Saturday, August 30, 2014

Coexist with...What?

                My daughter will be attending a new school next week. My wife and I attended  the school’s family  orientation two nights ago. The agenda was, for the most part, routine. Class schedules were handed out, lunch money paid in, phy-ed uniforms purchased, teachers greeted, lockers opened.

                I couldn’t help but notice, however, the myriad of flags on the walls of the cafeteria. Malaysia, China, Germany, etc. The U.S.? Yes. Israel? Well, no.

               Also, there was a particular kind of “Coexist” sign up in her core class area that caught my attention. Nobody else seemed to notice it. It is pictured below for your bloggish enjoyment and edification. (I noted that Islam was at the top and Christianity at the bottom, but to fill out “Coexist” with the symbols that were used that’s as needs be, I’m sure). Islam, the Baha’i Faith, Christianity and Judaism are not “coexistable” (to coin a phrase) according to Islam’s own Holy Book. And neither is any other religion compatible with the religion of peace. At least the radical version of it. And individual rights and freedoms are certainly not compatible with fundamentalist Islam.

                And, at the other end of the spectrum, ‘males/females’ better at least coexist, and hopefully much more, or there will be no existence for anyone.

                However, what may have been most striking, on such a rich instructional sign (“signs, signs, everywhere are signs, breaking up the scenery and tearing up my mind”… to quote lyrics from the  catchy hippie-era song ) is the nod to paganism. Paganism?

               “Irreligious and hedonistic” is one of the Webster definitions for paganism. That in itself is a great message for the impressionable kids, but there are, also, Satanic undertones to some forms of paganism, as well.

                So, to recap: the new tolerance expects us to openly, cheerfully accommodate a religion that bluntly states all infidels (non-practitioners of that religion) are to be killed, converted or made into slaves? I’d personally love to co-bleeping exist with you, if  it wasn’t for that little issue! (Hard for us to “coexist” when you kill me…as then I don’t exist anymore. But you didn’t put this sign up, so I need to cut you some slack…).

                 And agnostics and atheists are one thing, but paganism? It gets the “I” in coexist? Blithely, cheerfully "coexisting" with evil. I hope we don't have to "coexist" with the consequences of that...for eternity.
                (This 'sign' isn't really preaching tolerance, but intolerance of any normative standards of decency and of any differing viewpoints. One or two people that complain often get a Christmas-themed or Christian display yanked from the 'public square'. A girl was recently removed from her class for wearing a Mitt Romney (Mitt Romney!) shirt. I wonder how I'd be received if I demanded they take this 'sign' down?).




Thursday, August 28, 2014

Climate Change and Global Lying

                A recent article (by a New York Times reporter)  published in a local paper cited a new U.N. report claiming that “the world may already be nearing a temperature at which the loss of the vast ice sheet covering Greenland would become inevitable. The actual melting would then take centuries, but it would be unstoppable and could result in a sea level rise of 23 feet (I would’ve guessed 22’, 11” but I’m not a scientist), with additional increases from other sources like melting  Antarctic ice, potentially flooding the world’s major cities.”

                Antarctic ice is currently expanding (and rather dramatically so, at that), not contracting. Chicago, Paris, London, Berlin, Moscow, New Delhi, Mexico City, Montreal, Madrid, Warsaw… all at risk?

                The report, almost comical in its lack of logic and considered rationale, goes on to state “the risk of abrupt and irreversible change increases as the magnitude of the warming increases.” If a change is ‘irreversible’ it, by definition, precludes any future change, abrupt or not. A self-defeating argument. Hypocrisy is a strong suit of leftist dogma, logic is not.

                This new report was more aggressive in its ‘findings’ than any of the reports that underpin it. Odd.  According to the article, it highlights the urgency of the risks likely to be intensified by continued emissions of heat-trapping gases, primarily carbon dioxide released by the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas. The report went on to state that companies and governments had identified reserves of these fuels at least four times larger than could safely be burned “if global warming is to be kept to a tolerable level.

              “ That means if society wants to limit the risks to future generations, it must find the discipline to leave the vast majority of these valuable fuels in the ground” the report states.

                That’s funny, as experts back in the 1970’s and 1980’s were warning that we were running out of oil. And every other energy source. Had to conserve every ounce we could. Drive 55. Look at alternative energy sources. We’re still looking at- and subsidizing- alternative energy sources. Guess we now know the real reason why. We have too damn much energy. But, it’s of the carbon-based variety, so we can’t use it or the entire  Earth becomes a swamp. (I thought higher temperatures led to more evaporation).

                Where is the study chronicling the affects of not using all this abundant energy?! The needless (at least relative) impoverishment and degradation of virtually all peoples of the Earth. F.A. Hayek said “our hopes of avoiding the fate which threatens must indeed to a large extent rest on the prospect that we can resume rapid economic progress which…will continue to carry us upward.” He continued, “and the main condition for such progress… is that we learn once more to turn all our resources to wherever they contribute most to make us all richer.”

