Header Picture

Header Picture

Thursday, August 30, 2012

If A Politican Toots A Political Message With His Racist Dog Whistle and No One Knows What the Hell He's Talking About, Are All White People Still Racist?

Warning: This column is politically incorrect and purposely offensive. If you are an ill-informed liberal, communist, socialist or Democrat (or all four since they're the same thing!) STOP READING AT ONCE and contact your local Democrat field office for advice on how to proceed. For those of you who dare to continue, in spite of the warning you have just received, I will disclose as a point of political correctness that my love for Michael Jackson proves I am not a racist, plus I have many friends who are not white like me. On the other hand, my utter disdain for corporate rap does not make me a racist, it just proves I have some musical taste left. Anyway, regardless of who you are, you're probably going to get offended by this column.. Deal with it.

The term de jour from the rapidly-losing-its-grip Democrat Party and it's kept men and women in the MSM, is "racist dog whistle." I knew what they meant by it, but like so many terms and ideas that seemingly pop up out of nowhere during a political season, I wanted to know where it came from and why it was common lexicon all of a sudden.

Apparently the term started around 2000 during a successful campaign for right-wing Australian Prime Minister John Howard that had a lot to do with immigration. The guy who supposedly came up with the strategy, Lynton Crosby, is known as "Australia's Karl Rove." Since I know nothing about Australian politics and have absolutely no interest in learning anything about Australian politics, that's as far as I'm going to go. If you want more information, do a Google search or something.

Apparently, I'm thinking "I hate minorities." 

As I did more research on dog whistle politics, I became increasingly concerned for my sanity. My Internet search took me to several Communist websites, a raging maniacal blog by a white suburban housewife who has serious issues with men, especially conservative men like her ex-husband, a few Democrat sites, a very official and important looking site run by the Center for Social Inclusion, whoever the hell they are, and of course site after site about Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews.

Basically, the term means this: people who have limited knowledge about what the other side stands for believe there are certain words that are "cues" for people to act in certain ways, like rid the world of minorities or act racist, or steal from the poor,* or something, I'm not sure. Things like this used to be dismissed as silly conspiracy theories, but now they're the foundation of the Democrat Party belief system.

I saw this picture which I took from the American Labor Party site:

Since the people who run the American Labor Party site are communists and everything belongs to everybody, I don't need to give them credit for the picture I stole or cite the source further. I mean, right? It's communism.

What this picture says is that white people are targeted by Fox News because Fox News knows white people hate everyone except other white people (and even that's debatable if you're Irish or Italian, but that's news from 100 years ago). Anyway, the point of the communists who made this picture is that Fox News is racist and even though it might not be overt, the white people who are watching certainly understand the codes being used--and they're getting ready to jump out of their La-Z-Boys and Hoverounds and DO SOMETHING!

Then there was this gem from Tommy Christopher at Mediaite:

Right? Get it? I mean seriously, no way Romney was talking about
Obama's dismal record as President, he was talking about Obama's race, right?
Christopher actually said this.

And we all remember last week when the typically unfunny Mitt Romney had the unmitigated Ku Klux Klan-like gall to joke that no one has ever asked for his birth certificate. I am so disconnected to white dog whistle politics that I at first thought this was just some sort of dopey joke about the birtherism non-sense Obama has plagued himself with by his secretive behavior over his past. What I learned from the enlightened Left is that Romney was really referring to the fact that Obama is black, and black people don't have birth certificates, or something. I don't know, I got confused following the logic and dozed off.

And anyway, Obama forever put the birtherism issue to rest by printing up this button that people can buy from him.
For the record, I dislike Obama a great deal because of his ineptitude and politics but I never questioned that he was born in Hawaii. However, I do question whether he ever paid attention while going to school there.

All of this immersion in the logic of the Left led me to want to know what the codes are, because, well, I am white, and I feel like I might be getting left out.

I decided I needed a guide to help me navigate the coded messages Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and all of the other white people I encounter on a daily basis are sending me. So here, for the first time ever, is all of the current dog whistle politics codes conservative white people are using to take over the world. Before we get started, understand I didn't make these codes up, I found references to each and everyone of them. Don't get all up in my grille with your hissy fit because I am a racist or some other non-sense, I'm just relaying what I learned.
  1. Those people - Blacks, immigrants, Hispanics, the people next door with the Chevy Nova up on blocks
  2. Them - Blacks, immigrants, Hispanics. Can also be "them people" if you are from the Deep South
  3. Deep South - A place where white people live
  4. Civil War - Current: white people finally get tired of free black people and get violent; Historical: White people in the Deep South liked things the way they were as far as them people was concerned
  5. 10th Amendment - (See Civil War) Has nothing to do with the individual states determining their own course and direction
  6. States Rights - slavery
  7. Jesus - against a woman's right to choose and wants Nativity scenes in front of Town Hall at Christmas
  8. Tea Party - Ku Klux Klan
  9. Barack Obama - Black person
  10. Inner City - Black person
  11. Urban - uppity Black person
  12. Urban youth - unemployed
  13. Welfare - Black people
  14. Budget cut - take things away from those people
  15. Fiscal Responsibility - time to stop helping those people
  16. School Choice - destroy teachers unions
  17. Voter ID - prevent them people from voting
  18. Angry - Black person
  19. Immigration reform - Prevent them people from coming here and mowing our lawns
  20. Unemployed - Black or Hispanic
  21. Women's Health - abortion, oh wait, that's Leftist dog whistle politics
  22. Woman's Right to Choose - abortion, oh wait, that's Leftist dog whistle politics
  23. Religion - Western: against a woman's right to choose
  24. Religion - Middle Eastern: terrorist
  25. Arab - terrorist
  26. Dred Scott Supreme Court Decision: GW Bush speak for banning abortion
  27. Blue Oyster Cult Song Godzilla: call to arms against Black and Hispanics
  28. Oil - money for white people who want to destroy the world
  29. Sweep the floor - good job for a black person (as taught to us by Newt Gingrich)
  30. Catholic - denying a woman the right to choose
  31. Immigrant - Mexican dude who steals work from teenagers
  32. Mid-west - a place where white people who grow corn live
  33. Banker - Jew
  34. Media mogul - Jew
  35. Ghetto - place where those people live
  36. Detroit, Southside Chicago, Cleveland - places where those people live
  37. Los Angeles - place where those people live
  38. Single - Gay
  39. Never married - Gay
  40. Gay - fashion designer or choreographer
  41. Anointed - Baptist from the Mid-West 
  42. Family values - anti-abortion
  43. Family values - homophobic
  44. Family values - pro-prayer in school
  45. Skeptic - anti-Global Warming
  46. Medicare reform - deny seniors citizens the chance to stay alive

I understand this list is simplistic and sophomoric, but hey, I don't make the codes, I just found references to them and listed them in one place.

