Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Elsa The Lesbian Princess? (Not Your Father's Disney)

                 Naturally, there is a social media campaign underway urging Disney to make its Elsa character from the movie "Frozen" into "a lesbian princess," likely marking the first time the words "lesbian" and "princess" were ever strung together. The actress who portrayed Elsa in the film, Idina Menzel, recently went on record as saying "it's great" to see her character "stirring" things up.
                “I think it’s great that she’s stirring it up, and Disney’s just gotta contend with that,” Menzel told Entertainment Tonight during an interview on the red carpet at the Billboard Music Awards. “I’ll let them figure that out.” (The actress said she would embrace whatever decision Disney makes).
                Many in Hollywood and the LGBTQ community are hoping that this pressure forces Disney, once and for all, to make its cartoon characters more "real," progressive, non-judgemental, open and inclusive.

                Here is what one person close to Disney Studios decision-makers told me in a confidential interview last week. The person requested anonymity because "not everyone, even in Hollywood, has shed their traditional, Christian, Father-Knows-Best, oppressive ways yet." That person continued, "You know, in the first movie, Elsa learns how to 'let it go and embrace the icy powers that make her special.' Well, now we have to push way past that."

                The person, a creative consultant at a major motion-picture house, suggested that the upcoming sequel to Frozen should have Elsa involved in a torrid triangle of lesbian love with Ariel and Minnie Mouse. For purposes of this report, I will henceforth refer to the insider, whose gender I will not disclose and do not know, as "Pat."
                Pat continued by stating that Pat strongly believes Christopher Robin is a member of the  transgender community. "It was never made overtly clear what sex he/she/ze/Zir identified as, and we never saw he/she/ze/zir entering or using any type of bathroom at all. This is obviously troubling and leads to tension in the viewing audience." Pat went on to say that, "I also believe that Goofy and Pluto are getting it on behind the scenes, and that it would be best if their 'puppy-love' was brought out into the open, and celebrated for the wonderful thing that it is."

                Later in the covert interview, Pat revealed Pat's desire to see Tiana, Sheriff Woody and Eeyore together in the "first ever animated black woman-popular toy-sad donkey threesome." Pat added slyly, "You know why they call him 'Woody,' don't you?"

                The creative maven pointed out that Jack Sparrow recently came out as a woman, while Anna now identifies as a man. Pat also made reference to Lightning McQueen's recent statement that he now self-identifies as a midnight blue '57 Ford Thunderbird.

                At one point Pat queried me, "You do know that Maleficent was a female, don't you?" I admitted that I did, at which time Pat said she thinks that, in an upcoming feature, Maleficent, Princess Jasmine and Ursula should be simultaneously taken- in public- by Simba the lion. “This is just the kind of unique and edgy entertainment the public’s been waiting for,” Pat opined.

                In closing, Pat stated that Buzz Light-year should be a "natural fit" for Jessica Rabbit...and that zhe would like to see an honest, frank and 'raw' onscreen portrayal of their carnal lust as Buzz takes Jessica "to infinity...and beyond."

Monday, May 30, 2016

John Kerry Touts Borderless World

                 Secretary of State John (“Effing”) Kerry recently proclaimed his desire to live in a “border-less” world. Yes, the U.S. Secretary of State would like to see open borders across the globe. That is a great idea! What’s not to like about open?! Open borders, open marriages, open bathrooms, open pits, open sewage, open-heart surgery, open sores, all are fantastic, are they not?!! What could go wrong? Open and shut cases can now become open and open cases- much better, no? We don’t need walls. The Pope himself told us this! Borders, walls, fences, doors, roofs, get rid of them all. No structure is needed. Private property? No need for that. We are latter day Jacobins now. Let’s get rid of everything. Everything should be wide-open, everyone can be anyone. What a great recipe’ for happiness! No chaos here!
                We don’t need defined borders…or defined genders. Hell, why attempt to define or restrict anything? What’s wrong with crossing any line? Incest, bestiality, necrophilia, these behaviors have heretofore been off limits, taboo, beyond-the-pale, crossing-the-line, over-the-top, etc., but why? Surely these are just archaic white male Christian notions of morality that are built on outdated ethical constraints. They are simply unnecessary “behavioral borders.”
                So, everyone open your homes, legs and hearts and we can all live happily ever after.
                Border-line insanity.


Sunday, May 29, 2016

Memorial Day 2016

Memorial (simple definition):

* created or done to honor a person who has died or to remind people of an event in which many people died
Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary

Full Definition of Memorial:

1:  serving to preserve remembrance :  commemoritive
2:  of or relating to memory

Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary

Memorial Day
1)      a day on which those who died in active military service are remembered, traditionally observed on May 30 but now officially observed on the last Monday in May.

               Ironically, to most of us Memorial Day actually means: 1) the whole lazy summer lies ahead, filled with promise, and 2) We can party like it’s 1999! Neither of these are true for those who gave their lives.

        Americans have traditionally been an independent lot, though, sadly, that is changing rapidly now. They have also been a people that believed almost anything was possible through hard work. They were cheerful, yet serious. Most of all, they believed in freedom. And sacrificing oneself for one’s fellow man, if needed. Even if that fellow was overseas.
        From the Revolutionary War to the Civil War, World War’s I & II, on through the Korean and Vietnam conflicts, the First Gulf War and today’s War on Terror, the members of the American military have performed magnificently, exhibiting valor and class, dignity and discretion.
        Over the decades, Americans have willingly gone all over the globe to help their allies repel invaders, defeat tyranny and promote democracy and self-rule. Never in the annals of human history has a country sent its troops to so many nations, expended so much blood and treasure- and promptly left these nations to rule themselves as they wished, independent and free. In several cases, the totalitarian countries Americans defeated were given massive aid and materiel to help them get back on their feet, with the only requirement a promise not to invade their neighbors again once they had done so. After helping defeat Hitler , Mussolini and Tojo, they won the Cold War versus the Soviet Union.

