Roland Burris' version of Twas the Night Before Christmas

You'll hear the line, "no matter what was in it."

That's the problem with this whole health care debacle. No one has read this bill, they don't really know what's in it. The Republicans know it's a disaster, however, and the Democrats have tons of pork. Business as usual in politics in Washington.

Meantime, Obama and his family are off enjoying themselves for a vacation. If Bush'd gone on vacation during these tough economic times..what outrage! But Obama gets a free pass. Also standard operating procedure.

As for the health care bill - give health care to everyone on welfare, to be paid for by people who work their butts off... milk the wealthy dry.... as long as there are no wealthy people, the poor won't complain any more... as long as everyone's miserable, they'll be happy... never mind that if they'd just stopped having babies they couldn't afford, and gotten educations and then decent jobs, they could have afforded health care under the system as it used to be...

Wake up, everybody. The poor will love this bill...as everyone else will join them in poverty.

Law and Order certainly knows how to fan the flames...

Just saw the last half of an episode called "Rapture." A wealthy Wall Street type, who had promised to give money so a guy could take his welfare boys to a house in the country where they could skate, play ball, ya da ya da, reneges. But his company gets a bailout, and they proceed to go to Arizona to party on the tax payer's money.

So, the guy kidnaps the man's girlfriend, she manages to escape, runs into the street and is killed.

The guy goes on trial, and the lawyer puts all the blam on the Wall Street type for not fulfilling his promise. "The woman would be alive today if the wall street guy hadn't been a cold - hearted bastard."

And the writer has the jury aquit the guy! And when McCoy, and his DA and assistant are discussing the case, McCoy acts like he agrees with the verdict. And the DA has his little speech.. "The pain that the Wall Street people caused you, the destructoin, etc."

So the Wall Street debacle - fueled by the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, who were ordered by Carter, Clinton and other dems to give loans to people who couldn't afford them - is to be blamed on the "shadiness" of Wall Street.

And killing them is justified.

I'm reminded of the story of the minister in the UK who told his congregation it was perfectly okay to go out and shoplift from the big stores, because they were rich and therefore evil.

At the end of the episode, McCoy - or it may be the woman asistant, said "This is what is to come. More and more people are getting angry..." and of course they're going to take it out on those who are more "fortunate" (never more industrious) than them.

What's a prenuptial contract and why do people sign one

if it can be renogotiated at the drop of a pair of pants...admittedly, hundreds and hundreds of times over the last 7 years.

In the case of Tiger Woods vs his wife Elin Nordegren, I have no sympathy for Tiger. He brought this on himself. But when the woman married him, she signed a prenuptial contract. So now that she's going to divorce him... there is no debate. She gets exactly what that prenuptial contact states. And hopefully it's a good one.

But if it isn't...that's just too damn bad. It was a contract, she signed it, she wants a divorce now, there is no "renegotiating!"

http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/afp/20091217/tts-us-sports-golf-woods-marriage-media-193c25a.html is the article that says that she's going to get a divorce "after" she reneogiates the prenup.

I have sympathy with her now. If she really is trying to "renegotiate" that prenup, I will no longer have any sympathy for her. And that goes for anybody who signs a contract - premarital, sports or otherwise, and then gets some shyster lawyer to help him or her renege on it.

Tiger Wood's humiliation is not yet complete

I've never been a fan of Tiger Woods... in the first place because I've never been a fan of golf, in the second place because, when my attention has been drawn to the game of golf in my capacity as a freelance writer, it's been to see Tiger's feet of clay on the golf course - the tantrums and the swearing, which I don't like in children, let alone grown men.

But, as the Tiger Woods saga goes on, I admit I have taken to reading the articles and the comment sections attached to those articles. Not so much because I want to read all the salacious details of Woods' various affairs and rent girls, but because I find it fascinating (and depressing) to read about his incredible stupidity, and it's interesting to see how many people writing their comments are a) writing directly to Woods as if they actually think Woods is going to read their little scribbles, and b) religious types urging him to turn to God.

And that is when Tiger Woods' humiliation will be complete. When he finally does make his public appearance - on Oprah or Jerry Springer or whatever - and says he's turned to God and prayed and prayed and found redemption, and now he asks his fans to forgive him too.

God's got nothing to do with it!

Atheists have morals just as religious types do... indeed their morals are more pure, because they come out of an instinctive knowledge of what's right and wrong, and do not come from a book that promises eternal hellfire if they break the rules.

Adultery is a common human condition...humans may be at the top of the animal chain but they are animals neverthless, and most animals are not monogomous. Supposedly wolves are, and swans I think...

So although I'm disgusted with Tiger Woods that he'd cheat on his wife, it's not so much that he's cheated, as that he's done it so stupidly.

Indeed,that's what I can't understand about any man who cheats on his wife, and does it stupidly. A married man has no business fathering a chlid on another woman - wear a damn condom, you moron! Not only so that you don't get your paramour pregnant, but so that you don't catch any disease this woman might have and in turn present it to your wife!

And TIger Woods apparently never wore condoms when he was having sex - so he was dependent on the women in the case to take it upon themselves not to get pregnant. We've yet to hear of any women coming forward claiming to have a child he fathered or demanding a paternity test...which surprises me a lot, I don't mind telling you.

Then there's the fact that he apparently called up his women and actually left sexually-related voicemails! Which those women could in turn record off the phones and use in blackmail plots! How stupid is that? obviously if you call a mistress, you talk innocuosly or cryptically, so no one else who hears that message will be able to know for sure that you're talking to a mistress/prostitute.

Then there's the fact that Woods apparently used a madame and prostitutes provided b y her.. I presume this was in Nevada where it's legal...now I don't know about guys - obviously they use prostitutes all the time otherwise prostitution would not be known as the oldest profession -- but I've often thought... doesn't this affect the guy's ego? An actor, a politician, an athlete...and he has to pay for sex?

Well, what else is there? Of course, there's the fact that all of Tiger Woods' many women are blond haired and white. Certain pundits are saying that this means Woods has not gotten past the "post-racial" America (or "post-racist" as one man called it, and which seems to me to be a better term). Instead he's "bought in" to this "false view" of what constitutes beauty - which is blonde haired blue eyed women. So he's a disgrace to his race, not because he's cheating, but because he's cheating with the wrong color woman.

I have yet to read that he was in to bondage...which would really put him up the spout as far as most of his still-remaining fans are concerned. (And I must admit that I really liked Gil Grissom on CSI, until the character of the dominatrix was introduced and they made it seem like Grissom had availed himself of her services - that ruined his character for me, how can you respect a man (or a woman) who likes to be dominated in the way that dominatrixes do it?)

And I haven't heard that he beat on any of his mistresses or his wife, which again would really be beyond the pale, and much worse than cheating. (And considering his temper on the course, it's rather surprising, in view of these relevations, that he wasn't violent in the home. Although perhaps his wife kept a golf club handy to guard against that very proclivity.)

And perhaps what might have been worst of all... at least all these women he was bedding were women, and not men. Because if it had turned out that Tiger Woods was gay, the firestorm that's been going on would have been three times more explosive.

In the end, it turns out that Tiger Woods was "just a man after all", too stupid to exercise a little restraint in order to keep his image intact. Iit's not "pride goeth before a fall," but rather "stupidity goeth before a fall," and Tiger sure was stupid.

Did Tiger Woods Want to Get Caught?

I didn't bother to read any of the Tiger Woods coverage for the longest time...I dont' really care about Tiger Woods or what he does, what had me disgusted was how all his mistresses were suddenly coming out of the woodwork...eager to cash in on this opportunity to get 7-figure payouts for their sleazy stories.

Of course it turns out their speed was probably a good thing. As more and more of 'em come out into the open, the size of their payouts will probably diminish... of course they will probably get together and file a class action lawsuit against Tiger for not paying them all equally, or something...

Today, I was listening to the Rush Limbaugh show and he pointed out that a new "madame" had come forward and said that Tiger liked threesomes, and had paid one woman $15,000 for her services over a period of time.

And I"m just thinking to myself... was he trying to get caught?

Because he's an intelligent guy... or at least he sounds intelligent... why get married if you have no intention of not being a faithful husband? He was rich enough to be able to afford a cook and a maid and a laundress, so he didn't need a "free" one - which is what a wife is, eh? So he could have had three women in his very own house to service him... kind of like James Coburn's Derek Flint's harem in In Like Flint in the 1960s.

But why have so many mistresses and prostitutes? The more people of that nature you have, the more chances someone is going to spill the beans!

Of course what boggles my mind, among other things, is that Tiger actually paid for sex. I've never understood why men pay for sex. Doesn't that destroy their egos, to know that they can't get sex from a woman unless they pay for it? But for Tiger, actors, and athletes, with women throwing themselves at them all the time?