* - Seriously, like the poor have anything I'm going to waste my time stealing. They're poor for crying out loud! You can't get rich by stealing from the poor. You people should know this by now.

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Winning By Degrees: Where Ron Paul's Supporters Get It Wrong

This piece originally ran July 2, 2012, but in light of the events concering Ron Paul and his supporters at the RNC convention yesterday, I felt it was a good idea to take another look at it:


If you are a Ron Paul supporter and you are basing your voting choice this November on your emotional dissatisfaction over the GOP primary outcome and the candidacy of Mitt Romney, please read this and pass it along to all of your friends who also support Paul. I'm urging you not to take the Democrat/Liberal path of emotionalism to the voting booth, but rather to look intellectually at the war we are in to save our country in the long view.

I am a fighter for freedom and libertarianism, but I did not support Ron Paul for President.

Here's a quick look at Paul's 2012 platform:
  • Believes Healthcare is not a right but a commodity and should be treated as such. Government interference in the healthcare system directly and indirectly (via regulations and licensing) is to blame for the current unaffordability of healthcare in the US. I 100% agree.
  • Disagreed with US assassinations of Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki on the grounds that the bin Laden operation violated Pakistani sovereignity and the al-Awlaki assassination set a dangerous precedent giving the US government free license to kill people it thinks are dangerous or bad. I 100% agree.
  • On immigration, Paul contends that if charities want to treat illegals they should be free to do so but Federal mandates forcing hospital emergency rooms to treat illegal aliens are a burden on treatment facilities and make illegal immigration enticing. I 100% agree.
  • Believes the 14th Amendment (granting automatic birthright citizenship to children born in the US) should be amended to end birthright citizenship. I 100% agree.
  • Believes the embargo of Cuba should be ended immediately, citing our ability to trade with and visit Vietnam, China and other Communist countries. He correctly states that it's time to let the people reach out and help end the Castro regime the government has proven incapable of ending. I 100% agree.
  • Was against the war in Iraq on the grounds that it was Al Qaeda and not Iraq that attacked us on September 11, 2001, and that war should only be entered into to protect US citizens after a Congressional declaration has been made. I 100% agree.
  • Against foreign intervention and believes US forces should be removed from Korea, Europe, and Japan, and that foreign aid to all countries should be considerably reduced where it is not eliminated, citing the overwhelming financial burden US foreign intervention places on its citizens. I 100% agree.
  • Paul has called Social Security a "Ponzi scheme" that "is in bad shape." He alsos believes Social Security is un-Constitutional. I 100% agree.
  • Illegal drug addiction, Paul, a physician, believes should be treated as an illness, like alcoholism is. He correctly states that prohibition causes crime, and that the war on drugs has been a dismal failure. I 100% agree.
  • Believes "the federal government has absolutely no [Constitutional] role in education regardless of what the Supreme Court has claimed." He correctly states that the way to improve education, reduce costs, and regain control of our schools from violence and drug abuse is to remove the centralized control of school systems and to return school curricula, funding, and administration back to the local community level. I 100% agree.

I could go on for another 2500 words, but I've made my point -- I pretty much agree with Ron Paul on just about all of his platform. In fact, I took an Internet test on my libertarianism and I scored a "97% agreement with Ron Paul" score. But then again, I was a libertarian before being a libertarian was a cool way to fight for the future of the country.

That being said, I did not support Ron Paul for President and I am glad I didn't.


New Jersey is a ridiculous cesspool of bad Democrat ideas, labor union corruption, and Liberal do-gooder condescension to people who are struggling to get by. New Jersey sucks. The taxes here are unbelievably high, the roads are falling apart, crime rates are criminal, and some parts of the state smell bad. In fact, things were so bad in New Jersey that even liberals knew it was time to do something, so we all got together a couple of years ago and elected Republican Chris Christie to be our governor.

Christie is loud, in-your-face, chubby, and focused on New Jersey's problems -- but he is no way a Conservative. He's not a RINO, but just barely. In short, he is exactly the non-Democrat, non-Liberal governor the State of New Jersey can handle right now. New Jersey is a failed Socialist experiment, so a true Constitutional libertarian would make everybody's head explode but mine.

But we're taking New Jersey back by degrees. Three years of balanced budgets with no tax increases is a good start.

You Can't Always Get What You Want, But Sometimes You Get What You Need

Ron Paul is pretty much right about pretty much everything he says, but America couldn't handle him right now. Can you imagine all the Julias whining about "women's health issues" and all the Jeremys asking us to pay their student loans if an actual adult like Ron Paul got elected?

Sure that's what we proper-thinking people who understand freedom and liberty want, but we have to man- and woman-up and understand we can't get everything we want all at once. We have to win by degrees. In short, we have to take the country back from the Democrats in the same way the Democrats took it away from us...a little at a time.

Ron Paul supporters and people unhappy with Mitt Romney, listen to me -- we have to win in November and we have to continue winning by degrees. Most of us want our country back right now without compromise, but that's a foolish path to take: There are more people who have been conditioned to believe Big Government is our salvation than there are people who know what a mistake that belief is. We have to help them see the light of liberty and freedom one step at a time.

Don't destroy what little chance we have left to save this country for our children and their children. Vote for the candidate who most closely represents your desire for a life free from government intereference and then hold his or her feet to the fire every chance you get.

We must win by degrees.

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

2016: Obama's America

Chances are many of you have not heard of the movie I'm going to review today. Welcome to the United States in 2012, where debate and dialogue are discouraged.

I went to the movies last night. This is actually a big deal. The last movie I saw in a theater was The King's Speech in February 2011. I can't remember the movie I went to a theater to see before that one. I like movies, I just don't like the public all that much, because quite frankly, the public doesn't know how to behave in public. Young or old, male or female, people just can't sit down, shut up and watch a friggin' movie without talking or doing other annoying things like moving, eating, talking to the characters on the screen, or checking their phones for texts from their BFF's. Last night was no exception.

We went to a 6:30 showing of 2016: Obama's America and I was surprised to see that the theater was actually over half full. Not surprised because of the movie, but because it was a Monday at 6:30PM. Demographically speaking, it was a pretty fair cross-section of the general local population. And of course, there was talking and the mindless out-loud adding of comments at certain points in the movie. So Libs take heart, even mean Conservatives taking time out from pushing Grandma over a cliff to watch a movie that is anti-everything-you-stand-for still don't know how to properly behave in a theater -- just like everyone else.

But anyway.

One of my favorite movies of all time is Roger & Me by that total crackpot and intellectual opposite of me, Michael Moore. It was made back before Mike decided he was important, and when his humility died so did his relevance. But, in a society that used to encourage free thought, if Michael Moore did not exist we would have invented him anyway.

