Why do we have to be hyphenated Americans? You know, African-American, Mexican-American, Asian-American and so on. The terrorists don't talk about killing hyphenated Americans, they just talk about killing Americans. That's the way it should be, we are all Americans. Using the hyphen with a descriptor just separates us, keeps us apart. It's part of what leads to Ferguson MO and Trayvon Martin; it leads to discrimination and bigotry. That's not to say you shouldn't be proud of your heritage but shouldn't we be more proud of being an American?
A black officer shoots a white youth; the young man was unarmed, wearing headphones and couldn't hear the officer's instructions. It appears he really did shoot the young man from behind without provocation. There is video including that from the camera the officer was wearing but the police chief won't release the video for fear of starting a riot. That is pretty telling right there. The media, the ones actually covering the story, have no problem telling you the youth was not the most respectful, upstanding citizen; he was also dressed in baggy pants and covered in tattoos at the time of his death; he had a long rap sheet and was known to police. Compare that to the images of Trayvon Martin and Mike Brown, which turned out to be true. Compare the riots for those boys to the riots and demonstrations in support of the white boy. That's right, there aren't any riots or claims of discrimination because the left wing will tell you blacks can't be bigoted. If I used left wing 'logic' then I should be mad because it's clear that the shooting was raced based just because the two parties involved were of different race. Isn't there some kind of double standard?
The terrorists have talked over and over about their goal of wiping out America, killing Americans. In the ISIS video wherein James Foley was beheaded, he was forced to read a letter condemning America and blaming us for the world's problems. It's pretty clear the terrorists hate America. Think about this; Obama was raised by a mother, a father and mentors who all hated America. He was taught that America was a colonial power, invading other countries and taking their natural resources, oppressing the people. He was taught that communism was good and free market capitalism served only to make a few people rich and keep minorities oppressed. He was taught that we imposed our will on others through bullying and threats. Remember he said over and over in his campaign that he was going to remove America from our position of 'leader' and become one with the rest of the world, working together. He also talked about respecting others and their choices, not imposing our will upon them, not imposing our beliefs or systems of government/laws on them. He really believed that when he came to power, our enemies would understand that we were no longer a threat to them because Obama was in charge; he believed they would lay down arms. Now they have not; now things have gotten worse and Obama has no idea what to do to stop the attacks on America and our allies. He never thought about a plan B, other than the abortion drug; so he's lost. What was that question about having some real world experience?
We have talked about ISIS, al Qaeda, Hamas, and other terrorists coming across our southern border and the need to secure the border to protect ourselves. But what about the Americans and Western Europeans who have gone to fight alongside ISIS jihadis or with other terror groups? We've seen high profile members of ISIS who are Americans. We've seen Americans fighting as members of terror groups. The person shown killing James Foley was probably British. What happens when those people decide to return home? Wouldn't they be a serious threat to our safety? Wouldn't it make complete sense to send those people back to their countries of origin to coordinate and participate in a terrorist attack on our soil? Just saying.
Obama held a quick press conference concerning the murder of an American journalist, James Foley. He was terse and condemned the action but why he was terse is not what you think. He wasn't terse because he hated what happened nor was he terse because ISIS terrorists have promised to kill another American journalist, Steve Sotloff; in fact Obama didn't even mention that threat; no Obama was terse because he was mad that he had to work for a few minutes when he had a tee time and wanted to hit a few range balls before playing golf.
It's pathetic that so our Commander in Chief is taking so many vacations, plays so much golf and our world is in total and utter chaos. The ISIS terrorists said in the video, not to mention pretty much every time they are in public, that they will bathe in the blood of America. That's a direct threat to us and our President should be working closely with our military and intelligence staff to craft a plan to protect our country. He should also be making clear and direct statements that we will not be bullied and will hunt down every terrorist murderer responsible for killing innocent American citizens.
