Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas Sowell: Is Anybody Serious? (Excellent)
Creators Syndicate ^ | January 25, 2012 | Thomas Sowell

Posted on 01/25/2012 11:24:30 AM PST by jazusamo

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
GO NEWT!!
1 posted on 01/25/2012 11:24:34 AM PST by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

—With the economy still faltering and Iran on its way to getting nuclear bombs, surely we can get serious about the issues facing this nation. Or can we? —

Before I answer that, I need to see who is going to be on Dancing with the Stars.


2 posted on 01/25/2012 11:26:20 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; abigail2; Amalie; American Quilter; arthurus; awelliott; Bahbah; bamahead; ...
*PING*
Thomas Sowell

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Recent columns
Too Many People Speak Out Of Their Ignorance
South Carolina Message
An Ignored ‘Disparity’: Part IV

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to or removed from the Thomas Sowell ping list…

3 posted on 01/25/2012 11:26:36 AM PST by jazusamo (If you don't like growing older, don't worry. You may not be growing older much longer: T. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Unfortunately you’re all too correct for way too many people.


4 posted on 01/25/2012 11:28:40 AM PST by jazusamo (If you don't like growing older, don't worry. You may not be growing older much longer: T. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Thanks for the ping jaz. Dr. Sowell right on the mark as usual.


5 posted on 01/25/2012 11:30:42 AM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

If the party bosses allowed a true conservative with guts on the ballot without interference there would not be a problem with the election or this country for that matter.

The problem, Mr. Sowell, rests on Karl and his ilk, not the conservatives. It’s been that way for a long time.


6 posted on 01/25/2012 11:35:19 AM PST by MichaelCorleone (Real women don't kill their unborn. But womyn do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Haven't even read it, yet, but jaz, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, using the word "Excellent" after anything with Sowell's byline is ... redundant! ;^)

Now I'm gonna read it!

By the way, thank you so much for having me on your Thomas Sowell ping list. :^)

7 posted on 01/25/2012 11:37:59 AM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

—Unfortunately you’re all too correct for way too many people.-

Having dumped TV myself in the 90’s, I’m all too aware of it. :-(

I also believe the electorate has already proven that it will not wake from it’s stupor until it is too late. I have no doubt whatsoever, for one simple reason: It became “too late” before Obama was even elected, though he has exacerbated the situation greatly.


8 posted on 01/25/2012 11:39:11 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Finny

You’re correct, I seldom do it but sometimes I just get charged up. :-)


9 posted on 01/25/2012 11:40:25 AM PST by jazusamo (If you don't like growing older, don't worry. You may not be growing older much longer: T. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Sowell BTT. Anyone who can cite chapter and verse concerning Gingrich’s marriages but can’t state a single one of his policies is not serious.


10 posted on 01/25/2012 11:41:50 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Sowell is exactly right. Truth is, we’re just not very good at selecting and electing Presidents. Our process is all wrong. There certainly is a particular skill set that Presidents need to have— and our electoral process doesn’t test for any of that. Instead, our tests are all about things that don’t really matter for the actual job of being President.

We’re far better at seeking out and selecting a new American Idol that we are at finding new Presidents. The “debates” (which aren’t really even debates) are useless. Presidents don’t need debate skills. What they need is the ability to listen to diverse opinions and differing advice— and recognize good advice when they hear it. Presidents don’t need an encyclopedic knowledge of facts about the world or even it’s leaders. What they need is a gift for quickly assimilating new information in order to make sound decisions, perhaps on topics that they first learned about that morning.

The real day-to-day skills that make a President aren’t things that we come even close to in our selection process. I’m not sure what to do about it, but there’s got to be a better answer.


11 posted on 01/25/2012 11:42:27 AM PST by Ramius (Personally, I'd give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Too true. Until socialism bites the American people hard and painfully on their collective butts, too many will never wake up. As long as their bellies are full, they have mind-numbing entertainment, can have as much reckless sex as they want, then they will continue along the path of slavery and surrender their freedom and liberty.


