News

You Be the Judge

1 comment

Gambit sent Jim Brown a list of similarities between his column and the work of others, requesting an interview. His statement follows in full.

The American Spectator, David N. Bass, Jan. 15, 2009:

"Mark Bauerlein seems an unlikely prospect for penning an ostentatious book like The Dumbest Generation. ... Ignorant of politics and government, art and music, prose and poetry, the Dumbest Generation is content to turn up its iPods and tune out the realities of the adult world. It is brash, pampered, young, and dumb — and content to stay that way."

Jim Brown, Nov. 12, 2009:

"In his new book, The Dumbest Generation, Mark Bauerlein has little hope for young people today. Ignorant of politics and government, art and music, prose and poetry, The Dumbest Generation is content to turn up their iPods and tune out the realities of the adult world. It is brash, pampered, dumb — and content to stay that way."

CNN, Nov. 16, 2006:

"Friedman's ideas were embraced by President Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s and lauded by many in the business world. But they were also controversial because of the deep cuts in government spending and the more restricted role they entailed for government in buffering citizens from economic forces."

Jim Brown, Dec. 16, 2010:

"Friedman's ideas were embraced by President Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s, and lauded by many in the business world. But they were also controversial because of the deep cuts in government spending and the more restricted role they entailed for government in buffering citizens from economic forces."

Steven Malanga, The Wall Street Journal, Aug. 4, 2007:

"Nevertheless, opponents of privatizations and private-public partnerships argue that private operators can only make money "at the expense of" taxpayers, and that the new owners will skimp on maintenance and repair work in order to squeeze profits out of these operations. These objections typically ignore the significant restrictions and operating requirements written into the contracts — here in the U.S. and around the world — which allow governments to cancel the deals, take back the roads and bridges and keep the cash if operators don't live up to the terms. ... Some objections to private ownership are simply cynical ploys by politicians looking to maintain their hold on public assets, especially since roads and bridges operated by transportation authorities are often job-patronage mills."

Jim Brown, Mar. 26, 2008:

"Is there any legitimate concern that private operators are only interested in making money at the expense of taxpayers, and that new owners will skimp on maintenance and repair work in order to squeeze profits out of these operations? Progressive states around the country have dealt with these objections by building in restrictions and operating requirements to the contract which allow any such deal to be canceled and the roads and bridges taken back if operators do not live up to the terms. ... If you want to be a bit cynical about those who oppose private ownership, one might wonder whether those objecting are looking to maintain their hold on public assets, especially since the commissions that often run these public authorities, as we have often seen, can create real job-patronage mills."

Andrew Napolitano, 2005:

"So, if your representative in the House has voted, or your Senators do vote, for the House/Senate conference approved version, they will be authorizing federal agents on their own, in violation of the Constitution, and without you knowing it, to obtain records about you from your accountant, bank, boat dealer, bodega, book store, car dealer, casino, computer server, credit union, dentist, HMO, hospital, hotel manager, insurance company, jewelry store, lawyer, library, pawn broker, pharmacist, physician, postman, real estate agent, supermarket, tax collectors, telephone company, travel agency, and trust company, and use the evidence thus obtained in any criminal prosecution against you."

Jim Brown, June 30, 2011:

"Here is what members of congress did in their Patriot Act vote. They authorized and empowered federal agents on their own, in violation of the Constitution, and without you knowing it, to obtain records about you from your accountant, bank, boat dealer, bodega, book store, car dealer, casino, computer server, credit union, dentist, HMO, hospital, hotel manager, insurance company, jewelry store, lawyer, library, pawn broker, pharmacist, physician, postman, real estate agent, supermarket, tax collectors, telephone company, travel agency, and trust company, and use the evidence thus obtained in any criminal prosecution against you."

William Dalyrmple, The New York Times, Aug. 16, 2010:

"Most of us are perfectly capable of making distinctions within the Christian world. The fact that someone is a Boston Roman Catholic doesn't mean he's in league with Irish Republican Army bomb makers, just as not all Orthodox Christians have ties to Serbian war criminals or Southern Baptists to the murderers of abortion doctors. Yet many of our leaders have a tendency to see the Islamic world as a single, terrifying monolith."

Jim Brown, Aug. 19, 2010:

"Maybe it's because most Americans, including virtually all of our politicians, see the Islamic world as a single confusing and troubling monolith. In the Christian world, we have no problem making distinctions. Just because someone is an Irish catholic living in New Orleans doesn't mean he's sympathetic to Irish Republican Army terrorists. Southern Baptists do not condone the murderers of abortion doctors."