I bring Moore up to point out how much more open-minded (better) I am than those of you who will be sending me nasty messages in a few minutes. I've watched most of Moore's movies and I disagree with him typically 63-99% of the time. But I allow him to wander around in my head just so I can understand other points of view, even if I don't always agree with them. Sadly, the aforementioned nasty-message-writing people who are now preparing their written requests for my death don't do that when it comes to points of view that differ from theirs.

That being said, I went to the movie with significant skepticism, completely prepared to separate truth from propaganda. I am no fan of Obama, but until last night I pretty much just thought of him as an inept empty suit with very little skill and even less intellect. I am not an adherent to silly theories like birtherism and secret affiliations to Al Qeada. But with the amount of business the film is doing at the box office with no significant marketing campaign behind it I figured there had to be some substance to it.

Dinesh D'Souza's point-of-view is compelling and not something I had put a lot of thought into. He squashes birther non-sense in the first few minutes of the movie, as well as claims of Obama's secret attachment to Islam, effectively disarming the sum and substance of most of Obama's defenders.  No, D'Souza's theory is far more damning of the man and the party who elected him. No matter who you're going to vote for in November, you should at least have the intellectual integrity to view the movie and make up your own mind.

In Kenya, Dinesh D'Souza interviews Barack Obama's
half-brother George Obama, a man of differing political
opinions than Barack, and therefore relegated to
persona non grata status within the White House.
This is not the run-of-the-mill anti-Obama propaganda piece I had been told it was. It's far deeper than that. It strikes to the heart of every libertarian's fear that a man with enough talent and charisma can derail an entire political party or government because of people's desire to be a part of something -- without really understanding what they have become a part of.

That we have in the highest office of the land a man with a paternal ax to grind with the West, and Great Britain in particular, and a maternally inherited need to be a radical, is frightening. That most of Obama's mentors, heretofore hidden by the enabling monolithic American media, are to a man anti-American and pro-Communist, should be chilling to everyone who would rather live here than somewhere else. That the entire monolithic media and Democrat Party have chosen to look the other way without even the slightest bit of intellectual curiosity speaks volumes about the current inability of most Americans to understandi the world around them.

Obama's own words, used in context in the film, are damning enough without D'Souza's input, but if even 90% of what D'Souza offers in this movie is pure non-sense, Barack Obama deserves one term and a place in history as America's first racially-mixed President who was unfortunately a failure outside of the narrow-minded scope of his racial identity.

If 50% of what D'Souza offers is true, we're screwed.

If 75% of what D'Souza says is true, the Democrat Party and everyone who blindly supports Obama should be considered treasonous. This from a person who looks with a jaded eye at everything the extremes of either side spout. I'm that serious about what I am saying.

Stop writing that nasty message to me (seriously, they don't bother me anymore) and go put something else into your head other than what Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews want you to have up there. You will not die if you see the movie, but some of your naive, pre-conceived notions about the world you live in might, and that's not a bad thing. Those of you who think you are voting issues when in fact you are voting personality--or even worse your issues with your dad--are the cause of the problems in this country. Not Obama. He wouldn't be where is today without you. So yeah, own it.

To further prove the point that we are living in a dangerous period of idol worship and close-mindedness, 2016: Obama's America ranked number 7 over the weekend, grossing $6.509 million, ahead of Premium Rush, Hope Springs and Hit & Run, with virtually no publicity and no mass marketing. Not bad for a documentary that an entire political party in this country will refuse to watch.

Courtesy: Blaze.com

Monday, August 27, 2012

One Small Step For Mankind...

Neil’s spirit of discovery lives on in all the men and women who have devoted their lives to exploring the unknown—including those who are ensuring that we reach higher and go further in space. That legacy will endure—sparked by a man who taught us the enormous power of one small step. —President Obama on the passing of Neil Armstrong

When I was nine years old I stayed up with my brother and my mother to watch Neil Armstrong take his first step on the moon. It was a Saturday night and my father, a musician, was working. In the wee hours of Sunday morning Armstrong climbed down the ladder from the Lunar Module and stepped on the moon.

Neil Armstrong and I both went to the moon that night. And to a nine-year-old in New Jersey, staying up to four minutes to three in the morning was pretty much the same journey -- in terms of relative difficulty --  Armstrong traveled.

As a kid in the 60s, I had every model lunar module, space capsule and Saturn rocket you could buy. I never missed a launch, a landing or splashdown. I became comfortable with physics and the science of space. I followed an educational and career path in the sciences. I was pretty normal for the times.

I grew up in a nation that was comfortable reflecting our leaders and the skill and gumption of our heroes. Did it always succeed? Of course not, don't be so blinded by cynicism to see things only in black and white.

The passing of an American hero like Neil Armstrong is made all the more bitter by the intellectual mess America finds itself in today. Public schools no longer emphasize or encourage excellence in the sciences. The government is more interested in maintaining its power over our personal lives than in bettering the world we live in. To listen to the Democrats, every woman in America is more interested in abortion than in leaving a better world for future generations.

We are all to blame.

If we were a reflection of ourselves in the 1960s, we must also understand we are a reflection of ourselves today. That being said, based on who we elect to office and who we watch on television, we are a nation of narcissistic weaklings who bemoan risk and failure only to blame others for our actions. This is not the world Neil Armstrong promised me when I was nine.

Armstrong delivered. NASA delivered. The adults who inhabited the decade of the 60s delivered.

We have failed.

A reflection of who we are as a nation today.

A child staring up at the heavens in wonder at the accomplishment of the
United States and Neil Armstrong gives us all hope for the future.

The President of the United States of America doing it -- not so much.
In another disappointing display of narcissism and self-importance,
Barack Obama uses a stock photo of himself looking skyward as his way of
paying tribute to an American hero.

Taken from Barack Obama's official Tumblr account.

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

It's My Commencement And I'll Say 'Hell' If I Want To

For Future Reference
First Amendment to the Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Wise-Ass Kid Says 'Hell' In Front Of People To Prove How Grown-up She Is

Future professional smarty-pants Kaitlin Nootbar and her hovering dad are all over the news because Ms. Nootbar dared utter the word "hell" during her commencement speech in May. The school's principal has told Ms. Nootbar that in order to get her studious little hands on her diploma she must first give him a written apology.

The school is in Prague, Oklahoma and Ms. Nootbar maintained a 4.0 GPA in high school and earned an  academic scholarship to college because of her hard work and smartypantsness. However, none of that is germane to the story except if you want to ruminate on the fact that a supposedly smart person and her dad are so constitutionally inept as to think the Founding Fathers had her commencement speech in mind when they wrote up the First Amendment.

Using the cliched and boring pose
 of Facebook lemmings everywhere,
Kaitlin Nootbar proves she has the
mettle to say 'hell.'
When Ms. Nootbar handed in her draft of her speech for approval the line in question read as "how the heck do I know?" When she presented her speech live and in person at the graduation ceremony she said "how the hell do I know?" America is thoughtlessly siding with this wonderful young lady who is a role model to smart kids and smart alecks everywhere. A new hero to the American intelligentsia, Ms. Nootbar is now to free speech as Sandra Fluke is to birth control.