              President Abraham Lincoln said of the climactic battle of the American Civil War, The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.” Ironically, we have remembered the Gettysburg Address, but we are forgetting those who sacrificed- and the reasons why they did. Let’s all enjoy our cook-outs and campers, our boats and our hammocks tomorrow. But, as we do, let’s put down our coolers and yard games… and raise our glasses in a toast to the remarkable men and women who have given so much: “Thank you! We hereby highly resolve that you shall not have died in vain.”

              More than 218,000 American servicemen are buried overseas in countless cemeteries in numerous countries such as France, Belgium, the Netherlands, England, Italy, Luxembourg and the Phillipines, to name a few.


Saturday, May 28, 2016

Man Petitions Court For Restraining Order Against God

                 According to the TimesofIsrael.com, an Israeli man, a resident of the northern port city of Haifa, petitioned that city Magistrate’s Court for a restraining order…against God. He claimed that the Almighty had been particularly and unusually unkind to him. The petitioner, who was not named in the hearing’s protocol, represented himself in court. The report stated that the Heavenly Father did not attend the session, though this is, to my mind, pure speculation of the most baseless kind. Is not God everywhere and all-knowing?
                The aggrieved party said that he had tried to obtain the restraining order from police for the past three years, but that police had merely sent a patrol car to his home on several occasions. He claimed that God had evinced an extremely negative attitude toward him over a three-year period, though no details or specific examples were cited in the report.
                The presiding judge denied the request, terming it “ludicrous,” a sign that perhaps God was there, at least in spirit.
                        The truth is that we humans, around the world, have ludicrously been attempting to put a collective restraining order on God in recent years. In the West, we routinely take His name in vain. Jesus, His only begotten Son, is continually mocked and portrayed in the vilest and/or most cavalier of ways in cinema, on television and in “pop-music.” He is literally blasphemed and made the butt of jokes. Those who choose to follow Him are often portrayed as hicks from the hinterlands, “clinging to their God and guns.” Anyone who purports to believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, or who gives a nod to the Old Testament, is considered a nut case. In some instances, they are now even being fined and thrown in jail for “hate speech.”
                The desire for an adherence to certain standards of behavior and the belief in right and wrong offends a great many people.

                 Islamic extremists are truly intolerant and are killing Christians at a record pace in the Middle East, Africa and even in the West. This version of perversion- of the ultimate contempt for decency and humanity- must be even less pleasing to the Almighty.

Friday, May 27, 2016

Leonardo DiCaprio And His Huge... Carbon Footprint

                        Leo DiCaprio was honored in New York City this past week by the radical clean-water advocacy group Riverkeepers. In order to be feted for his environmental largesse at this event, he flew on a private jet from Cannes, where he had been partying with pretty people at the notorious Cannes Film Festival. He completed the 8,000 mile round-trip the next evening by taking a different jet back to France for a glitzy Cinema Against AIDS gala, replete with models galore.
                DiCaprio, who used his Oscar acceptance speech to state:  “Climate change is real. It is happening right now, it is the most urgent threat facing our entire species,” etc., constantly traverses the planet on private jets and yachts. His vast and expanding carbon footprint, of course, dwarfs that of those of us not in the top 1% of the top 1% in income. Since fossil-fuel driven travel is much cheaper, faster and more convenient than other modes of conveyance, giving this up would be a sacrifice of sorts. One that he is obviously unwilling to make, even though- unlike most of us- he could afford to do so. But, please understand, he is an important man. He gives lip-service…and real money to progressive causes. We should probably just do as he says, not as he does.
                Professionally, DiCaprio makes obscene sums of money by pretending to be someone he is not. I’m not sure that is a particularly difficult job for him.

                He does the same thing in his personal life, as well.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Three California Youth State They Are Transaged, Sue To Be Allowed Into Adult Movie Theater

 June 1, 2016
News Services-

                In a sure-to-be landmark case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, San Francisco, has ruled in favor of three California youth who recently sued to gain admittance to a XXX movie theater. The boys, ranging in age from 11-13 years old, solemnly stated that they “identify” as 23-year-old trans-genders, and thus could not reasonably be refused entry into the adult cinema. “Pat,” one of the transgender youngsters adults, who goes by the name “Pat,” claims that allowing trans-aged, trans-genders into theaters showing “adult movies” will make everyone feel “more comfortable, included and respected.”

                Pat and his friends are also suing two liquor stores and a Super America for, respectively, refusing to sell them a bottle of cherry vodka, a case of light beer and a pack of menthol cigarettes.

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Mr. Puppy Europe

                 Puppy play is big in England. According to an article posted on the UK Daily Mail Online site, approximately 10,000 people take part in the pet play ‘craze’ in the United Kingdom. A documentary on Britain’s TV Channel 4 explores this ‘phenomenon.’ The documentary, titled “Secret Life of the Human Pups,” focuses on men like ‘Kye,’ a 28-year-old Oxford graduate who intensely enjoys dressing up as a dog. Kye says that some women enjoy dressing up like pets as well, but that “females who are into pet play are usually into kitten play as they identify more with kittens than pups.”  (Please insert your own joke here). Kye also avers that “puppy play is definitely not about sex, it is a form of escapism.”
                The documentary also features the ‘sad’ story of a 32-year-old theater technician named ‘Tom,’ who “split up with his fiancĂ© Rachel because of his yearning to dress up as a Dalmatian.” Tom explains: “You disappear and start chasing puppy toys. You go so deep into the head space, you crave it and want it. It’s just magic.” Rachel countered by stating, “I didn't understand it. I didn't want to understand it.” She and Tom are still ‘friends.’
                Tom has spent in excess of 4,000 British Pounds ($5,883 American) over the past 10 years on his canine ‘habit,’ and happily shows off his rubber costume, complete with a breathing tube, but admits that “it is quite awkward to put on, you need a lot of talc.”

