Reality Based Libertarianism and Other Stuff.

New Jersey Man-Child Charged With Firebombing Synagogues In New Jersey

2012-01-28T09:23:00.000-05:00

Anthony Graziano, 19, of Lodi, New Jersey, is being held on $5,000,0000 bail for allegedly firebombing two synagogues in New Jersey. Additional charges were filed after police found a cache of material Graziano was allegedly collecting for future attacks.

On the morning of Jan. 3, authorities responded to a fire at Congregation K'Hal Adath Jeshuran in Paramus, when members smelled gas in the building and contacted authorities. Fire and police officials determined an accelerant had been used in the rear of the building to start a fire. The fire had quickly burned itself out, and no injuries were reported.

In the early morning of Jan. 11, police said Molotov cocktails were thrown at Congregation Beth El in Rutherford, igniting a fire in the second-floor bedroom of Rabbi Nosson Schuman's residence. The rabbi, his wife, five children and his parents were sleeping at the time. - Samantha Henry, AP

Anthony Graziano, 19, Lodi, NJ
Bergen County Prosecutor's Office / AP Photo

A recent high school graduate, Graziano is unemployed and does not own a car. He used a bicycle to travel to the scene of his alleged crimes. Police found that bicycle along with glass bottles, motor oil and other devices used to make incendiary devices in woods near the Jewish Community Center of Paramus.

Graziano was arrested this week and entered a not guilty plea at his arraignment on nine counts of attempted murder, bias intimidation and arson charges for a Jan. 11 attack on a Rutherford synagogue and a Jan. 3 firebombing of a Paramus synagogue. If convicted on all charges, he could face at least 95 years in prison.

Assuming Graziano is guilty as charged, one need look no further than his obvious depraved hatred and bigotry for an explanation for his crimes.

I am troubled by the reference to Graziano as a teenager in every media report I have read or heard about his alleged crimes. Typically, once criminal suspects over eighteen are identified, they are referred to as adults, not teenagers. By referring to Graziano as a teenager, he is granted an excuse.

"Oh, that Anthony, what a knucklehead! But you know how those teenagers can be."

An act of vandalism committed by a thirteen year-old is a completely different thing than firebombing a family of five in an attempt to burn them to death, but by referring to Graziano as a teenager, the implication is that he is just a kid, and well, you know, kids will be kids.

I know that in the America of 2012, the government has conditioned us to believe that "children" as old as twenty-six should still be covered by mom and dad's health insurance, but in the world of reality, by the time you reach nineteen, you've got to step up and shed the protective "teenager" shroud.

At nineteen, a person is able to join the military and vote for the people who put the military in harm's way. A nineteen year-old can sign contracts, own a home and do other things the rest of us adults can do (except drink legally -- but that's the product of knee-jerk governance rather than any form of common-sense).

So how is it a nineteen year-old is able to be an adult in the legal world, but is referred to as a teenager when charged with attempted murder?

Information for this column was gathered from multiple sources, including the Associated Press.

Freedom Friday, Because Non-Stop Politics Is Kind Of Annoying But People Can Occasionally Be Awesome

2012-01-27T10:37:00.001-05:00

I'm watching the debates, I'm listening to Newt tell me he's a Reagan Republican while he attacks Mitt for his wealth, I 'm watching Mitt campaign in his jeans so he can look more like me, I'm watching President Obama deny Keystone XL and then claim he is for all forms of energy exploitation. And I'm watching all of America sit back, scratch their heads, and watch as the circus parade passes by.

So, I said to myself, "Look, this is boring and nothing changes, and quite frankly I don't like any of these guys. It's Friday and I need a break from politics."

I agreed with myself and immediately went in search of stories about people. Regular people who like to do things other than shout at people, or depend on the government to guide them to the Promised Land.

I found two, and they both involve toys:

The first story comes to us from the Siberian city of Bernaul. The people of Bernaul are unhappy, and not surprisingly, their unhappiness comes from something other than the Siberian winter. They are unhappy with their government, because their government does not want them to protest about anything -- especially the government. This is also not surprising because Siberia is part of Russia, and we all know what Russians think of their own people.

Russian protesters in Bernaul go for the stop-action 60s-era Christmas
Special look as they protest their government.
Photo: Sergey Teplyako/vkontakte

Prosecutors are looking into the legality of the tiny little protesters, which include South Park figures, Lego Men and other cute and adorable stuffed animals who apparently think living under the Russian government sucks too.

Some of the signs read: "I'm for clean elections" and "A thief should sit in jail, not in the Kremlin."

This is a wonderful example of why people are so much better at everything than bureaucrats.

For the complete story read the Guardian/UK article from January 26, 2012.

The second story also comes to us from the Guardian/UK, and it also features a Lego Man -- or in this case, a Legonaut.

Presumably while other Canadian teenagers were playing hockey, either on the ice or on their Playstations, Mathew Ho and Asad Muhammed, both 17, spent about $400 and a few Saturdays building a spacecraft for their Legonaut. Using a commercial weather balloon and lots of ingenuity, the two sent their sky pilot to 80,000 feet above the earth.

Cameras attached to their spacecraft took 97 minutes of stunning video of the curvature of the Earth. A handsewn parachute helped the Legonaut safely return to the ground, and a GPS attached to the craft helped the teenagers find it after it landed about 80 miles away from where it was launched.

People like this give me hope that all the people in the world haven't just given up like some gray Orwellian mass of automatons. I just hope the prosecutors in Bernaul realize how stupid it is to get to the bottom of a protest being staged by toys. I also hope that some American teenagers don't try the Legonaut stunt because I'm sure they would violate at least 350 different Federal regulations in the process.

Read the complete story of the Canadian Legonaut and his Earth-based flight crew in the Guardian/UK article from January 26, 2012.

I'll Buy Me One of Those iPhones, As Long As You Don't Mention the Icky People Who Made It For Me

2012-01-26T14:37:00.002-05:00

That darling of the 99%, Apple Inc., posted some amazing end-of-year results yesterday.

73.3% revenue increase over last year totaling $46.33 billion
118% increase in net income over last year totaling $13.06 billion

Occupy Wall Street protester captures the action on his iPad
last Fall. By the way, remember the kid in the center of the
picture? He's a Columbia grad with a trust fund.

Everyone loves Apple and the deified Steve Jobs. Apple is the very model of a successful, modern corporation, and Occupying things would be ever so hard without iPhones, iPads, and iPods. Plus, their stuff is just so...cool!

I am thinking that Lai Xiaodong's family's love of Apple and Foxconn, a major manufacturer for Apple, is probably not as deep as your's is.

Xiaodong was a 22 year-old worker at Foxconn whose job it was to polish the aluminum backs of iPads. He died two days after suffering burns over 90% of his body and the loss of most of his face in an explosion in Foxconn's Chengdu factory in May of 2011.

Several days after Xiaodong died, factory works drove to his family's village to deliever his ashes. A few days later, the company sent a check for approximately $150,000 to the family. Prior to his death, Xiaodong's salary was $22 a day.

Safety standards in Chinese factories are low to non-existent, but then again, the savings on safety concerns -- and worker salaries -- gets passed on to American consumers (and consumers around the world), and after all, Chinese people are trying to take over America, and wll, they live in China for Pete's sake.

Lest you think I'm picking on solely on Apple, I'm not. I own Apple products. Dell, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, Lenovo, and Toshiba are also on an extensive list of other companies whose factories have their workers toil in horrendous working conditions. Some of these conditions include seven day work weeks, workers being forced to stand without rest until their legs are too swollen to move, safety concerns such as exposure to toxic chemicals and the dust build-up at the Foxconn factory that killed Lai Xiaodong and three others and injured eighteen.

I'm not mounting some holier-than-thou soapbox here and admonishing you to throw away all of your Chinese-made products. The money has been spent and the damage has been done and we can't retroactively change that. But consider this: Americans would never buy products from US companies that forced their workers to labor under these conditions in America. But somehow its okay for American companies to sub-contract foreign companies to treat foreign workers on foreign soil like slaves? We all like our cheap electronics, and that's why US manufacturing of consumer goods doesn't exist anymore.

Our current economic climate is tough, but you'll never convince me that times are tough for you if you own an Apple product, so don't even bother trying. We, as consumers, are also responsible for the treatment of Chinese and other foreign laborers, because we are an intrinsic connection in the wheel of economic-slave labor.

I'm not urging you to put down your iPod (although you would enjoy music a whole lot better if you listened to it as it was intended to be listened to) and I am not asking you turn off your Toshiba flat screen TV.

But maybe it's time we stop blindly worshipping companies because they are cool and have hip marketing campaigns. Maybe we should stop being lemmings who crave things just because other people have them without any concern for the people who built them for us. Maybe the next time we buy a product we should be responsible people and find out just exactly what it is we are buying.

We cannot be a freedom loving people if we pursue life, liberty and happiness on the backs of others. This is what you've all been complaining about. Right?

Increasing our standard of living at the expense of slave and indentured labor was repugnant 200 years ago, and just because we've forced the economic-slave labor force out of sight doesn't make it any less repugnant now.

The statistics and details for this column came from NY Times Business Day January 25, 2012 and The Atlantic Wire January 26, 2012.

This White Libertarian Talks About Race

2012-01-25T10:41:00.002-05:00

I'm not going to follow the herd and talk about the State of the Union address last night. The President didn't offer anything new, so I'm not going to waste our time dissecting the same old rhetoric.

Last night I got in a discussion with an acquaintance about race and politics. Although we're separated by about three decades in age, our politics and our race, we are connected by our civility.

My friend stated he was angry the Republican presidential candidates were portraying all African-Americans as "lazy and weak." He went on to say the perception of conservatives is this lack of desire to work is a major cause of the current economic climate we find ourselves in. He was sincere and not trying to goad me into a circular argument.

He was specifically referring to Newt Gingrich's suggestion that programs in urban areas should be aimed at teaching kids about work and the pride of ownership of one's own destiny. Unfortunately, this is what Newt meant, but it's not what he said. Either out of ignorance or a desire to garner attention, Newt uses words that are inflammatory to people who are not fully engaged with him. Because of this, his very worthy messages get lost on those he would most hope would listen to him. This is not leadership, it's politics.

Like it or not (and personally, I don't), our society allows words to have multiple meanings, depending on who is uttering them.

Ghetto. It's an Italian word that was originally used to describe the section of Venice that was inhabited by Jews. It morphed into a word that means any area of a city inhabited by poor people. Now, to a vast majority of people, it means urban areas predominately inhabited by African-Americans. If you are trying to successfully convey a message, you have to understand what your listeners are going to hear.
Foodstamp. This one really, really irks me, but to an unfortunately large segment of the US population, this word invokes "African-American." "Welfare" doesn't, but "foodstamp" does. Again, it's incumbent on the messager to either re-define the word or avoid it.

When I was a kid, if was happy I was gay. Words change, like society does. Now I don't have to necessarily be happy to be gay, as lots same-sex couples are going to find out as more and more states allow same-sex marriages.

Conservatives wear their frankness and honesty as a badge of honor. In reality, to a vast majority of people who think they disagree with them, their words come across as insensitive and spiteful. I don't make the reality, I just report it.

So when Newt talks about teaching kids that pushing a broom after school is a good thing, what gets heard and regurgitated is that Newt thinks black kids are lazy and dangerous and they should be kept in their places by teaching them janitorial skills. When this slaps Newt in the face like a branch let loose by the person walking ahead of him, this misinterpretation makes him indignant. It happens to all well-meaning conservatives. That's why we fail so often in the arena of ideas.

Maybe we on the Right need to customize our message for people who have been raised on racial division and a constant buzz in their heads that the US and it's white majority are inherently unfair. The racial divide in this country is real and it needs to be addressed. It is a divide of perception unlike the actual horrific divide of the 20th Century, but it is a divide nevertheless. I stated this and mentioned my deep disappointment that Barack Obama has been a miserable failure on this point -- and my words were met with solid agreement.

My acquaintance then went on to say that "successful people, black, white, Asian, and Hispanic, are afraid" of raising up poor blacks for fear of losing their own success.

I replied that I was sad to see that we live in two completely different Americas, and this is where the communication began to break down. It stayed civil, but my assertion that there simply aren't groups of people in this country actively keeping other people in poverty to protect their own wealth was met with a derisive laugh. I asked him to think about the possibility this was a perception that was removed from reality through years of propaganda from people who earn their livings being race baiters, and that got us nowhere.

Because I believe what I believe, it's up to me to figure out a way to communicate my message in a way that will get it across to someone who is firm in his belief that I am wrong. It is not his responsibility to look beyond my words to find their true meaning.

This is good advice for all of us...

A Campaign Speech In Front of People Other Than the Same Old Union Hacks and School Children

2012-01-24T13:35:00.001-05:00

Tonight is the Sate of the Union Address, or as the President calls it "A Campaign Speech In Front of People Other Than the Same Old Union Hacks and School Children." The President will promise a lot of things and place all of the blame squarely on the political opposition. If you are shaking your fist at me because you think I am a racist for not supporting the President, understand that I have said, and will continue to say, this same thing about every President, whether I think they are trying to "fundamentally change" America or not.

The State of the Union is a great time for a President go over his list of failures and get all indignant about them while we bob our heads like chihuahuas on the rear decks of our grandmother's '64 Impalas. If you buy into anything that gets said then you are, well, grandma always said that if I couldn't say anything nice...

I would like for the president -- any president -- to stand up there some day and just say, "Look the State of the Union is pretty crappy, and since I'm in charge I guess it's kind of my fault, so that being said, I'm going to adjust my trim a bit and get us sailing in a different direction." I would also like my first wife to give me back the years she stole from me by giving weedwhackers and paint brushes for Christmas, and telling me all the bills were paid.

Anyway, politics is on everybody's mind, especially since American Idol will get pre-empted, so I would like to offer you a reminder of why you keep coming back to this blog.

Here's a fun little political quiz game you can play with your Democrat friends. I like to call it "Fun With Positives," and as the name implies not only is the game fun, but it also proscribes saying negative things to prove your point.

Here's the rules:

You must state your political case by stating what you (and your candidate of choice) stand for, only.
You cannot mention the name of any opposition candidate, person, or party.
Even an incumbent is a candidate in an election, so don't get cute.

If you break any of the rules you prove that your political beliefs are not well formed or based in actual fact, and so I win.

A sample game might sound like this:

YOU: Why do you support [insert name of generic conservative presidential candidate here]?
ME: He believes, like I do, in small government that exists as a tool to success, not as a means or an end to it.
YOU: But [insert name of potential future failed president here] he's rich, so he's inherently unfair and he ties dogs to the roof of his car.
ME: I remember when I was in my twenties, people aspired to be rich, now they just aspire to bitch. I like rich people more than I even like middle-class people. Rich people very rarely storm the gates of the Bastille. And as far as tying a dog to a car, what are you going to tell me next, that he only pays 13% in income taxes? Why is that important to you, because you are a class-warfarist?
YOU: Okay, moving on, but what about that other guy [insert name of potential future failed president here], he's had multiple marriages and he thinks black kids should be janitors
ME: Frankly, I could care less about his marriage record, because when I was in my thirties we had a president who was kind of messy in that department and I learned from the monolithic media that a candidate's personal life didn't matter, because it was -- personal. As far as the janitors bit, you are obviously not paying attention. You brought race into this, not him, so what's that say about you? What I got from his speech was that kids from low-income families could gain a measure of self-esteem from learning early how to earn their own money. You might be surprised by this, but there are poor people from all the colors of the rainbow. I had a paper route when I was twelve and I bought a Schwinn Varsity from the proceeds. I wish I still had that bike.
YOU: But what about [insert name of current and future failed president here] don't you like? Pretty much his race, right?
ME: I don't like people who believe that the government -- any government -- should be central to people's lives. Whether it's a busybody on my local school board who sides with the teacher's union and PTA, or that obnoxious guy on Facebook who is always making fun of people who don't think like he does. I want a president who is all in as an American. One who is not just a self-serving party politician who puts his own position and power ahead of the success of the American people. I dislike politicians who believe that votes come from suffering, and therefore become purveyors of it.
YOU:
ME: I win. At the very root of libertarianism is the uplifting of the human spirit that enables people to reach their fullest potential and the incumbent joy that comes with witnessing other people's success. Try it some time. As for me, I am going to vote for the candidate who comes closest to my beliefs knowing full well that there is no such thing as a perfect candidate for everyone.

There is no doubt that the monolithic media and the Left in this country own the dialogue, but that doesn't mean those of us who truly feel differently shouldn't put our best efforts into taking the dialogue back.

Suddenly I'm An 'Insurgent?' And Here I Am Thinking I Stood For American Principles

2012-01-23T14:42:00.000-05:00

After Newt's not-so-surprising win in South Carolina this week, the monolithic* media (MM) has been scrambling around trying to figure just what the hell is going on. Using a word -- insurgent -- that makes most Americans extremely uneasy, the MM is trying to maintain the status quo by isolating those of us who are truly unhappy with the state of our nation from the rest of you who are content with the sorry state politics as usual has put us in.

Let's look at "establishment" versus "insurgency":

First, we have the Establishment Republicans. In Reagan's time they were referred to as "Country Club Republicans." They are a scourge on American politics because they tell us they are different than Democrats, but they're not. They're exactly the same. Here's some Country Club Republicans you might be familiar with:

Mitt Romney. Not only is he Country Club, but he's the guy on the membership committee with the reserved parking space by the practice green
Chris Christie. That is why Christie is such a great conservative governor for New Jersey. New Jersey would shrivel up like a slug in a salt flat with a real conservative in the Statehouse, so we have to be content with Christie. It's a start
Newt Gingrich. Don't let his "Reagan Republican" bit fool you for one second. The Newtster is a bona fide tweed and khaki wearing Republican who just hides it behind anger and indignance, and a desperate need to differentiate himself from Mitt
Every Republican Club member east of the Central Time Zone. (I stopped going to Republican meetings in 1993)

Now let's look at the insurgents who are scaring the Vente Lattes out of everyone, including the Occupy Wall Street kids, who, if they stopped for a second to actually think about things, would realize the similarities of cause:**

Rick Santorum. I know he looks like a frat boy from Cornell with a trust fund, but he's not. He's an actual real-life smart-ass from a blue-collar background. He's got the anger of Newt without the book smarts. He's also got the same problem Obama has: both were short-serving US Senators without much of a record to lean on. Oh., wait...
Ron Paul. Ron believes in small government, states' rights, elimination of the Federal Reserve, self-sufficiency, American exceptionalism, among other old-fashioned American things. And he's the insurgent? And you Republicans are okay with that?
Me. I want to go to work and make some money and take a vacation when I can afford it. I want my kid to go to college and the be able to pursue a career. I want to pay as little in taxes as possible, and I don't want the money I do pay in taxes going to government waste, political cronyism, Socialist Utopian fantasies, GM, the Bank of America, or green energy. I want this ear infection I have to go away and I want to keep the doctor I've been going to for ten years to help me get rid of it without some government stooge interfering. I want every American to be free and I want people who want to come live here to do it legally and then enjoy the same fruits my country offers. I want to be left alone so I can leave other people alone, so we can all go about our collective and individual businesses.

Yup, I am an insurgent.

* - I have been taken to task for referring to the msm as the MSM, because some people think there are factions in the media that represent all sides of the argument. Unfortunately, those folks are wrong. The mainstream media in the US represents shareholders, soap manufacturers and housewives (because they spend money on soap) and people who think the government (me) should pay for their Hoverounds. If you spend your time arguing the differences between Fox News on one side and everyone else on the other, you are missing the point. So, now it's the monolithic media (MM).

** - I refer only to those Occupy folks who are not just lazily looking for a church to crash in and a free lunch. I'm talking about the original vast majority of the movement who are as dissatisfied about things as I am, but who just aren't as sure as I am about the root cause of the cesspool we are currently wading in.

Barack Obama: The Perfect Candidate

2012-01-20T13:57:00.001-05:00

The field for the GOP nomination for president has been narrowed down to four, and very likely by this time next week there will only be three left. The Democrats are making great sport of the messiness of the GOP primary process. That's mostly because Democrats typically anoint their nominee (unless it's someone icky and female like Hillary), while the GOP vetts and studies their candidates before letting them carry the flag.

There is one other reason for the Democrat's delight at the GOP nomination and primary process: In 2008, the Dems fielded the only perfect candidate in the history of the country and they sure as hell aren't going to admit to any lapses in judgement now.

Here's a quick look at the imperfect GOP field:

Mittt Romney: He's been portrayed as a slicker version of Clark Griswald after apparently driving around New England with his dog strapped to the roof of his car. He's also got a problem explaining perfectly normal and logical tax returns and investments, and then there's all that messy liberal stuff he did in Massachusetts that people like Chuck Todd want to ride him on but they can't because, well, libs avoiding eating their own. Mitt's also a one percenter, so we all know how Americans feels about successful people.
Newt Gingrich: For a pretty ugly guy, Newt's got a lot of 'splaining to do when it comes to his relationships with the opposite sex, and his angry ex-wife isn't helping at all. Then there's his petulance, his history as a lobbyist, and that credit line at Tiffany's that only one percenters have.
Ron Paul: Besides the fact that he thinks Iran's quest for nukes shouldn't be interefered with, he's also got that newsletter that he either did write or didn't write, or he did know about or he didn't know about, but he's a racist regardless.
Rick Santorum: Despite having lost his bid for re-election to the US Senate by the biggest margin in history, Rick's general craziness is offset by the fact that he is not candidate 1, 2 or 3.

Here's a quick look at the most perfect candidate of all time, Barack Obama:

He's brilliant, and you gotta trust me on this, because no one has ever seen any of his his grades.
There may or may not have been sexual harassment claims filed by two of his former Harvard students, but we shouldn't examine this because we don't want to appear racist or anything.
He may or may not have been born in the US, but Donald Trump has bad hair, so you're crazy to even ask about it.
He may or may not have been aligned with radicals like Bill Ayers, Michael Pfleger and Jeremiah Wright, but even if he was, so what?
Michelle Obama may or may not have had to surrender her law license, but she's not president, so stuff it.
Obama may or may not have patronized bath houses in Chicago frequented by the elite of Chicago's "down-low" gay scene, but you're a homophobe for even thinking about it.
There are no ex-girlfriend's, bosses, employees, friends, neighbors, people who cut him off in traffic, or anyone else coming forward to talk about Obama when he was in his twenties and thirties. It's almost like he just appeared one day. Like a miracle or something. Sort of like Jesus, only way better, because who wants to get involved with religion?
He's really rich, but he didn't earn his money in business or anything horrible like that, so I guess he's not a one percenter, and only old white guys are in the one percent, except Steve Jobs, who was old, white and really rich, but he invented the iPad and iPhone and who could live without those? plus, Steve is dead, so he doesn't count.

So, if you ignore a few things, you have the perfect candidate, and now we find out last night that he sings Al Green tunes better than Al Green, so he's like this great president and he's better than Justin Beiber. How cool is that?

Barack Obama is perfect, not like those nasty Republicans, who, like the rest of us, have actual real histories from their actual, real lives.

Foodstamps: Liberal Codeword for Racism. Their Racism, That Is

2012-01-19T11:56:00.000-05:00

In past columns I have explained how Newt Gingrich is not consistent when he says he is a "Reagan Conservative," or any type of conservative for that matter. Newt is attacking Mitt because Newt pays taxes at a rate of 31% (like me) and Mitt pays at a rate of 15%. I bring this up again today because Newt is hammering Mitt for it, and well, Newt is being a faux-populist, a class warfarist, and a bit of a moron. We have a "conservative" in the White House who feels the same way about wealth as Newt does.

But today I learned that food stamps are racist and this is making my head explode. Not because this is such a stupid thing for an adult person to believe, but because I have to defend Newt on this. I am growing tired defending two guys I really don't like. My ying is fully at war with my yang, and right now I am sincerely wishing Ron Paul wasn't so naive.

On the Today Show this morning, Ann Curry got all up in Newt's grille about Newt's use of the term "foodstamp president" for Obama, when Curry really knows in her partially developed political brain that Newt meant something about black people. Newt stood her up on her pointy head on the point.

I actually know real white people who are on foodstamps, so I'm not really sure what Curry and her ilk are stabbing at. Does she think that only black people are on foodstamps? Do white people who are on foodstamps not count for anything? What about Hispanics, are they black, or white, or invisible?

An adult human being who lives in America and who gets upset because they actually think the word "foodstamp" is a white person's codeword for "black" should be ashamed.

And just FYI, Newt is referring to the fact that under the guidance of President Obama more people are depending on foodstamps than at any other time in history, therefore, he is the "Foodstamp President."

I am saddened by my logical conclusion that Libs and Dems are unaware that white people are also suffering under this current Administration.

I'm going to say what needs to be said here, and if you get mad at me for it, then you need to have a deep, introspective, honest talk with yourself: When Libs like Ann Curry get up in arms about foodstamps being a racial thing, they are showing their inherent racism and condescension. Conservatives and Libertarians, (who actually understand conservatism and libertarianism) see people. By their reaction to the word "foodstamp" it's obvious that Liberals and Democrats see color and class.

This is not my problem, it's yours.

"Fifteen Percent! How Does He Manage To Pay Less Than The Middle Class?"

2012-01-18T10:16:00.002-05:00

This is what the well-informed newsmaton on CNN just said in reference to Mitt Romney's Federal tax rate.