Of course the accepted logic is that men like Tiger pay for sex because they don't want a casual one-night stand woman to delude herself into thinkig she meant more to Tiger than that, and try to blackmail him to leave his wife and be faithful to her. Whereas girls you pay, know you're paying them for sex and that's it.

Another thing Limbaugh said was that Tiger had sex without protection - ie without a condom. If so, that's downright criminal and he should go to jail just for that. In the first place of course, it's stupid. Has Tiger never heard of Jason Caffey, or Shawn Kemp each of whom has over 9 illigemate children by different mothers? And never mind the illegitimate child issue. How many of these women would have had sexually transmitted diseases that he, in turn, could have passed on to the little woman at home? Or even AIDs?

(As an aside, Sports Illustrated did a story about athletes and their predeliction to procreate like rabbits.

Nearly one-third of all children in this country are born to unwed mothers. But this week, Sports Illustrated reports that among professional athletes out-of-wedlock births are epidemic. And of athletes in the major sports leagues, those in the NBA appear to have the greatest number of cases. According to SI, one of the NBA's top agents says he spends more time dealing with paternity claims than he does negotiating contracts. The agent tells the magazine that there might be more kids out of wedlock than there are players in the NBA. According to Sports Illustrated, Larry Johnson of the Knicks is supporting five children by four women, including two he has with his wife, and Shawn Kemp of the Cavaliers, who is not married, has fathered seven children. Other NBA players who have been the subject of paternity-related lawsuits include Patrick Ewing, Juwan Howard, Scottie Pippen, Jason Kidd, Stephon Marbury, Hakeem Olajuwon and Gary Payton, as well as Larry Bird, who is now the coach of the Pacers, and current NBC game analyst Isiah Thomas.

In other sports, baseball's Gary Sheffield and Juan Gonzalez, along with former greats Jim Palmer, Steve Garvey and Pete Rose, have been hit with paternity suits. The NFL names include Andre Rison and Alonzo Spellman; hockey, Mark Messier; boxing, Oscar de la Hoya; and tennis, Roscoe Tanner.

Read the oomplete article here:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/features/1998/weekly/980504/insidelook.html

Of course the article doesn't explain the real reason why athletes have more illegitmate kids than anyone else - they're too stupid to wear condoms. And the woman in question "saw them coming" as the saying goes. Because even once a mulit-millionaire athlete's career is over and he's making nothing, apparently the support payments have to continue as if he still did have that income...which seems pretty stupid.


And finally,there's the issue of Tiger's wife.

According to Limbaugh, Tiger's wife is still with him, and they're going to go together on a cruise.

If that's the case, the woman is a fool - and a gold digger - and deserves scathing comments heaped on her head.

The guy cheated on you - not with one mistress, not with two... but with dozens. And not only mistresses but for prostitues hired for the occasion - sometimes two at a time!

He's not worth being married to. Take your pre-nup and get out now, with the kids.

Conscious in Coma for 23 years

Talk about a living hell

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1230092/Patient-trapped-23-year-coma-conscious-along.html

The pro-lifers are going to say, "See? This is why people in comas who are vegetables need to be kept alive for decades. They might really have brains working in there and be conscious!"

While I can think of a few worse things, they are not much worse than being locked in an unmoving body for 23 years, not able to move. I'd much rather be dead.

This guy can now "comminicate" using lights or something. He still can't move. I'd still rather be dead. Quality of life for people like this, zero.

Anyone who thinks God would be upset because someone like this is let out of thier misery, sure has one sick idea of what God is.

Bow down to your masters, obsequious Americans!

First Obama, the President of the United States of America, which at one point was a sovereign country, bowed down to the Saudi King. There was a bit of outrage, but his "people" explained, "of course he didn't bow. The King was just a much smaller man." Also, "It's really hard to tell what he was doing. That other guy obscurs him."

Well, now he's bowed to the emperor of Japan.



Here's the thing. American presidents don't bow. They shake hands as equals. If he wanted to pay his respects to this much older man, he'd have bowed his head, not bent over so far you could iron a shirt on ihs back!

Please don't let Sarah Palin be the next Presidential candidate

I am really tired of this woman...

I'm a Republican, and a woman, and would very much like to see a competent woman as our next President...what a fist in the eye of radical Muslims that would be.

But Sarah Palin?

She's got a new book out, in which she details "tension" in the camp with McCain.

Now, the McCain/Palin campaign was one of the worst-run campaigns either, and you've got to blame McCain for that.

But what I want to know is...why was his choice of running mate delayed for so long. For that matter, why is any Presidential candidate's choice of running mate delayed for so long? Surely, these VP candidates should not only be vetted, but also *talked to*, for months in advance, not just picked out of the air in hopes of giving someone a political advantage.

The whole election system, not to say political systesm, in the USA has to be cleaned up. It never will be of course, as the crooks are firmly entrenched...

Go Out as a Hero, not as a Despicable Piece of ...

Let me preface this blog entry by saying that I'm not advocating anyone going postal and going out and killing innocent people.

If you're at the end of your tether and don't feel like you can face life anymore and want to commit suicide by cop... do it by first killing people who don't deserve to live - drug dealers, rapists, murderers who got off because of technicalities. Then, if you're shot down by cops doing their duty, you'll at least be remembered as someone who cleansed the earth of garbage.

I just don't understand why, when people snap, they want to go out in a blaze of gunfire and be remembered for killing innocent people who had little or nothing to do with them, so that their names will be despised forever by all right thinking people.

Obama gives a shout out before talking about Fort Hood murders

Obama was to have given a speech today about health care and Native Americans. *Before* he got on the rostrum, he was given the information about the murders at Fort Hood. Instead of going into that directly, he talks for three minutes to the Native Americans/First Americans in the audience, and then goes on to talk about Fort Hood.

Seems to me he should have talked about Fort Hood first.



On the other hand, I've read posts at various Replican websites that say that Obama was cheerful and smiling and upbeat, and then in a blink of an eye goes somber (just as Clinton did at somebody's funeral a while back... my mind's blanking on that person's name.) Anyway, to me, it doesn't look like he's cheerful at all, he speaks in his normal laid back manner. As for the "shout out" to a Medal of Honor winner... I dislike the term "shout out" for anyone except an athlete. "Let's give a little respect to..." something like that. Neverthless, it does seem odd that he would talk about the Health care stuff first, and then Fort Hood, when on a day like today, Fort Hood - and the fact that the shooter was a converted Muslim - is bound to raise some concerns, considering that other Muslim-American soldiers have also killed American soldiers recently.

(Having said that , the practice of a subordinate killing an officer has apparently a long tradition in the US military, but that's one guy killing an officer because he disliked that officer's treatment of him, not a guy killing others based on their religion because he's of a different religion. And let's not forget Timothy McVeigh killed a helluva lot of people too...)

As I've said over and over again, the only way to get peace on earth is to get everone converted to atheism and humanism. Then we might have a chance, because 20009 years of Christiantity/Muslims/Jews just ain't working.

Are you now, or have you ever been, a racist?

That's a play on words from the question during the Communist witch hunts of the 1950s, for those of you who "just don't get it," as the Reverend Jeremiah Wright would say.

To refresh your knowledge/memory... actors were brought into the room to testify. They could either name their friends who were communists, or they could keep their mouths shut, and be blacklisted for failing to cooperate. And of course, everyone they named would be blacklisted as well.

The same thing is now happening with the race business here in the US.

Take the Rush Limbaugh debacle. He's part of a group of businessmen who want to buy the Rams, and Al Sharpton and everyone in the race business is all outraged. Then even some owners chime in and say they dont want Rush. (Do they not want him, or do they want to give the impression that they don't, to get on the rising tide of sentiment against him so that they are not convicted as racists by being silent on the subject?)

"Convicted as racist." That's the point. Take football players. They can lie, steal, cheat, kill... and they'll get another chance on the football field because they are good players. But let someone schmuck be convicted of being a racist (and when I say racist, I am referring to a white person. Everyone knows minorities can't be racist! All that tension between Asians and blacks ... that's just disputes over living space. Nothing racist about it! Between Jews and blacks? No, that's not racist...)

ANyway, the actor who played Kramer made some unfortunate repartees to a heckling black guy at a night club, and all of a sudden his career is over. He's been branded, not as being unfunny or slow of wit when it comes to dealing with a heckler, but racist, and he'll never be allowed to work again. Although Jerry Seinfled is doing his best to "rehabilitate him" in the eyes of the people - and Bravo Seinfeld for taking such a brave step!

Meanwhile, Asians tried to do it to Shaquille O'Neal (after he "mocked" Yao Ming and therefore, the whole Chinese race), but O'Neal stood tall and said it was ridiculous. Of course, he could afford to do so - he's a great basketball player.

But when it comes to people who work in normal businesses, who can be replaced by dozens of other people...get yourself branded a racist - true or imagined... and your life is over.