                Those resources would be oil, natural gas and coal. And they could potentially make us all much better off, indeed. See, for example, North Dakota.

                Interestingly, the report states that the effort to counter climate change is gathering force at the regional and local level in many countries, particularly the United States, with states like California, New York and Massachusetts taking the lead. Yes, those three bastions of staggering economic growth, with their booming state economies are bravely showing us the way forward!

                Yet, in reality, President Obama is seeking- somewhat openly- to impose national limits on emissions of green-house gases, circumventing the United States Congress and the Constitution to cut a deal with the U.N. before leaving office in early 2017.

                Seems ‘political climate-change’ will destroy us, even as ‘global-warming’ would not.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Abortion...of Logic

               New York City is dispensing the ‘morning after pill’ to girls as young as 14 at more than 50 public high schools, sometimes even before they have had sex. (But nothing to infer there!).

                Sure, they can’t give the kids aspirin without their parents consent, but why would they need parental consent to hand out a  hormonal drug cocktail that snuffs out potential life?

                The conventional wisdom for this policy is that “kids nowadays simply aren’t going to abstain from sexual intercourse” or some version thereof. Many of the kids who are handed the pill are under 16. In most states, that’s the age for statutory rape. New York City’s schools already offer regular birth control pills and condoms, but apparently that’s not near enough. Need those emergency ‘abortion’ pills, too.

                Dr. Cora Breuner, a Seattle physician and member of an American Academy of Pediatrics’ committee on teen health, has said emergency contraception is safe and effective “if you use it in a timely fashion. It provides relief or solace to a young woman or man who has made a mistake but doesn’t want to have to live with that mistake for the rest of their lives.”

                One thing is clear. If this pill is used in a timely fashion, it is safe… to believe that it doesn’t provide relief or solace to the potential young women or men who didn’t make a mistake- just were the innocent result of one- and who don’t now have a “rest of their life” to live.

                Remember what your school is teaching you, kids. You don’t have to deal with the consequences of your own actions!

                And the cheapening of life continues unabated, as difficult as it is for some of us to conceive.


Monday, August 25, 2014

Revisionist Herstory

                A Minnesota state senator said recently that calling the invasive Asian carp by the name “Asian carp” is “hurtful to some people.” Apparently some are concerned that “it casts people from Asian cultures in a negative light.” No, it would simply be the name of a fish. If anything could somehow be cast in a negative light by its name…it would be the fish. (And where is the outcry over the name “American eel?!?” Eel, for pete’s sake!).  This same senator is touting a measure that would officially rename the fish “invasive carp.”

                There are more than one species of invasive carp, so this is not helpful to clarity and specificity. When we purge, police and “cleanse” the language, the language is made bland and pale, bereft of color and life, and ultimately, nearly meaningless. Those who use language will decide that falsification is a safer choice than truth.

                According to an article by Joe Soucheray in the St. Paul Pioneer Press, there is a campus initiative underway at Duke University to ban certain words and phrases, including the term “man up.” This, as an on campus poster proclaims, because “I don’t believe in gender norms.” (Apparently "I" is all of us).

                This takes me back to my college days when the feminists were first starting to get upset at the use of the word “history.” Why “history” and not “herstory” or “hertory” they asked. This is still an issue on some campuses and in other leftist enclaves.  “Herstory” is in the dictionaries now meaning “history seen or written from a feminist point of view” or something along those lines. “History” can be that as well. I seem to recall many historical lessons on, say, the suffrage movement, Rosa parks, burning bras, etc., etc.

                And, to be fair and even-handed…or neutral…why doesn’t this cut both ways?

                Why are herb, herd, and here ok?  What about “herald?” or “heraldic”? Those are important, elegant sounding words. Shouldn’t it really be “hisald” or “hisaldic”? And “Hercules”…ironic, don’t you think? “Hereafter”, “hereditary”, “heritage”, “hermaphrodite?” (both, so why not hismaphrodite?!).

              And, of all words, “hero”. Why do the girls get to claim this one?  Here are some of the Webster’s New Universal Unabridged definitions for “hero”: “a person who…has performed a heroic act and is regarded as a model or ideal”; “a being of godlike prowess and beneficence…”; “a warrior- chieftain of special strength, courage or ability”; “a man of distinguished courage or ablility, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.” This is reverse-sexism at its ugliest.

                (For more politically-correct language play, see my post “What’s in a Name? You’d be Surprised!” Remember, whoever controls the language controls thought. And who controls thought, controls everything).



Sunday, August 24, 2014

We've Re-discovered Columbus!

                 Depending on which revisionist-history argument you follow, either Christopher Columbus was a clueless navigator who stumbled on the New World by accident, landing in the Bahamas, yet thinking he had found Asia, or he landed on the North American continent and promptly started doling out generous portions of alcohol  to the Native Americans there to welcome him.

                The first scenario is the one currently in vogue among scholars. In this one, he also, apparently, accidentally found his way back across the Atlantic to Spain, the mother country, and showed up at Royal Court to explain how awesome he was.

