No one stands up for the free-enterprise system more than I do.
But sometimes, as in this case involving Spirit airlines, the hate that people have for such large companies is pretty justified.
A good, well regarded, successful company gains that reputation for how they handle the unusual situations.
And in the case of 76 year-old Vietnam vet Jerry Meekins, they are handling the unusual situation he faces in a foul manner.
Yes, Mr. Meekins did buy a ticket to travel to see his daughter one last time before he goes off to the Glory. For Mr. Meekins has esophageal cancer and that has so compromised his immune system that his doctor said he could not fly to see his daughter.
So, why doesn't the daughter just go see her dad?
Well, because Mr. Meekins daughter is having her own surgery.
So, the great customer service and compassion shown by Spirit airlines when Mr. Meekins asked for a refund:
NO!
That is the one word answer from one spokesdolt, Misty Pinson.
You know though that Mr. Meekins could get some of his money back at some point.
But Mr. Meekins has to die before or during the flight to get a partial refund.
I get that this airline has a pretty strict policy regarding refunds and they reinforced it in the following statement:
"At Spirit, we treat all our customers equally and with respect. That means our non-refundable fares are non-refundable for everyone."
I get it.
But read this to realize how stupid they are handling this situation:
We are very saddened to hear about Mr. Meekins diagnosis and sincerely hope that his health improves and that we have the opportunity to serve him on his current ticket and many more flights."
Whiskey? Tango? Foxtrot?
What about this does Spirit air not get?! The old dude is, let me spell this out.
D y i n g!
This man served his country. He is frickin' dying. He has a short time, if that to live. All he asking for is a lousy $197. Is a bend for this man really going to tee off the majority that fly this airline?
I doubt it.
Again, what separates a good company from a cut-throat is how it deals with this kind of situation.
An airline watchdog group seems to think that Spirit should refund the money.
Kate Hanni of FlyerRights.org said that it is standard operating procedure to refund tickets if the passenger has a note from the doctor that he or she can not fly.
And especially when a dying man, who BTW may not have all his faculties due to the cancer, is unable to fly because his immune system is so compromised.
America is a nation shows respect for those that have served by wearing the uniform of our armed forces. And now, because of the lapse of treating our vets who served in Vietnam with respect but with contempt, more than ever Jerry Meekins deserves not just his money back but a huge apology for not offering customer service, let alone any compassion.
This is but one of the reasons people in the United States have had it with flying.
Overbearing TSA agents, airlines constantly cutting back and raising fares, cutting flights. It is just one big mess.
But when a airline shows nothing but contempt for its customers and hides behind an unbendable policy, it deserves scorn.
The fact is that a man that served his nation when it asked him should not be treated like cattle because he made what turned out to be a mistake.
Spirit Airlines, give Mr. Meekins his money back. Realize that sometimes, it is better to bend the rules in an unusual circumstance than being heartless bastards.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Will Mitt Romney Win California? Should He Even Bother?
The short answer to question number one?
No.
The longer answer to question number two?
Yes if only to make Team Dear Leader have to spend money here in the once Golden State.
If the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, is not going to win California, then he should save resources for a so-called battleground state, right?
People, in this election, the whole of the United States is the battleground.
Of course there are some states pretty much in either the Democrat or Republican corner, right?
I think so. I think that California is one that will be hard to crack. Since 1992, the ceiling for the Republican party in presidential contests is 45%. Last time in 2008, the bottom fell out as the Dear Leader, President Obama, scored a 61% to 37% thrashing of then GOP presidential nominee, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. It was one of the worst Republican showings ever in California.
So, in that sense, we have more of a chance to go up to reasonable competitiveness or continue towards the relevancy of such state Republican parties as Massachusetts or New York state. In other words, irrelevant.
But how can that happen given the current state of the Cali GOP?
Clearly, there are areas of the state where the party is in control, strong and or competitive.
They are in this order.
Orange County, long the bedrock of the Republican party in California. It has gotten a bit lazy in the past few years and Democrats have made some inroads in this Republican mecca. But it can easily give a Republican candidate 60% or more of the vote.
San Diego county is another one. Although Democrats are strong in this county in recent years, the GOP is still very competitive outside of the city of San Diego. Essentially the Democrats have the city and the Republicans almost everywhere else in the county. Again, if the conditions are right, another place a GOP candidate could easily get at least 60% of the vote.
The Central Valley has become a strong Republican region. But the farm economy has taken a beating in recent years. Yet Republicans in this area are competitive to strong. In fact, it was here that the GOP hoped to wrestle a congressional seat in the 2010 mid-term election. It was very close and actually made another member of congress not stand for reelection.
The Inland Empire of Southern California. That is Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Both are the fastest-growing areas of California. These have both been what amount to swing-counties. In the 2012 governor's and United States senate race, both counties went for the Republican candidates. But not in strong numbers. If the numbers had been stronger, maybe the senate race would have been closer.
One last area where the GOP is strong is the area and counties around the state-capitol, Sacramento. In recent years these counties have been going Republican. But not as much in the last election as before. The Republicans have to work here to keep the Democrats from gaining anymore ground.
Again, how to do it with a cash-strapped party that has really no bench to speak of?
Enter the presidential candidate, Mr. Romney.
One advantage that Mr. Romney will have that Sen. "F--- You" McCain did not is that Mr. Romney is not going to take any federal money and the restrictions that come with it. And the super-PACS will be in full force anywhere they want to be in the United States.
Thus money wise, Mr. Romney will be able to go to areas that Sen. "F--- You" McCain did not even give serious thought.
California should be there not for what this election can do, but a future reelection campaign. Or the mid-terms that will take place in 2014.
In other words, Republicans and leaner's need something now and not later. We need to make this election winnable anywhere and close everywhere. And to write off any state before one even starts is foolish.
It is what Team Dear Leader did in 2008. They were every and anywhere. Even in states that they knew would not vote for Team Dear Leader. But, in a state like Wyoming, two counties voted for the Dear Leader, President Obama. And same in Utah. Texas. See, the Democrats for the first time since 1992 ran a truly nationwide campaign and won. Think about Ronald Reagan in 1980. And in both elections, the eventual winner was the underdog.
Mr. Romney needs to make sure that the base states are in his corner and then take some time and money to flirt with areas that could not be touched in previous elections.
California needs that help desperately.
If Mr. Romney puts any relatively serious effort here, it could mean a new Republican member of congress. Maybe some in the state assembly or state senate. If the result is competitive here, maybe a serious candidate can emerge to take on Gov. Jerry Brown in 2014.
We need to get the Cali GOP back. And we can not do it alone.
Mitt Romney, you probably will not win in California. But you need to help in rejuvenating a weak party at the state level. That will be a kind of victory in the long run. A competitive Republican party is needed now more than ever in the largest state in the union.
No.
The longer answer to question number two?
Yes if only to make Team Dear Leader have to spend money here in the once Golden State.
If the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, is not going to win California, then he should save resources for a so-called battleground state, right?
People, in this election, the whole of the United States is the battleground.
Of course there are some states pretty much in either the Democrat or Republican corner, right?
I think so. I think that California is one that will be hard to crack. Since 1992, the ceiling for the Republican party in presidential contests is 45%. Last time in 2008, the bottom fell out as the Dear Leader, President Obama, scored a 61% to 37% thrashing of then GOP presidential nominee, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. It was one of the worst Republican showings ever in California.
So, in that sense, we have more of a chance to go up to reasonable competitiveness or continue towards the relevancy of such state Republican parties as Massachusetts or New York state. In other words, irrelevant.
But how can that happen given the current state of the Cali GOP?
Clearly, there are areas of the state where the party is in control, strong and or competitive.
They are in this order.
Orange County, long the bedrock of the Republican party in California. It has gotten a bit lazy in the past few years and Democrats have made some inroads in this Republican mecca. But it can easily give a Republican candidate 60% or more of the vote.
San Diego county is another one. Although Democrats are strong in this county in recent years, the GOP is still very competitive outside of the city of San Diego. Essentially the Democrats have the city and the Republicans almost everywhere else in the county. Again, if the conditions are right, another place a GOP candidate could easily get at least 60% of the vote.
The Central Valley has become a strong Republican region. But the farm economy has taken a beating in recent years. Yet Republicans in this area are competitive to strong. In fact, it was here that the GOP hoped to wrestle a congressional seat in the 2010 mid-term election. It was very close and actually made another member of congress not stand for reelection.
The Inland Empire of Southern California. That is Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Both are the fastest-growing areas of California. These have both been what amount to swing-counties. In the 2012 governor's and United States senate race, both counties went for the Republican candidates. But not in strong numbers. If the numbers had been stronger, maybe the senate race would have been closer.
One last area where the GOP is strong is the area and counties around the state-capitol, Sacramento. In recent years these counties have been going Republican. But not as much in the last election as before. The Republicans have to work here to keep the Democrats from gaining anymore ground.
Again, how to do it with a cash-strapped party that has really no bench to speak of?
Enter the presidential candidate, Mr. Romney.
One advantage that Mr. Romney will have that Sen. "F--- You" McCain did not is that Mr. Romney is not going to take any federal money and the restrictions that come with it. And the super-PACS will be in full force anywhere they want to be in the United States.
Thus money wise, Mr. Romney will be able to go to areas that Sen. "F--- You" McCain did not even give serious thought.
California should be there not for what this election can do, but a future reelection campaign. Or the mid-terms that will take place in 2014.
In other words, Republicans and leaner's need something now and not later. We need to make this election winnable anywhere and close everywhere. And to write off any state before one even starts is foolish.
It is what Team Dear Leader did in 2008. They were every and anywhere. Even in states that they knew would not vote for Team Dear Leader. But, in a state like Wyoming, two counties voted for the Dear Leader, President Obama. And same in Utah. Texas. See, the Democrats for the first time since 1992 ran a truly nationwide campaign and won. Think about Ronald Reagan in 1980. And in both elections, the eventual winner was the underdog.
Mr. Romney needs to make sure that the base states are in his corner and then take some time and money to flirt with areas that could not be touched in previous elections.
California needs that help desperately.
If Mr. Romney puts any relatively serious effort here, it could mean a new Republican member of congress. Maybe some in the state assembly or state senate. If the result is competitive here, maybe a serious candidate can emerge to take on Gov. Jerry Brown in 2014.
We need to get the Cali GOP back. And we can not do it alone.
Mitt Romney, you probably will not win in California. But you need to help in rejuvenating a weak party at the state level. That will be a kind of victory in the long run. A competitive Republican party is needed now more than ever in the largest state in the union.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
How JFK Killed The Men's Dress Hat Industry And Its Finally Making A Comeback-Sort Of
Yeah, a long post title to be sure.
But I think it is totally accurate.
I have long had my little conspiracy theory of sorts as to the demise of the American male in regards to the wearing of the dress hat.
I blame it on one man.
That man is the the 35th president of the United States, John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Take a note of this.
Every 20th Century president until the first celebrity president, JFK, was a hat wearer.
I could take up a lot of space proving it, but I will not. I will simply write the names.
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
Woodrow Wilson
Warren Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Dwight Eisenhower
And then, it ends with JFK.
His handlers believed that his wonderful head of hair, and not to sound gay or anything, but it was, should not hide under the men's dress hat.
And thus, an industry that thrived began a seemingly irreversible demise.
Note that the following presidents did not wear a dress hat serving as the commander-in-chief.
Lyndon Johnson (occasionally-but not on a regular basis)
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan (cowboy Stetsons out of Washington on the Santa Barbara ranch does not count)
George H. W. Bush
Bill Clinton
George H. W. Bush
Barack Obama
Like it or not, the most prominent male dress hat wearer would be the president of the United States.
But since JFK was almost always seen in public hatless, many men dropped the one-time mandatory part of the well-dressed gentleman.
And it has gone on and on.
Much to your humble blogger's chagrin.
But I have begun to notice a trend and I think that it is a good one.
The return of the men's dress hat.
In 2009, the RVFTLC family took a road trip through the American South.
A wonderful discovery for your humble blogger is that of Cracker Barrel restaurant.
Oh I know that the rest of the United States has them. But not in California. The closest one is in Kingman, Arizona. A wee bit of a road trip.
It was actually in Flagstaff, Arizona that I kept looking at this particular hat at the gift store. It was not the usual baseball hat that your humble blogger likes to wear regularly.
A digression.
I am not the greatest fashion plate. I like what I like. When I do not have to be business casual for the pay job, I am pretty much a t-shirt, Levi's or shorts and flip-flop kind of dresser. Call it Cali Caz (or to be formal, California Casual!).
But there is always church. Or the monthly world-takeover meeting of my Masonic lodge. And the occasional dinner at a very nice restaurant.
All occasions to put on that suit or sports-coat. Definitely a necktie. Dress shoes. And, a dress hat.
So, back at the Flagstaff, Arizona Cracker Barrel.
I kept vacillating over the purchase of a brown dress hat. I really liked it. But it was $30 bucks. To me, a lot of money. Mrs. RVFTLC always knows when I really want to get something but hem and haw about it. Finally, I broke down and forked out the $30 for the hat below.
Oh, I thought it was the perfect hat. I mean, it is as I still have it. And to me, it is the perfect men's dress hat. I told Mrs. RVFTLC, I am going to bring back wearing hats.
