Saturday, December 04, 2010

Have a Very PC Winter Holiday

Once again, those steeped in political correctness attempt to make amends for actions that offend almost nobody. In Philly, the world"Christmas" is to be obliterated from the arch of a traditional holiday fair. It's ludicrous, especially in context that this was supposed to be a replica of a German village. Why is it that so many people who claim to embrace Freedom of Religion, seems to be so hellbent on denying that freedom to others.

It's like television. There are shows I hate-mostly reality shows and celebrity gossip shows-and shows I love. I don't want the other shows taken off the air, I just don't watch them. I don't want anyone else deprived of their worship and in schools and government we are urged to respect the rights of those who are out during feasts such as Ramadan, Eid, Yom Kippur, Chinese New Year and heaven knows what else. But where are the champions for those who want to express their Christian views?

I their wacky goony PCness, government entities large and small seem to be more reminiscent of hooting owls that turn their heads hooting angrily should anyone dare to disturb the status quo. They issue mandates banning this nativity scene, that Christmas sign and issue orders to respond "happy holiday" in an attempt to offend no one. Seriously, what kind of person is offended by good wishes even if it is in the context of someone's faith? I grew up in an area where there were three large synagogues. On Friday I would offer our neighbors a cheerful "Good Sabbath" just as they would wish my family a "Happy Easter" during the Paschal Feast. Freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom FROM religion. Frankly the forces of the Left who continue to play religion's gadflies end up alienating far more people than they attract. I won't wish them Merry Christmas if they can't handle it. But I wonder what kind of person would rather hear nothing than accept a wish of good will.

In that regard, I offer a recap of this column by
Kathleen Vallee Stein / December 16, 2009 Monrovia, Calif.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2009/1216/Is-it-OK-to-wish-Jews-a-Merry-Christmas

Like most Jews, I don’t take offense when someone wishes me a Merry Christmas. I take it in the spirit in which the salutation is intended: a generic greeting that doesn’t hold deep religious meaning. I put it up there with “Have a nice day.”

It’s a dark time of year and for me the lights, decorations, illuminated trees, and greetings of Christmas cheer are an attempt to lighten things up, that’s all. On a deeper level, the wish of a Merry Christmas means: Let’s get through the dark winter months until the sun comes back again.

In recent years, people tend to get nervous about offending the religious sensitivity of others. Especially at Christmas. Debates circulate about putting Christmas trees or manger scenes on public land. Some attempt to mitigate the issue by saying “Happy Holidays” rather than “Merry Christmas.”

But I have never met a Jewish person who felt seriously insulted by a holiday greeting; we understand the tsunami of Christmas and go with the flow.

Sure, there are religious decorations among the Santa-and-his-reindeer displays and inflated plastic snowmen. The crèche scenes remind Christians of the real purpose of the holiday. For the rest of us, the lights and decorations are pretty to look at.

My husband and I drive around and look at Christmas lights every year. It doesn’t move us to convert to Christianity or question our Jewish faith. It’s pretty clear to us that Christmas decorations are put out on lawns, strung along gutters, and sometimes placed on rooftops, to decorate the house, not to proselytize or move someone to religious rapture.

The most important Jewish holidays do not have any fictional characters to go along with them like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. They are deeply moving and meaningful to Jews, but there isn’t any bling.

On Yom Kippur, the most solemn day of the year, we fast, not feast. We sit in the synagogue the entire day and break the fast after sundown. It is spiritually rigorous and a time for self-reflection.

Since we don’t have any fun stuff to augment our holy day, we vicariously enjoy Christmas cheer, but it does not undermine our beliefs. After all, Judaism is the foundation of Christianity and both faiths share many values.

In recent years retailers have been catching on and now sell us deprived Jews some goodies for Hanukkah. Although the holiday is not the most important one on the Jewish calendar, some fun traditions have grown up around it and the accouterments are a retailer’s dream.

I have Hanukkah-themed guest towels in my bathroom that are embroidered with dreidels and menorahs. I even succumbed to the charm of a string of Hanukkah lights to hang in the window.

I live far-flung from the areas of California where a Jewish family seems to live on every block, but even the grocery stores out here have small displays with Hanukkah merchandise in an attempt to be respectful or to capitalize on our holiday. It’s quite funny actually: It seems as if no one in the store knows exactly when Hanukkah is, so they put things out during Christmas and hope for the best.

Irving Berlin (a Jew) wrote a beloved Christmas song, “White Christmas.” Mel Tormé (a Jew) wrote the charming lyrics “Chestnuts roasting on an open fire/ Jack Frost nipping at your nose,” from “The Christmas Song.”

And then there are the Christmas albums featuring Barry Manilow and Barbra Streisand, just to mention a couple more great Jewish names. When it comes to popular music, Jews have contributed plenty to the joy of the Christmas season.

I say to Christians and others who celebrate Christmas, don’t worry about your Jewish friends and acquaintances, we are just fine. The overwhelming majority of us will respond with a cheery “Merry Christmas” back at you.

To quote the end of Mr. Tormé’s “The Christmas Song:” “And so I’m offering a simple phrase/ To kids from one to 92/ Although it’s been said many times/ Many ways, Merry Christmas to you.”

Oh, and “Happy Hanukkah,” too.

Kathleen Vallee Stein is a freelance writer.