2,000 Invisible Dogs Invade the City

Piano Stairs

I don't think they could do this in most cities in the US - too many vandals who just love to destroy for destructions sake... but I guess there are still places in the world where it's possible to create beautiful things, safe in the knowledge that no one will come along and destroy it for the fun of it.

I think this is the Netherlands:

Father drowned trying to save others, son succeeds

This is a great story...this guy -- and the men who teamed up together to help him -- are heroes.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/10/02/father.son.flood.heroes/

LITHIA SPRINGS, Georgia (CNN) -- As Zack Stephney stepped into the floodwaters last week, history washed over him.


Thirty years after his father drowned in a rescue attempt, Zack Stephney helped save a woman whose car sank.

The youngest of five children, he was only 8 when his father died.

For three decades, he'd carried with him mere snapshots of memories: Family time at Christmas. Riding on the back of Dad's motorcycle. Tommie Stephney's love for drag-racing.

But as the 37-year-old Douglasville, Georgia, man set out September 22 to try and save a woman whose car was swept away by rushing waters, he thought of his father's drowning. He, too, had fought to rescue people struggling against currents.

That was in 1979.

See link for complete article.

Are Racial Differences Racist?

Many years ago, I briefly watched a retrospective of the TV show Good Times, an all-black sit com which I, white, watched and liked in my teens - although I confess I found JJ (Jimmie Walker) annoying with his "Dynomite" schtick.

In this retrospective, the actor playing Ralph Carter - Michael Evans, explained why John Amos as James Evans Sr. left the show. I can't remember exactly what he said, but it was something like, "In black culture, the father musn't be outshone by the son. The writers were making JJ the star of the series, and as the father, James Evans couldn't be asked to put up with that."

And let us not forget that when talking about Kwanzaa, etc, black advocates are talking about celebrating black culture. And if they're celebrating black culture, it must be different from white culture, correct? In what ways is it different, hm?

Well, one way in which it is different -- now -- is that 75 percent of all black children are born out of wedlock, as opposed to something like 30% for whites. Most black kids are second or third generation single parents, and believe it or not, if you grow up in a home with only one parent, especially if its an unmarried and uneducated mother, your'e going to be poor. (IF a kid, regardless of race, has a kid at age 15, they typically can't or don't want to finish their education, thus, uneducated.)

And single mothers raise their kid(s) differently than do dual-parent households. Because most of them are on welfare, they teach their kids not to take anything from anybody, so several generations of kids have been brought up to be a bit more violent than white kids. (Don't get me wrong. White kids can be plenty sadistic. So can Asians. People are people. But I'm takling about the differences generated by how parents raise kids differently.)

Point is, this study that Newsweek published, with the magazine cover, Is Your Baby Racist, talked about 100 white kids ages 5-7, who said that black kids were meaner than white kids.

Now, why does that make these kids racist? Can it be that black kids are meaner than white kids? Because black kids have been taught to be very prickly, to see offense everywhere, etc. etc.?

But, no. 100 kids say black kids are meaner than white kids, they must be racist.

Here are a few articles which show that children of different races are discplined differently...therefore they act different than other children... it is not racist to perceive differences in attitudes among different races...

http://community.greatschools.net/groups/181524/discussion/591250

This was an interesting comment to the blog question:

if u r over thirty and don't know "the switch" you are not only just "lucky" you ain't BLACK!!! haha I get chills just thinking about the switch, and unfortunately for us, it was NOT just "for show."

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-19006813.html
You can't read the above link without getting a subscription to the site, but this is interesting:

A new study shows that this generalization may be true with White children, but it is not true for Black children. The study also proves that child development research has frequently neglected cultural and ethnic distinction.

The study recruited 466 White and 100 Black families between 1987 and 1988 in Knoxville and Nashville, TN, and Bloomington, IN. The mothers of the families were interviewed at ...

First off, how can you come to any wide-reaching conclusion whatsoever when your study consists of 566 kids. Out of how many in the US. Millions and millions. And then again, 366 more white kids than black get tested...obviously things are going to be weighted/skewed a bit.

Yet these kinds of studies, with such small sample sizes, are reported as if they prove everything.

How Can This Not Be Racially Motivated????

Black kid gets on a bus full of all white people. None of them will let him sit down. Finally, he moves a bag, and sits down. The person who owns the bag starts beating up on this kid. Meanwhile, the entire bus stands up and starts cheering.

Had that been the case, the ACLU, ACORN, every African American person in the country would have been screaming racism and demanding that every kid on that bus have his identity known so he could never get a job again.

But...it was the other way around. The victim was white. The boy who beat on him was black, everyone cheering the beating was black.

So obviously, it wasn't a hate crime. It was just because the boy dared to move a bag so he could sit down, because none of the fine, upstanding kids on that bus wanted to let him sit next to them.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/illinoisnews/story/60D37B6EC5FF4711862576320011605B?OpenDocument

Pay your d*mn debt!

I'm watching Sports Center on ESPN, and every commercial break there's a commercial for some company saying, "If you've got $10,000 in debt you've got a right to reduce that debt." And there's footage of Obama looking back and forth between his teleprompters.

Here's what annoys me.

Lots of people have $10,000 in debt, and they're paying their bills on time. Why should *they* have to pay their bills, when other people who *can't* pay their debt, are allowed to "settle" their debt for pennies on the dollar?

I bet plenty of people who are perfectly able to settle their debts on their own are now calling up these companies in order to get this deal for themselves. Why shouldn't they?

I've often considered calling up these people and saying, "Hey, I don't have any credit card debt right now, but if you'll send me one, I'll rack up $10,000 worth of charges, and then settle it." And of course the merchants who accepted my "promise of payment' which is what a purchase on credit is, will be out of luck....and pretty soon out of business.

One of many annoying things about these commercials is the presence of Obama in them. Of course there's the "small print" saying, "This is a dramatization. Obama isn't necessarily endorsing this" but what do most people see? President Obama saying, "Sure, just because you incurred this debt doesn't mean you have to pay it. It's not your fault. You've been squeezed by the big, bad, racist credit card companies, and I"m doing somethign about it by makign it so you don't have to pay for anything you purchased, or return it even though you can't pay for it!)

Boycott Newsweek for its cover: Is Your Baby Racist?

I am reminded of a court case from a few years ago. A white couple wanted to adopt a black baby, but I think it was the ACLU or maybe ACORN that filed a lawsuit to prevent it. "Black children should be raised by black parents. They want to look up at their parents and see people who look just like them." I paraphrase, but that's the gist.

Now we get this piece of garbage:



Newsweek could have had a baby from each race, with that question, but no, only white people can be racist, eh?

And its offensive of course just as the bible is offensive in saying that babies are born sinners. Yeah, right.

Kids become familiar with their parents, and some react badly to strangers or to those who look different. Regardless of their race. Period, end of story. (After all, I suppose a baby can look at its arms, and see they're white or brown or black, and expect to see that same coloring in their caregivers, eh?)

I am so sick of "racism". It should be the "R-word" just like the "N-word." It is trotted out to end all discusson. Accuse someone of being a racist, and discussion over. They now must spend the rest of their lives defending themselves from that charge. If they're white, of course. If they're any other color...they get a free pass.

(As for example Shaquille O'Neal and his "mocking" of Yao Ming. Not that I thought that was anything for the Asian community to get in a fuss about, neverthless, it was water off a duck's back. Shaquille's black, he can't be racist.

Geoffrey Holder did indeed speak the truth when he said America was "afraid" to talk about racism. If only because whites aren't allowed to talk about the racism of others, the hate crimes of others. Didn't Professor Gates own mother "hate white people." Isn't that racist?

Racism afflicts every race. Otherwise, there wouldn't be genocidal warfare in the Sudan, in Kenya, in Somalia, etc. etc. and etc.

Good for Hilary!

I don't really care for Hilary Clinton. I think she sets a bad example for women - stand by your man even if he cheats on you, because that's your stepping stone to power.

But, I think she gave a good answer when asked what her hubby thought of...whatever it was. "He's not the secretary of state." Good for her. He's just an ex-president getting rich off of gazillion dollar speaking fees - and you don't see Obama going after those fees, do you?

Saw a headline where the guvmint is trying to "explain" Hilary's outburst. Didn't bother to read it, but frankly, why should she bother to explain it. *She's* the secretary of state, if the press have questions it should be her opinions they are after.

Charities will be hard hit by Cash flor Clunkers

I just thought of this.

For the last 4 days people have been fixing up their old, junky cars good enough to drive, then taking them down to a local car dealership in hopes of getting a new car. The $4,000 "rebate" the car companies are getting is - they are hoping - to be sent by the Government. $4,000 per person, per car. That's a lot of our tax money being poured out.

But that's not the point. The point is - what of those charities that used to get these cars? Not a day went by that I didn't hear a radio announcement from one charity or another, saying that the denotion of a used car would greatly help them out and be tax deductible. And unlike the cash for clunkers program, the car didn't even need to be drivable, they'd come and get it.

