Obama Throws Black Values "Under the Bus" With Gay Marriage Decision

Project 21 fellow Deneen Borelli says that President Obama has “thrown the black community… under the bus” in favor of gays with the announcement of his support for same-sex marriage.  With the news that many black pastors are speaking out against the President on the decision, Deneen points out that Obama has put himself “on the wrong side of the issue,” alienating some of his most loyal supporters by going against closely-held moral values in the black community.  Joining Deneen in this panel discussion is Fox News Channel’s “Happening Now” on 5/15/12 is co-host Bill Hemmer and talk radio host Santita Jackson (Jesse’s daughter).

Project 21's Borelli: Good to Know U.S. is Still Taking the Fight to the Terrorists

Discussing the increase in drone attacks on terrorists in Yemen and the foiling of another airline bomb plot, Project 21 fellow Deneen Borelli notes that it is good to know that the war on terrorism is still taking the fight to the terrorists’ bases rather than only concentrating on frisking American kids and the elderly in airports. On another topic in which a New Jersey standardized test asked schoolchildren to reveal a secret, Deneen pointed out that this overreach by educators is not only wrong but also “undermines what the definition of what a secret is.”

Deneen is joined in this 5/13/12 discussion on the Fox News Channel’s “America’s News Headquarters” by Fox News host Heather Childers as well as journalist Judith Miller and businesswoman Patricia Powell.

Bake Sale Ban Repealed: Freedom (and Cupcake) Lovers Win Quick Victory

School bake sales: No longer on the endangered list in Massachusetts

Conservative activists -- let's expand that to include all people of good sense -- won a rare quick victory in the "bake sale ban" controversy, which began Tuesday and ended Thursday with the administration of Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick backing down on plans to ban bake sales in the commonwealth's public schools.

The ban was quickly repealed following a public uproar, which led to a vote to repeal the ban in the Massachusetts state House and an order by Governor Patrick to the state's Department of Public Health to lift the ban.

The National Center for Public Policy Research was extremely active in publicizing the ban, helping instigate the public revolt that restored the rights of localities to set their own policies, and send a message to nanny state activists across the country.

These are among the many National Center activities that helped lead to this rollback:

Jeff Stier, interview, WXKS Boston, May 8

Jeff Stier, interview, KNX Los Angeles, May 8

Jeff Stier, interview, Terry Lowry syndicated radio (11 markets), May 9

Jeff Stier, interview, WTPL Concord, May 9

Jeff Stier, CNS News, May 9

David Almasi, interview, Brad Davis syndicated radio (4 markets), May 9

Jeff Stier, interview, G. Gordon Liddy syndicated radio (150+ markets), May 9

Jeff Stier, interview, WYSL Rochester, May 9

Cherylyn LeBon, interview, WFOY St Augustine, May 9

Op/Ed, "Opinion: Obesity Forecast is Overblown," New York Newsday, May 9, by Jeff Stier and David W. Almasi

Cherylyn LeBon, interview, WEAA Baltimore, May 9

Cherylyn LeBon, interview, Falls Radio Network (3 markets), May 9

Jeff Stier, interview, WIBA/WISN Madison/Milwaukee, May 10

Cherylyn LeBon, interview, KVEL NE Utah, May 10

David Almasi, interview, WCam & Company (NRA News)

Jeff Stier, interview, WGSO New Orleans, May 11

Cherylyn LeBon, interview, American Family Radio/One News Now, May 11

Jeff Stier, website, The Hay Ride

National Center personnel are continuing research and public education efforts on many nanny state issues.

Obesity forecast is overblown

In an op-ed in today’s Newsday, David Almasi and I explain why the obesity forecast in the news this week is overblown, and how it was choreographed to justify more nanny-state regulations.

We wrote,

Take those grim claims about a fat future for America with a grain of salt.

Several grains of salt, in fact. Add flour, sugar, baking powder, shortening, milk, eggs and vanilla. Mix them all together and bake for 20 minutes at 350 degrees.

Enjoy the cupcake this will create with the realization that the predictions are only half-baked. But eat in moderation. That’s the key to beating obesity.

