the luxury SUV, no doubt for resale at some future date. This may not qualify as a job created, but there can be no question that lives were touched. Now that’s stimulus you can believe in! “

Pat Caddell Reviews Midterm Elections for Democrats

I like Pat Caddell.  He often is the “house Democrat” on the Fox channel.    He is an old time Democrat…a good man….a good American.  I am positive this Obama crowd is as foreign to Mr. Caddell as it is to me.  I knew a lot of good Democrats thirty years ago when I was one of them.  Then in 1980 I rejected Jimmy Carter and fled from the changing party.

Robert Costa reports for National Review Online:  “Caddell on the Midterm Election.”

“In Jimmy Carter’s White House, Patrick Caddell was, in the words of Teddy White, the “house Cassandra” — an all-too-candid pollster whose prophecies spooked the president’s other advisors. Three decades later, Caddell again is warning his fellow Democrats about electoral doom. As he sips an iced tea over lunch in midtown Manhattan, Caddell sighs and tells me that the lessons of the Carter years appear to be all but forgotten by the current crop of Democrats in Washington.

“President Obama’s undoing may be his disingenuousness,” Caddell says. After campaigning for post-partisanship, Obama, he observes, has lurched without pause to the left. “You can’t get this far from what you promised,” Caddell says, “especially when people invest in hope — you must understand that obligation. The killer in American politics is disappointment. When you are elected on expectations, and you fail to meet them, your decline steepens.”

Comment:  Like Dennis Prager, Pat Caddell refers to Barack Obama as “disingenuous”.  So does Charles Krauthammer.  They are too polite to describe him,  by  his primary habit of not telling the truth when verbalizing, as a liar……for that is what being disingenuous means.

Roger Kimball Reminds Us of the Lessons of the Berlin Wall

For those younger Americans, probably 97.5% or more, who know nothing, or no longer know anything about the Berlin Wall or perhaps an equal percentage who know nothing or have forgotten the particulars of the good old USSR…..or Soviet Union (1917 – 1992, may it rest in pieces forever) you may find Roger Kimball’s article, “Tyranny set in stone” boring or too difficult to read.  However, if you have any interest in the survival of the country in which you live and maybe even work, the good old USA, force yourself to learn something important to remember…….the Berlin Wall.

I was in my 50s in the mid 1980s.  I never, ever thought that in my lifetime the Soviet Union and its western extension of control, East Germany, would ever come crashing down…….except when I went back to the Soviet Union in 1990…….one of the greatest inspirational experiences of my life occurred in October that year when I was in Kiev observing people in peaceful revolt standing in public sorrow both noon and night, bearing their personal tragedies and family losses to the thousands and thousands in mourning waiting to take their turn to tell their stories.  Grandmothers, sons, fathers, grandfathers,  brothers, neighbors, those disappearing  forever into the Soviet night by a government too big, too  cruel, too inhuman were at last given recognition that they had once lived and were loved.

For the countless know-nothings in our own country totally unaware of America’s  enemies and its  great threatening challenges  of our brief time in this world, or ignorant of nearly everything that has ever occured in our American past, becoming acquainted with the Berlin Wall is a beginning of  a worthy learning.

I visited Check Point Charlie  in 1993, I think it was.   I spent an entire day at its tiny wooden hut of a  museum watching its movies of the history of the Wall, people old and young attempting to escape, some to visit loved ones, others for freedom, and others killed for attempting to cross the zone.  Oh the courage, the bravery people under tyranny so often display. 

May I recommend as required viewing for all Americans wanting to know life as it was lived even in the kinder years of the Wall, the twilight years of the despotic regime of Erik Hoenneker’s dictatorship, dubbed by its Marxist creators, “The German Democratic Republic”……

…..the German film…”The Lives of Others”……a magnificent reproduction of life as close to reality as art ever could be made by people who lived very close to the script.

The following is an article written by Roger Kimball which can be found at the very worthy website, “The New Criterion”..November, 2009.

 Tyranny set in stone….by Roger Kimball…..The New Criterion

“It is in the moment of defeat that the inherent weakness of totalitarian propaganda becomes visible. Without the force of the movement, its members cease at once to believe in the dogma for which yesterday they still were ready to sacrifice their lives.
—Hannah Arendt

The inevitable never happens. It is the unexpected always.
—John Maynard Keynes

Was there ever a more fitting monument to tyranny than the Berlin Wall? Conceived in desperation, this brutal barrier was erected in 1961 by the state not for the protection but for the incarceration of its citizens. Hold fast to that thought. The Berlin Wall was the stuff of gritty spy novels, the literal instantiation of Winston Churchill’s “iron curtain,” which in 1946, with characteristic prescience, he saw descending across Central and Eastern Europe. The Berlin Wall was also an inescapable indictment, not just of a particular society but of an entire world view, the world view of Soviet Communism with its rhetoric of justice and class struggle in one hand and its reality of the Gulag and the systematic obliteration of human freedom in the other.