Ms. Nootbar is a rebel. She is cheeky. She is not afraid to push the envelope. She questions authority.

Ms. Nootbar's hovering dad, Mr. Nootbar, says this is a First Amendment issue. And after all, she was only quoting the Twilight movies or Twilight books, or something that the kids all love today, and if we're going to relate to the teens we have to let them have the freedom to say 'hell.' Otherwise the terrorists win! Or something, I'm not really sure what the hell his point was.

What Say We Look At the First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
  1. Congress can't make a state religion like what happened in England when the King got in trouble with the Vatican for doing things the Vatican didn't like
  2. Congress can't make a law preventing me from praying to Praying Mantis's or other insect-life if I choose
  3. Congress also can't prevent me from practicing my religion how I choose, unless of course I choose to not pay for your birth control
  4. Congress cannot make a law that forbids me from calling Barack Obama a liar, or an inept leader, or from making fun of some Congressman in Missouri for being a complete and uttter moron by not understanding the physiology of conception
  5. Congress can't outlaw my little slice of the Blogosphere, even if the constant theme around here is that everyone in Congress--or the government in general--is a moron and a crook
  6. Congress can't make a law that keeps me from stinking up a public park in New York City as long as I want--or until the weather gets cold
  7. Congress can't make a law that prevents me from suing Congress for being stuffy about my dislike of Congress
As we have noticed, nowhere in the First Amendment does it say that a public school administrator, on public school property, during a public school function, can't put the screws to a valedictorian's one chance to stick it to the man by using a racy word.

David Nootbar uses his vast Constitutional knowledge to
defend his daughter's use of the word 'hell' during her
commencement speech. Nootbar has not commented on
his feelings about lying.

You see, this is the double-edged sword of public education: the autonomy we grant educators to make my kid read books that will rot his mind is the same autonomy we grant educators to make sure decorum--as the administrator defines it--is maintained.

So, Ms. Nootbar's hovering dad needs to brush up on his Constitutional knowledge before he goes whining about his daughter's First Amendment right to say 'hell.'

As Usual Everyone Is Missing the Point Anyway 

All of this media attention is all well and good and I'm sure Ms. Nootbar, as a freshly-released-into-the-world-of-adulthood adult person, is enjoying her fame, but we're missing the point.

The point is, Ms. Nootbar lied to the principal about the content of her speech by submitting it with the word 'heck' instead of the far more inflammatory 'hell.' This has the potential to make Ms. Nootbar a liar, which is defined as a person who tells lies.

If Ms. Nootbar was so adamant about the word 'hell' she would have submitted it as part of her original text. That she didn't tells us the following:
  1. She knew it was inappropriate but was going to use it anyway, so she hid the truth from the school administration
  2. She succumbed to peer pressure to say the word 'hell' in public--how rebellious!--which made the administrator who approved the speech look foolish at the same time it pointed out how easily Ms. Nootbar folds under pressure
Either way, Mr. Nootbar should be spending less time defending the indefensible and more time teaching his daughter about propriety, the importance of truth, and what the hell the First Amendment guarantees us in the first place.

Personally I would be more concerned that my kid hid the truth--lied--to the school principal than I would be about some phantasmagorical assertion that a mean authority figure somehow abridged her Constitutional right to say whatever the hell she wanted to say.

Let's all just hope President Obama doesn't ring up the Nootbar household to chat about poor Kaitlin's oppression.

Additional content and photographs courtesy NY Daily News

Thursday, August 16, 2012

On Life, Death, Liberty and Why What I Don't Know Causes Me To Reject Both Liberalism and Conservatism

A Few Quotes to Ponder

A person who was way smarter than I could ever dream of being once told me, "asking man to describe God is like asking a computer to describe the engineer who designed it."

Another guy, Stephen Hawking, who is way smarter than the guy who was way smarter than me, wrote in A Brief History of Time, "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Then of course, that bastion of actual fascism and evil, Adolph Hitler, was quoted as saying, "What good fortune for governments that the people do not think." These words, coming out of Hitler's mouth, caught my attention.

The Part Where I Am Self-Indulgent In Order to Set Up My Point

I have stood in the face of personal death three times in my life, once after falling off a boat during a squall with no life jacket, once fifty feet away from a tree that got obliterated by lightning on a golf course, and once while the business end of a shotgun was pointed at me while being pumped as an argument over drugs and 8-Track tapes I was an unfortunate bystander to got a little out of hand.

I have also buried my parents, both of my brothers, my best childhood friend, too many relatives to count without losing track through the sorrow, and the very best dog that ever lived, in a snowstorm when I was twelve.

My Point

Okay, now that I've gotten you completely confused and probably a little sniffly over the dog in the snowstorm, let me get to my point: I've been on the planet for five decades, I've lived a lot of life, I've made enemies and I've retained friendships for scores of years. I've read enough books to qualify as a bona fide nerd. I've been married, divorced, unemployed, broke, married, not-very-broke, and comfortable. I've also been skinny, fat, reasonable, lonely and over-whelmed by the kindness of others. Like you, the first person who touched me when I arrived on this planet was a stranger, and like you, the last person who will touch me when I leave this planet will be stranger. Through it all I've come to the conclusion that I really don't know anything -- at all.

Except that the three quotes I started this piece with are true.

Here's a bunch of other things I don't know:
  • What's the Big Idea?
  • What's my purpose
  • Who the hell I am
  • Why the hell I'm here in the first place
  • How this all came about
If I don't know that stuff about myself, how the hell can I be expected to know anything about you?

Therefore, I can conclude that I also don't know:
  • How you should manage your life
  • What makes you happy
  • What's best for you
Here's some things I do know:
  • The only things that matter are the non-strangers in your life between the time you arrive at birth and the time you check out at death
  • Society functions like this: People don't cross the center line of the road while driving in order to protect themselves from pain and as an attempt not to inflict pain on others. The people who do cross the center line and kill themselves or other people, are going to do so whether crossing the center line is illegal or not
  • Waging war for a reason other than an immediate threat to our security is wrong
  • Governments and religions start wars, people just want to work and grab a beer at quitting time
  • Killing another person, whether it's because you had sex and now you're worried about how the result will impact your future, or because a jury of your peers found you guilty of murdering someone else, is wrong
  • Compelling one person to sacrifice a portion of their personal property for the benefit of another is wrong
  • Compelling a society to pay your medical bills because you were uninsured and helmetless when you ran your motorcycle into a truck, or any other dependence on others to correct your mistakes, is wrong
  • Telling another person who you can love is wrong
  • Telling me I must do as you say because of your politics wrong
  • Telling me I am stupid because I view life differently from you is wrong
  • Telling another person they are to be damned, or killed, or scorned, because of how they choose to pray, or not pray, is wrong
  • There is one race, and we're all a part of it
  • Infringing on your rights when you have not affected my personal safety or ability to pursue a peaceful existence, is wrong

Why What I Don't Know Forces Me To Pick the Lesser of Three Evils

So there you have it. The things I know are sort of abstract, filled with what used to be called common-sense, and fairly simple to comprehend. The things I don't know are even more abstract, devoid of common-sense and almost impossible to comprehend.