In a media blitz that includes a taxpayer-funded conference, reports from the Institute of Medicine (the health policy arm of the National Academy of Sciences) and Duke University, and a four-part HBO “Weight of the Nation” documentary beginning next week, a study led by researchers at Duke predicts that 42 percent of Americans will be obese by 2030. That’s a huge increase from about 36 percent in 2010 — a figure that’s held relatively steady for about a decade.

The assertion, however, is as reliable a predictor as a Magic Eight Ball. It’s based on projections like the number of fast-food restaurants likely to be built over the next two decades. Wall Street analysts can’t predict such things five years out. Yet the researchers claim to guess not only the number, but what people will eat in those establishments and how those choices will fit into their overall lifestyles.

That’s about as nutty as predicting obesity based on Internet access, which the researchers also did, predicting technological advancement encourages laziness.

Another factor they threw into the mix was the price of alcohol. The thinking is that if alcohol prices are low, people will drink to excess and gain weight. That is a very speculative assumption for what is supposed to be a scientific report.

The real purpose of the report is to ease the public into an acceptance of authoritarian interventions. The proposed solutions — which include high soda taxes, minimum pricing on alcohol (already being considered in Europe) and restrictions on where fast-food restaurants can open (already law in Los Angeles) are very unpopular. So activists feel the need to overstate the risk to make the case that we need emergency measures, no matter how drastic.

Institute of Medicine committee member Shiriki Kumanyika said as much in a Reuters interview, claiming: “The average person cannot maintain a healthy weight in this obesity-promoting environment.”

Other remedies for America’s junk-food junkies would likely include food restrictions that mimic today’s tobacco regulations. Expect to see higher taxes on food that government bureaucrats don’t want you to eat, as well as marketing restrictions, and more laws like the one passed this week in Massachusetts — a ban on public school bake sales.

These activists underestimate the American people. Amid the calls for government control over the nation’s cupboard, scant credit is given to the public’s willingness to adopt healthy eating habits. The Walt Disney Co. found more than half of its theme park customers took to its healthier food offerings. The Chop’t Creative Salad fast-casual restaurant chain in New York City, Westchester and Washington, D.C., had a 260 percent growth in revenue between 2006 and 2009.

Another missing element is skepticism. A true indicator of rigorous research is lingering doubt. There seems to be none here, as if the conclusion magically fit the hypothesis. One wonders if the reception would be the same if the report projected dramatically falling obesity rates.

To be sure, obesity is a public health problem that should be addressed with scientific discipline. Instead, as the current campaign illustrates, activists are politicizing obesity — using it as a vehicle to try to remake the American way of life.

Just as too much candy and soda crowd out more nutrient-rich and lower-calorie food and drink, flawed approaches such as this taxpayer-funded nanny-state blueprint could crowd out better ideas.

Project 21’s Bishop Nedd on Obama's New Position on Gay Marriage

Most likely because Vice President Biden forced his hand and not necessarily due to any evolution of his beliefs, President Obama today came out of the closet to announce his latest flip-flop in support of gay marriage.

This decision does not sit well with Project 21 member Council Nedd II, who is also the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Missionary Church & Bishop Ordinary of the Diocese of the Chesapeake and Northeast.

Bishop Nedd says his opposition to the President’s current sentiment to favor creating a new civil right at the expense of traditional marriage is not about bias or discrimination as it is about preserving the sanctity of faith.  Council says:

Opposition to gay marriage is not about hating homosexuals.  It is simply about preserving the sanctity of marriage and what our God has ordained as a blessed thing.

While New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the President’s announcement is a major turning point in American civil rights, gay marriage actually mocks the institution at the foundation of all civilization.

I preached about this very point this past Sunday.  What’s happening is nothing new in the history of the world, but our modern society is now primed for decline.  The Book of Judges in the Bible outlines the pattern that mankind seemingly never learns from.  First, social and sexual morality breaks down.  Next, the crime rate rises slowly – then exponentially.  Finally, society disintegrates altogether.  That cycle has begun again.

Council does not just dwell on the morality.  He also is appalled by the political and international facets of the Obama announcement.  He continues:

Putting aside the moral aspect of all of this, President Obama expressing his support for same-sex marriage also takes political pandering and governing by poll numbers to a new level.

It is more than just one man’s opinion when Obama chooses to use the bully pulpit of the presidency.

