Talk Radio Host Silenced by CAIR?

On Thursday, ABC affiliate WMAL in Washington, D.C. suspended mid-morning talk show host Michael Graham for his July 25 on-air statement, "Islam is a terrorist organization." An employer has the right to discipline an employee for actions committed while on company time or when acting as a company representative. However, it appears that WMAL or its owner, Disney, took the action because of intimidation from the Washington, D.C. based Council on American Islamic Relations, (CAIR).

It was clear to any actually paying attention that Graham was not condemning Muslims as individuals, but criticizing the religious leadership. Just as criticism of the Vatican is not a condemnation of all Catholics, this was not a condemnation of all Muslims. The views expressed by Graham on that morning’s show are in his Usual Suspects column, "The Tragedy of Islam." There he writes, "And the reason Islam itself has become a terrorist organization is that it cannot address its own role in the violence." Graham continues with, "I have great sympathy for those Muslims of good will who want their faith to be a true ‘religion of peace.’ I believe that terrorism and murder do violate the sensibilities and inherent decency of the vast majority of the world’s Muslims." Clearly, he is not inciting hatred of or violence to Muslims.

Graham is right. There have been few denouncements of terrorism and no large scale protests of it by Muslim clerics and leaders since 911. The purpose of Graham’s column and on-air statements was to inspire American Muslims to take a stand against terrorism. While, in many Arab nations, Muslims who speak out are killed; that is unlikely to happen in the U.S.

Since Graham expressed those views, the Fiqh Council of North America, (FCNA), issued a fatwa condemning terrorism that was supported by CAIR and other Islamic organizations: The first fatwa against terrorism issued by Islamic leaders of North America as a group since 911. CAIR has also issued a PSA entitled "Not in the Name of Islam." Could the reason for the PR campaign be that most of Graham’s callers agreed with him?

The timing is fortuitous and the sincerity questionable. Sherrie Gossett’s www.cnsnews.com article, "Group Authoring Fatwa Has Links to Bin Laden Ally," states FCNA evolved from the Religious Affairs Committee of the Muslim Students’ Association of the United States and Canada, which was an outreach project of Jama’at-i-Islami, a group that considers Osama bin Laden a hero. According to Neil Boortz’s website, FCNA chairman, Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, was "named in court papers as being associated with Islamic Jihad." In his www.worldnetdaily.com article, "CAIR founded by ‘Islamic terrorists’?" Daniel Pipes writes that CAIR receives funding from groups that give money to families of "martyrs." According to Pipes, CAIR’s civil rights coordinator and Texas chapter founder both have convictions for terrorism related charges, a fundraiser and a community relations director have both been deported and that community relations director was also convicted on fraud charges.

Some believe Graham’s comments may incite more anti-American hatred in the middle- east. It is possible, but those remarks are no more inflammatory than the media coverage of abuses at Abu Graib and the alleged desecration of the Qu’aran at Guantanamo Bay.

Graham is not the first radio personality to face disciplinary action for on-air comments. Howard Stern was fired for using the n-word and Doug, "the Greaseman", Tracht was fired for saying, "No wonder they drag them behind trucks," after playing a Lauryn Hill song. This is different: Stern and Tracht were expressing racism devoid of other content. Graham was trying to start a dialogue on his call-in discussion program and urge to Muslims to denounce terrorism. Additionally, Graham’s statements were about the religious leadership, not Muslims themselves.

Talk radio provides a forum for views that are controversial, unpopular or "politically incorrect." In Paul Farhi’s July 26 Washington Post article, "Muslims Call Comments by WMAL Host Hate-Filled," WMAL executive Randall Bloomquist said Graham’s comments were justified in the context of the program and the station had no plans to reprimand him. Two days later, Graham was given an indefinite suspension without pay. In his July 29 Washington Post piece, "WMAL Suspends Talk-Show Host for Comment on Islam," Farhi quoted WMAL President and General Manager, Chris Berry, saying of Graham, "We do not condone his position and believe his statements were irresponsible." Quite an about-face! Did the station or its parent company cave under pressure from CAIR? Since Graham made his remarks, CAIR’s website has urged visitors to ask WMAL’s management to reprimand Graham and to contact advertisers to "express your concerns about their support for a station that promotes anti-Muslim bigotry."