I don't know enough to be a Democrat or a Republican because I am simply not more capable of running your life than you are.

All of this being said, I will be voting Republican this November for the following reasons:
  • The Libertarian Party has got it wrong...they should be working to change the system as it currently exists from the inside, not as a fringe element in the national discourse
  • The Democrat Party is filled with power-mad career politicians who prey on the ignorance of its base in order to maintain a state of socialism
  • The Republican Party, filled with power-mad career politicians who prey on the fears of its base in order to maintain a state of semi-socialism, is at least open to the idea of reading the Constitution occasionally, and regardless of what Justice Ginsberg says, humankind -- in all of its existence -- has not created a document that even comes close to the Constitution of the United States when it comes to protecting the rights of the individual
So there you have it, my ignorance will guide my voting decision. The difference between me and the vast majority of people who will vote this November is that I acknowledge my ignorance.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

"Shared Prosperity" Vs. "Mutual Prosperity"

Obama's Consistency on 'Shared Prosperity'

The GOP is all a-twitter because President Obama said yesterday that he wants to work toward an America with "shared prosperity." With their indignant bloomers in an uncomfortable bunch they're acting like this is something new.
  • Obama, 2008: Said he would bring "fiscal responsibility and shared prosperity."
  • Obama, 2009: Said his economic plan "is about far more than just recovery — it's about sustained growth and widely shared prosperity."
  • Obama, 2011: Said he was working to bring about a "framework for shared prosperity."
  • Obama, 2012: Said he wanted a"new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared."
Welcome to the silly season.

Other People Who Have Spoken About 'Shared Prosperity'

There a quite a few in the Left Wing blogosphere today touting quotes by Ronald Reagan talking about 'shared responsibility.' I did a perfunctory search and found no reliable sources quoting Reagan using the term. I won't accuse them of lying or anything, I'll just assume they have way better Google skills than I do. However, when they are not excoriating him for it, some Democrats use Reagan's "rising tide lifts all boats" bit as an example of "shared prosperity." It's a stretch, but let's go with it.

While introducing Paul Ryan as his running mate in Virginia on Saturday, Mitt Romney said that Ryan would "help lead the country to widespread and shared prosperity." No one got up in arms about that statement.

So let's stop all the non-sense about Obama finally proving to the nation he's a Socialist. He proved he's a Socialist a long time ago. He's proved he is inept in the ways of fundamental economics, and a not very knowledgeable person when it comes to how you and I live our lives, and a pretty bad golfer. I mean, he's running for re-election, he's not an unknown entity.

They're Both Wrong Anyway

Unless Mitt means the same thing Obama does (and I am betting my vote in November he doesn't), what Mitt is actually talking about is mutual prosperity.

I've long ago lost hope that Obama knows what he's talking about, so I'm pretty sure he meant what he said. Of course, there's also that sinister voice in my head that keeps whispering that maybe Obama is doing what he's doing on purpose. Regardless, when it comes to 'shared prosperity,' they're both wrong.

Shared prosperity and mutual prosperity are not the same thing. Kindergarten taught us this.
  • If my mom gave me a little baggie with Nestle's Quik powder in it so I could have chocolate milk with my snack, and your mom didn't, but I give you some of mine (or you are bigger than me and you take mine away from me), that's shared prosperity.
  • If my mom gave me a little baggie with Nestle's Quik powder in it, and your mom did too! That's mutual prosperity.
  • If your frightening, unusually large, Kindergarten teacher confiscates both of your bags of chocolate powder, that's the government at work.

Mutual Prosperity Lifts All People, All the Time, So the Government Should Give Us That!

The government can indeed give us all mutual prosperity by:
  1. limiting its involvement in our commercial transactions 
  2. assuring the national defense
  3. assuring a well-maintained physical infrastructure
  4. putting large, angry, bullies in jail for stealing things like Nestle's Quik powder
If I am prosperous I can help you prosper by spending my money on your goods and services. If you are prosperous you will do the same for me. Notice how our race, politics, or religions, played no part in our pursuit of mutual prosperity.

The government does not create wealth, it takes a portion of our mutual wealth to provide items 1-4 above.
But when the government insists on dividing you from me, rich from poor, black from white, young from old, male from female, one has to ask why. If a government insists we are not mutual citizens by dividing us by groups with equal rights to exist as we choose to exist, then how can that government ever truthfully claim to be interested in mutual wealth?

Ask yourself, Left or Right, Conservative or Liberal, Democrat or Republican, are you more interested in mutual wealth or getting a leg up on others through manipulation of the system? If you said the former you might be a libertarian, if you said the latter you're part of the problem. 

Additional information and source material: Investors.com 

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

How To Argue With A Liberal Part XXIX: Soledad O'Brien Teaches Us That Facts Are Merely Obstacles to Overcome On the Way To Winning An Argument

In today's edition of my popular and potentially award-winning series "How To Argue With A Liberal," we  examine the role facts play during arguments about facts.

When I am getting yelled at for naively thinking we're all better off taking care of ourselves, I deal with two types of liberals:
  1. Those who throw facts out there knowing full well they are misleading or specious but their arrogance prevents them from worrying about coming off like a liar
  2. Those who repeat nuggets, bits, parts and extractions from other facts -- without knowing all the details -- that on their own are patently absurd or false but their laziness prevents them from worrying about coming off like a liar
Soledad O'Brien (D-CNN) falls into both categories.*

In the picture above, Soledad O'Brien is furiously leafing through an email containing a blog post from Talking Points Memo a Democrat Party mouthpiece. The piece was written by Sahil Kapur, who has previously written for the Guardian and the Huffington Post. The piece was entitled "The Myth That Paul Ryan Is A Bi-Partisan Leader."

That O'Brien, a "journalist," relies on a left-wing blogger for her notes and facts does not surprise me, nor do I have a problem with it. The problem I have is O'Brien never cites the piece she is looking through. To the contrary, O'Brien claims to be reading a statement directly from the office of Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR). She's not: She's reading an excerpt from the blog post linked in the previous paragraph. For more on this go to MRCTV.ORG (a right wing blog) (Did you see what I did here? I cited it as part of the information I am presenting to you)).

'Okay, big deal," you say and I pretty much agree with you. Except for this: I haven't gotten into an argument with a Democrat in the past 18 months where I have not been told to stop watching Fox News for all my talking points. To a Democrat or liberal (same thing) if you disagree it's only because the Orwellian folks over at Fox have brainwashed you into mis-understanding the facts. "Why not try watching CNN for a different perspective sometimes?" is the line I get from the nicer people who think I am as dumb as they are.