Justin Elliott, Salon.com, Aug. 16, 2010:

Conservative media personality Laura Ingraham interviews Abdul Rauf's wife, Daisy Khan, while guest-hosting The O'Reilly Factor on Fox. In hindsight, the segment is remarkable for its cordiality. "I can't find many people who really have a problem with it," Ingraham says of the Cordoba project, adding at the end of the interview, "I like what you're trying to do."

Jim Brown, Aug. 19, 2010:

Shortly after the Times story ran, conservative media personality Laura Ingraham interviewed AbdulRauf's wife, Daisy Khan, while guest-hosting The O'Reilly Factor on Fox. In hindsight, the segment is remarkable for its cordiality. "I can't find many people who really have a problem with it," Ingraham says of the mosque project, adding at the end of the interview, "I like what you're trying to do."

iWatch News, Jan. 23, 2010:

"The Saudi government owns Houston's Saudi Refining Company and half of Motiva Enterprises. Lenovo, which bought IBM's PC assets in 2004, is partially owned by the Chinese government's Chinese Academy of Sciences. And Singapore's APL Limited operates several U.S. port operations."

Jim Brown, Jan. 28, 2010:

"The Saudi government owns Houston's Saudi refining Company, an American corporation. Singapore's APKL Limited, an American company, operates a number of U.S. port operations. And Lenovo, which bought IBM's PC assets in 2004, is owned by a Chinese company."

Michael McGough, Los Angeles Times, July 3, 2010:

"One of the few subjects about which Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan was forthright at her confirmation hearings was cameras in the high court. She's for 'em. Not for the hoary arguments that televising the court's proceedings would undermine its 'ethos' and introduce the justices' faces to C-SPAN-watching terrorists."

Jim Brown, July 8, 2010:

"On TV cameras in the court room, that are presently prohibited, Kagan is for them. Good for her on this issue. Her colleagues have for years thrown up the hoary arguments the television would undermine the high court's 'ethos' and bring forth the justices' faces to C-Span-watching terrorists. Bunk."

David N. Bass' review of The Dumbest Generation appeared in The American Spectator in January 2009. Ten months later, Jim Brown's column — which was published in the Houma Courier, among other places — took on the same subject, using nearly the same wording.
  • David N. Bass' review of The Dumbest Generation appeared in The American Spectator in January 2009. Ten months later, Jim Brown's column — which was published in the Houma Courier, among other places — took on the same subject, using nearly the same wording.

Dave Treibel, OregonLive.com, Feb. 1, 2010:

"The new sleek tablet is loaded with impressive, sophisticated technology that Apple's engineers have worked on for years. It's the kind of "thinking ahead" philosophy and culture that Steve Jobs and Apple nurture and are known for. I thought, "Wouldn't it be great if Obama could corral an equivalent level of ingenuity and talent available to Steve Jobs to solve some of the complex issues facing our country?"

Jim Brown, Feb. 4, 2010 (in a column datelined "Portland, Oregon"):

"The new sleek iPad tablet is loaded with impressive, sophisticated technology that Apple's engineers have worked on for years. It's the kind of "thinking ahead" philosophy and culture that Steve Jobs and Apple nurture and are known for. The Oregon approach seems to be what an interesting challenge it would be if they could corral an equivalent level of ingenuity and talent available to Steve Jobs to solve some of the complex issues facing their state."

Steve Hymon, Los Angeles Times, Aug. 18, 2008:

"In many cases, the trains run right up the middle of the street — stations are literally on the curb. They run slowly and stop often in downtown, and it doesn't appear to be a problem in terms of people-train-car conflicts. Portland officials also drew a square around downtown and declared it a "fareless zone." If you ride the train or the bus only within that zone, it's free."

Jim Brown, Feb. 4, 2010 (in a column datelined "Portland, Oregon"):

"In many cases, the train runs right up the middle of the street — stations are literally on the curb. Portland officials also drew a square around downtown and declared it a "fare less zone." If you ride the train or the bus only within that zone, it's free. Such a system would be a natural for New Orleans and even in Baton Rouge."

David Scheer and Alison Fitzgerald, Bloomberg News, February 18, 2009:

"Stanford Group, selling the CDs through a network of financial advisers, told clients their funds would be placed mainly in easily sellable financial instruments, monitored by more than 20 analysts and audited by regulators on the Caribbean island of Antigua, the SEC said. Instead, the "vast majority" of the portfolio was managed by Allen Stanford and James Davis, the Antigua subsidiary's chief financial officer, according to the regulator. Some 90 percent of the portfolio is essentially a "black box," shielded from independent oversight, the SEC said. A "substantial" portion may have been steered into assets that are difficult to sell, such as real estate and private equity investments, it said."