It’s essentially policymaking by referendum.  Obama is acting like a puppet on the string – dancing to the whims of the left-wing special interests.  Is he that beholden to them?

I recently returned from an extended stay in the Persian Gulf.  Christians and Muslims alike there believe America is at the heart of the world’s moral decline.  I would try to come to the defense of my country, blaming the French.  But, despite the fact that no one has paid attention to the French much for decades, we actually now seem to be following their lead.

Borellis on Wednesday Night Glenn Beck Internet Show

National Center staffers Tom and Deneen Borelli — director of the Free Enterprise Project and fellow with Project 21, respectively — will be guests of Glenn Beck on GBTV tonight.  They will be talking about Occupy Wall Street’s fight against capitalism, with a focus on today’s protests at the Bank of America shareholder meeting.

The Borelli’s will be on during the first hour of GBTV at 5:00PM eastern.  GBTV is a pay-per-view service.  More information about it can be obtained by clicking here.

Massachusetts Bans the Bake Sale!

On August 1, the only food that can legally be sold in Massachusetts public schools is food that is prepared or distributed by the school.  That means the era of the bake sale is over in the Bay State.  As if that isn’t enough, regulators are looking to further ban any similar sales as they relate to after-school activities such as banquets, sporting events and door-to-door candy sales.

Interviewed by UPI, one PTA parent succinctly explains the effect this ban will have on fundraising for extracurricular organizations such as clubs and sports teams: “If you want to make a quick $250, you hold a bake sale.”

But the Massachusetts Department of Public Health says selling Bundt cakes to buy bats is no way to combat childhood obesity.  DPH medical director Dr. Lauren Smith says: “We know that schools need those clubs and resources.  We want them to be sure and have them, but to [fundraise for] them a different way.”

So good luck with that, parents!

Project 21 spokeswoman Cherylyn Harley LeBon says this is yet another example of the rise of the nanny state in America, and that the government needs to realize it is the home where habits are acquired and not their institutions of learning.  Cherylyn says:

As the mother of two young children, I am just as concerned as anyone else about alarming obesity rates in our country.  No one wants their child to be obese.  However, it is not the government’s job to police what our children consume.  It is parent’s responsibility to provide their children with healthy and nutritious meals.

States and schools can ban whatever food they prefer, but children will learn healthy eating habits at their own kitchen table — not from a state imposed law.

FDA Dietary Regs Go Beyond Science and the Law

In a piece today for Breitbart’s Big Government, I criticize the Food and Drug Administration for distorting both law and science.

The Food and Drug Administration is supposed to be the scientific arbiter concerning the safety of dietary supplements. Instead, it is acting arbitrarily, choosing to target one product not because of any actual risk, but as an attempt to justify its own forthcoming regulations.

The FDA issued warning letters late last month to ten makers of popular workout supplements containing the ingredient DMAA. The products are supposed to give users the feel one would get after drinking a few cups of coffee.  DMAA is found in geranium plants, but it is more efficiently produced in a lab, just like many vitamins and minerals Americans use every day.

Interestingly, the FDA warnings didn’t go so far as to actually ban DMAA, perhaps realizing it doesn’t have the science or legal authority to do so. Instead, the letters threatened a ban sometime in the future — still a powerful regulatory action – and implicitly pressured the supplement makers to take their products off the market.

What would be the basis for FDA’s authority to ban a nutritional supplement it hasn’t shown to be harmful? 

The best the agency could do is cite its own bizarre draft guidance that because the DMAA used in the supplements is created in a lab, rather than extracted from geranium plants, it can’t be used as an active ingredient. Those guidelines – which do not have the force or effect of law – have not been finalized and have been criticized by the authors of the law which dictates how the agency regulates supplements.

In the draft guidance issued last year, the FDA claims that synthetic copies of botanicals (like DMAA) cannot be “dietary ingredients.” This approach simply makes no sense. The vitamins that millions of Americans take every day are synthetic copies; it’s not like oranges are being squeezed to produce the Vitamin C for daily capsules.

As the American Herbal Product Association reasonably asserts, “If DMAA exists naturally in geranium - which has been in the food supply for years - synthesized DMAA is also a lawful dietary ingredient permitted for use in supplements.” 