                Yes, quite.

                Tom’s craving has become so intense that he has begun sleeping in a dog training crate, lined with puppy training pads in case he has to answer nature’s call. Tom- or ‘Spot,’ as he prefers to be called- was crowned Mr. Puppy UK last November, and will be traveling to the Mr. Puppy Europe finals in Antwerp, Belgium come February. Apparently, Tom is one ‘sick’ puppy.
                If you Google “Mr. Puppy Europe 2016” you will likely be brought to the website for “Leather Pride Belgium,” pretty much refuting Kye’s claim that this fetish has nothing to do with sex. The site touts “The Celebration of Fetish Life,” and lists the time and place for Mr. Puppy Europe 2016: 15-20 February, 2017, Darklands Hangar 29, Antwerp, Belgium. It also ‘cheekily’ asks the following questions: “Are you most sexy on your knees? Is your bark worse than your bite? You don’t feel complete without a wagging tail and thumbs are for the weak? Why save the world if you could chew your bone instead?”

                We have- quite literally- gone to the dogs.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016


                 Are you aware of- and familiar with- the term? It is in common usage now that transgenderism is all we talk about. Here is the definition of Cisgender: “A term for people whose experiences of their own gender agree with the sex they were assigned at birth. Cisgender may also be defined as those who have a gender identity or perform a gender role society considers appropriate for one’s sex.” The term is often abbreviated to simply cis, and is the opposite of the term transgender.
                According to Wikopedia: “There are two versions of the term: cis male for ‘male assigned male at birth’ or cis female for ‘female assigned female at birth.’ Further derivations analogously include ‘cis man’ and ‘cis woman,’ as well as cissexism (or ‘cissexual assumption’ or ‘cisnormativity’).”
                These designations were apparently issued by the Department of Redundancy Department.
                If progressive’s were to be honest- and why would they start now- they would admit that the word was specifically made up as a mockery of the 99.97% of us who “agree” with the sex we were “assigned” at birth. In the eyes of the vast majority of men and women, there is no need for another term for…men and women. The otherwise useless term “cisgender” therefore- in their eyes- essentially means: “those backward, conservative, paternalistic, stick-in-the-mud, traditionalist, uptight troglodytes who are somehow happy with their own gender.”
                There are more feminine males and more masculine females, to be sure. And they are free to feel like whoever they wish to feel like. If the former want to wear a dress and the latter boxers and a tie, they can go right ahead and knock themselves out. But if you have male genitalia, you are a male and if you have female genitalia, you are a female. You didn’t have any say in the matter. You were “assigned” your sex in the womb.
                Wombs belong to females.        

                Get over it.

How To Decide A Person's Sex?

                 The big, block headline in the “Nation & World” section of my local newspaper read: “How To Decide A Person’s Sex?”
                Well, that certainly is a puzzler, a nearly existential poser that has baffled and buffaloed the best and brightest of us over many millennia. Philosophers and sages have spent countless ages attempting to unravel this riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. But perhaps there is a key: our species’ self- interest. It cannot be in accordance with natural law and our survival that we don’t readily know nor take our sexes seriously and believe them to be ephemeral and irrelevant.
                I’ve got an idea. How about we agree that a female is deemed so because she has breasts and a vagina and therefore can potentially bear and feed children? A male would then be one who has the potential to fertilize the female’s eggs so that she can potentially bear and feed children. Radical, I know, but surely my progressive reputation proceeds me.
                If this is not, in fact, the case, then words- and concepts- have no meaning. Why do we call a horse a horse? What differentiates plants from animals? Why do we even try to do so? Is everything solely an artificial construct? How could that be? Why do we distinguish between the elderly and pre-teens? Who does it benefit? (You can bet it is the evil white male capitalists!).
                What should it matter if an adult has sex with a child- or a horse? Surely proscriptions against these love choices are just more forms of sexual discrimination perpetrated by uptight, conservative Republican traditionalists.
                Fortunately, in the past, our ancestors somehow puzzled out the mystery of male and female and the yin and the yang of the (then only) two sexes. If they hadn’t, we wouldn’t be here.

                Progressive? In light of our apparent difficulty distinguishing bad from good and male from female, and in our refusal to recognize these terms as “real” concepts, I suggest that we have regressed.

Monday, May 23, 2016

California Government Decides It Has The Right To Help Its Citizens Die

                California governor Jerry Brown (also known as “governor moonbeam”) has proposed a budget for 2016-17 that allocates $2.3 million for Medicaid to provide lethal drugs for assisted suicides. Estimates are that this would come to about $5,400 per patient. Who knew suicide was so expensive? Last fall, the governor signed the End of Life Act, making it legal for doctors to prescribe lethal doses of drugs for terminally ill patients who request them.
                Bizarrely, according to the National Review, the state’s Medicaid program does not allow patients access to palliative care to ease their pain. Moreover, second opinions and cancer treatments are also restricted under that program- a program that runs a deficit.
                “First, kill the old geezers” doesn’t have the same ring to it that “first, do no harm” does, but the times, they are a-changing, as the saying goes. How can the erstwhile Land of Milk and Honey be unable to come up with enough money for certain pain-killers and cancer treatments, but have no trouble finding $5,400 for each and every patient that wants to die? Only decades of progressive government can make a state more determined to help its citizens die than live.
                The official state motto was spawned by excitement over the Gold Rush in the 19th century, when the state was young and full of dreams. Let me now use it in describing the rush to extinguish the lives of those in their Golden Years.
                “Nurse, where did you put the secobarbital? Wait…”

                “Eureka! I have found it!”

