Fact Free Left

The outrage over another multiple murder of American military personnel on American soil by another Islamic extremist has been exacerbated by the fact that these military people had been ordered to be unarmed — and therefore sitting ducks.

Millions of American civilians have also been forbidden to have guns, and are also sitting ducks — for criminals, terrorists or psychos.

You might think that, before having laws or policies forcing fellow human beings to be defenseless targets, those who support such laws and policies would have some factual basis for believing that these gun restrictions save more lives, on net balance, than allowing more legal access to firearms. But you would be wrong.

Facts, Liberals don’t need no stinking facts. They have their Agenda and that’s all that matters because they are Homo Superior Liberalis and they are never wrong.

Most gun control zealots show not the slightest interest in testing empirically their beliefs or assumptions. There have been careful factual studies by various scholars of what happens after gun control laws have been instituted, strengthened or reduced.

But those studies are seldom even mentioned by gun control activists. Somehow they just know that gun restrictions reduce gun crime, no matter how many studies show the opposite. How do they know? Because other like-minded people say so — and say so repeatedly and loudly.

And then they get MSNBC and CNN and the Liberal media to repeat it over and over again.

The end justifies the means, regardless of how you got there. The Agenda is The Agenda.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” –Josef Goebbels

A few gun control advocates may cherry-pick examples of countries with stronger gun control laws than ours that have lower murder rates (such as England) — and omit other countries with stronger gun control laws than ours that have far higher murder rates (such as Mexico, Russia and Brazil).

You don’t test an assumption or belief by cherry-picking examples. Not if you are serious. And if you are not going to be serious about life and death, when are you going to be serious?

On Left, about how righteous they are about their Agenda and how to make you follow it no matter what. That is serious business.

Unfortunately, gun control is just one of many issues on which the political left shows no real interest in testing their assumptions or beliefs. The left glorifies the 1960s as a turning point in American life. But they show no interest in testing whether things turned for the better or for the worse.

Homicide rates had been going down substantially, for decades on end — among both blacks and whites — until the 1960s. Plotted on a graph, there is a big U-shaped curve, showing the turnaround after the bright ideas of the left were applied to criminals in American courts of law in the 1960s.

This was not the only U-shaped curve, with its low, turnaround point in the 1960s. The same was true of the venereal disease gonorrhea, whose rate of infection went down in every year of the 1950s — and then skyrocketed, beginning in the 1960s.

Teenage pregnancies had also been going down for years, until the late 1960s, when “sex education” was introduced in schools across the country. Then pregnancy rates rose nearly 50 percent over the next decade, among girls 15 to 19 years old — exactly the opposite of what had been predicted by the left.

Another program that had the opposite effect from its advocates’ claims was the “war on poverty” program created by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

Contrary to what was said during the celebrations of its 50th anniversary last year, the loudly proclaimed purpose of the “war on poverty” was not simply to transfer money or other benefits to the poor. Both Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and their supporters in Congress and in the media, all clearly stated that the central purpose of the “war on poverty” was to reduce dependency on government.

Both poverty and dependency on government had already been declining for years before this massive program began. The proportion of people whose earnings put them below the poverty level — without counting government benefits — declined by about one third from 1950 to 1965.

This was yet another beneficial trend that reversed itself after another bright idea of the left was put into practice in the 1960s. After half a century and trillions of dollars, the only response of the left has been to change the criteria, so that now the “war on poverty” could be portrayed as a success because it proved that, if you transferred more resources from X to Y, then Y would now have more resources. Who could have doubted that?

And now there are more poor children than in the Depression itself. Less jobs than in the last 40 years. But you won’t hear THAT from the Left.

Changing the goal after the fact is just one of the ways the left has portrayed its failures as successes.

And they continue to do so. Or, for the sake of The Agenda, they just ignore any “inconvenient” truths 🙂 that get in the way of it and demonize you for daring to defy them.

Just do as you are told. Believe what you are told, without question like they do and Utopia awaits you.

And if it doesn’t happen, it’s someone elses fault, like George W. Bush! 🙂

There is no way to know what is going on in someone else’s mind. But sometimes their behavior tells you more than their words.

The political left’s great claim to authenticity and honor is that what they advocate is for the benefit of the less fortunate. But how could we test that?

