Official Languages

Our furniture and other items of personalty have arrived from America.  The past few days have been spent unpacking and reorganizing; nothing particularly remarkable as far as this type of thing goes.  Last night my wife actually cooked a meal in our kitchen and served it on our dining room table, a welcome improvement from snarfing food on the run, or even eating at restaurants all the time.

The following administrative law decision from the Illinois Department of Revenue has come to my attention, especially its curious footnote: 

" 5 ILCS 460/20 states that the “official language” of the State of Illinois is English. 35 ILCS 120/7 requires that all books and records required to be kept by the Retailers Occupation Tax Act “shall be kept in the English language.” 86 Ill. Adm. Code 130.801(e) requires that books and records necessary for a determination of correct tax liability “must be kept in the English language.” In light of these provisions, it would be absurd for me to conclude that the department must issue its own documents and forms in a language other than English."

This is interesting and ironic to me because I now find myself in a jurisdiction whose official language is other than English, and my mastery of the Hebrew language leaves much to be desired.  While many of the official forms in Israel do have their English versions, official or (usually) otherwise, there still are many transactions where I must seek assistance beyond Google Translate in order to sufficiently comprehend the documents at hand.  I have had occasion (most notably but not solely the lease to our apartment) to engage a young American man, the son of a former client, whose linguistic skills and amenability to use them to supplement his income have worked to our mutual advantage.

Additionally, the Illinois provision is most out of character with what is thought of by most (including the liberals themselves) as the liberal stance -- One would think that it would be most politically incorrect in Illinois, the home state of Barack Hussein Obama (Hawaii and Kenya notwithstanding).

Politically Correct GPS

 We are, as always, having a wonderful and meaningful time during our stay in Israel.  We have rented a car, which we drove from the airport.  For $5 a day we added on a GPS device (with an English option), which all in all has been extremely helpful.  We were able to go visit my wife's plemenitza last night, who had some of her brothers and sisters and their families over; about 25 persons, mostly below the age of 10.  Religious Jews, making lots of kids, to catch up on that setback from Hitler's failed master plan.

Proportionately speaking, there seem to be a lot less shmucks on the roads of Israel than in America.  Not that there are zero; not by any means.  But the drivers here know that they are driving in order to get to some place, and that there are others with whom they share the road.

Okay, so we did encounter a shmuck last night on a narrow Jerusalem street, who was going in the opposite direction from us, and who refused to pass us so that we could proceed, even though he had clear road ahead of him beyond the constriction his car occupied.  While my Hebrew comprehension is good when I read the written word, my conversational Hebrew leaves much to be desired.  This particular driver sounded as though he was from somewhere in the former Soviet Union.  So I spoke to him in Italian.  Well, I didn't actually speak to him, I just gave him a hand gesture used by my Italian-American friends to indicate disgust and dissatisfaction.  Then, the drivers of the cars that had lined up behind him began to grow impatient, and they all started hitting their horns.  Eventually he moved, thereby unblocking me and the cars behind me.  I suppose that a shmuck driver level of zero percent is, as a practical matter, unachievable.

Some of the traffic circles in Israel (which the GPS people call "roundabouts," and which in Hebrew are called "kikarim") no longer exist, and, conversely, some of what were ordinary intersections have been made into roundabouts, and the GPS has not yet been updated.   These are but minor glitches, which we are able to surmount with a small dollop of common sense.

EXCEPT …

Except that political correctness has really, really made bollixed up our routine today.

This morning, we checked out of our hotel in the Holy City of Jerusalem, and proceeded to visit my wife's friend (whose late mother was a client of mine), who lives in an area considered the Jordan Valley, which Kerry and Obama are pressuring Israel to give to the terrorists in the so-called peace process.  The GPS informed us that the location was out of its range (though it did get us there).

That wasn't so bad, at least not at that point.  We had a delightful visit with our friend until noon, when she had to leave for her job.  We then proceeded to visit our son, who currently is based out of a locale in the north of Israel.  Instead of taking us up the usual road that parallels the Jordan River (which is in the politically incorrect territory), the GPS routed us out west through Tel Aviv, then up the coastal highways, and then back inland near Haifa, easily adding more than an hour to our trek. 

Actually, I sort of understand this.  I can easily envision some attorney for the GPS manufacturer sending out a memo expressing concern that some American tourist who gets routed to an Arab village will sue the GPS people.

[I shall not now comment upon the number of carbon debits the global warming apostles should claim from the GPS people on account of the increased fuel consumption from the politically-correct GPS.].