Obama Administration Asks Universities To Refer To Criminals As "Justice-Involved Individuals"

                The Obama administration has created yet another euphemism in an attempt to cover up, excuse, protect and defend...criminals and their behavior. In a directive sent to colleges and universities recently, Education Secretary John King discouraged the schools from asking applicants if they were convicted criminals. An accompanying pamphlet was sent along with this request. The pamphlet was titled, "Beyond the Box: Increasing Access to Higher Education for Justice-Involved Individuals."
       This could be the 'euphemism-of-the-decade,' no mean feat given some of the current administration's other doozies, such as 'man-caused violence.'
       You got it: rapists, burglars, pedophiles, drug-dealers, terrorists and their ilk no longer deserve to be labeled criminals. They are simply "involved with justice" in some way. Makes 'em sound more altruistic than the rest of us, doesn't it?

        'President of the United States' is another euphemism currently en-vogue. It is used to describe Barack Obama, a 'justice-involved' individual.

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Thurlow Weed

                Thurlow Weed does not sound like a modern name, and indeed it isn’t. The man who sported that moniker was born in 1797 and died in 1882. If you were unaware that he ever existed, you are safely in the majority, so don’t feel bad.
                Thurlow Weed would have been completely out of place on today’s college campuses. He never went to college. Or high school. He didn’t need “safe spaces.”
                Mr. Weed grew up on a small family farm in upstate New York.

                He began supporting himself at the age of 8.

                He joined the army when he was 16- during the War of 1812. Once the British were defeated, he became a newspaper apprentice.

                He had his own newspaper by the time he was 21.

                In 1823, he ran for the state assembly. He won. He went on to help found New York’s Whig Party. When the Whig Party splintered and dissolved he became a Republican. He was an ardent supporter of john Quincy Adams and was instrumental in the presidential nominations of William Henry Harrison, Henry Clay, Zachary Taylor, Winfield Scott and John Charles Fremont.
                Millenials on most college campuses today have never heard of him either. This is probably fortunate. The recounting of his history of hard labor as a child, of his independence and self-support before entering his teens and of his military service while in his teens would send them scrambling for their safe places and Play-Doh.
                And his name? You can be sure they’d ‘be like’: “Dude, this dude’s name is Thurlow, ha hah…Thurlow Weed man! Ha, Ha..ha, hah! Wonder if he was a stoner, ha, ha. Like, ya’ think, dude?”

                Thank goodness for “higher education.” 

Saturday, May 21, 2016

Transgender Rights? Civil Rights? Common Sense?

                The Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference has allowed transgender students to play on teams that “match their gender identities” since 2013. Karissa Niehoff, the group’s executive director, said that since the state has a policy barring boys from playing on girls’ teams, a transgender girl would be allowed to play on a girls’ team, but not a boys’ team. What? I’m so confused! So, if a boy identifies as a girl, he/she can play on the girls’ team, but not on the boys’ team? But, why can’t girls play on boys’ teams? I thought they had been granted that right years ago. I mean, if a “girl” who’s really a boy can take a leak in a girls’ bathroom, why can’t he/she play on a boys’ sports team?

                In a related story, Peyton Chapman, the principal of Lincoln High School in Portland Oregon, addressed the transgender rights issue thusly: “Some students may be uncomfortable with it, but we can’t let some people’s discomfort violate other people’s civil rights.” Let’s try this line of reasoning out on other “civil rights” issues. “Some people” were “uncomfortable” with slavery. Perhaps we shouldn’t have let their discomfort violate other people’s legal rights?
                In recent years, some college students have been famously "uncomfortable" with conservatives speaking on or near their campus, yet in virtually every case- First Amendment protections be damned- the conservatives (i.e. "other people's") civil rights have been expressly violated. Who is standing up for them?

                Where is their "safe space?"


American Woman Detained For "Insulting" U.A.E.

                 A 25-year-old American woman appeared in a Dubai court recently on misdemeanor charges for allegedly insulting the United Arab Emirates in public while waiting for a taxi at the Abu Dhabi International Airport. (Chill out, assholes, the U.S. routinely and ‘un-allegedly’ gets insulted by various people and entities around the world, but we can take it). This isn't the first incident of its kind. In 2013, a 29-year-old U.S. citizen from Minnesota was tried under a cyber-crimes law and accused of defaming the country’s image abroad for posting a spoof video online about youth culture in the U.A.E. He spent nine months in prison before being deported and fined $2,700.
                What should happen is this: Every American citizen traveling through the Middle East and/or communist countries/ dictatorships should receive a blanket amnesty from the president of the United States clearly stating that it is permitted for the named individual to make fun of, mock and “disrespect” the President of the United States and otherwise have fun at the expense of said states without any significant  repercussions whatsoever. They already have that right, in essence, thanks to the First Amendment. Therefore, we expect that in the interest of reciprocity, international comity and world peace, they will be granted the same license in all foreign lands. This won’t be the case, of course, as many tyrants/governments are so pathetic, tyrannical and cowardly that they will refuse to do so for fear of…hearing things that they don’t want to hear.
                A good litmus test is this: if your king, Emir, president or government wants to Kill or imprison somebody simply for “making fun” of them or it, then they- or it- don’t/doesn’t deserve to hold power.