Do we remember that? The passage of time tends to soften outlines, confuse oppositions, and swallow fundamental distinctions in a patois of complication. It is a process that promises greater understanding, or at least greater sophistication. Often, however, its chief fruit is an enervating, ultimately an endarkening, relativism. Although fragments of the Berlin Wall are distributed like talismans of freedom across the globe—fittingly, a large sliver stands outside the Reagan Library in California —its awful significance seems muted, even lost in the cacophony of historical second-guessing, the distorting glaze of nostalgia.

The story of the Berlin Wall is inseparable from the story of the peculiar disposition of Berlin following World War II. Thrust some 100 kilometers into the decidedly non-democratic German Democratic Republic, Berlin was nominally under the control of the four victorious allies, with France, Great Britain, the United States, and the Soviet Union each presiding over a separate quadrant. In reality, the city, like Germany itself, was split between democracy in the West and Communist tyranny in the East. It was a situation that guaranteed the city would become a theater in which the democratic West would be in daily public contest with Soviet Communism.

From the very beginning, Berlin was a huge embarrassment for the Soviets. The worker’s paradise of East Germany seemed the opposite of edenic to those condemned to live and work there. Contiguity with the West in Berlin assured that the discrepancy between life in a liberal democracy and a Communist state was (like Falstaff’s dishonesty) “gross as a mountain, open, palpable.” In 1948, the Soviets blockaded Berlin, a preliminary, they hoped, to annexing it entirely. The Berlin airlift, orchestrated by the American army general Lucius Clay, provisioned the city with some 4,500 tons of food, fuel, and other necessities every day for nearly a year—at its peak, 1,500 flights a day were crowding in and out of Tempelhof airport. Finally, in May 1949, the Soviets gave it up and lifted the blockade.

The airlift was an extraordinary act of political defiance as well as an unprecedented logistical feat. But it did not overcome the contradiction that was Berlin. Increasingly, East Germans voted with their feet. By 1960, a thousand people a day were fleeing East Germany via Berlin. Walter Ulbricht, the GDR’s Communist dictator, pleaded with Nikita Khrushchev to do something to stanch the flow of human capital. The following summer, Khrushchev, having taken the measure of JFK and his lieutenants, decided to close the border. At a dinner on August 12, he gleefully announced to his companions: “We’re going to close Berlin. We’ll just put up serpentine barbed wire and the West will stand there, like dumb sheep.”

Work began at midnight. The Russian soldiers had been told to withdraw if challenged. But no challenge came from JFK’s ovine entourage. In the succeeding months, the barbed wire was replaced by masonry and metal. The wall gradually encircled the whole of West Berlin. Some three-hundred guard towers punctuated the wall. A second, inner wall sprang up. The “death strip” between was mined and booby-trapped. Guard dogs accompanied the soldiers on their rounds. Erich Honecker, who replaced Ulbricht in 1971, issued a shoot-on-sight order. Somewhere between a hundred and two hundred people were killed trying to scale, or tunnel under, the wall, another 1,000 trying to flee elsewhere from East Germany. For Honecker, it was a small price to pay. Between 1949 and 1962, some two and a half million people had fled East Germany to the West. From 1962 to 1989, his draconian measures reduced the flood to a trickle of 5,000. “Overnight,” Michael Meyer writes in The Year That Changed the World,

the forty-two thousand square miles of the German Democratic Republic became a prison. Transportation and communication links were cut. Bustling streets and lively sidewalks in the heart of metropolitan Berlin suddenly became abandoned dead ends. Sewers, tramlines and power grids were blocked or cut. Families were broken, friendships severed. Children lost parents or grandparents. On official maps, the Western half of the city was blotted out—figuratively erased from the world of the living.[1]

It all seems so long ago now—not just the construction of the wall and the long eclipse of freedom that followed, but also the brief carnivalesque season that attended its collapse nearly thirty years later on November 9, 1989. What had begun in studied malevolence ended in stunning inadvertence. By the mid-1980s, the monolith of Soviet tyranny was betraying cracks. Mikhail Gorbachev, who ascended to power in 1985, endeavored to save Communism through a policy of selective liberalization. There was no question of scrapping Communism. Gorbachev time and again made it clear that he was a committed Communist. He might contemplate certain economic and social reforms in order to salvage the USSR’s corrupt and stagnant economy, but private property in any robust sense was out of the question. Similarly, there could be no serious rivals to the Communist party for political power.