                In the second scenario, the early colonists he ferried to the New World relied on the few Native Americans that didn’t promptly die from alcoholism (or the massive influx of European diseases they callously brought to the New World) to teach them how to hunt and grow corn. This they did, even as all-the-while desperately scheming at  inventing  the internal combustion engine to get global warming started.

                And not only did Columbus not discover America, he didn’t prove the Earth wasn’t flat. Apparently there were single-celled organisms millions of years ago that were aware of that. And scholars now claim that the Vikings, some Asians, African Muslims- and possibly Harry Reid- all beat him to the punch in coming to America.

                I do not doubt that some of the historical revisions might be true…might be corrections. I write this tongue-in-cheek. I wasn’t there. Almost certainly Columbus originally landed on an island in or near the Bahamas while trying to find a route to Asia. Never landed directly on modern-day American soil. But it is amazing how quickly things can turn, with mostly the same information available, and amazing how often done to support an agenda.

                The same folks who are great skeptics about God, or the historical value of America, about anything that any conservative or ‘Tea-Bagger’ says or believes, about the Founder’s and their intentions, or even about the existence of good and evil, gobble up as gospel truth ‘global warming’ doctrine, political-correctness dogma and revisionist history.

                And the self-same people who claimed all through the Bush administration that “Dissent is Patriotic” will try to silence the hell out of you if you dissent from their views.





Saturday, August 23, 2014

Cartoonish Behavior

                According to reports, roaming, free-lance, costumed ‘characters’ in New York City’s Times Square are protesting the NYPD’s informational campaign informing visitors that tipping said characters is not mandatory. On Tuesday, August 19th, a number of them took their ‘heads’ off and showed their (real) faces to protest this “hostile move” by the local police. These ‘giant Elmos, Mickey and Minnie Mouses, Statues of Liberty, and various other beloved children’s characters’ are, in reality, mostly Spanish speaking immigrants. (To quote an article  by Verena Dobnik in the Associated Press). One prominent protester’s sign read, “We make the world smile.”

                The police embarked on this informational campaign after a string of recent incidents in which some of the ‘characters’ assaulted tourists. Others were allegedly guilty of harassing people and groping women. Things came to a head last month when ‘a’ Spider-Man demanding money punched a police officer who was telling  a woman she was not obligated to pay.

                “We need to be respected”… said one of the characters… who was dressed as Minnie Mouse.

                According to the Associated Press article, the executive director of La Fuente, a pro-immigrant nonprofit that helped organize the performers, said,  “it’s their First Amendment right to entertain people.”

                That’s as may be. I’m all about First Amendment rights. And entertainment.

                I just didn’t think that harassment and assault were protected under the First Amendment. Or would earn one much respect.

                In a twisted way, seeing ‘Spider-Man’ punch a police officer might be entertaining to some. But, seeing, say, my wife get groped by Mickey- or Minnie- Mouse isn’t going to make me smile. And that’s a tip I will give to these ‘characters’.

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Ukrainian Rhapsody

              We are just three days away from the 23rd anniversary of Ukraine’s Declaration of Independence… from the Soviet Union (thank you Ronald Reagan, among others).

                The current fighting between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russian rebels illustrates just how fragile independence- freedom- can be. Almost always is, in fact. It requires constant vigilance. The United States had to fight the War of 1812 not many years after our independence…had been fought for and ‘won’. And several wars since.

                In the current fighting, Ukraine has had to try to stanch the steady flow of fighters and military hardware streaming across their eastern border from Russia…even as Russia  flatly denies it is involved in any such endeavor. Recently the Russians requested that they be allowed to send an aide convoy to eastern Ukraine for ‘humanitarian’ reasons. Ukrainian officials have been puzzled to find many of these Russian trucks empty.

                Just like their denials.

                Hang in there Ukraine. Here’s to you!



Wednesday, August 20, 2014

What's In A Name? You'd Be Surprised!

                There is a growing demand that the Washington Redskins National Football League club relinquish the use of their nickname of 77 years, as it could be offensive to some Native Americans. President Obama himself has weighed in on the matter, siding with those trying to force the club to change its name. I couldn’t agree more, yet,  after an extensive review  ten minutes of browsing team names across the sports spectrum, I must report that there are numerous other offensive team names that should be changed. Some are offensive on their face, many are non-inclusive, and a few are more subtly demeaning. All are politically-incorrect! The following is a partial list.

                Major League Baseball

*Cleveland Indians…really? “The Tribe”? (This could potentially be demeaning to Native Americans and IT support guys from the sub-continent!).

*Kansas City Royals…well, la-di-da  isn’t this high-brow salute to monarchy a kick in the pants to regular folk. Talk about your ‘one-percenters’. This name must be dropped now.

*Los Angeles Angels (of Anaheim)…typical Orange County Republicanism. Mixing religion and sports is not what our founders intended. Also, do fans really want to believe in something that can’t be seen or scientifically proven. (I mean other than global warming, of course).

*Minnesota Twins…there are no set family norms anymore. One, or three kids are o.k., as well. In fact, childlessness is a great option, too!

*New York Yankees…OMG! White wealthy types that worship business. Those “Damn Yankees”? And with all of the historical connotations? I suppose they wouldn’t just like to play Atlanta in the World Series, but burn it to the ground afterwards, too?! And, speaking of which…

*Atlanta Braves…A little different take on this one. I would’ve thought such overt sexism would  be extinct by now. What about the squaws young Native American women?

*Chicago White Sox…a little too caucasion and clean for my liking.

*Toronto Blue Jays…what about the gray jays, brown jays and green jays? Or even the Steller’s jay or the Pinyon jay? How are they supposed to feel? Criminy!

*Arizona Diamondbacks…well, excuse us! "Saphirebacks" or "Amethystbacks" not good enough for you?

*Chicago Cubs…of course, it’s all about the youth culture. Talk about ageism. “Cubbies”? Yeesh.

*Houston Astros…why not the Elroys or Georges or Janes? Orbitys?

*Milwaukee Brewers…why not Vintners then? Or Distillers? And really, nice to advertise booze across the land, anyway! Was “Crystal -Meth Makers” taken? Perhaps the Milwaukee “Recovering Alcoholics” would be a better fit for our times.

*Los Angeles Dodgers…is this code? Draft-dodgers maybe? Hmm? That would be okay, but just asking.

*Pittsburgh Pirates…this is disgusting. Headband, skull and crossbones…and an eye-patch? Really? This brutal stereotyping has got to stop. No sensitivity here.

*San Francisco Giants…I frankly would’ve expected better from San Francisco. What about the little guy?

*Washington Nationals…I can almost hear the militaristic, xenophobic martial music now! Jingoistic clap-trap from overly patriotic right-wingers to be sure.

San Diego Padres…another case of overt religious favoritism and insensitivity. San Diego “Imams” out of the question, I suppose? It's also appropriation!

                This is just major league baseball! Due to space constraints I will have to issue follow-up reports for the other sports at a later date.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

The Greatest Lie Ever Told



                The top marginal tax rate in 1981 was 70% (that’s a seven with a zero to the right of it!). The top marginal tax rate in 1989 was 31%.

                Total tax revenues for 1981? $500 billion. Total tax revenues for 1989? $915 billion. These are the government’s own figures, from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Yes, as with JFK’s tax cut, and in keeping with historical trends, when it is profitable to invest in business, expand or start new businesses, unemployment plummets, more people are added to the tax rolls and  more income (wealth) is generated to be taxed (albeit it at a lower rate…can you say “win-win”).

                This is a totally seperate issue from what the government decides to spend.

                It is logically impossible, literally insane (look these words up in your dictionary) to state that simply because deficits grew after a tax cut that the tax cuts themselves were to blame. (Though I can hear James Carville blathering, “If it looks like trailer trash and walks like trailer trash…it just might be…trailer trash!”).

                Yeah, well, I knew a guy that was a heavy smoker that lived to be 94 years old. Obviously smoking led to his longer life?

                Let’s look at it this way: a fellow makes $24,000 a year slaving away at his current job. He becomes outspoken on the issues of the day, and this articulate, astute, determined man becomes a champion of the underclass. He’s elected to congress and now makes (above-the-table) $125,000 a year.

                After years of struggling to make ends meet (he was about $10,000 in debt when elected), he know thinks, “I’m gonna get me some stuff, baby!”

                After a few years in congress, he’s developed a taste for the ‘good life’. Owns a nice enough home ‘back home’ and has a little place in the D.C. area. He’s also developed a taste for cocaine. Yeah, costs a lot, but makes me him feel so good at the moment. And call girls, too. He’s earned it, right? Struggling selflessly every day with ‘the people’s problems’. Needs a little release.

                He eventually finds himself in debt to the tune of…oh, oh… a coupla hundred grand.

                Should he (occupations aside) have refused the $101,000 per year pay hike? Was it the fact that he more than quadrupled his salary that got him  further into debt? Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? No, It is spending that is the problem.

                Giving some of our money back via tax-cuts is a ‘risky spending scheme according to some politicians??!

               “We simply can’t afford a tax cut”, many of these same politicians say. This is the most disgusting and perverted, nonsensical, banal, hypocritical, opposite-of-reality, anti-Constitutional, totalitarian, self-serving, economy-killing, narcissistic statement I’ve ever heard.

                And I  think I’ve understated it.

                Money taken from us under threat of incarceration, often demonstrably spent in ways which, at least in the long run, make things worse for many, or most, not better?

                 I’ve always wanted a Lamborghini Countach. (And a unicorn).  I can’t afford one. So I took my neighbors. He says he’d like it back. I told him I simply can’t afford to give it back. Wouldn’t be prudent at this time, given my financial obligations and such, to engage in that kind of a ‘risky spending scheme’.

                Don’t let anyone get away with this bold-faced lie, America! How stupid do these ‘representatives’ think they’ve made us? Government produces no real  wealth. To the contrary, It simply confiscates our money, spends it inefficiently and often in a biased, prejudicial manner…and blames us and shames us, the givers, if ever we  want some of it back or want less taken from us in the first place!

               When you are spending money taken from other people you do not have the right to say, "I/we can't afford to spend any less". (Or take any less...or 'give' any of it back).

               And you certainly don't have the right to say we need to spend much more of other people's money than we are currently- on this, that and the other thing- and then turn around and say to those people, "we can't afford to take any less from you. Sniff."

                Businesses are taxed lustily, as are many of the people whose jobs these businesses provided. Nearly everything they and their employees purchase is taxed. (And yet, many give large amounts of money to charitable causes). All this to invent and produce the goods and services (including the medicinal breakthroughs that save lives, the pharmaceuticals that they are not supposed to make much money on anymore) on which all of us depend. And then, of course, the government will tax many successful entities yet again when they/it dies, just for old times sake!

                And business is called greedy??!!!

                Governments exist first and foremost to grow government. And shrink their citizens. Remember the Third Reich, the Soviet Union? Cuba, China, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Albania, Syria, the Obama Administration?
                For a brief, shining moment we were the exception to this. But we have lost our collective memory. We, apparently, voted for a 'fundamental transformation'... from freedom, honor, success and dignity.  Wake up, America! We had a revolution, in part, because of a rather insignificant tax on tea.


Monday, August 18, 2014

The Founder?

                *“The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.”- (would be laughed out of both parties now).

                *”Taxes on consumption, like those on capital or income, to be just, must be uniform.”- (would be laughed out of both parties today).

                *”If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”- (huh? Dude, pass the Doritos!).

                *”What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”…”The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants. It is its natural manure.”- (scary, violent right-winger!!!).

                *”I have sworn, on the altar of God, eternal hostility to all forms of tyranny over the minds of man.”- (take that ‘political correctness’!).

                *”The future inhabitants of the Atlantic and Mississippi states will be our sons. We leave them in distinct but bordering establishments. We think we see their happiness in their union, and we wish it. Events may prove it otherwise; and if they see their interest in separation, why should we take side with our Atlantic rather than our Mississippi descendants? It is the elder and the younger son differing. God bless them both, and keep them in union if it be for their good, but separate them if it be better.”- (Words fail me, I don’t even know how to express the staggering foresight, historical significance, and intelligence in this, one of the most stupefying and underrated quotes… of all time. Also, it is possible we here in the U.S. are approaching another defining conflict now, that would benefit from just such a studied, moral and reasoned response as this).

                What nut-job, right-wing, extremist, “Tea-Bagger” issued all these quotes?

                The man who is almost universally trotted out as the founder of the  Democratic Party! That's right, Thomas Jefferson. What a great scam! You can’t possibly get farther away from what the modern-day Democratic party believes. Jefferson thought the ‘Articles of Confederation’ gave the central government too much power!! His distrust of big and concentrated government was such that Ronald Reagan would’ve appeared a statist in comparison.

                That said, in the last days of his presidency, Ronald Reagan went to Jefferson’s University of Virginia to speak to students. Saluting Jefferson’s ‘transforming genius’, Reagan said, “The pursuit of science, the study of the great works, the value of free inquiry, in short the very idea of living the life of the mind-yes, these formative and abiding principles of higher education in America had their first and firmest advocate, and their greatest embodiment, in a tall, fair-headed, friendly man who watched this university take form from the mountainside where he lived, the university whose founding he called a crowning achievement to a long and well-spent life. Presidents know about this, too. Directly down the lawn and across the Ellipse from the White House are those ordered, classic lines of the Jefferson Memorial and the eyes of the 19-foot statue that gaze directly into the White House, a reminder to any of us who might occupy that mansion of the quality of mind and generosity of heart that once abided there…and has been so rarely seen there again. He knew how disorderly a place the world could be. Indeed, as a leader of a rebellion, he was himself an architect, if you will, of disorder. But he also believed that man had received from God a precious gift of enlightenment-the gift of reason, a gift that could extract from the chaos of life meaning, truth, order."

              Jefferson would abhor  the Democratic Party as it is presently constituted, with its big- government- is -the- answer- to -everything ethos.



Sunday, August 17, 2014

A John ("Effing") Kerry State of the Union Address?

                My fellow effing Americans, the state of our union…is strong. That said, we have many things we have to accomplish, many wounds to heal, mouths to feed and many dreams yet to be realized. Sure, we’ve been thru some tough effing times, but as FDR said, “the only thing we have to fear is effing fear itself!” Yet, tragically, we are more divided now, in this nation, than we have been since the Civil War.

                And, as Lincoln said so eloquently, “four score and seven effing years ago, our forefathers brought forth upon this land, a new nation”…yada, yada, yada… and , “we are now met on a great effing battlefield to determine whether any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure.”

                And it was president Kennedy who said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your effing country!”

                Now, I think we all know that abstinence based sex-ed is a crock. I mean, look at Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton,  Jesse Jackson, JFK, Gary Hart, maybe even Thomas Jefferson, for example. Do you think it would’ve worked for them? Of course not! I’m not afraid to stand before you tonight and say that it’s effing time this country spends more, not less, on sexual effing education in our schools!

                Also, I’m proposing here tonight an additional eight hundred and fifty-effing-five billion dollars for literacy programs around the effing country. No child should be left behind in our quest to stamp out illiteracy. The proper use of the effing language is vital to the success of any person.

                In 1987, on June the 12th, president Reagan, standing at the Brandenburg Gate in the Berlin Wall said, “Mr. Gorbachev…tear down this effing wall!” Well, my dream is to tear down the effing wall between the haves and have-nots in this country! It’s high time we repeal the tax breaks for the rich. Those effers making more than $200,000 a year. Did you know the top 50% of income earners pay only 96.3% of the nation’s income taxes?! It’s time they chipped in and pulled their own weight! All of history teaches us that we should arbitrarily tax income made by the successful at a much higher rate than that made by those who aren’t as successful. We must punish those effers  who create wealth and jobs-and new drugs that save millions of lives….might have saved yours. Only in this way can we be truly effing successful as a country. Look at the former Soviet Union, look at Cuba, look to Albania and North Korea…these are the shining examples of a truly egalitarian society.

                Sure our “poor” are far, far wealthier than all but the handful of communist masters of these states, but more people in these worker’s paradises are on a level playing field and therefore make much the same income. We care about our poor people’s feelings. So what if in America a ‘poor’ family can make $29,000 effing dollars per year? The rich can make millions. In Cuba, et. al., the poor might make $800 to $8,000 a year….but no one outside of the party heads and government elite make much more than that. ‘One percenters’, lol. Maybe one tenth of one percent make a real living wage. 99.9% would dream of the income and status and leisure time and toys and high-tech gadgets that the Occupy Wallstreet, etc. crowd have here. See  my effing point? So much more equal distribution of wealth in these countries as opposed to ours! No envy, no violence, no need for ‘occupy this or that’.

                Yes, we have very real and grave challenges ahead of us. Dire threats to our country. Right-wing religious effing zealots are amidst us…as I speak! These people would have us acknowledge God, let the Ten effing Commandments be discussed- perhaps even observed- in public areas. They would have us ‘profile’ passengers on airplanes based only on 100% accurate information and historical record. They would- strength brothers and sisters- try to limit or even eliminate the one true religion…baby killing. I am so effing proud to stand here today and say that no one can be an official delegate of my party or speak at my party’s convention if they don’t believe in the right of any parent to kill their potential offspring! Thank you, thank you…that always gets the audience…oldy, but goody…thanks.

                As Teddy Roosevelt said, “Speak softly and carry a big effing stick.” And that’s just what we’re going to do to anyone in the ‘intolerati’ who disagrees with us. Give them the big effing stick… you know where! Because, as George H.W. Bush said, “I want a kinder, gentler effing nation.”

                Some jack-booted reactionaries on the right say we should fear the fact that almost 90% of those in the ‘mainstream media’ typically only vote for one party’s candidates, approaching the same percent as the ‘Supreme Soviet’ of years gone by, they claim. Some of those same folks say we should fear Islamic terrorists who have repeatedly vowed to wipe us off of the face of the Earth. Some say we should fear the corrupting of my party by foreign governments like China’s who have contributed massive amounts of money to our campaigns for certain…’policy’…considerations. Some of them say we should fear the continuing degradation of our effing ‘standards and morals’ as our culture gets more ‘coarse, vulgar and desensitized’. I say we should give these reactionary assholes a swift boat-excuse me, boot- in the effing ass!  I say we should only fear these pointy-helmuted, swastika-wielding effing reactionaries. Here, here!!

                As president Obama proclaimed, “We…are the ones we’ve effing been waiting for. We are the effing change we seek.”

                If this country is ever to live up to its democratic principles, we must strive to kill the most defenseless among us, limit the reach of our least able, punish all manner of success and dignity, reward sloth, let government dictate to individuals and not vice-versa, and completely eliminate the stain of effing Judeo-Christian values from our midst!

                Thank you. And may God bless this great effing country.



Thursday, August 14, 2014

Robin Williams Tribute

                The first time I saw Robin Williams was on “the Tonight Show” in 1984. He was promoting a new movie he was in, “Moscow on the Hudson”. He was showing Johnny his “Soviet hand-puppet”. He had a sock over his right hand and was trying to "talk" through it  while his left hand was muzzling it, so no words were audible. Nothing really got out except for increasingly breathless mumbling. Find the clip if you can. It was funny.
                As he was funny. And manic. I remember my first opinion of him was, ‘this guy’s mind is fast!'
                So I went to see the movie. It was great. Very funny, but about  serious subjects, it revealed a deeply human, subtle, passionate, touching side of him. Turns out, he was an excellent actor, as well. There followed many more movies and many more classic roles for him to bring to life. He was a master at making a thoughtful person laugh one minute and choke back tears the next. In the same movie. Sometimes the same scene.