Senators Orin Hatch and Tom Harkin, who wrote the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), which gives FDA authority to govern supplements, harshly criticized the agency’s draft guidance last year.  They wrote that the agency’s draft guidance undermines the very law it is supposed to interpret and that it “attempts to assert that synthetic copies of botanicals can never be a dietary ingredient, an assertion that is wholly without statutory basis, and in fact, contradicts longstanding FDA policy.”

Under the FDA’s distorted logic, if only manufacturers changed the source of their DMAA from labs to fields, the product would be perfectly fine.

Well, not exactly. The FDA, struggling to justify the warning, also makes unsubstantiated allegations about the safety of DMAA. Hundreds of millions of products containing DMAA have been sold since it became popular over the last five years with only one reported adverse effect. If only FDA approved pharmaceutical products had the same safety record. The agency should be held to higher standards.

I’m no advocate for dietary supplements. I disagree with the supplement industry’s resistance to widespread calls for DSHEA to be reformed. Most scientists, including many at the FDA, believe we should hold supplement makers to the same standards as pharmaceutical companies. Why? Because agents that claim to have a medicinal effect on the body should be shown to be safe and effective, regardless of whether they are pharmaceuticals or dietary supplements. Most simply put, if a product can change you to make you well, it can also change you to make you ill.

But here’s the kicker: this holds true whether the product is made by scientists or made by nature. Yet ironically, this is the very truism that FDA now is ignoring to force manufacturers to withdraw DMAA, since the source used in popular products such as Jack3D comes from a lab, not nature. DSHEA is flawed. But under any reasonable legal and scientific interpretation of the law, there’s no basis for FDA’s heavy handed regulatory threats against DMAA. If the agency wants more regulatory authority, it should persuade Congress to grant that authority. But until then, the agency should stick to the science and stick to the law as it is written.

Project 21’s Borelli Debates Gay Marriage, Islamic Law and Gender Politics on Fox News

On the 5/6/12 edition of “America’s News Headquarters” on the Fox News Channel, Project 21 fellow Deneen Borelli calls Vice President Biden’s recent comments favoring gay marriage a “trial balloon” for President Obama potentially changing his own view on the issue.  Deneen says it is “insulting” to compare gay marriage advocacy to efforts against discrimination of American blacks in the past, saying gay marriage is “not a civil rights issue.”

On another topic discussed during the segment, Deneen and her fellow panelists agree that a female lawyer involved in a terrorism trial has every right to dress in a way that she says will not offend her Islamic clients, but she has no right to demand a similar dress code be enforced against other women in the courtroom.

Later in this “Power Panel” segment, Deneen says “you can’t change the rules in the middle of the game” with regard to a 13-year-old boy who was kicked off an otherwise all-girl field hockey team because of fears that his presence on the team would cause it to someday be dominated by boys.  This situation delves to the heart of the arguments about gender parity in youth-related sports in America.

Deneen is joined in this discussion by Fox News Channel guest host Heather Childers, Fox News contributor July Roginsky and talk show host Mary Walter.

Boston Food Police's Half-Baked Idea

The Boston Herald reports that the food police in Boston are banning bake sales in schools.

Democratic state Senator Susan Fargo, chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Public Health, told the Herald that childhood obesity has reached “crisis” proportions. She justifies the draconian measure, “If we didn’t have so many kids that were obese, we could have let things go.”

I’ll be speaking out about the absurdity on Boston’s Talk 1200 with Jeff Katz at 8:05 AM Tuesday. 

A Hilarious Short Video for a Sunday Afternoon

National Center Senior Fellow R.J. Smith -- easily one of the nation's most dedicated bird lovers, by the way -- sent along this hilarious short video of comedian James Gregory having a bit of fun talking about seemingly nonsensical animal protection policies. Enjoy.

Why Do So Many Liberals Hate Good News?

I am amused to see, on an undeniably left-wing, though oddly-named website, the "World War Four Report," a criticism of of the National Center for Public Policy Research for, of all things, having a "neutral" name.

The website says, "DC's The Hill blog runs a piece entitled 'Fracking Innovations Enhancing Energy Independence' by one Bonner Cohen of the National Center for Public Policy Research (never trust think-tanks with bogus "neutral" names like that)."

