Crime-busting vs. ACLU-massaging

Tom Roeser talked to “a top level authority on police attitudes” and got an earful for Chicago Daily Observer about law enforcement in Chicago under the new superintendent:

Jody Weis’ appointment…an FBI agent who never wore a uniform nor patrolled a beat…signaled a mayoral disapproval of the department that is ruining morale. [The source] contrasted this with the record of New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani who stood by his department and beat off civil libertarians who tried to super-enforce infractions that hobbled the New York police.

He calls it a “soft revolt.”

“When the mayor and the police superintendent are more interested in pacifying the ACLU than in keeping down crime and going the extra mile for prevention, it’s bound to happen.”

Giuliani cleaned up NYC and lessened the cop-shooting of blacks, claiming as “the most fundamental of civil rights . . . the guarantee that government can give you a reasonable degree of safety.”  He is quoted by Stephen Malanga in City Journal.

“Murder and graffiti are two vastly different crimes,” he explained. “But they are part of the same continuum, and a climate that tolerates one is more likely to tolerate the other.”

NY Times and ACLU howled, and leftist commentators continue to try to debunk his claims.  His top cop plowed ahead:

His police chief, William Bratton, reorganized the NYPD, emphasizing a street-crimes unit that moved around the city, flooding high-crime areas and getting guns off the street.

Not complaining to state legislators to pass yet more unenforced and unforceable laws in a Prohibition-revisited effort to throttle honest citizens while don’t-give-a-hoot gangsters thrive — the Daley-Weis response.

The policing innovations led to a historic drop in crime far beyond what anyone could have imagined, with total crime down by some 64 percent during the Giuliani years, and murder (the most reliable crime statistic) down 67 percent, from 1,960 in Dinkins’s last year to 640 in Giuliani’s last year.

Blacks were among those who profited most from Giuliani-Bratton policies, as detailed by Deroy Murdock:

Take Brooklyn’s largely black 75th Precinct, New York’s toughest. In 1993, 110 of its residents were murdered. In 1998, homicides dropped to 37. Through June 20, 12 people were killed, compared to 19 a year ago.

Between 1993 and 1998, homicides in Bedford-Stuyvesant’s 81st Precinct tumbled 62%, from 26 to 10. In Harlem’s 28th Precinct, murders plummeted from 35 to eight, a 77% plunge.

The New York Post estimated what would have happened had crime galloped at its dismal pre-Giuliani pace. Sixty-four more Asians, 308 more whites, 1,842 more Hispanics and 2,299 more blacks would have been murdered.

In contrast with aggressive policing much bemoaned by liberals, Weis bemoans the situation:

“There are just too many weapons here,” Weis said Sunday. “Too many guns, too many gangs.”

The question is, what do Daley and Weis intend to do about it?

The Pope should do WHAT? Plus the Inverness problem

Bob McClory, a writer, and Rev. Patrick Brennan, a pastor, each has his point of view.  Bob

wants the pope to say he doesn’t know what’s wrong with the church and so to call a bunch of meetings to find out.

What might he have in mind, and can I go to one of these meetings?

Father Brennan wants four more years in Inverness, but the rules work against that.  Is there a happy solution here?  Rev. Michael Pfleger remains at St. Sabina, as we know, having served not two and a half but four terms and counting.  No fair.

On the other hand, there are good reasons, as opposed to merely expedient ones, to let Pfleger stay – while peppering him with a thousand ecclesiastical cuts. Same with Brennan and others who have carved themselves a place in the hearts of their parishioners.

The quotes are from my Chi Daily Observer piece, “Current Religious Movements vs the 1970’s: McClory and Brennan,” which you are invited to read.

Darwin dissed, ditto poo-bahs in Stein movie

Ben Stein’s documentary, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” is an attack partly on academic pussy-footedness and partly on Darwinism.  Stein opens with a half dozen or so cases of professors who were punished for showing even in a small way openness to Intelligent Design as explaining the origin of species than Charles Darwin.

The scientific community demonstrates nonsensical fear of intelligence as having a hand, apparently panicking at the thought of lending even a smidgen of respectability to the idea and forbidding scientists to do so at cost of their web sites, jobs, and careers, Stein argues through the film, which is being shown in six Chicago-area movie houses.

He goes after Darwinism itself with the point that the cell Darwin and anyone else knew about in the 1850s was a very simple item compared to the information-filled cell that scientists know about today.  The film makes the point partly with an animated display of dozens of shapes and colors and movement patterns. 

If Darwin’s cell were a tennis ball, one man told Stein when asked, today’s is a galaxy.  No comparison, in other words, but meanwhile science limps along with Darwin’s explanation, which doesn’t even hold together internally, much less explain that galaxy of data, which as accident is ridiculous on its face.  That’s what the film says, in a manner that I cannot but take seriously.