Not to mention that it took 2 days for our Partier in Chief to even make a statement condemning the killing of an American. Instead he was in Martha's Vineyard having a "working vacation". PM David Cameron cut short his vacation upon learning of the gruesome murder and called a cabinet meeting to determine how Britain would respond to the killing of an American. PM Cameron made a very quick statement condemning the barbarous act and is ready to take action. Maybe he's used to every other American President put in a similar situation taking the lead and he's ready to assist. Not our Glorious Leader, he can't be bothered with matters of importance while he parties with rich folk and celebrities.
The situation in Ferguson is getting worse by the day because, in large part, people jumped to conclusions about what happened between the officer and Michael Brown. The media jumped on the narrative and fanned the flames with biased reporting and now more people are dead, injured and many have lost their businesses. We talked last week about how the MSM used favorable photos of the dead youth and repeated over and over how he was not threatening the police, had his hands in the air. Several members of the Washington Redskins ran onto the field Monday night with their hands in the air in support of Brown and by inference damning the police.
But once again by waiting to pass judgement we find out things are not always as they seem. We've already talked about how Brown was involved in a strong arm robbery just minutes before the altercation with police. Now over a dozen witnesses have come forward to confirm the officer's side of the story; that Brwon was not being docile but rather rushed the officer and ignored his instructions and warnings. The officer was hit by Brown with such force, that it broke his eye socket. Why aren't all the haters and race baiters coming back and changing their tune? Why aren't people rallying in support of the officer? Because we've been taught over and over that police are racist, are mean, are bullies and that narrative has stuck.
Dr. Ben Carson hit the nail on the head, as did the black guy who's video is going viral, when they talk about how the black community has to change; has to quit listening to others tell them how they are supposed to think, who they are supposed to like & conversely hate, who they are supposed to follow. Quit being victims and expecting others to do things for you rather than doing things for yourself. As Dr. Carson points out, when the black community began relying on others to tell them what to do & think, it led them to a bad place; try living for 24 hours without the police, what would that be like in those neighborhoods? Look at what is going on now in Ferguson; look at what goes on every weekend in Chicago or Oakland. It's not a pretty picture. Do you still hate the police in general?
Following the same politicians, civil rights leaders and the same old 'I'm a victim mentality' has led the black community into poverty, the break down of the family unit, crime, violence and the continuing cycle of it all. What is all the rioting and muck raking trying to accomplish? As we've said before, the 'leaders' are talking about emotional issues, racism, bigotry, killing our kids. What is it you want to see done, specifically? Come up with a plan that can be put into place that doesn't involve giving you more money and we'll listen.
We've watched over the last 40 years as liberal movements have used emotional arguments to sway people to their causes, often resulting in legislation that limited people's rights, spent our money to support certain causes and generally caused havoc in our world, rarely resulting in the intended outcome.
In the past we've point out the fallacies of large scale renewable energy sources, such as large windfarms or solar energy systems. Among the problems are inefficiencies of trying to move that energy over large areas and the harm to wildlife from many of the windfarms. Now we have 'streamers' at lare scale solar installations.
What is a streamer you ask? It is a bird that is fried by the tremendous heat generated by the solar panels, which act like mirrors reflecting the sunlight and heat back into the atmosphere. A bird flies over and catches on fire; they are called streamers by workers at the plants due to the stream of smoke the bird leaves as it crashes to the ground. Think of photos of planes being shot down in World War II; it's just like that apparently.
The unintended side effect of building large scale solar farms has been to harm wildlife and now federal wildlife investigators are visiting some of the farms to investigate the problems. Brightsource Energy has a huge plant in the Mojave Desert and are now recommending the State of California halt expansion plans until they can figure out what to do; this comes on top of others concerns that the farms have caused harm to the desert tortoise and other wildlife. Now we are watching the renewable energy crowd pitted against the environmentalists once again and the irony just burns. Both are claiming there is a solution, they just haven't found it yet. We'll see how that works out for them, I'm sure it will cost the taxpayer more money in the long run.
With the great amount of heat being reflected by the mirrors onto the heating tower, doesn't some of that heat escape into the atmosphere? Doesn't that contribute to global warming, err, climate change? Where is Al Gore? Shouldn't he be protesting solar farms because they are causing ice caps to melt and killing polar bears?