This morning, Ms. O'Brien had it out with John Sununu about Medicare and how Paul Ryan is going to kidnap Mitt Romney and then go on a rampage throwing old ladies off of various cliffs near his hometown in Wisconsin. Well, she didn't actually say that, but, well, you know, seniors are going to die, and that's all you need to know.

I pulled this video off of YouTube. It's entitled: "CNN's Soledad O'Brien Schools Romney Surrogate on Medicare Plan."  Of course the best part of the video is at the 2:49 mark when Sununu tells O'Brien to "put on Obama bumpersticker on [her] forehead." Presumably, these are the "disgusting words" mentioned by Soledad O'Brien Supporter #4 below.

Here's some of the comments enlightened supporters of Soledad's support of Barack Obama's $700 trillion cuts to Medicare had to say:
  • "this sums up politics lately. smart lady with facts vs... old dumbass with conflicting talking points scooping up romneys crap." 5 Likes
  • "Anyone in the GOP who was not a clown has been run out by Koch-led Tea Party candidates. Thank yourself if you voted for any of them as they are the same asshats who will block a vote no matter the cost to the country." 4 Likes
  • "Classy lady with facts vs. Fat ass liar yelling gibberish." 0 Likes :-( 

  • "BTW you know when the right is losing...they start using disgusting words when they have nothing else. Yes, I'm talking about you crayhead!" 0 Likes :-(
  • "Sununu is full of crap. Soledad is reading exactly what Romney said. Sorry but Sununu's a liar liar pants on fire.Romney picked the worst candidate for VP & he will live to regret it." 0 Likes :-(
  • You go girl! 0 Likes :-(
At the 2:39 mark, with all of the smug disgust she can muster, O'Brien cites Factcheck.com as part of her refutation of what Sununu is saying.

Here's a screen shot of that mainstay of Democrat and CNN information, Factcheck.com :

Extra-special shout out to Ali Akbar (Activist, Opinion leader, Consultant.
Pres of @NatlBloggers. CEO at @ViceAndVictory. Chief #GiveUsRyan
Screamer! Organizer of #BlogBash) for sharing this.

For the less Internet savvy amongst you, this is a screenshot of the site to buy the domain name Factcheck.com from DomainNamesSales dot Com -- because Factcheck.com doesn't actually exist.  

You go girl! 

So just remember the next time you're getting hammered by a liberal: the facts they use may not in fact be facts, they might just be stuff people made up.  

* - Special shout-out to blogger DANEgerus.com for the new political identifier for media water-carriers.

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Romney-Ryan 2012: A Step In the Right Direction

Since 1932, the Democrat Party has slowly and succinctly been whittling away at the rights and freedoms of the individual American. As a party, the Democrats were smart enough to know that changing the direction of the country from an idea of personal liberty toward a centralized, statist government was not going to happen over night.

With a few exceptions (Reagan, the House Republicans in 1994) the Republican Party has chosen the path of impotency in response to the Democrat plan to erase much of what made America great.

That Mitt Romney was bold and visionary enough to pick a running mate who is not afraid to say that our rights are not derived from the government shouldn't be exciting, but unfortunately in America in 2012 it is.

To all of you libertarians out there: We are not going to win the White House or any sizable numbers in Congress just because Barack Obama is the most socialist president this country has ever seen. It took the Democrat Party 80 years to make the country what it is today, and its going to take us another 80 years to undo the damage.

In 2012, we are indeed going to benefit from the blind arrogance and hubris of the Democrat Party that Barack Obama so beautifully symbolizes, but the fight is only just beginning. The door is open to improvement if we are smart enough to understand that it will come by degrees, not with one fell swoop. The Democrat Party has become full of itself, and as we all know, it's pride that goes before the fall. Let's come together with everyone to the Right of John McCain and facilitate that fall for them.

We must win by degrees, and Romney-Ryan is a tremendous start. We must keep up the pressure on the people who would destroy us for believing in personal liberty, and we must understand this is just the first round of what is going to be a long fight.

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Reality Redux: Libertarian Manifesto: Don't Call Me a "Conservative"

Note: This piece originally ran August 25, 2011.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were. Stolen from Wikipedia because I was too lazy to actually look up the definition in a respected dictionary.

I am not a 'conservative.' People like Harry Reid, Barack Obama and Bill Maher are. I want change and the aforementioned and their ilk want things to stay the same, or change only minimally in the direction we are already heading. We need aggressive change now.

I'm not a conservative because I'm tired of:
  1. living in a welfare state that encourages failure
  2. a tax code that punishes success
  3. living in a society that uses race as a crutch
  4. living in a society that upholds stupidity and makes fun of intelligence
  5. professional politicians who are failures out in the real world running my life
  6. being told 'capitalism' is evil by people who don't understand capitalism
  7. of a political party encouraging illegal immigration in an attempt to bolster its membership
  8. unelected bureaucrats doing the jobs of the elected legislature
  9. uneducated people telling me I am causing Global Warming while the live the same life as me
  10. talking heads arguing with each other 24/7 on radio and TV
  11. Sean Hannity representing me
  12. being blamed for the failures of others because of my gender and the color of my skin
  13. driving around this country and seeing abandoned factories
  14. labor union leaders destroying the economy and education system
  15. government telling me how to manage every aspect of my life
  16. receiving absolutely zero representation in Washington, and Chris Smith (R-NJ) I mean you too
  17. living in a corporatocracy that is as much to blame for our current failing state as everyone else
  18. people who think the sun rises and sets at the White House (regardless of who lives there)
  19. people who don't understand history
  20. living in a country filled with people who think it's okay to be weak and evil to be strong

Do not call me a conservative. I want things to change.
It's the Democrats, moderate Republicans, racist politicians, cultural "leaders," and union thugs who want to keep things as they are.

Call me an American, but if you insist on labeling me otherwise, call me a revolutionary.

