The first day of May always brings out the leftist loonies of the world, who call it International Workers Day. Over the last several years the news media have tended to downplay the Marxist theme of the demonstrations that always take place on May Day, but this year might be different. It looks like the Occupy Wall Street crowd has been making its Marxist connections so obvious that even the New York Times will have a hard time not noticing.
The NFL draft concluded on Saturday, and the players drafted look about like the players chosen by NFL teams every other year; all of them are male, only about 35% of them are white, and a significant number are of Polynesian ancestry. The NFL is not a government bureaucracy, so personnel decisions are made purely on the basis of the perceived ability of the players to do the jobs the teams hire them to do.
As several news outlets are reporting, the Marine Corps is going to start allowing women to attend its infantry officer training program, and take other steps aimed at qualifying more women for combat related positions. Clearly these changes are being made for political, rather than military, reasons. It’s one more example of Fuller’s Law: when the government is in charge, decisions are made politically.
Things are different in the National Football League, where decisions are made for practical reasons.
The President has been blaming “speculators” for the rapid rise in fuel prices during his term. Meanwhile his own administration is implementing policies that actually do drive prices up. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar works tirelessly to increase gas prices. Thanks to Salazar, fuel production on federal lands has fallen to a nine year low.
Last week President Obama gave a speech in which he blamed “speculators” for the high gas prices that are causing so much pain for the middle class. The purpose of the speech was to divert voters’ attention from the Obama policies that have restricted our access to the fuel we need.
In making oil market speculators the villain, the President was either showing profound ignorance of both economics and history, or he was counting on the American people to be ignorant about those subjects.