Saturday, October 09, 2010

Why I Hate Insurance Companies

My son was hit by a drunk driver last week.
Luckily, he wasn't seriously hurt. Looking at the wreckage, that in itself is amazing. So I am thankful for that. What I am angry about is the reaction of the drunk's insurance company-one whose name you know. Their spokesperson is a woman named Flo. The story begins as my son is heading back from the Subaru dealership where he had just purchased a new air intake for the Impreza WRX he had bought two months earlier. It was not a new car by any means, but the interior looked like new and the few dings on the doors were largely cosmetic ones that he planned to have repaired down the road. While driving along a rather large street a man in a 2009 Jaguar ran a light at a left turn hitting a Mustang in the inside lane and then my son. Both the Mustang and my son's car were totaled. While my son was in the ambulance being looked at by EMT's, the guy in the Jag ran. He was caught down the road and failed the field sobriety test. So you would think that seeing he was drunk, he ran and he was arrested that this specific insurance company would want to settle quickly. And they did settle with the guy in the Mustang who had comprehensive. But this is a 21 year old and comprehensive insurance is costly. So they are trying to screw him over by offering less than half of what it will take to replace his used car. He wasn't expecting a new car. His request was to have enough to replace the cute little blue WRX that he had lusted after since sixth grade. But the insurance company tried to snow him with alleged comparable cars for sale in the area. Never mind that we had been on every single general and specific auto site for the American southwest seeking comparable pricing. So they think they will simply allow him to dangler on the vine. The problem is, he started a new job this week which is farther away. He was borrowing a car, but it has problems. My own car is currently in the shop for radiator problems and his dad needs his car for business. So my son is in the position of being forced to take a lowball offer or lose his job. This is a travesty. The drunk guy lives in a very nice house, is 63 years old and a stockbroker. He could probably write a personal check to cover this and everyone would be happy. Instead his jerky insurance company is pushing us to sue. They even yelled at my son "Nobody is going to take this case! You better settle or your will lose even this." which tells me they are playing defense. The guy that hit him was drunk, the drunk ran, he was arrested. Therefore, the ball is in his court. As much as I hate to do it, we will be talking to lawyers this week. This is why lawyers continue to get rich and why average folks despise insurance companies.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

The Need for ID: The Ultimate Irony

It's the second day of school
There is a kindergartner still at school 20 minutes after the noon dismissal.
Other students are coming in.
So when a man says he's here to pick up the kid, do you simply turn the child over to him?
There's more to the story. This particular school is in a mainly Hispanic area of Dallas. Many of the people in the area participated in a variety of marches and protests regarding things like requiring identification to vote, to live in an apartment in Farmers Branch TX and even traveled to Arizona to protest their law. What was that law again? Oh yes, the law was that people had to give law enforcement officers valid identification during the investigation of a crime or a traffic stop. People, including the president, are so up in arms over this law that the Attorney General is suing Arizona, despite the fact that many other states have similar laws on the books.

But back to Maple Lawn Elementary. You have a largely Hispanic parent population AND staff. The prevailing attitude is that asking for identification is "bad." So you don't require it. Instead you have this kind of laissez faire system where parents or other adults wander in, pick up random kids and then go. There's no list of acceptable rides home-banning non-custodial parents or vindictive exes from taking the children. There's no check of identification to ascertain that this person is who he or she claims. In short, it's a seriously delinquent system that was imposed because of a politically correct attitude that puts children in danger. Luckily this time, it was (supposedly) a case of mistaken identity. But the bottom line is this-in this modern society having valid identification is NOT optional. You must use it for writing checks, banking, loans, school access and to pick up your child at most daycare centers.

This is the same mentality that made Army officers hesitate to turn in one of their own that seemed a bit off and was embracing a jihadist attitude. That ended in treachery at Fort Hood when people DIED because someone was so very very afraid of causing offense. Of course there is also the side story that offense can often lead to expensive lawsuits. At some point we have to reel in the lawyers and stop tiptoeing around issues based on something as vaporous as hurting someone's feelings. PC attitudes are going to get people killed. This time we got lucky.

Monday, August 02, 2010

Creeping Liberalism

I admit it. I have watched Extreme Home Makeovers for a long time. I like shows where they take things that are broken or tattered and fix them. As the seasons have gone on, there have been serious undercurrents regarding past recipients of these over the top custom homes. I had wondered how a bigger house would translate into higher energy bills and property taxes for the willing recipients, but evidently that wasn't a consideration. I had also wondered why rather than salvaging some materials, the show resorted to increasingly elaborate ways of demolishing the existing, and evidently deficient, homes. Not content with bulldozers, the show has been exploding the houses leaving little to be salvaged. I also have an issue over what I see as over-specialized and highly limited spaces for children. That racecar bed or that princess castle has a limited desirability. Wouldn't it make more sense to do something that would allow for flexibility? I mean, I understand wanting to make the spaces special and I admit that I spent an entire night painting my own daughter's room pink for her fifth birthday, but you can make decisions that are adaptable for later use and more practical. That seems to be the sum total of my doubts, these houses, while they are superficially beautiful and wonderfully furnished, are sometimes more of an albatross than a swan.