But now, with the goverment extending the program, charities aren't going to be getting these cars (why doesn't the government have the cars be given to charities, instead of shredded? Well, because of those evil emissions, I guess.)

But, of course, charities are going to be hard pressed in future, anyway. Rich people used to give thousands and thousands of dollars to charities because they could take it off on their taxes. Soon, that tax "loophole" will be closed, so they won't give as much. (After all, why should they? They're vilified whether they make charitable contributions or not, so why do it? The government will be delighted to step in and pick up the slack... and increase *our* taxes in order to fund any new programs....

2008: Obama called a reporter "Sweetie"

The reporter shouted out a question as Obama walked by. Yeah, perhaps it was kind of rude...wait until you get into the press room... although this is how reporters get answers, by shouting out in hallways.

Obama's response was male chauvanistic in the extreme. Sweetie? How condescending. How dismissive. Would he have responded to a male reporter in the same way, if a male reporter had done the same thing? Well...he couldn't have, I suppose, as that would have raised eyebrows about his sexuality.... Sure, be dismissive of her as a rude reporter, if you like. (How about a, "Wait your turn, please.") But to call her sweetie???

I wonder if he calls his wife that? I'm sure he says to his daughters - that's the term for daughters or wives, not professional women trying to do their job.

Evolutuion of Religion

I've started a new blog in which I dissect the bible verse by verse, and I find much there to wonder about. For a book "divinely inspired to be the word of God" it doesn't make much sense.

http://evolutionofreligion.blogspot.com/


Check it out.

Here's the video of Lebron getting dunked on

http://www.tmz.com/videos?autoplay=true&mediaKey=f21ecae1-4984-4ba4-9216-94ee996cd4c1


It's not really worth watching - it is *impossible* to tell who the players are, let alone who is dunking on who.

I'm not sure if this is *the* confiscated tape, or just a similar tape that someone else made, but the camera is way at the other end of the court, and if you didnt know who the two players were, you wouldn't recognize them. And even if you *do* know who they are, you still wouldn't recognize them - the video is that poor.

Do you all remember the story? LeBron was at a basketball camp, and some kid headed for college dunked on him. No big deal, you'd think, except LeBron approached a Nike representative, who then approached the cameraman and confiscated the tape. Conclusion - LeBron didn't want a tape to leak out showing that he'd been dunked on by a mere college-bound kid.

No fear of that. You can't even see it.

What if shoe were on other foot?

I've been thinking about the reaction of Gates yesterday....

He's just broken into his home... cops come to the door asking about a break-in, and despite the fact that he KNEW he'd just broken into his own home and that by definition that would have looked suspicious, he accuses the cops of harassing him because he's a "black man in America," and accuses them of racial profiling.

I still don't understand that. It's not as if he and the driver were just sitting on the porch mindng their own business waiting for a locksmith to come, and someone calls because there are "two black men sitting on a porch in an all white neighborhood," although one must ask oneself then as well... if there's an all-white neighborhood, isn't is suspicious if some non-whites are there, sitting on a porch, with no white present?

That's not racial profilng, it's just common sense. Let us not forget that most petty crimes are committed by blacks, because more blacks than whites are poor. (And there's nothing racist in that statement of fact, either. Fact of life, most white-collar crime is committed by whites, who have no reason to steal apart from basic dishonesty - it's just that they do the "victimless" crimes of embezzling money, whereas people with no jobs are forced to steal from houses. And of course most politicians are white, and most of them are crooks, too.)

In any event, what if the shoe were on the other foot, and a white person goes into black Harlem. Wouldn't that individual stick out like... well, like a white person in black Harlem? Wouldn't all eyes be on that person, wondering what the heck he, or she, was doing there?

But these days, all a black person has to do is scream Racist and there is no defense.

I'm reminded of a recent incident with Barbara Boxer and some black guy who was supposed to speak before her committee. She was talking about the good that other black organizations have done, like the NCAAP and so on, and this guy just went ballistic on her, calling her "racial" because she dared to list other black organizations that had nothing to do with his. And at the very beginning of his tirade, she had just tried to carry on, because she had no idea why he was so upset. If I may use a sexist simile, he was just like a female beauty contestant throwing a hissy fit because some other girl's attributes had been listed along with hers. Just silly. Just, quite frankly, a guy with a chip on his shoulder ready to regard anything as racist.

Limbaugh had some excerpts of an Obama speech the other day:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_072009/content/01125115.guest.html

RUSH: Last Thursday night in New York City, President Obama showed up at the 100th anniversary celebration of the NAALCP. That would be the National Association for the Advancement of Liberal Colored People. Now, I play these four bites because it was I, El Rushbo, who told you prior to the election of President Obama that our race industry would not end. Racism, as an American original sin would not end. It would only get worse. Now, as with the health care sound bites, we have speeded these up. I find it's much more palatable to listen to this, and it also has a couple of other added benefits I don't want to have to mention. They're easily figured out. So here is Obama at the NAALCP. Make no mistake, folks, racism is alive and well in this country. The NAALCP was told as much by President Obama.

OBAMA (sped up): Make no mistake, the pain of discrimination is still felt in America (applause) by African-American women paid less for doing the same work as colleagues of a different color and a different gender; by La-tin-os made to feel unwelcome in their own country; by Muslim Americans viewed with suspicion simply because they kneel down to pray to their god; by our gay brothers and sisters still taunted, still attacked, still denied their rights.

RUSH: Oh, folks! Folks, this is the original litmus test. This is the original list of sins. This guy is out there stoking more hatred among these people. He's not bringing us together. Where's the unity? Here, we have three more of these. Here President Obama lists all of the excuses the left makes for African-American failure.

OBAMA (sped up): If you're African-American the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are high. Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. But that's not a reason to get bad grades. (applause) That's not a reason to cut class. That's not a reason to give up on y'education and drop out of school. No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands, you cannot forget that, that's why we have to teach all of our children! No excuses! No excuses!

RUSH: Oh, yeah, give 'em all the excuses. Give them all the excuses, and then say, "No excuses." "If you're African-American the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are high. Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. But that's not a reason to get bad grades." Now, Bill Cosby got drummed out of the black race for saying this stuff, right? (interruption) I don't... I know who runs the neighborhoods and who runs the schools in those neighborhoods. (sigh) Look, Snerdley, it speaks for itself. I really don't need to editorialize here. Let's now listen to Obama in full preacher mode.

OBAMA (sped up): Our kids can't all aspire to LeBron or Lil Wayne. (applause) I want them to aspiring to be scientists and engineers, actors and teachers, not just ballers and rappers. (applause) I want them aspiring to be a Supreme Court justice. I want them aspiring to be the president of the United States of America. (wild applause)


RUSH: Unless you're Clarence Thomas. Unless you're Condoleezza Rice. Unless you're Walter Williams. Unless you're Dr. Thomas Sowell. Then you can forget about all those aspirations because people like Obama are going to chop you into liver. And finally this is Obama's worldview.

OBAMA (sped up): My life could have easily taken a turn for the worse. I drive through Harlem or I drive through the South Dakota side of Chicago and I see young men on the corners I say, "There but for the grace of God go I." They're no less gifted than me. They're no less talented than me. I had some breaks.

RUSH: Ahem. Well, what were the breaks, meeting a bunch of communist mentors? Gee, if they could all meet Reverend Wright, you think their lives would be improving? If they could all meet Frank Davis you think they're lives...? (interruption) What is the question Mr. Snerdley? The Program Observer has a question. (interruption) Mmm-hmm. That's a good question. The program observer has asked: "How do you think the brothers in Harlem hear this when the first black president says that when he drives through there and he looks at the brothers in Harlem, he says, 'There but for the grace of God go I.' So what must the brothers in Harlem think?" What Obama is saying here is that we're all just winners at life's lottery.

It's all luck, and the government's gonna come in here and make it so there's no luck, and everybody finishes off just as bad as everybody else finishes off -- or ends up just as bad as everybody else ends up. But, folks, the real point about this is, this president promised unity. "We gotta get past all of this. We can't continue to think this way." He's out stoking fires of resentment in this speech. You think of the opportunity he has to inspire but going before this group and saying that? He took the opposite route. This speech didn't inspire anybody. This speech gave them continued reason to be resentful. He reinforced the existing attitude that exists in the race business today. I don't know when's the last time he drove through Harlem anyway. I think Caroline Kennedy was there more recently than he's been there. Didn't she have lunch with Sharpton at the soul food place? Sophie's, is that what it is? Sylvia's, yeah. Sylvia's. I remember that. That's when she blew it. She started eating on camera. No seasoned politician, even Ted Kennedy, eats when there are cameras around. You just don't. You can't possibly look good doing it -- and if you spill something, it's even worse.

