TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003

ANTI-INDIVIDUALS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

Are you tired of hearing me talk about the war on the individual yet?  Hopefully not.  This is a war against you, your self worth, your individual identity, and your status in society as a sovereign entity entitled to rights and protection under our laws.

"Diversity" is the current buzz word on college campuses and corporate boardrooms.   The diversity movement is an anti-individualist enterprise.  It categorizes people by their group identity, not by their individual traits such as character, achievement, ability and ambition. 

Next month the University of Florida is going to hold something called "People Awareness Week."  Well, that's good, isn't it?  At last we have some college campus out there that is going to celebrate the person ... the individual.  That's what "people awareness" is, isn't it? 

Nope.  Sorry.  The student newspaper tells us that "The goal of People Awareness Week is to encourage members of the UF
community to gain a lifelong dedication to learning about diversity.  ... encouraging acceptance, respect and appreciation of diversity in relation to race, gender, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability,  socioeconomic status and religious affiliation."

Well isn't that special.  Not one word about individual achievement, character, competence, compassion, humanity or ambition.  No.  You can't do that!  Your "awareness" of other people must be based on some trait that is common to a group, not particular to an individual.  Who cares what they think?  Who cares what they have accomplished or what they want to do with their individual lives?  All that counts is their group identity.  What color are they?  Do they sleep with their own sex, or do they practice heterosexuality?  What socioeconomic class do they come from?  What or who do they worship?  What color are they? 

At the University of Florida they seem to want to compel acceptance, whatever that is, on the basis of group identity.  What's wrong with acceptance based on who you are as an individual? 

The war against individuality began well over 100 years ago when two men who had never held a real job in their entire lives wrote a little manifesto ... back around 1848.   The war picked up a bit of steam when Lenin said "All our lives we fought against exalting the individual."   Still more steam when Krushchev said "Comrades, We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all."  The war is now moving ahead full steam.  Hillary Clinton is telling us that "we must stop thinking of the individual."  Ted Kennedy is praising the "war against individualism."  A local Atlanta politician tells us that "individualism is a sin."  And diversity movements thrive virtually everywhere you look.

Just remember this.  Every time you hear someone promote the diversity idea that person is telling you that individual traits and characteristics don't count.  We are being conditioned to regard people only in terms of their group identity.  If we don't start fighting back as individuals we may soon find all vestiges of our individual identities gone ... including those pesky little individual rights that were supposed to be protected by our government.  You know, things like property rights.

The war started by Marx and Engels over 150 years ago advances ... and is picking up steam.

Boot Boortz!

JUST IN CASE YOU DIDN'T READ THIS COLUMN YESTERDAY

Yesterday in my reading assignments I referred you to a column by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times.  Friedman is a liberal who is steadfastly in favor of the war in Iraq.  Just in case you slackers didn't read that column, here is one excerpt:

This war is the most important liberal, revolutionary U.S. democracy-building project since the Marshall Plan. The primary focus of U.S. forces in Iraq today is erecting a decent, legitimate, tolerant, pluralistic representative government from the ground up. I don't know if we can pull this off. We got off to an unnecessarily bad start. But it is one of the noblest things this country has ever attempted abroad and it is a moral and strategic imperative that we give it our best shot.

OK .. now read the column this time.

WHY IS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA IGNORING THIS?

Back to the Democratic Party attempts to prevent George Bush from putting any conservative judges in prominent positions in Federal Appeals Courts.

You remember Michael Estrada, don't you?  The Democrats successfully prevented a confirmation vote on his nomination so many times that Estrada finally got fed up and withdrew his name from consideration.  The only reason the Democrats could come up with to filibuster Estrada's nomination to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals was that he refused to release some private memos he had written when he was a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.  Bear in mind .. no previous nominee had been required to release such memos, but the Democrats did need some sort of excuse to block Estrada .. so the memos served that purpose quite well.

Now we know better.  Someone has leaked some Democratic strategy memos from the Senate Judiciary Committee.  Those memos discuss the necessity of blocking Estrada's nomination to the bench.  So ... why were the Democrats blocking Estrada?  Because, as the leaked memos said, "he is Latino and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment."