The following Sunday upon our return home, I wore the above hat and could not believe what happened.
Many men came up and said they really liked that I was wearing a hat. Many women came and said the same thing.
I felt vindicated.
That a well-dressed gentleman should top his outfit with a dress hat.
But it was a brown one.
Sometime in the following year, Mrs. RVFTLC and I took a little overnight trip to Long Beach, California.
Long Beach is to Los Angeles what Oakland is to San Francisco. Only not quite as scary.
We were walking along the shore and there were some shops. One was a hat store. A men's hat store.
Cool!
Again, the cheap side of your humble blogger took over and forced me into about a half-hour of vacillation. For I already saw the hat that I liked. And it was marked down. And even another 25% off.
Yet I went all over the store. Once again, Mrs. RVFTLC pretty much said "Get it!" And I did.
Here is that hat. And note the photo on the right is with feather, which I still have.
It is a beaut, isn't it?
Now, I have a brown and black hat. And both are well liked when I put them on all dressed up.
Oh, at church several men have taken to wearing a dress hat. A slow yet satisfying trend.
But one other hat was missing.
Dare I write it, but a more trendy men's dress hat.
There is a hat shop near the RVFTLC headquarters, Goorin Bros., and Mrs. RVFTLC and I went in last summer. I found the hat below.
It is known as a porkpie hat. I find it a crossover. A hat I can wear casually and dressed up.
So why do I think that the men's dress hat is making a comeback?
Well, even worse than the above about the late President Kennedy is that the regrettable hipster crowd is bringing back the fedora.
Actually, it is more of a faux fedora.
This is the trendy one that the hipster crowd tend to wear. Even popular among the gals. And I will admit, one the right gal it is rather sexy.
But it is not a real fedora. This is the real deal below.
Maybe this shows that I am a dress hat snob. And again, I think that the mod fedora does have its place. But it should not be passed off as the real deal men's dress hat. It is more on the line of the porkpie that I have.
The overall point is that the dress hat for men is coming back. No, not nearly as fast as I would like. But many a modern man is reaching back to something that I think defined the well-dressed man.
The men's dress hat.
And not even the ghost of JFK will slay this rebirth!
But I think it is totally accurate.
I have long had my little conspiracy theory of sorts as to the demise of the American male in regards to the wearing of the dress hat.
I blame it on one man.
That man is the the 35th president of the United States, John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Take a note of this.
Every 20th Century president until the first celebrity president, JFK, was a hat wearer.
I could take up a lot of space proving it, but I will not. I will simply write the names.
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
Woodrow Wilson
Warren Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Dwight Eisenhower
And then, it ends with JFK.
His handlers believed that his wonderful head of hair, and not to sound gay or anything, but it was, should not hide under the men's dress hat.
And thus, an industry that thrived began a seemingly irreversible demise.
Note that the following presidents did not wear a dress hat serving as the commander-in-chief.
Lyndon Johnson (occasionally-but not on a regular basis)
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan (cowboy Stetsons out of Washington on the Santa Barbara ranch does not count)
George H. W. Bush
Bill Clinton
George H. W. Bush
Barack Obama
Like it or not, the most prominent male dress hat wearer would be the president of the United States.
But since JFK was almost always seen in public hatless, many men dropped the one-time mandatory part of the well-dressed gentleman.
And it has gone on and on.
Much to your humble blogger's chagrin.
But I have begun to notice a trend and I think that it is a good one.
The return of the men's dress hat.
In 2009, the RVFTLC family took a road trip through the American South.
A wonderful discovery for your humble blogger is that of Cracker Barrel restaurant.
Oh I know that the rest of the United States has them. But not in California. The closest one is in Kingman, Arizona. A wee bit of a road trip.
It was actually in Flagstaff, Arizona that I kept looking at this particular hat at the gift store. It was not the usual baseball hat that your humble blogger likes to wear regularly.
A digression.
I am not the greatest fashion plate. I like what I like. When I do not have to be business casual for the pay job, I am pretty much a t-shirt, Levi's or shorts and flip-flop kind of dresser. Call it Cali Caz (or to be formal, California Casual!).
But there is always church. Or the monthly world-takeover meeting of my Masonic lodge. And the occasional dinner at a very nice restaurant.
All occasions to put on that suit or sports-coat. Definitely a necktie. Dress shoes. And, a dress hat.
So, back at the Flagstaff, Arizona Cracker Barrel.
I kept vacillating over the purchase of a brown dress hat. I really liked it. But it was $30 bucks. To me, a lot of money. Mrs. RVFTLC always knows when I really want to get something but hem and haw about it. Finally, I broke down and forked out the $30 for the hat below.
The following Sunday upon our return home, I wore the above hat and could not believe what happened.
Many men came up and said they really liked that I was wearing a hat. Many women came and said the same thing.
I felt vindicated.
That a well-dressed gentleman should top his outfit with a dress hat.
But it was a brown one.
Sometime in the following year, Mrs. RVFTLC and I took a little overnight trip to Long Beach, California.
Long Beach is to Los Angeles what Oakland is to San Francisco. Only not quite as scary.
We were walking along the shore and there were some shops. One was a hat store. A men's hat store.
Cool!
Again, the cheap side of your humble blogger took over and forced me into about a half-hour of vacillation. For I already saw the hat that I liked. And it was marked down. And even another 25% off.
Yet I went all over the store. Once again, Mrs. RVFTLC pretty much said "Get it!" And I did.
Here is that hat. And note the photo on the right is with feather, which I still have.
It is a beaut, isn't it?
Now, I have a brown and black hat. And both are well liked when I put them on all dressed up.
Oh, at church several men have taken to wearing a dress hat. A slow yet satisfying trend.
But one other hat was missing.
Dare I write it, but a more trendy men's dress hat.
There is a hat shop near the RVFTLC headquarters, Goorin Bros., and Mrs. RVFTLC and I went in last summer. I found the hat below.
It is known as a porkpie hat. I find it a crossover. A hat I can wear casually and dressed up.
So why do I think that the men's dress hat is making a comeback?
Well, even worse than the above about the late President Kennedy is that the regrettable hipster crowd is bringing back the fedora.
Actually, it is more of a faux fedora.
This is the trendy one that the hipster crowd tend to wear. Even popular among the gals. And I will admit, one the right gal it is rather sexy.
Maybe this shows that I am a dress hat snob. And again, I think that the mod fedora does have its place. But it should not be passed off as the real deal men's dress hat. It is more on the line of the porkpie that I have.
The overall point is that the dress hat for men is coming back. No, not nearly as fast as I would like. But many a modern man is reaching back to something that I think defined the well-dressed man.
The men's dress hat.
And not even the ghost of JFK will slay this rebirth!
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Egypt Fought A Revolution So The Men Can Have Sex With Their Dead Wives?!
I guess so.
According to this article in The Daily Mail, in a slew of Islamic legislation being considered in the Egyptian parliament, one would allow married men to have sex with their wife, or wives depending on how Islamic a man would be, up to six hours after they had died.
Unfrickingbelievable.
But to be fair, women can also do it with their dead husbands as well.
How so modern of them to be considerate of the gals.
The basis for this vile and disgusting proposal is courtesy of an allegedly "learned" imam from Morocco, Zamzami Abdelbari.
According to this article courtesy of The Daily Telegraph, Imam Abdelbari said that necrophilia, which is having sex with the dead, is "halal", which (and I know the Islamists ain't gonna like this comparison) essentially is the Arabic equivalent of kosher. But, halal is broader if you read the Wikipedia link.
Funny though. When I read the Wikipedia link, I don't find the section about schtuping the dead wife.
And what is magical about six hours? Is that when the corpse begins decay? Does the stench of death become kind of noticeable?
Well, again according to the good imam, said male husband, wanting one last bang with the wife can wash the corpse, and then do the deed.
And while Imam Abdelbari says the gals can do the same thing with their dead husband, he can't exactly explain how the gal gets the dead dude excited after the washing.
OK, lets get all the grotesque jokes I know most of you are thinking out of the way here.
Good.
I think that Allahpundit over at HotAir is having some doubts about this story. And it may be a good thing if there is something not right about it.
But I don't look at what radical Islamists want to do. No, I look at what they have done.
No more perfect example is what life was like for all under the repressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan pre 9/11/01.
If one thinks that is just an outlier, look at Saudi Arabia in its current form, dominated by-you guessed it-Salafist fundamentalist Islamics. Only the fastest growing Islamic movement in the world.
One of the first things to go in Islamic lands is women's rights.
If Sandra Fluke thinks the government should pay for her contraception, imagine how her life would be in Fundamentalist Islamicland? Let me just say that contraception would be at the bottom of her concerns.
This rise in fundamentalist Islam is why guys like Imam Abdelbari can issue such fatwas and at first, sounds like a morbid joke.
Then some country that is about to go Islamofascist tries to make said fatwa law of the land. Sharia law of the land.
Say, didn't our Dear Leader, President Obama, in selling out the long-time former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak tell all that this was the beginning of the Arab Spring? That all this was about is throwing out a dictator and bringing about freedom and democracy?
If this is what democracy looks like, Islamofascist style, I am ready to bring Mubarak back. Or his equivalent.
The fact that someone claiming there is any religious basis for having sex with the dead is absolutely wicked. That dude, Imam Abdelberi, has some very serious problems.
Yet a nation, Egypt, could very well consider making it government approved.
If this is what the Egyptian revolution was all about, my friends we are really in some very effed up territory.
According to this article in The Daily Mail, in a slew of Islamic legislation being considered in the Egyptian parliament, one would allow married men to have sex with their wife, or wives depending on how Islamic a man would be, up to six hours after they had died.
Unfrickingbelievable.
But to be fair, women can also do it with their dead husbands as well.
How so modern of them to be considerate of the gals.
The basis for this vile and disgusting proposal is courtesy of an allegedly "learned" imam from Morocco, Zamzami Abdelbari.
According to this article courtesy of The Daily Telegraph, Imam Abdelbari said that necrophilia, which is having sex with the dead, is "halal", which (and I know the Islamists ain't gonna like this comparison) essentially is the Arabic equivalent of kosher. But, halal is broader if you read the Wikipedia link.
Funny though. When I read the Wikipedia link, I don't find the section about schtuping the dead wife.
And what is magical about six hours? Is that when the corpse begins decay? Does the stench of death become kind of noticeable?
Well, again according to the good imam, said male husband, wanting one last bang with the wife can wash the corpse, and then do the deed.
And while Imam Abdelbari says the gals can do the same thing with their dead husband, he can't exactly explain how the gal gets the dead dude excited after the washing.
OK, lets get all the grotesque jokes I know most of you are thinking out of the way here.
Good.
I think that Allahpundit over at HotAir is having some doubts about this story. And it may be a good thing if there is something not right about it.
But I don't look at what radical Islamists want to do. No, I look at what they have done.
No more perfect example is what life was like for all under the repressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan pre 9/11/01.
If one thinks that is just an outlier, look at Saudi Arabia in its current form, dominated by-you guessed it-Salafist fundamentalist Islamics. Only the fastest growing Islamic movement in the world.
One of the first things to go in Islamic lands is women's rights.
If Sandra Fluke thinks the government should pay for her contraception, imagine how her life would be in Fundamentalist Islamicland? Let me just say that contraception would be at the bottom of her concerns.
This rise in fundamentalist Islam is why guys like Imam Abdelbari can issue such fatwas and at first, sounds like a morbid joke.
Then some country that is about to go Islamofascist tries to make said fatwa law of the land. Sharia law of the land.
Say, didn't our Dear Leader, President Obama, in selling out the long-time former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak tell all that this was the beginning of the Arab Spring? That all this was about is throwing out a dictator and bringing about freedom and democracy?
If this is what democracy looks like, Islamofascist style, I am ready to bring Mubarak back. Or his equivalent.
The fact that someone claiming there is any religious basis for having sex with the dead is absolutely wicked. That dude, Imam Abdelberi, has some very serious problems.
Yet a nation, Egypt, could very well consider making it government approved.
If this is what the Egyptian revolution was all about, my friends we are really in some very effed up territory.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Los Angeles Only SECOND Most Hated City In The United States?!
I am thoroughly amazed that this poll by the left-leaning Public Policy Institute shows Los Angeles as only the SECOND most hated city in the United States.
I guess one can thank God that there is always Detroit to hate even more!
Here is what is weird about this poll.
People were asked their impressions of 21 cities across the United States. None were in Alaska or Hawai'i. And a lot of cities, IMHO, were left off.
Now for the weird part.
A majority of people had a favorable impression of the following cities:
Boston
Dallas
Houston
Portland, Oregon
New Orleans
Phoenix
San Francisco
The criteria your humble blogger uses is that 45% or more of respondents have a positive view of the cities above.
I have not thoroughly read the 36 pages of stats, but what I think is driving the opinion is if a city is visitor-friendly.
I mean, New Orleans can not be viewed favorably because of its stellar civic leadership. Or how it responds to disasters. Or corruption.
But why the L. A. hate?
I think that there is a certain amount of jealousy because of our seemingly laid-back lifestyle.
But there is something underlying to this and I believe it is a couple of words.
Celebrity and Hollywood.
And let me throw in the perception that everyone is rich and beautiful.
But as a semi-Angeleno, let me tell you why I hate Los Angeles.
Total, incompetent political leadership.
Led by the slimy mayor, Antonio Villar*, and his disastrous two-terms as mayor of Los Angeles. If anyone thinks that he is the Great Hispanic Hope, please take him away. The latest of imbecilic moves by Mr. Villar is basically passing over $100,000,000 of budgetary debt to the next mayor whoever he or she might be.
Now under Mr. Villar, Los Angeles has the politically-correct police chief of the left's dream in Charlie Beck. Chief Beck, he just wants to push for illegal aliens to have California driver's licenses. Yeah, break the law and for Chief Beck, it should be rewarded with a driver's license.
Unfrickingbelievable.
OK, if you are fortunate to partake in public transportation in the Metro Los Angeles area, good luck.
It is really lousy if you need to actually be to work on time. Many days, buses are either late, do not show up or are stacked two to three behind each other.
And if that is not bad enough, Los Angeles is slowly becoming a city of haves and have-nots and very little in between.
Between tony neighborhoods, gentrification gone wild and middle-class denizens leaving Los Angeles in droves, its tax base is going with it. Without a strong middle-class within the city limits, Los Angeles could be in Detroit territory in my lifetime.
As I say, I reside in Pasadena and we are in many ways a mini-L. A. And that is not good.
All that I mention above is afflicting this city as well.
Those of us that live in this area remember a better time. A time I fear is long gone.
And that will eventually lead to Los Angeles being the MOST hated city in the United States!
*-Villar when he was married merged his now ex-wife and his last name to read as Villaraigosa. He ain't married anymore, I sure as hell am not going to refer to him by a phony name as was his marriage
I guess one can thank God that there is always Detroit to hate even more!
Here is what is weird about this poll.
People were asked their impressions of 21 cities across the United States. None were in Alaska or Hawai'i. And a lot of cities, IMHO, were left off.
Now for the weird part.
A majority of people had a favorable impression of the following cities:
Boston
Dallas
Houston
Portland, Oregon
New Orleans
Phoenix
San Francisco
The criteria your humble blogger uses is that 45% or more of respondents have a positive view of the cities above.
I have not thoroughly read the 36 pages of stats, but what I think is driving the opinion is if a city is visitor-friendly.
I mean, New Orleans can not be viewed favorably because of its stellar civic leadership. Or how it responds to disasters. Or corruption.
But why the L. A. hate?
I think that there is a certain amount of jealousy because of our seemingly laid-back lifestyle.
But there is something underlying to this and I believe it is a couple of words.
Celebrity and Hollywood.
And let me throw in the perception that everyone is rich and beautiful.
But as a semi-Angeleno, let me tell you why I hate Los Angeles.
Total, incompetent political leadership.
Led by the slimy mayor, Antonio Villar*, and his disastrous two-terms as mayor of Los Angeles. If anyone thinks that he is the Great Hispanic Hope, please take him away. The latest of imbecilic moves by Mr. Villar is basically passing over $100,000,000 of budgetary debt to the next mayor whoever he or she might be.
Now under Mr. Villar, Los Angeles has the politically-correct police chief of the left's dream in Charlie Beck. Chief Beck, he just wants to push for illegal aliens to have California driver's licenses. Yeah, break the law and for Chief Beck, it should be rewarded with a driver's license.
Unfrickingbelievable.
OK, if you are fortunate to partake in public transportation in the Metro Los Angeles area, good luck.
It is really lousy if you need to actually be to work on time. Many days, buses are either late, do not show up or are stacked two to three behind each other.
And if that is not bad enough, Los Angeles is slowly becoming a city of haves and have-nots and very little in between.
Between tony neighborhoods, gentrification gone wild and middle-class denizens leaving Los Angeles in droves, its tax base is going with it. Without a strong middle-class within the city limits, Los Angeles could be in Detroit territory in my lifetime.
As I say, I reside in Pasadena and we are in many ways a mini-L. A. And that is not good.
All that I mention above is afflicting this city as well.
Those of us that live in this area remember a better time. A time I fear is long gone.
And that will eventually lead to Los Angeles being the MOST hated city in the United States!
*-Villar when he was married merged his now ex-wife and his last name to read as Villaraigosa. He ain't married anymore, I sure as hell am not going to refer to him by a phony name as was his marriage
A Sweep For Mitt And Now Let The Campaign Begin
Since Rick Santorum announced he was ending his presidential campaign last week, the message was hat essentially, it is over in the Republican race.
And Mitt Romney proved that tonight with very huge wins in five states including two big ones.
Mr. Romney won in Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island all the states up for grabs tonight.
Some notes.
Only Rhode Island was a semi-opened primary allowing independents and Republicans to vote. The rest were closed.
Only one of the five states, Pennsylvania, will probably be in play come November. And that is indicated in the number of voters as opposed to the other four states. Pennsylvania had almost 800,000 Republicans participate in the primary. The next state would be the largest of the five, New York and they will be lucky to break 250,000.
Now that Newt Gingrich is vanquished, it is time to hang it up.
What I would love to see is Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Santorum together on the stage with Mr. Romney and offering their whole-hearted endorsement. That would erase any doubts that the key is unity and that the general election campaign can now begin.
Ron Paul, well he is Ron Paul. He will not leave and will force a roll-call vote at the GOP convention in Tampa in August.
I can live with that.
Mr. Romney is zeroing in on the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the failure that is his whole term in office.
Mr. Romney needs to state the obvious and tell us what he will do differently from the Dear Leader, President Obama.
I know a lot of people will rail that Mr. Romney is nothing but Obama-lite.
No he is not where it counts.
Mr. Romney, as I pointed out here, has already talked about merging and eliminating cabinet posts.
He has talked about returning many programs administered by the federal government back to the states.
On foreign policy, it is night and day between these two.
Mr. Romney will not forget that the War Against Islamofascist Terror is nor over. And he will not allow Red Korea to continue developing their nuclear program. Ditto for Iran.
With the primary essentially over, it is time for unity and to set Mr. Romney to victory not only in Tampa in August but across the United States in November.
And Mitt Romney proved that tonight with very huge wins in five states including two big ones.
Mr. Romney won in Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island all the states up for grabs tonight.
Some notes.
Only Rhode Island was a semi-opened primary allowing independents and Republicans to vote. The rest were closed.
Only one of the five states, Pennsylvania, will probably be in play come November. And that is indicated in the number of voters as opposed to the other four states. Pennsylvania had almost 800,000 Republicans participate in the primary. The next state would be the largest of the five, New York and they will be lucky to break 250,000.
Now that Newt Gingrich is vanquished, it is time to hang it up.
What I would love to see is Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Santorum together on the stage with Mr. Romney and offering their whole-hearted endorsement. That would erase any doubts that the key is unity and that the general election campaign can now begin.
Ron Paul, well he is Ron Paul. He will not leave and will force a roll-call vote at the GOP convention in Tampa in August.
I can live with that.
Mr. Romney is zeroing in on the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the failure that is his whole term in office.
Mr. Romney needs to state the obvious and tell us what he will do differently from the Dear Leader, President Obama.
I know a lot of people will rail that Mr. Romney is nothing but Obama-lite.
No he is not where it counts.
Mr. Romney, as I pointed out here, has already talked about merging and eliminating cabinet posts.
He has talked about returning many programs administered by the federal government back to the states.
On foreign policy, it is night and day between these two.
Mr. Romney will not forget that the War Against Islamofascist Terror is nor over. And he will not allow Red Korea to continue developing their nuclear program. Ditto for Iran.
With the primary essentially over, it is time for unity and to set Mr. Romney to victory not only in Tampa in August but across the United States in November.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
What, Gays And Lesbians Can't Be Humiliated On The Kiss-Cam?
One of the relatively new phenomenon in sports stadiums is the use of the Kiss-Cam.
For those unfamiliar, it is where there is time to fill (thanks mostly to television commercials) during a break in live action. In baseball it is usually between innings. In other sports like basketball, football and ice hockey, it is as noted during a break in the action.
It is camera people walking around and zooming in on what appears to be a couple. Usually of the opposite sex. And most of the time, they hardly even realize that there they are on the scoreboard for most of the fans to see. When they do realize, usually it is but a peck on the cheeks or a quick kiss. Some are looking for that camera. And then they do get a little crazy.
Now this pitcher for the Oakland Athletics, Brandon McCarthy, seems to not be happy when the Kiss-Cam is used at the Oakland Coliseum.
According to this on The Puffington Post, Mr. McCarthy is not a fan of the Kiss-Cam when it is used on same-sex couples. Especially male ones.
Mr. McCarthy took his rage about it on Twitter. Here is one of his tweets:
They put two guys on the 'Kiss Cam' tonight. What hilarity!! (by hilarity I mean offensive homophobia). Enough with this stupid trend.
Dude, lighten up already!
To many people it is funny. Straight, gay, lesbian, Black, White, whatever. And yeah, people would get a chuckle if two of the same sex locked lips.
Psst, Brandon. The whole purpose is a) to kill time and b) get some yucks.
Oh, and Brandon, do you even realize the reason why teams resort to such things?
To pay you and your teammates, Ace.
See, because every team televises their games, there is this thing called commercials. Advertisers pay a lot of money to be on said broadcast because a lot of people watch. And they watch the commercials. And because of that, the timeless sport of baseball gets a little longer because whenever there is any break in the action, there is a commercial.
But I guess this stellar star, with a lifetime record of 29-33, thinks that he should dictate the entertainment when there is a stoppage of play and there is what is called unofficially a commercial time out.
Hey, Brandon, maybe you do not like the bloopers that they show of baseball players. You know, all the mistakes, dropped balls, bad pitches, etc. Maybe that is humiliating to you.
Too bad, isn't it.
But let's get back to the tweets of Mr. McCarthy.
The second one deals with the humiliation of gay males:
so what? I know that isn't the intention, but the implication is that two guys kissing is funny. That's offensive to gay males.
Again, dude, whenever a camera pops up and they encourage people to kiss, it can be very funny. If gay males are that offended by getting the yucks, maybe they should just do what other people do. Ignore the camera. Many are totally oblivious and do not participate.
And let me point out that almost all humor is at the expense of someone and or their misfortune.
But, here is the capper of the wisdom of Mr. McCarthy:
so that's why they should stop doing it. Plus, it's cheap shitty comedy so it sucks on that level as well.
Yeah, it is cheap comedy. But it gets the laughs. Kind of like watching your cohorts and their bloopers. Although the prices that we have to pay to see the likes of you, it is not all that cheap.
I am a pretty purist type when it comes to sports and especially baseball.
I loath the so-called Commissioner of Major League Baseball, Bud Selig. He is doing all he can to ruin the game. This trying to switch teams from one league to another. Making the regular season in baseball as meaningless as in the three other major league sports. Too many teams. Never starting a World Series game at a reasonable hour for ALL fans. The list goes on.
I hate the designated hitter. Only the National League has held out and does not use it. Good for them!
I do not like inter league play. Again, part of that reason is what I wrote above.
But as long as sports encourages a family-friendly atmosphere, and baseball does, there will be things like the Kiss-Cam.
And really, why should gays and lesbians not be humiliated by it like the rest of us?
For those unfamiliar, it is where there is time to fill (thanks mostly to television commercials) during a break in live action. In baseball it is usually between innings. In other sports like basketball, football and ice hockey, it is as noted during a break in the action.
It is camera people walking around and zooming in on what appears to be a couple. Usually of the opposite sex. And most of the time, they hardly even realize that there they are on the scoreboard for most of the fans to see. When they do realize, usually it is but a peck on the cheeks or a quick kiss. Some are looking for that camera. And then they do get a little crazy.
Now this pitcher for the Oakland Athletics, Brandon McCarthy, seems to not be happy when the Kiss-Cam is used at the Oakland Coliseum.
According to this on The Puffington Post, Mr. McCarthy is not a fan of the Kiss-Cam when it is used on same-sex couples. Especially male ones.
Mr. McCarthy took his rage about it on Twitter. Here is one of his tweets:
They put two guys on the 'Kiss Cam' tonight. What hilarity!! (by hilarity I mean offensive homophobia). Enough with this stupid trend.
Dude, lighten up already!
To many people it is funny. Straight, gay, lesbian, Black, White, whatever. And yeah, people would get a chuckle if two of the same sex locked lips.
Psst, Brandon. The whole purpose is a) to kill time and b) get some yucks.
Oh, and Brandon, do you even realize the reason why teams resort to such things?
To pay you and your teammates, Ace.
See, because every team televises their games, there is this thing called commercials. Advertisers pay a lot of money to be on said broadcast because a lot of people watch. And they watch the commercials. And because of that, the timeless sport of baseball gets a little longer because whenever there is any break in the action, there is a commercial.
But I guess this stellar star, with a lifetime record of 29-33, thinks that he should dictate the entertainment when there is a stoppage of play and there is what is called unofficially a commercial time out.
Hey, Brandon, maybe you do not like the bloopers that they show of baseball players. You know, all the mistakes, dropped balls, bad pitches, etc. Maybe that is humiliating to you.
Too bad, isn't it.
But let's get back to the tweets of Mr. McCarthy.