Politically Correct Documentation (or Lack Thereof)

            I am a 3rd generation American.  I believe that we need to have an intelligent, practical and properly enforced immigration policy.  I believe that those who wish to latch onto the American Dream need to follow the rules, just as my grandparents did.  And I believe that we need to send away, and keep away, those who have come here but who have not played by the rules.

            It is my policy to not make inquiry of my students regarding such personal matters as religion, ethnicity, gender preference, or immigration status, effectively a very effective "Don't Ask - Don't Tell policy.  Nevertheless, I do become cognizant of such particulars quite often.  This, of course, gives rise to an inherent conflict when it comes to having a student whose presence in these United States was not accomplished according to the rules.  The way I resolve that conflict is to embrace the fiction that the law enforcement personnel are doing their jobs, thereby allowing me to ignore the immigration status matters and conduct an unimpeded professor-student relationship.   My students need to be able to approach me freely if they are to truly learn the subjects I teach.  Unless a student whom I know to be here illegally commits some sort of violence or larceny or other infraction of the safety and security of real Americans, I do not get involved in the immigration issues.

            Yesterday, I was giving a presentation to a group of my fellow faculty members.  None of my students (nor anyone else's students) were present.  During the presentation, I had occasion to mention that the exemptions from the insurance requirements of this Barack Hussein ObamaCare naufragio include "jailbirds and illegal aliens." 

            Three in the room, myself included, espoused what is commonly called the right-wing sentiment.  The remaining two dozen or so were approximately equally divided between the leftists and the überleftists.  One of the more vocal (and more über) of the überleftists took great umbrage at my use of the term "illegal alien."  She indignantly interrupted my presentation:  "They are NOT "illegal aliens!  They are undocumented immigrants!"

            I don't know how I was able to muster up the presence of mind for my immediate response:  "Janetta, if they were legal then there would be documentation!"

            Some of the leftists gave me a look of grudging approval.  Political leanings notwithstanding, Janetta had been grating on them, and they were happy to see her get a comeuppance.

            After the meeting, one of the more rational of the leftists, who works with preparing female prison inmates for release and  reintegration into society, came up to me and said, "I wish that you wouldn't refer to prison inmates as 'jailbirds.'"

            Seems that the Political Correctness Police are on patrol!

The Skinny on the AMA and Obesity

The American Medical Association has just announced that it has recognized obesity as a disease.

[Disclosure:  I am married to an obese physician, whose activities with the AMA have, over the years, declined from sparse to zero.].

There is no doubt that fat people are extremely predisposed to a wide range of illnesses and medical issues, that the ranks of the fatsos are growing (individually and collectively), and that it is a major public health issue.

Be that as it may, I'm not so sure that the AMA's latest action is such a great thing.  Changing labels does not, in and of itself, address the root causes of any problem, and what the AMA is doing is updating labels if not creating them.  And once the labels are in place and utilized by the population in general and the healthcare industry in particular, obese patients, having been labeled (synonym:  Stereotyped), will likely be subjected to treatment based upon the label and not based upon their individualized medical situation and lifestyle.

The insinuation of Obamacare into the healthcare equation (including the IRS) can only exacerbate the negative attributes of the foregoing dynamic.

What bothers me the most, however, is not whether obesity is or is not a disease, but rather, the political dynamic behind the whole thing.  Politics has usually done more harm than good to the delivery and efficacy of healthcare, whether in the prevention of administering the polio vaccine by the jihadis in Muslim countries, or the politicization of the AIDS/HIV epidemic.  And in that regard, the medical profession's politicoes have already shown that designation or nondesignation of a condition as a "disease" is based more upon political than health considerations when political correctness induced the declassification of homosexuality as a disease.

Whether a given person's weight, sexual preferences, or eating or drinking habits are or are not a disease is a red-herring issue.  The real issue here is the corruption of the healthcare delivery system, and the doctor-patient relationship, by political agendas, and the squelching of patient autonomy and informed consent.

Names On & Off the List

By now, the whole civilized world (and much of the uncivilized world) knows that Michaele and Tareq Salahi were waved through the White House security and attended Obama's State Dinner for the Prime Minister of India, and even got within handshake distance of Barack Hussein Obama himself.

My question: Suppose their name had been Cohen or Levy or Rabinowitz? Would the White House security staff have waved them through without making further inquiry to the party planners (i.e., consulted an actual copy of the official guest list)?

Before you answer, consider Tareq Salahi's connections in the Arab world which Obama is so anxious to please and grovel down to.