She said this because she does not understand the tax code, she only understands class warfare. She is all aflutter because Mitt Romney is a rich white guy who pays 15 % on investment income which is "less" than what normal downtrodden people like you and me pay on our income earned from labor. Somehow this is Mitt Romney's fault -- not the Federal tax code's fault. Incidentally, Congress writes the tax code, so the CNN newsmaton's beef is with the US Congress, not Mitt Romney -- unless of course her beef with Mitt is because he is a rich, white guy.

What a silly and vapid country we live in that a guy who has money is blasted for following the law and paying taxes how he is instructed to pay them.

For everyone whose bloomers are bunching up in all sorts of uncomfortable ways about Mitt Romney paying 15% (as prescribed by law) on his investment income, I have a solution for you.

Flat tax.

Even better, a flat tax on consumption, leaving labor untaxed.

You're welcome.

How Is It We Continue to Be Surprised By the Depravity and Vulgarity of War?

2012-01-12T10:08:00.001-05:00

As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular. -- Oscar Wilde, The Critic as Artist

I make no excuses for the four representatives of my country who defiled the dead bodies of their enemies. I am also not so naive as to think that urinating on the bodies of a fallen enemy is the first heinous act committed during war. I am outraged by this but no more outraged than I am everytime I see a casket, or a body, or a maimed soldier trying to piece his or her life back together. (The Pentagon has since confirmed but not released the identities of the soldiers and are not disputing the authenticity of the video)

A few years ago, I spoke with a soldier whose country and branch of service I'll keep private as per his wish. He worked in the medical corp in Afghanistan. A badly burned and nearly dead little girl was brought to this soldier's compound by her father. The little girl's body was so badly damaged by a bomb intended to kill Taliban insurgents that this soldier and his commanding officer had no choice but to overdose the child with morphine. That day, at least four lives were destroyed by war. This soldier's actions were necessary given the situation, but that necessity does not lessen the vulgarity.

Of course the Marines in this picture cheapened the perceived values of all Americans and set back foreign relations by a measure of years. Of course I am disgusted by what I saw, but I am no more disgusted by this than I am by all of the other stories of death and mutlilation I am aware of.

This is what happens during war.

Americans have come to believe that war is antiseptic and something that happens to other people in other lands. Then, when the daily depravity of war slaps us in the face we act surprised and indignant. We have disconnected the killing of people via drones and missiles from the killing of people by young men with guns. We send soldiers to kill but we demand they remain civilized. This my friends is the depraved behavior at the root of what these soldiers did, and we as a country should all take responsibility for it. Until we take that responsibility we should stop with the faux-outrage.

We have been at war in Afghanistan for ten years, and we barely pay attention to the death and mutilation anymore. Yet somehow defiling dead soldiers is suddenly wrong? I think we all need to check our personal and collective values.

War is necessary at times, but until we understand that war is always necessarily depraved we will continue to be outraged at the wrong things.

Newt Gingrich Is the Best Friend Two-Term President Obama Has

2012-01-11T10:29:00.001-05:00

Mitt Romney won New Hampshire last night, but the media all told us he would win because Mitt owns a house in New Hampshire, so no surprise there.

In other news, "conservatives" Newt Gingrich, Jon Hunstman and Rick Perry attacked free-market capitalism in a sad continuance of their desperate attempts to be taken seriously in the race for the GOP nomination. Calling venture capitalism "vulture capitalism" (as Perry did) might play well to the Occupy Wall Street crowd, but to serious people who understand how things work, its embarrassing.

Newt has proven that every one of us who had concerns about his lack of personal discipline were right. Because of his petulance and narcissism, Newt has done nothing but give the Democrats an incredibly large garrison of political ammunition to use against Romney should he win the nomination. Out-of-context attacks like quoting Romney as saying he "liked to fire people" are exactly the kind of fodder the Dems need to fire away at in the general election -- the fact that he was talking about using the power of the market to fire under-performing service providers, and not actually firing human beings in his employ, notwithstanding. And anyway, even though the economy is bad, if a person isn't doing their job they should be fired. There's lots of people who need jobs who can take their place. I think the ability to fire people is actually a good asset for an executive to have. But then again, I am an adult.

While Newt touts his "Reagan Republican" credentials with every breath, attacking capitalism was not part of Reagan's rhetoric. Reagan's "11th Commandment for Republicans" also advised against attacking other Republicans. If Newt was indeed a "Reagan Republican" he would know this.

Newt was also the big whiner in Iowa because of attacks on him by Romney supporters. Add "hypocrite" to Newt's lengthy list of personal accomplishments.

Newt's desire for revenge for perceived slights is far outweighing his abilities as a statesman, and he is damaging the party. If you want to make Barack Obama a one-term president, you people in the loyal opposition better turn your backs on Gingrich quickly before his thin-skin and petulance single-handedly hands Obama a second term. It's time for Gingrich to realize he is not a "Reagan Republican" and that his constant reminders that he is a conservative are ringing hollow.

Let's look at the other candidates:

Ron Paul has started listening to his advisers and is actually beginning to explain the Libertarian position quite lucidly. If he can overcome some of his more ill-advised statements early on in the campaign he just might be able to correct his course enough to be a factor. I did name Paul one of the most dangerous men in America from a Libertarian POV, but it seems he has abandoned the paleo-Libertarian mindset for one that can actually translate well to the rest of America.
Rick Santorum does not have the temperament to hold the office of President, but quite frankly that didn't stop America from electing Obama, so we'll have to wait and see on that one. Santorum is kind of conservative, but his record shows he never met a big government program he didn't like.
Rick Perry is just kind of dopey, so his stupid attacks on capitalism and Romney can be excused -- to a point. I would take him seriously as a candidate if his campaign had actually bothered to get his name on the ballots in all the states holding primaries. We'd all be better off if Perry would just slink back to Texas as soon as possible.
Jon Huntsman will become the darling of the Left Wing MSM in the coming days because of his ties to Obama and his family wealth. As far as having conservative bona fides -- not so much. He would serve the party he professes to belong to well by pulling out and endorsing one of the other serious candidates.

Republicans, Tea Party activists, independents, libertarians, embarrassed Democrats, dopey intellectuals and neo-Cons: it's time to get serious. Let the vetting and nomination process continue so we don't wind up with an adulated but flawed president like the Democrats foisted upon us. Stop the sniping, grow up and present a united front. All efforts should be on winning the White House, not personal revenge and scorched earth campaign tactics.

Now That New Jersey Is Completely Fixed, NJ Democrats Declare Gay Marriage "Top Priority"

2012-01-10T14:46:00.000-05:00

Before all of you haters run to your Urban Dictionaries to come up with clever new insults to hurl at me, let me explain a few things first:

It is completely wrong for partners, regardless of sexual orientation, to be denied access to the same privileges as partners in heterosexual relationships
As a Libertarian I have no interest in dictating how the personal lives of others are lived, as long as their behavior does not infringe on my right to live my life peacefully
As a Christian I realize that my faith does not include marriage between partners of the same sex, but it also teaches me not to judge others, lest I myself be judged
As a person who understands the machinations of politics, I realize Gay Marriage is a wonderful tool to use against so-called Conservatives and people who generally populate the "Right"
Although I am politically not opposed to gay marriage, I have a hard time living in a state where the dominant legislative party (Democrat) calls the matter a "top priority" when the general standard of living for all of us New Jerseyans, even the non-Gay ones, still sucks

Okay, now that I've cleared that up, let me get on with it.

In 2009, NJ State Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) abstained from a vote on legalizing gay marriage in New Jersey. This was a purely political move by the ever-political Sweeney that allowed him to remain silent on the issue of gay marriage without annoying his party. However, Sweeney now claims his 2009 abstention was "wrong" and that he' s had a "change of heart." Don't be fooled by this bit of honesty and introspection. Sweeney has not changed his core beliefs one iota, but core beliefs don't matter when a good political fight can be waged against one's enemies.

Yesterday, Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex) vowed at a press conference that passing gay marriage in New Jersey would be a "top priority" in the upcoming legislative session.

Oliver and Sweeney couldn't give a rat's hindquarters about gay marriage. I say this because when they had a sympathetic Governor (Jon Corzine) they did absolutely nothing to further the cause of civil rights for homosexuals. In fact, Jim McGreevey was actually gay and they still did nothing to further the cause of civil rights for partners in homosexual relationships.

But now they have Chris Christie to contend with, and Christie is riding high and sniffing around at the buffet table of national politics. What better way to give the national Dems something to hang their hats on than by forcing Christie's hand to either veto or sign the legislation? For all of you non-New Jersey types, this is how we play politics in the Garden State.

Hopefully either Sweeney or Oliver will take this actual list of political priorities for all of the citizens of New Jersey, regardless of sexual orientation, to heart:

Ridiculously high property taxes that are crushing the working poor, working class, middle class, arrogant wealthy class, and everyone in-between
Horrendously high corporate tax rates that guarantee long-term unemployment stays high
An eroding middle-class tax base
A crumbling infrastructure
Corruption and double-dipping at all levels of state and local government that exponentially increases the cost of living for all New Jerseyans
An antiquated and unwieldy public school system that ties the hands of teachers and ensures political cronyism and distorted salaries at the administrative level
Crumbling inner-cities that are in desperate need in spite of the incredible amounts of money New Jersey taxpayers are forced to funnel to them through Democrat-controlled political machines
A tax burden that is making people under thirty realize home-ownership in New Jersey is simply not feasible
A regressive tax system that includes raising tolls on major highways 100% without realizing this toll increases hits the "working class" and people who are struggling to get by the hardest
Gay Marriage

So, in conclusion, I would just like to say to Stephen Sweeney and Sheila Oliver that what you perceive as "priorities" in your out-of-touch world of politics does not translate well in the real-world of people trying to make a life for themselves. I am for equal rights in the eyes of the law for all people, but maybe, just once, you long-term, politically entrenched busybodies could prioritize for all of the residents, not just the politically expedient ones.

The Arrest and Imprisonment of 17 Year-Old Ameer Fathi

2012-01-06T12:09:00.001-05:00

At 5:15 AM on January 2nd, fifteen riot police stormed the Muharraq, Bahrain, home of seventeen year-old Ameer Fathi and arrested him.

Ameer suffers from bladder and kidney ailments as well as epilepsy and severe sleep apnea. His sleep is monitored nightly by family members to ensure his breathing remains normal.

At 11:30 AM on January 1st, Ameer left his home and visited his mosque. He left the mosque in the afternoon and returned to his home around 3:00 PM. Shortly after 5:00 PM Ameer returned to the mosque and attended a prayer class. After that he attended a Shi'a Ahlulbayt (family or household) ceremony at a Matam (a Shi'a congregation hall). All of this activity took place in the neighborhood of Karimi, which is where Ameer and his family live.

Ameer left the Matam around 10:00 PM and visited relatives with his mother, returning home at 12:30 AM on January 2nd. There is no eyewitness account or other record of Ameer having any contact with police or government authorities during the previous day. Ameer's whereabouts during the day are also corroborated by non-family members who were with him or saw him.

(Bahrain's ruling class is from the Sunni minority. Hammad bin Isa Al Khalifa, a Sunni, became the Emir of Bahrain in 1999. In 2002, he declared himself the first King of Bahrain. In the spring of 2011, members of the Shi'a majority demanded more power within the Sunni-led minority government. At that time the government began it's crackdown on the majority protesters, including mass arrests without cause.)

At 7:00 AM on January 2nd, Ameer's father arrived at the Muharraq police station to see his son and find out why he was arrested (Ameer's father also suffers from a heart ailment). Ameer's father was able to get a glance at his son from a distance, but was not allowed to speak to him or contact him in any other way. Several hours later the police told Ameer's father that his son would be taken to court on the 3rd and that he could see him then.

On the morning of the 3rd, Ameer's father attended court along with the families of other boys who were arrested around the same time as Ameer (it is unclear how many -- or if any at all -- of the other boys also attended the ceremony at the Matam on the first). Ameer was not present in court. His father inquired as to his whereabouts and was told he was "in the hospital." He was given no other details. That evening the family again requested information on Ameer's condition, but were given no information.

The next morning the family was told that Ameer was in the infirmary at the jail and he would be detained for 45 days. Ameer did finally call his family that evening (January 4) and stated that he was "fine," although his mother told me via email that "his voice was not usual" and that he "was so sad and upset." He asked that fresh clothes be brought to the police station so they could be transferred to him at the prison.

After the family got word that Ameer had arrived at the Dry Dock jail his mother went to visit him, but the police would not allow her to see him. As of the early evening of January 6th, Ameer had still not been allowed any contact with his family other than the two brief phone calls. His family had also not received any updates on Ameer's medical condition.

It may be easy for some of us to dismiss this story as just another example of the turmoil in the Middle East. Many of us will avoid letting this story affect them because of cultural or political differences, but the fact is we are talking about a seventeen year-old boy in ill-health who was removed from his home by the police and whose family is being denied information about his whereabouts or condition. There are countless stories like Ameer's in Bahrain, and as Americans, we are tied to each one.

The situation in the Middle East is no longer front page news here in the United States, but that does not mean that families throughout the region are still not suffering at the hands of brutal dictatorships. As Americans, we are inextricably linked to the region through commerce and politics. The US Navy 5th Fleet is also based in Bahrain, not far from where Ameer was arrested and where he is currently being detained.

As a country, we cannot continue to allow ourselves to remain dependent on the vagaries of foreign dictators because of our lack of political will at home. To turn a blind eye to Ameer and his family, and to the countless others like them in Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria and Iran, is disgraceful. Should we intervene militarily? Absolutely not. Should we raise our voice in support of freedom and follow through with the political and economic will to severe our ties with those who would arrest 15 year-old boys for no other reason than attendance at a religious service? Absolutely yes.

America still is the last, best, hope for personal liberty in a world that is quickly turning away from freedom. Our government needs to be told by its people that we will no longer allow our good name to be used to prop up brutal dictators because of political expediency at home and abroad. For every drop of oil we insist on buying from the supporters of Bahrain's brutal dictator (i.e Saudi Arabia)because we lack the intellect to develop our own domestic reserves, we share in the misery of Ameer's family. For every story like Ameer's we choose to ignore, we dig the grave of freedom just a little bit deeper.

Sarah McKinley, Being Used By the Arrogant Mass Media to Make Fun of People In Flyover Country, Should Be Heralded As An Example of Civic Responsibility

2012-01-05T12:35:00.000-05:00

Eighteen year-old Sarah McKinley of Blanchard, Oklahoma, is a mother of a three month-old son, who also lost her husband to lung cancer on Christmas Day.

On New Year's Eve, Dustin Stewart, 29, and Justin Martin, 24, both of Blanchard, attempted to break into McKinley's home, possibly in an attempt to steal prescription painkillers the men surmised might be in the home. There is also the possibility Stewart had other motives for the break-in. There is some evidence of a history of harassment of McKinley by Stewart, and two of McKinley's dogs were recently found dead due to unknown reasons.

The men knocked on the door for twenty minutes, while McKinley blocked it with a couch and called 911. Read the story and watch original video report from KOCO-TV.

Here is a portion of the twenty minute 911 call McKinley made:

McKinley: There's a guy at my door. I've got some dogs that keep coming up missing. This guy's up to no good. My husband just passed away. I'm here by myself with my infant baby. Can I please get a dispatch out here immediately?

Dispatch: Hang with me a second. Are your doors locked?

McKinley: Yes, I've got two guns in my hands. Is it okay to shoot him if he comes in this door?

Dispatch: Well, you have to do whatever you can do to protect yourself. I can't tell you that you can do that, but you have to do what you have to do to protect your baby. Is he trying to get in the door?

McKinley: He just keeps knocking.

Dispatch: Okay. Alright. Do you have like an alarm on your car you can set off with your remote control that might scare him and get him away?

McKinley: No, I don't.

Dispatch: Alright. That's okay.

At that point the dispatcher transferred the call to another dispatcher. The second call was not recorded.

Shortly after the call was transferred, Stewart broke through the door, brandishing a knife. McKinley shot and killed him. Martin fled after the gunshot and turned himself in later that night.

Police arrived at McKinley's home shortly after the shooting. The county McKinley lives in is rural and covers approximately 12,000 square miles. Those two factors make immediate police reponse nearly always an impossibility.

Authorities have decided not to charge McKinley in Stewart's death, following provisions in Oklahoma's law that allows a person to use deadly force in self-protection. Stewart's alleged accomplice Martin will be charged with 1st degree murder under an Oklahoma statute that holds a perpetrator liable for deaths occured during the comission of a crime.

The silly and idiotic MSM in the United States and the UK are touting this story with headlines such as "Make My Day, Pistol Packing Mama," and using disgracefully posed pictures of McKinley pointing her shotgun at the camera Jed Clampett-style.

The frivolous way the media is handling this story, and the way they are taking advantage of McKinley and her ordeal, misses the bigger, more serious point entirely.

Regardless of how over-reaching a state is allowed to become, it is folly to believe a state can effectively protect its citizens 100% of the time. Therefore, citizens must retain the right to protect themselves. The primary duty of every citizen in a free society is self-protection. It's a shame the MSM can't see that.

The Blanchard Police Department has set up a fund for Sarah McKinley and her baby. Checks are mailable to:

Chickasha Bank & Trust
1525 N Council Hwy 76
Blanchard, OK, 73010

For persons wishing to make a credit donation by phone, the phone number of the bank is 405-485-2300 (please ask for Leah).

Portions of this story were also compiled from the following: UK Daily Mail Online, KOCO-TV, News OK Community Blog

A Post-Hawkeye Look at the GOP Candidates

2012-01-04T13:56:00.000-05:00

Sometimes the Iowa caucuses mean something, sometimes they don't. There is too much flux in the current GOP race for anyone to decide anything definitively, so anyone who tells you something finite is either looking for ratings or full it -- or both.

Here's a look at what we do know, and as always, the point of view here is of what is best for personal liberty and self-determination.

Mitt Romney: (Rising) He has the money and the organizational skills culled from having lost the race in 2008 -- that's a good thing, even though the pundits and MSM would have you believe that once you lose a race you are a loser. I'm glad no one told Reagan that in 1976. Is Mitt a "Conservative?" Probably not, but then again, you most likely aren't either. Does he have some troubling legislative actions in his past? Yes, but he actually has a record as opposed to the guy currently in the White House, which allows us to question his views as they stand today and to hold him accountable.
Rick Santorum: (Rising) Because he is a former US Senator I don't believe he should be the nominee because Congressional foolishness put us where we are today. Like it or not he is a part of that problem. That being said the attacks against his "big government' votes notwithstanding, he is a small government-type. I'll support him if he is the candidate, but America is well-advised to put an executive in the Executive Office. We've got a legislator there now, and that's not working out so well.
Ron Paul: (Rising) Too bad his son Rand isn't running, because Rand knows how to espouse the beliefs of the movement far better than dear old dad. For the record, Ron is for adherence to the 10th Amendment and a lessening of the Federal government's role in our daily lives. That's a good thing. The next time some dope tells you Ron is for things like legalizing drugs and whatever nonsense they've been spoon feed, simply point out that he believes it is a state issue, not a federal one. Paul's foreign policy is a disaster and far too extreme for the real-politik world we live in right now. Paul has also been in Congress for thirty years, so he cannot hide from the fact that he is part of the problem.
Newt Gingrich: (Plummeting like a rock) Newt is like that friend or relative of your's who is brilliant and has tons of potential but will never amount to anything because his emotional well-being is suspect. His tantrums against Romney are just inexcusable for a grown man, let alone one who wants to lead the free world. Newt wants us to believe that when someone points out his weaknesses he is being attacked, but when he attacks someone he is merely telling the truth. That asinine logic should disqualify him immediately from taking part in the national dialogue, and that's a damned shame because Newt is a big thinker of brilliant thoughts and we could use his intellect -- if he could only manage to leave his tantrum-prone self at home.
Rick Perry: (Falling gently like feather) Perry is not really interested in running for president. He might like to be president, but so would I, but I'm not going to stick my neck out to do it -- so I understand where he's coming from. He would make an excellent executive at a time when that is precisely what the country needs most, but he's just not the guy.
~~Michelle Bachmann~~: (Thud) She lost any chance she had when she came out like a National Enquirer-reading housewife during the trumped up Gardisil-Rick Perry nonsense last summer.
Jon Huntsman: (Drifting aimlessly through space) According to all of the pundits, Huntsman is suddenly now the conservative torch bearer with loads of foreign policy experience and he is going to crush everyone in New Hampshire and save America. Not likely.

So there you have it. Eleven months to go and the loyal opposition is doing exactly what it is supposed to do -- vetting its candidates for the most important office in the world. Which we should be reminding our Democrat friends at every opportunity they did not do when they foisted Barack Obama upon an unsuspecting world.

2011 Review: Top Ten Protectors of Liberty

2011-12-29T11:00:00.000-05:00

The year started out with high hopes for everyone who loves liberty and despises oppression. It will end pretty much as last year ended -- oppression is more prevalent than freedom, and individual liberty seems to be disappearing fast.

With that, the Reality-Based Libertarianism Top Ten Protectors of Liberty:

1. Zanaib Ahmed, Bahrain: After following her story via Twitter I was one of the first Americans to interview her (An Interview With A Bahraini Revolutionary - March 6, 2011). Members of her family have been imprisoned, she herself has been thrown in prison, yet she stands against the brutal Bahraini regime.

Zanaib Ahmed, Bahrain

2. Asma Darwish, Bahrain: I posted several stories about Asma in the spring. She has fought to have the story of her brother's detention brought to light, in spite of the danger to herself and her family. That two young women are fighting heroically for liberty in a society that does not view women as equals is extraordinary.

Asma Darwish, Bahrain

3. Mohammed Nabbous, Libya: Mohammed started an underground Internet news station in Libya at the start of the revolution there and was killed by government forces on March 19. He was instrumental in bringing the Libyan revolution to the attention of the world long before the major news organizations became interested.

Mohammed Nabbous, Libya

4. Naama Margolis, Israel: She is eight years-old and all she understands right now is that she does not want to go to school because of the religious men who taunt her and spit at her because her mother does not view religion exactly the same as they do. (Naama Margolis, December 27, 2011) But we can hope that her story will be an inspiration to others who reject oppression in the name of religion of nationalism.

Naama Margolis, Israel

5. Unidentified Greek Motorcycle Policeman, Athens: As Greek society and government fell apart because they had spent themselves into oblivion, Greek citizens took to the streets to violently complain about having to take responsibility for destroying their own country. This unidentified police officer was hit with a Molotov Cocktail while riding his motorbike. After removing his burning helmet he was hit again with another gasoline bomb. He is a hero because he put his life on the line to protect his country and its people from themselves.

6. Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar: In some form of detention since her democratic victory in 1991 that the ruling junta later nullified, Suu Kyi is a symbol of liberty against oppression in the mould of Nelson Mandela.

Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar

7. Marisol Valles Garcia, Mexico: Twenty year-old, single mother, Marisol Valles Garcia was the only person to step up and take the job of police chief in her small northern Mexico town of Praxedis G. Guerrero. She has since fled, possibly to the United States after the threats to her life (and to her son's) became overwhelming. The story of her leaving her post was reported by ABC News as "Female Mexican Police Chief Fired." The bias of the reporting is curious. The next time you light up or take a hit of something, understand that you are equally responsible for the death threats to a 20 year-old woman and her 2 year-old son.

Marisol Valles Garcia, Mexico

8. Maria Corina Machado, Venezuela: Opposition candidate to Hugo Chavez, Machado was shot at during a speech at a softball stadium in November. Her bravery in the face of the depraved regime of Hugo Chavez has gotten very little, if any, coverage in the United States.

Maria Corina Machado, Venezuela

9. Vaclav Havel, Czech Republic: Along with Lech Walesa, Havel helped bring the Soviet Union to its knees. The playwright, poet, dissident and politician passed away December 18.

Vaclav Havel, Czech Republic

10. Reserved for the first American to step up and put their reputation and life on the line for freedom. Sadly, it doesn't seem Americans are particularly interested anymore.

I did not set out to populate the list almost exclusively with women but that is how it turned out. I'm not sure if this says anything about gender and freedom in the modern age, but I think it might.

I assembled this list looking at individual protectors of liberty, but we should all remain mindful of our servicemen and women who sacrified their time, health or lives to the cause of freedom, whether we were in political agreement with those efforts or not.

2011 Review: Top Ten Scariest People In America

2011-12-28T15:33:00.002-05:00

As we approach the end of the year I'll carry on my tradition of reviewing the year via easy-to-read lists. Other people do this, but I didn't steal the idea from them.