The second one deals with the humiliation of gay males:
so what? I know that isn't the intention, but the implication is that two guys kissing is funny. That's offensive to gay males.
Again, dude, whenever a camera pops up and they encourage people to kiss, it can be very funny. If gay males are that offended by getting the yucks, maybe they should just do what other people do. Ignore the camera. Many are totally oblivious and do not participate.
And let me point out that almost all humor is at the expense of someone and or their misfortune.
But, here is the capper of the wisdom of Mr. McCarthy:
so that's why they should stop doing it. Plus, it's cheap shitty comedy so it sucks on that level as well.
Yeah, it is cheap comedy. But it gets the laughs. Kind of like watching your cohorts and their bloopers. Although the prices that we have to pay to see the likes of you, it is not all that cheap.
I am a pretty purist type when it comes to sports and especially baseball.
I loath the so-called Commissioner of Major League Baseball, Bud Selig. He is doing all he can to ruin the game. This trying to switch teams from one league to another. Making the regular season in baseball as meaningless as in the three other major league sports. Too many teams. Never starting a World Series game at a reasonable hour for ALL fans. The list goes on.
I hate the designated hitter. Only the National League has held out and does not use it. Good for them!
I do not like inter league play. Again, part of that reason is what I wrote above.
But as long as sports encourages a family-friendly atmosphere, and baseball does, there will be things like the Kiss-Cam.
And really, why should gays and lesbians not be humiliated by it like the rest of us?
The Perils Of Being A New Puppy Owner-Again!
For those who are not regular readers of this blog-and really you should be!-below is the newest member of the Right View From The Left Coast family, Cashew.
He is also known as Master Cashew for he is still a puppy.
Sure, Cashew did just turn one year old last week. But he is still considered a pup until about a year and a half to two years old.
And yes, he is almost ready to graduate puppy school.
But he, and your humble blogger have a wee bit more to learn about each other.
For instance, just yesterday morning, literally under my nose, Master Cashew decided, I guess, he was hungry.
But he did not go for some doggie gruel. No, not at all.
Instead, Master Cashew decided to enter The Bunker and proceed to steal a slipper. And this is the end result of that.
I suppose that it could be a new style. One opened-toe slipper and one closed. Hell, from what I see these days, I guess it would not be all that bad. But seriously? Why? I mean, I thought I had this away from Master C. HA! Where there is a nose and something to chew on, there is Master C!
Now I do have a newer pair of slippers and these were a back up. But I kind of liked them. Had them for years. Well, this one I do not totally blame myself. I had this away and he did have to make an effort to find it.
But the hat that I am about to show you, well I take blame for and am more upset by that.
Above is your humble blogger wearing a Hurley hat. It had become one of my favorites. Wore it all the time.
Until last week.
That is when I made a now fatal mistake.
I put my hat on the end of my bed because I was doing something else. I was going to put it on my hat rack in my closet.
I went to do what I had to do. I was still doing it and there was just something nagging at me. That Master C was too quiet and in the RVFTLC bedroom. And not on the bed. But laying on our other dog, Scout the Wonder Dog's bed. And in my horror, with my Hurley hat in his mouth. If he could he would have been smiling at that moment. Yet I was ready to explode at the poor Little Guy. But then I realized that I left it where I should not have. It was my own fault.
This is a better photo of my hat's demise.
When you get a hold of a hat that you like, you want to wear it all the time. And that is what I found with this hat. Mrs. RVFTLC was not a huge fan. Said that it was not my color. But I liked it and that is what counted.
Well, Master Cashew thought enough of my hat that it became a snack of sorts.
These are a couple of examples of what it is like having a puppy around here. We have not had a pup around for 15 years when we got Scout the Wonder Dog.
And yet this is bringing back memories-many not all that good-of when Scout was a puppy. She was a terror even worse than Master Cashew. She barked at everything! She ate everything in sight! She ate the mail that came in our home in a door mail slot. In fact, she ate her big human brother's college graduation certificate. Yes, he was able to get a new one.
But I was 32 back then. I had somewhat better patience than I do now. And yet I did not scream bloody murder at Master C when he did what he did in the two examples I gave in this post.
Could it be that I have developed some patience that I did not think I had? Or do I just accept defeat better? I do not know.
But I love our Little Guy. He has brought a lot of happiness to the RVFTLC abode. And made Mrs. RVFTLC and I feel a little younger, And even Scout the Wonder Dog seems to have a little extra kick in her step.
Oh, one other thing.
Master C is doing quite well in puppy school. He knows the basic commands and we are diligent in using them as much as we can. He even did a trick before we even knew it was. He does the Commando Crawl. And he needed no training to do it!
So, as Master Cashew is about to graduate puppy school, his human daddy has to learn to put things away so a certain Little Guy does not make it a meal.
Sure, Cashew did just turn one year old last week. But he is still considered a pup until about a year and a half to two years old.
And yes, he is almost ready to graduate puppy school.
But he, and your humble blogger have a wee bit more to learn about each other.
For instance, just yesterday morning, literally under my nose, Master Cashew decided, I guess, he was hungry.
But he did not go for some doggie gruel. No, not at all.
Instead, Master Cashew decided to enter The Bunker and proceed to steal a slipper. And this is the end result of that.
Now I do have a newer pair of slippers and these were a back up. But I kind of liked them. Had them for years. Well, this one I do not totally blame myself. I had this away and he did have to make an effort to find it.
But the hat that I am about to show you, well I take blame for and am more upset by that.
Until last week.
That is when I made a now fatal mistake.
I put my hat on the end of my bed because I was doing something else. I was going to put it on my hat rack in my closet.
I went to do what I had to do. I was still doing it and there was just something nagging at me. That Master C was too quiet and in the RVFTLC bedroom. And not on the bed. But laying on our other dog, Scout the Wonder Dog's bed. And in my horror, with my Hurley hat in his mouth. If he could he would have been smiling at that moment. Yet I was ready to explode at the poor Little Guy. But then I realized that I left it where I should not have. It was my own fault.
This is a better photo of my hat's demise.
Well, Master Cashew thought enough of my hat that it became a snack of sorts.
These are a couple of examples of what it is like having a puppy around here. We have not had a pup around for 15 years when we got Scout the Wonder Dog.
And yet this is bringing back memories-many not all that good-of when Scout was a puppy. She was a terror even worse than Master Cashew. She barked at everything! She ate everything in sight! She ate the mail that came in our home in a door mail slot. In fact, she ate her big human brother's college graduation certificate. Yes, he was able to get a new one.
But I was 32 back then. I had somewhat better patience than I do now. And yet I did not scream bloody murder at Master C when he did what he did in the two examples I gave in this post.
Could it be that I have developed some patience that I did not think I had? Or do I just accept defeat better? I do not know.
But I love our Little Guy. He has brought a lot of happiness to the RVFTLC abode. And made Mrs. RVFTLC and I feel a little younger, And even Scout the Wonder Dog seems to have a little extra kick in her step.
Oh, one other thing.
Master C is doing quite well in puppy school. He knows the basic commands and we are diligent in using them as much as we can. He even did a trick before we even knew it was. He does the Commando Crawl. And he needed no training to do it!
So, as Master Cashew is about to graduate puppy school, his human daddy has to learn to put things away so a certain Little Guy does not make it a meal.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
The 4/20 Stoner's Christmas 2012 Edition
Last year I wrote about 4/20 and the hidden meaning behind the term.
I gave it the title of the Stoner's Christmas.
Essentially it is the day that advocates to legalize marijuana, basically, spark it up to draw awareness to their cause.
Or in other words, another day of getting stoned only with meaning,.
Instead of writing a whole new piece about the Stoner's Christmas, I will just let you read last year's epic piece.
Fundamentally, the facts are the same.
The Devil's Weed is not completely legal anywhere in the United States.
The so-called "medical marijuana" cottage industry in California is facing, surprise, a backlash from regular folks that don't like seeing "dispensaries" pop up in their neighborhoods and schools.
Many of the advocates still want to legalize because they see a huge tax bonanza. In other words, depending on addicts to feed government addicts. Yeah, that will work really good.
I still favor some decriminalization, but no legalization because it is simply another way the government is looking for cash.
In any case, enjoy the following:
4/20, The Stoner's Christmas
I gave it the title of the Stoner's Christmas.
Essentially it is the day that advocates to legalize marijuana, basically, spark it up to draw awareness to their cause.
Or in other words, another day of getting stoned only with meaning,.
Instead of writing a whole new piece about the Stoner's Christmas, I will just let you read last year's epic piece.
Fundamentally, the facts are the same.
The Devil's Weed is not completely legal anywhere in the United States.
The so-called "medical marijuana" cottage industry in California is facing, surprise, a backlash from regular folks that don't like seeing "dispensaries" pop up in their neighborhoods and schools.
Many of the advocates still want to legalize because they see a huge tax bonanza. In other words, depending on addicts to feed government addicts. Yeah, that will work really good.
I still favor some decriminalization, but no legalization because it is simply another way the government is looking for cash.
In any case, enjoy the following:
4/20, The Stoner's Christmas
Ahh, today is April 20. In the world of the marijuana
smoker, it is known as 4/20. A day to
celebrate sparking it up.
It is the day that the stoner world gathers to celebrate the joys of the ganja.
In and of itself, I can care less about what adults do in regards to the consumption of Mary Jane. I do worry about the kiddies getting it and getting hooked. But adults, I do not think if one consumes at home and does nothing like get behind the wheel of a car or anything like that we should bother them.
What does bother me about the legalization crowd is the justification for doing so.
Most prominent is that is will be regulated. And taxed.
It is the fundamental reason I can not support legalizing the ganja.
I do think that we can decriminalize personal use as described above. But legalization for the purposes of another government revenue stream, no thanks.
Any attempt to justify the encroachment of big government, and that is what most advocates do not realize they are doing, is a bad thing.
But here is some amusing things our politicians have said and or maybe not about the Devil's weed.
It is something that we do, as a society, need to deal with. We have to be honest about the fact that for many, marijuana is a gateway drug. That means for many they graduate to stronger and yes dangerous drugs. Much worse than marijuana and alcohol. The dull high of marijuana, the mind-numbing, is OK for some of these people for a while. But they want something more. And stronger. Some go on to cocaine. Others to meth. Some to heroin. Really bad stuff.
Yes, many who toke it up are just wanting to "calm down" and do not even consume adult beverages.
But the other dishonesty from the legalize it now crowd is that marijuana is not a gateway for many. Not all, but enough to not completely legalize the wicked weed.
I do not think that our prisons need to be overloaded with people that consume marijuana for themselves, in the privacy of their own home. And do not go out and drive or work under the influence. But legalizing it will not lead to the outcome the advocates claim. Regulating and taxing marijuana will lead back to the current situation that we have with tobacco.
In the mean time, stoners of the world, unite and have a good time today. Just don't bother me.
It is the day that the stoner world gathers to celebrate the joys of the ganja.
In and of itself, I can care less about what adults do in regards to the consumption of Mary Jane. I do worry about the kiddies getting it and getting hooked. But adults, I do not think if one consumes at home and does nothing like get behind the wheel of a car or anything like that we should bother them.
What does bother me about the legalization crowd is the justification for doing so.
Most prominent is that is will be regulated. And taxed.
It is the fundamental reason I can not support legalizing the ganja.
I do think that we can decriminalize personal use as described above. But legalization for the purposes of another government revenue stream, no thanks.
Any attempt to justify the encroachment of big government, and that is what most advocates do not realize they are doing, is a bad thing.
But here is some amusing things our politicians have said and or maybe not about the Devil's weed.
It is something that we do, as a society, need to deal with. We have to be honest about the fact that for many, marijuana is a gateway drug. That means for many they graduate to stronger and yes dangerous drugs. Much worse than marijuana and alcohol. The dull high of marijuana, the mind-numbing, is OK for some of these people for a while. But they want something more. And stronger. Some go on to cocaine. Others to meth. Some to heroin. Really bad stuff.
Yes, many who toke it up are just wanting to "calm down" and do not even consume adult beverages.
But the other dishonesty from the legalize it now crowd is that marijuana is not a gateway for many. Not all, but enough to not completely legalize the wicked weed.
I do not think that our prisons need to be overloaded with people that consume marijuana for themselves, in the privacy of their own home. And do not go out and drive or work under the influence. But legalizing it will not lead to the outcome the advocates claim. Regulating and taxing marijuana will lead back to the current situation that we have with tobacco.
In the mean time, stoners of the world, unite and have a good time today. Just don't bother me.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Is This Presidential Election Going To The Dogs?
It is amazing that as the United States appears to be at a tipping point economically, socially and our standing as the world's last superpower, this presidential election is becoming one about. . .dogs.
It started when Team Dear Leader, President Obama continued to attack Mitt Romney over an event that happened 29 years ago.
That event is Seamusgate as it is now being called.
That was when the family Romney took a driving trip from Belmont, Massachusetts to a family cottage in the Canadian province of Ontario.
The drive was 12 hours.
The family at this point was full. Mr. Romney, wife Ann and all five of the boys for a total of seven people.
But there is the family dog, Seamus the Irish Setter.
And the family car was a Chevy Caprice station wagon.
Below is a photo of Seamus. Pretty big dog, eh?!
And below that is what the Chevy Caprice station wagon looked like in 1983.
OK, so even though it is a small photo of the car, it barely had room for the people.
So, what to do about Seamus if he is going to join the family?
Easy.
Have a kennel, put it on top of the car and voila! Seamus can join the family.
Well, if you read the link, it did not go all that well.
Seamus, to be kind, got car sick and beautiful stream of diarrhea streamed from the roof down the car windows.
Now, it probably was not the best thing in retrospect to do. But hey, the family all wanted to be on vacation together.
And Seamus, he was family.
Needless to say, the animal "rights" crowd went ballistic over this tale.
And Team Dear Leader, President Obama, took advantage of this situation.
Top political operative David Axelrod tweeted a photo of the Dear Leader, President Obama, with the First Dog, Bo, in the presidential limo with the Dear Leader, President Obama.
The comment?
"How loving owners transport their dogs."
Oops! Team Obama bad!
Too bad that they forgot a little anecdote in the pre-presidential tome written by then Barack Obama, "Dreams From My Father".
Thanks to the doggedly intrepid work of the Daily Caller's Jim Treacher, we have this direct from the best-selling book:
“With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy). Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.”
YIKES!
It appears that young Barack was eating his way through the animal kingdom while in Indonesia.
Snake, check.
Grasshopper, check.
D o g, check!
And at one point, young Master Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, even promised tiger meat.
I wonder if Lolo knew Charlie Sheen at any point?!
So, our Dear Leader, President Obama, is. . a. . .dog eater!
In the young gals modern vernacular, EEEEEUUUUUWWWWW!!!!!
Now Team Obama is fighting back by suggesting that Team Romney is picking on a then-10-year-old Obama who was in a foreign land and surely under some kind of pressure to adapt to his new family.
OK, I think that by 10 years old, even in a foreign land and knowing that dogs, well they are more man's best friend rather than whats for dinner.
Young Master Obama could have simply and politely declined the delicacy.
But he did not. And he wrote it in his own words.
Now we do not have a photo as to what kind of dog then Master Obama ate. But it kind of makes this photo a little scary*.
Once again.
EEEEEUUUUUWWWWW!!!!!
Now there is a lot to make fun about for both dudes.
One problem is that both did what they did when they were younger and less unacceptable as it is now.
I remember many times riding in the back of an open pickup truck as a kid. I'm still here. And ir sure was not unusual to see dogs doing the same thing then.
As far as eating dog, in many lands it was and still is a delicacy as noted.
So in a way, yeah, I am defending both for doing what was OK seemingly now way back when.
Oh but that does not mean we can not have a little fun with this.
While we are having fun with Doggate, we must remember this.
The upcoming election is about very serious issues from the economy to whether or not the United States will continue to even be a superpower.
Because if we get it wrong, this nation as we know it will go to the dogs.
So, I will vote for the dude that put the dog on top of the car rather than the roof of his mouth!
*photo from Ace of Spades.
It started when Team Dear Leader, President Obama continued to attack Mitt Romney over an event that happened 29 years ago.
That event is Seamusgate as it is now being called.
That was when the family Romney took a driving trip from Belmont, Massachusetts to a family cottage in the Canadian province of Ontario.
The drive was 12 hours.
The family at this point was full. Mr. Romney, wife Ann and all five of the boys for a total of seven people.
But there is the family dog, Seamus the Irish Setter.
And the family car was a Chevy Caprice station wagon.
Below is a photo of Seamus. Pretty big dog, eh?!
And below that is what the Chevy Caprice station wagon looked like in 1983.
So, what to do about Seamus if he is going to join the family?
Easy.
Have a kennel, put it on top of the car and voila! Seamus can join the family.
Well, if you read the link, it did not go all that well.
Seamus, to be kind, got car sick and beautiful stream of diarrhea streamed from the roof down the car windows.
Now, it probably was not the best thing in retrospect to do. But hey, the family all wanted to be on vacation together.
And Seamus, he was family.
Needless to say, the animal "rights" crowd went ballistic over this tale.
And Team Dear Leader, President Obama, took advantage of this situation.
Top political operative David Axelrod tweeted a photo of the Dear Leader, President Obama, with the First Dog, Bo, in the presidential limo with the Dear Leader, President Obama.
The comment?
"How loving owners transport their dogs."
Oops! Team Obama bad!
Too bad that they forgot a little anecdote in the pre-presidential tome written by then Barack Obama, "Dreams From My Father".
Thanks to the doggedly intrepid work of the Daily Caller's Jim Treacher, we have this direct from the best-selling book:
“With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy). Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.”
YIKES!
It appears that young Barack was eating his way through the animal kingdom while in Indonesia.
Snake, check.
Grasshopper, check.
D o g, check!
And at one point, young Master Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, even promised tiger meat.
I wonder if Lolo knew Charlie Sheen at any point?!
So, our Dear Leader, President Obama, is. . a. . .dog eater!
In the young gals modern vernacular, EEEEEUUUUUWWWWW!!!!!
Now Team Obama is fighting back by suggesting that Team Romney is picking on a then-10-year-old Obama who was in a foreign land and surely under some kind of pressure to adapt to his new family.
OK, I think that by 10 years old, even in a foreign land and knowing that dogs, well they are more man's best friend rather than whats for dinner.
Young Master Obama could have simply and politely declined the delicacy.
But he did not. And he wrote it in his own words.
Now we do not have a photo as to what kind of dog then Master Obama ate. But it kind of makes this photo a little scary*.
EEEEEUUUUUWWWWW!!!!!
Now there is a lot to make fun about for both dudes.
One problem is that both did what they did when they were younger and less unacceptable as it is now.
I remember many times riding in the back of an open pickup truck as a kid. I'm still here. And ir sure was not unusual to see dogs doing the same thing then.
As far as eating dog, in many lands it was and still is a delicacy as noted.
So in a way, yeah, I am defending both for doing what was OK seemingly now way back when.
Oh but that does not mean we can not have a little fun with this.
While we are having fun with Doggate, we must remember this.
The upcoming election is about very serious issues from the economy to whether or not the United States will continue to even be a superpower.
Because if we get it wrong, this nation as we know it will go to the dogs.
So, I will vote for the dude that put the dog on top of the car rather than the roof of his mouth!
*photo from Ace of Spades.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Is Romney Right About The Mainstream Media?
Well, I think that there is some truth to what Mr. Romney is saying.
No question that the Obamawhore/Leftywhore (one in the same) are going to ramp up every negative that they can find or, frankly make up about Mr. Romney.
There is a reason that one Hilary Rosen decided to in a most accusatory tone, assail Ann Romney, Mr. Romney's wife, for not working a day in her life. Oh sure, Miss Rosen's defenders tried to add to the remarks that what she meant is that Mrs. Romney has never held a job outside of the home.
Hey, then Miss Rosen should have been saying that all the way through.
Raising a family of five boys may not be paid work outside of the home, but it is real work nonetheless.
Note that some have begun to ask the "Mormon" questions about Mr. Romney.
Too bad same "journalists" never seem to ask Democrat Mormon, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev) and the highest ranking elected Mormon in the United States any questions about Mormonism. And what they believe or don't believe.
Note that any failure at the time Mr. Romney was with Bain Capital will be front and center.
What the Mainstream Media will tell us is that they are just reporting and vetting the Republican nominee.
Too bad they did an epic fail when it came to some dude named Obama.
Talk about Teflon.
But Mr. Romney need not complain much. He just needs to state the obvious and move on. He knows that the Mainstream, Obamawhore/Leftywhore (once again, all in one and all the same) will come at him and hard.
Mr. Romney needs to create the narrative. He needs to focus not on the lack of real journalism and vetting of all serious presidential candidates, no matter what party. He needs to point out the failures of the Obama administration. The economy is a shambles. Unemployment is over eight percent. Deficits are the worst ever. Same with our national debt. All are unsustainable for an industrialized nation that the United States is.
But it is important for us to make note of the media and their one-sided vetting of Mitt Romney.
Mr. Romney is right. There is is and will be a vast left-wing conspiracy. And it is being led by the Mainstream Media.
Romney Talks Real Budget Cuts. . .YESSSSS!
Oooh! The Obamawhore/Leftywore media (one in the same) are going crazy because the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, is actually talking. . .wait for it. . .real budget cuts!
And to that I write a hearty YESSSSS!
It is about time.
According to the linked article, Mr Romney is seriously considering eliminating, yes eliminating, the Department of Housing and Urban Development. And treaded into territory that, while not complete, would cut or consolidate the dreaded Department of Education.
HUD, as the Department of Housing and Urban Development is known, has a current budget of $43,000,000,000. And the ED has a current budget of $71,000,000,000.
Combined that is $114,000,000,000 of an over $3,000,000,000,000 federal budget.
And the combined workforce of each department is 17,000.
That may not seem like much to budget hawks. And it clearly is not. But the fact that Mr. Romney is actually considering such things shows a seriousness not seen since Ronald Reagan was president of actually cutting the size and yes scope of the federal government.
One very serious difference between Mr. Reagan during the 1980s and Mr. Romney of the 2010s is this.
While Mr. Reagan was president, congress was very Democrat-dominated. Mr. Reagan never had more than 192 Republicans in the House of Representatives. And while the senate was Republican, the RINO quotient was much stronger than it is today.
If Mr. Romney is the GOP nominee and he does win election in November, the chances are that he will have a Republican congress. At the very least the House should be Republican. A worse-case scenario in the senate is a 50-50 partisan split. And a Republican vice-president, well that makes the senate Republican.
So while Mr. Romney has given a clue as to how he would cut the budget, this is what I think is very interesting from the linked article:
According to NBC, Romney told the fundraiser guests that he would combine many departments in Washington, adding: "Some eliminate, but I'm probably not going to lay out just exactly which ones are going to go. Things like Housing and Urban Development, which my dad was head of, that might not be around later. But I'm not going to actually go through these one by one. What I can tell you is, we've got far too many bureaucrats. I will send a lot of what happens in Washington back to the states."
What Mr. Romney is suggesting is what happens in the private sector all the time. When the money is not there, parts of any company have to be consolidated and or eliminated. It is not always great, but it is a reality.
And another reality is that yes, there are too many bureaucrats. Not just in Washington. But every state capital. Every county and many, many cities.
In another nod to Mr. Reagan, Mr. Romney suggests that a lot of what is done out of Washington will be sent back to the states.
Which leads to the ED.
The ED was created under former President Jimmah Carter in 1979. What the link will not tell you is that it was a huge payoff to the teacher unions as they sought to make education policy more uniform across the United States. Thus the power of states, counties, cities and most importantly local school boards was usurped.
Those of us that believe the federal government is too big and way too involved in local education policy have long sought to eliminate the ED. As well as another Carter-era boondoggle, the Department of Energy.
Of course the left will tell you that it is necessary to have a Washington bureaucracy, especially in education, because of the failure of education in the United States. Never mind that the failure has dramatically increased since the formation of the ED.
The fact that Mr. Romney broaches this subject is a sign that he is serious about sending some departments back to the states.
When he ran for the senate in 1994, Mr. Romney also suggested that he would seek to eliminate the ED, of course it was used to make him out to be anti-education.
No, Mr. Romney was right then and would be right now. Education is best handled when at all possible at the most local level.
Of course as noted this will clearly freak-out Team Obama and their allies.
But I believe that the American people have come to realize that the federal government is too big, too unyielding and in many ways most ineffective in most of what they touch.
That is what the election in November is going to be about.
It is important that Mr. Romney not let the Obamawhore/Leftywhore media (again, one and the same) lead the narrative. Mr. Romney needs to say it again, again, again and again.
The federal government is too big, out of control and yes, out of touch.
That states need to be taking up the slack, if they choose of things that they have long depended on Washington to fund if not operate.
By telling people that he will actually seriously make budget cuts, department consolidations and total elimination, Mitt Romney is telling the truth. And Team Obama. They will lie and lie often.
And to that I write a hearty YESSSSS!
It is about time.
According to the linked article, Mr Romney is seriously considering eliminating, yes eliminating, the Department of Housing and Urban Development. And treaded into territory that, while not complete, would cut or consolidate the dreaded Department of Education.
HUD, as the Department of Housing and Urban Development is known, has a current budget of $43,000,000,000. And the ED has a current budget of $71,000,000,000.
Combined that is $114,000,000,000 of an over $3,000,000,000,000 federal budget.
And the combined workforce of each department is 17,000.
That may not seem like much to budget hawks. And it clearly is not. But the fact that Mr. Romney is actually considering such things shows a seriousness not seen since Ronald Reagan was president of actually cutting the size and yes scope of the federal government.
One very serious difference between Mr. Reagan during the 1980s and Mr. Romney of the 2010s is this.
While Mr. Reagan was president, congress was very Democrat-dominated. Mr. Reagan never had more than 192 Republicans in the House of Representatives. And while the senate was Republican, the RINO quotient was much stronger than it is today.
If Mr. Romney is the GOP nominee and he does win election in November, the chances are that he will have a Republican congress. At the very least the House should be Republican. A worse-case scenario in the senate is a 50-50 partisan split. And a Republican vice-president, well that makes the senate Republican.
So while Mr. Romney has given a clue as to how he would cut the budget, this is what I think is very interesting from the linked article:
According to NBC, Romney told the fundraiser guests that he would combine many departments in Washington, adding: "Some eliminate, but I'm probably not going to lay out just exactly which ones are going to go. Things like Housing and Urban Development, which my dad was head of, that might not be around later. But I'm not going to actually go through these one by one. What I can tell you is, we've got far too many bureaucrats. I will send a lot of what happens in Washington back to the states."
What Mr. Romney is suggesting is what happens in the private sector all the time. When the money is not there, parts of any company have to be consolidated and or eliminated. It is not always great, but it is a reality.
And another reality is that yes, there are too many bureaucrats. Not just in Washington. But every state capital. Every county and many, many cities.
In another nod to Mr. Reagan, Mr. Romney suggests that a lot of what is done out of Washington will be sent back to the states.
Which leads to the ED.
The ED was created under former President Jimmah Carter in 1979. What the link will not tell you is that it was a huge payoff to the teacher unions as they sought to make education policy more uniform across the United States. Thus the power of states, counties, cities and most importantly local school boards was usurped.
Those of us that believe the federal government is too big and way too involved in local education policy have long sought to eliminate the ED. As well as another Carter-era boondoggle, the Department of Energy.
Of course the left will tell you that it is necessary to have a Washington bureaucracy, especially in education, because of the failure of education in the United States. Never mind that the failure has dramatically increased since the formation of the ED.
The fact that Mr. Romney broaches this subject is a sign that he is serious about sending some departments back to the states.
When he ran for the senate in 1994, Mr. Romney also suggested that he would seek to eliminate the ED, of course it was used to make him out to be anti-education.
No, Mr. Romney was right then and would be right now. Education is best handled when at all possible at the most local level.
Of course as noted this will clearly freak-out Team Obama and their allies.
But I believe that the American people have come to realize that the federal government is too big, too unyielding and in many ways most ineffective in most of what they touch.
That is what the election in November is going to be about.
It is important that Mr. Romney not let the Obamawhore/Leftywhore media (again, one and the same) lead the narrative. Mr. Romney needs to say it again, again, again and again.
The federal government is too big, out of control and yes, out of touch.
That states need to be taking up the slack, if they choose of things that they have long depended on Washington to fund if not operate.
By telling people that he will actually seriously make budget cuts, department consolidations and total elimination, Mitt Romney is telling the truth. And Team Obama. They will lie and lie often.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Ahh, If Only People Had The Make Up Of This Dog
I was very moved by this story about two dogs and how one did not leave the other's side even though he was hit by a car and killed.
Now obviously these two dogs somehow had some kind of relationship. Apparently, they were on the street for a time and developed some kind of bond.
I can not think of any other reason why the black Labrador Retriever would have been hovering and protecting the lifeless body of her friend.
But it was a driver passing by that realized something was not right.
The driver stopped and had cones that he put around the two dogs to protect the one that was alive and protecting the dead dog.
Then the authorities took the black Lab to the nearby Baldwin Park animal shelter where the unidentified dog was given the rightful name of Grace.
Now I know that dogs do not have the same cognition that humans do. Nor do they have the same exact emotions we humans have.
But it is becoming clear that they do know when things are amiss. And it is clear that Grace knew that something bad had happened to her new-found friend. And her natural and possible maternal instinct was to protect her friend. Not completely sure what happened.
Studies have been done in which households with two dogs and one dies show that the still-living dog is looking for their doggie brother or sister. And that they are emotionally detached from the family for a time as they miss their companion.
While it is now known how long Grace or her friend were on the street, it was long enough that Grace was protecting her friend.
I can only think of what a human being would do in such a situation.
So many times, we (and I thoroughly include myself in this) just do not want to get involved. it would be too much trouble. What about the family? What if I have to go to court? A lot of what ifs.
Grace did not have to think and or worry about such things. All she did was make sure that her friend was protected and not quite knowing what was wrong.
While Grace's friend went over the Rainbow Bridge, her story has a happy ending.
It appears that Grace is really Maggie and she has a family.
The family had been looking for Maggie for several days and went to the shelter just as the Good Samaritan was going to adopt her. And that was after many people called the shelter to try to adopt Maggie.
Well, Grace/Maggie is a wonderful story of loyalty that we humans can and should take a lesson from.
Now obviously these two dogs somehow had some kind of relationship. Apparently, they were on the street for a time and developed some kind of bond.
I can not think of any other reason why the black Labrador Retriever would have been hovering and protecting the lifeless body of her friend.
The driver stopped and had cones that he put around the two dogs to protect the one that was alive and protecting the dead dog.
Then the authorities took the black Lab to the nearby Baldwin Park animal shelter where the unidentified dog was given the rightful name of Grace.
Now I know that dogs do not have the same cognition that humans do. Nor do they have the same exact emotions we humans have.
But it is becoming clear that they do know when things are amiss. And it is clear that Grace knew that something bad had happened to her new-found friend. And her natural and possible maternal instinct was to protect her friend. Not completely sure what happened.
Studies have been done in which households with two dogs and one dies show that the still-living dog is looking for their doggie brother or sister. And that they are emotionally detached from the family for a time as they miss their companion.
While it is now known how long Grace or her friend were on the street, it was long enough that Grace was protecting her friend.
I can only think of what a human being would do in such a situation.
So many times, we (and I thoroughly include myself in this) just do not want to get involved. it would be too much trouble. What about the family? What if I have to go to court? A lot of what ifs.
Grace did not have to think and or worry about such things. All she did was make sure that her friend was protected and not quite knowing what was wrong.
While Grace's friend went over the Rainbow Bridge, her story has a happy ending.
It appears that Grace is really Maggie and she has a family.
The family had been looking for Maggie for several days and went to the shelter just as the Good Samaritan was going to adopt her. And that was after many people called the shelter to try to adopt Maggie.
Well, Grace/Maggie is a wonderful story of loyalty that we humans can and should take a lesson from.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Should Ozzie Guillen Be Punished For Being An Idiot?
The new manager of the Miami, nee Florida, Marlins, Ozzie Guillen, stepped into it big time as he heaped praise on the Red Cuba former dictator, Fidel Castro in a recent interview with Time magazine.
Unfortunately, the cheapskates at Time won't let you read the whole article unless you are a subscriber.
But here is the link anyway.
The point is that Mr. Guillen is no stranger to controversy.
And once one reads the kind of gloss-over at Wikipedia, it kind of scratches the surface.
Mr. Guillen is a native of Venezuela. And in 2005, after as manager he led the Chicago White Sox to win the World Series, Mr. Guillen supposedly shouted "Viva Chavez!" in reference to the pseudo-dictator of his homeland, Hugo Chavez. In that situation, he later claimed that he does not support Mr. Chavez. And Mr. Guillen did not attend the celebration for the team's win at the White House. Hmm, could that be because of the president at that time? One George W. Bush?
Ahh, but what really got people's panties in a bunch was Mr. Guillen referring to a Chicago Sun-Times sports columnist, Jay Marrioti as a "fag".
Once one gets the gay and lesbian community in an uproar, well it is surprising that he remained with the White Sox after that.
But in the Political Correct world, they were in a pickle.
Dump the Venezuelan, Hispanic (or is that White-Hispanic?!) manager to please the homosexuals or keep Mr. Guillen so as to not offend the Venezuelan, Hispanic community.
Mr. Guillen stayed.
So, Mr. Guillen is one that likes to stir the pot.
But here is where the plain stupid enters in the whole controversy.
In case Mr. Guillen did not know, the team he is now manager of, the Miami Marlins, is in the largest Cuban city outside of Cuba. Oh, and the new baseball stadium, Marlins Park, sits right adjacent to. . .Little Havana!
So Mr. Guillen, who has already at one time seemingly praised Hugo Chavez, decided to show Fidel Castro some love. You know, how amazing it is that he stayed in power since 1959. How cool it is that Castro survived the Bay of Pigs and other attempts to bring him down.
OK, could the dude have just started a fire and burned the new baseball stadium?
He might as well have.
Because if one thing trumps angry homosexuals and potentially angry Venezuelan-Americans it is really angry Cuban-Americans.
Imagine that this comment drew a five-game suspension. Not from Major League baseball. But from the Marlins Management.
The Marlins slapped the unusual suspension because of the avalanche of bad publicity in the local Cuban-American community.
But here is the thing.
I do not think that Mr. Guillen should have been suspended.
Mr. Guillen is to the sports world what many a Hollyweird celebutard is.
Not all that bright.
I mean, I think that he has that dual thinking that many Central and South Americans have towards the United States.
Most of the people love the United States. But because of years of indoctrination, the same people have had a hate for what is a catch-all phrase.
That is "Yankee imperialism".
Many don't want to see a Cuba-like communist dictatorship. But they like, well kind of what Mr. Guillen said.
That Fidel Castro has essentially given the United States the middle-finger since 1959. And we have done nothing but keep them in the virtual stone-age with an endless economic embargo.
Hell, Fidel gave power over to his younger brother, Raul.
What Mr. Guillen reminds me of is the young, generally but not always, White skater boys that wear the Che Guevara t-shirts while skating down the road. Almost none of the kids have any idea about Guevara and the fact that he was to Communist revolution what Josef Mengele was to Nazi Germany.
I don't think that Mr. Guillen really has a clue about politics at all. He just spouts-off and then has to realize that he had no idea what he was talking about.
Maybe Mr. Guillen, in the first link, has a problem with alcohol. Read the article. Just sayin'.
That could be why he says such things.
But suspending Mr. Guillen for being stupid, well that is exactly the wrong message. After, he did apologize. I do not know if Marlins' management made him do it, but he did. And the Marlins knew what they were getting in the person of Mr. Guillen.
For the Cuban-American community in Miami, they are right to be mad at him. But take the opportunity to educate Mr. Guillen the truth about life under the Castro brothers. That means as uncomfortable as it is, they need to embrace him and educate him at the same time. Seeking to censor Mr. Guillen is not the way to go. It is exactly what they are fighting against in their old homeland.
Mr. Guillen, I believe, has been punished enough for being an idiot. Time to either get rid of him or let him manage and keep his politics to himself.
Unfortunately, the cheapskates at Time won't let you read the whole article unless you are a subscriber.
But here is the link anyway.
The point is that Mr. Guillen is no stranger to controversy.
And once one reads the kind of gloss-over at Wikipedia, it kind of scratches the surface.
Mr. Guillen is a native of Venezuela. And in 2005, after as manager he led the Chicago White Sox to win the World Series, Mr. Guillen supposedly shouted "Viva Chavez!" in reference to the pseudo-dictator of his homeland, Hugo Chavez. In that situation, he later claimed that he does not support Mr. Chavez. And Mr. Guillen did not attend the celebration for the team's win at the White House. Hmm, could that be because of the president at that time? One George W. Bush?
Ahh, but what really got people's panties in a bunch was Mr. Guillen referring to a Chicago Sun-Times sports columnist, Jay Marrioti as a "fag".
Once one gets the gay and lesbian community in an uproar, well it is surprising that he remained with the White Sox after that.
But in the Political Correct world, they were in a pickle.
Dump the Venezuelan, Hispanic (or is that White-Hispanic?!) manager to please the homosexuals or keep Mr. Guillen so as to not offend the Venezuelan, Hispanic community.
Mr. Guillen stayed.
So, Mr. Guillen is one that likes to stir the pot.
But here is where the plain stupid enters in the whole controversy.
In case Mr. Guillen did not know, the team he is now manager of, the Miami Marlins, is in the largest Cuban city outside of Cuba. Oh, and the new baseball stadium, Marlins Park, sits right adjacent to. . .Little Havana!
So Mr. Guillen, who has already at one time seemingly praised Hugo Chavez, decided to show Fidel Castro some love. You know, how amazing it is that he stayed in power since 1959. How cool it is that Castro survived the Bay of Pigs and other attempts to bring him down.
OK, could the dude have just started a fire and burned the new baseball stadium?
He might as well have.
Because if one thing trumps angry homosexuals and potentially angry Venezuelan-Americans it is really angry Cuban-Americans.
Imagine that this comment drew a five-game suspension. Not from Major League baseball. But from the Marlins Management.
The Marlins slapped the unusual suspension because of the avalanche of bad publicity in the local Cuban-American community.
But here is the thing.
I do not think that Mr. Guillen should have been suspended.
Mr. Guillen is to the sports world what many a Hollyweird celebutard is.
Not all that bright.
I mean, I think that he has that dual thinking that many Central and South Americans have towards the United States.
Most of the people love the United States. But because of years of indoctrination, the same people have had a hate for what is a catch-all phrase.
That is "Yankee imperialism".
Many don't want to see a Cuba-like communist dictatorship. But they like, well kind of what Mr. Guillen said.
That Fidel Castro has essentially given the United States the middle-finger since 1959. And we have done nothing but keep them in the virtual stone-age with an endless economic embargo.
Hell, Fidel gave power over to his younger brother, Raul.
What Mr. Guillen reminds me of is the young, generally but not always, White skater boys that wear the Che Guevara t-shirts while skating down the road. Almost none of the kids have any idea about Guevara and the fact that he was to Communist revolution what Josef Mengele was to Nazi Germany.