That's the left for you. Always finding something to criticize that has nothing to do with the facts of a case, and not even getting that right. We're hardly alone. Does "The Brookings Institution" sound liberal on its face? Does the name of the "American Enterprise Institute" sound like a center-right outfit plus Norman Ornstein? Does the "Center for American Progress" sound like propagandists pushing policies promoting totalitarianism and bankruptcy? Does "The Heritage Foundation" sound like the most useful of the lot?

Nope, you have to dig a little deeper than the letterhead, and that's where we lose the left.

What has "World War Four" upset (what kind of a ridiculous name is "World War Four," anyway?) is the good news in Bonner Cohen's op-ed about America's increasing access to inexpensive natural gas and its benefits for U.S. energy independence (not to mention jobs). Nothing gives liberals the hives like cheap, plentiful energy, unless it is a strong United States, so I can see why a combination of both has them so irritated.

But for Americans generally, Bonner's article on natural gas is great news:

'Energy independence,' long an empty promise gladly served up by crafty politicians eager to curry favor with unwitting voters, might be a lot closer than even the most starry-eyed dreamer could have imagined only a short time ago.

The country is in the grip of what has rightly been called the 'shale energy revolution.' It is a revolution because it overthrows the existing order and casts aside long-standing assumptions about America's energy future. It's all about shale -- fine-grained sedentary rock composed of mud, clay and silt -- and our newfound ability to convert it to affordable energy.

In the space of a few short years, the United States has become the world's largest producer of natural gas. In 2000, shale accounted for just 1 percent of U.S. natural-gas supply. By 2011, it was 25 percent, and by 2030 it could easily be 50 percent or more. Once burdened with some of the highest natural-gas prices in the world, the United States is now a low-cost producer of a fuel that provides Americans with roughly 25 percent of their electricity.

Hydrocarbons exist in plentiful amounts in the extremely low-permeability -- or tight -- shale beds that underlie much of the United States, but these resources were not economically recoverable. What has changed is our ability to get at them and extract them in a commercially viable and environmentally responsible fashion. Two companion technologies -- multi-staged hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling -- have made this possible...

Read the rest here. If you like America and want her to prosper, anyway.

Target, Kohl's Shareholders Wanted

As many of our readers know, the National Center for Public Policy Research fights crony capitalism and left-wing activities by some of America's biggest corporations.

One of the ways we do this is by attending shareholder meetings, where we often have the opportunity to speak directly to corporate CEOs, asking them to explain what they've been up to, and what they plan to do in the future.

Some of these meetings are contentious. At other times, corporate CEOs agree with us on a way forward that protects the investments of their shareholders while benefiting the public and protecting liberty.

Many times, victories are won for the free market.

Right now, the National Center for Public Policy Research is conducting an ambitious shareholder meeting schedule, but we need some help. We're looking for a conservative or free-market activist who owns shares in Target or Kohls (or both) and is willing to let us represent him or her at one or both of their shareholder meetings. Our goal is to ask a polite, public-policy oriented question on the shareholder's behalf from a free-market point of view. There is no cost to the shareholder, but you would have to give us permission and prove you own shares (any number). The shares in the case of Target would have to have been owned by April 16, 2012 and continuously held since then and through the June 8 shareholder meeting. In the case of Kohl's, the shares would have to have been purchased by March 7, 2012 and held continuously since then and through the Kohl's shareholder meeting on May 10.

If you are a shareholder in either Kohl's or Target and meet these requirements, and are willing to allow the National Center for Public Policy Research to represent you to ask a question, or are willing to discuss possibly doing so, please contact the National Center's General Counsel, Justin Danhof, by email at jdanhof@nationalcenter.org or by phone at (202) 543-4110.

Project 21’s Minor Praises National Day of Prayer

Today is the National Day of Prayer, “an annual observance held on the first Thursday of May, inviting people of all faiths to pray for the nation.”

Events are being held across America, and Project 21 spokesman Demetrius Minor says the need for such an observance is more important than ever.  Demetrius says:

The National Day of Prayer is a great time to reflect upon the many blessings that have been bestowed upon our nation and to seek the wisdom and guidance of Almighty God.  As our country continues to face many challenges and uncertainties, it is important that we seek refuge and strength in our Creator.  We also pray for God’s direction for our family, friends, elected leaders and our communities. 

