Thursday, February 13, 2014

COCA-COLA'S SUPER BOWL AD TURNS AMERICA'S SONG INTO A LEFTIST DIVERSITY AD By Geoffrey G. Fisher The liberal left’s love affair with the term diversity reached new heights on Super Bowl Sunday when “America the Beautiful” was sung in eight languages by young girls as part of a Coca-Cola Ad. The reaction from conservatives was predictable and immediate. “How dare this corporation take an American icon like “America the Beautiful” and toss it into the cauldron of political correctness.” In short, it was a cheap shot. The hubris of this Atlanta behemoth in general and CEO Muhtar Kent in particular was galling and chilling at the same time. It took less than one day for liberal researches to track down the intimate history of the author of the lyrics, Wellesley College graduate and Professor Katherine Lee Bates. Miss Bates had what was called at the time a “Boston Marriage” – that is a long term friendship with fellow Wellesley Professor Katharine Coman. Beyond these few facts historians are guessing at the particulars of their living arrangements because women expressed friendships in ambiguous terms in the late Victorian era. Author Patricia A. Palmieri an expert of Boston Marriages writes: “"We cannot say with certainty what sexual connotations these relationships conveyed. We do know that these relationships were deeply intellectual; they fostered verbal and physical expressions of love." This has not stopped the radical lesbian community from taking the most reckless interpretation for their cause and naming Miss Bates a lesbian icon as seen in 2012 when she was listed as one of the 31 LGBT history "icons" by the organizers of LGBT History Month. What the homosexual community ignores is the period sensitivity to any suggestion that a woman of that era was sexually attracted to the same gender. American author Henry James coined the term Boston Marriage and wrote the period novel The Bostonians on this very topic. The heroine of the book Verena Tarrant, is the love interest of Mississippi lawyer and Civil War veteran, Basil Ransom and Olive Chancellor, an ardent feminist reformer from Boston. Contemporary reaction to The Bostonians was both swift and unambiguous - the liberal reformers of Boston were scandelized. Darrel Abel put it perfectly in his book from 2002 called Classic Authors of the Gilded Age: “But probably most offensive to Boston propriety were the unmistakable indications (veiled references) of Lesbianism in the portrait of Olive Chancellor, which made it a violation of Boston decency and reticence. The important point about Miss Bates is that her lyrics are of unity, an assumption that American is a country of believers in God and one that understood that brotherhood stood for all of us. America! America! God shed his grace on thee And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea! Professor Bates would have tolerated but not approved of her lyrics being sung in eight languages. Indeed, as a full professor of English literature she would have insisted that all immigrants learn Standard English in a public school. The problem with the big topic of Diversity is that it’s foreign (excuse the pun) to our collective DNA. Diversity gurus view the United States as a simple collection of many parts, a view that contributes to chronic alienation of recent immigrants from the American experience, from the American ethos. It denies new arrivals that sense of joining a dynamic culture that is of the new world and not the old world of Europe or Asia. Artificial Diversity brings divisiveness. Most liberals ironically refuse to embrace diversity of opinion – if you disagree with them you are a “homophobe” or stupid et cetera. Listen to the words of Presidential candidate Barack Obama speaking in 2008 at a fund raiser in San Francisco, the citadel of liberalism. The junior senator from Illinois tried to explain small town Americans to his fellow progressives: “…they (rural Americans) cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” Really? Basically if you disagree with a “liberal” you are marginalized as a gun-toting, bible thumping, xenophobe. Mr. President that sounds very provincial of you. John F. Kennedy promoted unity and togetherness in his last commencement address at American University in Washington, D.C. on June 10, 1963: “So, let us not be blind to our differences. But let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.” This was and is still great advice for the countries of the world he was addressing in 1963 and the young people of the United States today - Gen Y. Remember we live in the United States and not the United Nations. There’s a reason “E Pluribus Unum” (Out of Many, One) is one of our national mottos, that it is on our money and the Great Seal of the United States since 1782, and that is because we are many people who have created the greatest country in history and have created a culture worthy of this great country. Having English as our common language makes us stronger not weaker Mr. Kent. The greatest story of E Pluribus Unum or assimilation of the 20 century was the European Jews who escaped persecution in the Old Country only to live in abject poverty in cities like New York, Brooklyn, and New Orleans. They did this