Sunday's Op-Eds

Four op-eds in today's newspapers (Det News, Det Free Press, Oak Press) were worth reading and considering.  All offered insights and were thoughtful.  And, I think, they covered various ends of the so-called political spectrum.

First, Mitch Albom covered the story of the Mets player who forwent his teams first two games to be at the birth of his child, his first one.  I guess a number of sports commentators tried to run the player through the ringer about it.  I didn't see this stuff, since I don't really follow sports, but Albom included some quotes from these, well, Neanderthals.  And, apparently, there was a good deal of support for their ridiculous ideas.  Funny, though, he had the support of his teammates, his manager, and MLB.  So who are these ding-a-lings who said, and I'm recalling from memory as best I can, "Have his wife get a C-section and be at the game."  "He doesn't do anything [at the birth] anyway.  He should be with his team."  Albom had several great points, one about "We don't use leeches anymore, either."  The other he cited what this player's child will one day say.  "My dad missed two Major League games to be at my birth."  Then, Albom asked, "What will these other guys' kids say?  'My dad did his radio show when I was born.'"  I was at the birth of both of my sons and all three of my grandkids--and I'm glad I was.  They were five of the best days of my life.

Second, Brian Dickerson wrote about Mary Barra, the GM CEO, and her appearance before Congress, at least a committee.  He shined some light on the hearing, including some questions (his, not the committee members') that were insightful.  I have two questions myself.  First, some folks are feeling sorry or at least have some compassion for Barra in this.  After all, they argue, she wasn't the CEO when the ignition problem and cover-up(s) occurred.  Maybe fair enough, maybe not.  I'm assuming that she wasn't working on the assembly line or pushing some pencil as a low-grade accountant when all of this happened.  So, if she wasn't, did she know about the problem?  Did she know about the cover-up?  If not, why not?  If so, did she speak up?  If not, why not?  If she did, then why was she ignored or overruled?  Now, there's a question that might need an answer.  Second, I find it very disingenuous for these arrogant members of Congress to be holding hearings of this sort.  After all, who had done more to harm American people and their lifestyles than these self-appointed elitists?  I think that the LameStreams should begin asking the same sort of questions of members of Congress as they ask of others.

In the News, Nolan Finley wrote a piece that will invite, I'm certain, charges of "racism" and/or "bigotry."  I must admit first though that a lead story on the front page of the Free Press editorial section on the incident last week where a driver who accidentally hit a young boy who walked out in front of his car was beaten badly (still near death) by a mob of 10-12 "young men."  Oh, the driver was white and each of the mob was black.  The Free Press writer, in the headline, insisted, "It's not about race......"  Why do I find it hard to believe that had the driver been black, no beating would have occurred.  I can't prove it, but can't believe it would have.  I think the Free Press writer is delusional.  Finley's column related this incident to one a couple of months ago, when a man shot a young woman who knocked on his door in the wee hours of the AM--oh, and the man was white and she was black.  Why were there cries of "racism!" in this shooting, but not in the beating?  In fact, as the Free Press article insisted, "It's not about race...."  It was Winston Churchill who said, "Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes to them."  If the United States is to have a meaningful discussion of problems of race, everything must be on the table.

Walter Williams in The Oakland Press took on the sex and race police again.  With only the biting sarcasm he can write, he noted all of the inequality based on race and gender--that we must deal with.  How, he asks, do we justify that 39% of all Nobel Prizes won by Americans go to Jews, who comprise only 3% of the population?  "They are taking the rightful Nobel laureates of other racial groups."  And blacks, he notes, are grabbing an unfair share of NBA and NFL jobs.  With 13% of the US population, blacks make up almost 80% of the NBA and 2/3 of the NFL.  Surely they are depriving other races of professional football and basketball jobs?  And the NIH recommends more calories per day for male babies than female babies, up to 10% more. This, he cites, is a "government-sanctioned war on women."  And, if we truly value integration and equality, why are men and women segregated in our prisons?  These are other such differences between genders and races should be found "offensive," he insists, by the progressive elements in society.

There was also blather in The OP by E.J.  Dionne.  I won't waste my time with his column, other than repeat "blather."