So, I did some research and found these following stories. It's not all of the families that received the houses who are subject to these stories, but there are enough issues that I have to wonder if the producers of this show are paying attention to the aftermath. In one case, a California family took in five orphaned brothers to get a new nine bedroom house and then systematically moved the boys out. In another case the family took out a second mortgage of $450K and then lost the house for failure to pay. If you read in the comments, it is alarming how people who are given a luxury home that most of us will never be able to afford, and have their old mortgage paid off and have their medical bills paid and have college paid for all their children would somehow be able to manage things better.

http://www.therealestatebloggers.com/%20/real-estate-fraud/ge...
(read the comments....astounding)
http://www.arizonahousingbubble.com/2007/what-happens-to-thos...
(you will have to scroll down for this one)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8973501/
http://mikecandoit.com/real-estate/extreme-makeover-house-goi...
http://www.azcentral.com/style/hfe/decor/articles/2009/10/03/...
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/pardonourdust/2008/06/for-sal...

Please. take a look at these stories. You will find people compelled by greed to pretend they would offer children a home in order to get a new house. You will find people who absolutely could not handle money. You will also find out that the size of these houses pose a huge hurdles in terms of maintenance that was not anticipated by the producers or the recipients. The only thing that mattered was building the house.

At this point, you may be wondering about the title of this blog. I think this show demonstrates how well meaning liberal policies in government can be as much of a disability as a bonus. I am sure that the producers of this show are well meaning. They really want to help these needy people. But instead of giving them practical solutions and skills, the show makes the mistake of giving these families everything and not asking if there were skills in place to maintain them. Is this not what our government is aiming to do with every additional program down the line? By simply turning over money or grants or goods to people without making sure that they understand how to effectively use them in many ways is worse than doing nothing.

I think this gets at the core of the anger demonstrated by conservatives. There is no more giving nation than the United States. We gave billions in aid to Aceh after the devastating tsunami. We have given and are giving more to African nations than any other nation in the world. And that goes for nations like Somolia who are actively seeking to destroy us. There are countless charities that go around the world to make it a better place. When a crisis occurs, the US is where they turn for help. Many of the people who donate and work with charities do so on the groundroots level via local charities and churches. I know many who contribute time and money who are conservative. They don't want their names in lights, but they also don't like it that their contributions are ignored. The solution for many of our problems will not and cannot a liberal solution, nor will it be a conservative solution. But it must be pragmatic and practical. Right now what the administration is offering is the same as Extreme Home Makeover-all the goodies with no strings attached. Unfortunately, there are always strings attached.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Another Excuse For Honor Killings

Please, tell me again about Islam-the religion of peace. Tell me how women are free, even though they can be stoned to death based on nothing more than rumors. Tell me how high minded Islam is in regard to children, that can be used as shields, bartered for trade or killed outright for any infringment of parental authority regardless of the law of the land.

Now tell me that Canada is not complicit in allowing this to happen. Tell me that allowing the women who murdered her own daughter somehow deserves freedom of house arrest while her daughter lies dead in her grave. This is political correctness gone mad. To allow this based on the previous sufferings of the mother is to give tacit approval to sharia law and by association to a host of abusive family behaviors just because Canadian courts are too cowed by the implied threat of someone being mad at them.

Shame on you Canada, shame.

"(CTV News Calgary) — Lawyers for a Calgary woman who killed her 14-year-old daughter during a fight say she shouldn’t go to prison.

A judge is hearing sentencing arguments in the case of Aset Magomadova.

She was convicted of manslaughter for strangling her daughter Aminat in 2007 with a scarf.

During her trial, Magomadova testified that Aminat attacked her with a chair and threatened her with a knife.

The teen had a history of drug abuse.

Prosecutors say Magomadova should spend 12 years in prison.

Much of the focus of the hearing is on the trauma Magomadova suffered during the Chechen War.

A psychologist is on the stand Wednesday talking about Magomadova’s mental state.

The 39-year-old refugee’s husband was killed by a bomb in Chechnya.

She was badly wounded during the Chechen war.

When she came here in 2003, her children had a tough time adjusting to life in Canada.

Aminat got in trouble with the law and drugs.

But prosecutors point out that Magomadova showed no remorse or even regret for her daughter’s death.

They say she sees herself as the victim.

Doctor Patrick Baillie says Magomadova suffered from post traumatic stress disorder."

THERE IS NO EXCUSE.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

How Come We Didn't Hear About This in 2008?

It seems something strange is happening in regards to the DNC. Suddenly all those claims that voter fraud occurred are starting to take on lives of their own. I witnessed voter intimidation as Obama supporters surged into a caucus and took over the meeting. Whereas the Texas polling was fairly close, former Clinton strongholds were suddenly tipping for Obama. Now a documentary has come out. And it's by a Democrat who is appalled at what is happening to polling places and voters in the name of controlling power. To keep up, just this week it was released that felons who may not have had the permission to vote, votes for Al Franken, putting him in office. And then the Big One, Obama campaigns strongarmed many precincts in many states into submission. There are some big questions to be answered and the Clinton campaign tried to get the media to pay attention, but they were too busy with the coronation of Obama. Right now I see Hilary sitting back and watching it all unfold. It doesn't hurt that her old hunting buddy James Carville is polling negatives for teh DNC right. In short, there is trouble in DNC paradise.
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/04/texas-caucus-fraud/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGZFgMNM-UU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXNqFQmGxDU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4XFvq5XMk8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnclKiHwatw

Did Obama Steal the Primary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ccbd4DbpS4c&feature=player_embedded