Project 21' s Stacy Swimp on May Day Protests: Civil Disobedience or Uncivil Chaos?

Project 21 spokesman Stacy Swimp put together these comments about the radical celebration of May Day and the contradictions in their words and acts:

Protesters, many aligned with the Occupy Wall Street movement, seek to disrupt American business today in observance of International Workers’ Day (May Day).

Banks in Manhattan received suspicious (albeit non-toxic) powder in envelopes.  Businesses were vandalized.  Threats to disrupt commuters have been made.

Stacy Washington, a member of the Project 21 black leadership network, says: “The protest plan is to have major nationwide action on May Day to disrupt normal, everyday activities.  It’s attention-seeking behavior at its worst.  Like children throwing a tantrum, they should be ignored.  Without a clear goal, or objective, Occupy protesters are a constant reminder of just what this country does not stand for: rape, destruction of private and public property, filth, violence and disrespect for the American way.”

It is ironic that protesters claim their chaos is “civil disobedience.”   It’s ironic because they are commemorating past activities that promoted lawlessness and socialism.

May Day observes the 1886 Haymarket Riot in Chicago, which ignited after a protester threw dynamite at law enforcement officers who are keeping order during a general labor strike.

On that day, the cops were forced to protect themselves.  Tragically, many of them — along with many of the protesters — lost their lives.  In 1904, at the International Socialist Conference in Amsterdam called for worldwide annual protests to “stop work” and “demonstrate… for the class demands of the proletariat” in memory of the Haymarket violence.

Civil disobedience, in my opinion, is best defined as nonviolent protest of laws that are unjust.  To the contrary, Occupy radicals — from the outset — were documented as being disruptive, disrespectful and malicious in their treatment of private property.  Moreover, at least one woman has allegedly been sexually assaulted at an Occupy camp.

Rather than practicing civil obedience against unjust laws, Occupy protestors seem to show no consideration of the law whatsoever.  And their actions have hardly been nonviolent.

Like the Haymarket protestors in Chicago, they have violently lashed out at their fellow Americans.  Their cause is not a matter of civil disobedience, but is instead a matter of uncivil chaos.

Speaking on the threats and action of today’s Occupy protesters, Amy M. Ridenour — chairman of the National Center for Public Policy Research — says: “People who claim to care about the welfare of the so-called 99 percent seem in fact to care only about calling attention to themselves.  I realize at their advanced age it’s a longshot, but they should grow up.  Blocking bridges and roads does nothing for the 99 percent except make them late for work.”

It is noteworthy that the socialists and trade unions created the May Day protests as an “International Workers’ Day.”  In my mind, the forced unionism and socialism celebrated by the protesters is largely responsible for the unemployment of millions of American workers.

Union subsidies such as the Davis-Bacon Act cost American workers over 160,000 jobs per year while preventing equal access for all Americans to available jobs.

Forced unionism not only denies Americans a choice in employment, but it also violates citizens’ First Amendment right to dissent from union representation.  It’s important to note that states that have “Right to Work” laws preventing forced union membership have higher employment rates than states that do not.

Occupy protestors should remember these things when protesting in support of workers’ rights.

Internet talk radio host Kira Davis, commenting on Big Labor’s collusion with Occupy Wall Street protesters, says: “The fact that the Occupy movement is now coordinating with unions and May Day is solid proof that it is not a grassroots effort at all but an astroturfed campaign to benefit bloated, wealthy unions.  Union bosses want Occupiers — who despise capitalism — to stand with them as they strike for more money and benefits from their corporate employers.  Apparently irony really is dead.”

Occupy Wall Street and Big Labor, despite what they may believe, are not functioning in support of workers.  Instead, they are advancing a socialist agenda that has already caused higher unemployment rates and economic crisis.

A holiday is a time to celebrate.  The Occupy agenda provides the American people with absolutely no reason to be jubilant.

Development Associate Position Open at National Center for Public Policy Research

Development Associate Job Opening

Job Description:

The National Center for Public Policy Research, a 30-year-old free-market think tank based in Washington, D.C., seeks a Development Associate to support the National Center's database administration efforts and help the staff in easily obtaining the information they require to more effectively advance the Center's mission. The Development Associate is an entry-level position responsible for learning, developing, and maintaining components of the National Center's proprietary database while maintaining a high level of service for internal and external customers.

