Oh, Canada, indeed as voters on Monday ended nine years of Conservative party rule and swept Justin Trudeau and the Liberals to power.
It was not even close as the third party, the Liberals, went from 34 seats to a staggering 184 out of 338 seats, a solid majority. And it was not just the ruling Conservatives that were vanquished but the opposition, far-left New Democrats that suffered losses as well. The New Democrats lost 59 seats and is now back to being the third party and has 44 seats. The Conservatives lost 67 seats and is a stronger opposition party than the Liberals were for this election. The Conservatives have 99 seats.
The Liberals meteoric rise from the ashes can be summed up in two words.
Justin Trudeau.
Mr. Trudeau is the son of the late Liberal Prime Minister, Pierre Elliot Trudeau and the clan is essentially the Kennedy family of the Great White North. The Montreal-Toronto dominated media elevated Mr. Trudeau to a God-like status while it became clear he did a terrible job as PM. But he was an "intellectual" and let's face it, that trumps anything even and including strong leadership. Sure, Mr. Trudeau suppressed terrorism and kept Canada together, at the expense of making French-speaking Quebec a nation within a nation and forcing the nation to become a bilingual one. And his economic record was standard, liberal fare and proved to further alienate the economically stronger prairie provinces and British Columbia.
To be blunt, Justin Trudeau is not even in the same league as his father was. Justin Trudeau is but a dilettante much like the late John F. Kennedy, Jr.
But damn if he is not good looking and has that family name.
Very hard for the soon to be ex-prime minister, Stephen Harper, to go up against.
In comparison, one can compare Prime Minister Harper to Mitt Romney running up against Barack Obama.
No doubt that the Conservatives hurt themselves with some less than savory candidates that made rude comments against First Nation (Native Americans, Eskimos, Indians) people. Also, the economy is beginning to stagnate due to international pressures. Some Canadians saw Prime Minister Harper as wanting to be more like the neighbors to the South, the United States. Yet Prime Minister Harper is openly very much a Canadian nationalist.
But one aspect of a Canadian election compared to an American one is that it is not a popular-vote election. Because it is a parliament and a first past the post system, it is actually 338 separate elections. Think of it as a perpetual congressional mid-term. It is the leader of the majority party that usually forms the government. Even if it is not 170 seats in the case of this past election. Prime Minister Harper led two majority-minority governments before winning an outright majority prior to this election. Another aspect of Canadian elections is that the sitting prime minister can call for elections anytime before the fixed, four-year term ends.
With a 14-seat majority, Justin Trudeau has four years to see what he can do.
It maybe four long years for Canada.
Oh, Canada, indeed.
Thursday, October 22, 2015
Saturday, October 17, 2015
The Cost Of The Scandinavia Welfare State
With Sen. Bernie Sanders (I/D-Vt.) running for president, he is the closest candidate that promotes a Scandinavia-style welfare state. it is worth analyzing what the cost of such a state is really like.
Scandinavia are also referred to as the Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden.
The dirty little secret is that there is one three word reason the Scandinavian nations can afford a welfare state with a dab of capitalism.
The United States.
One of the reasons all the Scandinavian nations can do what they do is that they spend very little on defense spending. They all have small armed forces, including marginal navies and equally marginal air forces. They joined NATO and thus depend on the United States with it's still strong defense budgets and being the world's last superpower. Even with the cuts in defense spending, the Scandinavians can depend on the United States to help rescue them if there is some kind of military conflict.
So why is the Scandinavian model something the United States should avoid at all costs.
One, it is expensive with questionable results.
Two, it does not work.
Let's take a look at someone that lives in Denmark and see what it is like to live there.
In this article from earlier this year, the writer, Michael Booth, makes the point that American liberals/leftists love to point out the fact a McDonald's worker can easily make $15 an hour. And that more than 50% are sliced off the top in taxes. In fact for the average Scandinavian, as much as 60% of their income is taken away in taxes before they see what they can take home. In return there are a lot of "freebies" including free life-time education from cradle to grave. Same for health care for this is the land of single-payer, government-run health care. There are boatloads of mandates to the so-called private-sector economy that make it such almost in name only. Mandated, paid maternity leave for both parents, vacation time, sick time. You get the picture.
Here is an idea of the cost of living in the capital city, Copenhagen. This site says that of this writing, the Danish krone is 6.57 to the American dollar. So let's look at the link of the cost of living to see how much a very average car, a Volkswagen Golf costs. It is an average of 275,273 krone or $41,898.48c. How much does that car cost in the United States? At the Volkswagen website, the starting price is $20.175. It is more than half off the Danish price.
Why is that?
Ahh, there is the Value Added Tax, better known as a VAT that is cooked into the price of many items, especially big ticket items. This would be a way that big-government proponents would like to fund their plans to offer free college for all and even pay for single-payer healthcare. Of course the downside is that people will not be inclined to buy big ticket items if they do not have to.
But if you have that new Volkswagen Golf, how much is gas gonna cost ya? \
Well, almost triple the price of gas in the States. How about $6.34c a gallon? A fill 'er up? If the Golf has a 17.5 gallon gas tank, a cool $110.95c. Again, the tax is cooked in the price and thus it is hidden. Which is how it is in Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia.
Wanna take the family, mom, dad and two kids to the local McDonalds? Well, four combo meals cost a total of 280 krone or 70 krone each. That is $10.65c each. Roughly what one would pay at an airport in the States.
High taxation and low productivity are a disaster and only now, with the massive declining native birthrates, there seems to be a willingness of all Scandinavian governments to take in mainly Middle East, Muslim immigrants. New taxpayers.
But another downside is the fact that when all is taken care of you by the state, one's total well being cannot always be dealt with by the state.
According to Mr. Booth, the Scandinavian nations lead the world in suicides and the taking of anti-depressants. Also, and this is a surprise, these nations also are European leaders in violence against women. In this article, the Scandinavians are prolific binge drinkers. In Finland, Russian-adjacent, the leading cause of death among men in alcoholism. It is the second leading cause of death among women.
What Scandinavia celebrates is averageness. It does not really celebrate success. It is why those that can get the hell out. In many Scandinavian nations, leading hockey players that land NHL contracts know that if they stay citizens of their native land it will be massively taxed. Many, not all but many, realize their success is not something the home nation appreciates except as a big tax and thus many become American citizens.
Averageness leads to lack of innovation and or drive. In other words, Bill Gates could not really do what he did in any Scandinavian nation. Medical advances do not happen as often as in other developed nations. It is not to say some advances have not occurred in Scandinavian nations. But overall, even today, it is the United States that leads to innovation and yes, drive.
When Sen. Sanders touts Scandinavia, especially Denmark, he is asking for America to give up it's unique role in the world and celebrate averageness that we do not want to celebrate or make national policy.
Scandinavia are also referred to as the Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden.
The dirty little secret is that there is one three word reason the Scandinavian nations can afford a welfare state with a dab of capitalism.
The United States.
One of the reasons all the Scandinavian nations can do what they do is that they spend very little on defense spending. They all have small armed forces, including marginal navies and equally marginal air forces. They joined NATO and thus depend on the United States with it's still strong defense budgets and being the world's last superpower. Even with the cuts in defense spending, the Scandinavians can depend on the United States to help rescue them if there is some kind of military conflict.
So why is the Scandinavian model something the United States should avoid at all costs.
One, it is expensive with questionable results.
Two, it does not work.
Let's take a look at someone that lives in Denmark and see what it is like to live there.
In this article from earlier this year, the writer, Michael Booth, makes the point that American liberals/leftists love to point out the fact a McDonald's worker can easily make $15 an hour. And that more than 50% are sliced off the top in taxes. In fact for the average Scandinavian, as much as 60% of their income is taken away in taxes before they see what they can take home. In return there are a lot of "freebies" including free life-time education from cradle to grave. Same for health care for this is the land of single-payer, government-run health care. There are boatloads of mandates to the so-called private-sector economy that make it such almost in name only. Mandated, paid maternity leave for both parents, vacation time, sick time. You get the picture.
Here is an idea of the cost of living in the capital city, Copenhagen. This site says that of this writing, the Danish krone is 6.57 to the American dollar. So let's look at the link of the cost of living to see how much a very average car, a Volkswagen Golf costs. It is an average of 275,273 krone or $41,898.48c. How much does that car cost in the United States? At the Volkswagen website, the starting price is $20.175. It is more than half off the Danish price.
Why is that?
Ahh, there is the Value Added Tax, better known as a VAT that is cooked into the price of many items, especially big ticket items. This would be a way that big-government proponents would like to fund their plans to offer free college for all and even pay for single-payer healthcare. Of course the downside is that people will not be inclined to buy big ticket items if they do not have to.
But if you have that new Volkswagen Golf, how much is gas gonna cost ya? \
Well, almost triple the price of gas in the States. How about $6.34c a gallon? A fill 'er up? If the Golf has a 17.5 gallon gas tank, a cool $110.95c. Again, the tax is cooked in the price and thus it is hidden. Which is how it is in Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia.
Wanna take the family, mom, dad and two kids to the local McDonalds? Well, four combo meals cost a total of 280 krone or 70 krone each. That is $10.65c each. Roughly what one would pay at an airport in the States.
High taxation and low productivity are a disaster and only now, with the massive declining native birthrates, there seems to be a willingness of all Scandinavian governments to take in mainly Middle East, Muslim immigrants. New taxpayers.
But another downside is the fact that when all is taken care of you by the state, one's total well being cannot always be dealt with by the state.
According to Mr. Booth, the Scandinavian nations lead the world in suicides and the taking of anti-depressants. Also, and this is a surprise, these nations also are European leaders in violence against women. In this article, the Scandinavians are prolific binge drinkers. In Finland, Russian-adjacent, the leading cause of death among men in alcoholism. It is the second leading cause of death among women.
What Scandinavia celebrates is averageness. It does not really celebrate success. It is why those that can get the hell out. In many Scandinavian nations, leading hockey players that land NHL contracts know that if they stay citizens of their native land it will be massively taxed. Many, not all but many, realize their success is not something the home nation appreciates except as a big tax and thus many become American citizens.
Averageness leads to lack of innovation and or drive. In other words, Bill Gates could not really do what he did in any Scandinavian nation. Medical advances do not happen as often as in other developed nations. It is not to say some advances have not occurred in Scandinavian nations. But overall, even today, it is the United States that leads to innovation and yes, drive.
When Sen. Sanders touts Scandinavia, especially Denmark, he is asking for America to give up it's unique role in the world and celebrate averageness that we do not want to celebrate or make national policy.
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
It's Come To This
This is modern America, folks.
The land of the lawsuit for anything culture.
Let's meet this douchebrain, Jennifer Connell and why she is a candidate for douchebrain of the year. Hell, the decade.
Miss Connell is a human resources specialist that lives in Manhattan, New York. She went to help her nephew, Sean Tarala, celebrate his birthday in 2011. At the time he was an exuberant youngster celebrating his eighth birthday. And when he saw his aunt, an aunt that he seemed to really love, he went to say hello in a special, rambunctious eight year old boy way. Sean jumped up to say hey. Landed in her arms and they fell to the ground. And apparently, Miss Connell broke her wrist as a result of her nephew's exuberance.