Jim Brown, May 21, 2009:

"Stanford financial advisers told potential clients they were selling CDs in the Bank of Antigua. The money, according to the sales pitch, was that the funds would be placed in mainly easily sellable financial instruments, all to be monitored by a team of more than 20 analysts and audited by regulators on this exotic Caribbean island. Instead, the knighted boss "black boxed" the portfolio, shielding it from independent oversight, and steering a major portion of the funds into hard to sell real estate investments and private equity funds."

William L. Anderson, LewRockwell.com, Feb. 3, 2009:

"The reason is that governments confer immunity upon those privileged to work in the police and "justice" systems. ... The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that judges and prosecutors are absolutely immune for anything they do that is considered within the lines of their official duties."

Jim Brown, April 16, 2009:

"Both the legislature and congress have bestowed immunity to those privileged to work in the "justice" system. The courts have ruled that prosecutors are absolutely immune for anything they do that is considered within the lines of their official duties."

Viral email (as taken from the urban-legends site snopes.com, which debunks the story):

"On another note, there was this wimpy little man (who just passed away) on PBS, gentle and quiet. Mr. Rogers is another of those you would least suspect of being anything but what he now portrays to our youth. But Mr. Rogers was a U.S. Navy Seal, combat-proven in Vietnam with over twenty-five confirmed kills to his name. He wore a long-sleeve sweater to cover the many tattoos on his forearm and biceps."

Jim Brown, Feb. 26, 2009:

"But don't sell Mr. Rogers short. You may not know it, but the wimpy little guy on PBS was a Navy Seal, combat proven in Vietnam with supposedly over twenty-five confirmed kills to his name. And that long sleeve sweater? I'm told it was to cover a number of tattoos on his forearm and biceps."

BleacherReport.com, Oct. 5, 2008:

"Then on New Year's Day 1960, as soon as the Sugar Bowl ended, Cannon, before 83,000 fans, signed another contract, this one with the Houston Oilers of the AFL. That contract offered him $100,000 over three years, a $10,000 gift for his wife, and a slightly used Cadillac."

Jim Brown, Oct. 29, 2009:

"It was on New Year's Day 1960, between the goal posts of the Sugar Bowl, Cannon, before 83,000 fans, signed a contract with the Houston Oilers of the AFL. That contract offered him $100,000 over three years, a $10,000 gift for his wife, a slightly used Cadillac and a promised chain of Cannon gas stations selling Cannonball Regular and Super Cannonball."

Email from Jim Brown, July 13, 2011:

I've written hundreds of commentaries over the past 10 years. You apparently correctly pointed out that in a few of these articles, there were a few sentences that either were not properly attributed or were not surrounded in quotes. But in a number of instances, the party or publication making the quote was cited earlier in my commentary.

  See Andrew Napolitano, 2005, and Brown on June 30, 2011.

  Also see Brown on March 26, 2008, where Wall Street Journal of August 4th, 2007 was cited.

  Also, Brown on June 18, 2009 where New York Times was both cited and quoted.

  In other words, I cited and quoted the source in the article, but in a few instances, quotes were mistakenly not put around one or two of the sentences. But the source was cited and quoted.

  In Brown, April 16, 2009, Prof. Anderson is both cited and extensively quoted. A few words in a sentence were the same in both Anderson's article and mine, so I have gone back and put quotes around these few words.

  In other instance, I used and cited the original source of the quote but did not reference another article that also used the same quote. (See Salon, Aug. 16, 2010 and Brown, Aug. 19, 2010.)

  In anticipation of, and researching for future articles, I often make notes from shows like Morning Joe, or from numerous websites and papers I read each day. A review of my numerous articles will show that I often use several quotes in each column that are always attributed. My commentaries are sent out to a mailing list of friends and contacts, and I receive no payment for what I write. It is just a weekly blog on my personal website where I try to express thoughts on current issues of interest. It's often just my ramblings. If someone wants to use any part of the commentary, fine and so be it. Nothing I do is copyrighted. The columns are a hobby and not a business.

  It is my intention to cite sources and attribute quotes. If any mistakes were made, they were not intentional. I typically quote many people and do my best to attribute quotes to the appropriate source; any errors in punctuation or proper attribution are purely an oversight.

  I have talked to my editor (me), and the items you pointed out have been corrected and properly cited.

  I hope all this is clear.

  — Jim Brown

Comments

Showing 1-1 of 1

 

Add a comment