I don't think that Mr. Guillen really has a clue about politics at all. He just spouts-off and then has to realize that he had no idea what he was talking about.
Maybe Mr. Guillen, in the first link, has a problem with alcohol. Read the article. Just sayin'.
That could be why he says such things.
But suspending Mr. Guillen for being stupid, well that is exactly the wrong message. After, he did apologize. I do not know if Marlins' management made him do it, but he did. And the Marlins knew what they were getting in the person of Mr. Guillen.
For the Cuban-American community in Miami, they are right to be mad at him. But take the opportunity to educate Mr. Guillen the truth about life under the Castro brothers. That means as uncomfortable as it is, they need to embrace him and educate him at the same time. Seeking to censor Mr. Guillen is not the way to go. It is exactly what they are fighting against in their old homeland.
Mr. Guillen, I believe, has been punished enough for being an idiot. Time to either get rid of him or let him manage and keep his politics to himself.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Rick Santorum: A Couragous Campaign Comes To An End
As I alluded to earlier, former Pennsylvania senator, Rick Santorum, has "suspended"-re: ended-his quest for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.
It is really too bad that it has come to an end.
But Mr. Santorum showed how a campaign can and should be run when everything is basically against you.
A year ago, Mr. Santorum was but a blip on the screen of Republicans itching to run against the Dear Leader, President Obama. After all, the looming shadow of Mitt Romney, runner up in 2008 to Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, started him off really at a low point. Then there were others that decided to enter the race. Here are some of those Mr. Santorum outlasted.
Congressman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). Radio talk show host and former business executive Herman Cain. Texas governor Rick Perry. Former Utah governor and Obama ambassador to Red China, Jon Huntsman, Jr.
A rather impressive list I think.
The reason I believe that his campaign was courageous is that he took on issues that are not really at the forefront of the American voter this time around.
Yes, he spoke out as a devout, worshipping Roman Catholic on the issue of contraception. And while I have to admit I am not totally on his side about it, I appreciate his honesty of belief on the subject. And yes, it may have cost him some votes.
But another issue that Mr. Santorum spoke on better and much more at the heart of the matter is the breakdown of the traditional American family unit. And how we must as a society encourage married men and women and, if God so provides, that they have children in an intact family unit. There is a dirty little secret that as more and more families are headed by one parent (for a variety of reasons that are not the subject of this post) and it has led to a lot of problems. Social. Financial. And yes, children that are not even being raised by that one parent but the state, through daycare, pre-school and eventually K-12.
It takes guts to seek that as a campaign theme in the world of the 30 second soundbite gotcha moment.
And yes, Mr. Santorum did walk in it on more than one occasion. And he has to ease out of those minefields. And did so the best he could.
On foreign policy there is no question where he stood at the fundamental struggle the United States has with radical Islam. Mr. Santorum would and wants to take the fight directly to the Islamofascist terrorists before they get us.
The other reason that Mr. Santorum ran a courageous campaign is that he really had nothing but a core group of people that believed in him and his ideas.
In Iowa, he practiced a year of the kind of retail politics it take to ingratiate one's self with the voters in a state of Iowa's size and population.
And it did pay off.
Mr. Santorum DID eventually win the Iowa caucuses. And Mr. Santorum took that grit and determination on to win 10 more states and 3.2 million Republican votes.
Remember, he outlasted some very serious candidates and some non-candidates. And had a lot less money, support and structure.
Had Mr. Santorum won the crucial Michigan primary, and he nearly did, this would be a different race today.
But Mitt Romney as I noted just had a superior organization and money. And like it or not, the latter matters when running a national campaign.
Mr. Romney I still believe should seriously consider Mr. Santorum for his vice-president. Because Mr. Romney is going to need someone that looks, acts and is a fighter. And Mr. Santorum fits that bill. Plus, Mr. Santorum has Washington experience that Mr. Romney does lack.
Now, without a doubt, Willard Mitt Romney is on his way to the Republican presidential nomination. Mr. Romney has this blogger's full support.
But Richard John Santorum ran a campaign on a shoestring. Yet one of courage and determination that I hope is rewarded by a President Romney.
And now, the fight is on for Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama.
Let's get behind Mitt now!
.
It is really too bad that it has come to an end.
But Mr. Santorum showed how a campaign can and should be run when everything is basically against you.
A year ago, Mr. Santorum was but a blip on the screen of Republicans itching to run against the Dear Leader, President Obama. After all, the looming shadow of Mitt Romney, runner up in 2008 to Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, started him off really at a low point. Then there were others that decided to enter the race. Here are some of those Mr. Santorum outlasted.
Congressman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). Radio talk show host and former business executive Herman Cain. Texas governor Rick Perry. Former Utah governor and Obama ambassador to Red China, Jon Huntsman, Jr.
A rather impressive list I think.
The reason I believe that his campaign was courageous is that he took on issues that are not really at the forefront of the American voter this time around.
Yes, he spoke out as a devout, worshipping Roman Catholic on the issue of contraception. And while I have to admit I am not totally on his side about it, I appreciate his honesty of belief on the subject. And yes, it may have cost him some votes.
But another issue that Mr. Santorum spoke on better and much more at the heart of the matter is the breakdown of the traditional American family unit. And how we must as a society encourage married men and women and, if God so provides, that they have children in an intact family unit. There is a dirty little secret that as more and more families are headed by one parent (for a variety of reasons that are not the subject of this post) and it has led to a lot of problems. Social. Financial. And yes, children that are not even being raised by that one parent but the state, through daycare, pre-school and eventually K-12.
It takes guts to seek that as a campaign theme in the world of the 30 second soundbite gotcha moment.
And yes, Mr. Santorum did walk in it on more than one occasion. And he has to ease out of those minefields. And did so the best he could.
On foreign policy there is no question where he stood at the fundamental struggle the United States has with radical Islam. Mr. Santorum would and wants to take the fight directly to the Islamofascist terrorists before they get us.
The other reason that Mr. Santorum ran a courageous campaign is that he really had nothing but a core group of people that believed in him and his ideas.
In Iowa, he practiced a year of the kind of retail politics it take to ingratiate one's self with the voters in a state of Iowa's size and population.
And it did pay off.
Mr. Santorum DID eventually win the Iowa caucuses. And Mr. Santorum took that grit and determination on to win 10 more states and 3.2 million Republican votes.
Remember, he outlasted some very serious candidates and some non-candidates. And had a lot less money, support and structure.
Had Mr. Santorum won the crucial Michigan primary, and he nearly did, this would be a different race today.
But Mitt Romney as I noted just had a superior organization and money. And like it or not, the latter matters when running a national campaign.
Mr. Romney I still believe should seriously consider Mr. Santorum for his vice-president. Because Mr. Romney is going to need someone that looks, acts and is a fighter. And Mr. Santorum fits that bill. Plus, Mr. Santorum has Washington experience that Mr. Romney does lack.
Now, without a doubt, Willard Mitt Romney is on his way to the Republican presidential nomination. Mr. Romney has this blogger's full support.
But Richard John Santorum ran a campaign on a shoestring. Yet one of courage and determination that I hope is rewarded by a President Romney.
And now, the fight is on for Mitt Romney vs. Barack Obama.
Let's get behind Mitt now!
.
SANTORUM OUT!
Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum has suspended his quest for the Repblican presidential nomination as of this morning.
I think that Mr. Santorum ran a much better campaign than anyone, including myself, would have imagined a year ago at this time.
There will be a lot more on this later.
One good thing about this announcement?
Takes John Derbyshire off the front page at least for a day!
I think that Mr. Santorum ran a much better campaign than anyone, including myself, would have imagined a year ago at this time.
There will be a lot more on this later.
One good thing about this announcement?
Takes John Derbyshire off the front page at least for a day!
Monday, April 09, 2012
John Derbyshire And The Issue That Will NOT Go Away
Well, when one hits a nerve as John Derbyshire did with his now infamous piece on what he tells his children about how to be with Black Americans, it does not end in a day.
In my own post, which I stand by in its entirety, I am struck by the fact all four commenter's stood up for and what Mr. Derbyshire wrote.
Some went on cherry-picking and I have to admit, yes if one does that there are areas that I would agree with Mr. Derbyshire.
But my own feeling is getting more gelled, I suppose.
I find the fact that Mr. Derbyshire is an avowed atheist to be a great deal of his problem.
As a Christian, I totally believe that people are redeemable. Now, that does not mean that redemption does not sometimes come at a price. But one aspect of Mr. Derbyshire's screed was to suggest that helping a Black person in distress is very troubling.
I admit straight-up, I do not know what I were to do in a situation in which a Black man is beating up his girlfriend and I happened by said situation linked by Mr. Derbyshire. Yep, it is awful as it turns out.
But the instinct to help someone in distress is clearly something very much in Christian teaching.
The story of the Good Samaritan is the biblical passage most cited in such situations.
Yes, the man, Quintin Guerrero could have just ignored what had happened. He could have let the man, Kendal Major, dump his gal pal, Tosheba Alford from the moving taxi and keep beating the crap out of her. Yeah, Mr. Guerrero could have just whistled by and maybe even go behind something and be nothing but a voyeur and watched the violence continue.
But clearly, that was not the man Mr. Guerrero was.
And yes, he paid a horrible price for it.
But, how many times have you read where similar events have occurred and people did nothing? And they did not happen to be Black people?
And really, when we have read that, does that not outrage us?
Well, at least most of us.
The fact is that Mr. Derbyshire used a very sensational situation to suggest this is how Black people are and thus, let them be.
Could he have not found something the other way? Really, is there not a story in which a Black did not help a non-Black?
Before you ask me to find such situation, it is not for me to do.
Mr. Derbyshire painted a whole group with a broad-brush.
My point is that the danger in how Mr. Derbyshire presented his whole piece is that people do not and can not change.
This, one of the fundamental understandings of the Christian faith is how the acceptance of Jesus Christ changes one's life. No, it does not make it perfect. A Christian still sins. A Christian still does wrong. But because of the self-examination one does as a Christian, it is what I believe makes the difference in so many of life's seemingly mundane situations.
Thus we seek to make the world better. Or at least try.
Mr Guerrero was doing his best by trying to help someone he saw in distress. Even if it turns out that both the people involved ended up beating him to death, a great deal of credit to bringing the two miscreants to eventual trial and a court decision, to the cabbie, Angel Ruiz. He too could have just taken off and done nothing. But he helped police track down the two who seemed to do wrong and they took them away.
Mr. Derbyshire I am afraid lives in a cold, dark world of science. A science that justifies ignoring doing good even in a bad situation.
After all, science was a huge justification to what the Nazis did during the height of their Reign of Terror. Ditto all the victims of Soviet Communism. And the victims of Red China.
As for me, I would hope that I could be more like Quintin Guerrero than John Derbyshire would have been in a similar situation.
In my own post, which I stand by in its entirety, I am struck by the fact all four commenter's stood up for and what Mr. Derbyshire wrote.
Some went on cherry-picking and I have to admit, yes if one does that there are areas that I would agree with Mr. Derbyshire.
But my own feeling is getting more gelled, I suppose.
I find the fact that Mr. Derbyshire is an avowed atheist to be a great deal of his problem.
As a Christian, I totally believe that people are redeemable. Now, that does not mean that redemption does not sometimes come at a price. But one aspect of Mr. Derbyshire's screed was to suggest that helping a Black person in distress is very troubling.
I admit straight-up, I do not know what I were to do in a situation in which a Black man is beating up his girlfriend and I happened by said situation linked by Mr. Derbyshire. Yep, it is awful as it turns out.
But the instinct to help someone in distress is clearly something very much in Christian teaching.
The story of the Good Samaritan is the biblical passage most cited in such situations.
Yes, the man, Quintin Guerrero could have just ignored what had happened. He could have let the man, Kendal Major, dump his gal pal, Tosheba Alford from the moving taxi and keep beating the crap out of her. Yeah, Mr. Guerrero could have just whistled by and maybe even go behind something and be nothing but a voyeur and watched the violence continue.
But clearly, that was not the man Mr. Guerrero was.
And yes, he paid a horrible price for it.
But, how many times have you read where similar events have occurred and people did nothing? And they did not happen to be Black people?
And really, when we have read that, does that not outrage us?
Well, at least most of us.
The fact is that Mr. Derbyshire used a very sensational situation to suggest this is how Black people are and thus, let them be.
Could he have not found something the other way? Really, is there not a story in which a Black did not help a non-Black?
Before you ask me to find such situation, it is not for me to do.
Mr. Derbyshire painted a whole group with a broad-brush.
My point is that the danger in how Mr. Derbyshire presented his whole piece is that people do not and can not change.
This, one of the fundamental understandings of the Christian faith is how the acceptance of Jesus Christ changes one's life. No, it does not make it perfect. A Christian still sins. A Christian still does wrong. But because of the self-examination one does as a Christian, it is what I believe makes the difference in so many of life's seemingly mundane situations.
Thus we seek to make the world better. Or at least try.
Mr Guerrero was doing his best by trying to help someone he saw in distress. Even if it turns out that both the people involved ended up beating him to death, a great deal of credit to bringing the two miscreants to eventual trial and a court decision, to the cabbie, Angel Ruiz. He too could have just taken off and done nothing. But he helped police track down the two who seemed to do wrong and they took them away.