12 posted on 01/25/2012 11:49:42 AM PST by Clock King (Ellisworth Toohey was right: My head's gonna explode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Yep -- a nice kind of compliment he paid Newt, noting that Newt's been smart enough to ease off on the Bain Capital "demagoguery" (I think that term's a little strong for what Newt was doing, but that's me -- I defer to Sowell here). And then this beaut:

"On the other hand, if Romney just wants to sling a lot of mud in Newt's direction and hope that some of it sticks, then that should tell the voters a lot about Romney's character.

Great jumpin' Jehosephat, I do love Thomas Sowell.

Then he goes on to mention something that's been bugging me for days, YES! And that is that Romney keeps referring to Newt as a "lobbyist," when he was a consultant. There's a big difference. Thank you, Thomas Sowell.

Godspeed Newt Gingrich! And God bless Thomas Sowell.

13 posted on 01/25/2012 11:52:43 AM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Sowell is absolutely right. Trashing each other instead of the true enemy has proved disastrous so far this cycle.

I hope there is time for us to recover. If not, the entire country pays a terrible price.

14 posted on 01/25/2012 11:54:55 AM PST by comebacknewt (Newt (sigh) what could have been . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Poisoning the well of political discourse may be one of the reasons why we see such unsatisfactory sets of candidates for political office in both parties, not only this year but in previous election years as well.

Flashback:

Next for GOP leaders: Stopping Sarah Palin

15 posted on 01/25/2012 11:55:24 AM PST by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
Sowell is exactly right. Truth is, we’re just not very good at selecting and electing Presidents. Our process is all wrong. There certainly is a particular skill set that Presidents need to have— and our electoral process doesn’t test for any of that. Instead, our tests are all about things that don’t really matter for the actual job of being President.

Part of the problem is the visual media. Ever since the 1960 Kennedy vs. Nixon debate, the criteria changed from substance to style. How does the candidate look and speak to the camera becomes important, not what they are saying.

16 posted on 01/25/2012 11:57:23 AM PST by kosciusko51 (Enough of "Who is John Galt?" Who is Patrick Henry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone
If the party bosses allowed a true conservative with guts on the ballot without interference there would not be a problem with the election or this country for that matter.

I ask you on the day of your daughter's wedding. Do you really believe that? Me? I ain't so sure. I live in a country where 53% of the voters had no trouble pulling the lever for a jive-ass Chicago Community Organizer, whose very name is not a settled question.

With $4 gas, and 10% unemployment (at least), that same 53% is still out there. "Conservatism" requires thoughtful analysis, enlightened self-interest, the ability to detect the difference between bullshiite and Shinola, etc.

My research over to the Wal-Mart parking lot has convinced me that these attributes are in shorter supply than we might like.

17 posted on 01/25/2012 12:05:47 PM PST by Kenny Bunk ((So, you're telling me Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Roberts can't figure out this eligibility stuff?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

18 posted on 01/25/2012 12:08:55 PM PST by Tarantulas ( Illegal immigration - the trojan horse that's treated like a sacred cow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Sowell is saying what Krauthammer said last week.


19 posted on 01/25/2012 12:15:18 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
What they need is the ability to listen to diverse opinions and differing advice— and recognize good advice when they hear it. Presidents don’t need an encyclopedic knowledge of facts about the world or even it’s leaders. What they need is a gift for quickly assimilating new information in order to make sound decisions, perhaps on topics that they first learned about that morning.

All fine and good. I would add as a first requirement the ability to have all decisions strictly follow the language and intent of the United States Constitution.

Our Republic would have been much better served if our leaders did not undertake to "help the people" in the cause of solving "problems." We would have a more peaceful, ordered, and prosperous Republic.

20 posted on 01/25/2012 12:27:25 PM PST by sand88 (Hey Rove et al, I will, with great pleasure, NOT cast a vote for the Statist Mitt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson