Is it time to blow up the Public Schools?

The last post reviewed the case for teaching the Bible in schools. The most important reason is that the Bible contains the Judeo-Christian moral principles upon which America was founded. The Founding Fathers, not all of them religious men, nonetheless knew the importance of morality to societies and nations.

George Washington declared “it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the Providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits.” John Adams warned that it is “Religion and Morality alone which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.”

Thomas Jefferson who was against the establishment of a national religion (who wanted “a wall of separation between church and state”) was a strong advocate of the “freedom of religion” but not freedom from religion. When he wrote the first education plan for the capital, Jefferson used the Bible and Isaac Watt’s Hymnal as the primary readers.

Alexis de Toqueville in Democracy in America (1835) observed that Americans hold religion to be “indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions.”

In 1787, Congress declared that Religion, Morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall be forever encouraged.

Thus the American Founders understood the importance of God in the public square and insisted on the teaching of “religion” but not any particular Religion, in the public schools. What happened to the public schools over the years is a sad story of the grotesque distortion of the Constitution to achieve secular goals.

In another Weekly Standard article, David Gelernter asks: What gives public schools the right to exist? After all, they are no part of the nation's constitutional framework. I believe that public schools have a right to exist insofar as they express a shared public view of education. American public schools used to speak for the broad middle ground of American life. No longer. Public schools used to invite students to take their places in a shared American culture. They didn't allow a left- or right-wing slant, only a pro-American slant. Their mission, after all, was to produce students who were sufficiently proud of this country to take care of it.

There was a time early in the last century when public schools successfully educated all students and instilled in them patriotism and an appreciation of American values. Are they worth saving, or should we give private enterprise a chance?

Postscript: In a recent book Whose Bible Is It?, distinguished religious historian Jaroslav Pelikan of Yale University explains: Even in a secular age ... the Bible proves to be the unique antidote to cynicism and the source of inspiration for poets and philosophers, artists and musicians, and the countless millions all over the globe who turn to it every day and in their times of need.

Teach the Bible

David Gelernter is professor of computer science at Yale and a cultural thinker all of us on the right ought to know. First, his technical bonifides:

From Digerati: Encounters With the Cyber Elite by John Brockman: “David Gelernter, a leading figure in the third generation of artificial intelligence (AI) scientists, is highly regarded for his parallel programming language Linda, which allows you to distribute a computer program across a multitude of processors and thus break down problems into a multitude of parts in order to solve them more quickly. There are lots of clever computer scientists; David Gelernter is one of the few who is wise. He understands the need to interact with people rather than computers. He is a historian, social commentator, and sage with a snicker.” Gelernter’s writing for the general population includes Mirror Worlds (1991) that foresaw the World Wide Web and was "one of the inspirations for Java."

On the personal side, Gelernter was critically injured in 1993 opening a mailbomb sent by Theodore Kaczynski, the “Unabomber." He recovered from his injuries and chronicled the ordeal in his 1997 book Drawing Life: Surviving the Unabomber. Gelernter is a member of the National Council of the Arts, a senior fellow in Jewish Thought at the Shalem Center, Jerusalem, and a contributing editor to The Weekly Standard.

Gelernter is clearly a brilliant fellow, but why is he important? Well, let me quote some passages from one of his recent opinion pieces in the 5/23/05 issue of The Weekly Standard.

Scripture begins with God creating the world, but there is something these verses don't tell you: The Bible has itself created worlds. Wherever you stand on the spectrum from devout to atheist, you must acknowledge that the Bible has been a creative force without parallel in history.

The King James Bible, says Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, “has influenced our literature more deeply than any other book--more deeply even than all the writings of Shakespeare--far more deeply.” Lincoln called the Bible "the best gift God has given to man. But for it we could not know right from wrong."

Here is a basic question about America that ought to be on page 1 of every history book: What made the nation's Founders so sure they were onto something big? America today is the most powerful nation on earth, most powerful in all history--and a model the whole world imitates. What made them so sure? What made Abraham Lincoln call America “the last, best hope of earth?” They read the Bible. Winthrop, Adams, Lincoln, and thousands of others found a good destiny in the Bible and made it their own.

Evidently young Americans don't know much about the Bible (or anything else, come to think of it; that's another story). But let's not kid ourselves--this problem will be hard to attack. It's clear that any public school that teaches about America must teach about the Bible. But, you don't have to believe in the mythical "wall of separation" between church and state--which the Bill of Rights never mentions and had no intention of erecting--to understand that Americans don't want their public schools teaching Christianity or Judaism.

The idea that the Bill of Rights would one day be traduced into a broom to sweep religion out of the public square like so much dried mud off the boots of careless children would have left the Founders of this nation (my guess is) trembling in rage. We owe it to them in simple gratitude to see that the Bill of Rights is not--is never--used as a weapon against religion.

John Locke is often described as the most important philosophical influence on the American Revolution. Locke believed in a "social contract" in which citizens swap some freedom for a civilized life: Everyone's freedom is curtailed, and everyone benefits. The results are civil society and the state. Locke relied heavily on the Bible. For Locke, writes Richard Ashcraft (1987), "the Bible was the primary source for any endeavor to supply a 'historical' account of man's existence."

In modern times the Bible was no less important as a shaper and molder of American destiny. Woodrow Wilson, another intensely biblical president, spoke in biblical terms when he took America into the First World War--on behalf of freedom and democracy for all mankind. Harry Truman's Bible-centered Christianity was important to his decisions to lead America into the Cold War, and make America the first nation to recognize the newborn state of Israel--to the vast disgust of the perpetually benighted State Department. Reagan's presidency revolved around Winthrop's Gospel-inspired image of the sacred city on a hill. George W. Bush's worldwide war on tyranny is the quintessence of a biblical project--one that sees America as an almost chosen people, with the heavy responsibilities that go with the job.

There is no agreement whether God created the world, but the Bible's awe-striking creative powers are undeniable. Secularists don't see it that way; but the Bible's penetration into the farthest corners of the known world is simple fact.

So David Gelernter is an important man because of the brave things that he says. A report just issued by the Bible Literacy Project suggests that young Americans know very little about the Bible. Forty-one teachers took part: "a diverse sample of high school English teachers in 10 states." All are reputedly "among the best teachers in their subject." These teachers are convinced that students ought to know the Bible and don't … and that "Bible knowledge confers a distinct educational advantage."

Another shameless plug

San Francisco, May23, 2005: FOOD MUSINGS, Chitter chatter about food by Catherine Nash.

U Street Lounge
Marina darlings and their boy toys flock to this Union Street hang-out, so shimmy into your Citizens and get gussied up. A red neon sign alerts you to the lounge in the back, though you can hardly miss the dull thrum of music. If you're there to eat, go early to avoid late-night make-out sessions on the vibrant red and gold accented banquette.

Chef Michael Schley, of PlumpJack Café by way of the French Laundry, is a shy cutie-pie who circulates on the floor to make sure all is well, even directing traffic to the hidden bathrooms. If he knows you like something - in our case, the lemon creme fraiche and caviar-filled potatoes - he just may surprise you with a nibble on the house.

Start with an order of those mini caviar potato shooters or a plate of ice-cold oysters; the duck breast is sweet and moist - we ate one serving and promptly ordered another! Don't let the "matchstick potatoes" on the side fool you; one bite reveals that they're apple. Real fries are crisp and fluffy, and the beef short ribs are to die for.

Some more pub: Collin Nash, the producer of MTV’s “Laguna Beach” recently visited U Street. He loved the space, and per his director’s approval, will be shooting an episode of the show at U Street.

So when you next visit the city by the bay, check out U Street Lounge, a John Lama (ad)venture. "a la familia"...."get the canolies."

ps: The U Street web site has been upgraded. The dinner and brunch menus are "to die for."

Moral Decisions

Last night I attended my first meeting of the St. John Fisher parish Moral Decisions study group. I was impressed by the attendance, the attendants and the leadership of Pat Hart. The general study topic of the group has been “Natural Law and the relationship of Church and State” and they have been using the text Fifty Questions on the Natural Law by Charles Rice. According to the natural law, knowledge of God's existence and of fundamental moral principles constitutes a universal human sense. It is not innate, however, but must be learned through traditional moral systems, such as the Ten Commandments.

Last night we began a six part video series on the First Amendment by Professor Gerard V. Bradley, Constitutional Law Professor at the Notre Dame Law School. Professor Bradley is co-director of the Natural Law Institute at Notre Dame, president of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, vice president of the American Public Philosophy Institute, member of the board of advisors of the Cardinal Newman Society, and chair of the Federalist Society’s Religious Liberties Practice Group. Dr. Bradley's web page is found at www.nd.edu/~ndlaw/faculty/facultypages/bradley.html

The series entitled “First Amendment Issues” includes:

1. The Establishment Clause
2. The Free Exercise Clause
3. Secularism and the Constitution
4. The Trajectory toward the Naked Public Square
5. Catholic Institutions in the Naked Public Square
6. Possibilities for Reform

Pat Hart explained that there are many moral issues associated with this topic. Some of these include (1) the marginalization of religion by the Supreme Court; (2) an unwarranted expansion of the First Amendment through the Supreme Court's interpretation of the First Amendment; (3) overemphasis of the Establishment Clause at the expense of the Free Exercise clause; (4) the misnomer of Separation of Church and State to mean Separation of Religion and Society; (5) misinterpretation of the First Amendment to promote a secular anti-religious attitude in the public square; (5) the underlying assumptions by the Supreme Court about the world and man which are contrary to the concepts of the world and man held by Classical Western Civilization.

Pat distributed a newspaper account of the embryonic stem cell debate as just one example of many moral issues. Pittsburgh Bishop Donald Wuerl said: “We cannot allow our technology to outstrip our ethical reflection” and he called the stem cell debate a “separation of moral reflection from scientific studies” that is a “new wrinkle” in mistaken ideas about the separation of Church and state.

In the video, Professor Bradley recounted the remarkable history of the First Amendment’s “Establishment Clause.” Originally written as a prohibition on the Congress from interfering with the state’s authority in respect to religion, the meaning of the clause has morphed over the years to restrict first the entire Federal government and then the states and finally all government supported agencies from playing any role in the religious life.

Judicial Activism

Starting off with some thoughts on the revolt of the Senate "gang of 14" over the nuclear option:

The Wall Street Journal called it a "Senate Charade - a remarkable exercise in political self-protection."

"Judging by all of the self-congratulation, you'd think the 14 Senators who reached a deal Monday on judicial nominations were the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers. ‘We have kept the Republic,’ declared Democrat Robert Byrd, with all due modesty. ‘The Senate won’ and ‘the country won,’ added Republican John McCain. All 14 are apparently destined for Mount Rushmore, as soon as Mr. Byrd can stuff the money for the sculpture into an appropriations bill."

Tony Blankley called them a "Senate Regency."

"The Senate has been placed into receivership by 14 self-appointed trustees, several of whom are among the Senate's most wanton exhibitionists. Some of these ladies and gentlemen can be seen almost daily preening in front of television cameras confessing their moral superiority over their colleagues by virtue of their lack of firm convictions and their unwillingness to be team players."

"So begins the Regency Period of the Senate. As long as these fourteen stick together, nothing can pass the Senate. By organizing into a blocking mechanism — and presumably swearing blood oaths of loyalty to each other in a secret ceremony out of sight of the uninitiated — they have created a new tradition."

Thomas Sowell called the Republicans a "Compromised Party."

"The Senate Democrats hung tough and the Republicans wimped out. The Republicans had the votes but they didn't have the guts. Republican Senator Charles Grassley was one of the few who called a spade a spade, when he characterized what happened as "unilateral disarmament" by the Republicans."

"What is of major importance is that the American people lost a golden opportunity --- to set in concrete both the Senate's right to vote on judicial nominees and the American people's right to govern themselves, instead of being ruled by judges who increasingly take decisions out of the hands of elected officials and impose their own personal policy preferences."

As usual Tom Sowell exposed the fundamental issue: Who is to decide? For too many years the judiciary has subverted the Constitution by creating U.S. law, the role that the Constitution reserves for the people and their representatives. It no longer matters what legislation is crafted by our elected officials or what state constitutional amendments are voted for by the people. The appellate courts and the Supreme Court modify or eliminate these constitutionally protected actions as suits their own purposes. Such judicial activism must be stopped, by electing judges who abhor the practice.

Gotta Love 'em

Republican moderates are like women, you can't live with 'em, you can't live without 'em. When in San Francisco I asked Christine Todd Whitman about the Democrats judicial filibusters. She said all the nominees should get up or down votes....but...ie butt monkey...Christy wouldn't vote to change the Senate rules....too radical for her!

Well the mod's in the Senate have done the deed, made a deal with the devil. Harry Reid is celebrating since the "venerable" filibuster has been secured for all time, or so he thinks. Democrats have long venerated the filibuster, having used it for many years to thwart civil rights laws. Now they have compromised by promising to use the filibuster only in "extraordinary circumstances." Happy days! And what constitutes an "extraordinary circumstance" you ask? First response from the Dem's: any Supreme Court nominee.

The seven moderate Republican dealers were Senators Mike DeWine of Ohio, Susan Collins of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island, John McCain of Arizona, John Warner of Virginia and Olympia Snowe of Maine. The Republican signers pledged "mutual trust and confidence." Trust and confidence in Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid,... makes you wonder what world these folks are living in. The Democratic signers don't matter.

The agreement specifically admonished President Bush: "We encourage the Executive branch of government to consult with members of the Senate, both Democratic and Republican, prior to submitting a judicial nomination to the Senate for consideration." Now the minority can decide when a presidential nominee is an "extraordinary circumstance" and the president is supposed to vet his nominees with the Senate Democrats before he nominates them. What absurdity!!

And what of the magnificent (moderate) seven? Hugh Hewitt had this to say about John McCain -- "a great American, a lousy senator, and a terrible Republican-- took himself out of serious contention in the GOP primaries of 2008. The McCain Caucus showed itself last night, and is united not by 'moderation' but by enormous, towering ego."

As for the others, Hugh noted that "it will be much easier to persuade GOP voters to abandon Lincoln Chafee and Olympia Snowe in 2006. Worse than useless, defeating one or both of these incumbents will send a much needed message on how the party regards deals based on scissoring the Constitution."

Lindsey Graham was so emotional he nearly cried on the Sean Hannity show but then gave a speech about "we are at war, and kids are dying," that he compared to his heroic action in signing the compromise. What a moron.

John Warner is a lame duck, old fool. Mike Dewine and Susan Collins had better wake up. Bill Frist should caucus the 48 real Republicans in the Senate and boot the moderate seven out of any chairmanships they hold.

Economic Myth and Nonsense

In the last post we looked at a bit of the nonsense at the World Economic Forum. Liberals tend to believe anything that portrays America in a bad light. But it is surprising how many economic myths and nonsense are believed by smart and logical people. Even among the educationally elite Starbucks group, those folks who solve world problems on a daily basis, there are some who frequently surprise me with their beliefs on economic matters.

Thus I have decided to address several blog posts to the subject of economic myths. The reference materials, for those who would like to check my facts or learn more, include the following books:

The Progress Paradox by Greg Easterbrook

Rational Exuberance by Michael Mandel

How Capitalism Saved America by Thomas DiLorenzo

Myths of Rich and Poor by W. Michael Cox and Richard Alm.

A few of the myths that seem to be commonly believed include the following:

1. American’s living standards have been falling since the 1970s.

2. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

3. The current generation of children may be the first in history not to live as well as their parents.

4. As we outsource our high paying manufacturing jobs, Americans are left with inferior service jobs.

5. The United States economy has been passed up by the European Union and Japan, with China and India in close pursuit.

In a few posts I will show that these foreboding statements and many others like them are spectacularly wrong, they’re the “myths of our times: the myths of rich and poor.”

The Gender Gap

The World Economic Forum meeting in Jordan includes leaders from 45 nations. First Lady Laura Bush addressing the conference on the subject of women’s rights noted that women have achieved extraordinary gains in the Middle East and that change must come to any nation that wants to be considered truly free. "Women who have not yet won these rights are watching," she said.

A report released at the conference examines the economic gap between men and women around the world. “Women’s Empowerment: Measuring the Global Gender Gap” ranked Sweden #1 and the United States #17 out of 58 countries. The LA Times dutifully editorialized that “It’s not just the Arab world that needs to understand that countries are crippled when half the population is marginalized.” So, do we have a problem in the United States, or is this all just nonsense?

Let’s look inside the report. The rankings are based on five measurement criteria (with the US ranking in parentheses):

1. Economic Participation (19)
2. Economic Opportunity (46)
3. Political Empowerment (19)
4. Educational Attainment (8)
5. Health and Well Being (42)

Economic Participation of women includes their presence in the work force and their relative pay for equal jobs. Thus in a country where all the women work the gap would be zero while in a country where 35% of the women are able to stay home and raise a family the gap is 35%, and that is counted as a bad thing. In a country like the US where the average pay might be $25,000 for men and $20,000 for women the gap is 20%. In a country like Zimbabwe where the average yearly pay for men and women is, say, $1,000 the gap is zero, and that is counted as a good thing. Thus the top rated countries in this category are Thailand, Zimbabwe and Russia, while the US ranks 19th. What nonsense!

Finally Some Science

In May, a team of "adventurers" from Minnesota set off to "document climate change" at the North Pole. According to newspaper reports, they aim to "draw attention to the gradual warming of Earth's climate" and "hope to convince skeptics, especially in the Bush administration, that global warming is real...." (Jay Lehr, Chicago Sun Times)

This sort of global warming enthusiasm is all too common. Most often the main stream media (msm), politicians and activist groups promote the "findings" of such "scientific" endeavors as real and ominous.

But in the end, scientific truth will force it's way into the public consciousness.

Melting glaciers are a favorite of the global warming activists, and one of their most famous glaciers sits atop Mt. Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. Satellites measuring temperatures near its summit for more than 25 years have found no warming at all. And a study in Nature (Nov. 2003) showed that deforestation of the mountain slopes -- not warming temperatures -- explains the melting. But the activists don't care why Kilimanjaro is melting, only that it is.

Lately attention has turned to Antarctica. The scaremongers point out that seven ice shelves have broken off the Antarctic continent over the last 50 years. They blame global warming, completely ignoring the fact that the continent is actually cooling by 0.7 degrees Celsius per decade.

Antarctica contains 90% of the world's ice so what is happening there is most important. Global warming enthusiasts have been pointing to West Antarctica which has been melting. But 85% of the ice is in the East and that has been increasing thickness by 1.8 cm/yr while the remaining 15% has been decreasing at 0.9cm/yr. Thus at least 76.5% of the world's ice has been increasing. (Mark Peplow, LA Times).

A paper by R.J. Braithwaite's in Progress in Physical Geography described measurements of 246 glaciers sampled all around the world between 1946 and 1995. He found that some glaciers were melting, a nearly equal number were growing and others remained stable. He concluded: "There is no obvious common or global trend of increasing glacier melt in recent years."

Long term we're heading back into the ice age as any honest climatologist knows.

The climate crazies are also focussing their wrath on carbon dioxide, a harmless gas that mammals exhale and plants require, since it is also a "greenhouse" gas.

Scientists calculate the likely rise of global average temperature delta-T for the purely theoretical situation where atmospheric carbon dioxide is doubled but nothing else about the atmosphere is allowed to change. The answer is about 1.2 degrees Celsius, and it would take a couple of hundred years to complete the change.

The problem is that, in the real world, all sorts of other atmospheric and oceanic processes that depend on surface temperature are happening. Many of them amplify or reduce the original change of 1.2 degrees caused directly by the CO2. They are feedback processes and their effects need to be added up to give an overall value for the total 'feedback factor' F in the bottom line of the equation shown here for delta-T.

delta-T = (1.2)/(1 - F) degrees

Thus the temperature change may be greater or less than 1.2 degrees depending on the value of F and on whether it is positive or negative. For example if F = +0.5 (positive feedback) then delta-T = 2.4 degrees while if F = -1.0 (negative feedback) then delta-T = 0.6 degrees. (Garth Paltridge, Tech Central Station)

The latest issue (5/6/05) of Science Magazine offers some perspective on the uncertainty. Robert Charlson et al ("In Search of Balance") notes that the Earth's temperature is determined by a balance (actually imbalance) between solar radiation absorbed and radiation emitted by the Earth. Moreover, "in view of the discrepancies in magnitude and even sign (of the feedback) ...care must be exercised in the use of potentially misleading terms like "global warming."

In another paper ("From Dimming to Brightening") in the same issue of Science, Martin Wild et al note that widespread brightening of the Earth surface has been underway since 1985 due to increasing atmospheric transparency (cleaner air). From 1992 - 2001 the radiation power aborbed by the Earth increased by 6 Watts per square meter. That's nearly a 2% increase in 10 years. Let's see, more solar radiation hitting the Earth,....could it be warmer?

I'm encouraged that a good number of scientists are finally publishing the truth about the "global warming" debate. Truth is a good thing.

We support the troops

How dare you question our patriotism? " We support the troops, it's the war we oppose." Americans heard that a lot during the presidential election season from the Democrats and their media codpieces. We Republicans knew that it was just a bold faced lie. Now they have stopped lying and it's not pretty.

Lets start with Terry Moran, ABC's White House correspondent who the other day demanded of White House press secretary Scott McClellan:

"Who made you editor of Newsweek?" Moran was referring to the debunked Newsweek story of Koran flushing at Gitmo. So, Newsweek was lying, but even worse is the main stream media (msm) circling the wagons around a magazine that unjustly defames our military in a time of war.

Later on the Hugh Hewitt show, Moran came clean about the feeling of the msm about our courageous military.

"There is, Hugh, I agree with you, a deep anti-military bias in the media. One that begins from the premise that the military must be lying, and that American projection of power around the world must be wrong. I think that that is a hangover from Vietnam, and I think it's very dangerous."

Then there is this gem from Linda Foley, national president of The Newspaper Guild:

"Journalists are not just being targeted verbally or politically. They are also being targeted for real in places like Iraq. And what outrages me as a representative of journalists is that there's not more outrage about the number and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq. I think it's just a scandal."

"It's not just U.S. journalists either, by the way. They target and kill journalists from other countries, particularly Arab countries, at news services like Al Jazeera, for example. They actually target them and blow up their studios, with impunity."

Linda Foley is a union boss for msm. They support the troops.

Give Pepsi THE FINGER

PepsiCo president Indra Nooyi, speaking at the Columbia University Business School graduation, lectured to the graduates and their families about the U.S. giving the world “the finger.” In Ms. Nooyi’s sophomoric analogy the Earth is a hand and the continents are the fingers.

In her own words:

“This analogy of the five fingers as the five major continents leaves the long, middle finger for North America, and, in particular, The United States. As the longest of the fingers, it really stands out. The middle finger anchors every function that the hand performs and is the key to all of the fingers working together efficiently and effectively. … However, if used inappropriately – just like the U.S. itself - the middle finger can convey a negative message and get us in trouble. You know what I’m talking about.”

“What is most crucial … is that each of us in the U.S. – the long middle finger – must be careful that when we extend our arm in either a business or political sense, we take pains to assure we are giving a hand...not the finger.”

“Unfortunately, I think this is how the rest of the world looks at the U.S. right now.”

Pepsi is the same company that employs the gangsta rapper Ludacris as its spokesman, the same mobster whose albums require a parental advisory. When they also employ an America-hating immigrant as president, we know whose products to avoid. I say divest their stock before it goes into the tank. And send Ms. Nooyi back to India.

Going Home

I've had a wonderful time in San Francisco. The place is busy from the wee early hours in the morning 'til late at night. There have been many highlights: meeting Christy Todd Whitman; being "personally trained" by JJ; participating in the Bay to Breakers extravaganza; eating great Indian food with Jud and Renu and walking/cuddling baby Ava when she needed it; learning some economic realities from Kevin at UBS Financial Services; meeting all the fun people at Summation Legal Technologies and U Street; partying with the Young Republicans, including a young female astrophysicist who explained that the expansion of space only seems to be accelerating since the speed of light is actually decreasing; and trying to keep up with John, who knows how to show his dad a great time.

So it's been a fun trip, but now it's time to go home for a rest and back to the relative sanity of Los Angeles. As vibrant as San Francisco is, there is an unsettling air of moral relativism here that makes me uncomfortable. Bare to Breakers, homeless sleeping in the tiny parks, litter and sleaze are the symptoms. It's everywhere.

Take the article in the Chronicle Home and Garden Section today: "Whether you're growing daisies or pushing up daisies, it's all relative." Diana Rathbone is "puzzled by the current effort to portray life and death as opposing cultures, presenting obvious choices." Somehow her tale about life and death in the garden morphs into a diatribe against the quality of truth. "Shut up!" she shouts at the TV screen when President Bush is addressing the nation about fighting evil. She rails against Pope Benedict's proclamation against the "dictatorship of relativism." She yearns for the Clintons, the "undisputed king and queen of relativism.

I need to go home now.

San Francisco Catholic

After breakfast at Torrefazione I embarked on a constitutional hike up the 88 degree hill to Pacific Heights. (Note the incline has become 1 degree less difficult than yesterday.) Today I turned on Broadway the most spectacular view street in the area. After a few blocks I was stunned by a beautiful collection of buildings filling a complete city block. Upon closer inspection I found that this was the venerable campus of the Sacred Heart Schools.

The friendly policeman out front told me that the Broadway campus consists of 3 buildings for girls and 1 for boys plus library, science laboratory, etc. The SH boys attend high school on a separate campus in San Francisco and there is a new campus for boys and girls in Atherton, the crown jewel of Silicon Valley.

After a few days exposure to the secularity and sleaze of the city, I was reminded that San Francisco was once a bastion of Catholicism. Lee attended St. Vincent de Paul grammar school on Green Street near John's place and high school at Saint Rose Academy. The Academy was the city's premiere girl's school as evidenced by the hideousness of their uniforms. When I was picking up Lee from school, I could spot the St. Rose crowd from many blocks away, their uniforms were so "stunning."

On the way back to John's house I stopped at the Golden Gate Valley branch of the San Francisco Library. The exquisite building dates to the 1880s. It was Lee's favorite place as a child. The children's section fills nearly half of the tiny library, and the 3 computers are a gesture to modernity.

It's time for me to leave for lunch with John and a meeting with his financial advisor. Later on the garden store people are delivering trees and giant pots for his condo. Tonight we are having a dinner meeting at U Street with the San Francisco Young Republicans. How about that, Republicans in San Francisco!

Browsing the San Francisco Chronicle

The SF Chronicle makes one feel at home, like I'm back in Palos Verdes fuming at the LA Times. On the front page is the standard Monday story about bloody Sunday in Iraq; a piece about new immigration laws harming foreigners seeking asylum; a warning about the "House of Worship Freedom of Speech Restoration Act" that would allow religious leaders to speak out on political matters; and the previously mentioned coverage of the "freaky race."

Inside on page A4 one finds that "Newsweek is sorry for Quran fallout," but not for their irresponsible and anti-American behavior in publishing an unsubstantiated report about Quran flushing at Gitmo that incited rioting in Islamic countries.

Moving to page A9 we find that the "Russians profited from oil-for-food." Shocking! More than 30% of the bribery money went to high level Russian officials, including Putin's chief of staff. Could this explain why Russia opposed the Iraq war? One wonders.

Sunday's front page featured an opinion piece titled "Importing power, fostering polution." Apparently Gov Arnold is encouraging Nevada, Utah and Wyoming to sell electricity to California. Those states are planning a 1300 mile long electricity transmission line to California that could provide the 1000 additional megawatts per year to keep up with our growing economy. Sounds good, right? No, not according to the Chronicle since N,U,W are building coal fired power plants to generate the megawatts. Though new coal burning plants can be nearly pollution free, they do generate that dreaded carbon dioxide that contributes to GLOBAL WARMING.

Turning to the book review section, Roberto Gonzalez, anthropology prof at San Jose State, blasts Thomas Friedman's book " The World is Flat" for being "culturally misinformed, historically inadequate and intellectually impoverished." He did like the book's "lighthearted style." Friedman's thesis is that global competition has increased in a world that has become more interconnected by the internet. The economic playing field has been "flattened."

Gonzalez thinks it's terrible that "capitalism has spread like wildfire to China, India, Russia" since their workers are happy to receive a fraction of what Americans are paid. He also decries the widening gap between rich and poor in those countries. One wonders what this moron wants. Maybe it's the Mexican economic model?

Chien Lunatique

John left for work early this morning and I slept until 8 AM, an accomplishment in the middle of a busy, noisy city. It's just one block down the hill to Union Street and my favorite coffee house " Torrefazione Italia." During my continental breakfast John's friend Adrian, realtor supremo, stopped by to say hello and invite us to meet him for dinner tonight. After reading the SF Chronicle account of the Bay to Breakers event ("Everyone's a winner in city's freaky race") I was ready for some exercise.

On a sunny, cool day I decided to challenge the 89 degree incline up to the top of Pacific Heights. My first stop was just one block up Steiner at the Church of St. Vincent de Paul, Lee's girlhood parish church and school. After a prayer for our brave soldiers, I resumed my uphill hike to the park at Jackson, where lots of dogs were running free and easy, another nice thing about the People's Republic.

On Jackson across from the park is a mansion flying a giant French flag. Prominately displayed on the huge gate was a sign: "Chien Lunatique." Leave it to the French to think that we Americans should understand their French warnings. I think it means, beware "Crazy Frenchman."

Bay to Breakers

This morning John and I participated with about 100,000 others from around the world in the 94th running of the "Bay to Breakers" 12K race. The course starts at the Embarcadero on the San Francisco Bay and traverses the city through Golden Gate Park to the Pacific ocean 7.5 miles West. "B2B" is a well organized event with a strict set of regulations prohibiting alcoholic consumption and running naked among many other popular Frisco pastimes.

Fortunately, the SF cops riding their bikes along the route seemed not to see what we did. And when I say we "participated" in the race, I actually mean that we sat in comfortable lawn chairs in the Golden Gate Park, under a tree and close enough to the route to see everything, and I mean everything!

But first some stat's. The race was won in 34 min 49 sec by Gilbert Ohari from Kenya, followed closely by several other Kenyans. The first Elvis impersonator finished in 59 min flat; not at all bad wearing cowboy boots. In the very first B2B in 1912, Bob Vlught won in 44 min 10 sec. That's an improvement of 9 min 21 sec in 94 years or a bit less than 6 sec/year or 0.2% per year. What a Human Race!

That's enough statistics, I think, now back to the naughty bits.

After the 100 or so real runners finished in the first hour, the remaining 69,900 registered "participants" stumbled, pranced and sashayed through the course over the next four hours. Most were decked out in cultural costumes. There were a few dozen "runaway brides" of both sexes, sporting bridal gowns with towels covering their heads. There were at least a couple dozen pope wanabees, wearing cardinal regalia, some granting plenary indulgences to the crowd. There was a pope-mobile with a stripper on the hood. There were the gals from lovemyvagina.org. And of course the "Bare to Breakers" crowd was hanging out.

John commented that it's probably good to concentrate all the crazies in one city. Then all we have to do is cordon off the peninsula.

Now it's time to visit Jud, Renu and baby Ava Parker. Ava is a tina 5 month old bundle of heaven. I can't wait to see if she remembers me.

A Time for Radical Moderates

We just returned from the do for Christine Todd Whitman at the home of a Lead21 member in a new condo building South of Market near the new baseball field. The patio had a great view of the Oakland Bay Bridge. The event was sponsored by the Republican Women's Leadership Coalition, the California Young Republicans and Lead21.

Governor Whitman talkled for about an hour, with plenty of questions, about her new cause and her new book "It's My Party Too." She is concerned about the power of the "social fundamentalist" wing of the Party, and worried that their "extreme" views will drive away moderates. She cited the Terri Schiavo controversy as a case where the religious right coerced the Party into becoming involved with what was to her a family and state concern.

Mrs. Whitman said that the proposed constitutional ammendment banning gay marriage was another such divisive issue, and was only supported by the President because he needs the conservatives to support his Social Security reform.

