Salt Lake Tribune Smearmeister Glen Warchol Takes Cheap Shot At LDS-Owned Brigham Young University Over Texas Stadium Liquor Policy

So people want to know what's the difference between constructive criticism of the LDS Church vs. slander? Salt Lake Crawlmeister Glen Warchol gives us an example on July 6th, 2009.

Except the Crawlmeister should now be considered a "smearmeister", because his post, entitled "50% moral Cougars" is a deliberate smear of the Church-owned Brigham Young University. He implicitly takes BYU to task for "hypocrisy" because when the Cougars play the Oklahoma Sooners at the new Dallas Cowboys stadium in Arlington, Texas this fall, the stadium will only prohibit the sale of booze for half the game. Alcohol will flow from concessions through halftime and in club areas during the entire game.

Perhaps part of Warchol's motivation stems from information published in this Salt Lake Tribune article, which reveals that BYU will get an estimated $1.5 million in revenue from the game. However, since BYU did not release the information, Dallas Morning News reporter calculated that figure by asking BYU athletic director Tom Holmoe if BYU was getting close to the same amount of money it would get for a home game, which is $1.5 million, according to U.S. Department of Education figures. Holmoe responded affirmatively.

It can be presumed that some of that money will come from alcohol sales. And this is what's got Warchol's panties in a twist, since according to the Princeton Review, BYU students and fans hold the distinction of being the "most stone-cold sober" in the country. So I guess Warchol thinks it is hypocritical for the most stone-cold sober college in the country to accept revenue which may be partly derived from alcohol sales.

Talk about slippery-slope theory. First, it's an NCAA football game we're talking about here, not an LDS Area General Conference. So LDS standards are not going to be enforced. Secondly, BYU has no control over another venue's alcohol policy. Consequently, it really does not matter where the money's coming from, so long as BYU gets their prescribed cut.

Thus, Warchol's snide criticism of BYU is not constructive, but simply another cheap shot against an organization with which he ideologically disagrees. But Glen Warchol doesn't seem too distressed about living in Utah even though he's a chronic critic of the LDS Church; he's an established resident of Salt Lake's historic refinery district. Utah has many "Gentiles" who criticize the LDS Church for its alleged political domination of the state, and they continue to complain about it year after year after year after year...but of course, they never move from the state, though.

The only real controversy about this upcoming BYU-OU game is whether or not the Cougars can hold the Sooners to less than 50 points. Note that I did NOT suggest that the Cougars might actually win the game; if I did, I'd be arrested for TUI (typing under the influence). To be competitive, the Cougars must repair a defense that got shredded by quality teams like TCU and Utah last year.

Now if the Utes were playing the Sooners, that would be a different story.

Critically-Acclaimed British Historian And Holocaust Revisionist David Irving To Appear In Salt Lake City, Utah On July 13th, 2009

Once again, critically-acclaimed British historian David Irving is making an annual American tour - and Salt Lake City is on his itinerary. Irving will be appearing in Salt Lake at 7:00 P.M. on Monday July 13th, 2009. Unfortunately, because his appearances have been disrupted by antifa extremists and Jewish supremacists in the past, he does not disclose the precise location of his appearance until just a couple of days beforehand. A 2003 appearance in Salt Lake was disrupted by protestors.

David Irving's website is available HERE. His complete itinerary is available HERE, as well as instructions on how to obtain additional information and to pre-register for the appearance if desired. You will be able to purchase Irving's books there, or, if you already have any of his books, bring them to the event and he will autograph them.

David Irving attracts controversy because he's been slandered as a "Holocaust denier". But the facts are that most "Holocaust deniers" are more precisely described as "Holocaust revisionists". They do not deny that Jews were targeted, rounded up, incarcerated, and in some cases, even murdered, particularly in areas of active Communist partisan activity during World War II. Instead, Holocaust revisionists simply dispute the demographics, the methodology, and, above all, the singularity Jews attach to the Holocaust. The latter is most troubling because Jews present their Holocaust as the penultimate genocide, and many of them minimize genocide committed against other peoples.