Sunday, July 11, 2010

On Impeachment: A Serious Discussion

In browsing through Half Price Books Political Section, I came across the book entitled "The Genuis of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism" by John Nichols. Written during the GWB years, and including a forward by Gore Vidal, well known radical Leftist, I expected it to be more or less a diatribe against the Bush Administration. To an extent, it was. But there were also quotes from Founders and previous elected officials and presidents that apply in depth to this administration. The application to current events has as much to do with time as with people. Many of those who are currently rallying to protect this administration from impeachment are the same folks who as young congressmen and women were actively involved in The Impeachment in the form of the Nixon presidency and resignation. Because so many of them are still in office, they tend to believe that their party holds some sort of moral supremacy simply based on their partisanship. Read some of the comments below and ask yourself if it doesn't make you stop and go hmmmmm.......My comments are in blue

"Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone."--Thomas Jefferson
We are increasingly approaching a day when common decisions by free individuals will be taken out of their hands. We have already seen the subjugation of a large part of the population via the vehicles of public assistance. Assistance means help, but what help is it when in order to recieve money you must jettison marriage and male parents leaving broken families in the wake. This is the legacy of public assistance and it's result is generational poverty with the offshoots of crime, illegitimacy, addiction and death.

"No point is of more importance than that the right of impeachment shall be continued. Shall any man be above Justice?"--George Mason, Father of the Bill of Rights addressing the Constitutional Convention 1787
Consider for a moment that the use of a crisis, any crisis, to leverage partisan legislation has already been disingenuously used by the current administration. They have breeched the trust of the people through hiding the true costs and the mechanisms and agencies used to enforce their agenda. The healthcare bill would be one example, but the positioning for Immigration is also one that allows citizens to be imperiled while the adminsitration uses incipient danger to push their cause in a panic mode. No legislation should be compelled by such extortive methods.

"If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that eighteenth century document should be abandoned to a twentieth century paper shredder."--Barbara Jordan in reference to the Nixon impeachment
We currently have a candidate for the Supreme Court that is of the school of thought that the Constitution is a "living document" and that it must conform to the fluidity of political thought. By that light, we no longer have structure in government, but instead have a type of magic carpet mentality that would allow for fluidity in the face of the rule of law. This is the type of situational ethics that allows for illegal immigrants to work, receive services and live in this nation without contibuting in the same way citizens are expected to respond.

"Some say this is a sad day in American history. I think it could perhaps be one of our brightest days. It could be really a test of the strength of our Constitution, because what I think it means to most Americans is that when any president violates his sacred oath of office, the people are not left helpless." --Con. Charles Rangel
I wonder if Charles Rangel now would echo those words, of if he simply wrapped himself in the Constitution when it suited his purposes.

"I am fully aware that many American people consider that the president is being attached by sinister forces in this country, by the left-wing press or by the Democrats, and I can assure this gentleman that it matters not to me his party or his position. He is subject to the rule of law and to justice, and in my role under my oath he will get it, be he president or be he pauper."--James Mann, referencing the Nixon impeachment
Note that President Obama has banished Fox News and repeatedly complained about unfair treatment any time his actions are called into question. This type of childish behavior calls into question whether citizens are even allowed to question the actions of the administration. Indeed, in the more liberal media circles, such doubting would be hooted down with cries labeling you as racist or rednecked or simply stupid. This is the type of treatment that groups such as Tea Partyers, Sarah Palin Supporters and others have recieved regularly. The fact that a wealthy background supporter funds groups organized to disrupt, brings into question the propriety of having such a person regularly giving input to national issue.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong is not only unpatriotic ans servile, but it is morally treasonable to the American People."---President Theodore RooseveltTreasonable.
That's an interesting term. So if the compliant media, in failing to allow criticism and indeed in framing public addresses such as the one in Grand Isle, LA in such a light that favors the White House and President Obama, is shielding the president from criticism, are they committing treason? And if they are getting suggestions for stories or angles that flatter the White House, are they in fact abdicating their roles as members of a "free press?

"I do not believe that our people can tolerate the formation of a presidential precedent which would permit any occupant of the White House to exercise his untrammeled discreation to take over the industry, communications system or other forms of private interprise in the name of "emergency." --George Bender, Republican of Ohio in reference to Truman's takeover of the steel industry, 1952
Note how many industrial bases have been taken over by this president in power. Automaking, banking, mortgage loans, medical services, drug manufacturing and more. If we are truly a free enterprise economy, those corporations that did bad things would fail. Instead we propped them up and at a great cost to this generation and future ones in the form of taxes. This would seem to grossly overstep the powers of the Chief Executive's office and be almost a type of coercion for compliance within political circles as in a "don't rock the boat" type message.

"The powers of impeachment is the Constitution's paramount power of self-preservation."--Robert McClory, Republican of Illinois, 1974
Once again, the collusion of partisan ideals between Legislative and Executive Branches of government leave the Judiciary as the only possibility of recourse or dissent. Stacking the court with partisans that accept situational ethics over Constitutional rule of law will permit egregious actions in absolute defiance to the will of the people. It is dangerous.