I guess she did not believe little Sean when he said, in her words, "Auntie Jen! I love you!"
This is the basis of her lawsuit against, not the parents, but now 12-year-old Sean, is this:
“The injuries, losses and harms to the plaintiff were caused by the negligence and carelessness of the minor defendant in that a reasonable eight years old under those circumstances would know or should have known that a forceful greeting such as the one delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff could cause the harms and losses suffered by the plaintiff.”
Yes, every eight year old boy surely knows to greet ol' Aunt Jen on bent knee and kissing her hand.
Oh, didn't I mention that Miss Connell is a human resources specialist?!
And didn't I mention that she sought $127,000 from SEAN?
What human being does such a thing to another?
A useless gold digger, that's who.
I think that one should not share with a jury that she was having trouble holding a plate of hors d'ovures. Or that because she lives in a walk up in Manhattan she should get the $127,000.
Boy, Miss Connell must have sure learned a lot in her job to take such a vindictive action against a boy that loved her.
The jury in the case only took 20 minutes to tell this nit wit no way. That Sean Tarala is not liable for her breaking her wrist and or anything else. What happened was a total fluke.
As for Miss Connell, there is a special place for her and we all know where that is!
The land of the lawsuit for anything culture.
Let's meet this douchebrain, Jennifer Connell and why she is a candidate for douchebrain of the year. Hell, the decade.
Miss Connell is a human resources specialist that lives in Manhattan, New York. She went to help her nephew, Sean Tarala, celebrate his birthday in 2011. At the time he was an exuberant youngster celebrating his eighth birthday. And when he saw his aunt, an aunt that he seemed to really love, he went to say hello in a special, rambunctious eight year old boy way. Sean jumped up to say hey. Landed in her arms and they fell to the ground. And apparently, Miss Connell broke her wrist as a result of her nephew's exuberance.
I guess she did not believe little Sean when he said, in her words, "Auntie Jen! I love you!"
This is the basis of her lawsuit against, not the parents, but now 12-year-old Sean, is this:
“The injuries, losses and harms to the plaintiff were caused by the negligence and carelessness of the minor defendant in that a reasonable eight years old under those circumstances would know or should have known that a forceful greeting such as the one delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff could cause the harms and losses suffered by the plaintiff.”
Yes, every eight year old boy surely knows to greet ol' Aunt Jen on bent knee and kissing her hand.
Oh, didn't I mention that Miss Connell is a human resources specialist?!
And didn't I mention that she sought $127,000 from SEAN?
What human being does such a thing to another?
A useless gold digger, that's who.
I think that one should not share with a jury that she was having trouble holding a plate of hors d'ovures. Or that because she lives in a walk up in Manhattan she should get the $127,000.
Boy, Miss Connell must have sure learned a lot in her job to take such a vindictive action against a boy that loved her.
The jury in the case only took 20 minutes to tell this nit wit no way. That Sean Tarala is not liable for her breaking her wrist and or anything else. What happened was a total fluke.
As for Miss Connell, there is a special place for her and we all know where that is!
Monday, October 12, 2015
The Infantilization Of California
Yes, the state of California thinks that we are so stupid that they are making pharmacists have a conversation with you whenever you get any new medications.
I found this out the hard way yesterday.
On our way home from church, we took a side trip to our pharmacy to pick up a couple of nose sprays and a anti-biotic. We are going through the drive-thru and Mrs. RVFTLC tells the nice lady that there are 3 prescriptions for yours truly. The nice lady comes back with the medicine and proceeds to tell us that because they are new prescriptions, I have to have the pharmacist give me a consultation. But she was the only one available. Too bad she was at lunch. I was told I could wait a half hour or come back. I chose to come back and I did so today.
So I went to pick up the prescriptions, of which one of the nose sprays was not approved, a tale for another time. I also had additional prescriptions that needed to be filled. The nice gentleman was going to simply give me all my medicine without the consultation that I was told had to be done. So I proceeded to ask for the consultation. The nice pharmacist did what she was supposed to do and told me about each medication.
I wasted her time to make a point.
Whether it is an old medicine or a new medicine, all drug stores provide the reasons one's doctor gave you the medication. The dosage and when to take the medicine. All the possible side effects. In other words, whatever the pharmacist told me, I could easily read on my own.
The reason is not store policy but a California state law that makes an often overworked pharmacist have to take time to do something the consumer should do on their own.
It is why I believe our state government has infantilized us California citizens.
When my doctor prescribed the said medicine, he told me why and how often to take it. His nurse had already asked if I was allergic to medication, to which I said no. The doctor looked over the medicine information that I provided before making the prescription choices. Again, all important information is provided on stickers on the medication bottle and usually two sheets of often scary information. Not unlike the many medicine commercials one sees on television commercials.
Now, the state has added a layer of needless time-wasting when if any patient has a question or questions about new medicine they can always ask.
What is this to help the timid people that can't ask a question? Is this to do a CYA* for pharmacists?
Folks, it is a waste of time for all concerned.
I don't need to be told I can not get my medicine until I have a state-mandated consult with the pharmacist who is taking a needed lunch break. And when I come back the next day another pharmacy tech is just going to hand me all my medication without a consult.
How much more do our over paid, under worked state legislators need to get into our grills? How much more do they need to treat the populace like dweebs and morons.
Sure this is one thing. But as more and more of this bull crap keeps coming from our seers in Sacramento, it adds up.
We need to stop ignoring or saying something like we can't fight these ridiculous pieces of legislation. We need to take our lives back and this is a place to start.
I for one am writing my California state assemblyman and state senator to revisit this bad law and repeal it. And to start treating adults as such and stop even thinking of such crap. If you value being treated like an adult and live in California, you will do the same thing.
We have to stop the continuing infantilization of the California citizenry and here is a place to start.
*CYA-Cover Your A*s
I found this out the hard way yesterday.
On our way home from church, we took a side trip to our pharmacy to pick up a couple of nose sprays and a anti-biotic. We are going through the drive-thru and Mrs. RVFTLC tells the nice lady that there are 3 prescriptions for yours truly. The nice lady comes back with the medicine and proceeds to tell us that because they are new prescriptions, I have to have the pharmacist give me a consultation. But she was the only one available. Too bad she was at lunch. I was told I could wait a half hour or come back. I chose to come back and I did so today.
So I went to pick up the prescriptions, of which one of the nose sprays was not approved, a tale for another time. I also had additional prescriptions that needed to be filled. The nice gentleman was going to simply give me all my medicine without the consultation that I was told had to be done. So I proceeded to ask for the consultation. The nice pharmacist did what she was supposed to do and told me about each medication.
I wasted her time to make a point.
Whether it is an old medicine or a new medicine, all drug stores provide the reasons one's doctor gave you the medication. The dosage and when to take the medicine. All the possible side effects. In other words, whatever the pharmacist told me, I could easily read on my own.
The reason is not store policy but a California state law that makes an often overworked pharmacist have to take time to do something the consumer should do on their own.
It is why I believe our state government has infantilized us California citizens.
When my doctor prescribed the said medicine, he told me why and how often to take it. His nurse had already asked if I was allergic to medication, to which I said no. The doctor looked over the medicine information that I provided before making the prescription choices. Again, all important information is provided on stickers on the medication bottle and usually two sheets of often scary information. Not unlike the many medicine commercials one sees on television commercials.
Now, the state has added a layer of needless time-wasting when if any patient has a question or questions about new medicine they can always ask.
What is this to help the timid people that can't ask a question? Is this to do a CYA* for pharmacists?
Folks, it is a waste of time for all concerned.
I don't need to be told I can not get my medicine until I have a state-mandated consult with the pharmacist who is taking a needed lunch break. And when I come back the next day another pharmacy tech is just going to hand me all my medication without a consult.
How much more do our over paid, under worked state legislators need to get into our grills? How much more do they need to treat the populace like dweebs and morons.
Sure this is one thing. But as more and more of this bull crap keeps coming from our seers in Sacramento, it adds up.
We need to stop ignoring or saying something like we can't fight these ridiculous pieces of legislation. We need to take our lives back and this is a place to start.
I for one am writing my California state assemblyman and state senator to revisit this bad law and repeal it. And to start treating adults as such and stop even thinking of such crap. If you value being treated like an adult and live in California, you will do the same thing.
We have to stop the continuing infantilization of the California citizenry and here is a place to start.
*CYA-Cover Your A*s
Thursday, October 08, 2015
KEVIN McCARTHY OUT OF SPEAKER RACE-WHO IS NEXT?!
This morning Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield, CA) abruptly ended his quest to become speaker of the house of representatives in a closed-door meeting with the Republican house caucus.
The linked story talks about the fact that support for Rep. McCarthy crumbled after his remarks regarding the formation of the select committee on the events of Benghazi and now Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's knowledge of events during her tenure as secretary of state.
But buried in the link is what I believe to be the real reason.
No, it is not pressure from grassroots conservatives as much as this letter from Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) wanting to properly vet potential candidates for speaker for skeletons in their closet from the time of being in congress.
How refreshing.
Could it be true? Something that I have reported on here which I have read here. That in fact, Rep. McCarthy is indeed having an affair with a fellow member of the house, Rep Renee Elmers (R-N.C.). Who by coinkidink is from the same state as the devout Roman Catholic, Rep. Jones.
The official line from Rep. McCarthy that it is time for a new face to be in the top leadership position. And he is completely correct.
The troika of current speaker, John A. Boehner (R-Oh.), Rep. McCarthy and Steve Scalise (R-La.) have taken ineptitude to a high level. And have been absolutely terrible at communicating simple messages and or themes. All we have to do is look to Rep. McCarthy and his comments on the Benghazi committee as proof of ineptitude.
Bu the bottom line is the inability to communicate an effective conservative alternative to the current occupant of the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama. He is running roughshod over the majority party in the congress. And even with basically 50/50 support at best and for the most part running underwater in poll after poll, at least the Dear Leader, President Obama, looks like he is doing something.
Sorry but it is not enough that excuses are made that oh, the president will just veto anything that should miraculously come out of congress that he does not like. It puts him on record that he has danced around with rhetorical flourishes. It's called being the opposition party.
I hope that this latest development makes this man, Jim Jordan, think about getting into the race for speaker. I believe that he, not current leadership, can effectively unite all forces in the house and become an effective opposition to the Dear Leader, President Obama, in the waning days of his second and final term.
Now that Rep. McCarthy is out, is the question to ask who else is out of the running or who is in the running?
The linked story talks about the fact that support for Rep. McCarthy crumbled after his remarks regarding the formation of the select committee on the events of Benghazi and now Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's knowledge of events during her tenure as secretary of state.
But buried in the link is what I believe to be the real reason.
No, it is not pressure from grassroots conservatives as much as this letter from Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) wanting to properly vet potential candidates for speaker for skeletons in their closet from the time of being in congress.
How refreshing.
Could it be true? Something that I have reported on here which I have read here. That in fact, Rep. McCarthy is indeed having an affair with a fellow member of the house, Rep Renee Elmers (R-N.C.). Who by coinkidink is from the same state as the devout Roman Catholic, Rep. Jones.
The official line from Rep. McCarthy that it is time for a new face to be in the top leadership position. And he is completely correct.
The troika of current speaker, John A. Boehner (R-Oh.), Rep. McCarthy and Steve Scalise (R-La.) have taken ineptitude to a high level. And have been absolutely terrible at communicating simple messages and or themes. All we have to do is look to Rep. McCarthy and his comments on the Benghazi committee as proof of ineptitude.
Bu the bottom line is the inability to communicate an effective conservative alternative to the current occupant of the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama. He is running roughshod over the majority party in the congress. And even with basically 50/50 support at best and for the most part running underwater in poll after poll, at least the Dear Leader, President Obama, looks like he is doing something.
Sorry but it is not enough that excuses are made that oh, the president will just veto anything that should miraculously come out of congress that he does not like. It puts him on record that he has danced around with rhetorical flourishes. It's called being the opposition party.
I hope that this latest development makes this man, Jim Jordan, think about getting into the race for speaker. I believe that he, not current leadership, can effectively unite all forces in the house and become an effective opposition to the Dear Leader, President Obama, in the waning days of his second and final term.
Now that Rep. McCarthy is out, is the question to ask who else is out of the running or who is in the running?
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Is This Good Stewardship?!
I will just say that this is a perplexing tale of politics and religion that make me as the headline question.
According to this article, the former Florida governor and GOP presidential candidate, John Ellis Jeb! Bush, charged St. Martin's Episcopal church $50,000 for a speech a year ago September and it was on . . .stewardship.
This is what a church does to encourage people to give money and or more money?!
Let me write this.
If my church spent that kind of money to encourage people to give more money to pay for the functions of the church and it's outreach ministries, we would probably recall our vestry, the governing board, and ask for our rector and or priest-in-charge to be removed.
You have to understand that St. Martin's Episcopal Church, Houston, is the largest and one of the wealthiest churches in The Episcopal Church. It has some of the cream of the crop of the Houston establishment as members including former President George H. W. Bush and his wife, Barbara. And Mr. Bush's top long-time crony, James A. Baker. That is just the political establishment. You get the picture that this is high-end folks.
There is no doubt in my mind that this church could have found something more worthy than lining the pockets of the then future Republican presidential candidate.
I do agree that it takes money to make money, but giving one's time, talent and or money for one's church is not the same thing.
People will do the above if they believe in what the church has done, is doing and will be doing in the future. Yes, there needs to be encouragement, but to spend $50,000 to encourage people to give more to a church seems strange. And to giving to a son of a particular parish as is Jeb! Bush just has cheese written all over it.
I have been to many a stewardship dinner in my 23+ years at my Episcopal church and the most exciting, if one can say that, was held at a private country club. Probably paid for by the member and used as a tax write off as a charitable contribution. Not a give me $50,000 and I might give some of it back.
The Episcopal Church is not a "tithing" church in the sense that everyone is expected to give a tenth of their income, based on the Holy Bible, but more what they can and when they can not, use one's time and or talent in such a way that can be beneficial to the particular parish. Many a communicant/congregant do give a tenth of their salary to the church. Some more, some less and some can't give money at all.
The best way of encouragement I have found are the personal stories of those that have been touched in a positive way by the church's ministries. It is knowing that which has made us dig deep to pledge more than we might have in the past.
But to be honest, Mrs. RVFTLC and I would really have a hard time with a famous person speaking at a stewardship dinner and making off with a speaking fee as if this was just another notch of speaking fees. Which I think in any other setting is cool. If any group and or organization wants to pay a fixed fee for any famous person to speak, mazeltov.
But the cheese factor in which Jeb! Bush charges a HIGHER speaking fee from a church is, well disgusting.
That, to me, is not good stewardship. Even if the church can afford it.
This is but one more reason I do not find Jeb! Bush an attractive candidate for president.
H/T: Jeff Bradshaw.
According to this article, the former Florida governor and GOP presidential candidate, John Ellis Jeb! Bush, charged St. Martin's Episcopal church $50,000 for a speech a year ago September and it was on . . .stewardship.
This is what a church does to encourage people to give money and or more money?!
Let me write this.
If my church spent that kind of money to encourage people to give more money to pay for the functions of the church and it's outreach ministries, we would probably recall our vestry, the governing board, and ask for our rector and or priest-in-charge to be removed.
You have to understand that St. Martin's Episcopal Church, Houston, is the largest and one of the wealthiest churches in The Episcopal Church. It has some of the cream of the crop of the Houston establishment as members including former President George H. W. Bush and his wife, Barbara. And Mr. Bush's top long-time crony, James A. Baker. That is just the political establishment. You get the picture that this is high-end folks.
There is no doubt in my mind that this church could have found something more worthy than lining the pockets of the then future Republican presidential candidate.
I do agree that it takes money to make money, but giving one's time, talent and or money for one's church is not the same thing.
People will do the above if they believe in what the church has done, is doing and will be doing in the future. Yes, there needs to be encouragement, but to spend $50,000 to encourage people to give more to a church seems strange. And to giving to a son of a particular parish as is Jeb! Bush just has cheese written all over it.
I have been to many a stewardship dinner in my 23+ years at my Episcopal church and the most exciting, if one can say that, was held at a private country club. Probably paid for by the member and used as a tax write off as a charitable contribution. Not a give me $50,000 and I might give some of it back.
The Episcopal Church is not a "tithing" church in the sense that everyone is expected to give a tenth of their income, based on the Holy Bible, but more what they can and when they can not, use one's time and or talent in such a way that can be beneficial to the particular parish. Many a communicant/congregant do give a tenth of their salary to the church. Some more, some less and some can't give money at all.
The best way of encouragement I have found are the personal stories of those that have been touched in a positive way by the church's ministries. It is knowing that which has made us dig deep to pledge more than we might have in the past.
But to be honest, Mrs. RVFTLC and I would really have a hard time with a famous person speaking at a stewardship dinner and making off with a speaking fee as if this was just another notch of speaking fees. Which I think in any other setting is cool. If any group and or organization wants to pay a fixed fee for any famous person to speak, mazeltov.
But the cheese factor in which Jeb! Bush charges a HIGHER speaking fee from a church is, well disgusting.
That, to me, is not good stewardship. Even if the church can afford it.
This is but one more reason I do not find Jeb! Bush an attractive candidate for president.
H/T: Jeff Bradshaw.
Friday, October 02, 2015
The Politics Of Mass Murders
It is not very often that you will read it on this blog, but for once Donald J. Trump is right about something.
And surprisingly, the Dear Leader, President Obama, is wrong.
Yesterday another mass murder took place and this time it was at a community college in Southwestern Oregon that took the lives of 10 people and injured another seven. It was an act of madness as is seemingly all of these mass killings have been. They always are.
My friend and fellow blogger, Mr. Social Extinction, juxtaposed the reaction of the current GOP front-runner for president, the Donald, and that of the Dear Leader, President Obama.
It appears that, of course, the Donald is cold and almost callous when you just read what is below:
"You're going to have these things happen and it's a horrible thing to behold, horrible. It's not politically correct to say that, but you're going to have that will be for the next million years, there's going to be difficulty and people are going to slip through the cracks. what are you going to do, institutionalize everybody?"
Good question since in almost all cases there is some kind of mental issue involved. And we will not completely know because this gunman, Chris Harper Mercer, was killed by police that arrived on the scene of the carnage. Of course there are many accounts on Mr. Mercer's life, but one thing is clear that there was some kind of issue. Mr. Mercer graduated from the Switzer Learning Center in 2010. It is a high school that specializes in youths with learning disabilities. It is a broad term, learning disabilities. But more will come out, that is certain. And to note, Mr. Mercer had multiple weapons that, at this writing, he passed all the background checks and appeared to purchase legally.
Which leads to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
We know that he is pissed off because the gloves came off in a news conference yesterday.
An aside.
Why do we have to hear from any president on such a situation before everything is known? Whoever the next president is, I sure as hell do not want hear that president go on the air to pontificate without ascertaining all the facts. Period.
Now back to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Why now, instead of just offering prayers and condolences, the Dear Leader, President Obama, said that we should just out and out politicize these events until there is "sensible" gun control laws.
Of course.
And now the Dear Leader, President Obama, claims that there is something "routine" about these reports. No, in fact these are still isolated incidents. That is why it is still big news.
But then the Dear Leader, President Obama, outright lied when he claimed that states and or localities that have strict gun laws have less violent crime. May I remind the president that his hometown of Chicago has some of the strictest gun restrictions and the highest murder, murder, rate at the hands of guns than many states with such laws as open-carry. And let me throw in a few cities like Baltimore, Detroit, and now even Los Angeles that the murder rate at the hands of a gun are up drastically.
So here is what our Dear Leader, President Obama, had to say about this matter:
"Somehow this has become routine. The reporting is routine, my response here at this podium ends up being routine. And what becomes routine is the response those who oppose any sort of gun control legislation."
Let me remind the readers here that the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats controlled the legislative (congress) and executive branches for the first two years of his presidency. And the senate was a veto-proof one at that. Hell, he could have done what he cited yesterday, the massive gun confiscation done in Australia after a mass shooting in 1996. And it was done under a conservative government there. Of course it would have been ruled unconstitutional under that pesky second amendment to the United States constitution. It reads in it's entirety:
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I highlight people because it means law abiding citizens that could be called up in the case of war and or insurrection.
The American left hates this and intentionally blurs the plain meaning every chance that it gets. And here it is once again.
While the Donald often makes little if any sense and has a sketchy record on gun control, his statement made perfect sense. All the laws other than outright confiscation of all firearms might have stopped this. But reality is that it probably would not have done a thing.
Thus, mass murders will constantly be a source of great division for many Americans. But it would behoove Americans to have a sane, tempered approach rather than a knee-jerk We can solve the problem if only.
And surprisingly, the Dear Leader, President Obama, is wrong.
Yesterday another mass murder took place and this time it was at a community college in Southwestern Oregon that took the lives of 10 people and injured another seven. It was an act of madness as is seemingly all of these mass killings have been. They always are.
My friend and fellow blogger, Mr. Social Extinction, juxtaposed the reaction of the current GOP front-runner for president, the Donald, and that of the Dear Leader, President Obama.
It appears that, of course, the Donald is cold and almost callous when you just read what is below:
"You're going to have these things happen and it's a horrible thing to behold, horrible. It's not politically correct to say that, but you're going to have that will be for the next million years, there's going to be difficulty and people are going to slip through the cracks. what are you going to do, institutionalize everybody?"
Good question since in almost all cases there is some kind of mental issue involved. And we will not completely know because this gunman, Chris Harper Mercer, was killed by police that arrived on the scene of the carnage. Of course there are many accounts on Mr. Mercer's life, but one thing is clear that there was some kind of issue. Mr. Mercer graduated from the Switzer Learning Center in 2010. It is a high school that specializes in youths with learning disabilities. It is a broad term, learning disabilities. But more will come out, that is certain. And to note, Mr. Mercer had multiple weapons that, at this writing, he passed all the background checks and appeared to purchase legally.
Which leads to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
We know that he is pissed off because the gloves came off in a news conference yesterday.
An aside.
Why do we have to hear from any president on such a situation before everything is known? Whoever the next president is, I sure as hell do not want hear that president go on the air to pontificate without ascertaining all the facts. Period.
Now back to the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Why now, instead of just offering prayers and condolences, the Dear Leader, President Obama, said that we should just out and out politicize these events until there is "sensible" gun control laws.
Of course.
And now the Dear Leader, President Obama, claims that there is something "routine" about these reports. No, in fact these are still isolated incidents. That is why it is still big news.
But then the Dear Leader, President Obama, outright lied when he claimed that states and or localities that have strict gun laws have less violent crime. May I remind the president that his hometown of Chicago has some of the strictest gun restrictions and the highest murder, murder, rate at the hands of guns than many states with such laws as open-carry. And let me throw in a few cities like Baltimore, Detroit, and now even Los Angeles that the murder rate at the hands of a gun are up drastically.
So here is what our Dear Leader, President Obama, had to say about this matter:
"Somehow this has become routine. The reporting is routine, my response here at this podium ends up being routine. And what becomes routine is the response those who oppose any sort of gun control legislation."
Let me remind the readers here that the Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats controlled the legislative (congress) and executive branches for the first two years of his presidency. And the senate was a veto-proof one at that. Hell, he could have done what he cited yesterday, the massive gun confiscation done in Australia after a mass shooting in 1996. And it was done under a conservative government there. Of course it would have been ruled unconstitutional under that pesky second amendment to the United States constitution. It reads in it's entirety:
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I highlight people because it means law abiding citizens that could be called up in the case of war and or insurrection.
The American left hates this and intentionally blurs the plain meaning every chance that it gets. And here it is once again.
While the Donald often makes little if any sense and has a sketchy record on gun control, his statement made perfect sense. All the laws other than outright confiscation of all firearms might have stopped this. But reality is that it probably would not have done a thing.
Thus, mass murders will constantly be a source of great division for many Americans. But it would behoove Americans to have a sane, tempered approach rather than a knee-jerk We can solve the problem if only.
Thursday, October 01, 2015
Is The American Left Intentionally Diminishing Our Role As The Leader Of The Free World?
Of course they are.
Think about this for just a moment.
The Middle East is about to become a vassal state of Russia/Syria/Iran on one side and Sunni/The Islamic State/Israel on another. What is the current administration's standing in all of this? Essentially letting Russia and Vladamir Putin prop up the Bashar al-Assad regime of terror, by extension allowing Iran to join in the fun and their vassal state within a state, Hezbollah (the state within the "borders" of Lebanon) trolling for enemies to their Shia branch of Islam.
And a seemingly unholy alliance of Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and yes, Saudi Arabia and even more perplexing but understandable, the Islamic state, all Sunni's except for Israel, obviously.
The result of this war has been a mass exodus of people from the region to Europe, well pretty much everywhere that will in one way or another take them.
This is just one way America is weakened in the world.
But is this all by design?
The reason I believe that it is the case is simple.
Defense spending, the most important and only constitutionally mandated duty of the federal government, takes a huge bulk of spending that the left would like to see spread out in other ways. The only way to cut defense spending is to curb our role in the world. Once that is done then more of the defense budget can be cut and funnelled into favored left-wing programs.
Do you remember growing up seeing something that went like this:
It will be a great day when the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.
That was because of schools having to hold fundraisers for various things. In a perfect world, I could agree with that. But unlike the lefties that still today parade that around, I live in the real world. A world in which there are nations and radical ideologies that would love to destroy our way of life. Radical Islam does not care if we hold a bake sale for a bomber or spend more money on education. They have their own, perverse, ideas about education. Iran looks to us as some Great Satan. We have to be put in our place. And bye-bye to Israel.
But why? Why would we either outsource and or abdicate our role in the world?
Because at the end of the day, to complete the Europeanization of the United States, the defense forces, again the only constitutionally mandated entity called for in the constitution, must be gutted. And that includes the State department and the C. I. A as well. Once all of that is done, the left will make a case to expand the welfare state beyond the wildest dreams of even 20 years ago.
So yes, the American left, led by the Dear Leader, President Obama himself, is trying desperately to lower our standing and prestige around the world. There is even a segment of the isolationist right that would welcome this, but for different reasons.
Once that is done, then the Great Society can ramp up in earnest.
The fact is that, like it or not, the United States is the only superpower in the world that is a responsible one. The other actors such as Red China and Russia could go half-cocked over something most would find innocuous. Without a strong United States at home and abroad, can you imagine what would happen if things continue to deteriorate in such places as the Middle East?
It is all the more reason that the Republicans need to nominate someone who has a clue on how a responsible superpower is supposed to act.
Because we all know the Democrats and the left-wing will not allow an actual candidate that believes in what we call American Exceptionalism.
As long as the left continues to diminish our role around the world, it becomes clear that they do not care. And that is a tragedy for the United States.
Think about this for just a moment.
The Middle East is about to become a vassal state of Russia/Syria/Iran on one side and Sunni/The Islamic State/Israel on another. What is the current administration's standing in all of this? Essentially letting Russia and Vladamir Putin prop up the Bashar al-Assad regime of terror, by extension allowing Iran to join in the fun and their vassal state within a state, Hezbollah (the state within the "borders" of Lebanon) trolling for enemies to their Shia branch of Islam.
And a seemingly unholy alliance of Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and yes, Saudi Arabia and even more perplexing but understandable, the Islamic state, all Sunni's except for Israel, obviously.
The result of this war has been a mass exodus of people from the region to Europe, well pretty much everywhere that will in one way or another take them.
This is just one way America is weakened in the world.
But is this all by design?
The reason I believe that it is the case is simple.
Defense spending, the most important and only constitutionally mandated duty of the federal government, takes a huge bulk of spending that the left would like to see spread out in other ways. The only way to cut defense spending is to curb our role in the world. Once that is done then more of the defense budget can be cut and funnelled into favored left-wing programs.
Do you remember growing up seeing something that went like this:
It will be a great day when the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.
That was because of schools having to hold fundraisers for various things. In a perfect world, I could agree with that. But unlike the lefties that still today parade that around, I live in the real world. A world in which there are nations and radical ideologies that would love to destroy our way of life. Radical Islam does not care if we hold a bake sale for a bomber or spend more money on education. They have their own, perverse, ideas about education. Iran looks to us as some Great Satan. We have to be put in our place. And bye-bye to Israel.
But why? Why would we either outsource and or abdicate our role in the world?
Because at the end of the day, to complete the Europeanization of the United States, the defense forces, again the only constitutionally mandated entity called for in the constitution, must be gutted. And that includes the State department and the C. I. A as well. Once all of that is done, the left will make a case to expand the welfare state beyond the wildest dreams of even 20 years ago.
So yes, the American left, led by the Dear Leader, President Obama himself, is trying desperately to lower our standing and prestige around the world. There is even a segment of the isolationist right that would welcome this, but for different reasons.
Once that is done, then the Great Society can ramp up in earnest.
The fact is that, like it or not, the United States is the only superpower in the world that is a responsible one. The other actors such as Red China and Russia could go half-cocked over something most would find innocuous. Without a strong United States at home and abroad, can you imagine what would happen if things continue to deteriorate in such places as the Middle East?
It is all the more reason that the Republicans need to nominate someone who has a clue on how a responsible superpower is supposed to act.
Because we all know the Democrats and the left-wing will not allow an actual candidate that believes in what we call American Exceptionalism.
As long as the left continues to diminish our role around the world, it becomes clear that they do not care. And that is a tragedy for the United States.
Tuesday, September 29, 2015
Pat Sajak For California Governor?
With the California governor, Jerry Moonbeam Brown, being term-limited out of office in 2018, no time like now to begin to see a replacement for the four-term left-wing governor.
So why not Pat Sajak?!
Pat Sajak?!
Isn't he the dude that hosts the Wheel Of Fortune game show?
And what, pray tel, makes him worthy of consideration for California governor? Haven't we already had an actor screw up the state once?
Normally I would be in agreement.
But Mr. Sajak is NOT Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Well, Mr. Sajak is a Republican, right?
Yes, he is.
So he must be a squish, right? Just like Benedict Arnold, right?
In reading this I do not think so in the least.
Mr. Sajak is a solid conservative.
One huge difference is that Mr. Sajak is, to be blunt, a Globaloney Warming/Climate change denier. And while not a certified meteorologist, Mr. Sajak was a weather reporter for KNBC channel 4 in Los Angeles before he made it big in Wheel Of Fortune land. Along the way one has to assume he learned a thing or two about weather. And where it all fits in on the great ecological debate of this era.
Mr. Sajak is not shy about the fact he believes in what we now call American Exceptionalism. Here is from the profile article:
"The Wright Brothers, what was it, 1903, they got about 20 feet in the air and went about 180 feet. Sixty-six years later we put a man on the moon and brought him back. Oh, and in the meantime we fought two world wars and fought a great depression."
A very short, succinct history of the United States in the 20th century. I would add that, under Ronald Reagan, the United States defeated and literally ended expansionist Soviet communism.
Mr. Sajak is a college dropout but serves on the board of Hillsdale College. And a vice-chairman, no less.
Unlike Benedict Arnold, who ran for California governor on a lark, I would expect Mr. Sajak to think about it with seriousness. He is 68 years old and a very young looking one at that. He would be about 70 years old if he were to take the challenge. And he is not annoying about his politics. It rarely, if ever, shows up on Wheel Of Fortune. One of the extreme times it did it was not so political as it was somewhat endearing. Mr. Sajak was talking to a contestant and he said to the contestant "You're engaged - some woman agreed to marry you!" the man told Mr. Sajak, "Some gentleman." to which Mr. Sajak retorted in an innocuous way, "Oh, I'm sorry - wrong again. I had a 50-50 shot." Of course the gay crusaders noticed it during the summer reruns and gave Mr. Sajak a hard time. When Mr. Sajak is not hosting a television gold mine, he is doing some writing over at the Ricochet conservative website.
Mr. Sajak is a lot like Ronald Reagan in that he does not take himself seriously but the ideas matter to him.
But in a clearly moribund California Republican party, he very well could be a shot in the arm in making the party truly competitive statewide.
While he is not thinking about it now, Mr. Sajak has nothing to prove in Wheel Of Fortune land. It is more successful than he ever imagined. Mr. Sajak literally saved the show. He is a wealthy man.
Maybe it will be time for Mr. Sajak to save California from the excesses of the leftist power structure.
So why not Pat Sajak?!
Pat Sajak?!
Isn't he the dude that hosts the Wheel Of Fortune game show?
And what, pray tel, makes him worthy of consideration for California governor? Haven't we already had an actor screw up the state once?
Normally I would be in agreement.
But Mr. Sajak is NOT Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Well, Mr. Sajak is a Republican, right?
Yes, he is.
So he must be a squish, right? Just like Benedict Arnold, right?
In reading this I do not think so in the least.
Mr. Sajak is a solid conservative.
One huge difference is that Mr. Sajak is, to be blunt, a Globaloney Warming/Climate change denier. And while not a certified meteorologist, Mr. Sajak was a weather reporter for KNBC channel 4 in Los Angeles before he made it big in Wheel Of Fortune land. Along the way one has to assume he learned a thing or two about weather. And where it all fits in on the great ecological debate of this era.
Mr. Sajak is not shy about the fact he believes in what we now call American Exceptionalism. Here is from the profile article:
"The Wright Brothers, what was it, 1903, they got about 20 feet in the air and went about 180 feet. Sixty-six years later we put a man on the moon and brought him back. Oh, and in the meantime we fought two world wars and fought a great depression."
A very short, succinct history of the United States in the 20th century. I would add that, under Ronald Reagan, the United States defeated and literally ended expansionist Soviet communism.
Mr. Sajak is a college dropout but serves on the board of Hillsdale College. And a vice-chairman, no less.
Unlike Benedict Arnold, who ran for California governor on a lark, I would expect Mr. Sajak to think about it with seriousness. He is 68 years old and a very young looking one at that. He would be about 70 years old if he were to take the challenge. And he is not annoying about his politics. It rarely, if ever, shows up on Wheel Of Fortune. One of the extreme times it did it was not so political as it was somewhat endearing. Mr. Sajak was talking to a contestant and he said to the contestant "You're engaged - some woman agreed to marry you!" the man told Mr. Sajak, "Some gentleman." to which Mr. Sajak retorted in an innocuous way, "Oh, I'm sorry - wrong again. I had a 50-50 shot." Of course the gay crusaders noticed it during the summer reruns and gave Mr. Sajak a hard time. When Mr. Sajak is not hosting a television gold mine, he is doing some writing over at the Ricochet conservative website.
Mr. Sajak is a lot like Ronald Reagan in that he does not take himself seriously but the ideas matter to him.
But in a clearly moribund California Republican party, he very well could be a shot in the arm in making the party truly competitive statewide.
While he is not thinking about it now, Mr. Sajak has nothing to prove in Wheel Of Fortune land. It is more successful than he ever imagined. Mr. Sajak literally saved the show. He is a wealthy man.
Maybe it will be time for Mr. Sajak to save California from the excesses of the leftist power structure.
Monday, September 28, 2015
Kevin McCarthy In Speaker Race
No surprise as Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield, Ca.) announced that he will run in the election to replace John A. Boehner as speaker of the house.
In Rep. McCarthy's announcement, he sounded the right themes. And he did address the growing chasm between the GOP base voters and the representatives in Washington, D. C. in both the house and the senate:
"If elected speaker, I promise you that we will have the courage to lead the fight for our conservative principles and make our case to the American people. But we will have the wisdom to listen to our constituents and each other so that we always move forward together. I look forward to fighting for our conservative principles."
Forgive us in the rank and file but part of the problem is that Rep. McCarthy is a part of the GOP house leadership. The same one that has been led by John Boehner. The same leadership that ignored the base. The same leadership that cannot point to a meaningful, conservative accomplishment under this leadership.
It is possible that Rep. McCarthy, watching what happened to Mr. Boehner, gets the message. Rep. McCarthy has the chance to make amends with conservatives in the congress by not punishing opposition to leadership. And pursuing measures that conservatives want to see at least come to a vote. And to use his bully pulpit to pressure the senate GOP leadership to take up some of if not all the measures that go that way.
There will be more than Rep. McCarthy running for sure. It all depends on if conservatives can, once and for all, rally behind one candidate.
Are you ready for another election campaign?!
In Rep. McCarthy's announcement, he sounded the right themes. And he did address the growing chasm between the GOP base voters and the representatives in Washington, D. C. in both the house and the senate:
"If elected speaker, I promise you that we will have the courage to lead the fight for our conservative principles and make our case to the American people. But we will have the wisdom to listen to our constituents and each other so that we always move forward together. I look forward to fighting for our conservative principles."
Forgive us in the rank and file but part of the problem is that Rep. McCarthy is a part of the GOP house leadership. The same one that has been led by John Boehner. The same leadership that ignored the base. The same leadership that cannot point to a meaningful, conservative accomplishment under this leadership.
It is possible that Rep. McCarthy, watching what happened to Mr. Boehner, gets the message. Rep. McCarthy has the chance to make amends with conservatives in the congress by not punishing opposition to leadership. And pursuing measures that conservatives want to see at least come to a vote. And to use his bully pulpit to pressure the senate GOP leadership to take up some of if not all the measures that go that way.
There will be more than Rep. McCarthy running for sure. It all depends on if conservatives can, once and for all, rally behind one candidate.
Are you ready for another election campaign?!
How Boehner Screwed Up The GOP
Well, it's not all John A. Boehner's fault as much as the wing of the GOP that continues to pretty much ignore the base and pursue a "we're better at running the Welfare State than the Democrats" strategy.
Yesterday, the soon to be former speaker of the house took to the Sunday morning snore-fests to, essentially, diss the conservative base not just of the rank and file but of his own GOP caucus itself.
On Face The Nation, Mr. Boehner hung out the white flag in an obnoxious manner:
"And so, we've got groups here in town, members of the house and senate here in town, who whipped people into a frenzy believing that they know - they know - are never going to happen."
Great, Mr. Boehner. Then why are there two parties in the first place? Talk about feeding into the conspiracy theories. We give you a substantial majority in the house. We give Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) a majority in the senate. And now you tell us it was all on falsehoods? Now you tell us that we need a Republican president; No kidding, Sherlock?! And a supermajority in both the house and senate. For what? To just drip the socialism slowly or to actually do what we, the voters, want?
I get it that there is a Democrat in the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama. If Sen. McConnell had testes, he would force the nuclear option and block filibusters and send some of the legislation to the Dear Leader, President Obama, and let him veto it. That is what the Democrats did to then President Ford after the 1974 mid-term elections when they sent bill after bill that President Ford vetoed. Some were over ridden and became law. Other vetoes were sustained.
Taylor Millard over at Hot Air explains part of the problem and that is people being elected to do one thing, stay in Washington, D. C. way too long and become part of the problem.
John Boehner is but a perfect example of such a problem.
Mr. Boehner was elected in 1990 and joined with the Newt Gingrich forces that eventually ousted long-time house minority leader, Robert Michel. And he was all in on the Contract With America that was the cornerstone of the Republicans taking the house of representatives in 1994 for the first time since the 1950s. And when he saw that Mr. Gingrich was becoming politically toxic, Mr. Boehner was part of the so-called group that led to the ouster of Mr. Gingrich as speaker.
So, Mr. Boehner for a while knew how to deal with the internal politics of the GOP caucus. And he moved up the ladder in leadership. And of course in 2010, he became the speaker of the house and the game seemed to change for Mr. Boehner, already a house member for 20 years.
Instead of talking about the efforts to fight the so-called health care "reform" and the other multitude of excesses of Team Obama, the is what Mr. Boehner thinks are accomplishments.
The Ryan-Murray budget and or sequestration.
Extending most of the George W. Bush tax cuts.
Passage of the so-called "Doc-fix" bill.
Mr. Millard, as I am, is not impressed with this record of accomplishment. I suspect most members of the house are not impressed either. And the rank and file GOP voter, forget it.
The problem is that there is just this obsession about the "institution" and "process" among the GOP leadership. Thus what happens is the conservative message is co-opted for elections and then we get crap. All the "accomplishments" Mr. Boehner cites are beyond inside baseball. Did Mr. Boehner have a tax reform plan? HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! How about a plan to at the very least force some reform of Obamacare? HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Those are but two issues that separate the GOP from the Democrats. And yet, yet nothing! NOTHING!
Now to many voters, the GOP is not a party of reform but of basically greasing the wheels for their clients.
THAT is how Mr. Boehner, and Sen. McConnell are screwing up the GOP.
I pleased that Mr. Boehner is retiring but mad that he did not appreciate the mandate that he was given to be bold and lead. He became the very establishment that he fought against in his early years.
Whoever replaces Mr. Boehner needs to remember that an opposition party can still get what it wants even if the end result is not a absolute victory.
Yesterday, the soon to be former speaker of the house took to the Sunday morning snore-fests to, essentially, diss the conservative base not just of the rank and file but of his own GOP caucus itself.
On Face The Nation, Mr. Boehner hung out the white flag in an obnoxious manner:
"And so, we've got groups here in town, members of the house and senate here in town, who whipped people into a frenzy believing that they know - they know - are never going to happen."
Great, Mr. Boehner. Then why are there two parties in the first place? Talk about feeding into the conspiracy theories. We give you a substantial majority in the house. We give Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) a majority in the senate. And now you tell us it was all on falsehoods? Now you tell us that we need a Republican president; No kidding, Sherlock?! And a supermajority in both the house and senate. For what? To just drip the socialism slowly or to actually do what we, the voters, want?
I get it that there is a Democrat in the White House, the Dear Leader, President Obama. If Sen. McConnell had testes, he would force the nuclear option and block filibusters and send some of the legislation to the Dear Leader, President Obama, and let him veto it. That is what the Democrats did to then President Ford after the 1974 mid-term elections when they sent bill after bill that President Ford vetoed. Some were over ridden and became law. Other vetoes were sustained.
Taylor Millard over at Hot Air explains part of the problem and that is people being elected to do one thing, stay in Washington, D. C. way too long and become part of the problem.
John Boehner is but a perfect example of such a problem.
Mr. Boehner was elected in 1990 and joined with the Newt Gingrich forces that eventually ousted long-time house minority leader, Robert Michel. And he was all in on the Contract With America that was the cornerstone of the Republicans taking the house of representatives in 1994 for the first time since the 1950s. And when he saw that Mr. Gingrich was becoming politically toxic, Mr. Boehner was part of the so-called group that led to the ouster of Mr. Gingrich as speaker.
So, Mr. Boehner for a while knew how to deal with the internal politics of the GOP caucus. And he moved up the ladder in leadership. And of course in 2010, he became the speaker of the house and the game seemed to change for Mr. Boehner, already a house member for 20 years.
Instead of talking about the efforts to fight the so-called health care "reform" and the other multitude of excesses of Team Obama, the is what Mr. Boehner thinks are accomplishments.
The Ryan-Murray budget and or sequestration.
Extending most of the George W. Bush tax cuts.
Passage of the so-called "Doc-fix" bill.
Mr. Millard, as I am, is not impressed with this record of accomplishment. I suspect most members of the house are not impressed either. And the rank and file GOP voter, forget it.
The problem is that there is just this obsession about the "institution" and "process" among the GOP leadership. Thus what happens is the conservative message is co-opted for elections and then we get crap. All the "accomplishments" Mr. Boehner cites are beyond inside baseball. Did Mr. Boehner have a tax reform plan? HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! How about a plan to at the very least force some reform of Obamacare? HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Those are but two issues that separate the GOP from the Democrats. And yet, yet nothing! NOTHING!
Now to many voters, the GOP is not a party of reform but of basically greasing the wheels for their clients.
THAT is how Mr. Boehner, and Sen. McConnell are screwing up the GOP.
I pleased that Mr. Boehner is retiring but mad that he did not appreciate the mandate that he was given to be bold and lead. He became the very establishment that he fought against in his early years.
Whoever replaces Mr. Boehner needs to remember that an opposition party can still get what it wants even if the end result is not a absolute victory.
Sunday, September 27, 2015
The Letter Of James
The letter of James is much more interesting now that I have taken to writing about it.
I did not realize how much importance there is to the letter.
Today's reading from the Letter of James is important as it speaks of bringing a Christian believer (although not specifically referred to as such since the Christian church was not distinct from first-century Judaism yet) who strays back to the fold.
The reading (James 5 13-20):
Are any among you suffering? They should pray. Are any cheerful? They should sing songs of praise. Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them., anointing them in the name of the Lord with oil. The prayer of the sick will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective. Elijah was a human being like us, and he prayed fervently that it would not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. Then he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain and the earth yielded its harvest.
My brothers and sisters, if anyone wanders from the truth and is brought back by another, you should know that whoever brings back a sinner from wandering will save the sinner's soul and from death and cover a multitude of sins.
There is so much to unpack, as they say. But I want to deal the last sentence because that is something that I know affects every believer at some point in the Christian journey.
As a Christian, I believe in the truth of Jesus Christ. That he was born of a virgin and lived and died as one of us. That he was betrayed, crucified, died and buried. And that he rose on the third day and is sitteth at the right hand of the father and will come back to judge the quick and the dead. And that He died on the cross to absolve me of my sins if I just believe in him as Lord and Savior.
That is the very, very short version of the truth of Christianity.
But many people, many actually brought up in the church from baby to young adulthood end up at some point rejecting that truth. Some look at other religions. Some look to the "earthly" things such a success and drive to achievement. In the process, they lose that understanding of the simple truths of the faith.
One of the most prolific reasons, I believe, is the reality that all organized religion of any kind is led by human beings. Some of those human beings are driven by their own agenda and not that which is God's agenda.
Think about before the Protestant reformation and the fact that the organized clergy kept the Holy Bible from the people. Only they could read from the Holy Bible and it was in a language that, as the Book of Common Prayer notes in the 39 Articles of Religion, not understandeth by the people. Latin was not understood by the average German. Spaniard. English-speaker. By translating the Holy Bible into the language of the people where ever they lived, it took so much of the mystery of of the Holy Bible.
It also meant that we could all study the Holy Bible and understand such a powerful reading as the one above.
Do you have someone that you care about who has left the Christian fold? One that you wished you could bring back to the fold but did not know how?
What I understand this reading to mean is that the power of prayer can work. It may not be the way we think, but by prayer and asking God to directly intervene, which he also can do in his way, not ours, is all that it takes. It may not be some way to beat to the power of Christ but simply and sincerely saying to that person, "I'll pray for you." maybe all that it takes.
Remember, God is the one in charge.
And that is what makes this letter so important to remember.
I did not realize how much importance there is to the letter.
Today's reading from the Letter of James is important as it speaks of bringing a Christian believer (although not specifically referred to as such since the Christian church was not distinct from first-century Judaism yet) who strays back to the fold.
The reading (James 5 13-20):
Are any among you suffering? They should pray. Are any cheerful? They should sing songs of praise. Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them., anointing them in the name of the Lord with oil. The prayer of the sick will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, so that you may be healed. The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective. Elijah was a human being like us, and he prayed fervently that it would not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. Then he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain and the earth yielded its harvest.
My brothers and sisters, if anyone wanders from the truth and is brought back by another, you should know that whoever brings back a sinner from wandering will save the sinner's soul and from death and cover a multitude of sins.
There is so much to unpack, as they say. But I want to deal the last sentence because that is something that I know affects every believer at some point in the Christian journey.
As a Christian, I believe in the truth of Jesus Christ. That he was born of a virgin and lived and died as one of us. That he was betrayed, crucified, died and buried. And that he rose on the third day and is sitteth at the right hand of the father and will come back to judge the quick and the dead. And that He died on the cross to absolve me of my sins if I just believe in him as Lord and Savior.
That is the very, very short version of the truth of Christianity.
But many people, many actually brought up in the church from baby to young adulthood end up at some point rejecting that truth. Some look at other religions. Some look to the "earthly" things such a success and drive to achievement. In the process, they lose that understanding of the simple truths of the faith.
One of the most prolific reasons, I believe, is the reality that all organized religion of any kind is led by human beings. Some of those human beings are driven by their own agenda and not that which is God's agenda.
Think about before the Protestant reformation and the fact that the organized clergy kept the Holy Bible from the people. Only they could read from the Holy Bible and it was in a language that, as the Book of Common Prayer notes in the 39 Articles of Religion, not understandeth by the people. Latin was not understood by the average German. Spaniard. English-speaker. By translating the Holy Bible into the language of the people where ever they lived, it took so much of the mystery of of the Holy Bible.
It also meant that we could all study the Holy Bible and understand such a powerful reading as the one above.
Do you have someone that you care about who has left the Christian fold? One that you wished you could bring back to the fold but did not know how?
What I understand this reading to mean is that the power of prayer can work. It may not be the way we think, but by prayer and asking God to directly intervene, which he also can do in his way, not ours, is all that it takes. It may not be some way to beat to the power of Christ but simply and sincerely saying to that person, "I'll pray for you." maybe all that it takes.
Remember, God is the one in charge.
And that is what makes this letter so important to remember.
Friday, September 25, 2015
The Ultimate Friday News Dump; John Boehner To Resign As House Speaker
The Flaming Skull over at the Ace of Spades and Allahpundit's updates are proof of the ultimate Friday news dump.
That is that the speaker of the house, John Boehner, will resign as speaker and the house at the end of October.
The likely replacement will be the house majority leader, Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield).
Ahh, not so fast.
According to one of Allahpundit's updates, some conservatives may try to "Livingston" the likely successor, Mr. McCarthy.
The short history of what "Livingston" means is when Newt Gingrich resigned in the late 1990's, his successor was to be the then house majority leader, Bob Livingston (R-La.). But then it was exposed that he was having an affair and he stepped aside for the eventual winner, Denny Hastert (R-Ill.)
And there has been speculation, of course not confirmed, that Mr. McCarthy is a married man cavorting. And not just with any gal but another Republican congressman, Renee Elmers (R-N.C.)
If that is the case one of two things can happen.
Mr. McCarthy will be a conservative dream, held hostage in a sense, to be at the seat of power. Or he will try to be like a Boehner and seen as to willing to compromise. That will lead to either a drip of a possible McCarthy affair or an outright exposure that will lead Mr. McCarthy to stand down and also resign a la Livingston. And if it is with another member of congress, that congressman will probably resign as well.
So what other candidates are there out there?
One to watch is Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Oh.), a solid conservative and one that I believe will unify clearly disparate forces within the GOP majority.
Of course there is Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N. C.) who started the latest round of Boehner hate by filing a motion to "vacate the Chair" of speaker. Bet on him to run no matter what. Why not? He has nothing to lose, right?
My guess is that unless there is a serious attempt to oust Mr. McCarthy, he will become the next speaker of the house. And before people get all upset, Mr. McCarthy will be on a short leash by conservatives. Look for a possible McCarthy speakership to be more confrontational with Democrats and the Dear Leader, President Obama. Whoever is the new speaker that will be the case no matter what.
It really is the ultimate Friday news dump for John Boehner to resign as speaker while Pope Francis sucks up the news cycle on his first visit to the United States ever.
That is that the speaker of the house, John Boehner, will resign as speaker and the house at the end of October.
The likely replacement will be the house majority leader, Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield).
Ahh, not so fast.
According to one of Allahpundit's updates, some conservatives may try to "Livingston" the likely successor, Mr. McCarthy.
The short history of what "Livingston" means is when Newt Gingrich resigned in the late 1990's, his successor was to be the then house majority leader, Bob Livingston (R-La.). But then it was exposed that he was having an affair and he stepped aside for the eventual winner, Denny Hastert (R-Ill.)
And there has been speculation, of course not confirmed, that Mr. McCarthy is a married man cavorting. And not just with any gal but another Republican congressman, Renee Elmers (R-N.C.)
If that is the case one of two things can happen.
Mr. McCarthy will be a conservative dream, held hostage in a sense, to be at the seat of power. Or he will try to be like a Boehner and seen as to willing to compromise. That will lead to either a drip of a possible McCarthy affair or an outright exposure that will lead Mr. McCarthy to stand down and also resign a la Livingston. And if it is with another member of congress, that congressman will probably resign as well.
So what other candidates are there out there?
One to watch is Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Oh.), a solid conservative and one that I believe will unify clearly disparate forces within the GOP majority.
Of course there is Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N. C.) who started the latest round of Boehner hate by filing a motion to "vacate the Chair" of speaker. Bet on him to run no matter what. Why not? He has nothing to lose, right?
My guess is that unless there is a serious attempt to oust Mr. McCarthy, he will become the next speaker of the house. And before people get all upset, Mr. McCarthy will be on a short leash by conservatives. Look for a possible McCarthy speakership to be more confrontational with Democrats and the Dear Leader, President Obama. Whoever is the new speaker that will be the case no matter what.
It really is the ultimate Friday news dump for John Boehner to resign as speaker while Pope Francis sucks up the news cycle on his first visit to the United States ever.
Thursday, September 24, 2015
NR's Rich Lowry Drops A Bomb On The Donald
It's been a while since I wrote anything about Donald J. Trump, so why not write about this bomb dropped by National Review's editor-in-chief, Rich Lowry?
Don't you love it?! I do. It may be a bit too "adult" in language, but it has the Donald in a tizzy.
And it is worth watching!
Now I believe that the Donald is threatened by strong women and thinks that he can bully them the way that he does pretty much to those who are under him.
Thus this is the line Mr. Lowry said that is a truth bomb:
"He knows that he insulted and bullied his way to the top of the polls. No one was able to best him ever, except for this tough lady on that stage. And it must kill him. He must be simmering about it to this night."
The highlighted area is what counts. That the Donald was able to vanquish Rick Perry and Scott Walker into dropping out of the race. But he was left praising the appearance of one Carly Fiorina rather than doing his usual shtick.
Needless to say, the Donald took to Twitter:
.@FoxNews owes me an apology for allowing clueless pundit @RichLowry to use such foul language on tv. Unheard of!
Incompetent @RichLowry lost it tonight @FoxNews. He should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him.
Good Lord!
Really, you want to censor someone because he spoke the truth? You were punked and by a gal at that! Mr Lowry told it in the bluntest but truthful of ways.
I just want to see the Donald actually talk issues and not get into these childish, schoolyard games.
But until then I like to see a bomb dropped every now and then.
Don't you love it?! I do. It may be a bit too "adult" in language, but it has the Donald in a tizzy.
And it is worth watching!
Thus this is the line Mr. Lowry said that is a truth bomb:
"He knows that he insulted and bullied his way to the top of the polls. No one was able to best him ever, except for this tough lady on that stage. And it must kill him. He must be simmering about it to this night."
The highlighted area is what counts. That the Donald was able to vanquish Rick Perry and Scott Walker into dropping out of the race. But he was left praising the appearance of one Carly Fiorina rather than doing his usual shtick.
Needless to say, the Donald took to Twitter:
.@FoxNews owes me an apology for allowing clueless pundit @RichLowry to use such foul language on tv. Unheard of!
Incompetent @RichLowry lost it tonight @FoxNews. He should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him.
Good Lord!
Really, you want to censor someone because he spoke the truth? You were punked and by a gal at that! Mr Lowry told it in the bluntest but truthful of ways.
I just want to see the Donald actually talk issues and not get into these childish, schoolyard games.
But until then I like to see a bomb dropped every now and then.
The Religion Of Peace Strikes Again
It is the most wonderful time of year in Islam when those that are able to make their once-in-a-lifetime journey to Mecca to participate in the Hajj.
And every year it seems that there is a horrible stampede in which hundreds are killed in a stampede and earlier today was no exception as an estimated 700 plus have died as a result of one of those stampedes. According to the linked article 717 are confirmed dead and 863 are injured.
What makes this pilgrimage, and that is what it is, such a violent affair?
According to the Wikipedia link, there are expert guides and handbooks that, one can only surmise, follow the traditions of the pilgrimage and keep order.
But it appears thanks to modern transportation and the ability of Muslims from around the world to make the pilgrimage, starting in 1990, the Hajj Stampede became a thing. In that year, 1,492 people lost their lives. At this point that is the largest carnage to date. But today, today could rival it.
There is no such requirement in Christianity and Judaism, the other two great monotheistic religions. Sure, many Christians and Jews make pilgrimage to the Holy Land. And there are specific holy sites that each will visit. But how many times have you read about a stampede at the Church of the Holy Speculchre? That is where it is believed that Jesus Christ was crucified. Or at the Western Wall? That is supposed to be all that remained of the Holy Temple for Jews.
Why does it seem that even in what should be a peaceful once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage is there always some kind of violent stampede?
Like I say, the Religion of Peace strikes again!
And every year it seems that there is a horrible stampede in which hundreds are killed in a stampede and earlier today was no exception as an estimated 700 plus have died as a result of one of those stampedes. According to the linked article 717 are confirmed dead and 863 are injured.
What makes this pilgrimage, and that is what it is, such a violent affair?
According to the Wikipedia link, there are expert guides and handbooks that, one can only surmise, follow the traditions of the pilgrimage and keep order.
But it appears thanks to modern transportation and the ability of Muslims from around the world to make the pilgrimage, starting in 1990, the Hajj Stampede became a thing. In that year, 1,492 people lost their lives. At this point that is the largest carnage to date. But today, today could rival it.
There is no such requirement in Christianity and Judaism, the other two great monotheistic religions. Sure, many Christians and Jews make pilgrimage to the Holy Land. And there are specific holy sites that each will visit. But how many times have you read about a stampede at the Church of the Holy Speculchre? That is where it is believed that Jesus Christ was crucified. Or at the Western Wall? That is supposed to be all that remained of the Holy Temple for Jews.
Why does it seem that even in what should be a peaceful once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage is there always some kind of violent stampede?
Like I say, the Religion of Peace strikes again!
Monday, September 21, 2015
Ban The Man Bun
I like to think that I keep a healthy knowledge of pop cultural trends and I knew about the man bun but I did not realize this abomination actually had a name.
It is another blight of hipsterism that has polluted our culture nowadays.
For instance, today I had an appointment that I was really early for. So I took a visit to the nearby Starbucks. I got my beverage and decided that today I would sit outside. I had about 45 minutes and could still freeload WiFi. As I was on the phone looking at something, a gentleman walking by caught my eye. He was sharply dressed in suit and tie. And wearing . . .a MAN BUN!
Sort of looked like this guy.
OK, the beard was slightly better trimmed. But you get the idea.
Like pretty much everything else in hipsterland, this really sucks.
Somehow, this is so cool any guy can look like this, Why where I got the photo from is from a website called Man Bun Hairstyle Tutorial and Blueprint. How tragic.
Now I was criticised on my Facebook page for being a fashion police type. Usually, I don't particularly care. OK, I don't like tattoos. And a man bun can go away as did the dinosaurs.
So here's a RVFTLC confession.
Many a moon ago in college, I wore long hair. It was, to coin a phrase I heard on The Sopranos, a Jewfro. Really, with the right glasses I could have been a young Howard Stern. And even then, I was as much a conservative and Republican as I am today. But I was in college, a hard-rocker and looked the part. Why I even had a leather jacket to prove it.
But my theory held true. I wear my hair relatively short and gave up the leather jacket.
But a man bun?! Seriously?!
I do not get it. And then again, I get very little about the blight of hipsterism.
Seeing men my age (51) wearing such a thing is a sign of the end, folks.
It's all part of the culture that claims to promote individuality. Yet, surprisingly when so many people are doing the same thing, the individual factor goes right out the window. Which is why certain things become trendy in the first place.
But the man bun is also a sign of male femininity that is rather disturbing. Women throughout the ages have in one way or the other worn their air in a bun. Now the man bun was something in Asian culture, but certainly not Western culture or Islamic or African culture. Now, thanks to hipsters, many a man is growing long hair to match their scraggly beards and wearing their said long hair . . .in a bun like a woman.
Does this light stop? Ever?
It does when it is continued to be mocked and ridiculed. Not by the old farts like me but by the young that are very influenced by pop culture trends.
If there was only a way to ban the man bun . . .
It is another blight of hipsterism that has polluted our culture nowadays.
For instance, today I had an appointment that I was really early for. So I took a visit to the nearby Starbucks. I got my beverage and decided that today I would sit outside. I had about 45 minutes and could still freeload WiFi. As I was on the phone looking at something, a gentleman walking by caught my eye. He was sharply dressed in suit and tie. And wearing . . .a MAN BUN!
Sort of looked like this guy.
Like pretty much everything else in hipsterland, this really sucks.
Somehow, this is so cool any guy can look like this, Why where I got the photo from is from a website called Man Bun Hairstyle Tutorial and Blueprint. How tragic.
Now I was criticised on my Facebook page for being a fashion police type. Usually, I don't particularly care. OK, I don't like tattoos. And a man bun can go away as did the dinosaurs.
So here's a RVFTLC confession.
Many a moon ago in college, I wore long hair. It was, to coin a phrase I heard on The Sopranos, a Jewfro. Really, with the right glasses I could have been a young Howard Stern. And even then, I was as much a conservative and Republican as I am today. But I was in college, a hard-rocker and looked the part. Why I even had a leather jacket to prove it.
But my theory held true. I wear my hair relatively short and gave up the leather jacket.
But a man bun?! Seriously?!
I do not get it. And then again, I get very little about the blight of hipsterism.
Seeing men my age (51) wearing such a thing is a sign of the end, folks.
It's all part of the culture that claims to promote individuality. Yet, surprisingly when so many people are doing the same thing, the individual factor goes right out the window. Which is why certain things become trendy in the first place.
But the man bun is also a sign of male femininity that is rather disturbing. Women throughout the ages have in one way or the other worn their air in a bun. Now the man bun was something in Asian culture, but certainly not Western culture or Islamic or African culture. Now, thanks to hipsters, many a man is growing long hair to match their scraggly beards and wearing their said long hair . . .in a bun like a woman.
Does this light stop? Ever?
It does when it is continued to be mocked and ridiculed. Not by the old farts like me but by the young that are very influenced by pop culture trends.
If there was only a way to ban the man bun . . .
The Next GOP Casualty Is Scott Walker
According to The New York Times, the Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker, will be the second candidate to drop out of the presidential race as he will make the announcement a formality today at 4:00 pm, PDT.
This may have been prompted by the latest CNN/ORC poll which puts Mr. Walker in asterisk territory. Not good for a campaign that should be much better than it is.
Another factor was two rather weak debate performances. Let's face it that it was pretty hard for anyone to get in words edgewise against the current front runner, Donald J. Trump. But that is no excuse. When Mr. Walker spoke it was mostly about his tenure, an excellent one, as the governor of Wisconsin. But really nothing that set him apart from say someone like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. To be blunt, Mr. Walker seemed to be not ready for the big game.
That does not mean Mr. Walker does not have a future in Republican politics. After all he is only 50 years old and can now finish his term as governor. There is always another presidential run or a more realistic run for the United States senate.
Good luck to Gov. Scott Walker.
This may have been prompted by the latest CNN/ORC poll which puts Mr. Walker in asterisk territory. Not good for a campaign that should be much better than it is.
Another factor was two rather weak debate performances. Let's face it that it was pretty hard for anyone to get in words edgewise against the current front runner, Donald J. Trump. But that is no excuse. When Mr. Walker spoke it was mostly about his tenure, an excellent one, as the governor of Wisconsin. But really nothing that set him apart from say someone like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. To be blunt, Mr. Walker seemed to be not ready for the big game.
That does not mean Mr. Walker does not have a future in Republican politics. After all he is only 50 years old and can now finish his term as governor. There is always another presidential run or a more realistic run for the United States senate.
Good luck to Gov. Scott Walker.
Saturday, September 12, 2015
Say San Fran, How's That Sanctuary Going For You?
An interesting post by Jazz Shaw over at Hot Air shows that the group Judicial Watch obtained information on crime in San Francisco, a sanctuary city, and, surprisingly crime-especially violent crime-is up in the city by the bay.
According to the report, since San Francisco became an official sanctuary city in 2011, arrests for murder have increased a substantive 55% with arrests for rapes increasing a staggering 370%. Yes, you read that right, 370%.
The following chart is helpful in following the trend. For your help in understanding the code violations:
187 - First and second degree murder.
240 - Simple assault.
243 - Battery.
261 - Rape.
Again, keep in mind that these are cases in which an arrest has been made. This is not counting any case that is unsolved. And according to the Judicial Watch press release the above are for arrests and bookings. Again, there is nothing about the actual number of murders, per se in the city.
So the question in this.
Is this a direct result of being a sanctuary city and the sheriff's department expanding the meaning of sanctuary city so as to not hand over any suspected illegal alien to federal law enforcement?
While it seems that there is a casual possibility, it is hard to quantify because, by sheer coinkidink, the sheriff's department of San Francisco county does track such a thing through it's jail management system.
Thus I come to the same conclusion that Jazz does and that it is not clear but extremely probable the spikes are at least related to the sanctuary city enforcement and the perception that if one is an illegal alien criminal, and just being an illegal alien does not count in this, they will simply go through the system like any other criminal.
But look at this year compared to all of last year. Already there are 78 murders in which an arrest and or booking has been made. There are 54 assaults. Which means with three and a half months left of 2015, 58 more murders and 40 assaults will have to take place to surpass the 2014 total. And with the trajectory edging upward, the chances that it will be higher than last year are better than 50/50.
The problem in seeking ways to engage in such crime protection and or prevention is that by not tracking the status of those going through the jail system there is not knowledge if it is indeed due to increasing crime by criminal illegal aliens or just the overall rise in crime that we are seeing in many major American cities.
What the powers that be in San Francisco are doing is intentionally burying their heads in the sands to appear to be tolerant and somehow morally superior to those cities that do track such statistics and cooperate with federal officials in turning over illegal aliens.
The people of San Francisco, so much as they know of this, need to demand that the sheriff's department make known whether or not a suspected, arrested criminal is an illegal alien and if so turn them over to federal law enforcement.
As an aside, a look at the San Francisco Chronicle website and the local news area shows nothing about this important story.
The reality is that the city of San Francisco is violating federal law and the federal government is doing nothing about it. And the people that elect the sheriff and the city council/board of supervisors (San Francisco is a city-county government.) have no one to blame but themselves.