End of saga, with whimper

Time-Warner/HBO performer Bill Maher has apologized:

“My statements on the April 11th edition of Real Time with Bill Maher were intended solely as an indictment of the Catholic Church’s cavalier mishandling of the child abuse scandals over the years,” said Maher. “My comments did not in any way refer to the LGBT community, and I am sorry if they were misinterpreted that way.”

LGBT?  Wasn’t the issue his calling Benedict XVI a one-time Nazi and the church a “child-abusing religious cult”?  Why the apology to lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals?  Here’s why:

In discussing the Pope and the church, he

misappropriated the historic slogan “We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it,” leading some viewers to believe Maher was making a connection between gays and pedophilia.

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), surprised to hear this from Maher, “a staunch supporter of LGBT equality,”

reached out to Maher to discuss the implications of his improper use of the slogan, and the host issued [the above-quoted] clarification and apology.

All right, that’s settled.  As for the pope as former Nazi and the church as cult, he

acknowledged that the Catholic League [for Religious and Civil Rights] was right when we said that Joseph Ratzinger was forced to join a German youth organization (from which he fled at the first instance),

Says the League in a release, adding, “Maher then said that if a CEO were in charge of an institution that housed molesters, he would be fired.”

Or as Blithe Spirit correspondent Bonnie recounted:

Bill sort of apologized.  he said his “opponents” were technically right, and that he will never make a “pope is a nazi” joke ever again… but he did say that if the pope was a CEO of a big company that runs day care centers and they found all the same sex abuse they’ve found, and covered it up, that the pope would be in jail.

He further defended himself as an equal-opportunity satirist, saying it’s unfair to say he only goes after catholics and describing a skit he did belittling muslims.

(A fuller treatment of all this is at Newsbusters, with a link there to MsUnderstimated.)

The church’s defensive coordinator in these matters, Catholic League director Bill Donohue, expatiated:

[T]o suggest that Pope Benedict XVI was in charge of policing molesters, and failed in doing so, is patently absurd.

As Pope John Paul II’s right-hand man, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger’s principal job was to make sure that theologians were faithfully presenting the teachings of the Catholic Church. He was, to some extent, the Church’s Academic Dean, someone who was charged with enforcing academic standards. He was not the Church’s Dean of Students, i.e., he was not discharged [sic] with enforcing codes of conduct.

Moreover:

Maher has to understand that no one person, including the pope, could possibly be held accountable for the behavior of its employees in a global institution. There are priests from Boston to Bosnia, and it is simply preposterous for any one person to know exactly what is going on everywhere at any given time. Maher would have been better advised to focus on those bishops who proved to be enablers—it is the bishop’s job to know what is going on in his diocese, not the pope’s.

That’s interesting: go after the bishops.  In any case, Donohue would like it if “Maher gave up his Catholic-bashing obsession once and for all.”

I would too.  There’s humor and there’s overkill, pricking balloons and blowing up buildings.  Ideally, the satirist comes up with something almost everybody can laugh at. 

The late Joel Wells, editor of The Critic magazine (Chicago-based, also late), had an almost Wodehousian touch, as in the 1960s cartoon with the priest announcing his resignation because of the church’s anti-human rights position in this or that in one pane and introducing his new wife in another.

My first book, What a Modern Catholic Believes About Prayer was a Thomas More Press publication.  Wells was its editor.  I signed a contract in his and Dan Herr’s offices on State Street, above their book store — Herr was the publisher — and Wells put out his hand and said, “Now hand over the keys to your car.”

Dry, perfect.

From opinions to convictions to — what?

John Fund on Barack Obama and what he considers it a waste of time to discuss:

No one suggests that Mr. Obama has ever endorsed any of the actions of the Weathermen [Bill Ayers], which occurred when he was still a child. But to this day he won’t discuss how he came to know him, why he chose to associate with Mr. Ayers and what he thinks of his current opinions about the U.S. government. All that will continue to fuel questions about Mr. Obama’s associations — just as his continued relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has.

He’s a fellow Hyde Park liberal, is how he chose to associate with him.  But what O. thinks of A’s “current opinions,” which loom large in any commited-liberal mind and influences their decisions, is important. 

O. will never discuss this, and the rest of us will have to decide what we could expect from him as president.  This is standard requirements of a candidate, who is normally expected to do more than make general unexceptionable statements.

Later:  Reader Phil on the Ayers business:

To me this is a bogus issue.  What I’d rather see is someone’s asking BA …Did he ever wonder why a powerhouse political fundraising fixer named Tony Rezko wanted to be, and apparently became, his best friend?