There you have it.  Documentation from a Democratic staffer on the Senate Judiciary Committee saying that a nominee for an appeals court judgeship is being blocked  because of his ethnicity.  Can you just imagine what would be happening if this had been Republicans blocking a nomination because of the nominees ethnicity?  Democrats would be calling for hearings, an investigation, and resignations.  The New York Times and the Washington Compost (thanks, Ollie) would be hammering it on page one for days on end.  Rather would be absolutely beside himself. As it is, the story is being ignored.  This may have been the first you heard about it.

Who is protecting whom out there?

SOME INTEMPERATE THOUGHTS

A 350-pound man attacks police in Cincinnati.  The police fight back.  Gargantua has cocaine and other drugs in his system.  Blubberbutt ends up Tango Uniform.  You attack a police officer ... you attack the men and women whom we place out there in harms way to protect us ... and you end up getting hurt, or you could die; especially if you're doped up.  What's the problem?

As Ollie said ... I would love to see a split screen shot of American troops listening to George Bush last Thursday, and American troops listening to Hitlary the day after. 

Quiz:  Who murdered more Muslims than anyone in the history of the world?  If you don't know the answer you're probably a Democrat ... or a government school teacher.

I see that the media is still referring to that incident at the Siegfried and Roy show in Vegas as a "tiger attack."  I am now firmly convinced that it wasn't an attack.  If that had been an attack Roy Horn would have been dead in seconds.  That tiger was actually trying to protect a friend he thought was in danger.

Yesterday I suggested that it won't be long before some Democratic candidate demands that George Bush not use any video footage of that visit to Iraq in his campaign advertisements.  Well ... I was almost right.  My friend Alan Colmes is now suggesting that any use of this video would be "politicizing" his visit.

If you go to the website for the Georgia Democratic Party you will see .. running right down the left side .. a list of statewide elected Democrats. At the bottom of the page you'll see a list of Democratic members of congress.  Nowhere on that page will you see the words "Zell Miller."  He's Georgia's Democratic U.S. Senator and he has been disowned by the Georgia Democratic Party for failing to toe the party line.

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to consider a lower court decision on a California gun control law.. The lower court ruled that the Second Amendment gives state militias the right to bear arms, but not individual citizens.  More on this later ... but for now, at least in California we are to assume that our founding fathers, in the midst of creating the Bill of Rights, decided that with the Second Amendment they would grant rights to government, and not to private citizens.

READING ASSIGNMENTS

OK, class.  We'll start with this.  Peter Brooks explains why Bush's trip to Iraq was more than simple PR and more than a morale boost for our troops.  It was a policy power play.

Today the Social Security Administration will release a report showing that partial privatization could lead to permanent solvency for the system.   You can depend on Democrats to fight any such reform however. 

And more on Social Security reform ... this from Jack Kemp.  It's a time bomb folks.  Don't ignore it.

Conservatives are upset with Bush's free-spending, big-government leadership style.  Will they support him in November? 

David Limbaugh on the intense competition among Democrats to see who can demonstrate the most hatred of George Bush.

Now here's a subject you haven't seen in many columns.  Should you be allowed to sell a kidney to someone who needs one?  Thomas Sowell says yes.  This may be a situation where political correctness actually costs lives.  It really all goes back to that central question ... who owns you?

Remember that program to register all Muslims and Arabs entering the United States?  Well, the Homeland Security folks have ended it.  Political correctness at work?

The UN has come up with the names of 108 nations who don't seem to want to cooperate in the war on terror.

Do you want to adopt that stray, homeless dog that has learned how to open car doors so that it can find a warm place to sleeep? Here's your link to the story.

GET EMAIL FROM NEAL!

We're all set and ready to start signing people up for the Boortz Blast, Neal's FREE email newsletter launching soon. Each issue will include exclusive content so if you can't get enough of Neal, you've gotta sign up! Also, we will never, ever, ever sell our lists.