                Always he made us laugh.

                I don’t know the demons that he was wrestling with, but it’s difficult for a family anytime a loved one passes. It’s even harder to deal with, if possible, when that loved one took their own life.
                There is a classic scene in “Moscow on the Hudson” in which Williams’ character (a musician on tour with a Russian orchestra) defects in a Bloomingdale's department store in New York City. Held briefly by U.S. authorities, he is allowed to go outside and watch as the bus carrying his fellow musicians is pulling away. He looks at his friend through an open bus window, gently moves his arms up and down and states, “I am free…free like bird."

                Yes you are, Robin.

                “Goo-ood morning, Heaven! There’s a new heartbeat here.”
                Carpe Diem, captain, my captain.

Mass Extinction?

                According to “a new study” that has been “hailed by outside experts”,  species of plants and animals are becoming extinct “at least” 1,000 times faster than they did before humans arrived on the planet. Species now are disappearing from Earth about 10 times faster than biologists had previously believed said the study’s lead author. The study also "found" a dramatically lower rate of extinction in the past then scientists had thought.

                Imagine that. This time, they are dead-on accurate, however. Really! Usually, when data is adjusted, or serious, long-term, quantative measurements are changed as a result of, say, new technologies, etc., they are done so incrementally. If there truly is a high level of confidence and certainty  in these measurements.

                This study’s conclusion that species are becoming extinct 1,000 times faster than they did before homo-sapiens gummed up the works- which is 10 times faster than they had thought prior to said study- is an admittance that they were, in essence, 1,000 percent off in their previous belief! But, again, not to worry, this one is spot on! (How do you know this now? The past is just further in the past then it was).

                Furthermore, and remarkably, the lead author went on to say that “we are on the verge of the sixth extinction. Whether we avoid it or not will depend on our actions.”

                You see, five times in the past, a vast majority of the world’s life has been extinguished in what have been called mass extinctions. The most recent was 65 million years ago. The first was 445 million years ago. In the third ‘event’ 252 million years ago, called “The Great Dying”,  83% of all living things on Earth perished.

                You may have detected a pattern here. Mankind wasn’t a factor in any of these. That’s right,  all of the scientifically –acknowledged mass extinctions, including one in which 80-90% of all species were snuffed out, occurred …before we did. The United States didn’t exist. Neither did the Koch brothers. There was no energy production.  No greenhouse gasses. No cows. No cities, no urban sprawl, no building or developing of any kind. There were no human beings.

                Yet, as with global warming, experts now  “know” that-  though we had nothing to do with any earlier occurrence- the next round is totally on us.

                Objectivity? “Fairness?”

                What other species is aware of, and concerned with, other species becoming extinct? (From my observations, mosquitoes and deer ticks- among many, o.k. all, others- wouldn’t be prime candidates for this thoughtfulness).

                And are scientists and experts worried that, for example, Christians are becoming extinct in certain parts of the Middle East... and on college campuses and in portions of large  cities across America for that matter?

                In general I love animals. Really love wild places. Love an unspoiled vista…I’d wager more than most. Guarantee you more than most liberals in big cities.

                But the extinctions that trouble me the most? Those of logic… and freedom of thought and speech.



Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Soviet Union Lite (That's U.S.)

                A 16-year-old Philadelphia girl, Samantha Pawlucy, was mocked by her geometry teacher for wearing a Mitt Romney tee-shirt to school in September of 2012. Based on all the articles and excerpts I’ve read, it appears clear that her teacher went into the hallway to call other students and faculty into her room to laugh at her. That doesn't seem very nurturing or supportive. Apparently, her teacher also called a ‘non-teaching assistant’ into the classroom who attempted to write on her tee-shirt with a marker. Moreover, she allegedly told Samantha to remove her shirt (!) and that she would be given another one to wear.

                This ‘teacher’ went on to ‘explain’ that Carroll was a “Democratic school” and that “wearing a Republican tee-shirt was akin to wearing a KKK shirt.”

                At one point, she claims, upon returning to school to find this same teacher still teaching her class, she was embarrassed  and distressed and hid in the bathroom, fearing retaliation or even expulsion.

                One of the things Samantha liked about Mitt Romney’s candidacy was his stance on late-term abortion. This episode is just another example of the consistency of the the tolerant, inclusive, we-are-all-the-same liberal-progressive dogma. They try to abort anyone…or anything…or any idea…that gets in the way of their power and control. And they do it by flat-out lying about their political opponents, who they usually accuse (falsely) of actions and intentions and opinions that they themselves actually hold. These are  true fascists. Brutal, hypocritical, mindless thugs who hold themselves up to be superior ‘intellectuals’.