                And that’s no joke.

Friday, May 20, 2016

Trudeau Emancipates Transgenders, Elbows Woman In Chest

                 Shortly before elbowing a woman lawmaker in the chest, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (and his government) introduced legislation that would formally ban discrimination against transgender people and would consider crimes against them “hate crimes.” Trudeau (and crew) timed the introduction to coincide with the “International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia.”

                The pretty politician seems to like judging others and meeting out justice.

                He himself should have at least been penalized "two minutes for elbowing."

Thursday, May 19, 2016

Pawternity Leave? (Part II Of "From Here To Meternity")

                “Paw-ternity” leave is the next big thing, the wave of the future that will soon wash over businesses big and small. What, precisely, is paw-ternity leave you ask? It’s the paid leave of absence pet owners are beginning to demand from their employers when they “adopt” or bring home a new furry family member of a different species. Get it? Many employers in England already offer this benefit and some Americans, like Lindsay Putnam, are determined to see that American companies provide this perk as well. “Bringing my adopted cat, Jameson, home with me in 2014 was one of the happiest days of my life,” she wrote in a piece for the New York Post. “Having to go back to work two days later was one of the worst. While the rest of the country is hung up on the necessity of maternity leave . . . one group continues to be overlooked when it comes to paid time off from work: new pet owners.”
                We’ll hold a tel-a-thon, Lindsay.
                Putnam claims that giving new pet owners paid time off is good for business. “According to Psychology Today, pet owners have better self-esteem, fitness, sociability and happiness than non-pet owners. They also have lower blood pressure and cholesterol,” she averred, while stating that this is not true of those who just have children.
                Ms. Foye, here are a few reasons why maternity leave and paw-ternity leave aren’t comparable:

1)      Babies are more fragile and vulnerable than puppies or kittens, and take dramatically longer to reach an age where they can survive on their own.
2)      You don’t breastfeed your puppy or kitten. At least, I fervently hope you don’t.
3)      Your puppy or kitten- or whatever pet baby you own- did not come out of your uterus/vagina, thereby leaving them an extended, bloody mess and your exhausted body in need of prolonged rest, repair and recovery.
4)      Your puppy, kitten or guppy can’t grow up to become president- or even come up with ideas like “paw-ternity” leave.

              Why don’t we just institute “eternity” leave? We can all be on permanent leave and our employers would just have to send us our paychecks every two weeks for perpetuity.

              We in the wealthy West have become far too soft, infantilized, effeminate, entitled and narcissistic to ensure that our societies last much longer.  That is simply a fact.
                Of course, if Lindsay was smart, she would have identified a much easier way to get her paid leave. Take a tip from me, Lindsay: just tell your employer that you “identify” as a pregnant woman.

                You’re welcome.

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

From Here To Meternity

                 First there was maternity leave. Then came paternity leave. More recently, a few of the insane and selfish, such as author Meghann Foye, have clamored for “meternity” leave. Ms. Foye can’t understand why only women who have babies get maternity leave. She believes it’s patently unfair to  childless women. She does not like the fact that most women get married, get pregnant and have babies in their 20’s and 30’s, and then are granted “That socially mandated time and space for self-reflection” called maternity leave.
                Self-reflection?! It is obvious she’s never had a kid, or spent long periods of time around one- or more.
                She continued: “It seemed that parenthood was the only path that provided a modicum of flexibility. There’s something about saying ‘I need to go pick up my child’ as a reason to leave the office on time that has far more gravitas than, say, ‘My best friend just got ghosted by her OkCupid date and needs a margarita’—but both sides are valid.” (Emphasis mine). Something? Yes, it is a mystery. Caring for your child or drinking with a friend whose hook-up no-showed. Who wouldn't think those two reasons are clearly equally valid,  Meghann?
                Yes, many flee the rigid strait-jacket that is single life to gain the “flexibility” and freedom of parenthood! Foye should be in a strait-jacket.
                But, if you think “meternity” leave is the newest, craziest call to be granted paid time off from work, you would be sadly mistaken. It is hard to believe what’s coming next.

                Tune in tomorrow, for Part II.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

Hillary Clinton Vows To Support Statehood For Washington, D.C.

                Hillary Clinton recently vowed to support statehood for Washington, D.C., if elected president of the United States this November. In a post written for the Washington Informer, an “African American newspaper serving the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area,” she claimed that the district is “often neglected” in terms of federal funding because it is “at the mercy of right-wing ideologues” in Congress.
                Does she mean someone like Barbara Boxer? Nancy Pelosi? Lindsey Graham? Jim (“crybaby”) Boehner? Harry Reid? Chuck Schumer? Congress is filled with radical left-wing ideologues, but I’m not aware of any radical “ideologues” on the other side of the aisle. Surely the former first “Lady,” always in full pander mode, is ludicrously inferring that racism is somehow at the heart of this evil desire to arbitrarily limit federal appropriations for the capital city.
                In fact, the Senate will soon consider S. 160, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009, which would grant the District of Columbia a representative in Congress. The House of Representatives passed similar legislation in the previous Congress and is considering a related measure, H.R. 157, in the present session.
                This is absurd and unconstitutional. Though the district’s residents lack direct voting representation, they do not lack for representation of their interests and concerns. The Framers' specifically planned for a "federal town," one designed to serve the needs of the federal government. They charged every member of Congress with responsibility for the city's well-being.
                The Founders intended that the nation's capital remain autonomous and not subject to political pressure from a state government. Nor did they want the federal city and its constituents, many of whom would be in the government, to have that authority and the power of an individual state, as well. They deliberately crafted the Constitution so that the District would not be within a state. That is why it is called a district, the District of Columbia. And why New York, Boston, St. Louis, etc., aren’t.           
                Congress lacks the constitutional authority to simply grant the District a voting representative by fiat, as S. 160 would do. The Constitution limits such representation to states alone. Even if Congress wishes to alter the means by which District issues are raised in the national legislature, it still has the legal responsibility- and obligation- to reject proposals that violate the Constitution.
                There is a reason – as obvious as it is shameful- why Hillary Clinton wants to grant state’s rights to the District of Columbia. It would expand the Federal government’s power over the states and their inhabitants while giving a similar boost to the Democratic Party. Her party. And a federal government she’s (tragically) about to lead.