Gorbachev had set himself an impossible task. As Hannah Arendt observed, the essence of totalitarianism lies in arbitrariness and control. Efforts to liberalize totalitarian regimes therefore lead not to reform but dissolution. Keeping the lid on freedom is like being a little bit pregnant: an impossibility. By 1989, cracks in the façade of Soviet totalitarianism had become so many fissures of freedom. The Tiananmen Square Massacre in China that June had the effect of galvanizing nascent movements for freedom across Eastern and Central Europe and even in Russia itself. Borders with the West in Hungary and Czechoslovakia were breached and a new exodus to the West began. In one three-day period, 50,000 people fled. A common joke: “Last one out, turn off the lights.”

In East Germany, Erich Honecker was deposed by the Politburo in October. His successor, Egon Krenz, was a doctrinaire Communist desperate to salvage the regime and his career. With the Hungarian and Czech borders hemorrhaging people, he knew he had to address the issue of exit visas. He did not declare the Berlin Wall open. On the contrary, he said that the wall was “a bulwark against Western subversion.” He carefully drafted a plan that would allow East Germans with the appropriate papers to leave after applying to the authorities. The plan was to take effect the following day, November 10. He read the provisions aloud to his colleagues sentence by sentence to be sure that there was no misunderstanding. He then gave the document to his assistant Günter Schabowski, who was on his way to a press conference.

At the end of the press conference, Schabowski read from Krenz’s communiqué. The effect was electrifying. Schabowski had just announced that the East Germans would be free to go. In the hubbub that followed, the question “When does the decree take effect?” penetrated his ears.[2] Schabowski paused to consult his notes. “Ab sofort” came the famous reply: “immediately.” Almost instantly, the wall was besieged by impatient throngs. The guards did nothing to stop them. Krenz’s plan for a state-controlled dispensation was shattered. And thus began the unraveling that would soon engulf not only Eastern Europe, but also the very seat of empire. In many ways, as Victor Sebestyen observes in Revolution 1989: The Fall of the Soviet Empire (Pantheon, 2009), it was “a mistake.” He quotes an unnamed diplomat who described the fall of the Berlin Wall as “one of the most colossal administrative errors in … history.”

Although dramatic, was the fall of the wall really so important? After all, protests and freedom movements were springing up all across the Soviet empire. But Michael Meyer is right: if Krenz’s plan had been put into action as he wished, things might have been different:

The wall would not have “fallen.” It would have been opened, not breached. The communists would have done it, not the people. Change might have come by evolution, not revolution. The bureaucrats would have gained time. Might they even have contained or channeled popular unrest, defused it, convinced people that reformed communism could work, possibly even keep themselves in power? Without the drama of the Fall … would the Velvet Revolution in Prague have come one week later? Would Romanians have found the courage to rise up against Ceausescu a month later? The dominos of Eastern Europe might have toppled differently. A few might not have toppled at all.

What, finally, brought down the wall? The candidates for that honor are many, from the impersonal operation of History to the people-power of movements like Solidarity and the spiritual leadership of Pope John Paul II. Among Western academics, the role of Mikhail Gorbachev enjoys pride of place. His mantras of glasnost and perestroika (“openness” and “restructuring”) became favored terms in English. In the late 1980s, Gorbachev, the true-believing Communist, was the hero. Never mind that he wished to salvage the Soviet empire: he spoke to the hearts and minds of the Western intelligentsia in a way Ronald Reagan never did. Reagan, after all, had the temerity early on in his tenure to describe the Soviet Union as an “evil empire.” How the liberal establishment recoiled from, how it ridiculed that phrase. “The Western diplomatic firmament,” William F. Buckley Jr. recalled in 1990, “shook with indignation.” Then came “Star Wars” and Reagan’s military buildup. How the Left scorned that. How the Soviets scrambled to keep up. After one of his chummy sight-seeing tours of Moscow in 1984, the Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote an article about his trip for The New Yorker. The Soviet’s “great material progress” impressed him, as did the look of “solid well-being of the people on the streets.” He dismissed as groundless the rumors that were beginning to circulate that there was trouble in paradise. Although some commentators had suggested that the Soviet Union was in crisis, even “in danger of collapse,” Galbraith brusquely dismissed such pessimism: “This I strongly doubt.”