I was on the road earlier this week and listening to a local radio station, since the program to which I was tuned isn't available on satellite radio. There was a local church advertising for parishioners to join them, a 'come check us out' type of ad. Among the benefits of this particular church is the fact that they "share tongues." The exact wording in the radio ad - We share tongues.
OK, I haven't been to church in a long time, but if the women in your congregation are hotties and are sharing their tongues, that might get me to attend. But exactly how are you sharing tongues? Is it the traditional 'swapping spit' during the greet your neighbor portion of the service or is the tongue sharing a little more intimate? Husbands are OK with this? And one last thing, am I required to share tongues with anyone or do I have a right of first refusal? I don't want to be tickling tonsils with 90 year old Gertrude, unless she has lots of money and is willing to leave it to me in her will. Just sayin'.
I do wonder how this got by both the producers and the church staff.
The Ray Rice situation just won't go away, even with Tony Stewart killing someone in an auto race. There are several lessons to be learned from both situations, such as, people are much more upset over what Ray Rice may have done that what Tony Stewart may have done. Beating a woman is apparently more reprehensible than killing a 20 year old because you are an arrogant prick with an anger management problem. That's assuming a lot of 'facts' to be true when we don't really know them to be true.
Once again, no one outside of Ray and his wife, along with police and prosecutors, know what went on in that elevator. People assume Ray hit his then fiance, knocking her unconscious and then he drug her out of the elevator to their hotel room. Assuming Ray hit his fiance, people want justice, their version of justice and there in begins the lesson we should learn, but likely won't. The NFL is considering establishing new rules to quantify the penalty for a player involved in a domestic abuse case. People are upset that Ray only received a 2 game suspension and they want more punishment.
Let's look at some facts. Had Ray been charged and convicted by the DA, which has not happened and likely won't, he probably would not have faced jail time as a first offender. Ray is losing somewhere north of $500K in salary. His 2 game suspension and lost money is more than he would have suffered had he been in the NBA, MLB or any other major sport. Not to mention the loss of respect in the court of public opinion. Roger Goodell, the NFL commissioner and sole arbiter in these situations, used the facts available to him and made a decision that really is pretty stiff and should be a stiff penalty.
But because the public at large is outraged at the perceived light sentence, they are now willing to give more power to the central authority in the NFL. In fact, they really wanted that central authority to mete out a harsher punishment even when he may not have had the authority to take such action. Isn't it kind of like a President using executive power to take action when people are outraged, even though he may not have the authority to do so?
Now the people are losing some freedom, some rights in order to correct a perceived injustice. The proposed penalty for a first offense, domestic abuse, is a 4-6 game suspension without pay; a second offense is a one year ban from the game. Think about most domestic violence claims; it's often a he said - she said situation. We don't have video or witnesses. Whom are you supposed to believe? An automatic 4 game suspension costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars seems harsh if you claim you are innocent and might very well be innocent; guilty only of being in a bad situation.
But that right there is how people lose rights; they willingly give up their rights because of something they see that is abhorrent and repulsive. The cry to have the authorities do something to punish the wrongdoer begins to outweigh the protection of their individual rights, until it is too late. The authorities, often the federal government, are only too happy to step in, take more authority and control over the population, under the guise of protecting the weak and helpless. Before we know it, the central authority has more power than ever intended and controls almost every segment of our lives. Sound familiar?
Did you ever notice that liberals generally use emotional arguments to 'support' their desire to enact certain programs to help the downtrodden, the poor, the abused? Think about what they say; the rich are not paying their fair share; the rich didn't build it themselves; the poor aren't there through any fault of there own; the rich are getting richer. Paul Krugman is one of the left's favorite economists. Over the years we've shown him, along with others, to be wrong. He rarely directly cites accurate or complete stats if he cites statistics at all.