Projects will also involve managing current contributor communications, invitations, recruitment of attendees to large meetings/events, and other projects as needed.

Duties and Responsibilities:

• Respond to internal requests for data and reports.

• Maintain and improve the database.

• Ensure that monthly donors information stays current

• Research current and prospective monthly donors.

Qualifications:

• Entrepreneurial spirit, humility, high sense of urgency, and a passion for economic freedom.

• One or more years' experience with database management preferred.

• A broad understanding of the National Center's mission and projects

• A good understanding of issues important to the free market, and a basic awareness of the 'news of the day.'

• Willingness to learn and develop your skill set daily.

• Strong communication skills, written preferred.

• One year of fundraising experience preferred.

• The ability to listen required.

• BA or BS in related field preferred.

EOE/M/F/D/V

Competitive salary (commensurate with experience and talent)

Please send resume and cover letter to sthomas@nationalcenter.org. Candidates should use the cover letter to describe successful projects they executed or developed. No calls, please.

Project 21's Stacy Swimp Wants to Just Be an American

In this newly-released clip from filmmaker Steven Michael, Project 21 spokesman Stacy Swimp expresses his desire to be an “unhyphenated American.”  Stacy says that the mindset of race — exemplified by the use of the term African-American — divides people.  The unnecessary division created by race politics, he says, is exploited by “hustlers” for their own personal gain.

Stacy says there is nothing wrong with celebrating one’s heritage, but laments that there are those who want him to fixate on the concept of race instead of his desire to “just be an American.”  Over the years, Stacy has endured being called “Uncle Tom,” “Uncle Ruckus” and a “sell-out” for his modest request.

“I don’t want to be anything than what I really am,” says Stacy, who notes that he is six generations removed from slavery and Africa.  He mentions that he has white friends who were born and emigrated to America that he considers more “African-American” than himself.

Borellis Guest-Host Liddy Show on Thursday

Tom and Deneen Borelli — the director of the National Center’s Free Enterprise Project and fellow with Project 21, respectively — will guest-host the nationally-syndicated talk radio show of G. Gordon Liddy on Thursday, April 26 between 10:00AM and 1:00PM eastern.

The G. Gordon Liddy Show audio page is available here.

Pink Slime: Who is the real culprit?

In a piece for Forbes, Dr. Henry I. Miller and I write:

The recent controversy over "lean finely textured beef" (LFTB), or "pink slime" as the media and activists love to call it, is reminiscent of the old TV commercial, "Where's the beef?" There just isn't much there there. But the flap is a symptom of something much larger: a kind of puritanical and purist view of food that is based not on science or facts but on intuition -- and ignorance.

It's true that the way the beef product is produced sounds unappetizing. It's made from parts of the cow that previously were either discarded or used for lower-value products such as animal food. Treated to remove much of the fat and to make it inhospitable to bacteria, it's both healthful and safe. It offers other advantages as well. According to Jim Dickson, professor of animal science at Iowa State University, "It is estimated that using this process with the fat trim recovers 10 - 12 pounds of additional lean meat from each carcass. This means that we are using our beef resources more efficiently, which also means that we can meet consumer demands with lower prices and fewer cattle."

We should not forget that many meat-based processed foods sound sort of gross; consider, for example, head cheese, haggis, and the Pennsylvania Dutch delicacy called scrapple, which is known locally as "everything but the oink." But the "yuk factor" apparently doesn't detract from their appeal; these foods have been eaten for centuries.

Although LFTB has been used for decades by schools, leading fast-food outlets and major supermarket chains, suddenly it has become the object of ridicule and vilification, and users have abandoned it in droves. Know-nothing food activists have had a field day. The real (and ridiculous) agenda of many who are trashing LFTB is to get us all to go organic.

According to food activist Michele Simon, "Pink slime is just one of many problems with industrialized meat. So let's hope this week's groundswell of interest in pink slime inspires Americans to demand labeling, buy organic or stop eating ground beef all together." And New York Times columnist Mark Bittman called the "pink menace" a symptom of a larger disease -- "the industrial production of livestock on a scale that's far too large to sustain without significant collateral damage."