Other media actions have been influenced by "political correctness." CBS/Infinity radio affiliate WTIC cancelled commercials for a symposium about terrorism on the grounds that the subject was "too controversial" and "too many people might be emotionally affected." By ignoring the current terrorism situation and its connection to Islam, the media does the public no favors. Regardless of whether one agrees with a show’s content or a host’s opinions, one should support freedom to express views other than those of corporate management or special interest groups. The next "off limits" topic or opinion could be one that matters to you.

Copyright Eva Ellsworth, 07/30/05, all rights reserved

Note: To disclose any possible conflicts of interest, last fall Michael Graham gave me a free copy of his book Clinton and Me because I made a donation to Fisher House.

Note: If anyone wishes to counter CAIR’s writing campaign, here is the list of WMAL advertisers: testad@tcicomm.com, routhierd@tcicomm.com, tcimail@tcicomm.com, sales@pohankalexus.dealerspace.com, mandelle@pepperlaw.com, bbroullire@comcastsportsnet.com, jcreech@melwood.com, fedgov@1igsi.com, info@fairoakschurch.org, admissions@regent.edu, emba.coordinator@business.wm.edu, combsa@fmmc.army.mil, redelman@ricedelman.com, rmalone@fbw.com, cbraudis@mutualfundstore.com, trock@erols.com, crricchi@aol.com, chef47@msn.com, fodebbie@aol.com, midatlantic@basements.com, Roofdog@aol.com, sales@solatubeskylight.com, sales@sjroof.com, info@heartcheck.com, tony1winkler@yahoo.com, pumphrey@pumphreyfh.com, sfrazier@bgf.org, bill@1031.us, StewartTeam@PointingYouHome.com, info@annhand.com, cuttingedgekiosks@yahoo.com, pottenritter@jordankitts.com, jmack@gutterhelmetsystems.com, vabeach@procraftcoatings.com, info@thompsoncreek.com, smiles@bethesdasedationdentistry.com, info@theeyecenter.com, jay@rosenbergmedia.com, customerservice@tni.com, info@tonyandjoes.com, pr@1800gotjunk.com, gloriag@manorworks.com, fodebbie@aol.com, suggestions@merrifieldgardencenter.com, schapman@offenbachers.com, info@regionalpestmanagement.com, info@cabinetdiscounters.com, info@getstyle.com, etessel@croppmetcalfe.com, out2dry@nomorewater.com, jwingert@alexandriabuickpontiacgmc.com, mcarroll@brownscar.com, ernie@smithgifford.com, ehill@cherner.com, gsm@cowlesford.com, jeffdoughty@moorecadillac.com, elliot@roiadvertising.com, wanda@radialtire.com

Political Correctness and Therapism Won't Win the War on Terror

On July 18, CBS/Infinity radio affiliate WTIC AM in Hartford was scheduled to begin airing commercials for an upcoming symposium on terrorism hosted by the Peoples’ Truth Forum (PTF). On July 15, a CBS/Infinity sales representative notified PTF’s president, Jeffrey Epstein, that the ads were being cancelled because of a decision by the legal division. According to Frank Salvato’s WorldNetDaily article, "CBS/Infinity Radio blacks out anti-terror conference," their official statement said, "Too many people might be emotionally affected by the subject matter…It’s too controversial to be aired at this time."

The cancellation was made a week after the first London transportation system bombings. It was the worst possible time to decide that the subject is "too controversial." Since then, there has been an attempt to repeat the London bombings and several bombs exploded in the Red Sea resort city of Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt. Terrorists have increased the frequency of attacks and probably are planning more. This IS THE time to air material about terrorism and national security.

CBS/Infinity cited subject matter rather than content in their official statement. It would be understandable if the network were to be concerned that people would be "emotionally affected" by audio of a beheading for example, but it is highly unlikely that PTF’s commercials contained such material. The advertisement posted on PTF’s website simply listed the date, time, place, speakers and their credentials. The only other text was "The organization’s primary objective is to heighten public awareness with respect to national security. Warmly invited are patriotic Americans who share PTF’s concerns for the future of our nation – especially those interested in learning more about Islamic terrorism and the threat it poses to future generations." That doesn’t sound particularly controversial or emotionally stirring to the average person. Presumably, the radio spots were similar. I believe the reasons for the cancellation were political correctness and what is known as therapism.