Meanwhile, Ronald Reagan kept battling against the intolerable enormity of Communism. In 1987 in Berlin, he delivered one of his most famous speeches: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” The great line was written by Peter Robinson, now a scholar at the Hoover Institution. Both the State Department and the National Security Council attempted to get the line dropped from the speech. It was “naïve,” it would raise “false hopes,” it made Reagan look like “a crude anticommunist cowboy.” The speech went through seven drafts; each time, the line was excised; each time Reagan restored it. The Soviets were furious when Reagan delivered the speech. Well might they be. It was on his watch, as Buckley put it, that Communism “ceased to be a creed, surviving only as a threat.” “Ronald Reagan,” Buckley added, “had more to do with this than any other statesman in the world.”

The twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall provides an opportune moment to remind ourselves what was at stake in the Cold War—what still is at stake on the perpetual battleground of freedom. I know that sounds histrionic. But the fall of the Berlin Wall—the first act whose denouement was the collapse of the Soviet Union two years later—is a contemporary as well as a historical subject. That is to say, we have not written finis to that chapter of our moral history. It is not clear that we ever will. As Leszek Kolakowski, one of our greatest genealogists of Marxism, observed in 2002,

communism was not the crazy fantasy of a few fanatics, nor the result of human stupidity and baseness; it was a real, very real part of the history of the twentieth century, and we cannot understand this history of ours without understanding communism. We cannot get rid of this specter by saying it was just “human stupidity,” or “human corruptibility.” The specter is stronger than the spells we cast on it. It might come back to life.

As we look around the world today, a melancholy spectacle greets our gaze. The Soviet Union is no more, but a minatory if diminished Russia has taken its place. A possibly nuclear Iran. A confirmed nuclear North Korea and Pakistan. Preposterous anti-American strongmen like Hugo Chávez in Venezuela. An increasingly rampant threat of Islamofascism. The enemies of freedom and the West are more numerous than ever. It is here that the two deepest lessons of the Berlin Wall lie. First, that tyranny frankly confronted can be defeated. But, second, that the victory of freedom is never final: it must always be renewed not only through our willingness to acknowledge and struggle against evil, but also through a forthright proclamation of our own founding principles. It is this last requirement of freedom that seems most difficult for Western intellectuals. To quote Kolakowski once more, there is “one Great Cause that has persisted more or less intact throughout the past decades in the Leftist mentality: the loathing of democratic countries. Allegiances changed, but if there was something enduring in Leftist politics, it was this: in any conflict between a tyrannical and democratic country, the tyrants were right and democracy wrong.” One would have thought that the admonitory tale of the Berlin Wall would provide an incontrovertible disabusement. Alas, it is a lesson we have yet to absorb. “

Educating America by Building Temples to Left-wing Gods at Tax Payer Expense

Los Angeles, California, folks……A temple is being built to worship one of the top Leftwing flakes of the last century, Bobby Kennedy.   It is called the Robert F. Kennedy Learning Center.  I learned about the complex only this morning when I opened up my Weekend Wallstreet Journal to its opinion page. 

Allysia Finley, a name totally unfamiliar to me, had written an article about MODERN AMERICAN LIBERAL EDUCATION! 

It appears Bobby and Teddy Kennedy are to be remembered in Los Angeles, California, in name, if not in fact, by their fans in charge of public education taxing  in America’s largest and most populous bankrupt state.

Brace yourselves as you become more acquainted with the twenty first century establishment LEFT’s  concept of public education priorities at public expense:

“At  $578 million – or about $140,000 per student – the 24 acre Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools complex in mid-Wilshire is the most expensive school ever constructed in U.S. history.  To put the price in context, this city’s Staples sports and entertainment  center cost $375 million.  To put it in a more important context, the school district is currently running a $640 million deficit and has had to lay  off 3,000 teachers in the past two years.  It also has one of the lowest graduation rates in the country and some of the worst test scores.

The K-12 complex isn’t merely an overwrought paean to the nation’s most celebrated liberal political family.  It’s a jarring reminder that money doesn’t guarantee success – though it certainly beautifies failure.

The cluster of schools is situated on the premises of the old Ambassador Hotel where the New York senator and presidential candidate was shot in 1968.  The school district insists that it chose the site not merely for sentimental reasons, but because it was the only space available in the area and the property was dirt cheap.

