Republican Voters Split on Rick Perry's Statements on Social Security

USA Today, "Poll: Perry's Social Security view concerns some Republicans":

Republican voters are evenly split over whether Texas Gov. Rick Perry's outspoken stance on Social Security makes them more or less likely to support him for the presidential nomination, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, but they are worried that his views could cost him in the general election.

The survey, taken after the CNN/Tea Party Express debate among Republican contenders Monday, illustrates the complicated politics on the issue that has prompted the sharpest divide between Perry and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, the contenders at the top of national polls.

Perry, the Texas governor, calls Social Security a "Ponzi scheme" for younger workers that needs to be fundamentally revamped for future recipients. One in five Republicans say that position makes them more likely to support him; one in five say it makes them less likely to do so. However, by more than 2-1, 37%-17%, Republicans predict Perry's position will hurt rather than help his chances of being elected president.

Keep reading.

A majority of both Republicans and independents says protecting Social Security, despite its problems, is most important. Also at Gallup, "Perry 'Ponzi Scheme' Remark Doesn't Faze Most Republicans: Solid Majority Believe Social Security Should Be Preserved." (Via Memeorandum.)

But see Charles Krauthammer, "A Ponzi scheme that should be fixed." As usual, Krauthammer's is the best article I've read on this in a long time.

The Beauty of Moral Excellence

Peter Wehner has an interesting piece, at Commentary, "Our Lack of Moral Vocabulary":

Earlier this week, David Brooks wrote a fascinating column on young people’s moral lives, basing it on hundreds of in-depth interviews with young adults across America conducted by the eminent Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith and his team.

The results, according to Brooks, were “depressing” — not so much because of how they lived but because of “how bad they are at thinking and talking about moral issues.” Asked open-ended questions about right and wrong, moral dilemmas and the meaning of life, what we find is “young people groping to say anything sensible on these matters. But they just don’t have the categories or vocabulary to do so.” What Smith and his team found is an atmosphere of “extreme moral individualism — of relativism and nonjudgmentalism.” The reason, in part, is because they have not been given the resources — by schools, institutions and families — to “cultivate their moral intuitions, to think more broadly about moral obligations, to check behaviors that may be degrading.”

This is part of a generations-long phenomenon. In his 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind, Allan Bloom wrote, “There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of: almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative.” And the university, Bloom argued, is unwilling to offer a distinctive visage to young people. The guiding philosophy of the academy is there are no first principles, no coherent ways to interpret the world in which we live.

But this is merely a pose. No one, not even a liberal academic, is a true relativist. Scratch below the surface and you’ll find them to be (morally) judgmental toward those who want to discriminate based on race, gender, or sexual orientation. They will likely have strong (moral) views on criminalizing abortion, restricting marriage to one man and one woman, anthropogenic global warming, water-boarding terrorists, rendition, Israeli settlements, profits for oil companies, and cutting taxes for the rich. The left is adamant: women have a “right” to an abortion and gays have a “right” to marry. These rights are viewed as a priori and inviolate. And no one, not even a progressive liberal arts professor, is morally indifferent to someone who wants to rape his wife, molest his children, and steal his iPad. It is fashionable to insist we don’t want to “impose our values” on others or “legislate morality.” But the reality is we do so all the time, on an endless number of issues, and no civilization could survive without doing so. The question, really, is which moral standards do we aspire to? What is the ethical code we use to judge ourselves and others?

Keep reading, and note:

One final thought: what is often lost in this debate is that human fulfillment and happiness isn’t found in a world stripped of moral beliefs. Despair, not joy, is found among those who believe in nothing, who find purpose in nothing, who fight for nothing. Because of human anthropology – because we are moral creatures, made in the image of God – we are meant to delight in His ways, to live lives of high moral purpose. All of us fail more often than we should. But we cannot give up on the aspiration; nor can we allow our hearts to grow cold and indifferent, unmoved by the beauty of moral excellence.

But check Brooks' essay, which strikes a chord with my experience. I do think young people are deeply moral, but they lack an expressive vocabulary to articulate these beliefs in the public realm.

Black Flash Mobs

Some news agencies refuse to report the racial identity of those committing flash mob violence around the country, and political correctness prohibits a frank discussion of the issue among civic leaders and national policy makers. Seriously. Roland Martin on CNN's bumbling and blathering about "no matter if it's black or white," blah, blah. Freakin' asshat black criminal apologist. These are black mobs dick! Yet another example of how progressivism is kicking this country to the curb. See Ward Connerly, "Flash Mob Racism":

Earlier this year, the Justice Department of the Obama administration announced its objective to aggressively monitor the police departments of major urban cities. The purpose of this effort is to determine whether such departments are involved in racial profiling of blacks and Latinos and whether they are engaged in police brutality. Since that announcement, events have unfolded in some of those cities that reveal how misplaced that policy initiative actually is.



In Chicago, the District of Columbia, Milwaukee and Philadelphia, a group of “flash mobs” have unmercifully terrorized residents of those communities – attacking citizens, breaking windows of business establishments and stealing merchandise, and committing other random acts of violence. In each instance, the mobs have been overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, black youth. This fact has accounted for the failure of most of the news media to report either the events themselves or the racial background of the perpetrators. Several news sources have readily admitted that it is their practice not to mention the racial identity of those involved in criminal activity. Jim Stingl, a columnist for the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, recently wrote, “This newspaper normally avoids mentioning the race of people involved in crimes, unless it’s part of a description to help apprehend someone at large.”



Philadelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter is not afflicted with the same disease of political correctness as many in the media. In a recent 30-minute sermon delivered from the pulpit of his Baptist church, Nutter confronted the culture that many of us believe drives the behavior of these individuals when he said, “You have damaged your own race…Take those God-darn hoodies down, especially in the summer. Pull your pants up and buy a belt ‘cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt.’’



“If you walk into somebody’s office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won’t hire you? They don’t hire you ‘cause you look like you’re crazy,” the mayor said.



Mayor Nutter is correct. When we have young people burglarizing stores and neighborhoods and beating up bystanders without provocation, there is obviously a widespread cultural problem in the group committing these acts. That reality must be faced and the thugs responsible for these acts should not be ignored or coddled. They and their parents, if there are parents in the households, should be held accountable for their behavior.

It's racist violence. Black racist mobs attacking whites. See, "Teen girl gang assaults woman in brazen daylight attack outside Philadelphia City Hall." (At Memeorandum.) And also, "More flash mob mayhem for DC-area as band of female looters storms convenience store."

Why Won't Germans Have More Babies?

At Der Spiegel, "A Land Without Children."



A lot with children is a land without laughter and vitality.



But sure to read down to the bottom for Parts II and III.