 

Mainstreamers yell down from tower

Heavy tut-tutting going on among the mid-level, if not high, priests of media-dumb, per Romenesko’s daily Poynteronline, about ABC men’s questioning of Obama the other night:

Stephanopoulos “sounded somewhat taken aback” by criticism

New York Times
Jacques Steinberg says George Stephanopoulos “sounded somewhat taken aback” during a phone interview about the debate controversy. The ABC newsman said he would have approached one critical aspect of his job differently. “I could imagine moving up some of the questions. You can differ over that.” Many thought the early questions were irrelevant, but “we thought it made sense to deal with the core controversies.”

> Some praised ABC’s moderators, but the critics were far more vocal (WP)
. . . . . . .

>Clinton didn’t have a flag, but “she was spared this inane question” (TA)

> Public regard for the media’s role in democracy wasn’t enhanced (WP)

> Welcome to the “Springer Show,” presidential campaign edition (Bee)

This going after O. on his San Fran elitism, consorting with Ayers the unrepentant terrorist, and Rezko connections very much bothered the poo-bahs, who in effect poo-pooh voters’ concerns, in this case about things that tell us something important about the allegedly Something-Different candidate.

They keep those letters comin’

They are going after Bill Maher:

Only hours since Bill Maher slandered the Pope by calling
him a “Nazi” and likened the Catholic Church to a “child-
abusing religious cult,” MRC Action Team members flooded
Time-Warner/HBO with more than 10,000 emails demanding
an apology.

Nothing yet by way of response, says MRC (Media Research Center), which is going for 25,000, reminding readers that

in 2005, Maher made similar remarks that were brushed off by Time-Warner executives as being “silly” and a matter of “creative freedom.”

If you want to pitch in and haven’t, go here, where they offer “talking points,” including that “Maher is by extension attacking every person of deep religious beliefs” and that T-W should not give him a platform for such stuff.

At the very least, if Maher has freedom to talk this way, others have it to object.

Later: Reader Phil on first mention of this:

This incident is really telling when one remembers that George S. Kauffman was permanently thrown off What’s My Line for saying something like “I hope this will be the one show where White Christmas isn’t played.”

The times they have changed.

Big O. and Starbucks drinkers

Theory about Barack Obama as candidate here: he’s the first Starbucks candidate.  He speaks to the condition of the Starbucks fan.  “You guys,” he addressed Chi Trib editors and reporters gathered 3/16 to hear him explain Rezko etc.  McCain, on the other hand, calls reporters “jerks” with a grin.

O. is also liked by those, Starbucks fans or not, who are congenitally suspicious of business success.  He’s married to one of these.  She warned low-income working mothers in Ohio in February against money-making (wealth-creating) pursuits, while herself making big bucks as a hospital executive — much more since her husband vastly increased his political influence by getting elected to the U.S. Senate. 

“Don’t go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond.”

This would be the Mrs. O’s formula — leverage influence (clout) in a non-profit public service job where clout can make a big difference.  Consider Rezko and the state hospital board. 

Viewed this way, she has parlayed her bitterness at being born black in modest circumstances, not into a clinging to God and guns — her God connection being grossly political anyhow, putting religion as it does at the service of ethnic complaints — but into a turning and clinging to a (wealth-consuming or -redistributing) government-public service source. 

Hey, religion itself pays, as we know from her pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s golden parachute in his gated enclave mansion in a white suburb. 

Whatever her Ohio working-woman audience should do, however, it should not be in the (wealth-creating but still evil) corporate world.  She was clear on that.

Some would turn his water off

Wheels are turning to go after Time-Warner, who ran the Bill Maher rant vs. the pope cited below:

E-mail Time-Warner And Demand An Apology For
Bill Maher Anti-Catholic, Anti-Faith Tirade!
HBO’s Bill Maher went too far with his recent diatribe against Pope Benedict, calling the Pope a “Nazi”,” calling the Catholic church a “cult.

MRC’s Culture and Media Institute is calling on every MRC Action team member to email HBO’s parent company, Time-Warner, and demand an immediate apology and retraction of Maher’s hateful, anti-faith comments.

Lest there be worry about impeding Maher’s freedom to rant, we can classify such a protest as consumer rebellion.  I do anyhow.

Bill foams @ mouth

Someone out there supports Bill Maher in his abusive habits, paying good money for stuff like this:

“I’d like to tip off law enforcement to an even larger child-abusing religious cult,” Maher told his audience. “Its leader also has a compound, and this guy not only operates outside the bounds of the law, but he used to be a Nazi and he wears funny hats. That’s right, the Pope is coming to America this week and, ladies, he’s single.”

He’s one mad guy in his own mad, mad world.  It’s enough to get a reasonable fellow somewhat irritated.