"When the Chief Executive of the country starts to investigate private citizens who criticize his policies or authorizes subordinates to do such things,then I think the rattle of the chains that would bind up our constitutional freedoms can be heard, and it is against this rattle that we should awake and say no."--Con. William Cohen, Maine, in regards to the Nixon impeachment
There have been repeated suggestions that President Obama might be given the power to control the Internet. Already the ability to oppose the government in the media is being attacked via the misnamed "Fairness Act" that would impose programming limitations intending to drive largely conservative Talk Radio off the air. There are also actions in play to subsidize failing newspapers. How objective do you believe these news outlets would be when the government controls what they receive. One of the first actions taken by usurpers and tyrants is to control the media. When we have these messages being accepted by members of one party, everyone should be concerned. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

" ..For Barr, it had never been about sex with interns. He had become enraged at a much earlier stage in the Clitnon presidency, after it was revealed that White House staffers had obtained confidential files on Republican officials, apparently for political purposes...'Initially, primarily watching the way the people in the White House operate, it rasied some very serious questions in my mind. They didn't seem to care at all what the law allowed then to do or prohibited them from doing.....'What bothers me most is the abuse of power'...'The Constitution provides a mechanism, a political tool for a political offense.In our system of government, the only vehicle we have to remove somebody from office, if they abuse their office, is impeachment."--quote from book by John Nichols, referencing Con. Bob Barr, Georgia, on the impeachment of President Clinton, 1997
It's ironic that political history parallels sports history. When SMU was given the Death Penalty by the NCAA, the devastation of their athletic programs made the NCAA hesitant to give such a penalty to larger players in places like Alabama, Nebraska, Oklahoma for fear of similar total meltdowns. After the impeachment of Nixon and his resignation in disgrace, many in Congress were reluctant to approach the idea of impeachment even though many of the crimes noted were just as bad or worse in the Clinton White House. Such reticence continues although within the general population outside the Beltway, people are repeatedly asking why this adminsitration continues to behave in such highly partisan and destructive ways. The punishment of Red States through dismissal of their claims or dithering, as witnessed with the Oil Spill, is causing many to fear that this has become yet another Imperial Presidency where there is retribution and revenge exacted for failure to comply with their agenda.
"Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of. Our enemies are numerous and powerful; but we have many firends, detemining to be free and heaven adn earth witll aid the resolution. On you depends the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rests the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Acti worthy of yourselves."--Joseph Warrne, Boston Massacre Oration, 1775
And, I would add, Remember in November.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

University of Illinois Instructor Fired Over Catholic Beliefs

The following story deals with intellectual narrowing of our universities. A Catholic professor, teaching a course on Catholicism is anonymously accused of hatespeech for daring to claim that he conforms to the belief that homosexuality is flawed. The University of Illinois is no long a true university as it only allows for the limited expression as defined by the politically correct and the politically leftist mentality. This is wrong. It smacks of the turning over of those that failed to adhere to the Communist Party Line during the bad old days of the USSR. What next? Pogroms? At what point are Americans going to be allowed to truly have freedom of speech, freedom of thought. This is appalling. University of Illinois should be ASHAMED.
University of Illinois Instructor Fired Over Catholic Beliefs

Friday, July 02, 2010

21 killed near U.S.-Ariz. border as Obama speechifies about Immigration Reform

21 killed near U.S.-Ariz. border as Obama speechifies about Immigration Reform

Why Is the Gulf Clean Up So Slow

Why Is the Gulf Clean Up So Slow

Obama and the Oil Spill: Points to Ponder

The Gulf Oil Spill will go down as one of the most disastrous manmade catastrophes in modern history, of that there is no question. But such accidents don't happen in a vacuum. A friend of mine that is a police officer said "Fatality accidents are usually a series of bad decisions." I believe that axiom could also be applied to this crisis as well.First, a long time ago a raw young senator was plucked by very powerful millionaires to carry the banner for what they hoped would be a more easily controlled, "less cowboy" president. Names like Soros, Pickens, Buffet carry a great deal of political and economic power behind them. And rich people have rich friends. While the elite of the wealthy often have charities and such, they also indulge in pay for play, meaning that they massage the political strata and expect conciliatory payback down the line. British Petroleum was also an early corporate contributor to the Obama campaign. These powerful groups mobilized with their fellow millionaires to create a perfect storm of an election. Whether it was supplying ad space, or brokering air time or actually creating out of whole cloth a web site whose only purpose seemed to be to push Obama into the presidency, these folks were willing to do it.Obama gets elected after an exercise of some of the most egregiously biased media coverage of the history of the nation. In a type of casting like "American Idol" opposing candidates are pushed aside. Media time cannot be bought and newspapers will not cover some of the candidates early on in the primary season. Instead just a few are covered-Obama, Clinton, Romney and McCain. McCain is bringing up the rear, but suddenly gets a flurry of media coverage. Nobody bothers to ask why.The casting is complete, old guy vs, young hip minority guy, aging veteran vs. Ivy League lawyer. McCain, not surprisingly, loses. Obama, shaped by a coalition of very powerful people is in office.

Once Obama's in office, policy is set based on political premise over pragmatic goals. British Petroleum weighs in heavily to advising the White House on energy policy. Just days before Deepwater Horizon blows out, inspectors give it a clean bill of health. LIkewise, despite over 700 violations, BP gets awards from the government. When compared to other operators in the area, BP has the lion's share of violations, but is still given slaps on the wrists, until the wellhead blows killing 11 people. April 20, 2010, Deepwater Horizon explodes. This is unusual for a few reasons. First, while it is flammable, oil itself is slower to burn than gas, Any gas layers into the system should have set off alarms. It is believed that methane was the culprint for the explosion. The first reaction was to blame the entire process of deepwater drilling.This totally ignores that beach communities have pushed for oil rigs to be out of sight. This moves rigs beyond areas where repairs could be completed using divers. Once you are in the middle of the Gulf, you are in deep sea water.