Today, it's the Top Ten Scariest People In America:

Barack Obama: Not because he is inept which is scary, but we've had inept presidents before, in fact we've had them as recently as 2007. He's scary because he is a divider and a manipulator. He divides to hide his ineptitude and the wedge he is driving between people of differing political ideologies is proving to be extremely destructive.
Joe Biden: He's Number 2 and he is an utter buffoon.
Rush Limbaugh: Not because he is a narrow-minded bloviator (he is), but because he is a divider and a manipulator. He divides in the name of advertising dollars and the wedge he is driving between people of differing political ideologies is proving to be extremely destructive.
Sean Hannity: He is intolerant of people outside of his comfort zone and he has a nationwide radio network to spew his intolerance to other intolerant people, all in the name of advertising dollars.
NBC: Fear-mongers in the extreme with a hard-Left political ideology, each and every broadcaster on NBC and its associated networks has long forgotten the journalistic principle of neutrality and fairness. That they hold so much sway over such a large segment of the population is scary.
Ron Paul: A relic of the paleo-Libertarian Party that lowered itself to every freak Right Wing faction in the country, Ron Paul is now bringing Libertarianism to the national stage, which is really scary to pragmatic and level-headed libertarians who simply don't buy into his narrow-minded views of the world. He's scary because he could single-handedly send the Libertarian movement back to the mid-1980's when all the hippies and punks were kicked out in favor of racists and extremists and John Birch-types. We've been fighting against that era of stupidity for 25 years and some of us would like to get past it all now.
Occupy Wall Street: Nah, they're not scary, and they're not even relevant, but those three simple words help with Google hits like you would not believe, and well, there is the fact that these folks will be running the old age home my kids are going to stick me in.
John Boehner: The Michael Scott of politics. 'Nuff said.
SEIU: All labor union leadership is a threat to the private sector just because of their history of corruption and worker manipulation, but the SEIU, as a public-sector union, has far too much influence over the government and its operations. They have become a shadow state that no one is comfortable talking about.
People Who Need Public Assistance To Help Them Quit Smoking: The City of New York proudly advertises public assistance for people trying to quit smoking. Just freaking quit smoking for crying out loud. Why do you have to rely on government aid to help you save your own life? Their utter patheticness far outweighs any sense of fear I get from an over-reaching government.

"Today We're Celebrating Mainly Christmas, But All Holidays Of Course," Or, Occupy Nashville Is Just A Mirror Of Christmas At Your House

2011-12-28T14:28:00.003-05:00

I just love the quote in the title. The girl who tried to be sincere but just ended up sounding dumb and confused could not be a better representative of the 99% if we had sent her to a re-education camp. Her mind is so polluted with political correctness she can't even let Christmas just be Christmas. Watch the video, it'll help cure your post-holiday blues.

In a gift that just keeps on giving, two erudite and serious Occupy Nashville protesters got into a bit of a tiff on Christmas Day. According to one Occupier, she's never been to a family gathering that didn't include some sort of argument, so it was really no big deal. Maybe that's why she's chosen to live in a park.

The story originally aired on Nashville's CBS affiliate News Channel 5, which promptly pulled the story and cut links to it after the report started going viral.

Anyway, these folks are fine representatives of the 99%, and to paraphrase, the rest of us of course too. These are the folks Barack Obama ran for President for and Nancy Pelosi said were the Democrat's version of the Tea Party. I can't wait until they all leave the park for jobs in the Statehouse.

Eight year-old Naama Margolis Is Threat to Ultra-Orthodox Men in Beit Shemesh As She Immodestly Walks to School

2011-12-27T10:47:00.000-05:00

The link below will bring you to a sub-titled report from Israel's Channel 2 News and a report they aired last week about the ultra-Orthodox community of Beit Shemesh and an eight -year-old girl who is taunted and spit on because of her "immodest dress."

8 year-old Naama Margolis is spit on and called
"slut" because of her immodest dress.

Religious intolerance is as equal a threat to freedom as state intolerance is, and freedom-loving people need to be aware of threats to freedom, however insidious -- and faraway they may be.

I have often written about the persecution of women and girls in ultra-conservative Islamist societies. This is the first extensive video report I have seen of ultra-Orthodox Jewish persecution of women and girls although I was aware of it. There is a great deal of difference between cultural norms and traditions that are accepted by all who participate and the purposeful coercion of people to live as the intolerant majority would have them live.

The video is long, and the subtitles sometimes get out of synch, but it is compelling and important for citizens of a country that is embroiled in the political and theological struggles of a region half a world away.

Click to watch: 972 Mag translation of Israel Channel 2 report on eight year-old Naama Margolis and the ultra-Orthodox community of Beit Shemesh.

A Liberal Primer: How Not To Write Hate Mail

2011-12-23T09:31:00.001-05:00

Dear Anonymous,

I always enjoy reading your hatemail because it is a great indicator that I have made my point. Yesterday's post about Obama's latest 2012 campaign video (Barack Obama's Campaign Video for College Students, Or, If My Kid Comes Home From College and Annoys Me With This Crap I'm Not Paying Next Semester's Tuition - December 22, 2011) obviously made you feel very sad and frustrated, but in the long run, that's a good thing. I am writing you this letter out of my desire to help you become less cliched and stereotypical. As a service to you I've decided to give you pointers on writing hatemail so you can get your points across, assuming you actually have a point.

To remind you, this is what you wrote:

This was so poorly written, I cant even understand your point. And quite frankly, you used quite frankly 3 times in your blog. I'm not pro Obama, but I like to read well written blog posts. If you are going to make your case, make some sense first. Layoff the Fox News while you are at it. It's dumbing you down. - Anonymous

I'll go sentence by sentence, take notes:

The word "can't" is a contraction for "can not." If you are going to critique someone for writing poorly, you should probably not write poorly while doing so.
Although it is sometimes accepted, sentences starting with the word "And" should be avoided. There is always a better option.
Quite frankly, when you point out my redundant use of the phrase "quite frankly" you should put "quite frankly" in quotes. It quite frankly also helps to take the time to understand that the redundant use of the phrase "quite frankly" was done as a literary device to point out exasperation. Quite frankly, I am sorry you were not able to grasp that.
"I'm not pro Obama..." Based on how upset you are about a post taking Obama's campaign to task, I think you are. You need to do a little introspection, or stop trying to lie about your political proclivities either out of embarrassment or because of a lame attempt to pull the wool over my eyes.
"but I like to read well written blog posts." Well, then, you've come to the right place, as long as you are intelligent enough to understand subtlety and satire. Based on your writing ability, you should think of me as your god and learn about words and how they work together.
Also, "pro Obama" and "well written" should be hyphenated to ensure the reader knows those two words go together. Don't make me take out my red pencil.
I like when you tell me that I should attempt to make sense first before I make my case. Read the post again. I am hitting people like you over the head with a mallet, so I'm surprised you didn't get the gist of what I wrote. I know lots of smart people who are actually not pro-Obama who stopped watching Fox News for a few moments and really enjoyed this piece.
In this last sentence you give yourself away. Because I am obviously taking President Obama to task you assume I watch Fox News. I bet you dislike millionaires and billionaires too. You probably think all the problems in the world stem from evil bankers. This makes you a cliche, and an ignorant one at that. I could be like you and tell you to watch MSNBC, but you're probably too busy getting your news from Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert to watch Morning Joe. Come at me with legitimate points instead of tired old cliches you barely understand but think sound good because they come from cool guys you adore. With a little effort on your part maybe you too will have a future outside of the basement in your mom's house.

Lastly, you sign off as "Anonymous." How many times have I told you people that I won't publish your comments if you don't have the cajones to put your name behind them? It's right over there ---> in the rules and regulations for crying out loud.

So here's what I learned about you from your angry defense of the guy you are not defending:

If you truly were not "pro-Obama" (note proper use of hyphen) and just thought this Blog sucked you would have moved on. So therefore, you either have a very sad and pathetic life which gives you the time to critique little Blogs like mine, or you are pro-Obama and I really hit a nerve.
You are under 25, or you smoked so much pot when you were younger your grasp of difficult and foreign concepts has been severely limited.
If you are male, you very likely wear your hair in a faux-hawk, even though you don't realize that people over five years-old with faux-hawks are laughed at when they go to the Mall. You also probably think the rest of society wants to see your underwear so you wear your pants down at some 1996-cliche level to prove how tough and hip you are.
If you are female, you are most likely orange from too much inside tanning. You speak with an affectation called 'vocal fry' (think Britney Spears on Xanax) and wear gold-lame low-top Chucks.
Regardless of sex, you are unsure of what you actually think politically, hence the fear of using your actual given name, unless your parents were embarrassed by you and named you 'Anonymous' so they didn't have to take the blame for all the dumb things they knew you were going to do.
You are an intellectual eunuch.
You probably went to college, or are still in college, so you are excused for not knowing too much about how the actual world you will someday struggle in.
You are one of the people in the video and you are trying to rationalize your embarrassment at being a member of a Cult of Personality.
You are my 12th Grade English teacher who never liked me in the first place and who was really resentful when she was forced to give me an 'A' because of my brilliance even though her hatred for me made her drool on her lesson planner.

Here's the type of hatemail I usually get:

You #^&$*%(#^ @$&*(%) I hope you #$&^% get hit by a bus. You ignorant #*&%$#. - Anonymous

So in spite of the your obvious language-center deficiencies, you did prove you are somewhat more intellectual than the average angry person who vehemently denies being pro-Obama while they make asses of themselves defending him.

Besides all of the fun at I am having at your anonymous expense, I thank you for reading and I hope you'll keep reading so that someday you can look back at this time in your life and say to yourself, Gosh I was so silly and immature until I started reading Jack's blog. Now, thanks to him, I have a fuller understanding of the world around me, and, by golly, I've even started to develop a sense of humor, which looking back, I understand was the first thing Liberalism stole from me.

Your friend,
Jack

Note at the Bottom: I get lots of hatemail from Anonymous, and they all sound the same, which leads me to the following possible conclusions: All of my hatemail comes from one person who is obsessed with me, or all liberal haters are embarrassed by their opinions and are unable to process any individual thoughts, so they simply write what they are told to write by Keith Olbermann and Eric Boehlert.

Barack Obama Campaign Video For College Students, Or, If My Kid Comes Home From College And Annoys Me With This Crap I'm Not Paying Next Semester's Tuition

2011-12-22T11:17:00.003-05:00

Barack Obama's latest campaign video stars young minority males and young women of all races re-educating their families by pointing out how horrible old people are because most of us (anyone over 22 anyway) understand what a complete and unmitigated disaster Barack Obama is as a president.

Listen up old people! If your snotty twenty-something comes homes and starts preaching about Obama, make him or her sit at the kid's table, because that's where they belong -- politically speaking. Or you could call your local branch of Hare Krishna and ask them to take your kid because the Krishna's would be a more productive cult for your kid to join than the Democrat Party. (Dig the 1970s reference!)

Watch for yourself, but if you're old like me, don't send me nasty messages because your blood pressure spiked and your heartburn kicked in. I don't want to hear it, even if I could.

Obama failed with class warfare because quite frankly most people would like to raise their standard of living rather than be dragged down to the lowest common denominator just to make things fair.

Obama failed by playing the race card, because quite frankly, he's such an embarrassment that if he was an actual-grew-up-in-my-same-family-brother-and-not-just-my-brother-by-cultural-reference I would be embarrassed as hell and I would ask my mom to kick his lame ass out of the house in case I was planning on bringing some of my friends over to play xBox. But then again, I am old and out-of-touch so I'm still playing pong on my Atari.

Now Obama is going after young people who quite frankly are usually not immune to political silliness, unless of course you're me and you voted for Reagan when you were twenty. But, seriously, in Obama's America, young people are the last resort of a failing statesman, so listen you kids, stay the hell of my lawn and take away grandma's voter registration card while you're at it.

How long before Obama has Bo go after the canine vote? Because I have two dogs who are absolute socialists and who wouldn't be able to chase a cat without looking for a MilkBone first.

Hat tip to Chris Bedford at the Daily Caller for bringing this to the attention of old people everywhere.

Libertarian Manifesto: The Socialist View of Liberty and Libertarianism, Part I

2011-12-21T14:00:00.000-05:00

I received an interesting opinion piece a few days ago written by George Monbiot and published in the Guardian. The piece claims that "right wing libertarians have turned 'freedom' into an excuse for greed and exploitation." I love this kind of stuff. After glancing through his bio, I determined that Mr. Monbiot is the kind of person the world desperately needs: he's driven, sincere and he's angry about everything, especially anything the private sector might have had something to do with. People like Mr. Monbiot help drive the discussion, and however much I disagree with him, his opinion helps define the differences between statism and individual freedom.

As an interesting sidenote, I got the piece from a friend who is so far from me on the political spectrum as to be practically standing right next to me on my left. Monbiots' piece is long and my responses will necessarily be long as well. The difference between the perception of libertarians by people with a statist agenda and the true ideas of liberty are far too important to gloss over, so I'll break the discussion up into three parts.

Monbiot begins:

"This bastardised libertarianism makes "freedom" an instrument of oppression. It's the disguise used by those who wish to exploit without restraint, denying the need for the state to protect the 99%."

This is actually sad to anyone who believes in individual freedom. Mr. Monbiot's world-view is that people are pathetic and will be exploited and oppressed unless bureaucrats come to their defense. He believes everyone needs the state to protect them, but he fails to realize that states and statists are the most egregious oppressors of man in the history of mankind.

"Freedom: who could object? Yet this word is now used to justify a thousand forms of exploitation. Throughout the rightwing press and blogosphere, among thinktanks and governments, the word excuses every assault on the lives of the poor, every form of inequality and intrusion to which the 1% subject us. How did libertarianism, once a noble impulse, become synonymous with injustice?"

This is purely subjection with no corroborating facts, but it sounds really sincere and well thought out, so who can argue with it? I would have preferred to actually read actual examples of how the "rightwing press" "blogosphere" and "thinktanks" have oppressed the so-called 99%. Mr. Monbiot is taking theory and falsely applying it to reality as he sees it, which is specious at best and horribly manipulative at worst. The theory of libertarianism when brought to its extreme is in fact anarchy, but modern libertarians eschew anarchy (total liberty) for a philosophy that understands some form of state is necessary, for the good of the whole. This is where people like Mr. Monbiot get lost because they are too busy dividing people by race, or percentage, or some other theoretical divider, to the point of forgetting the smallest minority - the individual.

"In the name of freedom – freedom from regulation – the banks were permitted to wreck the economy. In the name of freedom, taxes for the super-rich are cut. In the name of freedom, companies lobby to drop the minimum wage and raise working hours. In the same cause, US insurers lobby Congress to thwart effective public healthcare; the government rips up our planning laws; big business trashes the biosphere. This is the freedom of the powerful to exploit the weak, the rich to exploit the poor.

I don't know much about the banking system in the UK so I won't comment on it. I will point out that government rules and regulations on the banking industry will be shown by history to be the main causative factors in the banking implosion in this country. I will also point out that the very same candidate who ran for president by excoriating the "banks" is now the president who sidles up to the "banks" at $38,000 a plate fundraisers. He is also the same president who is blocking at least 20,000 construction jobs to appease environmentalists who contribute heavily to him as well. While I'm at it, I'll also point out that just like I am not fully versed on the UK banking system, it is a foolish thing for someone who is not well-versed on the US healthcare system to use our current healthcare upheaval to prove his point. US insurers were lobbied by Congress and sweetheart deals were cut left and right to instantiate a healthcare overhaul that will likely never be fully implemented because of Constitutional issues and the way the state (federal government) jammed it down the throats of a populace that was in the majority opposed to it. Monbiot's definition of "effective healthcare" is antithetical to the free-market system that for 250 years made America a shining beacon of prosperity, innovation and freedom. Our country is different than yours Mr. Monbiot, and its irresponsible to infer otherwise.

As far as "big-business" trashing "the biosphere," this is really just demegoguery at its worst. I suggest Mr. Monbiot travel through China or the former Soviet Union to see how the "biosphere" was trashed long before big business was allowed to play. And government's ripping up "our planning laws?" Whose planning laws, the fringe environmentalist movement that has no other agenda but to stop progress in its tracks? These are just words strung together to get the unthinking riled up. The basis in fact is wanting to say the least.

"Rightwing libertarianism recognises few legitimate constraints on the power to act, regardless of the impact on the lives of others. In the UK it is forcefully promoted by groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, the Adam Smith Institute, the Institute of Economic Affairs, and Policy Exchange. Their concept of freedom looks to me like nothing but a justification for greed."

I have enough trouble keeping up with all the loony movements in my own country to comment on groups in another country, but I will ask if Mr. Monbiot has ever read Adam Smith. If one truly understood libertarianism one would never use the phrase "rightwing libertarianism." There is no such thing. There is libertarianism, which promotes the freedom of the individual to prosper and pursue the maximization of their potential, and there is the stale Left / Right divisions that have clogged political thought since the French Revolution.

"So why have we been been so slow to challenge this concept of liberty? I believe that one of the reasons is as follows. The great political conflict of our age – between neocons and the millionaires and corporations they support on one side, and social justice campaigners and environmentalists on the other – has been mischaracterised as a clash between negative and positive freedoms. These freedoms were most clearly defined by Isaiah Berlin in his essay of 1958, Two Concepts of Liberty. It is a work of beauty: reading it is like listening to a gloriously crafted piece of music. I will try not to mangle it too badly.

Mr. Monbiot divulges his prejudices in the second sentence of this paragraph by painting all successful people with a broadstroke brush, surmising that wealth and success is only attained by exploiting the poor, or in the silly parlance of 2011, "the 99%." He also admits that he is firmly opposed to private enterprise by claiming all corporations are evil. The rhetoric is tired and lacking in thought, but Mr. Monbiot believes everything comes from the state, so he is at least consistent. The "millionaires and corporations are bad" philosophy gets far too much prominence from people who don't bother to understand the role the state has in oppressing freedom and liberty. It should be noted that Berlin's essay comes from the same point of view. They are confusing anarchy with libertarianism as they remove individualism and replace it with statism. History has shown this model is a failure.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. When a state has absolute authority over its people, its people will not be free -- they will be oppressed. What might be helpful to one individual may be harmful to another and the power of the state becomes corrupted when it is given control over the choice.

Libertarian Manifesto: The Socialist View of Libertarianism, Part II

2011-12-21T13:59:00.000-05:00

This is a continuation of the examination of George Monbiot's December 21 opinion piece in the Guardian.

Monbiot continues:

"Put briefly and crudely, negative freedom is the freedom to be or to act without interference from other people. Positive freedom is freedom from inhibition: it's the power gained by transcending social or psychological constraints. Berlin explained how positive freedom had been abused by tyrannies, particularly by the Soviet Union. It portrayed its brutal governance as the empowerment of the people, who could achieve a higher freedom by subordinating themselves to a collective single will."

The only issue I will take with this paragraph has to do with the possibly unintended implications in the use of the words "positive" and "negative" as subjective definitions of freedom, but my beef here is with Isaiah Berlin, not Monbiot.

"Rightwing libertarians claim that greens and social justice campaigners are closet communists trying to resurrect Soviet conceptions of positive freedom. In reality, the battle mostly consists of a clash between negative freedoms."

Again, the use of the term "rightwing libertarian" is incorrect and my guess is it is being used here to demagogue to his audience. The parsing of freedom into 'positive' and 'negative' is troubling to me, but it is an accepted terminology in spite of the implications. The green movement, certainly in America, is a movement away from private enterprise toward statism and so therefore, libertarians and the dreaded Right Wing, have a healthy fear of greens. One only needs to look at the loss of freedom -- economic and personal -- Americans have been subjected to since Richard Nixon gave us the EPA. Social justice campaigners would be well advised to separate themselves from the green movement as the two are not mutually exclusive. Lest anyone think otherwise, even us people who believe in personal freedom believe in social justice. We just don't think the bureaucrat is the answer to social injustices. In fact, it's quite the opposite, I firmly believe the cause of most social injustice is the state.

"As Berlin noted: "No man's activity is so completely private as never to obstruct the lives of others in any way. "Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." So, he argued, some people's freedom must sometimes be curtailed "to secure the freedom of others". In other words, your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. The negative freedom not to have our noses punched is the freedom that green and social justice campaigns, exemplified by the Occupy movement, exist to defend.

This is a bit confused here. Humans are not fish, and although I get the metaphor, it's a bit simplistic and it plays only to those who refuse to think about their own place in the world. While no one will argue with the fact that my rights end where your's begin, the Occupy movement has proven that it is not interested in protecting personal rights, but that it is rather more interested in dismantling private enterprise. I also don't believe the green movement is interested in individual liberty and progress. History has proven the green movement is indeed closely tied to statism and the dissolution of the private sector. Certainly a social campaign to protect the rights of those who require protection is something to be lauded, but when the campaign becomes the domain of the state, the state necessarily has to choose winners and losers and that is an affront to personal liberty.

"Berlin also shows that freedom can intrude on other values, such as justice, equality or human happiness. 'If the liberty of myself or my class or nation depends on the misery of a number of other human beings, the system which promotes this is unjust and immoral.' It follows that the state should impose legal restraints on freedoms that interfere with other people's freedoms – or on freedoms which conflict with justice and humanity."

As an academic statement, Berlin's words cannot be disputed, but in the laboratory of the real world the problem theorists like Berlin and Monbiot have is they disregard the constant and certain growth of the state. They naively believe the state will be good-hearted to all it is charged with ruling without taking into consideration that the people who run the state will invariably be the same people Berlin and Monbiot are afraid of giving 'negative' freedom to in the first place. This oversight of reality is dangerous. How can those who prefer statism honestly believe that a government made up of people who (as they believe) cannot handle freedom will be able to handle power over other people. It simply is doesn't make sense.

"These conflicts of negative freedom were summarised in one of the greatest poems of the 19th century, which could be seen as the founding document of British environmentalism. In The Fallen Elm, John Clare describes the felling of the tree he loved, presumably by his landlord, that grew beside his home. 'Self-interest saw thee stand in freedoms ways / So thy old shadow must a tyrant be. / Thou'st heard the knave, abusing those in power, / Bawl freedom loud and then oppress the free.' The landlord was exercising his freedom to cut the tree down. In doing so, he was intruding on Clare's freedom to delight in the tree, whose existence enhanced his life. The landlord justifies this destruction by characterising the tree as an impediment to freedom – his freedom, which he conflates with the general liberty of humankind. Without the involvement of the state (which today might take the form of a tree preservation order) the powerful man could trample the pleasures of the powerless man. But rightwing libertarians do not recognise this conflict. They speak, like Clare's landlord, as if the same freedom affects everybody in the same way. They assert their freedom to pollute, exploit, even – among the gun nuts – to kill, as if these were fundamental human rights. They characterise any attempt to restrain them as tyranny. They refuse to see that there is a clash between the freedom of the pike and the freedom of the minnow."

In the preceding paragraph, Monbiot uses 'landlord' and 'powerless man' to describe a person who owns property and someone who doesn't own the piece of property in question, and who we are left to assume does not own any property. What Monbiot is actually saying is that personal, or private, property is bad because someone might not like the way a person uses it. This is the ultimate in statism, which is commonly referred to as communism. His simplistic statement that "rightwing libertarians ... assert their freedom to pollute, exploit, even -- among the gun nuts -- to kill" would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that this kind of demagoguery is being bought whole cloth by an entire population of disenchanted people. The very same people who do not realize that it is the state that is propagating their disenchantment, not the guy who owns the land the tree is on. As far as the "gun nut" bit goes, I'll just leave that an argument between divergent cultures for another day.

I would also like to know why Mr. Monbiot believes the rights of the man who didn't own the land the tree resided on should trump the rights of the man who did.

There is a bigger problem here that saddens those of us who believe in the individual. Mr. Monbiot calls anyone who has not found their own personal path to prosperity a "minnow." What an incredible insult. An incredible insult that unfortunately gets misunderstood by the very same people he is referring to.

More than any property owner, evil banker, or corporate shill, making people believe they are helpless minnows is the greatest attack on freedom I can imagine.

Libertarian Manifesto: The Socialist View of Libertarianism, Part III

2011-12-21T13:58:00.000-05:00

In part two, Monbiot used a poem by 19th Century English poet John Clare to define his view of the struggle between the haves and the have-nots as it pertains to his view of freedom.

Minbiot continues:

"Clare then compares the felling of the tree with further intrusions on his liberty. 'Such was thy ruin, music-making elm; / The right of freedom was to injure thine: / As thou wert served, so would they overwhelm / In freedom's name the little that is mine.'"

What Clare (and Monbiot) don't mention is, why was the tree felled? Was it taken down to make room for a new home or factory? Was it diseased? Did it present a danger to the property owner's home, and therefore his and his family's life and limb? Was it turned into a piano to make the music that Monbiot so eloquently compares Clare's poem to? Was this a dispute between neighbors that 150 years later will contribute to upending the private sector as we know it?

If life were as simple as a poem, we'd all be poets.

"Last week, on an Internet radio channel called The Fifth Column, I debated climate change with Claire Fox of the Institute of Ideas, one of the rightwing libertarian groups that rose from the ashes of the Revolutionary Communist party. Fox is a feared interrogator on the BBC show The Moral Maze. Yet when I asked her a simple question – "do you accept that some people's freedoms intrude upon other people's freedoms?" – I saw an ideology shatter like a windscreen."

Well, actually, no you didn't. What you did see was one person who was unable to articulate her beliefs, and who therefore should be considered accordingly. Also, I don't know what the "Revolutionary Communist Party" is, but I can pretty much guarantee its members don't have a good grasp on libertarianism. Therefore, to use one person's ideological failing in an indictment of an entire political belief is specious and self-serving. By the way, only an anarchist would refuse to accept that some people's freedoms intrude upon others. Libertarians, right wing or otherwise, understand this and incorporate it into their philosophical struggle.

"I used the example of a Romanian lead-smelting plant I had visited in 2000, whose freedom to pollute is shortening the lives of its neighbours. Surely the plant should be regulated in order to enhance the negative freedoms – freedom from pollution, freedom from poisoning – of its neighbours? She tried several times to answer it, but nothing coherent emerged which would not send her crashing through the mirror of her philosophy."