If the sheriff would take such statistics and there is a correlation between higher violent crime and criminal illegal aliens, it would prove the abject failure of the whole sanctuary city scam. And prove ant-illegal alien pols to be right.
According to the report, since San Francisco became an official sanctuary city in 2011, arrests for murder have increased a substantive 55% with arrests for rapes increasing a staggering 370%. Yes, you read that right, 370%.
The following chart is helpful in following the trend. For your help in understanding the code violations:
187 - First and second degree murder.
240 - Simple assault.
243 - Battery.
261 - Rape.
So the question in this.
Is this a direct result of being a sanctuary city and the sheriff's department expanding the meaning of sanctuary city so as to not hand over any suspected illegal alien to federal law enforcement?
While it seems that there is a casual possibility, it is hard to quantify because, by sheer coinkidink, the sheriff's department of San Francisco county does track such a thing through it's jail management system.
Thus I come to the same conclusion that Jazz does and that it is not clear but extremely probable the spikes are at least related to the sanctuary city enforcement and the perception that if one is an illegal alien criminal, and just being an illegal alien does not count in this, they will simply go through the system like any other criminal.
But look at this year compared to all of last year. Already there are 78 murders in which an arrest and or booking has been made. There are 54 assaults. Which means with three and a half months left of 2015, 58 more murders and 40 assaults will have to take place to surpass the 2014 total. And with the trajectory edging upward, the chances that it will be higher than last year are better than 50/50.
The problem in seeking ways to engage in such crime protection and or prevention is that by not tracking the status of those going through the jail system there is not knowledge if it is indeed due to increasing crime by criminal illegal aliens or just the overall rise in crime that we are seeing in many major American cities.
What the powers that be in San Francisco are doing is intentionally burying their heads in the sands to appear to be tolerant and somehow morally superior to those cities that do track such statistics and cooperate with federal officials in turning over illegal aliens.
The people of San Francisco, so much as they know of this, need to demand that the sheriff's department make known whether or not a suspected, arrested criminal is an illegal alien and if so turn them over to federal law enforcement.
As an aside, a look at the San Francisco Chronicle website and the local news area shows nothing about this important story.
The reality is that the city of San Francisco is violating federal law and the federal government is doing nothing about it. And the people that elect the sheriff and the city council/board of supervisors (San Francisco is a city-county government.) have no one to blame but themselves.
If the sheriff would take such statistics and there is a correlation between higher violent crime and criminal illegal aliens, it would prove the abject failure of the whole sanctuary city scam. And prove ant-illegal alien pols to be right.
Friday, September 11, 2015
Rick Perry, We Hardly Knew Ye
The first casualty of the GOP 2016 presidential nomination field has "suspended" his campaign and that is the former Texas governor, Rick Perry as he made the announcement today in St. Louis.
In Mr. Perry's announcement, in a clear swipe at the current GOP front runner, Donald J. Trump, he spoke of the conservative grassroots,
"We have a tremendous field of candidates . . .so I step aside know our party is in good hands. As long as we listen to the grassroots, listen to that cause of conservatism, our party will be in good hands."
Hmm, as I write it, to me it is also a swipe at the so-called GOP "leadership" in Washington, D. C.
The reason that Mr. Perry is dropping out is the age-old problem of a candidate that can not even draw more than 2.5% does not get any money. And Mr. Perry was burning through what money he was getting trying to breakthrough a field of 16 other candidates.
As the article points out, when Mr. Perry ran in 2012, it did not turn out so well and he was seen as a lightweight in being unable to fully name three cabinet departments that he would eliminate. I personally do not think that people were thinking about that as much as that there are other candidates that in many ways saying the same thing this time around.
The issue that should have put Mr. Perry in the top tier, illegal immigration, was taken by the Donald. Somehow, people do not trust a border governor that took on the current occupant of the White House in regard to illegal immigration over a bloviator that talks a good game.
Mr. Perry was in my top five of candidates to look at carrying the torch of conservatism but when you can't be taken seriously by so many with bad poll numbers, it does not matter.
I leave you with this quote taken by Allahpundit over at Hot Air from the former Texas governor:
"For me the message has always been more important than the man. The conservative movement has always been about principles, not personalities. Our nominee should embody those principles. He - or she - must make the case for the cause of conservatism more than the cause of their own celebrity."
I can tell you who will not be getting any endorsement from Rick Perry.
In Mr. Perry's announcement, in a clear swipe at the current GOP front runner, Donald J. Trump, he spoke of the conservative grassroots,
"We have a tremendous field of candidates . . .so I step aside know our party is in good hands. As long as we listen to the grassroots, listen to that cause of conservatism, our party will be in good hands."
Hmm, as I write it, to me it is also a swipe at the so-called GOP "leadership" in Washington, D. C.
The reason that Mr. Perry is dropping out is the age-old problem of a candidate that can not even draw more than 2.5% does not get any money. And Mr. Perry was burning through what money he was getting trying to breakthrough a field of 16 other candidates.
As the article points out, when Mr. Perry ran in 2012, it did not turn out so well and he was seen as a lightweight in being unable to fully name three cabinet departments that he would eliminate. I personally do not think that people were thinking about that as much as that there are other candidates that in many ways saying the same thing this time around.
The issue that should have put Mr. Perry in the top tier, illegal immigration, was taken by the Donald. Somehow, people do not trust a border governor that took on the current occupant of the White House in regard to illegal immigration over a bloviator that talks a good game.
Mr. Perry was in my top five of candidates to look at carrying the torch of conservatism but when you can't be taken seriously by so many with bad poll numbers, it does not matter.
I leave you with this quote taken by Allahpundit over at Hot Air from the former Texas governor:
"For me the message has always been more important than the man. The conservative movement has always been about principles, not personalities. Our nominee should embody those principles. He - or she - must make the case for the cause of conservatism more than the cause of their own celebrity."
I can tell you who will not be getting any endorsement from Rick Perry.
9/11/15
Today is the 14th anniversary of the Day of Dread; the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and the take down of United Flight 93 over Shanksville, Pennsylvania which invariably saved more lives.
I will write about what that day was like for me and the RVFTLC family. I probably have done so before, but I think there is always a different perspective every time I think of this horrible day.
In the RVFTLC household it was actually supposed to be an exciting day. Our son was leaving for his six months of study abroad at the Sarbonne in France. Mrs. RVFTLC had to leave for Los Angeles International Airport, better known by it's acronym code, LAX, in the wee hours of that Tuesday morning. I did not have to get up for work until about 5:45am. They had long left roughly about 4:30am. So when I woke up, I was all alone with Scout the Wonder Dog. Just us.
I began to prepare for work by eating breakfast. Fox News Channel was just added to our local cable company at the time so of course I was watching it. They were talking about a plane that seemed to crash into one of the World Trade Center towers. It seemed like a local story for the New York City area at best. The people that were talking seemed to believe and imply that it was an accident. As it turned out, it was American Airlines Flight 11 that had taken off from Gen. Logan International Airport in Boston heading to LAX. It impacted the North Tower at 8:46am, EDT.
To be honest, I got bored with the story thinking it was an accident and of little real consequence except it was more than likely people died.
How wrong I was.
I turned the television off and turned on my bathroom radio. At that time, radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt was on from 6am to 9am. He talked in passing about the situation at the World Trade Center. Again, not in a way that made it more than an accident. Although if memory does serve me right, Mr. Hewitt did speculate the possibility of a terrorist attack.
It did shortly become clear during those few moments that indeed, some thing more was about to happen and change the United States forever.
A little over 15 minutes after the first plane slammed into the North Tower, at 9:03am, a second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, also from Boston to Los Angeles, slammed into the South Tower while many television stations had cameras on the smoke and fire from the North Tower. In real time on live television the world saw a terrorist attack unfold in brutal fashion.
At that point it was clear something was amiss.
Hugh Hewitt was certain at this point that indeed, it was a terrorist attack.
I continued the process of shaving and showering for the work day, but very nervous about whether or not our son was actually in the air on his way to France.
During this time, Mr. Hewitt announced that the next piece of the terror puzzle unfolded as reports came in that the Pentagon had been attacked. It was American Airlines flight 77 heading from Dulles International Airport in Washington, D. C. to Los Angeles. Again a little over 15 minutes passed from the attack on the South Tower when more terror ensued. It was at that point when Mr. Hewitt said it. The United States was under attack.
And the infamous United Flight 93 takedown by passengers had not even taken place.
I left for work but was getting very concerned now. Keep in mind this is before the era of cell phones that we have now. A big deal that we gave our son was a phone card, remember those?, to call us from France. i heard nothing from Mrs. RVFTLC if the flight took off and if our son was OK. I called home after 8am and there was no answer. I left a message for her to call me ASAP as I wanted to know what the hell was going on.
While at work we pulled the television from our break room and started watching what, at this point, was non-stop coverage. It was no doubt my generation's Pearl Harbor and worse we were not as certain who committed this act of terror as we knew that Pearl Harbor was done by the Imperial Japanese navy and air force.
Finally I heard news that really got me upset.
All flights in the United States were to be grounded. No domestic flights. No flights going out of the United States abroad. No flights from abroad could come into the United States. It would be a surreal three days not seeing one airplane and or helicopter in the air.
Needless to say, still not hearing anything from Mrs. RVFTLC and not knowing at this point where our son was, work was pretty secondary. But I plugged along. And finally the call came.
Mrs. RVFTLC and our son literally had to play Escape From LAX as the airport, as were so many others, was being evacuated. However, there were idiots using the situation to cause more chaos and someone called in a bomb threat. It took what little order their was and made a stressful situation worse. The police were inspecting every car leaving the airport and needless to say my little family was a part of this. I did not get the call until I was at lunch around 11am. As it turned out, our son did not ever get on the plane. They had to watch the horror enfold on live television screens in an airport lounge. Mrs. RVFTLC had to tell our son that he would not be going to Paris that day. Needless to say there was a huge disapointment from him but in the end he understood.
As it turned out, our corporate headquarters was in New Jersey, not far from Ground Zero as it became to be known. And they ordered all offices closed throughout the United States. Our office closed at 2pm, PDT. By coincidence, I had an appointment to get a scan of my head to prepare for removing my tonsils and scraping some of the inside of my nose, I believe that is called rhinoplasty. My wife picked me up from work and we went to San Gabriel hospital where this had to be done. It was here that I admit, I lost it.
I just could not believe such a thing could ever happen here, in the United States. I broke down and cried because I was remembering seeing the film footage of people jumping to certain death rather than being incinerated in the fires that ensued and the eventuality of the Twin Towers falling to the ground like a Lego set. I got my composure and had my procedure and we went home. It was there that we found out our church, Church of our Saviour, was going to have a service of rememberance that night.
We went to church because it was meet and right to do. We all needed to ask God why he would let such a thing happen. It was to embrace loved ones. It was also to remember the importance that not even the act of terror that occurred would bring down the greatest nation in the world.
It was a scary time for the weeks after, but knowing that we would know it was al-Queda that committed the deed and that we were going after them made many of us feel somewhat better.
But I remember 9/11/01 like it was yesterday. It is a memory I shall never forget. It is why I have the photo above for we shall never forget.
God Bless America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)