Recently he wrote an op-ed piece in which he talked about inequality. Krugman's basic premise is this: American inequality has become so extreme that it's inflicting a lot of economic damage. And this, in turn, implies that redistribution - that is taxing the rich and helping the poor - may well raise not lower the economy's growth rate. I want to point out that Krugman says "may". Because you see he can't cite statistics or historical examples to support his thesis. Why? Because it's been tried and never, ever worked. Not once. But it sure sounds nice; makes liberals feel good about helping the less fortunate.
John Jordan, a successful businessman, authored a response piece to Krugman and it worth pointing out the highlights. Looking at data from the census bureau from 1967 through 2012 the upper 5% of our population, in terms of wealth, has grown steadily over that 45 year period; from 43.6% to 51% of our population. Isn't that a good thing? I'll bet you would have thought that percentage to be much lower. If you listen to the MSM you'd certainly think more people live in poverty than not.
The 2nd fifth has stayed pretty steady, dropping slightly from 24.2% to 23%; the 3rd quintile has decreased from 17.3% to 14.4% as has the fourth, 10.8% to 8.3% of our population. And yes the poorest quintile has decreased as well, 4% to 3.2%. Jordan points out that while the top 5% of income earners has increased steadily, a lot of that represents the fact that many of those earners are in high demand, high reward occupations, such as professional athletes, movie stars, corporate executives. I'll throw in politicians as well.
To me that shows that the wealth earned by the middle and upper income classes has been growing steadily over that period, even though there has been a downturn in recent years. Federal welfare spending over the same period has increased from $5000 per person in poverty in 1973 to $15,000 per person in 2011. The percentage of federal income tax receipts paid by the top 5% of earners has increased steadily over a similar time frame as well, going from 37% to 59%. So redistribution has been in full swing for 40 plus years and what do we have to show for it? The percentage of population living at or below the poverty level has not decreased, despite that group of people receiving 3 times as much money.
At what point do they realize that the real solution to getting people out of poverty is not government run assistance programs based upon redistribution; programs that promote dependency, not work. Rather programs that encourage business expansion and job creation; just like we saw in the 80's and 90's; those programs also created upward pressure on wages, which directly helps the lower and middle classes. But unfortunately those that are concerned with policy and many of those that make policy are worried about feeling good, since they are 'helping' by giving the poor other people's money. Remember how many liberals have been in trouble for evading taxes...
We had technical difficulties the last couple of days so didn't post anything. Kind of nice not to have to wade through the crap that is happening in our world. So let's take another day, since it's kind of like a Monday for us, and enjoy some funny stuff.
A little boy asked his mother, "Mommy, how come I'm black and you're white?" His mother replied, "Don't even go there Barack, from what I can remember about that party, you're lucky you don't bark."
It's not funny but it's true; for every job created under the Obama administration, 75 people went on food stamps.
I might as well go to work today, I'm in a bad mood anyway.
My doctor told me to avoid any unnecessary stress, so I didn't open his bill.
Sometimes I think I drink too much, then I look at the bottle of beer and think about all the workers, who's efforts went into making the beer; from the farmers growing the hops and barley, to the trucker delivering the goods to the brewery and all of the people at the brewer's; if I didn't drink, then they would be out of work and their dreams would be shattered. Then I say to myself, It's better to drink this beer and let their dreams come true, than for me to be selfish and worry about my liver.
I had a shop teacher one time who told me if I cut off my fingers in shop class, I'd flunk typing class.
Border Patrol agents are working in tough conditions and don't have enough equipment to keep themselves safe. Combined with the inability to do their jobs, moral is at an all time low. Some agents feel like the government is more worried about taking care of the illegals than taking care of the employees. Apparently that's not quite true; if you work for the DHS in Washington D.C. you are going to enjoy one of the most luxurious gyms in Washington. VIDA Renaissance has gained a reputation as the gym for people to join or utilize when visiting D.C. Foreign dignitaries are often seen there. It is 10,000 feet of top notch, high quality service featuring a spa, salon, rooftop pool and lounge not to mention full service locker rooms featuring free products from Bang Salon (whatever that is). DHS has now spent $436,000 on 2 year memberships for 236 employees. I'm sure none of them are in harms way and probably make six figure salaries. The purpose? To help their morale and "improve working conditions". That's about $1900 a year per employee. I wonder what the money could do for the agents in the field actually doing the work?