Romania is a former Soviet-bloc country, and anyone who is even vaguely familiar with the environmental and human abuses of the Soviet Union should understand that this is a poor example to use in a debate about libertarianism. As a refresher, the Soviet Union was communist and more to the point, statist, which is exactly what Mr. Monbiot would have us believe is the only thing that can save us from ourselves.

In his example, I would ask why the local citizenry does not have the ability to regulate the plant. Is it because the larger national government restricts it from doing so? Why would a national government do such a thing at the expense of its own people if people require the state to protect them in the first place?

Seriously, if you are going to tout your defeat of a so-called libertarian as a way of promoting your own beliefs and debating skills, you'd have more credibility if you debated someone with even a modicum of ability and knowledge.

"Modern libertarianism is the disguise adopted by those who wish to exploit without restraint. It pretends that only the state intrudes on our liberties. It ignores the role of banks, corporations and the rich in making us less free. It denies the need for the state to curb them in order to protect the freedoms of weaker people. This bastardised, one-eyed philosophy is a con trick, whose promoters attempt to wrongfoot justice by pitching it against liberty. By this means they have turned "freedom" into an instrument of oppression."

Monbiot's issues with the individual's ability to navigate life on his own notwithstanding, I would counter his conclusion this way:

The state is not the answer. Man's own desire to protect himself and provide for himself and his family is the answer. Are there morons among us? Is there evil among men? Yes to both. Is giving power to individuals who are masquerading as a government entity the solution to the problems of reality? I say, look at history with an open mind, free of agenda, and the answer will be plain to see.

Libertarianism is not currently evolved to the point where it is a panacea for all of mankind's ills, but it is light years ahead of statism and modern day liberalism.

Belmar Man Attacks Homeless Person, Proves Why True Liberty Is Still An Illusion

2011-12-20T09:18:00.002-05:00

Yesterday a story broke in the New Jersey area about twenty year-old Belmar resident Taylor Giresi and his unidentified seventeen year-old accomplice / videographer who taunted and beat a local homeless man and then posted the video of their exploits on YouTube. Click here to watch the video and read the story from New12 New Jersey.

Giresi repeatedly attacks and taunts the man who is obviously not capable of protecting himself. Watching the video is difficult so be prepared -- but watch it.

To me it also elicits the sad realization that true liberty can never be achieved as long as there are morons like Giresi and his little friend infecting the peace. The victim was no threat to me, my family or the liberty of society in general. That much cannot be said about the Batman-hoodie-wearing Giresi and his Boy Wonder sidekick.

As much as the inevitable police state resulting from Statism is a threat, clowns like these two men require regular peace-loving citizens to depend on the police to protect them. The choice is forced on us by the idiots among us -- police state or the full-on anarchy of an armed vigilante citizenry.

To me, a society filled with twenty-year old immigrants who are busting their humps washing dishes and mowing lawns is far more desirable than a society that produces and coddles young men like Giresi and his buddy-with-the-court-protected-identity. This statement flies in the face of a lot of hard-core conservatives and neo-cons who think I am advocating illegal immigration. I'm not. I am advocating as easy a road to freedom and liberty for those who contribute to society as possible and as hard as that is to believe, that is completely consistent with the Libertarian point-of-view.

A country that refuses to wean bored, affluent and ignorant young men who prey on helpless people for fun while it frets over an influx of hard-working young men more than willing to take the place of the former is doomed to failure.

A Special Holiday Message To Everyone, Or, Just Because You Have A Video Camera Doesn't Mean You're Obliged To Screw Your Kids Up

2011-12-19T11:47:00.000-05:00

With the Holiday Season upon us I felt obligated to speak up about a subject that will have serious consequences for our society in about twenty years. Listen to me parents, you did stupid stuff when you were a kid, but luckily your mom and dad didn't have the technology to embarrass you in front of anyone other than Aunt Sally and Uncle Irv, and even that got boring after a while.

But now, you can embarrass your kids in front of the whole wide world.

Let's look at the first instance of getting famous on the back of a child's private and precious moment.

This video was posted December 26, 2008 and has received 91,417 hits. That means the video was viewed 91,417 times and unless these people come from an extremely large family, I'd have to guess the bulk of those hits were by strangers.

Was it necessary for these parents to publicly humiliate their daughters?

Sure they're excited, but how thrilled are they going to be in high school when every kid they go to school with has access to their private Christmas morning joy? Let's check back with them in five years.

Here's Ollie's first roller coaster ride:

This video has received 219,752 hits since it was posted on July 24, 2009.

Why do Ollie's parents think that Ollie wants the world to see him shrieking in terror on a roller coaster?

Why are Ollie's parents more concerned with getting a good shot of Ollie humiliating himself instead of comforting him?

Go Ollie! Entertain us!

I picked my nose after dancing at a family party when I was four and my family applauded my "Pick Your Nose Step." To this day I am scarred by that to the point of having never even considered dance as a career path. Imagine if my parents had videotaped it and posted it for the world to see.

In fact, sometimes Today's Mom is so anxious to be an Internet sensation she's willing to help her kids trash her house with flour so she can get on TV and get people to love and pay attention to her:

So parents, if you catch your kid sexting her BFF when she's thirteen, don't look around at society for someone to blame, because you crossed the line between private family interaction and public displays of intimacy years ago.

If your kid comes home and tells you he's being bullied, maybe before you call your Congressman to ask him what he's going to do about the big bullying problem in America, maybe, just maybe, that video you posted of your kid right smack in the middle of his emotional development got in the wrong hands.

Your kids are cute. Okay, what else you got? Let your kids live a nice quiet life filled with love and emotional support and don't saddle them with your complete unhappiness over your dull and boring life by letting the rest of the world watch them grow up.

Seriously, just because you can make your children's personal lives public doesn't mean you should.

Note at the Bottom to the Folks Who Own These Videos: These videos were found through public searches on YouTube, so if you didn't want me to make snide remarks about them and your family, you should have kept them private.

Even In the Occupy Wall Street Nation, Money Is Still A Way To Keep Score

2011-12-18T15:27:00.000-05:00

"Money is just a means of keeping score."

I like this quote. It's brash. It's arrogant. It's true. It makes it plain and simple that there are winners and losers in life.

The problem is we have been shielding kids for decades from the harsh truth about winning and losing, and now they only understand that keeping score is unfair.

Our parks, ports and media are being occupied by people who were told as kids that keeping score was evil and that winning and losing doesn't matter. What matters is that everyone has a good time and enjoys themselves as long as no one is left feeling bad about anything.

Jeremy has been taught since he could walk that he is awesome. Even though Jeremy probably could have used a metaphorical swift kick in the ass from time-to-time, his parents and teachers made sure Jeremy's self-esteem was always as high as it could be. He was told he could be whatever he wanted, including a guy with a Master's Degree in Middle Eighteenth Century Baltic Art. Unfortunately, Jeremy is now saddled with debt from getting an education he can't use to support himself and boy is he pissed off at the rest of us. His self-esteem is still quite high though.

He was taught all of this non-sense to help bolster a political ideology.

This is a cruel thing to do to a human being. Jeremy has been left without the necessary coping skills for adulthood so he whines about the unfairness of a world he is unprepared for. He is unable to look at himself as an individual who is owed nothing more than the right to exist peacefully, so he looks for someone to blame for his own failures. This is why Liberalism is such a threat to the quality of individual life. Shielding people from reality because reality is ugly does not stop reality from being real.

You can whine all you want, but money is indeed a way to keep score and the sooner you accept that fact, the happier your life will be.

Congress Decides Not to Tell You How to Light Your House

2011-12-16T15:37:00.001-05:00

I was going to buy all of my family and friends incandescent lightbulbs for Christmas this year. I also planned to get heavily involved in the forthcoming incandescent lightbulb black market. In fact, my retirement was hinging on becoming a black market incandescent lightbulb tycoon.

This was because Congress passed an energy efficiency law in 2007 that would have effectively outlawed regular old incandescent light bulbs as of January 1, 2012. Nobody paid too much attention to this attempt by the Federal Government to sit next to you while you did your knitting, probably because Congress was incredibly embarrassed at having passed such a moronic law in the first place. By the way, George W. Bush was president in 2007 so all of you mainstream GOPers need to stop with the conservative indignation right now.

Back when America wasn't filled with stupid busybodies who
had nothing better to do than to mess things up, smart people
invented stuff that made our lives better, not worse.

The brilliant thing about the incandescent light bulb ban is that we would have had to use compact flourescent lightbulbs in our homes because they are more efficient and they make people who love birds and trees happy. Except they contain mercury so special precautions have to be taken when you break one. They also can't be used in enclosed spaces or with timers, and they have to be disposed of like old paint and car batteries. If you happen to dispose of your compact flourescent at a facility that incinerates garbage, we will all die from airborne mercury vapors.

Other than that, they're an excellent replacement for a technology that has served us pretty well for over a hundred years. We will be able to completely stop using coal-fired power in our homes! Well, actually that's a lie but you get the point. Green energy is the future, and if you are against green energy you probably root for cancer and aim for little girls walking their puppy dogs on the sidewalk while you drive your '74 lime-green Plymouth to the Chamber of Commerce meeting.

Compact flourescent bulbs ~~are better for the earth so~~...wait, no they're not.

Compact flourescent bulbs are way worse than incandescent bulbs but since Subaru-driving, granola-munching, tweed-wearing egghead types are worried about the earth, we should use them. But since we don't want to use them because they suck, the eggheads asked the government to step in and protect us from ourselves. Seriously, in 1900 the earth was a lot cooler than it is now, and it's all because of lightbulbs. If you don't agree with that logic you probably pray, shoot guns and fly Old Glory from your front porch. You might be a good American, but you are a bad Citizen of Earth.

Congress shouldn't be applauded for doing the right thing and allowing us to light our homes as we see fit, but we should give them the same credit for fixing this insane legislation that we give our teenager for not wearing the same socks 12 days in a row. Okay, your feet don't stink so bad, but we really need to talk about why girls think you're gross.

Let me weigh the benefits against the two products for myself. Let me decide which product is better for my family and my environment. Let me choose between an expensive product that will save me money over the long-term and an inexpensive product that I know is safe and slightly more expensive to use.

I'll take care of my business, which will free you Congresspersons up to do more important things like fix the tax code and cut into the deficit.

Read the Washington Post story about the legislation.

Read the facts about compact flourescent bulbs courtesy of GE.

Time Magazine Person of the Year

2011-12-15T16:17:00.002-05:00

I used to read Time magazine, back when it was actually a news magazine and not an opinion piece that mocks everything outside of its little liberal comfort-zone in every issue.

I was on a quick flight to Nashville over the weekend, so I picked up a copy to do some time-killing..

Two things struck me:

Time thinks its readers are stupid and therefore needs to patronize them by talking down to them
The line between objective journalism and editorializing has been so completely blurred that every piece, whether presented as news or opinion, is warped by the ideology of the editorial staff

I was going to go into a story-by-story dissection of the liberal myopia and misinformation I found, but quite frankly, I wasted enough time (pun unintentional) with this National Enquirer-for-the-Misinformed already.

Maybe when Leopoldo Galtieri was taunting Margaret Thatcher Time was relevant, but between the timelag inherent with magazines and the utter naivete of its politics, its simply not a relevant contributor to the national discussion anymore. Which is why its editors drive their political agenda as hard as they do - they're ~~pandering~~ preaching to the choir in a desperate attempt to stay alive.

Which brings us to the "Person of the Year" issue.

The editors at Time magazine would like you to believe that the protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Bahrain are no different than the lugubrious funk-addled malcontents occupying your local park. In case you aren't paying attention to anything -- they're different.

The Occupy malcontents are more closely related to the violent thugs in Greece who are upset that their personal souvlaki-flavored fatted calf has been eaten down past the gristle to the point where nothing is left for the citizens of Greece to munch on.

Sure there are a lot of people protesting things. Some are protesting because their police-state-of-residence arrests them in the middle of the night for no reason and occasionally just shoots them because they can.

Others protest because they want something from the rest of us because they have traded their individuality away to the state in return for the fantasy of three squares and a stress-free life.

There is a difference and we should make sure we understand what it is.

Sports Illustrated and Melissa Segura Prove Why They Should Stick to Bats and Balls and Leave Civics to the Less Politically Prejudiced

2011-12-13T13:22:00.001-05:00

I read Sports Illustrated because I like sports. I don't read it to learn about civics or politics. An article in the November 28, 2011 issue entitled Sport In America: In My Tribe reminded me why.

The premise of the article was a group slap on the back to all of the magazine's staff writers disguised as a re-telling of their favorite sports stories. It was okay, a little bombastic and self-serving, but that's how sports writers are sometimes.

Everything was cruising along nicely until I got to staff writer Melissa Segura's attempt to mix race, soccer and the inherent evilness of America. Here's what the article, and Segura, had to say about how superior Ms. Segura's political views are:

"To staff writer Melissa Segura, soccer in the U.S. had always been the sport of the suburban upper crust, with its pricey youth travel teams, shiny Umbros and halftime oranges cut by mothers who didn't have to work to make ends meet (or by their help)."

This statement helps us to understand Melissa Segura's prejudices against her fellow citizens. I don't know where Ms. Segura grew up, but I do know from reading her work that she grew up disliking and resenting a lot of people. Ms. Segura should realize that most moms in America cutting cut up oranges for their kids are struggling to get by and raise their kids to the best of their abilities, just like pretty much everyone else. The inference of course, is that soccer is a white, middle-class sport, and that those white people are living on Easy Street and their Hispanic maids do all the hard work -- like cutting up oranges for Dakota and Jeremy.

"But a month before the 2010 World Cup, Segura toured the predominantly Hispanic trailer parks of Nacogdoches, Texas, where Clint Dempsey, the most inventive player in U.S. soccer history, grew up learning his moves from Latin American players who lived in those double-wides."

"It is not lost on Segura that in the same week she reported Dempsey's story, she also wrote about professional sports leagues' response to Arizona's controversial immigration bill, which targeted the same people Dempsey credited as his soccer influences."

What is lost on Segura and the editors of Sports Illustrated (published - not surprisingly by Time, Inc. which only has one political view) is that the Arizona law is based on current Federal law -- and was put in place to protect the citizens of Arizona -- regardless of race -- from lawlessness.

The article then goes on to say that Segura watched a U.S. World Cup match and "saw her country reflected like never before," as she described the multi-national faces of the men comprising the team. That this was a surprise to Segura illustrates how out-of-touch she is with the daily lives of the American people. It also shows clearly the journalistic prejudice of Segura and her magazine. Because of their politics, Segura and her editors view America as a monolithic Right Wing white mass of hatred, which is silly, naive and insulting to those of us who actually live here.

"[players] placing their hands over their hearts during The Star-Spangled Banner even as the Obama Administration announced plans to use drones along the southern border that the relatives of U.S. players Jose Torres and Herculez Gomez had crossed."

What Ms. Segura implies then is that laws are of no consequence. We don't know if the relatives of the players mentioned came over legally or illegally, but that distinction doesn't seem to matter to Ms. Segura. What matters to her is that there are people in this country who demand that immigrants follow the laws of their country, and that is insulting to Ms. Segura and her magazine. In Ms. Segura's world, we should not protect our borders or enforce our laws because a good soccer player might not get a shot, or, so I surmise, a person of the ethnic background she approves might not be able to move here. Her naive and poorly informed opinions wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for the fact that she had the power of a major magazine -- a willing supplicant to her prejudices against her country -- at her beck and call.

"While politicians in Washington argued, 23 men from backgrounds as diverse as the country they represented showed what an inclusive America could be."

Laws about immigration, or the fact that it is people like Ms. Segura who view people first through the lense of race long before viewing their hearts and actions, notwithstanding.

"'It was sports prefiguring politics,' Segura says. 'The team never addressed issues of immigration or inclusion; it simply played the game -- together -- with regard not to abilities..."

She's talking about athletes, so why does that surprise Ms. Segura? It doesn't surprise her one bit, but it does give her a launching point to explain her politics to her readers while she remains cloaked in the false clothing of a journalist. I was personally insulted that I paid for a magazine that was merely a forum for Segura to spout her distaste for the people in America who think respecting the rule of law is a good thing.

"...the way Jesse Owens and Jackie Robinson demonstrated decades earlier how much better we can be when we see America's differences as a bounty instead of a burden."

What she says here is correct, except her comparison is specious, and she obviously has no understanding of the country she lives -- and earns quite a nice living -- in. She attempts to compare true heroes and pioneers like Robinson and Owens with people who may or may not have come here legally. That is an incredible insult to Owens and Robinson and men and women who fought alongside them for equality. Owens and Robinson were natural born citizens fighting for their rights in a nation that was blind and deaf to the wrongs it was committing. Ms. Segura would have you believe her cause is a parallel to their struggle when it is in fact the struggle of people to do whatever they want, anywhere they want with little or no regard to the rule of law. That is not racism Ms. Segura, and you need to drop your personal prejudices and put some effort into understanding the world outside of your tiny little sphere of experience.

In conclusion, I wonder if Melissa Segura thinks her magazine's objectification of women is okay, or does she just pick and choose who is wrong strictly based on her own political misconceptions?

Melissa Segura bio.

Libertarian Manifesto: Why I Am A Libertarian

2011-12-09T15:50:00.001-05:00

While working on a piece today about why I am a Libertarian, I came across this article by Steve Horwitz that concisely sums up why -- at heart -- we are all libertarians, whether we realize it or not. This piece should be required reading.

Pausing to Note the Continued Upward Climb of Humanity by Steven Horwitz.

"With a new study out today that provides evidence that those who approach their lives with a spirit of gratitude (when it's deserved of course) to others score higher across a whole number of measures of well-being, it's worth taking a moment for some "social gratitude."

In a world of pepper-spraying cops, genital-groping TSA agents, and a debt-to-GDP ratio that's topped 100 percent, it's sometimes hard to find the good, but despite the ankle weights the state keeps attaching to us, humanity keeps running, moving ever upward.

In the long view, life expectancy continues to rise as do literacy rates. Slavery is in long-run retreat and illegal in every country, and despite the apparent desire of US politicians of both parties to declare war on every small country in the mid-east, deaths from war continue to fall and violence in general continues its decline. Every day the news is full of new secular miracles, from 3-D printers that can produce the head for Jeff Dunham's new dummy to medical procedures that save lives that would have been lost even as recently as a few years ago. The average American household continues to be able to afford fantastic toys that the rich of a generation ago could not have imagined, and poor Americans today are more likely to own basic necessities (not to mention "toys") than was the average American household a generation ago.

And perhaps most important: a diminishing percentage of humanity lives on less than $1 per day, and global income inequality is falling as well.

Even as freedom retreats in some quarters, the freedoms we have left continue to improve the lot of humanity in ways our ancestors could only dream of. The sad part is that we continue to weight and shackle ourselves in ways that are slowing that progress from what it could have been. We do so because too many are too skeptical about the benefits of freedom and those with power (or who want it) are all too willing to take advantage of that skepticism to serve their own interests, both political and corporate. (Ed. Note: Emphasis added)

As we pause to recognize all we are grateful for today, let's also re-commit ourselves to the task at hand, which is to understand the degree to which free people under the right institutions can maximize the degree of social cooperation, peace, and prosperity made possible by the progressive extension of the division of labor and exchange. And let's further re-commit ourselves to taking what we've learned and spreading it to the four corners of the Earth so that the cornucopia so many enjoy in the West can be the reality not just for every American, but for all of humanity." - Steven Horwitz, November 24, 2011

I try to bring as much new material to the discussion as I can, but when someone puts the beauty of libertarianism as simply and eloquently as Mr. Horwitz did, there's no reason to pretend to be able to do it any better.

Pardon Me, Is That A Good Source of Potassium In Your Pocket Or Are You Just Happy To See Me?

2011-12-08T13:31:00.001-05:00

I had a hard time figuring out what to write about today.

Eric Holder is making a fool out of himself trying to further the Fast and Furious coverup
Darryl Issa is giving me hope that America's goose is not cooked by grilling Eric Holder
America's Formerly Most-Creepiest Governor Jon Corzine is trying to convice us that not knowing where $1.2 billion of other people's money is isn't really a big deal
President Obama said in his news conference that the Keystone Pipeline will create jobs, but not as many as extending the payroll tax cuts or extending unemployment insurance (call me what you will, but I heard that one with me very own ears)

Eh, just boring same-old-same-old in the era of the downfall of America. I mean, sometimes I bore the both of us. I was really feeling uninspired.

Then, God His Very Self shot me with a lightning bolt of cosmic inspiration and led me to a story, making me read it until I was reminded why I waste thousands of hours a year writing this blog.

An un-named Muslim cleric from Europe issued a dikat prohibiting women from eating or touching bananas, cucumbers, carrots or zucchini. Speaking to the Egyptian religious publication el-Senousa News, the cleric explained that if women liked these otherwise phallic and unholy foods they should have a third party cut them up for them in another room. He suggested a male relative like a father, or a brother, or maybe their husbands as long as things didn't get out of hand. Okay, I added that last bit. The cleric did not go into the creepy ramifications of asking your dad or uncle to slice you up a zucchini. I wish he had.

This cleric, who is unusually sexually repressed even by the standards of most extremely repressed religious fanatics, also warned women against holding these food items in public places like supermarkets because the act of holding them would be "harmful" to the women. The last thing this guy wants is women holding dinner ingredients and thinking about dessert.

At first I thought, wow, these Muslim clerics really have way too much time on their hands.

But then I thought about it, and now I don't think the cleric went far enough in his efforts to suppress women in the name of religion. I also think this good man of God should have forbidden women from the following:

Riding on airplanes
Ordering cheesy breadsticks at Pizza Hut
Going to baseball games because of multiple temptations
Polka parties because of the invariable bratwurst infestation, plus, that music is salacious
Using writing utensils - especially those giant ones you get at the museum sometimes
Owning daschunds
Sending nutlogs and fruitcakes to their friends as holiday gifts
Being Facebook friends with Anthony Weiner
Calling the Fire Department
Watching 'Hunt For Red October'

In other news about lack of self-control, Majlis al-Ifta al-Aala, Saudi Arabia's highest Islamic council recently announced they had concluded that if women were allowed to drive there would "be no more virgins" in the country in ten years. My first thought was that they thought the women would all crash into something, but they were obviously deeper thinkers than me because they attributed the national loss of virgins to the "surge in prostitution, pornography, homosexuality and divorce" that would inevitably result in having chicks behind the wheel. This was something I hadn't contemplated before whilst stuck in traffic behind a woman applying her mascara.

Not to be outdone, Saudi Arabia's Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (honestly, I did not make that up), decreed that some women's eyes were far too alluring for regular pious men to withstand looking at, so those women with extra "tempting" eyes needed to cover them up as well, along with all the other stuff men find so interesting to look at.

Ladies, remember this the next time some religious lunatic shoots up an Army base in the name of Jihad and your President calls it an "incident of workplace violence."

God pointed me to Pamela Geller's 'Atlas Shrugged' blog for information on this story.

Note at the Bottom: I would just like to say to anyone issuing a fatwah against me that I completely agree with everything I learned from my research about fruits and vegetables and how women are obviously not capable of thinking of men when they make a salad or banana split. And if you could find a way to ban broccoli - for men and women - I would be most obliged. Also, if you are planning on blowing up my car or kidnapping me, could you wait until after Christmas?

Remembering Pearl Harbor

2011-12-07T09:57:00.001-05:00

This video contains recently surfaced color film of the aftermath of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Some of the video is graphic and I in no way mean to be disrespectful by posting it. I do however believe that one does not do justice to the lives that were lost by "remembering" a sanitized and edited version of the events. We either remember in detail, or we forget in fog.

Ohio Third Grader Removed By State Officials Because of His Weight

2011-12-06T09:48:00.000-05:00

Last month, authorities in Ohio removed a nine year-old third grader from his home because of his weight. Last year the mother took the boy to a local hospital to seek a cure for his sleep apnea and that's when authorities became aware of his weight. According to social workers on the case, they worked with the family for about a year before making the decision to remove the child from his mother's care, after he had successfully lost a few pounds but gained them back.

The child weighed over 200 pounds.

He is now in foster care.

Much discussion took place about the rights of parents versus the rights of the state, but then the story faded away.

I don't claim to have knowledge sufficient to make a judgement in this case but I am curious about a few things:

What are the qualifications of the social workers who made the decision to remove the boy from his home?
What are their backgrounds and personal histories? Have they comported themselves in their lives in such a way that gives them the gravitas to make such important decisions about the lives of others?
What is the history of the foster family that is now taking care of him? Are they better people than the child's own mother, and who exactly made that judgement?
Is the State going to remain responsible for the boy's potential pyschiatric needs as well as those of the mother? Years later, when the unseen psychological damage this is may be causing the boy comes to light, will the social workers on the case be interested in helping him, or will they claim he is of age so he is not their responsibility?
What emotional support is the state providing the mother?
Does the boy have a predisposition to obesity? If so, is it genetic?
Is the state right to intervene on a child's behalf because of potential health problems in the future?

I'm afraid too often we ask the wrong questions.

Wayne Hills HS Update, Or, Anger Management Should Be Added to the Core Curriculum

2011-12-03T09:13:00.001-05:00

The acting commissioner for the New Jersey State Board of Education has upheld an administrative law judge's ruling that the nine suspended Wayne Hills HS players should sit out today's championship game against Old Tappan HS.