Mr. Derbyshire I am afraid lives in a cold, dark world of science. A science that justifies ignoring doing good even in a bad situation.
After all, science was a huge justification to what the Nazis did during the height of their Reign of Terror. Ditto all the victims of Soviet Communism. And the victims of Red China.
As for me, I would hope that I could be more like Quintin Guerrero than John Derbyshire would have been in a similar situation.
Saturday, April 07, 2012
Alleuia! The Lord Is Risen!
The Lord is risen indeed. Alleluia.
The Gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ according to Matthew:
Matthew 28: 1-20:
[1] In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
[2] And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
[3] His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
[4] And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
[5] And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
[6] He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
[7] And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
[8] And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.
[9] And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
[10] Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.
[11] Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
[12] And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
[13] Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
[14] And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
[15] So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
[16] Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
[17] And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
[18] And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
[19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
[20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Wishing you and yours a blessed and Happy Easter!
How John Derbyshire Has Set Conservatism Back Decades-Unless We Conservatives Reject This And Now
Until today, John Derbyshire has been a contributor to the conservative fortnightly, National Review.
There is a reason why he is no longer welcomed at National Review.
It is for this horrifying piece he wrote for a webzine called Taki's Mag.
The piece that will be written about here is allegedly in response to what is known in the Black community as "The Talk". But I am certain it is not limited to the Black community. I think the Hispanic, the Asian and yes, Whites, can also have "The talk".
So, what is "The Talk"?
It is how parents speak to their children about how they dress. How they act. What other people will think of them. This is the article that Mr. Derbyshire linked that explains, in part, what "The Talk" is all about.
In and of itself, I think that it is a good thing. A lot about this has risen from the Trayvon Martin killing. And a big part of it was the fact Master Martin was wearing a hoodie. And yes, Master Martin was Black. I addressed that here in regards to the hoodie.
So, one would think that Mr. Derbyshire would address that with his children, right?
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
His piece starts off negative about Blacks and how they refer to themselves. And seemingly yearning for the days when they were referred to as Colored or Negroes.
Friends, it does not get any better from there.
Oh, we should be nice and courteous. Us non-Blacks to Blacks. And Mr. Derbyshire does concede that gee, there are all kinds of Black Americans. But in the same breath explains that he knows of no Black who has been a Fields Medal winner.
Pssst! Until this, I had no idea what a Fields Medal was. I never heard of it. It involves math. And I am lousy in math. Maybe I am part Black?!
Sorry to digress.
The most grievous is the following from the piece. I warn you now that this is from Mr. Derbyshire, not your humble blogger.
(10) Thus while always attentive to the particular qualities of individuals, on the many occasions where you have nothing to guide you but knowledge of those mean differences, use statistical common sense.
(10a) Avoid concentrations of Blacks not all known to you personally.
(10b) Stay out of heavily Black neighborhoods.
(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with Blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by a gunshot).
(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of Blacks.
(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of Blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by Black politicians.
(10g) Before voting for a Black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a White.
(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to Blacks in apparent distress, e. g., on the highway.
I mean, is this for real? Do non-Blacks really feel this way in general?
Now, I don't limit places that I may find myself to bad Black neighborhoods. Bad predominantly Hispanic ones. Bad predominantly Asian ones. And yeah, the bad White neighborhoods.
And since I attend sporting events, I guess I should worry. Oooh! There maybe. . .Black people there! YIKES! Be afraid, very afraid! You know. That is that whole concentration thing.
And, well I guess I should never, ever go to the beach or Disneyland. Maybe skip Magic Mountain. And does Knott's Berry Farm count too?! Never mind I would not go to said parks because I don't really like them. And they can cost a month's salary at the low end. Especially Disneyland. And yeah, I don't think Mr. Derbyshire finds "It's A Small World" a good thing.
As far as where one lives, some of that is not easy. I mean, the United States is being governed by a. . .BLACK POLITICIAN! Where shall I go now, Mr. Derbyshire?! You offer no escape! And BTW, what are you doing here?!
And being acosted by a "strange Black" on the street? Really? Has Mr. Derbyshire ever encountered a homeless person? Shockingly, a lot are not B L A C K. Shhh!
And yeah, I am going to pass by a person in distress just because they are Black. Because you know, they are gonna do something to me fo sure anyways.
OK, I guess there is the Blacks are not very smart meme.
There is a grain of truth to that.
But it nowhere near their fault for crying out loud.
They are the victims of the true Axis of Evil.
That is the following:
Big Government.
Big Labor.
Big Business.
Big government conspires with big labor to keep Black youths in government schools in low-income areas and there almost no chance to get out. And while many Blacks vote Democrat when the Democrats really do not care about them except election time or to full-throat a victim hood story, I think this kind of piece kind of helps make many feel that no one cares.
In one of the parts I highlighted, Mr. Derbyshire did note about scrutinizing Black politicians. I do feel the leftywhore media ignored a lot of baggage of the Dear Leader, President Obama, that they would not have if he was a White politician. But where I part company is on two of the greatest members of the United States House of Representatives. They are Congressman Tim Scott of South Carolina and Congressman Allan West of Florida. I wished that I could have good, decent men of their standing and character representing me in congress.
Now, there are some things that are stereotypes and generally spot on about any given group or even individual.
And I am honest enough to say that yeah, sometimes I myself fall into the trap of it. But not to just demean any given person and or group.
See, I think anyone can improve their lot in life. If one lives in the world of victim hood, there is always someone there to enable.
More than anything, that is what has happened to Blacks in America.
Keep these stereotypes out there, and it is a self-destructive cycle that will keep getting worse.
But what the above piece has done is set back conservatives decades.
Because by Monday morning, this will be topic number one all over the blogosphere, MSNBC, the Leftywhore media, you know, the usual suspects.
Well, I am not in this group that would call themselves "conservatives".
I am a Republican because I believe in the rights of and dignity of the individual. The only group that I care to want to see is the American group. I am first and foremost an American. The heritage I have while proud of it, is not what defines me. It is that I was blessed to be born in the greatest nation ever in the history of the world. Thus, I am an American.
I am a conservative because we need to break the Balkanization of this Great Land. When conservatives engage in propagating the continuing Balkanization of the United States, we have to totally and absolutely reject them.
And that is why I support Rich Lowry, editor at National Review for not only rejecting what Mr. Derbyshire wrote, but making him no longer a contributor at National Review or National Review Online.
I know that some will think that this is censorship, but it is not.
Poison like what Mr. Derbyshire wrote is what I expect from the other side. Not from one of our own.
There is noting wrong with open and honest discussion of such issues. But when it looks more like something written by a member of the Ku Klux Klan than one seeking open, honest dialogue, it has to be stopped.
Conservatives have been fighting this stereotype as long as I have been alive, 47 years. In the spirit of that, when one of our own commits this kind of grievous act, demeaning and degrading a whole group of people, we have to speak up. We can not just say it is OK to say, as fact, that Blacks are not so smart. That we should be afraid of them if we are not Black. I will not go on.
Now we must reject any of this "thinking" from the likes of Mr. Derbyshire.
I am one individual, but I reject it and will always speak out against this kind of hate from a "conservative" for it is hate.
There is a reason why he is no longer welcomed at National Review.
It is for this horrifying piece he wrote for a webzine called Taki's Mag.
The piece that will be written about here is allegedly in response to what is known in the Black community as "The Talk". But I am certain it is not limited to the Black community. I think the Hispanic, the Asian and yes, Whites, can also have "The talk".
So, what is "The Talk"?
It is how parents speak to their children about how they dress. How they act. What other people will think of them. This is the article that Mr. Derbyshire linked that explains, in part, what "The Talk" is all about.
In and of itself, I think that it is a good thing. A lot about this has risen from the Trayvon Martin killing. And a big part of it was the fact Master Martin was wearing a hoodie. And yes, Master Martin was Black. I addressed that here in regards to the hoodie.
So, one would think that Mr. Derbyshire would address that with his children, right?
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
His piece starts off negative about Blacks and how they refer to themselves. And seemingly yearning for the days when they were referred to as Colored or Negroes.
Friends, it does not get any better from there.
Oh, we should be nice and courteous. Us non-Blacks to Blacks. And Mr. Derbyshire does concede that gee, there are all kinds of Black Americans. But in the same breath explains that he knows of no Black who has been a Fields Medal winner.
Pssst! Until this, I had no idea what a Fields Medal was. I never heard of it. It involves math. And I am lousy in math. Maybe I am part Black?!
Sorry to digress.
The most grievous is the following from the piece. I warn you now that this is from Mr. Derbyshire, not your humble blogger.
(10) Thus while always attentive to the particular qualities of individuals, on the many occasions where you have nothing to guide you but knowledge of those mean differences, use statistical common sense.
(10a) Avoid concentrations of Blacks not all known to you personally.
(10b) Stay out of heavily Black neighborhoods.
(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with Blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by a gunshot).
(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of Blacks.
(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of Blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by Black politicians.
(10g) Before voting for a Black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a White.
(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to Blacks in apparent distress, e. g., on the highway.
I mean, is this for real? Do non-Blacks really feel this way in general?
Now, I don't limit places that I may find myself to bad Black neighborhoods. Bad predominantly Hispanic ones. Bad predominantly Asian ones. And yeah, the bad White neighborhoods.
And since I attend sporting events, I guess I should worry. Oooh! There maybe. . .Black people there! YIKES! Be afraid, very afraid! You know. That is that whole concentration thing.
And, well I guess I should never, ever go to the beach or Disneyland. Maybe skip Magic Mountain. And does Knott's Berry Farm count too?! Never mind I would not go to said parks because I don't really like them. And they can cost a month's salary at the low end. Especially Disneyland. And yeah, I don't think Mr. Derbyshire finds "It's A Small World" a good thing.
As far as where one lives, some of that is not easy. I mean, the United States is being governed by a. . .BLACK POLITICIAN! Where shall I go now, Mr. Derbyshire?! You offer no escape! And BTW, what are you doing here?!
And being acosted by a "strange Black" on the street? Really? Has Mr. Derbyshire ever encountered a homeless person? Shockingly, a lot are not B L A C K. Shhh!
And yeah, I am going to pass by a person in distress just because they are Black. Because you know, they are gonna do something to me fo sure anyways.
OK, I guess there is the Blacks are not very smart meme.
There is a grain of truth to that.
But it nowhere near their fault for crying out loud.
They are the victims of the true Axis of Evil.
That is the following:
Big Government.
Big Labor.
Big Business.
Big government conspires with big labor to keep Black youths in government schools in low-income areas and there almost no chance to get out. And while many Blacks vote Democrat when the Democrats really do not care about them except election time or to full-throat a victim hood story, I think this kind of piece kind of helps make many feel that no one cares.
In one of the parts I highlighted, Mr. Derbyshire did note about scrutinizing Black politicians. I do feel the leftywhore media ignored a lot of baggage of the Dear Leader, President Obama, that they would not have if he was a White politician. But where I part company is on two of the greatest members of the United States House of Representatives. They are Congressman Tim Scott of South Carolina and Congressman Allan West of Florida. I wished that I could have good, decent men of their standing and character representing me in congress.
Now, there are some things that are stereotypes and generally spot on about any given group or even individual.
And I am honest enough to say that yeah, sometimes I myself fall into the trap of it. But not to just demean any given person and or group.
See, I think anyone can improve their lot in life. If one lives in the world of victim hood, there is always someone there to enable.
More than anything, that is what has happened to Blacks in America.
Keep these stereotypes out there, and it is a self-destructive cycle that will keep getting worse.
But what the above piece has done is set back conservatives decades.
Because by Monday morning, this will be topic number one all over the blogosphere, MSNBC, the Leftywhore media, you know, the usual suspects.
Well, I am not in this group that would call themselves "conservatives".
I am a Republican because I believe in the rights of and dignity of the individual. The only group that I care to want to see is the American group. I am first and foremost an American. The heritage I have while proud of it, is not what defines me. It is that I was blessed to be born in the greatest nation ever in the history of the world. Thus, I am an American.
I am a conservative because we need to break the Balkanization of this Great Land. When conservatives engage in propagating the continuing Balkanization of the United States, we have to totally and absolutely reject them.
And that is why I support Rich Lowry, editor at National Review for not only rejecting what Mr. Derbyshire wrote, but making him no longer a contributor at National Review or National Review Online.
I know that some will think that this is censorship, but it is not.
Poison like what Mr. Derbyshire wrote is what I expect from the other side. Not from one of our own.
There is noting wrong with open and honest discussion of such issues. But when it looks more like something written by a member of the Ku Klux Klan than one seeking open, honest dialogue, it has to be stopped.
Conservatives have been fighting this stereotype as long as I have been alive, 47 years. In the spirit of that, when one of our own commits this kind of grievous act, demeaning and degrading a whole group of people, we have to speak up. We can not just say it is OK to say, as fact, that Blacks are not so smart. That we should be afraid of them if we are not Black. I will not go on.
Now we must reject any of this "thinking" from the likes of Mr. Derbyshire.
I am one individual, but I reject it and will always speak out against this kind of hate from a "conservative" for it is hate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)