Monday, May 16, 2016

President Obama Says It's Too Hard To Vote

                 President Obama recently declared that it is too hard to vote. Too hard? There isn’t anything easier. You just walk in and sign a sheet…and vote. This is the only act in America that doesn’t require a valid I.D. It is far too easy to vote.
                You can’t buy a loaf of bread without presenting a driver’s license or I.D. card. Purchase a ‘big ticket’ item and you need to present a valid, government-issued photo I.D., your social security number, a note from Oprah Winfrey and a blood sample. If, Heaven forbid, you want to buy a pack of cigarettes, you’ll need a driver’s license and birth certificate- and be required to submit to finger-printing.
                Too hard to vote? It is much, much easier than standing in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles licensing station waiting to get your driver’s license renewed! If we don’t require an I.D. for exercising the privilege of voting for the leader of the free world- an act that also has serious repercussions for people around the globe- why should we require one for anything else?
                Want proof that it is too easy to vote? Some precincts in the U.S. have seen more votes cast than they have registered voters. Moreover, thousands of dead people across the country somehow manage to vote in each presidential election.
                If they can do it, anybody can.
                George Washington must be rolling in his grave.

                But he’ll probably still vote this November 8th.

Sunday, May 15, 2016

President Obama Nonchalant About Terrorism, Goes Off Half-Cocked About Firearms

                 President Obama often seems oddly nonchalant and sanguine when addressing the problem of Islamic terrorism. At times he seems completely out-of-touch with his fellow American’s concerns in this regard. Aides say that his “approach” reflects his belief that “overreacting” to a terrorist attack only “elevates” extremist groups and exaggerates their influence.
                More to the point, however, the President actually appears to believe that the terrorist threat is overstated and that the focus on it could become self-paralyzing and an excuse to adopt “misguided” policies. Yes, such as those that would protect Americans at the expense of terrorists.
                Obama’s aides take every opportunity to note that more Americans are killed by gun violence than terrorist attacks. This would be a good argument…for a seven-year-old. Terrorists themselves have used guns to kill many of their victims. Most crimes, whether committed by guns or other weapons, have historically been stopped by guns, and only guns, or the threat of their use. No precise statistics are available to support this fact, however, and the media is utterly disinterested in reporting on anything positive pertaining to firearms.
                While nearly all gun crimes are quickly or eventually ended by the brandishing and/or use of guns, no acts of terrorism are deliberately ended or prevented by terrorists.
                Talk about dis-ingenuousness. It is not the NRA that is purely agenda-driven.
                It is stupefying how many people are too biased or ignorant to admit these obvious facts.

Saturday, May 14, 2016

Firemen's Poles Banned In Vienna

                The iconic fireman’s pole is being phased out in Austria. In fact, the last usable pole in the nation’s capital of Vienna was physically removed recently. The only remaining firefighter’s pole in the city resides in its firefighter’s museum.
                Officials claim the poles are no longer necessary because new or renovated stations are laid out in such a way that they wouldn’t result in time saved in getting to a fire. These layout changes themselves were made because “stairs are safer.”
                Say what? I’m not aware of any carnage that has occurred due to sliding down a 12 foot post. I do hear of people tripping and falling down the stairs, etc., on a regular basis. More to the point, however: these are firemen. We wouldn’t want our firemen (and women) exposed to any risk as they are racing into a fire to pull people out of burning, collapsing, smoke-filled buildings, would we now?!
                Make no mistake, this aversion to firemen sliding down poles will quickly spread throughout the West. Fire stations will no longer be allowed to have poles, even as “pole-dancing” is rapidly increasing in popularity with many women who feel liberated by the exercise and freedom of expression and artistry that their pole performances provide, as they spin around, hang on and slide towards the floor upside down.

                So stands the world in 2016.

Father-Daughter Dance Called "Not Inclusive Enough"

                The annual father-daughter dance at Brockman Elementary School in Columbia, South Carolina has been cancelled because it “isn’t inclusive enough.” This is ridiculous. The event could easily have been titled the “father-daughter-mother-gay cousin-transgender friend-Islamic terrorist-transsexual-transspecied-horse-dog-Satanist-Hillary supporter-dance,” but it wasn’t, because they wanted it to be a bleeping father-daughter dance! Okay, assholes? Therefore, adding any other groups would be overly inclusive, understand?
                Should all the gay pride parades around the country be cancelled because they aren’t inclusive enough? I, personally, am offended as hell that they don’t open them up to staunch conservatives, committed heterosexuals and Family Research Council members in the name of inclusiveness. Perhaps the National Organization for Women (NOW) can chill out and expand a bit, as well. How is it even “permissible” for an organization to be called that now? “Our group is only for women, not men, ha, ha, boys!” What about inclusiveness, bitches? Wouldn’t it be better if your organization was called the ‘National Organization for Anyone Who Wants To Join?’ Would this not set a better example of inclusiveness and tolerance?  
                Here’s a puzzler for those of you with liberal minds (pardon the oxymoron, morons) to ponder: Should men who “identify” as women be allowed to join NOW?