Alot of people, including attorneys, students and parents, are of the opinion that this rush to judgment is a result of the Penn State scandal, but I contend the opposite: The nine players would have played in spite of their alleged involvement in a criminal offense (assault) if people weren't paying attention to the pervasive mentality in scholastic athletics that football programs are to be protected regardless of the ethical costs to the institution.

In other news, responses are running 48 - 0 against my opinion, mostly because I a) don't know the facts, or b) am a @#$@%:_) @@$%^&*. Based on the language and the appalling grammar, I am guessing that 100% of the responses are from angry high school students who need to worry more about their English grades and less about football.

Although not cited in the previous post, all the information contained in that post were taken from the following sources: New York Daily News, New York Times, Newark Star-Ledger, WABC and WNYW.

Penn State Vs. Wayne Hills High School: Winners On the Field, Unethical Losers Off the Field

2011-12-02T11:00:00.001-05:00

At a house party in Wayne, NJ, on October 29, two teenagers were beaten in an altercation which left one of the teenagers lying unconscious in the middle of the road. The beaten teens were football players from Wayne Valley High School and the perpetrators were identified as football players from Wayne Hills High School. Showing an amazing amount of cowardice, the young men who did the beating have not stepped forward to claim responsibility for their acts, and have decided to let other innocent students take the fall with them.

One for all. All for one. We play as a team. We assault people as a team.

Nine student athletes from Wayne Hills High School were subsequently suspended from taking part in football activities by the Board of Education, and a judge has upheld those suspensions. As of this writing, another appeal is waiting to be heard which would allow the suspended players to play in a State Championship game tomorrow (Saturday, December 3). The students who were left beaten in the road have not filed an appeal regarding the beating they took at the hands of the Wayne Hills HS football players.

It's all about the Big Game.

At a Board of Education meeting on November 17, Wayne Hills football coach Chris Olsen gave an "impassioned plea" to let his suspended players play.

It's all about the Big Game. Football is important. Scholarships are important. The beaten kids didn't die or anything.

Many people in the football hierarchy at Wayne Hills HS claim that the kids who were suspended will have their identities released by default because they won't be at the Big Game, and this will ruin their lives.

This is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. If Coach Olsen, or anyone at Wayne Hills HS, is so concerned about protecting the identities of his minor players, then he should just forfeit the game and protect the kids himself. Oh wait, forfeit the Big Game? No way, football dynasties never forfeit the Big Game. Or Coach Olsen could use his position as a leader of young men to convince the perpetrators to step forward and face the consequences of their actions. Word has it the students who actually did the beating are Coach Olsen's best players, and how can you win the Big Game if your best players aren't suited up? But to people like the football hierarchy at Wayne Hills HS morality has nothing to do with winning football championships.

Coach Chris Olsen (standing) and players from his Wayne Hills HS
football team attend a Board of Education meeting last month to
appeal for reinstatement of nine players who were charged with
aggravated assault and later suspended from the team.
Photo: New York Daily News

On November 18, a pep rally was held at Wayne Hill HS. Members of the Junior class wore tee-shirts with the words "the police." During the rally the football team shouted "F*** the police" at the Juniors. Faculty eventually stopped the chanting, but now we all have a good idea what kind of young men are formed in Coach Olsen's program.

The kids have lawyered up because they want to play in the Big Game and they want college scouts to be able to see them play so they can get scholarships and maybe even be in the NFL someday. Their coaches and parents have been coddling them and making them feel special since Pop Warner, and no beaten up kid from a cross-town rival high school is going to make all that effort go for naught. The claim is that a criminal record might hurt their son's chances of getting a scholarship. The kids who were beaten will likely not get a chance to strut their football prowess in any Big Games in the near future, and their sholarship chances are unknown.

Darren DelSardo, the attorney for one of the minors involved said his client is innocent and that his client is "already having stomach pains, throwing up." DelSardo didn't mention whether he thought it was wrong or not that the perpetrators of the assault have not manned-up and taken responsibility for their actions. He also didn't mention how the assaulted kids were doing, but then again, that's not his job.

The suit filed on behalf of the suspended students contained the following bit of sage legality: "...the students were denied due process in the administration's decision" to suspend the players because the "alleged criminal actions were separate from school functions." Which pretty much means that what these kids do outside of school is of no consequence as long as they're ready for the Big Game.

It's all about the Big Game. Raising young men to become good citizens is not the issue.

Attorney's for the students who didn't get beaten and left unconscious on the side of the road also maintain that at least two of the suspended students weren't even there. In this case the Football Code of Ethics prevents the kids who are guilty from protecting the innocent kids by stepping forward, while the innocent kids keep their big mouths shut to protect the guilty. I wonder if that was their own choice or if someone convinced them to keep quiet? No matter how you look at it, this is a code of false morality.

If you were up in arms because former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky raped little boys in the showers at Penn State, but you think the kids at Wayne Hills HS should play in the Big Game tomorrow, your situational ethics need adjusting.

In one case a sick individual committed heinous crimes to satisfy his own perverted needs and an entire football hierarchy hid the truth to protect the program. In the other case a few sick individuals beat rival football players senseless and an entire football hierarchy is fighting to sweep the assaults under the carpet to protect the program.

Rah rah sis boom bah, hit 'em again, harder, harder.

An Obama Letter To Herman Cain and His Supporters, Especially Those Who Are New to Politics

2011-12-02T09:32:00.001-05:00

On September 28, I endorsed Herman Cain to be the Republican candidate for president (An Early Endorsement for Herman Cain). I had some reservations about his foreign policy skills but I am a flat-taxer and I want a business-person in the White House. Those positions haven't changed.

However, for whatever it's worth I am withdrawing my support for Cain. Simply put, a man who admits to giving money to another woman for thirteen years without his wife's knowledge can't be trusted to do the nation's business. I was willing to let the story play out in regards to his other accusers, but, where there's smoke there's fire and the country is in far too much trouble right now to elect a man who cannot make proper judgements in his personal life. Errors happen and people make stupid decisions, but there comes a time when the stupid decisions stop. If stupid decisions continue by the time a person has reached Mr. Cain's age and level of success, they're no longer stupid decisions, they're calculated ones.

To say I am disappointed by Mr. Cain is an understatement. But, the reality is, politics is an ugly business filled with ugly people. I do not feel sorry for Cain. I may at some point feel bad for his campaign workers and his family but I'll withhold that judgement until the full story comes to light.

I do feel badly for the people who were new to politics -- in particular young college-aged conservatives -- who jumped on the Cain Train because it was highlining in fresh political air. They have been duped either by Mr. Cain's ignorance or avarice, and so their cynicism begins.

I say hold off on the cynicism and keep your idealism and enthusiasm on the front burner. Life happens in stages and so does political reform. It appears we may all have been sold a faulty bill of goods by Mr. Cain, but that shouldn't stop us from embracing the next candidate who reflects what we want from our governmental officials.

If we allow our cynicism and disappointment in our political process to grow we will loose. There are good people out there -- even those with faults -- who are genuine and capable. The vetting process is important to prevent another Barack Obama from ever happening again, and sometimes that vetting process makes those of us who jump on a bandwagon early look like fools.

But we are no greater fools than those who choose to deceive us by hiding their faults.

By his own admission, Mr. Cain has proven that he is not fit to lead the free world.

People Who Should Apologize To Me On My Birthday

2011-12-01T09:33:00.001-05:00

Today is my birthday. I am thankful for lot's of things. Okay, now that we've gotten the mushy stuff out of the way, let's talk about people who owe me an apology.

I am accepting birthday apologies from the following:

Herman Cain. I've never endorsed anyone for a primary before, but I took a chance because I thought you might be a different kind of candidate. Now, it seems to me that you're just Bill Clinton without the tears and political savvy.
Class Warfarists. If you've used the word "millionaire" in a derogatory manner at any time in the last two years you are gumming up the works with your pitiful lack of common sense. I bet if I gave you a million dollars you'd shut up.
Anonymous Blog Haters. Actually, the amount of hate mail I get is a good thing -- if you're not getting flak you're not over the target -- but you people who tell me reading this blog is a waste of time because of my occasional attempts at humor really frost my pumpkins. I understand when I miss the mark, but when I hit it you should give me props.
Barack Obama. Well, actually you didn't ruin the country, but you're doing a damned good job of making sure it all just starts to look like Chicago. Please stop.
George W. Bush. You and your supporters owe me an apology for calling yourselves "conservative" because you really @#*:-) it up for those of us who really understand conservative politics. Seriously, if I was a nincompoop and didn't understand how things work I'd blame it all on you too.
The American People. Please stop dabbling in politics because it's obvious none of you know what the hell you are doing. If you're not going to check with me before you vote next time, please stay home.
Ron Paul. You're doing for Libertarians what Barry Goldwater did for Conservatives. The only problem is I'll be too old to enjoy the benefits when someone playing with a full deck finally shows up on the national Libertarian stage.
The Democrat Party. You're supposed to elevate people who were voted "Most Likely to Succeed" in high school, not people who were voted "Class Clown."
The Republican Party. Or as I like to call you "Democrat-Lite." Either fish or cut bait, but you have to stop messing around because its past time to get serious and act like grown-ups.
The Mass Media. I remember who you people were in high school and college. And now you're running public opinion. Enough said.

I'm glad I got that off my chest. Now where the hell's my cake?

How To Shut Iran Up and Stick Our Giant American Thumbs In Saudi Arabia's Eye While We're At It

2011-11-30T12:47:00.001-05:00

The rabble in Iran has been aroused again. This time they're picking on the British because of the new sanctions being placed on Iran by us and them, and they can't find us anymore because we split thirty-two years ago. All British diplomats have been pulled from Iran and all Iranian diplomats have 48 hours to pack up their carpeting and cheap Armenian suits and get out of Great Britain. This is a good thing.

A better thing would be to drop our giant capitalist L.L. Bean hiking boots on their throats by putting them out of business. This can be done in a simple 10 step program:

Round up everyone in this country who is against American energy self-reliance and tell them flat out, "Listen Jeremy, stop getting in the way. If you want to go green there are a lot of undeveloped countries around the world you can take you and your hemp sweater to, but we're going to become independent again, so don't say we didn't warn you."
Tell the EPA they'd better buy a lot of mops and buckets because there's going to be American oil, gas, and coal everywhere
Go knock on Canada's door and explain to them how sorry we are that we have a guy in the White House who sort of doesn't understand anything other than getting elected, and that we sure would like them to bring their pipeline to the border on North Dakota because we've reconsidered and decided being grown-ups is the only way to save our asses, so on second thought we're going to build that pipeline after all, and Tim Horton's is way better than Dunkin' Donuts
Personally visit every oil, coal and gas worker in the country and tell them how really sorry we are for being so insensitive and that we'll never let it happen again, and now that we've cleared all of that up can you please go back to work
Visit the moose in Alaska and tell them they should start looking for new migratory routes in the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve or get used to munching breakfast next to oil derricks and refineries. If the moose tell us they are unhappy with that we should tell them Canada is accepting moose Visa requests
Flood America with oil -- no dope, not literally, figuratively and capitalistically.
Watch the world price of oil plummet
Stick our elbows in our neighbor's ribs and guffaw as the kind-hearted folks in the Middle East start scrapping their solid gold bidets to buy camel feed
Refuse to answer the phone when Saudi Arabia robo-calls us with their end-of-year specials on light sweet crude
Teach future generations about the folly of American foreign policy in the 20th Century but ensure them that America eventually came to its senses and broke the bonds of slavery to countries that would rather see us dead

It's not that hard to do America. We just need a little will and backbone and we need to teach the ignorant among us about what needs to be done so we can live the kind of lives the Occupy Whatever folks are demanding we let them live.

The American Path To Hell: Heaven Helps Those Who Help Themselves and County Welfare Agencies Take Care of the Rest

2011-11-28T14:16:00.000-05:00

Don't get me wrong, I truly feel bad for kids who have been put in bad situations by stupid parents, and I feel bad for adults who are having a tough time right now, but I can only feel so bad. I have to save some sympathy for myself and having been in their shoes, my empathy informs me that none but themselves shall save them. I also feel slightly annoyed that I constantly have to qualify every criticism I have of the Left with silly, obvious statements like the one you just read. Maybe someday...

I have been broke before. No car, bologna-ends-for-$0.29-at-the-supermarket-broke. The wolves have been at my door, and as much as I would have liked the nice lady from the county to come and give me a handout, I found a way to work and earn enough money to get by. I took what work was available and I made the best of it. I have never been humiliated earning a dollar and I simply cannot feel sorry for a full-grown, healthy American adult, regardless of the state of the economy. Sorry, call me callous, but the fact is I have no patience for those of you who would argue otherwise.

I watched the first few minutes of 60 Minutes last night, mostly because the remote was on the other side of the living room and I was too tired from eating and watching football to get up and retrieve it. That lasted about eight minutes.

The first segment featured that most faux-sincere "I-wish-America-would just-give-in-and-admit-it-sucks-and-ask-to-join-France" journalist Scott Pelley. He was on the case of the 250,000,000 Americans who live in their cars and only eat nasty school lunches. Click the link to watch the video after you grab some tissues and have your pet Yorkie safely in your lap.

There were little kids galore. All were hardened from living in trucks and cars and waiting for someone to help their dads and moms with handouts and things like that. America never looked so bad, and I was just about ready to call up some of my Socialist European friends and ask if I could crash on their Ikea-couches.

One guy, who looked like he was strong enough to kick both of our asses without breaking a sweat, told Scott how he would sit on a cooler next to his car as his kids slept in it. They parked in the parking lot of a local hospital so they could use the bathroom (and presumably take advantage of the health care that's available for indigent people). They were down to their last orange when a nice lady from the county came along and gave them some money for a motel room.

Scott Pelley looked like he was going to pop a vein from all of the sincerity on his face. Then I thought occurred to me that broke me from the spell 60 Minutes was hoping to cast on my common-sense.

This father was portrayed as both a hero and a victim, yet it became obvious to me he was neither. He made the choice every night to sit in a parking lot and feel bad for himself instead of getting up off of his Coleman-imprinted ass and elbowing his way into earning whatever he could to help support his family. He was a victim of circumstance for sure, but he was a victim of choice first and foremost.

Every morning on my way to work I pass day laborers queued up looking for work. Some are illegals, some aren't. All of them are standing outside at 6 AM every day of the week, regardless of the weather. I've never seen this guy standing in line with them.

When I pass by that same spot at lunchtime they aren't there -- because they are all working. Scott Pelley and 60 Minutes wanted me to believe that in Orlando, Florida, a perfectly healthy adult American man cannot find a way to make enough money to buy four oranges and a loaf of bread for his family? Really? You're taking his word for it without thinking about this?

Because you are offended by what I have just said, right now you are saying that it is humiliating for an adult American to have to stand outside waiting for day work so he can feed his family. Well, sorry to have to say this but you are wrong. What's humiliating is living in a car in a parking lot with one orange to feed your kids and not doing anything about it other than crying and waiting for the government to come fix your wagon. What's also humiliating is allowing some condescending, arrogant journalist to interview you so he can sell soap. It is not noble to humiliate yourself, even in 2011 America.

We need to stop exalting the wayward among us and start placing expectations on them that they put every effort at their disposal into being good providers for their families, good neighbors, and good stewards of the America we have inherited but are so far seemingly hell-bent on destroying. I don't mind paying taxes to help the truly needy, but I resent paying anything to anyone who refuses to help himself first.

Heaven helps those who help themselves, and the county takes care of the rest. Until the county runs out of money.

I Am Thankful For Barack Obama, and Unlike His Wife, I Am Proud of My Country

2011-11-23T10:12:00.001-05:00

I am thankful for a lot of things this Thanksgiving Eve. My house smelled like apple pie when I woke up this morning (my wife is an early morning baker), my daughter is flying home from college. I have a job that has its moments of not sucking, and other than suffering through the results of how I treated my body in my twenties and thirties, I'm in pretty good shape for the shape I'm in.

I'm also an American. Granted, the Obama Administration, most of the Democrat party and the totality of the MSM are trying to make me think that's a bad thing, but they simply do not have the same life experience I have. Is my life perfect? To someone living in Coite d'Ivoire, or a Mexican teenager crossing the desert in Arizona so he can go to Las Vegas and bus tables, its as near to perfect as it can be. The world is a sucky place to live in, and the amount of suckiness we deal with here pales in comparison to most of the rest of the world. I still judge the goodness of a place by the amount of people trying to live there or emulate it. The American political system is an embarrassment because of the fools we have put in charge, but the people and the country itself are unique among all countries.

That being said, I struggle with nationalism because of my philosophical beliefs, but being a pragmatist, I'm blessed to fly an American flag on my porch and I want nothing more than for every citizen on earth to be able to say that about their own circumstance. Don't be fooled by the Democrat's portrayal of other people's perception of this country. Other than the hard-core Seventh Century anachronists among the crazy wing of Islam, we are still admired for our generosity, spirit and industriousness. The recklessness of ill-informed and oft times poorly intentioned foreign policy notwithstanding.

But most of all, speaking politically, I am thankful for Barack Obama. His complete and utter ineptitude and malice toward the principles most Americans still hold dear will serve as a wake call to us all. Obama's wake-up call will make the post-Carter wake-up call look like an errant hit of the snooze alarm as we look back from history. As long as we heed it.

Barack Obama has no awareness of history, political science, or philosophy while at the same time he has a distorted view of his abilities and his place in the world. This is a good thing. The American people gifted Obama the White House because we took the words of a smattering of political agendists who view being mad at America as no different than harboring resentment toward their dads.

No one paid attention to Obama, his history, his ideologies or his abilities as we looked the other way and gave him the run of the joint like a love-sick teenager hopes her prom date doesn't notice her acne. And now we've been reminded just how silly it is to depend on a bureaucrat to provide anything other than bureaucracy.

Cults of personality, idol worship, genuflecting to royalty, and kissing up to smarmy pointy-headed politicrats is not the American way, and I have faith my neighbors will understand this...even the ones who voted for Obama the first time because they thought they were actually doing something positive.

That's why I am thankful for Barack Obama. Like a harsh smack in the face, he has reminded us of who we don't want to be.

Libertarian Manifesto: Our Government Is Completely Filled With Fools, And Its All Your Fault

2011-11-22T13:48:00.001-05:00

For some reason you people are enamored of a big, gigantic government that will hold your hand from the time you separate from your mom right up until your own kids disown you and stick you in a facility that's 100 miles away, and you know, "it's just too far to make the trip Dad, but I'll send you a Reader's Digest with a cool article about World War II."

That's because you all think you live in a democracy (you don't). Democracy is really nothing more than mob rule, and we all know how that works out for people who aren't in the mob.

You've been told you live in a "Representative Republic," whatever that nonsense is. You don't. You live in an oligarchy that's starting to do a really bad job of convincing you otherwise.

In my daily life, I live in a meritocracy, in spite of all of this stupid government that keeps constantly knocking on my door and trying to get me to acquiesce. You probably do too, if you work, or go to school, or do normal human stuff that doesn't rely on someone else to take care of you.

Since I live in said meritocracy, I look at what a person accomplishes. Intent is meaningless. As is potential. That being said, Barack Obama is an abysmal failure as a leader, and quite frankly I'm beginning to think as a human being too.

Unfortunately for America, John Boehner isn't far behind. He's just lucky that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi keep cutting in front of him in the line for second place behind Obama.

This is the government you voted for. You wanted big government filled with professional politicians, but what you got instead is a power and intelligence vacuum at the very seat power you ceded freedom to.

That is why the Super Committee is such a joke. It was never meant to succeed.

Obama wanted it to fail so he could wash his hands of making the right decisions for America, which are unfortunately the wrong decisions for his party and his himself
Reid wanted it to fail because Obama told him so and because Reid only really worries about Cowboy Poetry festivals
Boehner wanted it to fail because he figured the next Congress would negate the stupidity of it by the time the budget cuts kicked in. He was assuming there would be a president not named Barry in office by then

You were duped from the beginning because the people you hired to run your lives think you are all gullible fools. The Super Committee was just another way for these fools to kick the can down the road.

Good politics. Bad judgement. Horrendous leadership.

S&P is making noise that it is going to downgrade US debt soon because of the government's inability to govern. If I were you I'd start using your cash for kindling because in a few months it's not going to be worth anything, and we won't have any fuel to buy with it anyway.

Blame the government all you want. It's your fault though and the sooner you realize it, the better off your kids will be.

Note at the bottom: To maintain my sterling record of consistency, I will start to say extremely negative things about my congressional representatives, some of whom I voted for, in the next few weeks.

A Tale of Two Michelles

2011-11-22T12:58:00.001-05:00

The entire country, or at least the people in the media and those who think Obama is doing a bang-up job as prez, were all up in arms when Michelle Obama got booed at the start of the NASCAR race last Sunday:

Last night, GOP presidential hopeful Michelle Bachmann appeared on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon:

The song the NBC / Jimmy Fallon houseband is playing is "Lyin' Ass Bitch" by the Roots.

What Michelle Obama got was an actual, spontaneous, political and emotional response from a crowd of people.

What Michelle Bachmann got was a set-up from NBC and the producers at Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.

Where's the outrage? Where are the apologies? Where are the feminists?

Matt Lauer, Ann Curry & Al Roker: The Three Stooges of Doom

2011-11-22T10:21:00.001-05:00

Because I have not yet mastered the art of being a happy person, I woke up wishing I could go back to bed today. But I do that every day except Christmas (most Christmas's anyway, depending on what I'm getting that year). My unhappiness with being awake on a Tuesday morning was compounded by my bad decision to watch The Today Show while I ate breakfast.

Ann Curry is very worried about you
because it's going to rain tomorrow
while you're on the way to grandma's
house to freeload some turkey
and give the stink-eye to your
brother-in-law.

Here's what I learned:

Thanksgiving is ruined because it is going to rain tomorrow and 42,000,000 Americans will be stuck at LaGuardia airport in New York City. Well, they didn't exactly say everyone would get stuck at LaGuardia, but I think that's what they meant
Thousands of people who don't live in The Big City burn their houses down every year deep frying turkeys on Thanksgiving. They had the hokey staged videos of deep fried turkeys gone bad to prove it. Well, they didn't exactly say thousands, but I know what they meant
America is ruined because the Super Committee failed to do exactly what everyone with common sense knew they were specifically set up to fail to do. Everyone but NBC that is. Well they knew it too, but they think you are dumb and didn't know. Get it?
English kids didn't think Kate looked like a princess because she wore a sweater and jeans or something to some thing she did somewhere over there, and a couple of English people are upset so we should be too
My wife can't cook as good as Martha Stewart
Would you trust your Thanksgiving travel plans to this buffoon,
even if he stood in front of a map with clouds on it
and acted really sincere about the impending
doom of Thanksgiving travel?

Now, it's obvious you have some common sense or you would have blocked this website by now. Your common sense helps you realize that sometimes it rains, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes holiday travel sucks, sometimes you wish a blizzard would blow into town so you didn't have to spend so much time with all of those people.

But, understanding that the road of life sometimes travels on nice smooth roads as well as the kind of roads we have here in New Jersey is boring. Being an adult is boring, most of the time. Thank God. However, the 300 talking heads shouting at you on a daily basis rely on things not being boring so you will listen to them and buy the soap they are selling.

The Three Stooges of Doom only get paid when things are bad, so,
it makes sense to make sure things are bad.

Here's my advice to survive the impending holiday and all of the terribleness surrounding it:

Bring an umbrella
Leave a little early
Hide the beer from the beer-swilling members of your family until after the turkey is carved
Don't call your ex-wife and tell her you're thankful she's your ex-wife
Avoid watching television so you don't know how bad things are while you do what you do. (Actually, that's excellent everyday advice)

Why I'm Having A Hard Time Feeling Sorry For You

2011-11-21T15:17:00.001-05:00

I was reminded today of a beautiful, sunny, Saturday afternoon in July of 1979. It had something to do with the night before, Van Halen and Asbury Park, but that's none of your business. Yup, my memory (at least in this case) is that good, even at my advanced age. I spent about two or three hours that day sitting in a gas line, because that's what we all did in the summer of 1979 (except for the aforementioned bit which is still none of your business).

Just so you know, a barrel of oil cost about $15.85 (peak) and a gallon of gas went for around $0.85 cents (adjusted for inflation that's about 2.52 in 2010 dollars). I don't remember exactly how much I bought, but I find it hard to believe I would put in any more than two or three dollars since that's probably all I had in my pocket -- I was an absolutely broke college student, y'know. Since I was buying the gas to get my butt to school on Monday, I was pretty sure I spent the rest of the weekend doing things that didn't include driving somewhere or spending money. By the way, I'm not looking for pity here, key words: Friday night, Asbury Park, Van Halen. We make our choices in life, and that my friends is my point.

I was going to a technical school that later got shut down for falsifying loan applications, but its all I could afford at the time. I was unwilling to load myself up with student loans, figuring I could go to school on the five year plan (it eventually took fifteen). In the end, it worked out, but at the time it was a royal pain in the ass. But looking back, most of everyone's journey is in fact, a royal pain in the ass. That's kind of what it's all about...figuring out how to make ends meet so when you get older you can feel like you actually accomplished something.

It also gives people like me who were not necessarily born yesterday a chance to tell you kids to stop your bitching and apply yourselves, and stay the hell off my lawn while you're doing it. If you keep on hoping someone else will take care of your business for you, who's going to take care of it for you after you all put me away in the old age home?

Put that in your Occupy Wall Street pipe and smoke it.