In short, if we insist on having any meat at all the activists seem to want us to eat only New York strip steaks and filet mignon from organic, grass-fed, free-range cattle that were raised listening to Peter, Paul and Mary protest songs.

Not surprisingly, while making a meal (so to speak) of the pink slime non-issue, the activists completely ignored a recent outbreak of actual illnesses from Salmonella bareilly contamination of a frozen raw yellowfin tuna product known as "tuna scrape." A hundred sixty people in 20 states and the District of Columbia have been infected, 26 of whom have been hospitalized. Scraped from the bones of the fish, it resembles ground raw tuna, so we hereby christen it "red slime."

Activists' sanctimoniousness toward food is part of a larger trend, one perhaps epitomized by Berkeley restaurateur and chief of the food police Alice Waters, who is unhappy that we "have been indoctrinated to believe that food should be fast, cheap and easy. And it's really that kind of thinking that is destroying the world." Tell that to poor people who can't afford organic free-range guinea hens or morel mushrooms ($1,280 a pound at your local Whole Foods).

This is the sort of New Age babble that worries the polymathic Dick Taverne, aka Lord Taverne of Pimlico. In his brilliant book, "The March of Unreason," Taverne argues that "in the practice of medicine, popular approaches to farming and food, policies to reduce hunger and disease, and many other practical issues, there is an undercurrent of irrationality that threatens the progress that depends on science and even [threatens] the civilized basis of our democracy," and that we ignore it at our peril. The undercurrent has now become a torrent.

Taverne decries organic food activists' resistance to many proven technologies, including agricultural chemicals and food irradiation, but he singles out in particular their intractable objection to genetic engineering of plants and animals. He believes that such resistance will prevent consumers of organic products from enjoying many nutritional and safety improvements to come. Taverne argues persuasively that the conflict over genetically engineered crops is the most important battle of all between the forces of reason and unreason, both because of the consequences should the opponents prevail and also because their arguments are so perverse and so consistently and utterly wrong-headed. He observes, for example, that if human intervention to induce genetic improvement of plants is "unnatural," we've been unnatural for 10,000 years; with the exception of wild berries and wild mushrooms, virtually all the grains, fruits and vegetables in our diets have been genetically modified in some way.

How ironic that on the subject of food production and security, the British Peer of the Realm gets it right, while the Berkeley food icon is out to lunch. With apologies to the Scottish essayist and historian Thomas Carlyle, of all the quacks who ever quacked, food activists are the loudest.

Blame the Teachers, Not the Tests

In another move toward a more post-racial America, the Obama Administration filed suit against the city of Jacksonville, Florida and the local firefighters union there.  The complaint says that the written test used in part for certain firefighter promotions has a “disparate impact” on blacks because blacks have fared statistically worse and often not promoted if they do pass the written test because they may still score lower than their white counterparts in their testing classes.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez says the U.S. Department of Justice’s goal of “make-whole relief” – involving a new testing regime on top of back pay, retroactive seniority and promotions – “should send a clear message to all public employers that employment practices that have the effect of excluding qualified candidates on account of race will not be tolerated.”

But… there wasn’t someone telling them they could not advance solely due to the color of their skin.  It was a test administered by a third-party company.  To make things even harder for Perez and Obama to justify in this post-racial era is that it appears more than one testing service was used for some of the testing.

The union is named, by the way, because they are included in setting up the testing process.  And, so as to add a conspiratorial air to the issue, there are allegations that the union is cheating and showing favoritism to its white members.

Justice appears to think the written tests are too arbitrary and “not sufficiently job-related.”

Project 21 spokesman Horace Cooper has a different take on the cause.  Maybe it goes back further.  Maybe the culprit is a poor public teaching regime and not a corrupt fire department that is holding some people back – black and white and any other race – when it comes to something like test comprehension.  Horace says:

While the Supreme Court has upheld in the early ‘70s the ability of people to claim discrimination merely because they don’t do well on work place tests, it is really time to reassess whether that should continue.  The problem isn’t the workplace tests, the problem is poor public schools that don’t prepare minority students for competition.  Why do we not acknowledge that rather than punish employers?