Break into a house....get arrested

Based on the article I read, seems like "Henry Louis Gates Jr., the nation's pre-eminent black scholar" has a chip on his shoulder.

He locked himself out of his house, and so broke into it.

A neighbor, who apparenlty didn't know him by sight, called the cops. She saw two black males breaking into a house, and so that's what she told the police. Now, I'm sure if it had been two white males breaking into a house, she'd have told the police it was two white males. But since it was two blacks, she had no choice but to tell the cops it was two blacks breaking into a house.

So the cops arrive. They ask Gates for ID, but he refuses to come out of the house. So, what? THese cops are supposed to recognize that Gates is "the pre-eminent black scholar in the US"?

Had he not had a chip on his shoulder, and simply come outdoors and showed the guys his ID and explained what happened, I seriously doubt if he would have been arrested. But he refused to show the cops his ID, so what choice did they have?

And of course, now Al Sharpton is going to get into the act.

So, here's the lesson. Next time two blacks look like they are breaking into a house, don't call the cops. Let them steal whatever they want. It's all you can do, these days.

Black scholar's arrest raises profiling questions
BOSTON – Police responding to a call about "two black males" breaking into a home near Harvard University ended up arresting the man who lives there — Henry Louis Gates Jr., the nation's pre-eminent black scholar.

Gates had forced his way through the front door because it was jammed, his lawyer said. Colleagues call the arrest last Thursday afternoon a clear case of racial profiling.

Cambridge police say they responded to the well-maintained two-story home after a woman reported seeing "two black males with backpacks on the porch," with one "wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry."

By the time police arrived, Gates was already inside. Police say he refused to come outside to speak with an officer, who told him he was investigating a report of a break-in.

"Why, because I'm a black man in America?" Gates said, according to a police report written by Sgt. James Crowley. The Cambridge police refused to comment on the arrest Monday.

Gates — the director of Harvard's W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research — initially refused to show the officer his identification, but then gave him a Harvard University ID card, according to police.
See article for the rest of it

Mark Sanford's Torpedo Has Exploded

The guy abandoned his state, and his family, to fly to Argentina for an affair?

Jesus.

I say kick him out of the governorship, kick him out of politics all together. Let him go live in Argentina with his mistress.

One wonders if he was paid big bucks by Dems to totally make a fool of himself??? Yeah, that's a conspiracy theory, but no wilder than what the moron has actually done.

The Mark Sanford Question

Mark Sanford, the governor of South Carolina, turned down Obama's stimulus money for his state, because of the strings he knew were attached. The guy was a hero...he was primed to run for the 2012 nomination.

Then he pulls a disappearing act. He's hiking the Appilachian trail by himself. His wife doesn't know where he is. His aides don't know where he is, he hasn't been in touch. Then... no, he was actually unwinding in Argentina.

Democrats and some Republicans are saying this was an incredibly stupid thing to do, and that he's torpedoed his chance for the nomination. Others (and I wonder if Limbaugh is among them - I'm currently in a location that doesn't get his show)are saying its no big deal and the Dems are just trying to cause trouble.

My own opinion? The guy's an idiot. If he *was* in touch with his wife and aides all the time, why not say so? Why all the secrecy - which gave the impression that the government of South Carolina was just plain incompetent. It was like the Flyover of New York that caused so much panic. The police knew, but they weren't allowed to tell anyone. That made a heckuva lot of sense.

If Stanford wanted to go away, fine. Just have his press corp say - he's somewhere unwinding. We know where he is but we're not giving out his location.

That would have been 100% better than what did happen.

I frankly wouldn't ever vote for the guy - except perhaps of it was only a choice between him or Obama. If it wasn't stupidity, then there was something fishy going on. But how it was handled was still stupid. You don't say, "We don't know where he is but he does this quite a bit and we're not worried." No, even if that's the truth , you say, "He's taking a break and doens't want the press following him. We know where he is, that's all that matters."

Why do Universities insist Students label themselves culturally?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=7567291&page=4
'White African-American' Suing N.J. Med School for Discrimination
Paulo Serodio Says He Was Harassed, Assaulted After Defining Himself as African-American

Okay, Serodio's great-grandparents came from Portugal, but his family has lived in Mozambique for 3 generations. Serodio was born in Africa, therefore he's African. He moved to the US and obtained American citizenship, therefore he's African American.

What's the big deal?

Well, the big deal is, why was he made to have to define himself "culturally" at all? Isn't the US supposed to be a melting pot? (No, it's supposed to be a multiculturist country where everyone else's culture has to be catered to, and the "american culture" of self-sufficiency has to be left at the wayside.

Here's two sentences from the article:

Filed Monday in U.S. District Court in New Jersey, the lawsuit traces a series of events that Serodio maintains led to his 2007 suspension, starting with a March 2006 cultural exercise in a clinical skills course taught by Dr. Kathy Ann Duncan, where each student was asked to define themselves for a discussion on culture and medicine.

Serodio labeled himself as a white African-American, another student said she was offended by his comments and that, because of his white skin, was not an African-American.

According to the lawsuit, Serodio was summoned to Duncan's office where he was instructed "never to define himself as an African-American … because it was offensive to others and to people of color for him to do so."

Who are these "others"? Self-hating whites who think *they* deserve to be punished for what the culture of the world was like since time began up until about 40 years ago? (As soon as men figured out how to make weapons, the stronger enslaved the weaker.)

and

Zeff pointed out that Serodio only labeled himself after his instructors asked him to do so and was then penalized for it.

and

The lawsuit claims Serodio began to be harassed by other students who sought disciplinary action against him for his statement in Duncan's class, but was never given a chance to defend his views against the complaints.

What right do students have to seek disciplinary action against him. In a cultural class he defined himself as African American. One class! Big deal!

and

In September 2006, Serodio said he again asked to define himself culturally as part of another course exercise. Again, according to the lawsuit he said he was a "white African-American." And again, he was called to the course instructor's office and told never to define himself that way again.

According to the lawsuit, Serodio then wrote an article for the student newspaper, titled "A More Colorful View Than Black and White," in an attempt to explain his self-identification and to call for tolerance at the school.

But when complaints started pouring into Dr. I. Thomas Cohen, then the dean of student affairs, the lawsuit alleges that Serodio was called in again and told by Cohen that if he "lay low for awhile" Cohen would see that a record of the incident would not be placed in Serodio's transcript.

I ask again...why is a medical school asking students to "define themselves culturally"?

Sure, doctors these days need to know the ins and outs of dozens of cultures, because God forbid they should actually offend someone in the US by not treating their culture right, and God forbid these immigrants learn our culture and figure out that if something is done that offends *their* culture, it's not because it's a deliberate insult but because that's the way we do things, and they need to be tolerant of our ways.

Wanda Sykes comments about Limbaugh

Much is being made, in certain circles, about Wanda Sykes jokes about Rush Limbaugh at the Press Corps dinner last night...or the night before..whenever it was.

Supposedly she made some jokes about Obama as well, I dn't see them on YouTube. Of course, it's okay for blacks to make jokes about Obama. Catch a white perosn doing it - even the same joke - and of course they'll be branded a racist and probably lose their job. (And I'm not blaming the oversensitive idiots who scream racism, but the companies, etc. who cave to their threats.)



Obama's comments:





I have to admit that this is the kind of humor that is all the rage these days. Way back in the 1970s the "Dean Martin Roasts" were all the rage, with a variety of comedians putting down the guest of honor. And of course Don Rickles, the king of insult. I've never understood or cared for that kind of humor.

The Hypocrisy of Beauty Pageants

Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was competing to be Miss America, when a gay judge (why would a male gay be judging a woman's beauty pageant?) decided to politicize the contest by asking her if she supported gay marriage. Citing her faith as a Christian, the girl said, No. Perez Hilton, the gay judge, promptly gave her 0 points, causing her to lose the Miss America crown. He also wrote a profanity laden blog entry about her, apparently (I have not read it) criticizing her for daring to answer his question honestly. (Presumably, if she'd lied, but still been homophobic, he'd have voted for her, but because she refused to give her support on national TV, she must be excoriated.)

And then the deification of Carrie Prejean started, with Christian groups praising her for being so brave as to answer such a controversial question honestly. (Because,let's face it. People are not allowed to not be for gay marriage. At least, not to discuss it. They'll get shouted down by demonstrators if they try, much as those who try to explain why illegal immigration is illegal are shouted down.)

But how long will this deification carry on? It has now been revealed that Carrie Prejean, this Christian woman, posed for nude photos. She says she did it when she was 17. People who have seen them say she looks older than 17. But the pageant judges are all upset. Apparently there's some moral clause. If a beauty queen poses for nude photos, she can be stripped of her crown.

And this is just a joke!!!! Prejean has her hands covering her nipples, and is wearing panties. You see those kinds of photos every day in underwear advertisenments.