The symposium’s title is "The Radical Islamic Threat to World Peace and National Security." CBS/Infinity may have found that title to be politically incorrect and, therefore, "too controversial." Political correctness prevents many from facing the connection between terrorism and an extreme, militant form of Islam. It would be "intolerant" to mention it although al-Qaida has taken credit for attacks and put the world on notice that such attacks are part of a Jihad. Facts are ignored so that no group is singled out and no one’s feelings are hurt. That happens in airport security checks and will probably happen in the New York City subway passenger searches: Young, middle-eastern looking men don’t get a second glance while seven-year old cub scouts, teenaged girls and elderly grandfathers get full searches. Politically correct security measures inconvenience the public, but fail to protect it. Politically correct media coverage entertains the public, but fails to inform it.

Therapism is a worldview in which people are fragile and behavior results from disorders. Therapism’s belief that people are frail, delicate, sensitive creatures who can’t face life without being shielded and/or "treated" is patronizing and ignores personal responsibility. Therapism is prevalent in our educational system in which games with winners and losers "damage self esteem" and the use of red ink for corrections is "stressful." CBS/Infinity’s fear that "Too many people might be emotionally affected by the subject matter" is an example of that worldview. Will therapism prevent behavioral profiling in searches of New York City’s subway passengers? It might be "stressful" for a person to be singled out for a search because he was behaving in a suspicious manner. We wouldn’t want to hurt anyone’s self-esteem, would we?

CBS/Infinity shielded the public from possible political incorrectness and an unpleasant topic by canceling PTF’s commercials. We can’t fight terrorism or defend ourselves from it if we pretend it doesn’t exist. Terrorism is a matter of national security that needs our continued attention. When we hide our heads in the sand, our backsides make great targets.

Copyright Eva Ellsworth, 07/23/05, all rights reserved

A New Low in Greeting Cards

I thought greeting cards had reached an all-time low with misandrist cards with greetings such as "If men are God’s gift to women, then God must really love gag gifts." I was wrong. Now there is the Secret Lover Collection of 24 cards. According to Stephen Kiehl’s Baltimore Sun article, "Adulterer’s need cards too," the line’s creator, Cathy Gallagher stated, "It’s all about forbidden love. Look at how many people on soap operas are having affairs. That’s real."

People do commit adultery, but soap operas aren’t real. Soap operas, movies, plays, etc. are fantasy and are sold as such. If soap operas are an accurate depiction of reality, how come the characters seem wealthy, yet are rarely depicted working?

Gallagher refers to adultery as "forbidden love." Not wrong, not immoral, simply forbidden. That seems to equate "Thou shalt not commit adultery" with "Keep off the grass" or "No parking beyond this point." Gallagher’s statement and the cards themselves imply that adultery "isn’t that bad."

In Kiehl’s article, Gallagher said she believes 50% of married people have had affairs. She said, "I’m not making a choice for them. People make choices. And by the time they buy this greeting card, they’re already involved deeply in the affair…This is an entrepreneurial venture. And this is an untapped market. That’s the bottom line." It seems best to leave that market untapped. Gallagher’s "entrepreneurial venture" capitalizes on peoples’ misery. It is true that medicine, psychiatry and other professions profit from peoples’ misery, but those professions attempt to alleviate problems rather than encourage their creation.

The mere existence of the Secret Lover Collection gives tacit approval and implied normalcy to having affairs. Gallagher justifies this by saying "I’m not making a choice for them." However, it seems that implied, tacit approval encourages immorality. Sinful behavior should not be encouraged on the basis that people do it anyway.

Having an affair is a choice: The wrong one. Adultery always leads to pain. Adulterers’ spouses and children are inevitably hurt by affairs. Frequently, the adulterers are hurt by their own actions. Some unscrupulous individuals have affairs without remorse: Serial adulterers who are proud of their lists of conquests; those from the "if it feels good, do it" school of thought; the "ends justify the means" types who will have an affair for a promotion or other gain; and those who blame their spouses for their own misconduct. However, I suspect most adulterers start their affairs as a misguided way to alleviate their problems only to make things worse. Chances are that during and after the affair, these adulterers are filled with shame, guilt, remorse and self-loathing. For some that serves as a "wake-up call" to end the affair, change their behavior and lead moral lives. Some couples say their marriages became stronger after an affair forced them to seek counseling and/or resolve long standing issues. Yet, in most cases, adultery leads to broken marriages and broken homes – divorce hearings and custody battles.

Gallagher absolves herself of responsibility by stating, "It’s not like people will see these greeting cards and say ‘I’m going to go out and have an affair!’" A greeting card won’t inspire anyone to commit adultery, but those already considering it may see the presence of the cards as societal acceptance of affairs. The last thing those who are struggling with their morals and consciences need is the impression that adultery is "no big deal" and "everyone is doing it."