The next blame was justifiably placed on British Petroleum. They cut corners and people died as a result. But who allowed the corners to be cut? Where were the inspectors on this issue?Moving forward, trying to spin the problem, in-house BP advisors tell the White House that sure it's a bad spill but that it can be fixed. Obama, believing them, puts off definitive action. This is critical to realize that had some actions like skimmers and booms been mobilized immediately much of the coastal marshland could have been salvaged. Instead, Obama,Emmanual, Axelrod, those guys who don't like to waste a crisis and knowing Cap and Trade was on the horizon, make the decision to delay thinking that a little oil on the water off shore from hardline Blue Dog and Republican coastal states would mobilize them into blindly supporting Cap and Trade provisions that would limit domestic off shore drilling. Unfortunately, British Petroleum is a British corporation. They don't really owe allegiance to this White House or to anything beyond making a buck off the Yanks.

BP lied. They knew the spill was far worse than imagined and that capping it would not happen easily. Two months and counting and only now have twelve of the thirty countries that offered assistance been contacted. Doesn't it make you wonder how long this crowd would take to act after a hurricane, and earthquake or God forbid, a terrorist attack?Even more glaring that this is the "out of sight, out of mind" attitude with which this crisis and all other issues outside the Beltway are attacked. It seems that photo ops and rehearsed speeches are issued while state governors like Bobby Jindal have had to repeatedly ask for the EPA, the Coast Guard and other federal groups to stop throwing up roadblocks to taking action. Jindal requested permission to build sand berms the day after the spill. Two months later he was still asking and when they finally started, the EPA gets huffy when the sand is taken from wildlife nesting areas. Here's a news flash for the EPA, if Lousiana doesn't get to build the berms sooner rather than later, those birds are going to die anyway. In addition skimmers were stopped because of fears that there weren't enough life jackets. Seriously, if someone is trapped in a car wreck do you stop the rescuers because they don't have enough flashlights?

Now the White House is trying desperately to spin this crisis their way. Obama's last Gulf speech was on a pristine beach in Florida. Why was he not in Biloxi or Grand Isle? Probably that was because the White House staff could not insure a benevolent welcoming backdrop for their president. In fact, given the attitude right now along the Gulf, they would have been luck had people not started throwing the toxic goo at him-Secret Service be damned. Biden shows up saying nothing and doing less. There are stories about clean up crews that show up while the Prez and VP are talking but which disappear once they are through. The folks along the Gulf may not be Harvard graduates, but they are adults and they know when they are being used and lied to. And when Petrobras agents show up at New Orleans drilling supply companies offering to take charge of rigs that have been shut down due to the moratorium, and the dots are connected right back to Obama supporters George Soros, well let's just say folks down there are not happy.

In the meantime the DNC are passing bills, ignoring budget deadlines and in general NOT DOING THEIR JOBS while the headlines about the Oil Spill gives them continuing political cover. Secretly the White House staff must be overjoyed that this crisis has taken the border war in Arizona off the front pages. While oil has spewed in the Gulf, armed drug cartels have taken over a national park. And the Feds solution is to put up signs warning people to keep out. I guarantee had this been any other president there would be mobs with pitchforks and torches parked on the White House lawn. Why is it that so many people, especially those in the media, continue to give this bumbling excuse of a president a free pass? Why do they not research the history of BP's relationship with those in the Democrat Party elite? When the mayor of San Francisco has his money in Transocean and has his wife's money in BP and when White House insiders also have a vested interest in seeing British Petroleum prosper, then you have to wonder if they are more interested in solving the problem or in just using the problem for political effect. So the final question is, when does the investigation begin?

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Research 2000: Problems in plain sight

Daily Kos, frequently cited by the likes of Keith Olbermann and other ranting liberals, admits their polling numbers were cooked. Excuse me while I laugh.
Research 2000: Problems in plain sight

Friday, June 18, 2010

USA vs. Slovenia Decided by Koman Coulibaly's Disallowed Goal (Video)

I know most people don't consider soccer a "real" sport. But it is the world's sport. FIFA, the soccer world's coordinating body has been trying for years to get some share of the American market. Games like this one do not help their cause. Having a referee call such an egregiously biased game demonstrates that FIFA doesn't take the U.S. participation seriously. In their endeavor to give smaller countries a voice, FIFA has gone the route of the UN, allowing such nations to use bullying and bias to rule the day.

This game was badly called. Obvious fouls were overlooked on the Slovenian side and imaginary calls were made against the U.S. side. If politics are going to rule such events, as they have in the Olympics, then have a bit of common sense and have a method of overseeing referees in such events. Otherwise you are simply pandering to one group at the expense of another.

USA vs. Slovenia Decided by Koman Coulibaly's Disallowed Goal (Video)

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Wake Up America-Have We Lost Arizona

All you apologists who demonstrate your smarmy sympathy for illegals who are coming into our nation, please view this. This is alarming as it tacitly cedes a section of our sovereign nation to Mexican drug cartels simply because this administration is unwilling to go head to head and defend our land and the citizens who live here. What is it going to take to get Washington's attention? A Juarez style slaughter in Phoenix? A rash of killings of young women? What is it going to take Obama before you realize that defending our nation's sovereignty is YOUR JOB???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPrl4P9AcrQ&feature=player_embedded

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Obama and Thin Skin

Obama and Thin Skin

Where's Obama's Plan A

Now that we understand the critical need for President Obama to spend Memorial Day playing golf and hanging out with his good friend Sir Paul McCartney instead of either dealing with helping the coastal areas of our nation and remembering those who gave the Ultimate Sacrifice, I think we need to analyze carefully the decisions made by this administration in regards to recent events.

It goes as follows.