But what makes this a significant issue is not so much the slander campaign against Irving and other revisionists, but the fact that several European nations and Australia have laws against Holocaust denial. This means that if you express public disagreement with official Holocaust dogma in these nations, you can be arrested, tried, and imprisoned, as in the case of German political prisoner Ernst Zündel. Imagine if you were tried, arrested, and imprisoned for disputing global warming theory, or for publicly proclaiming the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. It's a free speech issue; the truth is able to stand on its own without statutory protection. By supporting David Irving's free speech rights, we better defend our own rights. Rev. Ted Pike also speaks out against Holocaust denial laws HERE.

I first encountered one of David Irving's books in 1990. Entitled "The War Path", it was a continuation of his analysis of events leading up to and encompassing World War II in Europe. But as I read this book, something different began to be apparent - alone among all historians, David Irving expressed very little personal animus against National Socialist Germany. He dared to suggest that not all Germans were monsters. In short, he implied that the average German was just as patriotic to his country as Americans and British were to their respective countries. This represented a departure from the conventional wisdom that the Nazis were utterly evil. But Irving still holds to the basic notion that there was a "right side" and a "wrong side" in World War II, nonetheless.

Contrast Irving's work with William Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", which actually was more detailed and informative, but which in spirit was little more than 1200+ pages of regurgitated Allied propaganda.

U.S. Senate HELP Committee's Affordable Health Choices Act Would Fine A Person At Least $1,000 For Not Having Health Insurance

On July 2nd, 2009, the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, of which Senator Orrin Hatch is a member, unveiled a national health care proposal which would force all Americans to carry health insurance and impose a fine of $1,000 or more per year upon individuals refusing to carry health insurance. The fine would be included on one's annual Federal tax return. See the committee's press release HERE; media stories from the Associated Press, the Deseret News, and KSL Channel 5.

The HELP committee's proposal, entitled "The Affordable Health Choices Act" (no numerical designation yet; the 615-page draft is available HERE in PDF format) is one of three different Congressional proposals compared side-by-side HERE on the Kaiser Foundation's website. The other two proposals, one by the Senate Finance Committee, which is also addressing the separate issue of subsidizing health insurance for the poor through Medicaid, and one by a U.S. House Tri-Committee, also would require all people to carry health insurance and impose a tax penalty upon those who don't.

Other common attributes of all the bills include requiring insurance companies to sell coverage to any applicant, without charging higher premiums for pre-existing medical conditions. The poor and some middle-class families would qualify for government subsidies to help with the cost of coverage. The government's costs would be covered by a combination of higher taxes and cuts in projected Medicare and Medicaid spending.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines envisioned by the HELP committee will raise around $36 billion over 10 years. Senate aides said the penalties would be modeled on the approach taken by Massachusetts, which now imposes a fine of about $1,000 a year on individuals who refuse to get coverage. Under the federal legislation, families would pay higher penalties than individuals. The HELP Committee could complete its portion of the bill as soon as next week, and the presence of a government health insurance option virtually assures a party-line vote.

Proposing to force all Americans to buy health insurance exposes the deficiencies of the existing market configuration. An estimated 47 million residents of the United States are without health insurance; 15 percent are illegal immigrants. Many are younger healthy libertarian-oriented yuppies who make good money, but prefer to pay as they go and don't want the bureaucratic hassle of filling out a bunch of forms. But others can't afford health insurance for a variety of reasons; loss of job, pre-existing medical conditions, or make too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to buy health insurance.

In addition, providers have been pulling out of networks like Medicare and Medicaid because reimbursement is not sufficient and timely. Private sector workers cannot afford to run up deficits - they lack the power of taxation. Either they cut unprofitable operations, or they go bankrupt. Even some of the liberals on Democratic Underground think forcing people to buy health insurance is wrong.

To persuade people to buy health insurance, one must meet the following criteria:

(1). Must be affordable. No one will be willing to spend more than 5-10 percent of their income on insurance.

(2). Must be universal. No one who applies can be turned down for pre-existing medical conditions.