Those already having affairs need real help which may include marriage counseling, individual counseling, treatment of problems such as depression or substance abuse and/or a return to their values and religion. Such interventions may enable them to stop the adultery and repair their lives and their families’ lives. What they don’t need are greeting cards that encourage continuation of the adultery.

Gallagher’s collection includes a breakup card that reads, "I can’t go on like this anymore…I guess our timing wasn’t right." It would be better if it said, "We are violating God’s law and our marriage vows. My conscience can no longer allow that." Gallagher’s website has received 60,000 hits since she started it in May and she is filling orders for retailers nationwide. The popularity of her greeting card line is a sad testimony to the state of marriage in the US.

Copyright Eva Ellsworth, 07/17/05, all rights reserved

Low Fertility in US Citizens

The report "Births to Immigrants in America: 1970 – 2002" by the Center for Immigration Studies state that in 2002, 23% of US births were to immigrant mothers. 10% of US births were to illegal immigrant mothers.

The problem with this is that the babies get automatic US citizenship that can be used to prevent deportation of their parents if they are here illegally. An "anchor" baby of any immigrant can sponsor his/her parents and other relatives for permanent residence. Immigration has been seen as a way to increase the number of younger workers to shore up social security. However, that idea breaks down when those immigrants or their children sponsor older immigrants. Martin Walker wrote in "Walker’s World: Nightmare of social Europe," that immigration was supposed to be part of Europe’s "solution to the demographic disaster" but many young workers bring their parents and marry women from their countries of origin who bring their parents. Walker wrote, "The result is that in Belgium, for example, more than half the immigrants over the age of 40 are unemployed and dependent on social security payments."

A better solution to our problem of an aging population would be to increase the number of children born to US citizens. First we should consider the reasons why it is low. Few people don’t want children. Low fertility is a bigger problem.

According to the CDC, 6.1 million women between the ages of 15 and 44 have impaired fertility. The April 12, 1984 issue of MMWR states, "In 1982, one in eight US couples were classified as infertile." According to British fertility expert Bill Ledger of Sheffield University, one in seven British couples have trouble conceiving. He predicts that will increase to one in three. Ledger attributes declining fertility to obesity, STDs and waiting to long to start a family. We have the same problems here.

Overweight women do not ovulate as efficiently as those of normal weight. The CDC classifies 65% of Americans as overweight or obese. Women who wish to conceive should try to attain a healthy weight to improve their chances.

In 2003, the CDC estimated that 19 million STD infections occur annually and almost 50% will be in those between 15 and 24 years of age. Gonorrhea and chlamydia can cause pelvic inflammatory disease, (PID). PID can cause blocked fallopian tubes resulting in infertility. In males, untreated gonorrhea can cause the testicular inflammation. Epididymitis, that can lead to infertility. Abortion may also lead to infertility. According to the Concerned Women for America website, "Studies have found that 3 to 5 percent of all women who have had abortions are left sterile."

The incidence of STDs and abortions is not likely to decrease until our culture changes. Currently, many view having multiple sex partners rather than being in committed relationships not only acceptable, but as the norm. Some push for increased education about condoms, but condoms are not 100% effective in the prevention of disease. They are not effective at all if they are not used. According to the Chicago Sun-Times article "Girls just as bad as boys" by Lori Rackl and Andrew Herrmann, college women who want sex outside of committed relationships often believe that if they get drunk and don’t carry condoms, they won’t be seen as sluts. They are not only sluts, but also irresponsible. The same is true of the men who "hook-up" and don’t use protection. In addition to spreading STDs, it seems that those who have transient encounters with multiple partners fail to learn the skills needed for lasting, committed relationships. They not only risk infertility due to infections, but risk never being able to relate to anyone well enough to get married and start a family.

Another major cause of infertility is delaying reproduction. In 1970, the median age of women marrying for the first time was 20.8 years. In 2003, it was 25.3. Women are most fertile in their late teens and early twenties. Fertility greatly decreases around age 35.

One problem seems to be that, after marriage, couples often wait until they have a large amount of money and possessions to have children. Not a bad idea, but fertility drops the longer one waits. My parents’ generation had children while renting apartments. Now couples wait until they own homes. Families also feel they need far more money to rear children than they used to. Previous generations of kids thrived without $300.00 birthday parties, lessons in every activity that exists or $100.00 sneakers, (children can survive in shoes from Walmart).