From her days in the EPA she feels that the Republicans have done a good job on environmental issues but have not sold their accomplishments. For example, while she would vote against the Kyoto Accord on Global Warming, and noted that the Clinton Senate did reject it 95 - 0, she thought that Clinton/Gore were much better at keeping the dialog alive with foreign countries than Bush is. While the US is in the leadership of working on technological solutions we don't get much credit.

She thinks sending John Bolton to the UN will be viewed as another slap in the face to our allies and should be avoided.

She urged moderates to become "radically" involved in changing the Party.

During the QA session I asked what she thought of the Democratic filibuster of judicial nominations. She said it was wrong and that every presidential nominee should receive an up-down vote. However, she would not change the Senate rules to stop the filibuster.

If that's an example of Whitman's Radical Moderation, I'm content to remain a neocon.

The People's Republic of San Francisco

San Francisco, 1990 Green Street: I'm reporting today and for the next few days from the heart of Blue Country, the People's Republic of San Francisco. I arrived yesterday and am staying with son John on Green Street, only three blocks from the house where his mom grew up. From the North facing windows I can see U Street, John's resturant on Union Street, the Palace of Fine Arts, the Golden Gate Bridge, Sausalito, Belvedere, Tiburon, Angels Island and the bay. Sail boats are out in force on a clear and windy day. What a great place to visit!

Yesterday John and I went to Gold's Gym where JJ worked us out. Being personally trained by JJ is more painful than listening to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid whine about the "Nuclear Option." In the evening we went to U Street for dinner. The menu is even more fabulous than my last visit two months ago. Delicious! The resturant was filled up until we left around 9PM. It was interesting that singles outnumbered couples and 2/3 of the singles were women. It's no wonder that John spends a lot of free time there.

Later this afternoon we are going to a reception for Christine Todd Whitman, two term Governor of New Jersey and head of the EPA under President Bush from 2001 - 2003. The event is at the home of a member of "Lead21" an organization of young Republican business leaders. John recently joined the group. It should be interesting. Stay tuned.

Happy Days for the GOP

The Pew political survey results published today suggest that President Bush is now popular among swing voters and even some Democrats. The Republican Party is supported by the strong majority of independent voters including the well-educated and optimistic as well as those at the other end of the economic spectrum.

"The common threads among independent voters are a highly favorable opinion of President Bush personally and support for an aggressive military stance against potential enemies of the US"

Republicans are more optimistic and believe in the power of the individual, regardless of income, while Democrats have much more negative attitudes about the future. Even among the poor, the two parties have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and possibilities. Republicans are optimistic and positive; Democrats are pessimistic and cynical.

The Republican coalition share several traits; they are conservative, patriotic and religious.

The Democratic coalition is dominated by Liberals who are secular, strongly opposed to the Iraq war, strongly in favor of gay rights, and opposed to the public display of the Ten Commandments in government buildings.

Gender or Sex?

When Harvard President Lawrence Summers suggested that biology might be partially responsible for the relative rarity of female science and mathematics professors, he stuck a finger in the eye of the women’s studies movement. The essence of women’s studies is the concept of “gender,” that differences between men and women are not biological but are cultural artifacts, imposed by the oppressive patriarchal society.

Nancy Chodorow, a women’s studies pioneer, believes that sexual differences “derive from the contingent circumstance that women happen to be the primary caretakers of children. The special, ‘feminine’ empathy required for rearing children becomes indelibly associated in our minds with people who just physically happen to be female.”

Chodorow believes that the emotional closeness of mothers and daughters perpetuates the conventional female sexual role. “If we could just break the association between gender and child care, then we might vanquish gender” … and establish an androgynous society.

Happy days!

Meanwhile, in Nairobi, Kenya, a nursing dog foraging for food retrieved an abandoned baby girl in the Ngong forest and carried the infant to its litter of puppies. Neighbors discovered the baby, unharmed, and cuddling with the puppies. According to doctors, the stray mama dog saved the baby girl’s life.

Gender? No way!

Happy Mother's Day

Happy Mother’s Day Mom. Happy Mother’s Day Sweet Lee. Happy Mother’s Day Dear Carolynne. Happy Mother’s Day Pat. Happy Mother’s Day Ginny and Maureen. Happy Mother’s Day Aunts Marie, Maybelle, Grace and Gloria. Happy Mother’s Day, Cousins Taffy, Suzanne and Elise. Together you produced 31 fabulous children, or 2.4 kids per mom. Well Done!

Happy Mothers Day nieces, cousins-in-law, and all our 'mom' friends. You’re great Americans all. And there’s not a “Desperate Housewife” in the bunch.

Yet media pundits and feminists can't seem to stop mourning the state of modern motherhood. "Madness is their new metaphor. And a mother's brain, as commonly envisioned, is impaired by a supposed full-scale assault on sanity and smarts. So strong is this last stereotype that when a satirical Web site posted a ‘study’ saying that parents lose an average of 20 I.Q. points on the birth of their first child, MSNBC broadcast it as if it were true."

"But what if parenting really isn't a zero-sum, children-take-all game? What if raising children is actually mentally enriching for mothers - and fathers?"

Some leading brain scientists, including Dr. Michael Merzenich at UC, San Francisco, now believe this to be true. "Becoming a parent, they say, can power up the mind with uniquely motivated learning. Having a baby is a revolution for the brain."

{reference: Katherine Ellison, author of The Mommy Brain: How Motherhood Makes Us Smarter}

All I can say is that Carolynne’s birth motivated me to begin college and when John came I finished my PhD. Lee got a BA and MBA while they were little and without the “benefit” of child care.

I definitely think the babies made us smarter, not to mention more motivated.

Los Angeles, Mexico

So I’m in my Boxter breezing down the 405 on a rare excursion from the Hill and guess what I see. On a billboard advertising a local Hispanic radio station is prominently displayed the address: “Los Angeles, California.” Except the “California” was crossed out and replaced by “Mexico.” What the heck is going on?

I knew the Mexican government was engaged in a devious plot to invade the United States in order to become a US welfare state (“The Mexifornia that Roared” 4/26/05). Unfortunately for Vicente Fox, the US government knew all about Grand Fenwick, “The Mouse that Roared,” and avoided even attempting to secure the border. What’s more, the invading Mexicans really like it here and have little interest in returning to Mexico for welfare payments. In fact, the latest Zogby poll conducted in Mexico shows that the ordinary people there have decidedly different views of the Mexican-American dynamic.

Zogby found that a large majority of the Mexican population (58%) believes the southwest territory of the US rightfully belongs to Mexico, and that Mexicans should have the right to enter the US without permission.