(3). Must be a sufficient number or providers, and they must have an incentive to remain in business. Lowering malpractice insurance premiums would help.

(4). Eligibility must be limited to legal residents of the United States. Proof of legal residency must be shown. We cannot afford compassion for illegal immigrants.

Here's a list of members of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, for those who want to contact them and tell them that forcing all Americans to buy health insurance is wrong (instructions on how to contact any U.S. Senator HERE):

Democrats by Rank
-- Edward Kennedy (MA)
-- Christopher Dodd (CT)
-- Tom Harkin (IA)
-- Barbara A. Mikulski (MD)
-- Jeff Bingaman (NM)
-- Patty Murray (WA)
-- Jack Reed (RI)
-- Bernard Sanders (I) (VT)
-- Sherrod Brown (OH)
-- Robert P. Casey, Jr. (PA)
-- Kay Hagan (NC)
-- Jeff Merkley (OR)

Republicans by Rank
-- Michael B. Enzi (WY)
-- Judd Gregg (NH)
-- Lamar Alexander (TN)
-- Richard Burr (NC)
-- Johnny Isakson (GA)
-- John McCain (AZ)
-- Orrin G. Hatch (UT)
-- Lisa Murkowski (AK)
-- Tom Coburn, M.D. (OK)
-- Pat Roberts (KS)

The Real Reason For The Decline Of The Newspaper Industry: Slipshod Journalism. Arizona Republic Botches The Story Of Mormon Pole-Dancer In Mesa, AZ

The decline of the newspaper industry in the United States has generated much finger-pointing by journalists. Everybody is to blame - the public, the government, the advertisers, and particularly us "accursed bloggers", although most of us "accursed bloggers" don't seek to compete directly with them, but merely to expand upon their stories and provide additional background and perspective.

Where they don't point the finger very often is at themselves - and an article about a Mormon pole-dancer published in the Arizona Republic illustrates why journalists need to start examining their own actions. The article profiled Jennifer Bourland, who with a partner has opened up a pole-dancing gym in Mesa, Arizona. Bourland was once an exotic dancer herself, starting at age 33 when her husband became terminally ill with cancer and the family needed income after she was fired from her previous job as a food merchandiser. She had a modestly successful career as a dancer, which she has now parlayed into enterpreneurship.

Oh, and by the way, Jennifer Bourland is a Mormon. And there the story ended. No follow-up.

Except for one problem - a story about a Mormon pole-dancer is going to generate a number of follow-up questions, since pole-dancing is not necessarily associated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Here are the two questions which immediately formed in my mind:

(1). Is Bourland an active Mormon or a Jack Mormon?
(2). Have any Church leaders have given her any static about her profession?

These questions are quite pertinent, since the LDS Church has counseled women not to work in strip joints, and even has advised Mormons not to work in places where liquor by the drink is served. So naturally, readers will be wondering about her status in and relationship with the LDS Church. Yet the Arizona Republic didn't even address these issues.

This is inexcusably sloppy journalism which is regrettably becoming more commonplace throughout the industry, as Thomas D. Williams suggests in this Truthout article. Helen Thomas has actually become a poster child for the decline in American journalism. There are exceptions; in Utah, KSL and the Deseret News continue to produce the highest quality journalism, with the gritty but gutsy Ogden Standard-Examiner running a competitive third. But the Salt Lake Tribune? In a two-newspaper town, they're thinking about making their online product less accessible to the public. That's insanity. The Tribune has some talent, but they are also infested with mediocrities. Particularly at the management level.

The message I deliver to the newspaper industry is simple - don't cry poverty and then put out half-finished garbage to the public. Give us quality content consistently, which includes anticipating and answering follow-up questions based upon your target audience. If we "accursed bloggers" are taking your audience away, perhaps it's because we're doing things you once did and stopped doing. Quit dressing up and publishing regurgitated AP and UPI content; get out of the chairs, hit the phones and streets and start reporting. And to the national media, I say this: Stop your obsession with celebrities and start giving us real news once again. We don't care what Madonna had for breakfast today. Really.