                If not, explain why.

Thursday, May 12, 2016

British Buses To Sport Phrase "Glory To Allah"

                According to Breitbart.com, Britain's largest Islamic "charity" intends to launch a new advertising campaign in order to "break down barriers" and portray Islam in a positive light.  The campaign will adorn the sides of "hundreds" of buses in London, among other cities, with the phrase "glory to Allah."
       Islamic Relief claims that the advertising is aimed at raising donations for its Ramadan aid to Syria. Apparently, Muslims reading the ads are told that they should donate to Islamic Relief if they want to" gather the rewards of Ramadan."  Many outsiders, however,  are skeptical, as the organization has previously had its accounts with HSBC Banks closed over "concerns that cash for aid could end up with terrorist groups abroad."
       The iconic British buses were chosen for their high visibility and will be utilized in U.K. cities with large- and growing- Muslim populations, such as London, Manchester, Leicester, Birmingham, and Bradford, the Sunday Times of London reports.  Imran Madden, director of Islamic Relief's United Kingdom Branch, stated: "We want to change for the better the perception of Islam. The bus campaign is about breaking down barriers and challenging misconceptions."
       The announcement of this new campaign to "re-brand"  Islam came just one day after London elected its first Muslim Mayor, Sadiq Khan, a co-incidence Islamic Relief called a "nice irony."
       The buses, sporting the phrase "Subhan' Allah," or "Glory to God,"  may be met with "raised eyebrows" according to the Times. Breitbart claims the phrase is supremacist in nature and "is in the same tradition as 'Allah hu Akbar,'  which rather than meaning 'God is Great' actually means '[Our] God (Allah) is greater [than yours].'"
       Raised eyebrows? That's it? Christians are being slaughtered across the Middle East and North Africa. Pro-Christian messages aren't allowed there, and any Christian attempting to openly practice their faith in these countries, let alone tout its superiority will likely be killed.  Christian groups in Britain- and the West in general- have routinely been denied in their efforts to get their message into the public square, whether on buses, in films, on campus...or wherever, and now... this? Incredible.

       Are these buses not public transportation? Should taxpayers be funding this? What happened to the concept of separation of church and state? What happened to the West?

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Detroit's Teachers Say Show Us The Money

                 Almost all of Detroit’s public schools were closed last Monday resulting in over 45,000 students missing classes after roughly half the district’s teachers called in “sick” to protest the possibility that some of them won’t get paid over the summer if the district runs out of cash. This, just the latest in a series of “sick-outs,” caused 94 of 97 schools to close as 1,562 teachers dutifully, robotically obeyed their union’s plea for them to stay home, despite the fact that teacher strikes are illegal under Michigan law.
                This is an amazing display of chutzpah and hypocrisy given teachers near-constant diatribes for “volunteerism” and against money-worship, big business, the for-profit motive, false advertising, capitalism, Wall-Street, “greed,” the rich, the one-percent, etc., etc., and their similarly constant, aggressive and narcissistic bloviating about how important they are to the development of their charges knowledge, character, happiness and ability to get along with everyone else on earth.
                When it comes down to the potential loss of cash from their own pockets, however, they promptly exclaim, “screw the little retards, we’re outta here until you show us the f@^!&ing money!”

                Based on how Detroit public-school students fare on competency tests, these teachers are lucky they get paid at all.

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Europe To Soon Have More Practicing Muslims Than Practicing Christians

                Speaking at the European Union Parliament recently, according to the U.K. Sun, Belgian minister Koen Geens stated: “In Europe, very shortly we’re soon going to have more practicing Muslims than practicing Christians.” To make his point, Geens quickly added, “That is not because there are too many Muslims, it is because Christians are generally less practicing. Europe does not realize this, but this is the reality.”
               Belgian deputy Prime Minister Jan Jambon then added: “I’ve said a thousand times, the worst thing we can do is to make an enemy of Islam. That is the very worst thing we could do.” No, J.J., it’s not. You are already doing the very worst thing you could do. You are aiding and abetting a cultural suicide. Your own.
               And, for-the-record, Europe hasn’t made an enemy of Islam, Islam has made an enemy of Europe, Christians, the West, gays, and fill-in-the-blanks. You know, “infidels.”  Europe- and America- have taken in literally countless Muslim immigrants and fed and housed them, despite being constant targets of radical Islamic terror. Some Christian churches in Europe have even taken down their crosses and essentially been converted into Muslim outreach centers.
              The terrorist attacks on Brussels killed 32 and injured scores more. Yet, some women in parts of Europe feel the need to wear hijabs for their own safety, some community pools are being designated as male or female only, and now Muslim slogans are adorning buses in London…where a Muslim mayor has just been elected.
              Europe has been looking for a way to prevent wars among its nations for decades. The European Union was instituted in part to foster a feeling of unity, strengthen relations between member states, and bolster overall economic and military strength, while reducing the probability of armed conflict.
             Ironically, the E.U. now appears willing and able… to surrender to a foreign invader without firing a shot in its own defense.

San Francisco Introduces Enhanced Family Leave Benefits

                The city of San Francisco has enacted a new, ultra-generous family-leave policy that goes far beyond existing California law. Workers with a newborn- or an ailing family member- will now be entitled to 100 percent of their salaries for up to six weeks, with 45% being paid directly by employers.
                The rule, like the state policy and the “Affordable Care Act,” or Obama-care, applies to firms with 50 or more employees, and is yet one more reason for smaller companies to avoid hiring and to keep part-time workers part-time workers… or move out of the city entirely.
                Ironically, San Francisco is one of the least family friendly cities in the nation, due in part to zoning laws that make housing exorbitantly expensive. The new law appears to be family friendly on its surface, but is rendered largely moot due to the fact that the city has the fewest children per capita of any major American city, a by-product of the fact that it also harbors the most gays and lesbians, the only people who can afford the outrageous housing prices. This is not a pro-family policy, it is an anti-business, pro progressive policy.