By contrast, Zogby's survey of Americans conducted within a few days of the Mexican poll shows a large majority (58%) supports reducing immigration levels and 68% wants the military deployed along the border to protect the US from illegal immigration.

Immigration is the driving force behind population growth in the US since we're not having enough babies. ("Married Americans: Do Your Duty," 4/2/05) If present trends continue, the US population, now 293 million, is expected to be about 400 million people by the year 2050.

The US accepts about one million new legal immigrants a year. Also, about 400,000 immigrants come to this country each year illegally, and 8 to 10 million illegal immigrants reside in the US today.

In a recent poll by RoperASW, 85% of Americans agree that illegal immigration is a “serious” problem, and over half (55%) say it is “very serious.”

In fact, 76% of Americans prefer that legal immigration be kept below current levels. A majority (58%) would prefer fewer than 300,000 enter per year.

Most Americans want to completely halt illegal immigration (68%) and to reduce the number of illegal immigrants now present in the United States to near zero.

Americans support tough measures to halt illegal immigration, including mandatory arrest and forfeiture of property, followed by deportation, for anyone here illegally (83%).

The intriguing question is what about the remaining 17%?

My guess is that they are Democrats living in Boston, San Francisco and inside the Washington Beltway. There might be some Republicans too.

Definition of a Loser

Washington's top Democrat Harry Reid (NV) opined in response to a question about President Bush's policies:

"I think this guy is a loser."

"He's driving this country into bankruptcy."

"He's got us in this intractable war in Iraq."

Harry’s impetuous remarks are being challenged.

An RNC statement called the senator's comments "a sad development but not surprising from the leader of a party devoid of optimism, ideas or solutions to the issues people care about most."

Hugh Hewitt has initiated a contest asking you to finish the sentence:

"Harry Reid calling George Bush a loser
is like ___ calling ____ a ____."

E-mail your suggestions to hugh@hughhewitt.com.

My favorites so far:

Neville Chamberlain calling Winston Churchill a poor judge of Germans.

Barbara Boxer calling Condaleeza Rice a moron.

Michael Jackson calling anybody a "freak."

My definition of a loser: Harry Reid

U Street

SAN FRANCISCO — Carved into the Marina district of San Francisco, U Street, a sophisticated restaurant and lounge has quickly become a neighborhood mainstay. U Street, just 3-months young, now shifts its focus to the menu. From the Beard House in New York, to the French Laundry in Napa, Executive Chef Michael Schley, has learned from the masters. Most recently working as chef de cuisine under James Ormsby at PlumpJack Café, Schley gets set for his first executive chef position at U Street. Schley’s menu features small plates of Modern California cuisine. U Street owners John Kelley, Scott Loose and John Lama’s vision of providing the Marina neighborhood with great food, personal service and a late night entertainment atmosphere has become a reality.

U Street, a 42-seat restaurant elicits warm rich tones accented by deep colors and hardwood flooring. Local artist Michelle Tholen lines the walls with art reflecting depth, light, peace and mystery. Live DJ’s spin down-tempo ambient music in the full service lounge, located in the rear, which accommodates an additional 50, rounding off a sophisticated, lively and fun restaurant. For brunches, warm nights or cool nights that heat up, a flip-of-the switch retractable glass ceiling exposes U Street to nature’s roof. U Street is located at 1980 Union Street (at Buchanan). For more information, write to info@ustreetlounge.com or visit UStreetLounge.

This blurb is from the Nob Hill Gazette and is a shameless plug for my son John's new business.

God Bless America on this National Day of Prayer

“Since our Nation's earliest days, prayer has given strength and comfort to Americans of all faiths. Our Founding Fathers relied on their faith to guide them as they built our democracy. Today, we continue to be inspired by God's blessings, mercy, and boundless love. As we observe this National Day of Prayer, we humbly acknowledge our reliance on the Almighty, express our gratitude for His blessings, and seek His guidance in our daily lives.”

GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, May 5, 2005.

I want to thank good friend and Zone bridge partner Judy Floyd for sending this prayer, dedicated to our service men and women, past and present.

It is the VETERAN, not the preacher, who has given us freedom of religion.
It is the VETERAN, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the VETERAN, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the VETERAN, not the campus organizer, who has given us freedom to assemble.
It is the VETERAN, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the VETERAN, not the politician, who has given us the right to vote.
It is the VETERAN, who salutes the Flag.
It is the VETERAN, who serves under the Flag.

ETERNAL REST GRANT THEM O LORD,
AND LET PERPETUAL LIGHT SHINE UPON THEM.

For a wonderful site dedicated to prayer see Annie’s Homepage .
Click on 2005 Holidays near the bottom of the home page for Annie's National Day of Prayer page.

More Good News

Being a liberal Democrat must be really tough these days. As a Party member you are required to see gloom and doom everywhere. Iraq’s a disaster. The environment is a mess. Global warming is killing the Earth’s biosphere. Racism and chauvinism are rampant. The economy is in trouble. We’re running out of oil.

Au contraire, mes cheres! In “An Earth Day to Rejoice” (5/1/05) I exploded the myth of environmental gloom. In “Hollywood Warming” (2/11), “Mike Crichton Rocks” (2/12), and “Global Warming Debate” (2/15) I debunked the hysteria about global warming. Now let’s take a look at oil and energy.

Following are excerpts from a debate between Peter W. Huber, co-author of "The Bottomless Well: The Twilight of Fuel, the Virtue of Waste and Why We Will Never Run Out of Energy," and Paul Roberts, author of " The End of Oil: On the Edge of a Perilous New World."

Roberts recites the liberal dogma: “We're definitely headed for a shortage of cheap energy. Despite the assurances of OPEC, oil is getting harder to find. Today's high prices aren't short-term. Optimists insist that rising energy prices will bring on alternatives, like hydrogen or solar. But these technologies are decades from being economically viable — and won't be without a fundamental shift in the way we reward, and punish, energy decisions.”

Huber responds with facts: “Humanity currently consumes almost 70 BBOEs (billion barrels of oil or equivalents) every year, about half of it oil, half other stuff. That's hardly a drop out of the planetary bucket. The U.S. has 1,000 BBOEs of coal in the ground, and even more uranium. Tar sands in Alberta, Canada, and Venezuela hold more than 3,000 BBOEs. We already know how to tap these vast resources, and our technology keeps improving. If we choose, we can economically dig, dam, pump and purify all the energy we like.”