Note at the bottom: I won't even start to talk about Iran, and the Soviet Union, Three Mile Island or Jimmy Carter. I don't think you caould handle it all at once.

Occupy Wall Street: "I'm Against Private Property, Not Personal Property," Or, The Left Begin To Eat Their Own

2011-11-21T09:42:00.001-05:00

I lost my company football pool because the New York Giants couldn't beat the Philadelphia Eagles, at home against the Eagles' second string quarterback, so today started out somewhat lugubrious for me.

But my dark mood was lifted when I watched this video from the Jon Stewart Show:

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

I'm not generally a fan of Jon Stewart, not because I don't think he's funny -- I do, I just think the Left and the MSM give his point of view far too much weight. That's why a Left Wing media giant such as Stewart taking the darlings of the Left to task for their childishness and vapidity is such a wonderful thing to behold.

Maybe there is hope for common sense afterall.

Barack Obama Just As Dumb As GOP Candidates

2011-11-19T08:24:00.001-05:00

Whether it's fair or not, the GOP candidates can't get spinach stuck in their teeth without the MSM swarming all over them like flies on road apples.

I don't recall the MSM doing the same for Barack Obama, but I do recall the flubs...

Google and YouTube are apparently having a little code problem today, so if the audio mutes after a few seconds, here's the original link:
Click to watch a YouTube video mash-up of some of our Commander-In-Chief's greatest hits.

Wallowing in Affluence

2011-11-18T14:51:00.000-05:00

I knew a guy who was always broke. Cash poor. Ambition poor. Happiness poor. But he had gallons of piss and vinegar to help him ferment his antipathy for everything that didn't lend him a hand.

I would listen to him tell me what a sad hand life had dealt him all the while he was raising an eyebrow at what he perceived to be my success. I'm not successful to the extent I want to be, but I get up in the morning and try to achieve slightly more than I did yesterday. I miss the mark alot, but when I hit it, its worth it. I've had some really bad jobs that in no way match my utter brilliance and sheer industrial magnificence, but my choice of jobs has never been anyone else's fault but my own. Ditto any other decisions I have made as an adult.

I'm beginning to think I am in the minority on this, but I just can't feel sorry for people who continually make bad decisions and then blame other people for the result.

I was concerned after our subject told me the wolves were pretty much chewing through his front door and that it wouldn't be long before all hope was lost. I went to visit him and we watched some television on his 48" hi-def, but we couldn't talk much because he was constantly getting calls on his cell phone. I waited for him to finish one conversation by surfing the web on his Mac.

But, his life sucked and it was most definitely someone's fault. He took this feeling to his grave, and for that I will always feel a sense of failure -- his and mine.

When I hear someone, whether they are Occupying Wall Street or sitting at a bar, complaining about how unfair life is and how America doesn't offer them anything, I am reminded of the people I have met in my life who have spent their time wallowing in affluence.

Sure the economy is bad. Sure there are crooks in the financial and government sectors. But once you only identify yourself as a member of a group -- Democrat, Conservative, 99%, union guy, or downtrodden malcontent -- you have doomed yourself to a life of jealousy and envy. There will always be a group of people who are better off than you. There will always be individuals who are better off than you as well, but when you begin to identify yourself as "you" and not a part of something, you begin to realize the complete lack of limitations in your path because of the country you live in.

Who Cares About Bon Jovi's Stupid Bees, Or, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) Joins In the Latest American Craze: Class Warfare

2011-11-16T15:08:00.001-05:00

I don't like Jon Bon Jovi. It's not because I think his music is twee (I do), it's because he held a fundraiser for Al Gore at his large and ostentatious Monmouth County mansion in August 2000. It was on a Friday, and to ensure that that very elitist of tree huggers Al Gore, got to his little soiree on time, the Secret Service shut down 15 miles of the Garden State Parkway which caused me to sit in traffic for three hours instead of being home grilling burgers and drinking beer. Come to think of it, an awful lot of cars sat idling on the Parkway for an awful lot of hours burning an awful lot of fossil fuel just to keep Al and Jon happy. Screw them. Hypocrites.

Enough with the kissing guys,
I just want to get home from work,
if that's okay with you.

I also don't like Bruce Springsteen much because when I was a teenager you either became a Bruce fan or you didn't. I like most of his music, but as for the guy himself? Eh, not so much and I have no other reason why. Shoot me.

He did wave at me after I let him pull in front of me on his motorcycle on Main Street in Freehold many years ago. There, I am like everyone else in New Jersey -- I have a Bruce Springsteen story.

Apparently Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) doesn't like either of these two rock icons either. But that's because they got tax breaks on their properties in New Jersey. Read Senator Tom Coburn's (R-OK) Rather Lengthy and Boring Report on Why Everyone Should Hate Millionaires By Clicking Here.

Bruce Springsteen got some tax breaks for leasing his Monmouth County property to an organic farmer and Mr. Awesome Hair himself Bon Jovi only paid $100 in property taxes on his property because he raises bees on it.

These were two examples of millionaire tax abuse in Sen. Coburn's report.

First of all, so the @#;-) what? These aren't Federal issues they're state issues, and if the laws of New Jersey happen to give tax breaks to property owners for keeping their land preserved as farmland, then it's none of the Federal government's business.

Secondly, even some poor people in New Jersey take advantage of our rather generous farmland tax laws and I don't see Senator Coburn taking them to task. For that matter I don't see that master of not-really-being-a-Libertarian-but professing-to-be-so-because-that's-his-schtick John Stossel, who is quoted frequently in Coburn's report, taking them to task either.

Enough with bashing successful people. Even if you don't like them because they're stuffy out-of-touch rock stars who pretend to be everymen and who haven't put out a good song in like two decades, they still have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

In fairness, the bulk of Coburn's report is about tax loopholes that dastardly millionaires take advantage of. Maybe Senator Coburn should stop being such a hypocrite and work on a flat tax for everyone if he's so concerned about fairness.

POP QUIZ: Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis: Ugly Words or Union Cheerleader. Take Quiz Then Discuss.

2011-11-15T15:11:00.001-05:00

Watch the video and the answer the question:

LINK TO NBC 5 Chicago Video of CTU President Karen Lewis.

On one hand, Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis thinks its okay to make fun of Education Secretary Arne Duncan's speech impediment, but on the other hand she tears up when talking about an unflattering cartoon of her in the Chicago Tribune. In her speech, Ms. Lewis also talks about the large amount of marijuana she smoked while attending an Ivy League college in the 70s because she was the only black woman there.

This is:

Fun to watch two denizens of Big Education turn on each other
An example of the hypocrisy of Big Education and Big Labor in general
An an example of a rapt union audience having moral turpitude by not booing a bully
An example of a person who clearly should not represent anyone for anything
All of the above

EXTRA CREDIT: Read more about Karen Lewis's self-admitted "ugly words," the backstory between Arne Duncan and the Chicago Teacher Union, and Ms. Lewis' completely unforced apology to Mr. Duncan: Click Link for EXTRA CREDIT.

Unless You Live In NYC Area You Probably Won't Get This Side of Occupy Wall Street Story

2011-11-15T09:23:00.001-05:00

The bulk of this post was taken from a report on New York City's Fox 5 10:00 PM newscast from Monday, November 14. For the full report click this link.

This is the cleverly edited frame used by CNN for their video link on
the removal of protesters from Zuccotti Park last night.
If you watch the whole video (click here) you'll find its really rather
boring and innocuous. But we don't watch content do we?
We just absorb headlines.

When I visited Zuccotti Park in October I tried to speak to staff at two adjoining restuarants, but neither would speak to me on the record about any effects the protests were having on their daily business. Off the record, they were not happy but did not expect the protests to last this long.

Mayor Bloomberg (D-NY without having the backbone to admit it) has so far been more sympathetic to the Occupy Wall Street protesters (who are incidentally mostly not New Yorkers) than he has been to the citizens of his own city. That story changed last night after a group of business owners in the area marched on City Hall yesterday to let the mayor know how deeply the protest movement has cut into their livelihoods.

Here is the complete text of the Fox 5 story from last night:

(NewsCore) - The "Occupy Wall Street" movement has cost surrounding businesses $479,400 so far, store owners said.

A New York Post survey of a dozen restaurants, jewelry shops, beauty salons, a chain store and mom-and-pop establishments tallied almost a half-million dollars lost in the 53 days since the Zuccotti Park siege began on Sept. 17.

"We're done with them!" barked one Broadway business owner. The restaurateur -- who requested anonymity for fear of reprisals -- said his profits drained as soon as campers moved in.

"My customers used to take food to eat in the park, but now they can't," he lamented.

With clogged streets, aggressive signs and stories of predators and criminals lurking among the knot of protesters, business owners and managers say shoppers are not taking the risk of coming to the area.

"They think the protesters are violent," said Jewelry 21 manager Danny Nia.

It's worst on Saturdays, when protesters parade up and down Broadway all day long, the businesses said.

"When they march on the sidewalk, everyone runs away," said Mike Rauach, owner of VIP Men's Suits on Broadway. "They kill business."

Some businesses have suffered higher staffing costs. Stubborn occupiers, for example, often hold impromptu meetings inside coffee shop Pret a Manger, forcing workers to stay hours past closing time.

"They'd keep asking for 20 minutes, 20 minutes," one worker complained.

And the coffee shop has lost loyal customers who now can't find a place to sit.

"But we can't tell [OWS protesters] to leave," the worker added.

The movement costs the dozen businesses just over $9,000 a day.

That figure doesn't include money spent on toilet paper, cleaning supplies and repairs, businesses said, as the tent dwellers turn bathrooms into personal washrooms.

On two separate occasions the owner of the Essex World Cafe has rolled up his gate to find someone had defecated on it overnight.

"It must be a good place for them to hide," the owner cringed.

Next door at Ho Yip, a Chinese restaurant, filthy clothes and underwear carpet the bathroom floor, the manager said.

"I have to pick it up," the manager groused.

At Cafe Health World on Maiden Lane, delivery calls have slowed down from Goldman Sachs, where mid-level analysts burning the midnight oil would often order takeout. Now, manager Alex Furkov said, no one wants to stay in the Financial District.

"They're making it look like everyone's Warren Buffett over there," he said. "They're our livelihood. That's what keeps the lights on in this place."

The OWS folks insist, to the point of whining, that their First Amendment right to protest must be protected by the very society they are protesting against. I have a couple of questions regarding rights:

What gives these people the right to keep other people from earning a living because they have decided they don't want to be part of a capitalist system?
What gives these people the right to leave their dirty underwear on the floor of another person's business simply because their mom is not around to wipe their bottoms and pick up after them?
What gives these people the right to force a business to stay open past its posted operating times (thereby incurring extra cost to the owner) because they want a warm place to meet?
What gives these people the right to defecate where it is convenient for them to defecate?

Nancy Pelosi asked God to bless the Occupy Wall Street protesters, but I would implore Him to bless them and her with some common sense and civility first.

After that we can talk politics.

Veteran's Day

2011-11-11T09:10:00.001-05:00

As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular.

-- Oscar Wilde, The Critic as Artist

Thank you to all who served when called and for understanding firsthand the vulgarity of war.

Occupy Penn State, Or, I Sent My Kid to a College Where Football Is Sacred...Little Boys, Not So Much

2011-11-10T09:34:00.000-05:00

College is one of only two times in life that a person knows everything. The other time is the period between 8th grade and high school graduation. Just ask someone in this age group and they'll set you straight. In fact, the MSM is so enamored of the sheer brilliance of the kids occupying various places across the country they are obviously willing to look the other way at the increasing number of sexual and property crimes being committed within the so-called "communities" springing up around the Occupy protests.

College kids shouldn't always be the arbiters of morality though.

Last night, shortly before 10:00 PM EST, the Board of Trustees of Penn State announced that Penn State football coach Joe Paterno and university president Dr. Graham Spanier were being removed from their positions. This was not only the right move, it was the only move the Board had. However, announcing the decision at 10:00 PM at a school with a segment of the student body as out-of-touch with morality and prone to poor behavior as Penn State proved to be not such a good idea.

What you have just watched is several thousand Penn State students protesting the firing of a football coach who failed to protect young children from a sexual predator he kept in his employ. Granted, it's about 1% of the total student population, but the morons chanting "Joe Pa, Joe Pa" and "We Want Joe!" as they destroy other people's property obviously don't have a problem when it comes to children being raped in the showers of their school's football program. I guess, according to this segment of the student body of Penn State, the school would have been better off if the scandal had just stayed out of sight -- like the victims themselves.

Meanwhile, Mike McQueary, the GA who admittedly witnessed Jerry Sandusky showering (and according to his Grand Jury testimony having intercourse) with a ten year-old boy, and decided to protect the kid not by beating Sandusky to within an inch of his life, but by leaving the scene and informing his coach, still has his job. Way to go Penn State.

Penn State, Joe Paterno, and the students of the university and their families have nothing to be proud of. Unless they are taking to the streets in defense of the dozens of kids whose lives were destroyed by Jerry Sandusky, the student body of Penn State needs to quiet down and do some serious introspection.

Just because Paterno was a legend on the football field does not mean he was not weak of character at best and morally bankrupt at worst. That also applies to every single person at Penn State who knew about Jerry Sandusky's depraved behavior and did nothing.

No amount of chanting or property destruction is going to change that.

Herman Cain and Me

2011-11-09T15:02:00.001-05:00

Once upon a time I wrote and produced print and television campaign ads for my local Republican club. I also helped with other things in the political theater that were not so noble. My experiences opened my eyes to the utter bullshit that is politics in this country. While I'm confessing, I acted for a brief period of time as press secretary for a mayor that was put into power by a political machine. The problem is that mayors of small towns in New Jersey don't need press secretaries -- unless they are so unqualified for the job they have been manipulated in to that they do need one.

I also worked very hard to get a fellow Republican elected to the local school board in my town. I didn't like him very much, but it was his turn to run, and well, we are talking about the GOP here. Anyway, after he was elected he got drunk one night and assaulted some cops in a neighboring town. Brilliantly (and drunkenly) he kept asking the cops if they knew just exactly who he was. Needless to say his political career was over. Mine was too. Not because I got drunk and acted like an ass, but because I put alot of effort into someone who did.

I know from whence comes my cynicism.

A few months ago I endorsed Herman Cain. I realized he was a foreign policy lightweight as well as being naive on a few domestic policy issues, but he came across as sincere and willing to take a stand. Policy comes and goes, but character is what we leave behind when we shuffle off the planet.

Now, according to a few women, Herman Cain is also a pretty seedy guy. One woman coming forward I could ignore, but five gives me cause for concern -- even though I know full well that anything is possible in the theater of American politics.

I flat out don't believe Sharon Bialek. She has a lot of instability in her personal life and she said that by coming forward with her story she hoped Mr. Cain would reflect on his behavior and understand the err of his ways. Her words sounded too much to me like that of woman with an emotional axe to grind as opposed to someone who was actually hurt in some way. She also read her statement relaying the facts of her story. I have never been sexually harassed, but my first serious kiss was from a girl who was a year older than me and who, in fact, scared the hell out of me. I remember every uncomfortable detail of it, from 1974.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

However, having gone through a messy divorce with a really pissed off woman who was not my first kiss, I also know what its like to have utterly nonsensical accusations tossed in my direction. There is no single way to handle being publicly told you are someone you are not, but there are common-sense ways not to handle it.

I am bothered by Mr. Cain's insistence that he doesn't remember certain facts, people or places as if he is above it all
He also comes across as far too naive for someone who has achieved as much as he has achieved.
He seems weak in the face of personal discomfort
He is defending himself by attacking others, including that old Clinton theory of a mass conspiracy against him

It was also revealed today that Sharon Kraashauer, who filed a complaint against when he was CEO of the National Restaurant Association, also filed a harassment claim at her very next job. Some people either have crappy luck or are liars.

My endorsement stands but I am waiting for the pages to turn. I am will to give Mr. Cain the benefit of the doubt because of the character he has shown me so far, but I won't hesitate to abandon him immediately if it turns out that he behaved in the way he is being accused of behaving. For the record, even though I never vboted for him, I pulled my support from Bill Clinton for the same reasons, but you people were obviously not paying attention to either me or Bill.

Mr. Cain, you do need to do a better -- more presidential -- job in handling the accusations being levelled at you. The press also needs to do a better -- more objective -- job in reporting facts, not suppositions, as well as keeping their own political persuasions at bay.

This is part of the vetting process that we should have done with our current president. Unfortunately, in 2008 most of you people couldn't see facts for the fairy dust in your eyes, so we got Barack Obama.

I'm going to let the process unfold before I make a decision either way.

Joe Paterno: Complacency Kills Another Legend's Reputation

2011-11-08T15:19:00.001-05:00

I am a firm believer that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is why I have a hard time with organized religion, young cops, bureaucracies and any institution that allows people to hold onto power for long periods of time. And if corruption doesn't bring down the entrenched, complacency surely will.

I am a football fan, and as a by-product I am a Joe Paterno fan. Paterno is in his 62nd year on the coaching staff at Penn State and his 44th year as head coach. Critics have charged for years that at 84, football has passed JoePa by, yet he continues to recruit at a high level and his program continues (for the most part) to win. He has also been seemingly devoid of scandal for the length of his tenure.

Now word has leaked that in 2002, receivers coach and graduate assistant Mike McQueary allegedly witnessed former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky sexually assaulting a young boy in the locker room shower of a Penn State facility. Sandusky had retired from the football program in 1999, but was still a fixture on campus. McQueary contacted Paterno who then contacted Athletic Director Tim Curley and university vice president Gary Schultz. The police were never contacted. Both Curley and Schultz stepped down from their positions this week, and both face prison time for lying to a grand jury about Sandusky's alleged involvement with under-aged boys
McQueary played for Penn State in the late 90s. After working during 2002 as a graduate assistant, he was promoted to administrative assistant. He is now Penn State's wide receivers coach and recruiting coordinator.

Sandusky was apparently able to access Penn State's facilities at his pleasure as recently as two weeks ago. There is no reason to believe that Sandusky's repugnant and criminal behavior suddenly ceased after the 2002 incident.

For Sandusky, Paterno and Penn State, more is yet to come. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times today:

The mother of Victim Six said she confronted Sandusky after her son, then 11, told her he took a shower with Sandusky after a tour of the Penn State football locker room in 1998.

"Jerry Sandusky admitted to my face, he admitted it," the mother said. "He admitted that he lathered up my son. They were naked and he bear-hugged him," she said.

The grand jury report said Sandusky apologized to the boy’s mother.

"I understand. I was wrong," the report quotes Sandusky as telling the boy’s mother. "I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won’t get it from you. I wish I were dead."

-- David Zucchino in State College, Pa.

Joe Paterno needs to step down, sooner rather than later. He choose to act minimally in an effort to protect an associate rather than to protect vulnerable young boys who were being molested in his facilities. Age is not an excuse. Being a good guy is not an excuse.

JoePa may be a legend and an icon but the simple fact of the matter is he knew about Sandusky's activities. He also did not sever ties with Sandusky after learning of his criminal activity. Paterno's desire to keep the scandal in house is a moral failure. If you were morally outraged at the Catholic Church for protecting the reputation of the Church by moving admitted child molesters to distant parishes, yet you are willing to excuse JoePa because you like him or his success, you are a hypocrite

JoePa is guilty of helping cover up a scandal to protect his own legacy and the reputation of Penn State's football program.

McQueary is no hero and also needs to step down. Sure he contacted Paterno, but he also apparently decided to forget what he saw after realizing nothing was going to be done about it.

Paterno may very well have assumed that he did the correct thing legally when he contacted his own superiors about Sandusky. But he not only is he the face of Penn State football, Joe Paterno is Penn State. Whether you like that statement or not, it's a fact. He is complicit in the cover-up and guilty of taking the morally bankrupt path by concluding his involvement was completed when he contacted his AD. Complacency and inaction in an effort to protect an institution while children were harmed in inexcusable.

After one's roots grow too deep, human nature insulates us from moral choice. Penn State's failure is society's failure, and frankly, I am tired of failing.

Tebowing: A Sign of American Hypocrisy or Ignorance?

2011-11-07T14:51:00.000-05:00

I'm not sure if Tim Tebow will ever become a successful quarterback in the NFL. Most football pundits dismiss Tebow's throwing skills and pretty much predict he will fail. Lots of kids come out of college and don't live up to their expectations in the hyper-competitive NFL. Matt Leinart (USC) and Brady Quinn (Notre Dame) are two such notable examples. But Tebow is national news.

Tim Tebow "Tebowing" during a recent Denver Broncos game

If you are a casual fan of the NFL you know who Matt Stafford is and you've probably heard of Sam Bradford. Both are college and NFL contemporaries of Tebow. If you don't live under a rock you know who Tebow is.

That's because Tebow is just about as polarizing a figure as there is in 2011. Sure he doesn't throw well, but the problem seems to be that he prays openly and unabashedly talks about his faith. He also did a Pro-Life PSA with his mother for the 2010 Super Bowl. The ad was considered "controversial" by many and was protested by many women's groups, which pressured CBS not to air the ad. (Huffington Post Feb. 7, 2010).

"Tebowing" -- the latest stupid social media fad -- is a way to either mock Tebow's overt Christianity or just have some fun at his expense. In his post on Deadspin, editor Tommy Craggs takes the Right Wing to task for being offended at people mocking Tebow (click to read). Unfortunately, even though he makes some valid points, it's obvious Mr. Craggs has quite the agenda against the Right and overtly religious people. So much for my search for objective arguments.

Packers tight end Greg Jennings kneels
in prayer after scoring a touchdown.
I have not yet heard of Jenningsing
as the latest Internet fad.

Athletes pray all the time. Some have so totally handed over control of their own destinies to God that they get really mad at Him when they drop an easy pass in the end zone. Who can forget the Buffalo Bills' Stevie Johnson and his angry Tweet to God after missing a sure touchdown catch last season? I don't know if God actually has a Twitter account, but I would assume that if He did He'd have an awful lot of followers.

"I praise you 24/7!!! And this how you do me!!! You expect me to
learn from this???How??? I'll never forget this!! Ever!! Thx Tho."

Jets and Cardinals players share
a post-game prayer.

I may have a different view of God from you, but I don't think He is so much of a micro-manager that He is responsible if you don't catch a touchdown pass. Or get you a parking spot at the Mall. It is unlikely He will drop a sack of nickels on your front porch so you can pay the cable bill. If you think He is a micro-manager, that's fine, I won't comment on your faith and you should avoid telling me I will burn in Hell because I don't agree with yours.

America likes to belive it is tolerant, but it's not, at least of people who don't conform with the current pop culture norm. America is also filled with people who are not able to discern between dangerous behavior and innocuous behavior.

Even though it was founded by people seeking it, America has never been a particularly tolerant place when it comes to religion. Or race. Or liking NASCAR. That's because America is filled with people, and people are typically not too bright when it comes to things they don't understand. And, well, someone has to go to Hell and it sure as hell isn't going to be me.

Tebow is a young man with a solid religious background and a public profile. As opposed to the myriad other professional athletes in this country who openly profess their faith, Tebow has also dared to disagree with the Pro-Choice movement in this country. Unlike other athletes who pray openly and leave it at that, Tebow entered the political arena when he did the Pro-Life PSA. That's why its okay to mock him and vilify his faith. That's kind of sad actually. He's not a leader, he's a kid with a belief and a platform. While I agree that the platform comes along with a certain level of public scrutiny, why is it necessary to publicly scorn someone you don't agree with?

Apparently in the America we live in, you can expect tolerance only if you parrot the corporate line as espoused by the MSM and dominant Left wing culture. The MSM and Left Wing find faith of any kind to be deserving of their derision and scorn. What does that get you? Voila! Tebowing and worse.

You have to question the fundamentals of any group of people who respond with condescension and anger to opinions and ideas that don't jibe with their own. I am talking to you, the Left in general and the narrow-minded amongst the Right.

We supposedly live in a free country. If Greg Jennings wants to pray after scoring a TD we should respect his rights as an American. If Tim Tebow wants to pray after making a play, and he wants to do PSA's with his mom about a subject he believes in, we should do likewise.

To do otherwise is to spit on the graves of every person who sacrificed their lives for the basic freedoms our Founding Fathers put their own lives on the line for.

In Honor Of the OWS General Strike Called For Today Here's A Few Things I'm Striking Against

2011-11-02T11:11:00.001-04:00

I am writing this column from a sixth row aisle seat on a Southwest Airlines flight from Philadelphia to Denver. It's cramped and funny smelling but at least I'm not sitting in traffic in New Jersey. Since I am looking at working a 16 to 18 hour day today, I though maybe an open letter to the people who support the general strike was in order.

Dear People Who Support The General Strike,

Today is the day of the general strike the Occupy Oaklanders came up with last week (November 2 General Strike - posted 10-28-11). I am joining you by striking against a few things that I think should be striked against (pardon the syntax but there was no other way to put that).

First and foremost I am striking against the general strike by flying to Denver today to do my job so I can continue to earn a living so I don't have to go camp in an urban park and complain about my lack of prospects. I was in college when Jimmy Carter drove the Ford Pinto that was the US economy right into a drainage ditch and I was just starting out in my career as Ronald Reagan dug the rear tires out of the mud and helped get my crappy American made econo-car back on the road. I know about thin prospects and tough times.