                Yet, isn’t offering extra benefits only for fathers and mothers discriminatory and exclusionary? How many weeks off with full pay do the spouses of those changing gender-or species- get? How about those caring for an ailing pet?

Monday, May 9, 2016

A Man's "Right To Choose?"

                    Many women are “pro- choice.” A “woman’s right to choose” is so ubiquitous a mantra, one would think it could be found in the Constitution…or perhaps the Bible.
                    In the interest of fairness, inclusiveness and equality, where is the “men’s rights” movement? Where are those folks who tout a “man’s right to choose?” Isn’t it his choice to wear a condom… or not wear one? What if a man doesn’t want his girlfriend/wife to have an abortion and she decides to have one anyway? What if she wants to “keep” her child, but he wants her to abort it?  Shouldn’t we codify and enforce the man’s “right to choose?”
                   What if he decides she needs to be slapped or spanked? Obviously, it’s his choice, and he’s not even trying to kill anyone, unlike the woman pursuing an abortion.
                   In reality, we know that the man usually doesn’t get to make any of these choices. Hell, he doesn’t even get to decide where the sofa goes. In these decisions a “tie” goes to the female. Our society doesn’t question any of this.
                  But, what if, via a religious epiphany, he becomes a devout Muslim and thereafter decides that his wife can’t work outside of the home or have anything but her eyes showing while in public?
                  In this case- and this case only- liberals, feminists and progressives in general somehow seem to think this poses a painful and difficult “tolerance conundrum.”

                  Liberalism- as it is currently conceived and defined- is a mental disorder.

City Council Asks Parents What Gender Their Four-Year-Olds "Most Identify With"

                 The Brighton and Hove, England, City Council wrote to parents of students as young as four-years-old asking them to record on a form what gender their children “most identify with” before starting school. It recently contacted the parents, urging them to support their child’s choice of “gender identity,” via a letter confirming primary school places.
                The letter, sent to thousands of parents preparing to send kids to new schools later this year,  also requested they leave the gender section of the forms blank if their child had “another gender identity” altogether. The missive continued: “We recognize that not all children and young people identify with the gender they were assigned at birth or may identify as a gender other than male or female, however the current systems (set nationally) only record gender as male or female. Please support your child to choose the gender they most identify with. Or if they have another gender identity, please leave this blank and discuss with your child’s school.”
                They recognize that not all children may identify as a gender other than male or female? At four years old, how many “other genders” do they think kids are aware of? One thing is for certain, we have to rid ourselves of that old, paternalistic national system that only recognizes male and female genders, else where would we find ourselves?!
                Though the letter is redundant and poorly written, at least it is meddling, offensive and insane. What more could you want from a City Council or school district?
                Many parents were understandably appalled by the letter. One mother stated: “Children at school should be free to develop their identity. They are not adults — let them enjoy the innocence and creativity of their childhood.” Tory MP Andrew Bridgen said: “Schools should be teaching kids to read and write, not prompting them to consider gender swaps.”

               Boy, are their priorities screwed up.

Sunday, May 8, 2016

Trump Vows To Be Presidential

                 Let’s say you, like Donald Trump, are a candidate for president of the United States, and you, like Donald Trump, have hitherto acted like a buffoon at a Junior High School dance. If a reporter then asks you if you would even be able to act presidential should you get your party’s nomination to become the chief executive, do not reply like Donald Trump did. By declaring, like a nine-year-old boy, “You won’t even believe how presidential I’m going to be,” you will just have guaranteed that is the case.

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Denmark To Introduce Tax On Red Meat?

                 Denmark is considering proposals to introduce a tax on red meat, after a government think tank came to the conclusion that “climate change is an ethical problem.” The Danish Council of Ethics recommended an initial tax on beef, with a nod towards extending the regulation to all red meats in the future. It also stated that, in the long term, the tax should apply to all foods at varying levels depending on their climate impact. The council voted in favor of the measures by an overwhelming majority, and the proposal will now be put forward for consideration by the government.
                Without food we will all die. In light of this fact, is it really “logical” and “ethical” to tax it? Perhaps we should levy a massive tax on all emergency medical procedures as well? And, surely, a “toilet tax” would be reasonable and ethical. Each flush puts raw sewage (and who knows what else!) into the environment and/or further taxes our treatment plants, etc. This is leaving a smelly footprint on our mother, the earth. And people complain about cigarette smoke! (But not smoke from unfiltered marijuana cigarettes, oddly enough).
                We all know about the looming water shortages. Potable fresh water will be very scarce in the coming decades. Therefore I propose we slap a $10 per 12-ounce-vessel consumption tax on it immediately. This seems a reasonable conservation measure. It’s less than a dollar an ounce!
                Moreover, we all know there is only so much oxygen to go around. What’s more, we are cutting down our rain-forests at an alarming rate, reducing the planet’s ability to regenerate this life giving gas. A hefty user tax on oxygen appears to be the only logical way forward. Every breath taken by every human on Earth should be taxed at a constant rate. The more breaths one takes, the higher the tax one pays. You use more you pay more. It’s only logical. And ethical.
                At particularly reflective moments, I wonder…what is the current tax rate on abortions? Assisted suicides?

                What? They’re effectively subsidized?!
                I have a beef with that. There is an ethical problem here.

                There’s something rotten in Denmark. And in modern-day “progressive thinking” in general.