in order to give their children a better life. And of course the degradation suffered by the Jews of the 20th century during World War II cannot be matched by any racial or ethnic group in American society today. Yet in 2014 Jews enjoy the full embrace of America contributing to the fields of music, medicine, business, and politics. Think about it – can you get any more American than George Gershwin (Rhapsody in Blue, An American in Paris or Irving Berlin (White Christmas, God Bless America, and Blue Skies). Today Diversity is nothing more than a continuation of Pluralism of the 1980s and Multiculturalism of the 1990s. Diversity is the love child of modern liberals like Barack and Hillary who have reservations about American Exceptionalism. Evangelicals argue that the founding generation of America was put together with the guiding hand of Almighty God. I agree. How else can you explain Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and Franklin being contemporaries in 1776? Just take Thomas Jefferson. His brilliance was best explained by John Kennedy at a dinner honoring Nobel Prize Winners of the Western Hemisphere on Sunday April 29, 1962: “I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.” The bottom line is there is nothing wrong with speaking several languages as an individual as long as you can speak Standard English. Muhtar Kent’s affront to American sensibilities harkens back to Coke’s former CEO Roberto Goizueta’s introduction of New Coke on April 23, 1985 – an introduction that proved to be one of the great marketing blunders in business history because he misread the American people. My advice to Muhtar Kent, stick to your business ledgers and leave the political correct propaganda to true socialists like the president, Mrs. Pelosi, and Mrs. Clinton. (Word Total: 1258)


CONDOLEEZZA RICE FOR PRESIDENT: DRAGON SLAYER AND SO MUCH MORE BY GEOFFREY G. FISHER The 4s5th President of the United States will take the oath of office on Friday afternoon, January 20, 2017, on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol building. This inauguration will either mark the return of our country to social and fiscal sanity or a continuation of financial ruin. Most political analysts now conclude that the Democratic Party will nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton for president. Of all the possible GOP nominees only Condoleezza Rice has the brains, experience, temperament and steely resolve to eviscerate the Democratic Dragon that is consumed with being the first woman president. Professor Rice of Stanford University is a woman of substance rather than a woman of cunning pretending to be a trailblazer but in actuality is nothing more than a modern version of the wronged Victorian woman. One who has made a disgraceful bargain to look the other way as she clung to the coattails of a powerful man. It would be an intrepid act if Mrs. Clinton admitted to her bargain, that is she came clean by saying that she clung to her husband in order to advance in politics – that statement would be both honest and refreshing. Although Mrs. Clinton is many things, honest and refreshing never. Liberal columnist Maureen Dowd of the New York Times summarized the real Mrs. Clinton when she wrote in September of 2007, “Without nepotism, Hillary would be running for the president of Vassar.” I agree Dowd but the former First Lady is still formable and undoubtedly has the killer instinct – so how would Dr. Rice slay this dragon? It comes down to capturing a greater percentage of important voter blocks that have been trending Democratic lately. As a charming, informed and poised campaigner Condi Rice will engage most Americans with her life story (she grew up in segregated Birmingham, Alabama where she felt the blast from the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in September of 1963), she will also engage the voters with her abilities, and experience. Politically, Professor Rice will easily capture the GOP establishment along with many moderate Democrats – she will also ultimately win over the social and Tea Party conservatives. The thought of a President Hillary will quell any division with the Republican Party. Although Dr. Rice has flirted with the issue of abortion: “I’ve called myself at times mildly pro-choice. I’m kind of libertarian on this issue, and meaning by that that I have been concerned about a government role in this issue. I’m a strong proponent of parental choice, of parental notification. I’m a strong proponent of a ban on late-term abortion.” Pro-Lifers will have to be satisfied with a libertarian view on this issue rather than Hillary’s radical agenda promoting abortion on demand. President Hillary will likely add two radicals to the Supreme Court bench setting the Pro-Life movement back by 20 years. Here are some specifics for any Tea Party purists: politically, Professor Rice will peel off 4% of the female vote and probably 5% of the black vote giving her a winning formula if she follows the same electoral route used by Governor Romney in 2012. No other Republican candidate can match this intrusion into the Obama coalition. Whereas Governor Romney was stiff and opaque to the voters, Dr. Rice is both a natural political figure and someone that generates