Roberts falls back on environmental concerns: “Tar sands and heavy oil are plentiful, but they're larded with carbon. While we can remove the carbon in a laboratory, doing so on a global scale would require a system bigger than the world's steel and iron industries combined. Can the market build this system? Yes, but only if we provide the right incentive, making carbon a cost rather than a freebie.”

Huber: “Paul, you don't foresee shortage. You want to create it — with a new carbon tax. Congress won't touch your carbon tax because most Americans hate the idea. Meanwhile, Canada and Venezuela are already producing a million barrels a day of tar-sand oil, for under $15 a barrel, and they can expand production indefinitely. They will. And efficiency, sad to say, just doesn't curb consumption. Per unit of energy used, we produce twice as much gross domestic product today as we did in 1950s — and consume three times as much energy.”

Roberts: “No serious player says efficiency is the solution. But suppose we combined the tax with a serious research and development push for technology that lets us de-carbonize — and thus rehabilitate — coal?”

Huber: “Anti-nuclear greens did far more for coal than Congress ever did. Since 1980, we've boosted nuclear output enough to displace 200 million tons of coal a year. It would have been 600 million tons if we'd finished building the plants in the pipeline. China now leads the world in developing next-generation pebble-bed reactors.”

Roberts: “Yes, nukes have been demonized by the left, which refuses to acknowledge advances in reactor design. Yes, given future electricity demand, no option should be ignored, especially a zero-emission one like nuclear.”

Huber: “The next energy economy is electricity. Electricity has met more than 80% of the growth in U.S. energy demand since 1980. It now fuels more than 60% of our GDP. Even with modest battery packs, hybrid cars will soon power shorter trips off the grid too. Expensive oil hasn't tanked the economy because power plants don't burn it. Only two fuels can supply limitless, cheap power today: coal and uranium. We've got lots of both.”

“We consume about 7 billion barrels of oil a year and 11 BBOEs of coal, gas, uranium and hydroelectric power. More than 80% of the total comes from North America. The U.S., Canada and Mexico provide about 60% of our oil. Electrification is shifting demand to the not-oil side of the ledger, where coal and uranium supplies are essentially unlimited. Oil markets are unstable because unstable governments control the cheapest oil — but Alberta's tar contains far more oil than Arabia's sand.”

It seems that the energy question is not all gloom and doom after all. In fact, “we’re running into oil, rather than out of it.” Since 1971, over 1.5 Trillion barrels of oil have been added to our known oil reserves while 0.8 Trillion barrels have been consumed. (The Economist, “The bottomless beer mug,” 4/30/05) Technological advances have increased recovery rates from oil fields from 20% in the 1980’s to 35% today, and we’re still leaving 65% in the ground. Technology has also improved the success rate of oil discovery from 18% twenty five years ago to 67% today.

The only threats to an energy plentiful future: Discontinue research and technology and let the environmental extremists (Democrats) dictate our energy policy.

Christy

Christy is my granddaughter. She just turned 16 and lives in Bend, Oregon. Christy’s older brother John is in the Army, 82 Airborne, and recently returned from Iraq. Johnny turned 20 while in Fallujah. Following is Christy's first attempt at poetry.

Gramps, I am just writing to show you a poem I wrote for History class. I'll start from the beginning. We watched Saving Private Ryan and had to write what we were thinking or feeling. So I wrote this.

People far and wide,
trying to save our country,
people just like us,
trying to make a difference,
they may get hurt,
and some may die,
but this is our world,
our love,
our life,
this is our country,
this is our war.

Please save us,
God be with us,
they yell out,
we cannot do it alone,
people are dying,
blood is thick,
it turns the water red,
kids not ready to be men
are getting ripped to shreds,
God please save us.
We cannot do it alone.

Tell me what you think.
Love, Christy

I think it's mighty fine sweetheart and I'm going to post it on PalosVerdesBlog.
I hope our family and friends like it too.

An Earth Day to Rejoice

I spent some time last weekend celebrating “Earth Day” and representing the Point Vicente Interpretive Center and the Los Serenos Docents at the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium. Walking around the exhibits, I was struck by two things. One, there are a multitude of top notch organizations doing good work for the environment. Two, the efforts seem to be paying off.

Then why are the newspapers and environmental hierarchy so worried? The Guardian science editor proclaimed: “The human race is living beyond its means… almost two-thirds of the natural machinery that supports life on Earth is being degraded by human pressure.”

A report prepared by the World Bank and issued by the Royal Society in London warns that:

> An estimated 24% of the Earth's land surface is now cultivated.

> Humans now use between 40% and 50% of all available freshwater running off the land.

> At least a quarter of all fish stocks are over harvested.

> Since 1980, about 35% of mangroves have been lost and 20% of the world's coral reefs have been destroyed.

> Deforestation and other changes could increase the risks of malaria and cholera, and open the way for new and so far unknown disease to emerge.

It sounds bad. But the common folks seem to be unimpressed. Dr. Steven Hayward, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the Pacific Research Center, noted in the recently published annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators: " It appears that public regard for environmental doom-saying is declining."

So what does the ILEI say? Among the environmental quality improvements highlighted are the following:

Air Pollution has fallen to the lowest level ever recorded. Virtually the entire nation has achieved clean air standards for four of the six pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act (carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and lead). Air quality in the 10 largest metropolitan areas--five in California--has improved by 53% since 1980. Los Angeles has improved the most of any city.

Car Emissions, one of the largest contributors to air pollution, will be reduced by more than 80% over the next 25 years, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Mercury Emissions have declined by 45% during the 1990s due to the phase-out of municipal and medical waste incineration. As a result, consumers can feel comfortable consuming fish such as salmon and trout.

Forestland in the eastern half of the United States is increasing at a rate of 1,000,000 acres a year.

Wetlands continue to multiply, growing at a rate of 26,000 acres a year.

Toxic Releases have declined since 1988 due to increasing efficiency and reduced materialization of our economy.

Global Warming’s “hockey-stick” graph, believed to show a dramatic warming trend, is now being called “rubbish.” Scientists have shown that the equation used to generate the graph would yield the same result for any random numbers input.

Dr. Hayward summed up the report: “The environment is perhaps the most successful public policy story of the last 30 years and the good news is getting noticed by the public. Some greenies are slowly and grudgingly admitting what conservatives understand instinctively: Richer is cleaner. Our growing economy and technological prowess is what drives environmental improvement. The Malthuisian mindset caused environmentalists to issue one doomsday prediction after another. Pick any prediction from the last 30 years and it was usually wrong, often by an order of magnitude. This is why I keep offering to bet any enviro $1,000 that air pollution will be lower at the end of Bush's presidency than when he took office.”

So far there have been no takers.