N.J. Logan was at home recuperating from hip replacement surgery earlier this week when she heard a noise downstairs. The 80 year old thought it was her husband but quickly realized it was not and that someone was trying to break into her home. She grabbed her gun and dialed 911. The operator told Logan to put the gun down, several times. Logan said, "I'll put it down when I see the police." She then went down the stairs calling out warnings to the burglar/rapist, telling him that she had a gun. The intruder left quickly and without taking anything but more importantly, without harming Logan. We'll never know for sure, but it's likely the perpetrator didn't want to take a chance on getting shot by a woman who he believed would use the gun on him. Can you believe the operator told her to put the gun down? And do what?! Sit back and 'enjoy it'...
French Reporter Gallagher Henwick has been doing what the American media, for the most part, won't do; he's reporting from Gaza on how Hamas is using human shields and placing their batteries inside hospitals, private homes etc. Gallagher and his crew have been inside Gaza where he's shown that civilians are not allowed to leave, despite receiving warnings from the IDF, because Hamas soldiers threaten to kill them; Hamas wants the civilian casualties in order to turn public opinion against Israel. The U.S. MSM is not reporting on this, and yes, condemns Israel. In fact Gallagher and his crew were almost hit by an IDF missile earlier this week as he was showing a Hamas mortar/rocket installation positioned inside a medical clinic. Dammit, now I have to like a French guy.
Dr. Ben Carson had an interesting take on abortion during a recent interview. He pointed out that many people criticize ancient civilizations for practicing human sacrifice but when it comes to abortion in the United States, "aren't we actually guilty of the same thing?"
You knew it was going to happen eventually, especially in the world we have created; a world of victims, where any perceived slight is bigotry, hatred and discrimination. Now a bar in Denver that caters to gay men has been cited for violating the state's civil rights laws. Ha ha.
The Denver Wrangler is not a country western bar but a gay bar, the owners of the bar cater to "bears", which I'm told is the genre of gay men that are overly masculine and often shun intimacy with men who exhibit effeminacy. Lots of leather, hairy bodies and bare chests in this place. Andy Dick or Richard Simmons wouldn't be welcome at the Wrangler.
Enter Vito Marzano, a gay man that had been attending a fund raiser somewhere else. He was dressed in drag and didn't want to go home after the party broke up so he headed for the Denver Wrangler; you can imagine he was in the wrong place. The bouncer denied Vito entry, not because he was dressed in drag but because his photo on his license didn't look like him. The bar has been cited several times recently for serving underage patrons so they are being overly careful; according to them, Vito is not the only person denied entry due to a possible fake ID.
This is also important, Vito is not transgender and has never made that claim, he was just dressed in a costume that night. While the bar does have a dress code forbidding high heeled shoes, wigs or appearance altering makeup or strong perfumes, the owners claim that is not the reason Vito was denied entry. State officers from the Division of Civil Rights say the dress code is OK in and of itself, they claim the owners are using the dress code to exclude overly feminine women or transgender people. The investigators also pointed to comments made by staff and the bar's website which obviously caters to the 'bear' subculture.
So what is wrong with marketing to a particular subset of the market? Catering to a particular demographic should not be evidence of discriminating against others. Businesses do it all the time; Sports Clips caters to men that like sports, are they now guilty of discriminating against men who like the theater? Lane Bryant caters to elderly overweight women, are they guilty of discriminating against hot chicks? Does Ruth's Chris Steakhouse discriminate against poor people now?
Freedom of association is what's at stake in this case. The 'bears' should have a right to congregate in a place that caters to their likes and needs. Transgender people are allowed to enter as long as they comply with the dress code; the code doesn't keep them out of the business, it just says that management and patrons want to associate in a certain atmosphere. If that's discriminatory, then it's out in the open and people can use boycotts or other social pressures to force change.