                Tragically, for various reasons that may be addressed in another posting, they have largely been successful in this mean-spirited , intolerant, non-inclusive suppression of thought, ideas, democracy and freedom. ("Tea-Baggers"). I wish I could call them the ‘one-percenters’, but truthfully I’d be mistaken. They may be three or four or five percent –or much more- of the population. Those that see no problem with forcing all union members to pay dues that go only to certain candidates…Democrats in virtually all cases, whether or not those union members agree with their positions or find them anathema! Those that see one or two media venues still open to political debate and want to shut them down and call the bill that would do that, “The Fairness Doctrine”.

                One of the primary reasons Richard Nixon was impeached was because he was thought to have used government entities such as the IRS to gain and keep  power. Obama? IRS? Oh what the hell, you can’t possibly be talking about impeachment you racist bastard! Apparently, no one wanting Nixon impeached was racist. (I am not a fan of the Nixon presidency. He governed in a very liberal, and consequently damaging, manner. And he was a bit scheming, thin-skinned and power hungry. The anti-Reagan. But so very like…Obama. One little difference though, he didn’t actually hate his country. Which was nice).

                But I digress. Back to Samantha and her shirt. Which, hopefully, her teachers haven’t torn off of her body in the past two years.

                If Mitt Romney is unacceptable to them, (a rather middle of the road, even liberalish Republican) perhaps Stalin or Trotsky would be more palatable. More to the point, this country was founded on freedom of speech. You might recall the first amendment. Liberals love to trot this one out when they want to make sure they can say any dirty word imaginable in print or on air. They don’t like it, however, when it’s used for what it explicitly was designed for…to protect political speech of all kinds…to foster ideas and thought.

                One other thing. Does anyone really believe that if Samantha had worn an Obama/Biden tee-shirt to this school that she would have been singled out,  taken to task, mocked and ridiculed?


Sunday, August 10, 2014

Non-Viable Logic

            Many courts now bend over backwards to protect the ‘rights’ of alleged murderers. And , in some cases, convicted murderers. These same courts often bend over backwards, forwards and any other way one cares to name to protect ‘abortion rights’. (An inalienable right from God? Perhaps Jefferson, et. al., forgot to single this one out. They meant to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…and unfettered abortion. “Sorry, our bad”).

            It does seem a tad odd to this parochial, red-state mind that a 15 year old can walk into an abortion clinic, wearing, shall we say, a ‘peace’ belt buckle and butterfly tattoo… and not much else…and kill her kid…sorry, ‘non-viable tissue mass’ without breaking a law or even having to notify her parents’. (Say, ‘non-viable tissue mass’ is an interesting phrase given that every single human being that has ever lived was also a ‘non-viable tissue mass’ at that same point in their lives/gestation, etc. by their very definition. Yes, libs, every one who has ever lived has proved the stupidity and falseness of that heinous, callous, mean-spirited euphemism of yours. Billions and billions of times over).

            Yet, if that same girl were to light up a cigarette…the horror. She’d be mocked, chastised and rebuked, if not charged; her parents would be notified, and the business where she bought the cigs from might be fined, banned from selling all tobacco products for a month, perhaps exposed on t.v. and held up for general ridicule and contempt.

            Logic is not a strong suit of liberal dogma.



Thursday, August 7, 2014

Smoke Alarm

                Who is one to believe in these troubled times? Who may be worthy of our support, our vote?

               If you aren’t very well informed, dislike the political arena, get upset that we all can’t agree on everything, yet get even more upset when your ‘soaps’ or sports are interrupted by the crucial everyday workings of democracy being reported, I ask you to consider this: the scoundrel factor.

                Simply put, it is hypocrisy that is the key here. The litmus test. If you will engage in or encourage/aid/abet behavior you profess to find appalling, damaging or evil to further your own gain, you are a scoundrel of the highest order. Not worthy of anything other than our deepest scorn- and possible incarceration- let alone election to the highest office in the land.

                For example, in the 2000 and 2004 elections, Democratic operatives roamed the streets of places such as Milwaukee and Madison Wisconsin (among the most closely contested of states),  St. Louis, Missouri and various other cities offering free cigarettes to those ‘willing’ to be bussed down to the polling booth(s) and vote for their candidates. This is simply a matter of  record. This from the people who detest smoking. The same folks who’ve made billions off of ‘Big Tobacco’. The same folks whose anti-tobacco lawyer friends helped keep them in office.


                Did Republicans, those supposed friends of ‘Big Tobacco’, have people on those- or other- streets offering cigarettes to would-be voters? Or passing out Barbara Streisand concert tickets or free copies of Al Franken’s brilliantly titled tome, “Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot” to bribe people into voting for their candidates? No. And exposure to either of these, while certainly unpleasant and traumatic, probably won’t take years off of your life.

                Yet, this second-hand voting could be deadly.

                To our republic.

                Watch these Democratic Operatives- and their minions- pull out all the stops in 2014 and 2016.