A big reason women delay starting families is the emphasis on careers. Many critics of women see pursuit of a career as "me-ism" or "having it all." It was not like that for many of us: Family and social pressure pushed young women onto the career path. Many women say our society seems to perceive women who don’t have careers are "losers" who have no skills. My parents and teachers emphasized college and career for my future. I was afraid to admit I wanted to be a housewife. I pursued a career to please others. That isn’t "me-ism." Younger women seem to have caught on. According to Maxine Frith’s article, "Desperate to be housewives: young women yearn for 1950’s role as stay-at-home mums," the average 29 year old wants the traditional homemaker mom role. Women are realizing that "having it all" just means doing it all and taking the risk if foregoing the things that really matter.

Copyright Eva Ellsworth, 07/10/05, all rights reserved

Is This Still the Republic Our Founders Intended It To Be?

On this anniversary of the approval of the final draft of the Declaration of Independence, the Kelo vs. City of New London eminent domain ruling gives me grave doubts that this is the republic the Founding Fathers intended it to be. John Adams said, "The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." I don’t know about anarchy, but tyranny seems imminent.

In the Kelo decision, the majority on the Supreme Court, (Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy and Souter), expanded the definition of public use to include private projects that promise to bring jobs and/or increase revenue. I thought seizure of private lands and their redistribution for the "benefit of the community" only happened under communistic, totalitarian regimes. This nation was founded on the concept of individual rights, liberties and responsibilities - not collectivism. Owning property has always been part of the "American Dream." Now we have little faith that our homes, businesses or other private property will not be seized by the government if another individual or business can generate more tax revenue from it.

Revenue, not jobs, is the real force behind the seizures. According to John Fund in Political Diary, on the day after the Kelo ruling, the town of Freeport, TX announced it would condemn the properties of two seafood companies for the building of a private marina. The town will loan the developers $6 million for the project. Fund wrote, "What is certain is that the displacement of the two seafood companies will cost scores of jobs."

Use of eminent domain in such cases is illegal except for blighted properties in eight states, (AR, FL, IL, KY, ME, MT, SC and WA). This helps property owners in those states, but does not entirely protect them because blight is loosely defined. When the average person thinks of blight, he thinks of property that hasn’t been maintained in the past few years. Government officials do not see blight that way. In a CBS story, Mayor Cain of Lakewood, OH said, "The term ‘blight’ is used to describe whether or not the structures generally in an area meet today’s standards." That could mean almost anything. For example, a house without walk-in closets could be defined as not up to "today’s standards" because new homes have them.

The House of Representatives recently passed a bill to deny some federal funds for city or state projects in which eminent domain was used to transfer property to private developers. The bill affects funding by the Treasury Department, Department of Transportation and HUD. A similar bill is pending in the Senate. These bills are a good start, but they don’t protect property owners in cases where federal funding comes from other departments or is not involved. For example, federal funding is generally not used to build luxury "town home" developments, yet such developments bring in far more property tax revenue than the mid-priced single family homes they often replace.

The Kelo ruling should apply to those who made it. That may happen. Los Angeles based Freestar Media is applying to the town of Weare, NH to use eminent domain to acquire a house belonging to Supreme Court Justice David Souter. Freestar Media plans to have a hotel built on the site which is likely to generate more tax revenue than Souter’s property does. The hotel will be named "The Lost Liberty Hotel" and will include the "Just Desserts Café" and a museum with "an exhibit on the loss of freedom in America." I believe that what is deemed acceptable treatment of ordinary US citizens should be acceptable for those who deemed it so.

In light of the Kelo ruling and other recent Supreme Court decisions, our focus should be on whether nominees for the Supreme Court and other federal courts will interpret laws as they were written. Justice Sandra Day O’Conner’s replacement should be a strict constructionist; not a jurist who will twist and stretch the language of our Constitution in order to fashion new legislation. We should not have situations in which legislation by legislatures is needed to undo legislation by the judiciary. The judicial branch is not supposed to legislate by "interpreting" legislation in ways that were never intended.

I read that, when Benjamin Franklin left the final meeting of the Constitutional Convention, the wife of the mayor of Philadelphia asked him what the new government would be. He replied, "A republic, Madam. If you can keep it." When it comes to the potential nominees for the Supreme Court, make sure Congress approves a jurist who will try to do that.

Copyright Eva Ellsworth, 07/04/05, All rights reserved