So here is what I am striking against starting today:

if you actually think there is a major political party in this country that wants to pollute the air and water, I am striking against you because you are stupid
if you actually think there are politicians in this country that want to make laws that get women killed on the floor of some doctor's office, you are stupid and I am striking against you
if you vote for people based on one narrow belief or belief-system at the expense of the defeat of a viable political candidate you otherwise agree with, I must take you to task because you are causing the entire country problems. Democracy is a process, not a destination
if you honestly think the Federal government has your best personal interest in mind and is actually enthusiastic about taking care of you, you guessed it, I am on strike against you
if you believe that regardless of the stupid life choices you make -- like taking out a mortgage on a piece of property you can't afford or getting a Master's Degree in ancient Greek pottery -- someone else should come to your rescue, you need to call your dad and mom because I am too busy trying to make smart life choices to waste time having sympathy for you.
if you think that Bill Clinton's sexual harassment accusers are politically motivated but somehow Herman Cain's aren't, I must inflate my giant inflatable rat on your front lawn
if you think there are jobs that are beneath you because you are educated or somehow superior to someone else, then I can't feel sorry for you if you can't get a job
if you have not taken the time to understand both sides of the political debate in this country and have simply signed on with one or the other without a full briefcase of facts, I must picket you because you are at the root of the political quagmire we are in today
if you truly believe that Barack Obama and his political party are working hard to fix things but all of us mean conservatives are getting in the way, I'm on strike against you

How will I accomplish this strike, you ask? Good question. I am just one insignificant Reality-based Libertarian blogger and I am only able to exert a slight financial pressure on the world around me. But I can do the following:

I will stop spending my hard-earned capitalist money on you or your products (that goes for people who are affiliated with you such as advertisers) if you are overt in your support of theories and decisions that are detrimental to the future of this country
openly and unabashedly laugh at you when you try to convince me that I am wrong about anything in Items 1 through 9
stop giving you a pass on your cute little naivete. It's not so cute anymore and its ruining the country
stop feeling sorry for you when you get mad at me for explaining to you how wrong you are
stop being polite as you proselytize your naive and ill-informed political theories in my direction.

Other than that I will go about my daily, freedom-seeking, capitalist existence with a smile on my face and my tongue firmly implanted in my cheek as I watch you live out your frustrated life because you have put your leaders ahead of you in your personal list of priorities.

Obama and the Trickle Sideways Economics Theory

2011-11-01T17:23:00.001-04:00

Ronald Reagan had naive faith in the intelligence of the American people which allowed his particular view of economics to forever be derisively called "trickle down economics." Sure, if you're not top economic dog and you don't think deeply on a regular basis this theory sounds condescending. But so what? Get over it. You're not rich and it's not America's fault.

Reagan would have been better advised to message harder on the "rising tide lifts all boats" description, because indeed that's what it does.

The term "trickle-down economics" was originally used to describe the tax cuts and reforms put into law by Reagan and the Democrat congress he worked with. Reagan was able to work with the Dems back in the day because the Dems:

were not the extreme ideologues they are today
were not quite as ill-informed about how the world works as they are today

For thirty years the Left and the wienie-set amongst us has decried "trickle-down economics" as the foolish bluster of the rich right wing. And once again the lazy GOP allowed its theories to be demagogued relentlessly so that now any theory that doesn't depend on the government greasing the skids of the economy gets dismissed immediately.

Now we have a president who believes in a completely different economic theory: trickle-sideways economics. Trickle sideways is the economic theory of giving money to your friends and supporters so they will continue to befriend and support you, and if they spend some of that dough on the rest of us, well, all the better. The basic tenets of trickle-sideways economics are:

give union members jobs so they can go out and buy cheap Chinese crap to ensure the middle-man class stays solvent
give union members jobs so more money can be put in Democrat coffers, thus insuring more money for union jobs
insult and ignore the vast majority of Americans who don't work union jobs and offer no real reform of the tax and trade codes to give those Americans an actual chance to succeed

Under trickle sideways, teacher, police, firefighter and public sector unions make up the bulk of recipients of President Obama's stimulus and "jobs" plans. This puts smart people like me in the position of coming out against teachers and cops and firefighters. Coming out against giving more money to teachers and cops is like coming out in favor of cancer because not everybody dies from it. Only a real bad person would support cancer, and only a real bad person would be against throwing more money at teachers and cops, regardless of the folly of doing so.

Let the economic engine of the American people loose and the Federal, state and local governments will make enough money (even under the current horrible tax code) to buy Mercedes-Benz firetrucks and truffles for lunch for all of those little kids on the federal school lunch program.

We've allowed the members of the intelligentsia class to mock trickle down economics because they don't understand it, while we've let them shove trickle sideways economics down our throats because the theory is sympathetic to their cause.

Brilliant job America.

November 2nd General Strike

2011-10-28T12:30:00.001-04:00

After the violence that occurred in Oakland this week, rumors have begun to circulate that a general strike is being planned for November 2. At first blush, this seems like just another Occupy Something maneuver to propagate the movement.

The last general strike in the United States was held in 1946 in the San Francisco Bay Area (see link) stemming from general unrest over wage suppression throughout the US at the time. The strike was initially a labor union movement but quickly morphed into a peaceful protest within the community-at-large. My opinion is that the details and history of this period of unrest in the US is largely ignored by historians because it is too closely related to the end of the Second World War, the beginning of the Cold War and the anti-Communist fervor of the 1950s. We are currently being instructed that general strikes are something they do over there in Europe because Europe has become such a Socialist cesspool. But we here in the US have a long and valuable history of protest.

Maybe it's time for the nation in general to voice its dissatisfaction with the government we have saddled ourselves with. Karl Denninger, who is largely credited with coining the phrase "Tea Party" (from his exhortations to mail tea bags to Congress in 2009) if not with being the movement's founder, has come out in favor of the strike scheduled for next week. Read his opinion here: Click Link. He makes a ton of sense.

The Tea Party movement has indeed been hijacked by the intractable wing of the GOP to the point that much of its original message of fiscal responsibility and containment of governmental financial incompetence has been lost. The Occupy movement is quickly becoming a bastion of the fringes of society who would be displeased and anti-whatever no matter what condition the economy was in.

Once again, the people who make the country work have been silenced.

Maybe it's time to take a day and shut it all down.

Reject Fox News, CNN, and any major media outlet
Generate no taxable income for the government, which pretty much means doing nothing for the day but voicing your unhappiness with your government
Generate no commerce for the day to show that the power of the country is still in the hands of those of us who generate commerce
Reject any connection to Big Labor, public labor and any other organized group with any political function whatsoever
Support the infrastructure of the country by remaining peaceful and community oriented

I am assuming that most of you regular visitors have concluded that I've finally gone over the edge.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

What I am simply saying is that the majority of this country, the people who keep the whole thing up and running, have once again been sheepled by the political extremes and the media. We sit back and watch everyone else decide what's good for us even though we all know we are on a disastrous course. Until we change that apathy, we have no one to blame for the shape of things but ourselves. When the general population takes to the streets the people who are currently guiding the national conversation -- organized labor, disorganized discontented twenty-somethings, semi-organized middle-aged Americans who are tired of the current tax structure -- will quiet down and take notice.

How quickly would the people we have put in power stop muddling around and actually get down to the business of course correction if they realized the citizenry had put themselves back in charge of the whole thing? It would take one day.

Hey! That Free Food Isn't For You! It's For People Who've Earned It By Pointing Out How Unfair the System Is!

2011-10-27T13:08:00.000-04:00

Two important things happened yesterday at Zuccotti Park.

The OWS kitchen staff is getting tired of making meals for the "professional homeless" and recently released prisoners, both of whom have been pretending to be actual, real, protesters in order to grab some grub. Apparently the Zuccotti Park kitchen staff hates it when one group of people doesn't take care of their own needs and then depends on another group of people for their sustenance. It should be noted that the "professional homeless" and recently released prisoners occupied Zuccotti Park long before the current squatters showed up. But, you know, whatever.

I guess no matter where you go there will always be people looking to take advantage of the rainbows and unicorns supplied by another group of well-meaning, fabulously intentioned do-gooders.

“We need to limit the amount of food we’re putting out” to curb the influx of derelicts, said Rafael Moreno, a kitchen volunteer.

A security volunteer added that the cooks felt “overworked and under appreciated.”

Man, I hear them, because that's exactly how I feel.

Read the whole New York Post story here: CLICK LINK.

In a related, and equally ironic story, Occupy Oakland got real mean Tuesday night. Depending on who you listen to it was either the police's fault or the man's fault. According to their take on things, the poor, down-trodden occupiers of said Oakland only behaved in a peaceful and well-intentioned manner, and then the police just, out of nowhere, started beating them and tossing tear gas canisters their way. I hate when I am acting peacefully and the cops just start hitting me with truncheons.

To quote the President, I am sure the police "acted stupidly." Our Dear Leader's "vilify first, think second" philosophy seems to be taking hold across the nation.

Because they were so, just, mad at what happened in Oakland, the Occupy Wall Street crowd headed uptown a bit and blocked traffic in an attempt to goad the police into "acting stupidly." The cops didn't, but ten protesters got arrested.

Truly, the Occupy Something Other Than Your Mom's Basement movement has become a microcosm of society in general: Some people are honest and work hard and some people are not honest and don't work hard.

Class warfare or simplistically blaming the target of your ire will never change that.

Excuse Me, That Homeless Woman Is Messing With My Protest Movement's Feng Shui

2011-10-27T10:23:00.000-04:00

I published this picture on October 10, 2011 of a homeless woman sleeping in Washington Square right in the midst of the Occupy Wall Street protests.

I took a ton of flak from some very nasty Leftists and Occupy Wall Street organizers over my comment that while I was there not one protester offered this woman as much as a bottle of water. To me, this picture represents the utter hypocrisy of the movement.

Ocean County Freeholder: With Choices Like This, What's the Point of Choosing?

2011-10-25T16:56:00.000-04:00

Today we're going to talk about an upcoming election for Freeholder in my home county in New Jersey. Freeholders are unique to New Jersey, because New Jersey purposely sets out to make everything as expensive and inefficient as possible when it comes to matters of government. Freely elected, they sit on boards of from three to nine members. Typically in most counties each Freeholder is put in charge of a particular area of county government as an executive and each member of the board votes on legislative issues. Some counties differ slightly in administration, but in my county, Ocean, that's pretty much the way it works.

There is one seat up for election in November.

Candidate Number 1, Joseph Vicari, the incumbent, has been on the Board since 1981. He is also the superintendent of schools in a municipality in the county. New Jersey has somewhere in the neighborhood of 600 individual school districts which are set up on a town-by-town basis. We do it this way because:

it makes things way more expensive which helps keep our property taxes so high no one can afford to live here anymore
it offers employment opportunities at exorbitant salaries for administrators, political hacks and union flunkies
it is a completely redundant system with no hope of streamlining or passing cost savings on to the taxpayer, so it's perfect for a corrupt little place like New Jersey

Mr. Vicari, 61, has spent his career in the public sector, first as a school teacher. He receives $97,837 a year from his teaching pension, and $18,500 a year as Superintendent of the Berkeley school system. Mr. Vicari offered to take a reduced salary as Superintendent because I guess in the current fiscal climate all the money he was receiving from the public till made him uncomfortable. The average Superintendent in New Jersey earns $163,000 a year (Source: NJSpotlight). Freeholders in Ocean County earn $50,000 per year, plus benefits. So, that means I pay Mr. Vicari $166,337 per year, which quite frankly is making me broke.

However, Mr. Vicari is also the rare New Jersey politician without a scandal, at least one that we know of. After forty years in public service I would pretty much think whatever skeletons he had in his closet would have gone public by now, so we have to assume Mr. Vicari is clean.

But, I'll have a hard time voting for him again this year because:

he's spent too long in public service
he's spent thirty years on the Freeholder Board, and quite frankly he can't have the same enthusiasm for the job he once did
he's already earning a public salary so he should be (if we lived in a common sense state) prohibited from earning another concurrent public salary

Candidate Number 2, Michelle Rosen, is an adjunct professor at the local community college (a publicly funded institution). She was elected to serve on a township committee in the early 1980s, and has unsuccessfully run for three other county or state offices in the years since. Ms. Rosen declared bankruptcy in 2002, claiming $662,000 in personal debts, and assets of $20 in her checking account and $2,170 in other personal assets. Fifty dollars of her personal assets were her dog. I have two dogs, and trust me, they're worth half that, but they're family so I would never consider them to be an "asset."

Since the 1990s, Ms. Rosen, 64, has also been arrested six times on disorderly persons charges for either passing bad checks or theft of services. She says her financial and arrest issues are "a private matter," and refuses to discuss them.

So here's my choice:

I can vote for a triple dipper who has held the same office since 1981. In the interest of full disclosure, I worked on two of Mr. Vicari's campaigns twenty and twenty-four years ago
I can vote for a person who gets arrested for passing bad checks and has run her finances so far into the ground that she listed her dog as an asset

As Bill, a writer from London. England, once cleverly wrote: "There is little choice in a barrel of rotten apples."

In case you haven't guessed yet, Candidate Number 1 is a Republican, and Candidate Number 2 is a Democrat.

Additional information compiled from Asbury Park Press reports, Erik Larsen, Staff Writer.

The Subdued Response to the Iraqi Troop Withdrawal

2011-10-24T13:53:00.000-04:00

Last week President Obama killed deposed Kook-in-Chief Moammar Khadafy and announced that the war in Iraq was over and we were bringing the troops home.

If we're not paying attention this was all great news and a banner end of another miserable week for the Campaigner-in-Chief.

But let's just get this out of the way first: Obama didn't kill Qaddafi. NATO flushed him out but that's on the efforts of the British and French. If Quaddafy was killed in March, then maybe Obama could tell us he did it. Freedom fighters on the ground offed Gaddafi. Sure Obama put us in the conflict, but the US had nothing to do with what happened to Kadafy. So stop crowing about what a great foreign policy president Obama is. He's not.

Now, let's talk about Iraq.

I'm not a nation-builder, and I'm not interested in sending our troops to ill-defined countries for ill-defined purposes. I'm happy the troops are coming home, but something about the announcement gnawed at me all weekend. Something just didn't seem kosher, if you'll excuse my mixing of Semitic metaphors. Friday afternoon is the time all administrations use to dump unpopular announcements. They're called Friday News Dumps for a reason. The underwhelming response to this overwhelming news was odd. Even Chuck and Dave over at NBC were decidedly lukewarm in their responses to their hero's actions. Why, they almost seemed objective.

Granted, the troop pullout is on the original timeline put in place by the Bush Administration and not the timeline Obama pledged to during the campaign in 2008, but still, why the reticence over the de facto ending of a miserable war most people agree now we should never have entered in the first place?

Approximately 4,500 soldiers have been killed in Iraq since 2003, and now we're taking down our tents and putting our Hummers on transport planes and getting the hell out of there. Iraq doesn't have a functioning government (I guess they're modeling themselves on us), and it's sandwiched between the seething haters that are Syria and Iran. There was no clearly defined "victory" so it was a war we could not win, but this almost seems like retreat to me.

From what I can see we are abruptly leaving Iraq for the following reasons:

the Obama Administration (including that annoying woman named Hillary who Obama stuck in the State Department to keep her quiet and who makes fun of our domestic politics on foreign soil) was not able to negotiate immunity from prosecution under Iraqi law for our troops. This is a simple tenet of international policy that was not a request peculiar to this engagement. This is a massive failure for the Administration. One that will have repercussions for decades to come.
Obama, always the campaigner, needed something for his base. The Occupy Wall Street movement has become an embarrassment, along with the economy and the American Jobs Act, so in a desperate attempt to at least get the far Left to vote for him, Obama hastily and without thought removed the only stability Iraq (and the region) has.

A year from now, the Middle East is going to look remarkably different than it does to today because of this decision. That's not a good thing. The Republican candidates for President better get their geography straight because you guys (and girl) just got handed two things:

The Presidency
A worse global situation in terms of our relations in the Middle East than we have today

If I am wrong I will be the first to admit it, but I offer Vietnam, the Korean Peninsula and Eastern Europe as all the proof I need that harsh and immediate troop withdrawals are not the way to sustain peace.

Around the World in 80 Trades

2011-10-21T10:17:00.001-04:00

Everything we do, and I mean everything, is the result of a trade. So let's just admit it and get on with the trading.

Except for being embarrassed by our parents and other family members, mankind's personal interactions have always been driven by two things:

"Hey, what say we go over behind that rock and cuddle? Trust me, I'm not like all the other guys you see hanging around the cave. Plus afterward, I'll go kill us something to eat."
"The old cavelady is complaining about my hunting skills. She says the little troglodytes are cold and hungry. How 'bout we trade some of these fine Sabre-tooth Tiger teeth I have for some of those Wooly Mammoth hides and shank steaks?"

You can occupy Wall Street or the basement of your mom's house all you want, but eventually you're going to trade something you have for something you want. You, my friend, are a Capitalist. Whether you admit it to yourself or not.

That being said, I really dislike television. Well, I love the concept of television and the way it lets me waste all that time between dinner and bedtime. But, I don't like to watch other people get murdered, or even the solving of said repugnancy. I'm also not interested in dull comedies that pretend they are funny while they insult me. Pretty much when one of my teams' games isn't televised my life sucks. Except for this neat little gem of a TV show I found last night called Around the World in 80 Trades. Check your local listings.

Conor Woodman, in the Sudan,
finds he is not such a good camel trader

It's a couple of years old but a lot of things around me are older than that, so, whatever. Basically, the show is about a smug British guy who was a commodities trader in London (who doesn't love smug British guys, except maybe smug French guys?). He quits his job, sells his flat (I like to call them 'apartments') and takes his liquidity to trade for things for profit as he travels around the world. This is a fascinating look at the third or fourth most basic human function, and I am riveted by it.

It is a fascinating look at travel, culture and the basic need we all have to get something we want by giving away something we have, with the hope of making a little extra in the process.

What I mostly take from this is the realization that Information Age humans are completely disconnected from what makes life fun and interesting. It's the one-to-one relationships we develop in our daily efforts to survive and better our lot in life that makes life interesting and fulfilling. Sitting in traffic after arguing with the wife about who paid the electric bill and then sitting in a cube hoping the next eight hours of your life will pass by so you can go home and watch re-runs of "Friends" is probably not what we were put here for. The same might be said for camping out in a city park because you have nothing else to do and well, everything sucks anyway.

I'd give you the link to watch the shows for free but I'm not a fan of free content on the Internet. Instead, here's the link to the BBC homepage for the show: CLICK HERE. I'll just assume you'll do a Google search and find the free content yourself.

Check it out you little closet Capitalist you, you might be amazed at what you are missing (metaphorically and entertainment-wise).

The Arab Spring Eight Months Later

2011-10-20T14:15:00.000-04:00

Reports coming from the pro-Gaddafi stronghold of Sirt in Libya is that Moammar Gaddafi was killed earlier this morning. Most major news outlets have confirmed this, and I have seen photographs that purport to be from Sirt that show an obviously dead Gaddafi.

But, like, everything else in the Middle East, only time well tell.

The experts are tripping over each other trying to get their opinions about how horrible, or how wonderful, all of this is going to turn out, in the near future, or many years from now. I'm not sure which. Actually, no one knows the first thing about how things in the Middle East are going to turn out -- not even the people in the Middle East. But there are two basic Western schools of thought you can count on:

If the person opining is a Conservative, the entire region from Morocco to Afghanistan is going to become one very nasty and hard-to-be-neighborly-with Islamist state that will eventually kill us all
If the person opining is a Liberal, happy days are here again, except death is bad, but in the end, everything is going to be like an animated Disney film, replete with a sexy but oppressed princess, a scurrilous but pure street urchin, a monkey and Robin Williams acting manic like usual.

The reality is that likely neither of the above will come true, but if I had to bet on one, it wouldn't be Item #2.

So here's where the Arab Spring stands, eight months later:

Tunisia: The health officer that slapped the fruit vendor who immolated himself and set the whole thing in motion has come out with her side of the story (Reality-based Libertarianism October 19, 2011). It clarified absolutely nothing, but it does put focus on the incredible chasm between the government and the people of Tunisia
Libya: Now the fun begins. Will the Transitional National Council keep its ties to the West or will Fundamentalist factions within Libya further the civil war to gain control of the country? Is the TNC truly pro-western, in spite of the many jihadists within its ranks? Will Gaddafi's two fatwahs against America be withdrawn? Will the Libyan people continue to suffer grievously while those in power figure out what to do next?
Egypt: It is glaringly obvious the the Egyptian Revolution was an abject failure. Women, foreigners and anti-military protesters are all still being oppressed, and in the case of Coptic Christians -- killed. All the Egyptian people did was lop off the head (Mubarak) of the beast (the Army) which simply allowed the beast to increase its martial power over the people.
Yemen: The US government is snacking in bed with President Saleh and his brutal regime. Maybe that's a good thing for us, maybe it's not. But it's certainly not a good thing for the people of Yemen. Expect this to end badly for everyone but Saleh in the short term.
Bahrain: We have a Navy base (NSA Bahrain) in Manama, and Bahrain is considered the linchpin of our interests in the Middle East. Dictator King Khalifah is every bit as brutal -- if not more so -- than any other dictator in the region. The difference is, he just likes to terrorize his own people, within his own borders. (See Reality-based Libertarianism April 20, 2011). This will be a protracted fight until Saudi Arabia either annexes Bahrain or the House of Saud falls.
Saudi Arabia: Personally, my estimation is most of the trouble in the region comes from one of two places, this is the first. Stop the political non-sense here at home, drill for oil and natural gas and put the Saudis as close to out-of-business as possible. Then watch the Middle East change direction drastically.
Syria: Assad is a homicidal and genocidal maniac and the world will be shocked when it eventually learns how many Syrians have been killed during the unrest there. Again, Assad is only killing his own people so it's easy for the West to stick their hands in their pockets and shrug as they walk away. We can't be the world's policeman, but we shouldn't forget what is taking place in Syria.
Iraq: In spite of the fact that two of the most hated presidents in the last ten years have their fingerprints all over this place, Iraq just might be our best hope for lasting peace in the region. That being said, it's time to force the Iraqis into coalescing their government so we can bring our kids home.
Iran: Yeah, well, this is just not going to go well. Iran is one of two state sponsors of idiocy in the region (see Saudi Arabia). The West needs to understand, quickly, that war is not only inevitable here, it's the only thing the Iranian regime will understand. In 2008, President Obama seriously blew the best opportunity any president since Reagan has had to help topple Ahmadinejad's regime from within. That will most certainly come back to haunt us all.
Afghanistan: No Western power is ever going to solve the problem of Afghanistan. Pull out, protect our own blood and treasure, and blockade the place with a Kevlar curtain. Pretty much you can throw Pakistan in there too.

It's not pretty, but we've committed ourselves to the region over years of horrendous foreign policy. We have no choice but to engage and get smart. We need an Administration that is well-equipped and well-versed on the region to protect ourselves and possibly help spread freedom to the people of the region. Forget money and oil, we need to rediscover who we were before we helped totally screw up the place.

Unconfirmed But Reliable Reports That Deposed Libyan Dictator Killed This Morning

2011-10-20T09:11:00.001-04:00

WARNING: Graphic. Click for another photograph of Moammar Gaddafi confirming his death. (Courtesy @SamWaddah and @Al Arabiya)

Unconfirmed cell phone photograph of deposed Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi taken shortly after his capture.

Photo Courtesy of Global Post.
Photographer: Philippe Desmazes
Copyright/Source: AFP/Getty Images

Raw video from Russia Today film crew in Sirte: CLICK FOR LINK.

Are You Ready For Some (Political) Football? The CNN Debate

2011-10-19T10:49:00.000-04:00

I watched the CNN GOP debate last night for a little bit. Like I've said before, there's just not enough new political ground to be tilled on a weekly basis. It makes good theater, and even better soundbites, but as far as good government? Not so much. The opening montage was more befitting ESPN's Monday Night Football than a debate about serious political issues. Packaging trumps policy. Style trumps substance. Meanwhile, we sit there and watch and think we are contributing somehow. Right thinking people (I mean people who think properly) everywhere should be concerned about this.

But, the MSM runs the country and if they want games, then let there be games.

I'll keep this short, winners to losers:

Newt Gingrich: Head and shoulders above the rest, there is no arguing that (as long as we're talking about governing and policy matters). Trending: Up
Mitt Romney: He's got lots of weaknesses (chief among them being an East Coast Republican), but he's got a lot of strengths too. Trending: Marginally Up
Herman Cain: Withstanding the attacks fairly well, but his complete lack of depth on matters of foreign policy are becoming painfully evident. I am sticking with my endorsement, but I'm going to need more than what I am getting. Trending: Down
Michelle Bachmann: She actually seemed a little less shrill and a little more important last night. Still a long way to go. Trending: A teensy-weensy-little-bit Up
Rick Perry: He placed fifth just because the other two were so bad I couldn't justify anything lower for the Rickster. There's just something about him that is plastic and thin of substance. Might it be his plasticity and thinness of substance?
Ron Paul: Herman Cain could teach him a thing or two about foreign policy. That's not a good thing.
Rick Santorum: There is just something monumentally unlikeable (and untrustworthy) about him. He's just got one of those personalities that kills off any redeeming quality he might have.

Anderson Cooper was smarmy and superior as usual, but he wasn't bad as a moderator at all.

Now let's talk about the real problem.

I've rooted for the New Orleans Saints since I was a little kid, something that is not easy to do in the land of Big Blue and Gang Green. I identify with my team. I love everything about my team. When someone on my team acts like a jerk I look the other way. They're my team. Your team sucks. When my team loses I make excuses. When they win, I call you up at midnight and make fun of you. I am a sports fan.