I love that Obama climbs the pulpit with claims that he's "been on this since Day One." Even his press secretary was quoted on the third day as "not having done anything yet."
Plan A was evidently to blame everything on BP.
Plan B was to blame Bush.
Plan C was to blame the Corps of engineers (just out of habit)
Plan D was to blame bureaucratic snafus (which is pretty much like blaming himeself....)
Plan E was to blame Bush.
Plan F was to allow the oil to spew and drive up gas prices to European levels (in spite of the highest domestic storage since 1970)
Plan G was to blame BP.
Plan H was to blame Cheney and Halliburton.
Plan I was to sit and spin around in the chair behind the desk in the Oval Office.
Plan J was to ignore Jindal's attempt to save the marshes for two weeks by holding up permits because he's an evil Republican that doesn't agree with the DNC.
Plan K was to allow amnesty of all illegal immigrants.
Plan L was to take photos with the US soccer team
Plan M was to blame Bush.
Plan N was to stuff the spewing well with Napolitiano (it's the most she's ever done for the environment....)
Plan O was to sit around and hope that Ayers came through with a plan....No? Tooo bad.
Plan P was to throw Napolitano under the bus. But it must be a clean fuel bus.....
Plan Q was to abolish Don't Ask/Don't Tell
Plan R was to outlaw Rush Limbaugh
Plan S was to blame Bush.
Plan T was to blame the Tea Partyers for their racist attack on the environment (the media will eat this one up....)
Plan U was to send illegal immigrants one mile under the sea to work for minimum wage sealing the plug.
Plan V was to have Revs. Wright, Sharpton and Jackson pray for a miracle.
Plan W was to have Simon Cowell scathingly criticize BP on television.
Plan X was to blame Bush
Plan Y-There is NO PLAN Y
Plan Z was to create a diversionary crisis and hope nobody along the Gulf notices how their sea water has changed from clear to molasses.



Sunday, May 16, 2010

Where Do Seals Go To Get Their Reputations Back?

“…Three Navy SEALs who faced courts-martial for allegedly abusing a terrorist and covering up the incident should be asking these questions. Last week, a military jury delivered the same verdict for Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe that two previous juries had given Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe — not guilty.
The charges against the three elite SEALs stemmed from the apprehension of Ahmed Hashim Abed in a daring nighttime raid in Iraq last September. Abed is believed to have led the ambush of a convoy in Fallujah in 2004, during which insurgents pulled four American military contractors — one a former SEAL — from their vehicles, brutally beat them to death, mutilated their bodies and hung the corpses from a bridge over the Euphrates River.
McCabe was charged for — if you have a delicate constitution, stop reading here — striking Abed once in the midsection while he was in the SEALs' custody. Huertas and Keefe were charged with dereliction of duty for failing to prevent the alleged abuse and impeding the investigation into it.
In the civilian world, these charges don't sound like much. In the world of the SEALs, they lead to dead-end careers.
That was implicit in the offer from military brass scared stiff by the Obama administration's political correctness: acknowledge guilt and accept ruinous administrative punishment, or take your chances with a court-martial and end up in the brig. The SEALs, men of honor, chose to defend their names and try to continue serving the nation in the Special Operations Forces…’


Such is the situation in our point of history that the words of criminals hold more validity than those of the highly trained professionals who are paid to control them. Police, Security, Military personnel are all held in every facet of pop culture to be corrupt and inherently evil. This is political correctness at its worst. And it is being allowed to infect every facet of our lives.
Consider the Ft. Hood Massacre (no doubt that term will be downgraded to the more politically palatable “Shooting” before he goes to trial) Several people noticed Hassan’s erratically skewed Islamist outbursts. But nobody in the military command dared to breathe a word of their suspicions. Such is the nature of political correctness that we have driven a wedge between those that administer military programs and those who must act on those commands. There was a point in time where the front line personnel had reason to expect support from their commanders. But instead of military personnel in the Pentagon, we have creatures in uniform who seem far more concerned with their own careers than the safety and support of the front line personnel.
Make no mistake, this situation was not another Abu Ghraib, although no doubt that situation in a small way made this one possible. Then men accused in this case were not poor infantry personnel trained mainly to shoot and be shot at. Navy Seals are among the military’s elite services. They are highly trained in all matters military as well as the political expectations governing their actions. They act on black ops with full knowledge of the military and political implications of their actions. For the military to take the word of an avowed and captured terrorist over the reports of such highly trained personnel is the worst type of pandering to the powers of political correctness.
So where do these Navy Seals go to get their reputations back? Although exonerated, this court martial’s history will be a blot on their jackets. Such situations are career-enders. In addition, because of the highly skilled nature of their training, these men in normal circumstances would form the power elite at the upper echelons of command down the road. But that path is doubtful now due to a military upper command that is far more concerned with their polling than the actions and support of their personnel. I would hope that these men, having seen the worst of what a PC attitude can do will come into the public domain as candidates and advocates. They can testify on how far afield our country has flown from the solid application of Constitutional goals over interpretation.
If you look around you, this pandering to political correctness is responsible for many of the issues we face. We are not allowed to condemn those who come here illegally. We are not permitted to question the wisdom of gaming the system to get the most from the Welfare State without being branded as wrong. This court martial was just one case where we see an effort to vilify those who defend us by the very same people who would gladly sell the American people out for a few diplomatic dinners. We cannot allow this to continue. When you vote this year, remember how a regime of political correctness nearly sent good men to prison on a trumped up charge. And then remember who runs the show.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Misleading Points - Ramesh Ponnuru - The Corner on National Review Online

Misleading Points - Ramesh Ponnuru - The Corner on National Review Online

Is Dean Koontz Trying to Tell Us Something?