the integrity of a female Jimmy Stewart, earnest and altruistic. On the issue of temperament Condi is poised, gracious, and steady under pressure – that is a woman of courage and vision. Her foreign policy experience has been a crucible for her – she understands the nuances that exist in the real world and the need to act on the best information available. She displayed that steely resolved on September 11, 2001, calmly advising the president on how to respond to the sneak attack on our home front. She also had a message to the Code Pink crowd after the invasion of Iraq took place: “I welcome your opinions but I do not welcome your uniformed opinions.” She is also modest in her victories – for example advising Bush 41 on victory in the cold war: “We harvested these victories due to decisions of President Harry Truman, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, and General George Marshall who implement both the Truman Doctrine, and the Marshall Plan in 1947 to strengthen Europe against an aggressive Soviet Union. These policies are commonly understood to be the start of the Cold War that Dr. Rice helped end. As Stanford provost in 2002 she brought this elite school back from the brink of bankruptcy by eliminating a $20 million deficit and replacing it with a $14.5 million surplus within two years. In contrast Mrs. Clinton has never run any business - her two experiences in government service, the Task Force on National Health Care Reform of 1993 and her stint at the State Department produced mediocre results: an abject failure in the former instance and the Benghazi debacle in the latter instance. Indeed, Mrs. Clinton has a long history of losing her composure under pressure – for example in 1999 in the Congo when a student speaking through a translator, innocently asked her what “the president” thought about a Chinese trade deal with the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The translator substituted “Mr. Clinton” for the word president. “You want me to tell you what my husband thinks?” (Hillary) replied, clearly irked by the thought of being her husband Bill’s spokeswoman. “My husband is not secretary of state, I am,” she replied. The incident showed how Hillary is easily rattled and as a consequence her behavior only reinforces the stereotype of the emotional woman. The end result is Mrs. Clinton came across as churlish and silly. On the topic of honesty there is also no comparison since Condoleezza Rice is a person of integrity – her honesty has never been brought into question. By contrast Hillary is known for her difficulty in telling the truth – in 1996, New York Times Columnist William Safire penned “Blizzard of Lies” – “Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady -- a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation -- is a congenital liar.” Carl Bernstein of Woodward and Bernstein fame, stated “Since her Arkansas years, Hillary Rodham Clinton has always had a difficult relationship with the truth.” Mrs. Clinton became so hysterical in 2007 that she promoted her years as first lady as a time of great personal courage arguing (that) she risked her life…with a hair-raising flight into Bosnia that ended in a “corkscrew” landing and a sprint off the tarmac to dodge snipers. “I don’t remember anyone offering me tea,” she quipped. Of course the story proved to be a colossal lie as shown on video tape. Her apology: “I misspoke”. Mrs. Clinton cannot be trusted or believed. Yet this fact does not stop this maniacal dragon who fancies herself as the prototype woman of Helen Reddy’s song: I am Woman. “I am (Hillary), hear me roar (With supporters) too big to ignore… CHORUS Oh yes I am wise But it's wisdom born of pain Yes, I've paid the price (an adulterous husband) But look how much I gained… Mrs. Clinton’s stint as Secretary of State was an appointment by another powerful man this time to mollify Hillary’s disappointed feminist supporters – a move that worked and put Barack Obama in the White House – it’s called quid pro quo and not foreign policy experience. Unfortunately, her callous attitude mixed with her lack of experience produced Benghazi. Her response was telling: "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans," Clinton said. "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?" Four dead Americans apparently are “just an inconvenient truth”. Dr. Rice will tackle our $16 trillion debt with the political finesse and bravery demonstrated in all of her public and private life. She will restore our standing in the world by once again giving our friends solace while putting our enemies on notice. Hillary can then return to the lecture circuit where she commands $200,000 per speech and can bask in the warm glow of her many sycophants. Then we can all be happy. (Word Total, 1386) Geoffrey G. Fisher is a federally designated Highly Qualified state-certified history teacher living in southwest Florida. He holds a BA in History from the University of Connecticut and a MA in Public Policy from Trinity College in Hartford, CT. In addition to teaching he is a former elected official and speechwriter. Mr. Fisher now writes the political blog: THE THINKING CAP at He is also a weekly columnist for the Political e-Magazine: THE PATRIOTUPDATE.COM