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Being Old and Male and White, I Had A Hard Time Finding a Barack Obama Campaign Group That Would Have Me

So you don't have to, I peruse the official Barack Obama 2012 campaign website from time-to-time, mostly just to find out what silly things the Obama people are asking their fervent supporters to do to help keep Obama and the fam in the White House.
Being a libertarian, I sometimes feel jealous and a little left out. After all, who doesn't want to belong to a group of likeminded people who look at life through the same narrow, myopic lens as you?
Whilst I was perusing the aforementioned site I came across the groups page with the following header splashed across the top:
Needless to say, I was intrigued and wanted to see where I might fit in:
  1. African-Americans Even though my first non-third-grade-teacher crush was Gladys Knight, I'm pretty white. I'm sorry for all Americans that the President of the United States views people through the lens of race first, in spite of his campaign promises to be the first "post-racial president," but he does Conclusion: I can't jump
  2. Asian-American and Pacific-Islanders I was a bit flummoxed by this one at first. Then I remembered Obama is at times, a native of Hawaii, and then of course at other times he is a native of Indonesia. Conclusion: In spite of my fondness for pineapple and sushi I can't join this group
  3. Educators I am not an educator, although I do support educators, especially my third grade teacher Mrs. Bobick, but that's mostly because she was awesome! I do not support my fifth grade teacher who's actual, real, name was Shirley Leadbeater (I shouldn't have to explain why I don't support her). I am also vehemently opposed to public-sector labor unions and I think the NEA has destroyed more good teachers and students than they've supported. Conclusion: This group wouldn't have me
  4. Environmentalists I support the Nature Conservancy and have for years -- ever since my incredibly dumb and socialist second year college Poli Sci professor told me I was "not very bright for supporting that group as all they do is buy property." I also think Global Warming is a hoax, plain and simple, and I think people who support the hoax are nothing more than Communists in Socialist's clothing. I also think the EPA should be stripped of its non-Congressional regulatory powers. Conclusion: This group would hit me with a badger if I tried to join
  5. Jewish-Americans Although I swear in Yiddish frequently, I am a goyim. What's interesting to me is Barack Obama's apparent disdain for Israel and the fact that in four years he hasn't once visited our strongest ally in the region. Then there's that whole messy bit where he complained about having to deal with Netanyahu. Oh yeah, and the whole refusal to call Jerusalem the capital of Israel, lest Israel's enemies be offended. Frankly, I find it hard to believe that a non-anti-Zionist person of the Jewish faith would support Obama. Conclusion: Goyim, right out
  6. Latinos Again, even though I am fond of many varieties of food and drink from various Latin and Hispanic places, I am a gringo. However, I'm surprised the Latino community still thinks Obama has done anything for them other than make their chances for success in this country slimmer. The whole illegal immigration thing is a sham both parties use to their advantage when it's convenient, so don't bother me with that tripe. Conclusion: Gringos need not apply
  7. LGBT Americans Although the football players in high school called me names that made me occasionally wonder, I'm boring and straight. I witnessed up close the shame being a homosexual brought to a person I love because they didn't free to be who they were. Then there's the whole libertarian point-of-view on things, but those of you who fit into this category keep in mind: Obama was against same-sex marriage until June when Joe Biden forced his hand to come out in favor of it. The President has done absolutely nothing more than pay you lip service. Conclusion: I kind of would rather watch women's diving than men's so I disincluded from this group too
  8. Native-Americans No jokes here. Barack Obama has continued a 150 year tradition of treating Native Americans as sub-human and anyone who would say otherwise should be ashamed of themselves. For him to pander to this group is shameful considering the realities of rez life
  9. Nurses I am not a nurse -- I get pukey just thinking about certain things. But why are nurses a special group in Obama's eyes? Is it because doctors are always mean to them? This is just silly and pandering. Conclusion: I think most people are gross, so hats off to nurses and sorry I can't join your group
  10. Parents Aaaaaaaaaa Ha!!!!! I'm a parent! But I wouldn't be caught dead supporting a man who has done so much to make the future for my kids so bleak. Conclusion: Even though I could actually join this group I'm not that dumb
  11. People of Faith Which faith? The one that doesn't want to pay for people's birth control against their own tenets? Conclusion: I have faith, just not in crooked politicians, plus I refuse to belong to a church so religious people won't have me
  12. People With Disabilities Really? What has Obama done for this group? George HW Bush signed the ADA while Obama likened his bowling score to being almost good enough for the Special Olympics. Conclusion: I am blessed I am not in this group, and I am also offended that Obama panders to it
  13. Rural Americans Which ones? The ones who cling to their guns and Bibles? Or the ones who are losing their jobs in the coal mines left and right? Conclusion: I live in suburbia
  14. Seniors I'm old but I'm not that old. and to be honest with you, I'm a little tired of "seniors' expecting to never have to give up anything while the rest of us go broke. There I said it. Deal with. Conclusion: Now that I am a proven ageist, I'll never get into the home my kids want me in
  15. Small Business Owners I was a small business owner until 2008, but as far as small business owners supporting Obama? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Ha! Conclusion: I used to be in this group, unfortunately the Federal government has pretty much wiped it out
  16. Veterans & Military Families I did not serve, and I find it hard to believe that those who did would support President Obama's positions on national defense. Forget the war in Afghanistan he campaigned on ending and the fact that he pulled out of Iraq on Bush's timeline. Conclusion: Hats off to those who did what I did not do
  17. Women I am not woman and I am hardly ever in touch with my feminine side. I do however like women, except for those who purposefully try to make my life miserable like my ex-wife. Other than give them a lifetime of being dependent on the Federal government like their mascot Julia I don't really know how Obama has helped women, unless you, as a woman, define yourself by the free birth control Obama forced people to give you. Conclusion: Based on my dating record in high school, I am not welcome
  18. Young Americans I was young once, now I'm sort of in the middle. Luckily when I was young the worse thing people my age had to deal with was that other Democrat wunderkind Jimmy Carter. How you kids today are going to get through another four years of Obama escapes me. If you're looking for a future filled with high taxes and minimal earning potential, Obama is your man. Conclusion: Stay off of my lawn!

Obama promises Americans who don't pay a lot of
attention to reality a lifetime of unicorns and rainbows.
What he delivers is quite the opposite.
This photo was lifted from the site
No copyright infringement intended, but I needed
a picture of Obama riding a unicorn to make
my point.

So there you have it, eighteen ways to further divide the country. Granted I could join the group Parents for Obama but I actually like my kids so I'd rather join a group called Parents Who Put Some Effort Into Making A Better Future For their Kids. Oh wait, that group is called Adulthood. 

So after looking at Barack Obama's lame attempt to divide us from ourselves, I don't feel left out at all.

Monday, August 6, 2012

Some Thoughts On Chick-fil-A: The Free Market Is Alive and Well, and The Chick-fil-A Bully Symbolizes the Unraveling of the Left


After more than a week, and over thirty nasty hate-filled messages on Twitter, the antagonist from How To Argue With A Liberal Part XXVII: In This Installment A Person Who Doesn't Even Know Me Wishes for My Death (July 30, 2012) apologized to me over the weekend. Basically, he said gets really mad when he sees the hate and lies people he disagrees with spout and well, he was really, really mad because, presumably, I dared to print what Mitt Romney actually said about the London Olympics. I think we're friends or something now, but, you know, my feelings are still a little bit raw, so I'm proceeding cautiously.