I read quite a bit. I like polished writers that have a nice turn of phrase, that create characters with depth and humor and which demonstrate a deeper knowledge behind their writing. Rick Riordan, Tony Hillerman, Faye Kellerman, J.A. Jance, Stephen Saylor, Grisham, Neil Gaiman and more list among writers I enjoy for their writing styles. I also read a great deal of non-fiction. Since I have spent my Spring Break nursing the Grandfather of all Sinus Infections as well as reading consistently about the shenanigans going on in Washington, this particular passage struck me as almost prescient. It's from Dean Koontz ' 1994 book " Dark Rivers of the Heart." While you read this, keep in mind who was in power then and who is in power now. Oh, and before I forget, if you want another interesting political view of the world read a book titled "Gideon" by Russell Andrews. It's ten years old, so you will have to seek it out, but it was a bestseller and some libraries may still have it.

"....May I give you something to think about?" he asked again and then continued without waiting for a response."What's happened to you couldn't happen to a United States Representative or Senator."...
"...Most people are unaware of it,:" said the stranger," but for decades, politicians have exempted current and future members of the U.S. Congress from most of the laws they pass. Asset forfeiture, for one. If cops nail a senator peddling cocaine out of his Cadillac by a schoolyard, his car can't be seized the way your house was."..."
"...You might be able to prosecute him for drug dealing and get a conviction---unless his fellow politicians just censor him or expel him from Congress and, at the same time, arrange his immunity from prosecution. But you couldn't seize his assets for drug dealing of any of the other two hundred offenses for which they seize yours."...
"...Harris said, "who are you?"
Ignoring the question , the stranger went on in that soft voice: "Politicians pay no Social Security taxes. They have their own retirement fund. And they don't rob it to finance other programs, the way they drain Social Security. Their programs are safe..."
"...The stranger said, "They exempt themselves from healthcare plans they intend to force on you, so someday you'll have to wait months for things like gallbladder surgery, but they'll get the care they need on demand. Somehow we've allowed ourselves to be ruled by the greediest and most envious among us...."


Keep in mind, Koontz wrote this TEN YEARS AGO. This was after the last debacle with foisting nationalized healthcare in terms of an attempted redistribution of wealth was put to rest as the Clintons vandalized their way out of office. It is time to put this bill to rest. IT IS A BAD BILL. It is not about health care even a tiny bit. Sure, they will appease certain demographic groups with small tokens that are seized from the bulk of one sixth of our economy, but in the end this simply dissolves the middle class leaving only the ruling elite and the rest of us. And that, my friends, is what totalitarian regimes are all about. You should fear far more the velvet glove approach than you do violence because at least forced change let's you know what you are in for.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Math Fail

So.....Obama's Man on the Mic Gibbs says that if the healthcare bill is passed it will reduce premiums by "3000%"

Huh?

Consider this from American Thinker:

"Monday in Strongsville, Ohio, President Obama said that ObamaCare will reduce health insurance premiums by "3,000 percent." Considering that a 50 percent decrease in premiums would mean that we'd be paying half as much as we now pay for health insurance and that a 100 percent decrease in premiums would mean that we'd be paying nothing for health insurance, President Obama is telling us that insurance companies will actually start paying us money to keep our health insurance.

If your current health insurance policy costs $5,000 a year, insurance companies will pay you $145,000 a year (2,900 percent multiplied by $5,000). If you're fortunate enough to be paying $25,000 a year for health insurance, insurance companies will pay you $725,000 a year. There's no word whether you can purchase a more expensive health insurance policy to increase the amount of money that insurers pay you each year..."

Wow. So now the insurance companies will be paying me, and paying me handsomely, to have health insurance. How exactly does that work? Do these people have a freaking clue what they are talking about or did Obama go "off prompter" again? I shudder at thinking people who have such a loose grasp on basic math are fiddling with such a huge segment of our economy. I don't think they know the implications of what is in this bill and I don't think they care.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Pretty Darned Odd

I don't post bad stuff on my blog. I just don't see the point.
I also give attributions to other writers or link to their stories.
So it was odd odd odd that my blogger account "went away" for awhile. It was a big scary too because I have already lost a slew of blogs on my FoxDFW site thanks to a precipitous site change that simply dumped off all the old blogs without warning. Nice.
But what is curious is that the only thing I have done is link to a couple of stories. Blogger/Google found that "suspicious."
I find myself being a bit suspicious that someone is seeking to either kill off conservative blogs or that someone is seeking to censor conservative bloggers.

The Democrats’ Tangled Web - James C. Capretta - Critical Condition on National Review Online

The Democrats’ Tangled Web - James C. Capretta - Critical Condition on National Review Online

Will the 'Blue Dogs' hunt for Obama? - latimes.com

Will the 'Blue Dogs' hunt for Obama? - latimes.com

Posted using ShareThis

Friday, February 12, 2010

Snow Day!

So for the second day, we in Dallas are snowed in. More than twelve and a half inches of the white stuff fell. Not much if you are Newark or Chicago, but historic for the Dallas area. In fact yesterday there were big feathery flakes all day long. Truly amazing. This storm is currently in Mississippi to South Carolina taking just another dig at the Global Warming mythology. Gotta love it.!

Sunday, January 17, 2010