But more egregious than that is the fact that the beauty pageant people actually paid for this woman to get breast implants!!! Why? Why would they pay for her to get breast implants, and why did she need breast implants any, except for the fact that they wanted her to be more attractive to men, most of whom apparently like big breasted women?

So they want her to be attractive to men, but they don't want her to pose "suggestively." Jeesuz.

Don't get me wrong. I think it is a bit hypocritical for a Christian woman to get breast implants and pose practically nude (if she's got on panties,and is hiding her nipples, she's not really nude).

And I think it's disgusting that any woman will pose like that - for example I believe Kiera Knightly did so, and a few others - and then expect that any man will be able to look at them as other than a sex object again.

It's the same old double standard, though. Take beach volleyball. Guys get to dance around in knee-length bermuda shorts, women have to play in bikinis. Or track and field. If there was any advantage to be gained in wearing bikini bottoms, you know guys would do it. But they don't. The only reason for women to do it, therefore, is so that guys will tune in, or pack the stands, in order to get some eye candy.

What in the world???

I've just turned on Nick - presumably Nickelodian.

The show is a cartoon version of that movie of a few years ago...Barnyard.

So, of course all the animals are walking on their hind legs. Fine.

The male cow, the main character, has udders, just as in the movie. But, ya know, male cows do not have udders! Indeed, it's only the female cattle that are called cows. Male cattle are bulls.

Bulls do not have udders.

Now, the plot of this particular episode, which I came in when it was almost over, was that some cow thought that the main character, a bull (with udders) was her son. So she wants to get married so he'll have a father. But no bulls will marry her, so she chooses a rat. And the bull character, albeit in a fantasy sequence, sees himself having a half-bull half rat sister. Thereby implying that that big ol' cow is going to have sex with that lil bitty rat...and that different animal species must have sex with each other all the time.

Dis-gusting.

Almost as disgusting as what happens in real life, whcih is that guys go around raping cattle and sheep all the time. I don't think it's possible for a woman to get it on with an animal, although legend has it Catherine the Great tried to do so but I seriously doubt it! Anyway, it's obscene. And it should be illegal.

Then again, the next show on Nickelodeon - that's a kid's channel, ya know - was just as obscene. Another one of those children's programs where the girls lust after the boys and are willing to do anything to get a boyfriend, and the boys lust after the girls and eye tehm as sex candy, etc. etc. etc.

No wonder the US is going into the toilet.

Only A Mother

This is the saddest thing I have ever seen in my life.

babyfaithhope.blogspot.com

A pregnant woman had a check of her unborn child done, and it turned out it had encephaly. It did not have a brain. Doctors recommended that she abort the child. She didn't. She gave birth to it.

This was not a child with Down's syndrome, who could lead a happy, productive life once born. This was a child who did not have a brain, period.

So, she gave birth. The child has no brain. It cannot see. It cannot think. It will never be able to do anything except lie on its back and be cared for by the mother. Fed with a spoon. Changed every day, for all her life.

It is just obscene that God would allow such a thing to even happen to a baby. It is just obscene that someone who believed in God would give birth to this poor little thing, rather than euthenize it.

If you read the blog, the woman is clearly extremely religious. At one point apparently she allowed Comments to be made on her blog, and people were reacting to her selfishness with disbelief. Of course, this made no impact. Those people are just "agents of Satan". But that's okay, she forgives us.

I cannot forgive her, however. Her baby has...no...brain. It's a vegetable. And yet she clearly believes God has sent this brainless baby to her as a gift.

How a religious person could believe that God is loving and kind after being visited with this type of child... a child with no brain. She's feeling all noble and brave because she's taking care of this brain-less child....that's the thing, of course. She's feeling noble and brave. Everyone should be impressed with her because of what she must be going through.

Bull-pucky. If she had had an accident and was now in a wheelchair or an iron lung or what have you, and bravely decided that she would not let that handicap stop her, because she still had a brain, and could communicate and create and live, that's one thing. But her child... has.... no.... brain.

I don't know how much clearer to put it. There is no quality of life there. If it itches, it can't tell it's mother where. If it has a pain driving it crazy, it can't tell its mother where. Toothace? You'll just have to suffer, kid. Want to watch TV? Oh, sorry, you're blind. Well,at least you can listen to it.. oops, sorry, you're deaf. Well, at least the plot can be signed into the palm of your hand, the way deaf-blind people communicate with each other. Nope, can't even do that... the baby has... no.... brain.

It is just obscene.

Arlen Specter proves that you can't believe anything politicians say

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on March 19, 2009 that:

Specter staying on Republican ticket

Sen. Arlen Specter yesterday tried to snuff speculation that he was preparing to bolt the Republican Party in the face of a conservative uprising that threatens his bid for a sixth term.

"To eliminate any doubt, I am a Republican, and I am running for reelection in 2010 as a Republican on the Republican ticket," Specter said in a statement released by his campaign manager.

Now, a little more than 30 days later, Specter has converted to the Democrat party.

Specter To Switch Parties

Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter will switch his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat, according to sources informed of the decision.

Specter's decision would give Democrats a 60 seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, assuming Democrat Al Franken is eventually sworn in as the next senator from Minnesota. (Former senator Norm Coleman is appealing Franken's victory in the state Supreme Court.)

Specter as a Democrat would also fundamentally alter the 2010 calculus in Pennsylvania, as he was expected to face a difficult primary challenge next year from former represenative Pat Toomey. The only announced Democrat in the race is former National Constitution Center head Joe Torsella, although several other candidates are looking at the race.

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs needs a teleprompter

As he doesn't think very fast on his feet.



FYI, don't suggest this or that, say, "I was not briefed on that, I will find out and get back to you." Do NOT say, "Contact the White House" when YOU are the White House, for the purposes of that meeting!

I would think that the Air Force would be to blame. Apparently they told the NY Police Department about the planned flyover, but then told *them* not to tell anyone about it because it was top secret! How stupid is that?

Meantime, in a year when Obama is whining about carbon footprints, meanwhile flying in his own pizza chef to make dinner for him and a few friends, Obama keeps flying places to give speeches that could just as easily be televised from the WHite House. Sure, all things being equal its better if Obama is delivering his speeches in person, but things aren't equal, are they? Obama believes in Global Warming, therefore shouldn't he be acting in a more responsible manner, as he expects the citizens of the US to do???

HOw much did it cost for that photo op, for getting the planes ready, etc., and their carbon footprint, and what was the bloody point? It's the POTUS's plane, not him! Nobody cares about that!

Another Case of Do As I Say, Not As I Do

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/04/27/2009-04-27_plane_stupid_mayor_bloomberg_outraged_over_military_photoop_involving_lowflying_.html

This past weekend, Air Power Over Hampton Roads had a ton of airplanes using up a ton of fuel, to entertain thousands of individuals for free. It was a great show, and great photo ops were had.

Then we get the President's photo op. President Obama, the guy who is saying that Cap and Trade is great, and that we all need to inflate the tires in our cars (that's true, by the way, we should. Visual looks of tires don't give good info.), that gas is okay at $4 a gallon and will hopefully go higher so people will stop driving so much...

And yet when the time comes for a photo opportunity, and an opportunity to scare New Yorkers silly, Obama's minions lose no time doing it.

Supposedly the New York police department was told, but they couldn't tell anyone because it was a secret??? If the president wans't on board that plane, why did it need to be a secret?

What was even the point of it? Photo ops consists of presidents getting out of planes to shake the hands of soldiers or other individuals for a job well done. A Presidential Plane flying next to the Statue of Liberty - something that can't happen anymore anyway - ridiculous!

The hypocriticalness of political correctness

First off, let me say that I support gay marriage. Secondly, let me say that I support people's right to free speech. Hell, white supremacists can march on Civil War battlefields, but a woman can't say that she things marriage should be between a man and a woman?

THis is an excerpt from an article from the Washington Times:

Apparently, the Miss USA organizers agree. Instead of apologizing for Mr. Hilton's vile behavior, the pageant director of the Miss California contest, Keith Lewis, sent a note to Mr. Hilton throwing Miss Prejean under the bus: "I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss CA USA 2009 believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman. ... Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA family."

If that's the case, why was Perez Hilton even allowed to introduce politics into his question? Of course, what the author provided was just an excerpt of the letter, perhaps the letter was blaming Hilton as well as the contestant for Hilton's "gay rage" afterwards.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/25/tolerance-in-the-age-of-obama/

Then there's this little bit of free speech denied:

At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill last week, former Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo came to speak against legislative proposals to provide illegal-immigrant students in-state tuition discounts not available to law-abiding Americans and legal immigrants.

Protesters at the institution of higher learning responded by blocking Mr. Tancredo with massive banners and screaming, "No dialogue with hate." Adults in the room stood by while students smashed a window a few feet from where Mr. Tancredo stood. Physically threatened, Mr. Tancredo was forced to leave without delivering his remarks.