Grown Man With Good Job Picks On What Looks To Be A Very Nice Young Lady Working at Her Local Chick-fil-A

If you're like me and you have no life other than spouting political theories and getting yelled at for them, you've probably seen this video. If you're not like me and you have a regular life, you should watch:

  • Smith pulled the video, probably more out of embarrassment than any sense of decency, so the only working copy I could find was from the guy a guerillapolitics dot com
  • Rachel is my hero. She's composed in spite her obvious discomfort. The world needs more Rachels and less Adam Smiths
  • The Democrat Party wants women to aspire to be hand-out queens like their fictional Julia, but the world would be better a better place if more people aspired to be like Rachel
  • Smith's hatred for corporations over-shadows his ignorance of the fact that Chick-fil-A is not a corporation, it's a privately held enterprise
  • Smith says he is a nice guy. I'm a nice guy. I know lots of nice guys. Nice guys don't pick on young ladies because of politics
  • Smith contends he's not gay -- apparently people's perception of Smith's sexuality is important to him
Adam Smith, the tough-guy you just watched pick on a poised and low-paid Chick-fil-A worker, was the CFO at a medical manufacturing company in Arizona. I say "was" because I guess the CEO of said company saw this video and decided he didn't like the way Mr. Smith represented his greedy and mean corporation -- so he canned Smith's angry rearend.

After getting fired for being an idiot, Mr. Smith suddenly got so remorseful he was driven to tears, and he filmed himself apologizing for his behavior. That Mr. Smith, a well-paid, educated adult was not able to control his urge to lash out at a young woman trying to earn a living should bother the rest of us who know how to behave in public.

As you can see, Adam Smith is sorry for the way he acted. But he was really, really, mad because he disagrees with the guy who runs Chick-fil-A about same-sex marriage, and well, when you're that mad you just have to yell at someone!
  • Smith is a true Democrat because basically none of this was his fault -- he was just so darned mad he couldn't help himself
  • The arrogance Smith exhibits as he preaches to the rest of us (who didn't yell at Rachel) to be civil is laughable
  • Pretty much, what I get from his apology is that he's sorry his escapade blew up in his face
  • Smith at one point claims he felt bad right away, but then he claims he was so pumped up about sticking it to Chick-fil-A for its "human rights violations" that he just considered Rachel to be "collateral damage" -- his timeline is as delirious as he is

What the Hell Is Wrong With These People?

The Left has been coddled for so long they've come to believe the first visceral and emotional response they have is the proper response. They have been conditioned to believe they are are entitled to be mad, hurt and angry. This has been accomplished after years of being told by their political leaders that everyone who disagrees with them is bad and aiming for the "end of the world as we know it" (Nancy Pelosi's words, not mine).

Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the United States Senate accuses Mitt Romney of not having paid taxes for ten years and no one on the Left bats an eye. They just believe him. This in spite of the fact that the IRS is way too good at its job to let a rich guy like Romney go for ten years without having paid his fair share. Reid knows this logic will escape the minions on the Left because they just want to be mad at Romney for not being Obama. This is what happens when your politics become a Cult of Personality instead of a means of protecting your freedoms. That Barack Obama held the same views as Dan Cathy did until Joe Biden forced his hand never enters the minds of the angry Democrat.

Important Reminder To Angry Democrats: We Watched the Free Market At Work

Last Wednesday was an important day and not because of the same-sex marriage issue. We watched the free-market work, and it did so beautifully. People who are tired of being bullied by people for their beliefs (by people who want to be accepted for their's) went out and spent money to support another man's right to live his life according to his own beliefs.

Same-sex marriage wasn't the issue, neither was the false notion that Chick-fil-A somehow spouts hate because of Cathy's beliefs. Freedom was under assault by politicians who know a good bandwagon when they see it. Period.

Mr. Cathy and I do not share the same views on same-sex marriage. I don't know enough about what the hell we're doing on this planet in the first place to condemn a person for loving another person. I also don't know enough about how the universe works to condemn Mr. Cathy for believing what he believes. I'm pretty sure God's got it together enough to sort this all out at our final destination. And for you atheist libertarians out there, I guess none of this matters anyway.

If, however, Mr. Cathy was instructing the nice young ladies who work for him to ask prospective chicken sandwich eaters who they liked to have sex with before serving them, I would probably not -- in spite of their deliciousness -- eat Mr. Cathy's chicken sandwiches. I would, however, be perfectly happy to watch the market put Mr. Cathy's firm out of business for being so ridiculous. I would also smile while I watched the likes of Boston Mayor Tom Menino (D) and NYC Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D) stand in the wings and learn how completely impotent they are when it comes to matters of conscience.

It's Only Going to Get Worse

If last Wednesday is any indication, there are a lot people in this country who are tired of elected government officials like Menino and Quinn attempting to run their lives based on their personal agendas -- regardless of what the law (or reality) says.

As November approaches, the Democrats you encounter in your own personal private, peaceful, daily lives, are going to become more rabid in their hatred of opinions that differ from their own.

Hold fast, smile at them, let them rant, then go do something to protect your freedom and the freedom of Americans who will come long after people like Adam Smith are just embarrassing memories in the annals of American political history.

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

If You Think Mike Bloomberg Is All Up In Your Business, Wait Until Christine Quinn Is Mayor

Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R) (I) (D), New York City, has proven time and time again that he thinks he knows how to run your life way better than you ever will. He wants you to immediately stop smoking, eating trans fats, drinking big sodas and giving your baby formula instead of the good old-fashioned way God intended babies to eat -- regardless of the reason.

The people are up in arms over Bloomberg's desire to run their lives.

However, compared to NYC Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D), Bloomberg is a freakin' libertarian.

We all know how certain political profiteers, panderers and nincompoops have jumped on the anti-Chick-fil-A bandwagon because the president of the privately-held company has dared to hold a religious view on same-sex marriage (Boston Mayor Is Totally Against Even Thinking About Not Supporting Gay Marriage - July 25, 2012). But Speaker Quinn has trumped them all by actually using the power of her office to coerce the landlord (New York University) of the city's only Chick-fil-A restaurant to run the damned homophobic bigots right back to where they came from.

In the coming days, Ms. Quinn will walk back her statements and say she was speaking as a "private citizen." When she does that, Ms. Quinn will be lying through her teeth. Here's a copy of the letter Speaker Quinn sent, on official letterhead, using the phrase "I write as Speaker of the New York City Council, and on behalf of my family," to introduce her attempt at bullying the University.

Quinn Letter to Sexton

Courtesy: Politicker.com

Speaker Quinn is not exercising her right as a private citizen to protest against Chick-fil-A because of their differing opinions on same-sex marriage. Speaker Quinn is using the power of her office to determine who gets to do business "in her city" based solely on whether she agrees or disagrees with the opinions of the proprietors of the business.

In Christine Quinn's world, diversity means agreeing in lockstep with her or ceasing to exist.

Democrat or Republican, gay or straight, you people better get your heads around the incredible threat to freedom people like Christine Quinn pose to the rest of us.