America is sports crazed. America is politics crazed. America has blurred the line between sports and politics. Now that we are using political debate to sell soap we are in real danger of losing the ability to discern between the good and bad of those we fundamentally disagree with. This will only further the divide between us, which will eventually push one side off the cliff. Don't think that's a good thing...because we're tied together. When one side goes off the other will quickly follow.

Politics is not sports my friends. Politics is the pathway to the future we leave our children. America needs to grow up and understand this. Now.

The Health Officer Who Sparked the Tunisian Revolution Speaks Out

2011-10-19T09:30:00.000-04:00

I Got Your Down Twinkles Right Here

2011-10-18T17:37:00.000-04:00

As many of you know, I have been fascinated with the Occupy Wall Street movement for like a week or something. But, as only some of you may know* I actually wanted the Occupy Wall Street movement to do something, to change things, to be a force for good in the political discourse of our country. I was rooting for the movement to have substance. I also root for the Knicks.

If you are a committed Leftist, Statist, hippy, agorist, communist, socialist, labor union dude, college student, college professor, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat, Eric Boehlert follower, or Rachel Maddow's hairstylist, please see the second note right before the video before continuing.

* - I am referring only to people who actually read this blog, as opposed to the myriad Leftist haters who have been slogging me non-stop with hate mail who obviously don't have a clue what the hell they are talking about.

** - Stop reading now, because you are very likely not going to get the satire which will cause you to then waste my time by tweeting me with inanity only to get intellectually ass-kicked by me before you block me. I am biased. I'm okay with that. I am biased against superciliousness, stupidity and people trying to be something they are not.

Okay kids, let's walk through the Seven Basic Hand Signals:

Twinkles: "This is to show agreeance to something." Now I never lived on a commune, and ever since I was a little kid I've found hippies kind of amusing, but I have to say I find it hard to believe that America's labor unions and the American Nazi Party -- who have both come out in favor of the OWS movement -- will ever use twinkles.
Down Twinkles: The first time I ever heard the term "down Twinkles" was many years ago when I had a friend who had a Yorkshire Terrier that used to hump my leg whenever I would visit her, but I haven't heard it since. I'm thinking the next time my boss asks me to work late I will give him "down twinkles."
Direct Response: This means there is critical information missing. Up until Occupy Wall Street came along and fixed everybody's wagon, we would just say "what the hell are you talking about?"
Clarifying Question: This means "there is a question I need to have answered before the process can continue." I have a question...why can't I just raise my hand and ask my question? Why do I have to make a hand signal that looks amazingly like an obscene gesture punks in the Seventies would make at the police?
Point of Process: This little triangle you are now making with your hands means I have gotten off the process. There was also another meaning to this that I learned many years ago working in Lower Manhattan but I'm not going to tell you what it is. Why can't I just say, "ummm excuse me, you're rambling or off-point or I need to clarify something or something? Where the hell is Vestman? I'm confused."
Wrap It Up: Means "you've been rambling." That probably comes in handy when you're hanging out occupying things with the Columbia U graduate student with the trust fund set up by grandad who also tried to stow away on a flight at JFK by hopping the ticket counter. (Warning: offensive language, drug use and chronic stupidity), or right after you've just smoked a blunt with a communist and you need to go to the kitchen area for some Screaming Yellow Zonkers.
Raise the Roof: Vestman actually said this with a straight face. Sometimes when I can't hear someone I politely say "I can't hear you." But most times I'm just happy I don't have to listen to them and I just stand there with a high school graduation picture grin on my face.

Now, if someday there is an Occupy New Jersey movement we will need the following additional hand signals:

Fugheddaboutit

Fugheddaboutit: This is a silent way to ax the person with the clarifying question who needs to wrap it up "what are you freaking stupid?"
Hey Stunad! You Annoy the Crap Out of Me!: This gesture is used when you've tried the Wrap It Up Gesture but the guy with the "Fear the Illuminati" sign just won't yield the floor so we can vote on whether to have bean sprouts or tofu with our Hard Lemonade apertifs.

Hey Stunad! You Annoy
the Crap Out of Me

The Maloik: Sometimes called the 'evil eye,' this sign is basically just a way to ward off bad luck, but if you want to put a spell on me for giving you down twinkles because I think you are childish and unserious, go right ahead.

The Maloik. Please note, west of New Jersey
this is often called the Hook 'em Horns sign.

I Wonder Whose Kid Mr. Deutsch Hopes Will Get Shot In Order to Give His Pet Movement It's "Moment?"

2011-10-14T13:36:00.003-04:00

Donny Deutsch, who's name I am constantly in fear of mis-spelling, is the chairman of Deutsch Inc. He is also the guy NBC trots out whenever they need to trot out a middle-aged know-it-all who is able to pontificate on matters NBC thinks I should be thinking.

In the video clip below Mr. Deutsch says the Tea Party "repulses" him and the Occupy Wall Street movement needs to "grow up." Oh yeah, he also says the OWS movement needs a "climax of class warfare" that results in a "Kent State moment."

If you still need more proof about the agenda of NBC News, then I know a park in lower Manhattan you need to go camping in.

Well, that got your blood boiling didn't it? Deutsch is most definitely a... he's a... dope, but he's a powerful and influential dope.

I thought it might be helpful to contrast and compare the Tea Party with the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Ten Things the Tea Party stands for:

Lower taxes
Governmental fiscal responsibility

Ten Things Occupy Wall Street stands for:

Wall Street sucks
Corporate greed sucks
The Tea Party sucks
You suck
Mom and Dad suck
College sucks
The police suck
Republicans suck
The financial system sucks
Everybody sucks

Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat Party, NBC News and college professors everywhere are all rooting for the Occupy Wall Street movement because it's not the Tea Party (See Item #3).

If you are standing firm behind the philosophy and ideology of the OWS movement let me remind you exactly what its cheerleaders like Donny Deutsch are rooting for:

Shout out to WeaselZippers for dredging this video nugget of Left Wing sophistry up.

The Week In Review: Occupy Wall Street Edition

2011-10-13T02:30:00.000-04:00

In some of the many hate messages I received this week I was accused of having a "bias" and of "being snarky" -- so much so that one anonymous Occupy Wall Street organizer suggested I change my last name to "Snarkey." I didn't have the heart to tell her that no one really uses that term anymore, it's so two-thousands.

First of all the my two favorite things about myself are my bias and what some like to call my snarkiness. But to combat that perception of me in my endless fight to be loved by all the people, I will now post the rest of the best of my pictures from Zuccotti Park with no editorializing whatsoever.

Egyptian ex-pats march down Broadway to Zuccotti Park

Zuccotti Park

On bronze statue at Zuccotti Park

Washington Square

The Freedom Tower rises up
over Washington Square

The Dartmouth GOP Economic Debate

2011-10-12T09:52:00.000-04:00

Here's a quick overview of how the candidates fared at last night's Economic Debate held at Dartmouth College and televised by Bloomberg.

The format was a welcome change and helped some of the candidates really push their message while it hurt others. The production values and moderators were so amateurish I thought I was watching some local access cable television program, so, enough said on that.

In order of finish:

Mitt Romney: Like him or not, he won this debate hands down. He was good on facts, responses and that indefinable quality -- gravitas. The obvious animus between Mitt and Rick is working in Mitt's favor. Trending: Up
Newt Gingrich: Now that he's stopped being combative his true strengths are surfacing once again. The fact that he's channeled his earlier churlishness into some good old-fashioned directness should make Newt a force to reckon with. Calling Congress "stupid" was the best line of the night. Trending: Up
Herman Cain: In real danger of becoming a one-trick pony with his constant 9-9-9 messaging. While I understand marketing, Mr. Cain needs to show his complete depth of knowledge lest he be accused of having no depth at all. It was fun to see Cain respond to attacks though, and it shows that at least in the minds of some of the other candidates, Cain is a front-runner. Trending: Flat
Ron Paul: Seriously. When it comes to matters of economics, there is no one better than Ron Paul, at least to this libertarian free-marketeer. This debate did his image good too. He can't win but I sure would love to see him as Secretary of Treasury. Trending: Up
Rick Santorum: The angry politician act is starting to wear thin. He's struggling so he has no other viable strategy (in his mind) than to be in constant attack mode, which will only make him struggle more. He has become a one-trick attack pony, and there is nothing more annoying than an attack pony. Trending: Down
Michelle Bachmann: This is where it gets really tricky. There is a dead-heat for last place, but I have to do better than just scoring them in a tie. Turning Cain's 9-9-9 into 6-6-6 as some sort of Fundamentalist scare tactic was just stupid. She had no answer of any import, but her hair looked great, so I put her in sixth. Her forced laugh at Huntsman's "price of a pizza" line about Cain's 9-9-9 plan gave me those special chills with that special name I won't name here. Trending: Flatline
Jon Huntsman: His hair was not as good as Bachmann's but it was better than Perry's. There is an old adage: Comedy is best left to the funny. Huntsman is not funny but his constant attempts to prove he is are simply, well, not funny. "I thought it was the price of a pizza." Dope. Trending: Flatline
Rick Perry: There was a shot of Romney answering a question about something hard with Perry in the background. He looked like a hearing person at a sign language convention. He also didn't seem even slightly interested in being there. I think Governor Perry is finding out that national politics is tough. Trending: Stick a Fork in Him

Occupy Wall Street Part X: So What Exactly Did I Learn?

2011-10-11T19:02:00.002-04:00

So, there you have it. Occupy Wall Street on a sunny Saturday afternoon in October. Let's take a look at some of the pics and people who didn't make the cut.

This picture pretty much sums it all up for me. The signbearer said she was directing it to the "thieves on Wall Street." The irony was just to much for my tiny little head to handle so I didn't engage her further.

In case you sometimes need to be hit with a hammer to get a point, she was not directing her sign at people who receive entitlements. Get it? I had a big plan to write my opinions on what I saw, but seriously, this picture is worth a thousand words.

Zuccotti Park was clean and I saw no
signs of any public urination or defecation.
But then again, this was a Saturday afternoon
and the police presence was huge.

Hippies gotta eat, especially when them munchies start acting up.

He calls himself Captain Student Loan. Somehow
his decision to get the Masters without a
job are now everyone's problem.

I wonder if Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats
actually know who they are supporting when they
laud the movement?

Most ironic of all, a homeless person sleeps on a bench in
Washington Square in the standard NYC avoidance zone
of sleeping homeless people. Ignored by the protesters
the entire time I was in the park, I did not witness anyone
share with her the plentiful food and water that was available
as part of the cooperative movement, nor did I witness any signs
of compassion for her from the assembled multitude.

So, like I asked in the title, what exactly did I learn?

I learned exactly what I hoped I wouldn't learn when I started out.

Occupy Wall Street Part IX: This Protest Movement Even Has Its Own Catholic Priest, Just Like When I Was A Kid

2011-10-11T18:03:00.002-04:00

Frs. Brian H. (l) and Stuart S. (r)
head up a "non-traditional" church in White Plains.

As we near the end of our journey its nice to see that some things never change. The Occupy Wall Street movement even came repleat with its own Catholic priest just like back in the Sixties. No good anarcho-confusion protest movement is complete without one. Giving in to the passage of time and the good sense acquired after that Catholic priest to anarchists and hippies everywhere, Father Daniel Berrigan, wound up on the FBI's Top Ten Most Wanted List, our Catholic priest is more, shall we say, like a banker or insurance agent.

I started the interview by asking if I could ask a few questions, and then we were off.

Stuart: All of our systems are collapsing and the choice will be cooperate with others, form cooperatives, just two people, five people, ten people to solve problems. You know, all the issues, whatever concerns you, cancer, fracking, nuclear energy, Indian Point (Ed. Note: Indian Point is a nuclear facility about 50 miles north of New York City and we're all going to die), these are all issues that people have. And there are organizations, go join an organization if you want to join one. But really to get to the grass roots level people will begin to organize around issues, because the systems are interested in self-preservation. The end justifies the means. Every system is more concerned about its own survival than it is about truth, or about love, or about change or about what we need to be concerned with. To me Jesus is the way, the truth and the light and to me that [message] has really been killed in our society. Our education dumbs you down, religion dumbs you down, politicians. It's all about money and power so if you don't want to be dumbed down you have to make choices and distinctions.

We jumped off and I asked what Brian did for a living and he said he was a priest. He then said he was at one time a Catholic Worker and explained that the CW movement, a pacifo-anarchist movement, or "personalist," found that their philosophy didn't work. We then talked a little about anarchy, minarchy and libertarianism.

Stuart: Ron Paul was asked a question about some college kid who couldn't get healthcare and he said "well, so what? That's his problem." The problem is how do you change? If everyone was living responsibly then everyone could be anarchists, everyone could be libertarian. Which is the question always for libertarians, how are you going to regulate the crooks without force? (Ed. note: I don't know, but I'm working on it, but for now I'll settle with minarchism) There always has to be some form of state. Which as our system collapses, first we're in a state of fascism but after that you would hope for some cooperation between people. If everyone lived responsibly we wouldn't have these issues. Eventually you have to face the spiritual. The liberals are devoid of any kind of spiritual center.

With that a really horrible group of musicians playing some brass and an overly loud bass drum walked by and our interview ended. Brian was my last interview and I was glad for that. He made sense even though he was envisioning a world we both know will never exist.

It takes all kinds to occupy Wall Street, some are delusional, some are naive, some are stoned, some are rich little college kids, some are labor union operatives, and some are idealists. I for one was disappointed in what I saw and heard and claims to the contrary, I learned that this movement may have started organically, but it will soon be driven by money and propaganda.

Occupy Wall Street Part VIII: One Doctor Says Eliminate Private Health Insurance and Our Problems will Go Away

2011-10-11T17:06:00.001-04:00

At Washington Square I spoke with a doctor who is a general practitioner in New York City. When I first interviewed him I was struck by both his passion and his compassion, but as I listened back to the interview all I really heard was, well, you're smart, you'll figure it out.

Me: What are some of the concerns that brought you here today?
Dan: We have a couple of concerns in our practice. We work with a lot of young families starting out and we see a lot of them losing their jobs, losing their health insurance, and maybe nothing impacts people's lives like losing jobs or their health insurance. Especially young people, in their twenties and thirties trying to get started, have really lost opportunities.

Dr. Dan G.
I just wondered when he came upon the 99% number.

Me: How do you feel about the new healthcare reform as it starts to get phased in?
Dan: It's certainly a very mixed thing. The US has hundreds of thousands of people go bankrupt with medical bills every year and certainly people deserve some security from going bankrupt if they develop cancer or they have a heart attack. It's very quickly [after] a person develops an illness that hundreds of thousands of dollars in bills can come due, and for a lot of people their insurance may cover [them], it may not. So alot of it is as a society that we choose not give everyone security if something catastrophic happens.

Me: Are we failing at making health insurance available to people?

Dan: Anyone can go buy health insurance but you may need ten or fifteen thousand dollars to buy it. I think there's been very little success in private medical insurance. As a system really it's not worked well in any society. In the US it's been very effective in making things very expensive and certainly in promoting a lot of high-tech procedures that may or may not be beneficial, as we've certainly just seen with the PSA test. Urologists generate a lot of bills, a lot of money and a lot of procedures, and they certainly have a strong lobby now to help them sustain those things.

Me: As a doctor if you had the opportunity to fix the system, where would you focus first? Health insurance? Tort reform? Or some other area?

Dan: Well I don't see where private for-profit insurance has been an effective model, so I think public health insurance has been effective in almost every capitalist country in the world. People who have a lot of resources do okay in the current system, but people who are in the one percent who get sick generate all the costs.

I cannot disagree with him on the bulk of what he says, but his assertion that the public sector is the panacea to our healthcare problems is simply naive and misdirected.

I pressed him further on health reform, being very careful to not refer to it as Obamacare or to state my feelings on it (extreme horribleness), but other than a cat-who-ate-the-canary smile when he first said it was a "mixed thing" the good doctor was not straying from his monologue on health insurance and following the European or Canadian model.

Occupy Wall Street Part VII: My Head Explodes Trying to Keep Up

2011-10-11T11:32:00.001-04:00

After Pat M., I spoke with Evan P. who is a farmer and glassblower currently living in Grafton, New Hampshire. To help keep your own personal head from exploding as you read this, I'll give you some facts up front.

Evan requested his picture not be taken, but this was his sign.

Agorism is a political philosophy that espouses black market capitalism and no government, basing all transactions between individuals. Usually referred to as Anarcho-Capitalism, agorism is a wing of libertarianism that is closest to full-on anarchy. The main difference between anarchy and agorism is the use of capitalist transactions (in the latter) as opposed to bartering and market cooperation (in the former).

Me: So the first thing you said to me is that you hoped I was not from the Libertarian Party. Why?

Evan: Because Libertarians are trying to run people's lives. I'm an Agorist.

Me: How quickly do you want change?
Evan: I don't know what you mean.
Me: There are no jobs, the economy is in the tank. How quickly do you see change?
Evan: Well, everything is always changing.
Me: How quickly do you see the change that you want?
Evan: Well, I'm making it right now.

Me: Change takes time. As a libertarian I want to gradually change the system so that the government plays a lesser role in everyone's lives.
Evan: Is that what the Libertarian Party wants? I thought they wanted to, like, rule people's lives.
Me: I don't know if you know what libertarians are then.
Evan: Not libertarians, the Libertarian Party. I've read their platform, well I read the one before they revised it and fucked it up and then I read the new one and its much worse than the old one. They want to become part of the government instead of withdrawing from it and stopping funding for it. We don't have to get involved [with the government] we just have to stop holding it up. We don't have to fight to push it over we just have to stop holding it up and it will collapse under its own weight. We have to build a counter-economy. We have to build underground economies and build the kind of society we want to live in now with peaceful voluntary sustainable alternatives. I think agorism is applicable no matter where we are, [at] any peaceful voluntary interaction. Right now we are peacefully and voluntarily interactiing so right now between us there exists a state of anarchy. If a cop came up and started interfering between us then there would be statism involved. But right now anywhere where the enforcers aren't there is anarchy. We are already most of the way there.

Me: Okay. That works on a one-to-one scale.
Evan: Everything is on an individual scale.
Me: So how do you handle the individuals who don't support your right to interact freely and peacefully?
Evan: Well, I don't support them. I would withdraw my funding from them.
Me: How do you handle the individual who is just going to take what's yours because he wants it?
Evan: Well as individuals we all have the right to defend ourselves. We have the right to organize into a group.
Me: Which then becomes a state.
Evan: Not if its voluntary.

Me: Sum up the root of what you believe in one word.
Evan: Love.
Me: What about in those instances where love does not exist?
Evan: Where does love not exist?
Me: I'll take you to some places a few blocks from here tonight where love does not exist.
Evan: Let's spread love all over the place until its everywhere then.

Remember when you lived in the Seventies and you would go to parties and everybody talked like this? I wonder if the Democrat Party will still hitch their donkey cart to the Occupy Wall Street movement after hearing Evan talk about hoping the government collapses under its own weight?

Patrick G. and Dave U. are living
the communal life in Poughkeepsie,

Next I visited with three guys from Poughkeepsie, New York, who live on a commune. Well sort of. The guy on the right has a wife (and I think a kid, but the recording became unintelligible as he explained his family situation), and the guy with the tape on his mouth doesn't. The guy on the left (striped shirt just out of frame) was pretty much incoherent so I couldn't grasp what his deal was. They were living an agorist agrarian life of farming and living off the land without cash or being part of the economy.

When I asked them how they put a roof over their heads they reluctantly admitted that someone was paying the rent on the converted garage they were sharing. They also eventually admitted that someone was paying their car expenses because "you gotta get around."

Their political philosophy is "spiritual" and they feel the root of all of our current problems is a "lack of compassion."

They're not leeching off of me as far as I know, but they are dependent on someone else for support. They're also not contributing much to the society they live in.

I've tried to be as objective as possible in compiling my reports. My mind was open and I was hoping to find a coherent philosophical movement as arrived at Zuccotti Park on Saturday. I take everything I hear from the MSM with a grain of salt so I wanted to learn for myself. Listening back to the recordings I made, I am confident my objectivity is intact.

Tune in. Turn on. Drop out. At least until the puppet-masters in the Democrat Party grab on to you to help them form their version of the Tea Party.

Occupy Wall Street Part VI: UAW In the House

2011-10-11T09:30:00.000-04:00

Pat M., a 73 year-old retired UAW worker who also served in the US Army drove down from Quebec to take part in the Occupy Wall Street demonstration. Pat is French-Canadian by birth, but spent his working years in the US.

Me: You drove down here specifically for this?
Pat: Yes, 100 percent.

Me: So why are you here?
Pat: I'm here basically to let the public know, to let the public be more aware, that the 1% is paying the taxes. There's too many loop holes and they don't pay their fair share of this economy. Wall Street has gobbled up all the 401Ks, all the pensions that the people had and now they're trying to privatize Social Security so the money will end up on Wall Street.

Me: You worked for GM for twenty-five years. Did you retire or were you laid off?
Pat: I retired.

Me: Is your plant still in operation?
Pat: No, the plant closed in Tarrytown. There used to be one in Framingham, Mass [sic], Mahwah, Linden. They're all gone.

Me: Who would you blame for the closing of those plants, GM or the Federal government?
Pat: Probably both. The government took their tax breaks and opened up plants overseas. I mean...we should do the building here. The Buick Century was [built] in Tarrytown, they took the Century and moved it to Mexico, and at the dealership it was the same price.

Me: How did you feel about GM taking money from the government?
Pat: I think it's a good thing. They paid the money back, they hired a lot of people, and they let the money flow a little bit. Our Region 9 covers New England, New York state and Puerto Rico. Our Region [9A] Director Julie Kushner was here yesterday.

Me: How much influence are the unions having on this protest?
Pat: I think they're just getting on board now. They took a little time to get on board, but I think it's a movement that's going to grow.

Me: And you think that's a good thing?
Pat: I think it's a good thing. It's not going to hurt anybody. Most of these people here, they are out of work, or hurting, or believe in the cause. They're not here just by accident.

I tried to press Pat further on the financial and operative support the UAW might be offering the demonstrators but the answer invariably came back to 'people are hurting' and 'they believe in the cause.' He did give me his business card though.

Between the business card and the fact that regardless of which way I steered the conversation Pat steered it back in the direction he wanted it to go, I'd surmise that Pat wasn't there by accident either.

Occupy Wall Street Part V: He Was A Leftist Until I Explained to Him He Wasn't A Leftist

2011-10-10T20:21:00.000-04:00

I ran across David M., from the "Hudson Valley" in New York, sitting on a wall at Zuccotti Park. As I mentioned it's the content of the signs that intrigue me more than the general appearance of the person. I was a dopey malcontent not too long ago, and frankly if you were to ask my wife she'd say she was surprised to hear I used the word 'was.' But regardless of that, I've been waiting for a few years for kids to take their discontent out to the street and the fact that they don't see things as I see them doesn't scare me.

David M. from New York. Like most of
the people at Zuccotti park he was just
sitting and waiting to be interviewed.

On the bottom right of his sign are the words "Dead Prez."

Me: So I get the big words but what do the little words in the corner mean?

David: It's a music group.

Me: So what's that got to do with the rest of your sign?

David: It's the name of one of the albums. The whole album is about self-reliance, umm, like, anti-politics and pretty much discipline. All about self improvement I would say. Ed Note: Dead Prez is an American hip-hop duo who have been around for about fifteen years.

Me: Okay, cool. So, do you consider yourself on the Left or on the Right of this whole issue right now?

David: I'm a Leftist.

Me: Okay, but, you listen to music that talks about self-reliance and political freedom and so on and so forth. I'm a libertarian so you would think I'm on the completely other end of the spectrum from you wouldn't you?

David: Ahhh, I don't. I mean I have Leftist views but...

Me: What libertarians believe is 'leave us alone and let us do our own thing. I don't need help.' Would you agree with that?

David: Yeah I would agree with that.

Me: Right, so you're really closer to what I believe than what a Leftist would believe, because the farther you go to the Left the more you're relying on someone else to do your thing for you.

David: Right, I just think we should be left alone to take care of ourselves.

IBEW Union Guy Sitting Next to David: I have a sticker on my hardhat that says "I refuse to give up any more of my freedom."

Me: But that's a paradox because you already gave up some freedom to your union.

With that the IBEW Union Guy Sitting Next to David proceeded to filibuster for ten minutes about how labor unions were doing something that had to do with labor and greedy corporations and getting a fair slice of the pie from the man but there's no work because of things that management are doing and his union gives him free health care and a pension or something but there's so much regulation that his specialty doesn't exist anymore or it's over-regulated or something. I don't really know because I kind of checked out and started thinking about getting a slice of pizza right after I heard the word 'freedom' and saw the IBEW patch on his shirt.

Here's the point, David is all about doing things with discipline and morality. He's all about being a rugged individualist and not depending on others. He's a libertarian but he just doesn't know it because all of his life it has been explained to him that being on the Left is the only proper side to be on. I have a hard time believing David does not have company.

Again, we need to stop dismissing a good portion of these people and we need to start embracing their desire for change. Because with a little education there are not many people who will disagree with what we stand for -- as long as we overcome the constant drone of the MSM, labor unions and Democrat party.

There's a lot of people who don't want to be on the Left, they've just not been given a viable alternative.