According to campus reports, leftists had prepared for a week to mount a speech-squelching demonstration. The same thuggish tactics have been used at Columbia, Georgetown and Michigan State universities to shut down speakers who support strict immigration enforcement. The UNC administration apologized for the students' tantrum but took no steps to examine its own culpability for fostering a climate of intellectual vandalism and intolerance.

Seems like it was the leftist students who were "hate-filled." They should all be shipped off to Mexico for a month or two, and try doing the same kind of thing down there. The cops would have them in jail so fast (because they'd obviously have money that could be extorted) before you could say Jack Robinson.

But of course that's the thing. You can't have a dialog with the left. They don't want to listen to your reasoned arguments, they want to call you a racist immediately, so that instead of being able to make your reasoned arguments, you're forced to defend yourself from their accusations.

Sad...and a sad state for the US, which is going to become a third world country before very long, thanks to those people....and for all right-minded people who stand by and give them sanction - "the sanction of the victim," as Ayn Rand calls it.

Game: Let's Kill a Baby

http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/iphone/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=217100229&subSection=Macintosh+Platform

What sicko could even invent a game where a crying baby is silenced by shaking one's IPhone until it dies. (The game ends when the baby's eyes turn into X-es, signifing death.)

Worse, what kind of sicko would even want to play this game?

Apple on Thursday apologized for offering on its App Store the "deeply offensive" Baby Shaker iPhone application that sparked protests from groups fighting infant abuse.
The company acknowledged that it made a "mistake" approving the application, which depicts a crying baby and has users quiet the infant by vigorously shaking the smartphone. The quieted baby is shown with crosses on its eyes to indicate it's dead.

Their apology:

"This app is deeply offensive and should not have been approved for distribution on the App Store," an Apple spokeswoman told InformationWeek. "We sincerely apologize for this mistake."

She declined to discuss whether the incident indicated that the company's approval process was less than foolproof and in need of review. "We do have a process and this was a mistake," she said. "I don't have any comment beyond that."

Sounds sincere to me.

on the other hand, as usual, people who can make some money out of this debacle look like they're gearing up to do so.

Apple's refusal to disclose how the application found its way onto the App Store was one of several complaints the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation had with the company's apology, which the group called "stale."

"Who is this apology directed to?" said Patrick Donohue, founder of the foundation. "It's directed at the media to kill the story. This is the most cynical apology I have ever seen."

The popularity of the App Store is evident in the 1 billion downloads reached Thursday in nine months. Many users of the online store and the iPhone are young men who as first-time fathers are often the ones who shake crying babies out frustration, causing severe brain damage or death, Donohue said. "You literally couldn't have asked for a worse form of messaging for the demographic that are specifically targeted to prevent shaken baby syndrome."

and

A company called Sikalosoft developed Baby Shaker, which sold for 99 cents. The application is not the first controversial one connected to the App Store. In February, Apple rejected as "potentially offensive" an application that would have shown clips from South Park, the irreverent TV cartoon known for its scathing social commentary.

Frankly, I'd forget the IPhone and go after Sikalsoft and whichever idiot there created this app.

Want the dictates of your will to be carried out?

If you're poor or middle class, I don't think lawyers and judges will care a great deal about where your money goes. You can leave it to your mistress or your dog, and they don't care. It's what you wanted.

When you leave billions of dollars in money, and you specify that that money is ALL supposed to go to dog-related charities, you can bank on your bequests NOT being carried out. So, if those are really your wishes, the only thing to do is start liquidating your estate while you are still alive, and making donations to the charities of your choice, rather than bequests.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090421/ap_en_ot/us_helmsley_dogs

Helmsley's estate announced 53 charitable grants Tuesday, the bulk of which went to New York City hospitals and medical research. The largest grant, $40 million, went to a digestive diseases center at New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center, while $35 million went to start two research facilities in Helmsley's name at Mount Sinai Medical Center.

The estate for Helmsley — who died in 2007 at age 87 — divided $1 million equally to 10 animal rights charities, including the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and several groups that train guide dogs for the blind.

Her estate was worth $137 million (supposedly - who knows how much of that Madoff or other swindlers had?), you would have thought they could spare a million each for those ten animal rights charities, instead of dividing a measley million up between them.

But a surrogate court judge ruled in February that trustees for the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust had sole authority to decide which charities benefit from her estate.

"Throughout their lives, the Helmsleys were committed to helping others through the innovations of medical research of responding to those in need during critical times and in other areas," the trustees said in a statement Tuesday. "We now have the privilege of continuing their good works by providing support where it will make a difference."

So much for trusting trustees.

Private property rights in USA eroding quickly

So now we get this story, which is utterly obscene.

Valley couple can't kick stranger out

SPOKANE -- A stranger moves into the backyard of an elderly Spokane couple's property and now they can't get that woman to leave.

The woman has been living in their garage for almost a month but even so police say she isn't trespassing because police say the property owner's son invited the woman to live in that garage.

Since when should that even matter? The son doesn't own that property, this elderly couple does! The fact that they don't have the right to evict a squatter is beyond obscene.

It all started when Don allowed his stepson to move into the garage three months ago.

"He moved different people in, he had as high as eight people in here at different times and we told him no you stay there and no one else," Bain said.

When Don asked for the guests, including the woman to move out there was a confrontation and his stepson was arrested and taken to jail. The woman and another man stayed without a lease and not a dime paid for rent.

"She don't even pay the light bill," Bain said.

Don called police, hoping they'd be forced to leave, but police say the woman isn't trespassing.

"First of all we understand this is a frustrating situation for the Bains, but she was allowed to live in this facility," Lt. Stephen Jones with the Spokane Valley Police Department said.

Police say it doesn't take much to establish residency...

"There's no cut and dry test for this other than she's been living there for a period of time, her belongings are there and the current resident invited her in and allowed her to live there," Lt. Jones said.

Um, Lt. Jones... the current resident is in jail, and he didn't own the place he was living in, either!

This is just ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than having to allow homeless people to take up space in public libraries and so on.

Round up the homeless and send them to Madagascar or somewhere where they can make their own living off the land, and take them off the public purse. Any immigrants who are homeless - assuming they're illegals - send them back where they came from.

Like your pet? Say goodbye.

http://www.nohr669.com/

.R. 669 stands for House Resolution 669 and is titled "The Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act". It is a bill currently before Congress that if passed will change the way that the US Government classifies animal species that are not native to the United States. H.R. 669 will make it illegal to breed and sell many animals that are very common in the pet trade.

How About Making the Risks Relatively Large?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h5GsQddXmwLT46d8IS07UFzCVkfA

The Somali pirates who took a US merchant captain hostage for five days were heavily armed but inexperienced youths, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday, adding that the hijackers were aged 17 to 19.

The pirates who kidnapped Captain Richard Phillips, three of whom were killed by US Navy snipers Sunday, were "untrained teenagers with heavy weapons," Gates told a group of 30 students and faculty members at the Marine Corps War College in Quantico, Virginia.

"There is no purely military solution to" piracy in the region, he added.

"As long as you've got this incredible number of poor people and the risks are relatively small, there's really no way in my view to control it unless you get something on land that begins to change the equation for these kids."

>>>As long as you've got this incredible number of poor people and the risks are relatively small, there's really no way in my view to control it unless you get something on land that begins to change the equation for these kids

In other words, start paying them money - giving them welfare - so they'll stop kidnapping people and holding ships for ransom?

Here's a way to solve the piracy problem - kill all the pirates. Have a few planes in the area with heat-seeking missiles, and as soon as a pirate vessel leaves its moorings, shoot it out of the water.

Yes, the pirates are poor - although rich enough to buy weapons, apparently - but is it the fault of the US that the Somali government can do nothing for its people? Or rather, wants to do nothing for its people? Let us not forget there are two different tribes in Somali, and like the Hutu and the Tsutsi in Kenya, they both hate each other and think the other tribe inferior. Weird how that happens, isn't it?

Obviously the stakes are raised now. American ships and French ships will now have their crews killed on sight, apparently, which will necessitate Navy ships escorting them. No big deal - that's what navies are for!

Here's info about Somali from the Wikipedia...it's apparently the Muslims who are the pirates...