That was the only cheap thing about the project.  In order to build on the site, the school district had to resolve protracted legal battles with Donald Trump – who wanted to build the tallest skyscraper west of the Mississippi there – and with historical conservationists who demanded that certain features be restored or recreated.

Set to open Sept. 13, the school boasts an auditorium whose starry ceiling and garish entrance are modeled after the old Cocoanut Grove nightclub and a library whose round, vaulted ceilings and cavernous center resemble the ballroom where Kennedy made his last speech.  It also includes the original Cocoanut Grove canopy around which the rest of the school was built.  “It wasn’t cheap, but it was saved,” says Thomas Rubin, a consultant for the district’s bond oversight committee, which oversees the $20 billion of bonds that taxpayers approved for school construction in recent years.

I asked Mr. Rubin whether some of the school’s grandiose features – like florid murals of Robert F. Kennedy – were worth the cost.  “Did we have to do that?  Hell no.  But there’s no accounting for taste”, he responded.

Talking benches – $54,000 – play a three-hour audio of the site’s history.  Murals and other public art cost $1.3 million.  A minipark facing a bustling Wilshire Boulevard?  $4.9 million.

The Kennedy complex is Exhibit A in the district’s profligate 131-school building binge.  Exhibit B is the district’s  Visual and Performing Arts High School, which was originally budgeted at $70 million until costs skyrocketed midway throught construction when contractors discovered underground methane gas and a fault line.  Eventual cost: $377 million.

Mr. Rubin admits that the Roybal Center project was “a tremendous screw-up that  “should have been studied closer beforehand.”  The project was abandoned for several years, only to be recommenced when community activists demanded that the school be built at whatever cost necessary in order to show respect for the neighborhood’s Latin children, many of whom were attending an overcrowded Belmont High School.

The Roybal center now ranks in the bottom third of schools with similar demographics on state tests, while Belmont  High ranks in the top third.  But even though many Roybal kids can’t read or do math, at least they have a dance studio with cushioned maple floors and a kitchen with a restaurant-quality pizza oven.

Expect more such over-the-top and inefficient building projects in the future.  Los Angeles voters have approved over $20 billion of bonds since 1997 and state voters have chipped in another $4.4 billion of matching funds.  Roughly a third of the cost of the Kennedy complex will be shouldered by state taxpayers.

The district’s building spree has sparked outrage from charter schools, not least because they are getting only a tiny piece of the bond pie.  California Charter School Association President Jed Wallace says a charter school can be built at a seventh of the cost of the Kennedy complex and a quarter of most L.A. schools.  For example, the nonprofit Green Dot built seven charters in the area-to serve about 4,230 mainly low income students – for less than $85 million in total.  These schools also have a collective graduation rate that’s nearly twice as high as that of the Los Angeles Unified School District, which Education Week magazine pegs as 40%.

Mr. Rubin says it’s unfair to compare charters with traditional public schools because charters aren’t saddled with onerous government regulations regarding labor and environmental standards.  What he doesn’t say is that charter schools don’t have taxpayers as a backstop.  Traditional public schools “have no accountability or restraints,” Mr. Wallace bristles.  “They don’t have to make the tough choices when costs run over.”

That’s fairly evident as I glimpse a billboard-sized marble slab engraved with quotes by Cesar Chavez, Maya Angelou, and Ted Kennedy.  But, hey, you can’t put a price on taste.”

Comment:   Thank you Ms. Finley for such clarity outlining the priorities of leftwing educators, their gods and their temple builders.  I expect here in Minnesota our Mark Daytons, Garrison Keillor fans and our Marxist centers of religion and similar learnings  both public, private, high school and college, will be securing tax monies to build a  billion dollar temple to Paul Wellstone. 

I am wondering, however, which anti-American minority will be created and Lefty trained in the arts of “victimhood rhetoric and writing, acting, finance,  politics and  infiltration”……perhaps ten year old graduates of the Saudi madrassas.   Since they have already had a head start in memorizing  intolerance, they could easily switch gods from Allah to Marx…..and then evangelize throughout the land with a head start at a young age.

I am also wondering what the Kennedy Complex will look like a year or two after opening.  With the usual grafitti of anti-American expression, liberal destruction of property, both often celebrated by the Left as examples of the sufferings of its people, I am wondering  what lights might be still lighting up in 2012.

And again I am wondering if California’s in-coming governor will have Arnold’s cheek to beg Washington for Minnesota and the rest of the country’s tax paying money to bail out these thieves and sharks of the modern American education rackets.   Talk about taxation without representation!