Italian Somaliland gained its independence from Italy on 1 July 1960. On the same day, it united with British Somaliland, which gained independence on 26 June 1960, to form the Somali republic. The Somali state currently exists largely in a de jure capacity; Somalia has a weak but largely recognised central government authority, the Transitional Federal Government (TFG), but this is only the latest in a string of ineffectual, externally recognized governing authorities.[4]

De facto control of the north of the country resides in the regional authorities. Of these, Puntland, Northland State, Maakhir, Galmudug, acknowledge the authority of the TFG and maintain their declaration of autonomy within a federated Somalia, while Central, Southern Somalia, and Kismayo (the third largest city in Somalia) are under the control of the Islamic Courts Union and Al-Shabab. Baidoa is currently the seat of the TFG, and Somalia's commercial centre. On the other hand, the Somaliland region in the north, with its capital in Hargeisa, has unilaterally declared independence and does not recognise the TFG as governing authority.[2] It is unrecognised internationally due in part to opposition from the TFG and other countries, such as neighbouring Ethiopia, which fear ensuing secessionist movements.[5]

Interestingly, while AIDS is ravaging much of Africa, it is relatively unknown in Somalia, due, it is presumed, to the Muslim religion there. (Although one wonders if it's that, or if it's because, with the country being in such a state of flux, there's just no way to know who has AIDs and who doesn't?)

What were these people thinking?????

When I was a kid growing up, the Frito Bandito was on all the airwaves. And I loved that character! But of course he had to go, because he was apparently insulting to Mexicans.

Now Burger King has just launched a new "Tex-Mex" burger in Spain, and it most defnitely is insulting to Mexicans..all you have to look at it. Tall cowboy, short, fat Mexican.

And I'm wondering - did they have their Spanish advertising people come up with this, or did they come up with this gem in the USA? I mean, you're trying to sell something to Spaniards, why would you want to show someone short and fat... that's not the way to do it!



I just wonder sometimes if advertising people have ulterior motives... but even if they do, surely the people buying the advertising are smart enough to know when something is offensive? I mean - if that fat, short Mexican had been a fat short woman, the reaction would have been the same, surely.

It's one thing to be ridiculously politically correct, and its quite another to be stupid. A blustering bandito is funny, kind of like a Mexican Yosemite Sam, but a short, fat guy matched up against a tall lean cowboy... how can they not see that that would be offensive? (Never mind the fact that they use the Mexican flag like a cape - which is tabu in Mexico. Quite a change from the US, where you can burn the US flag without fear of recrimination. Freedom of speech, don'tcha know.)

But then, what do I know? A few years ago there was some kind of campaign where a lot of black guys went around saying, "Yo." I thought for sure that would be pulled quickly because it was offensive, making them look stupid, instead, it turned out to be extremely popular.

ANd quite a few times I've seen a commercial about phone service in Barbados, making the Barbadians look like total idiots. It's funny, but they do look stupid. And yet, it doesn't seem to have been pulled, either, and I would have thought people of color would have thought it offensive.

If only I had the power to vaporize people...

A couple of days ago, an Angels pitcher, Nick Adenhart, was killed by a hit and run driver. Two other people in the car with him were also killed, but of course since the pitcher, being so high-profile, is the one getting all the press.

Until today when a website called TMZ printed a photo of the woman who was killed, Courtney Stewart.

This site allows people to comment on their articles, and for every 3 or 4 comments that express their sorrow at the waste of such young lives, or anger at the killer and his driving drunk and with a suspended license, there is at least 1 vile comment by someone actually expressing joy that this young woman is dead.

Of course these people don't have to use their correct names when they post - that's the anonymous safety of the internet. It's too bad, because I'd really like to track each one of them down, frogmarch them into a bathroom, and stick their head into a toilet for several minutes. (To be sure, if they're too big, I'd hire someone to do it... neverthless, no more than what they deserve. They are as big a waste of air, space and food as the loser who killed them in the first place.

http://www.tmz.com/2009/04/09/person-who-drove-adenhart-so-cal-girl/

Intimidation rules in the USA today

If somebody wants to buy a pet from a breeder, it is nobody's business but their own.

Yet PETA has seized upon the fact that Vice President Biden bought a dog from a breeder, saying that it meant a dog at a shelter was killed (yet - most pets in PETA care are killed) and now this poor women is getting death threats and being harassed by various agencies.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Bidens-Puppy-Breeder-Never-never-never-again.html?yhp=1

This type of crap is what is bringing down America.

"I thought when Joe Biden bought a puppy from me, what an honor," Brown told the Daily Local News. "Out of millions of breeders in the country, in the world, he picked me."

That was December.

When the story got out, Brown faced backlash from pet lovers who thought the Bidens should have opted for a shelter over a breeder to find their new puppy.

PETA seized the moment as an opportunity to blame the killing of shelter animals on people who buy from breeders. The organization's TV commercial, "Buy One, Get One Killed" ran in Delaware after the Biden puppy story made headlines.

Dog wardens from the state showed up at Brown's Wolf Den kennel, repeatedly, for inspections.

"I was cited for a piece of kibble on the floor and five strands of dog hair. They took a picture of that, they walked around, snapped pictures and don't tell you why," Brown told the newspaper.

She was found "not guilty" for each citation, but hiring a lawyer for the court hearings has cost her $4,000 so far in legal fees.

Brown says she and Biden both received death threats from animal activists.

Now, where do I get my facts about PETA:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/5106600/Peta-under-fire-over-claim-that-it-khttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/5106600/Peta-under-fire-over-claim-that-it-kills-most-animals-left-at-its-US-headquarters.htmlills-most-animals-left-at-its-US-headquarters.html

But now Peta - People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - is itself on the receiving end of angry words over its own treatment of animals after it emerged that the organisation put down 96 per cent of the animals handed into its American headquarters. Of 2,216 animals taken to its premises in Norfolk, Virginia, last year, 2,124 were put to sleep - almost six per day. Homes were found for just seven.

The high-profile charity, famous for its "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" campaigns, has euthanised more than 20,000 pets in the last decade, according to figures it has supplied to Virginia state officials.

Injure your thumb and get millions. Get murdered, family gets nothing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1169009/Family-father-stabbed-death-thugs-denied-compensation--tried-fight-back.html

England has gone to the dogs, I'm afraid, and of course the US will not be far behind.

A young man was woken in the middle of the night by 4 youths outside his house being too noisy. He goes down to ask them to be quiet, he makes the mistake of stepping outside, and was stabbed to death.

Since he "contributed to his own death" by stepping outside, his family deserves no compensation.

Meanwhile, prisoners in UK jails are routintely given millions of dollars because their human rights were violated (they were denied cocaine), and a woman at a department of defense job injured her thumb (oh, horrors) and gets a half million pounds in compensation!

The family of a man who was stabbed to death by teenage thugs after he asked them to keep the noise down have been denied compensation - because he tried to fight off his killers.

Kevin Johnson, 22, was brutally murdered by the gang who invited him to 'meet Mr Stanley' during a confrontation outside his home moments before plunging a blade into his chest, arm and back.

The young father collapsed a few feet from his front door whilst the trio - aged 19, 16 and 17 - ran off in 'triumphant mood' before stabbing their second victim a short distance away.

According to the CICA the parents, child, husband, wife or partner of a person who died as a result of a violent crime can claim up to £11,000 for the loss of their life.

Yet that figure is dwarfed by the amount paid to an RAF typist last year who injured her thumb at work and was awarded half a million pounds by the Ministry of Defence.
Mr Johnson, who works as a taxi driver, said his case simply highlighted how badly victims' families are treated by the Government.

He said he and his wife, Kath, 59, their son's fiancee Adele Brett, 28, and their one year old son, Chaise, were condemned to a life sentence after his death in May 2007. The rejection for compensation had only added to their pain, he added.

Recent figures showed that inmates in British prisons were awarded £6.5million for injuries between 2005 and 2007, for claims including assaults, medical negligence, unlawful detention and sports injuries.

Drug-addicted prisoners at some jails received compensation because their human rights were breached when they were denied drugs such as heroin and substitute substances.

Will Grounding Your Children Become Illegal?

It appears to be headed that way in Canada.

Quebec dad sued by daughter after grounding loses his appeal

The family's legal wrangling started with a dispute over the girl's internet use.

'Either way, he doesn't have authority over this child anymore. She sued him because she doesn't respect his rules. It's very hard to raise a child who is the boss.'

— Kim Beaudoin, the father's lawyerShe had been living with her father after her parents split up when he grounded her in 2008 for defying his order to stay off the internet. The father caught her chatting on websites he had blocked, and alleged his daughter was posting "inappropriate pictures" of herself online.

Her punishment: she was banned from her Grade 6 graduation trip to Quebec City in June 2008, for which her mother had already granted permission.

The father — who had custody — withheld his written permission for the trip, prompting the school to refuse to let the girl go with her classmates.

That's when the girl asked for help from the lawyer who represented her in her parents' separation, and petitioned the court to intervene in her case.

Since when does a 12-year-old girl get to sue a parent for being grounded for breaking the rules of the home???

This wasn't a case of physical or emotional abuse, but rather of a spoiled brat, apparently, who didn't want to obey her father's rules.

The court should never have accepted the case in the first place, but should certainly never have judged for the 12-year-old girl.

Parents already can't spank their children. Now they can't ground them? Soon they probably won't even be able to touch them without permission from the state!