T.S. Eliot once said, “Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm — but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.”

This suggests that one way to find out if those who claim to be trying to help the less fortunate are for real is to see if they are satisfied to simply advocate a given policy, and see it through to being imposed — without also testing empirically whether the policy is accomplishing what it set out to do.

The first two steps are enough to let advocates feel important and righteous. Whether you really care about what happens to the supposed beneficiaries of the policy is indicated by whether you bother to check out the empirical evidence afterwards.

Many, if not most, people who are zealous advocates of minimum wage laws, for example, never check to see if these laws do more good by raising some workers’ wages than harm by preventing many young and inexperienced workers from finding jobs.

One of my own pieces of good fortune, when I left home at age 17, was that the unemployment rate for black 17-year-old males was in single digits that year — for the last time. The minimum wage law was ten years old, and the wage specified in that law was now so low that it was irrelevant, after years of inflation. It was the same as if there were no minimum wage law.

Liberals, of course, wanted the minimum wage raised, to keep up with inflation. The result was that, ten years later, the unemployment rate for black 17-year-old males was 27.5 percent — and it has never been less than 20 percent in all the years since then.

As the minimum wage kept getting raised, so did the unemployment rate for black 17-year-old males. In 1971 it was 33.4 percent — and it has never been under 30 percent since then. It has often been over 40 percent and, occasionally, over 50 percent.

But people who advocate minimum wage laws seldom show any interest in the actual consequences of such laws, which include many idle young males on the streets, which does no good for them or for their communities.

Advocates talk about people who make minimum wages as if they are a permanent class of people. In reality, most are young inexperienced workers, and no one stays young permanently. But they can stay inexperienced for a very long time, damaging their prospects of getting a job and increasing their chances of getting into trouble, hanging out with other idle and immature males.

There is the same liberal zeal for government intervention in housing markets, and the same lack of interest in checking out what the actual consequences are for the people who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of government housing policies, whether as tenants or home buyers.

They have the best of intentions so consequences don’t matter and they are someone elese fault anyways.

Government pressures and threats forced mortgage lenders to lower their lending standards, to allow more low-income and minority applicants to qualify. But, after the housing boom became a bust, the biggest losers were low-income and minority home buyers, who were unable to keep up the payments and lost everything — which was the very reason they were turned down before lending standards were lowered.

Rent control laws have led to housing shortages in cities around the world. More than a thousand apartment buildings have been abandoned by their owners in New York alone — more than enough to house all the homeless in the city.

High tax rates on “the rich” — however defined — are an ever popular crusade on the left. Who cares about the consequences — such as the rich investing their money overseas, where it will create jobs and economic growth in other countries, while American workers are unemployed and American economic growth is anemic?

All these policies allow the political left to persist in their fact-free visions. And those visions in turn allow the left to feel good about themselves, while leaving havoc in their wake.

For they are Homo Superior Liberalis!

Liberals are like Wile E. Coyote.  For example:

• Elaborate and expensive ideas and contraptions that always fail miserably.
• These ideas always come from the same source.  Like Wile E. Coyote using ACME, liberals use John Maynard Keynes, Saul Alinsky, and Karl Marx for their sources every time.
• The goal is more important than the damage attempting to achieve it causes along the way.
• Never focusing on the possible consequences, but only focusing on the goal. Unfortunately, for Wile E. Coyote, a Mac truck, a train, an explosive rocket, etc. bring the reality of the lack of ability to see all possible consequences into the picture.  For liberals, the realities of human nature and economics seem to elude them, as they seem to think that this ACME product will work this time, and that their “super genius” will exert control over what is uncontrollable.

Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”  Anyone watching Wile E. Coyote knows it is just a cartoon intended to make you laugh at the Coyote’s rampant stubbornness and stupidity.  In real life, we would call such behavior insanity.

The Liberals call it The Agenda, and it’s perfection, just like they are. All they have to do is force you to see it. 🙂

But you’re just a “hater” if you disagree.

 

Kids Count

Ever since President Obama took office, the poverty rate among children has soared to 22 percent, with three million more children living in poor conditions, according to an authoritative new report released Tuesday.

A higher percentage of children live in poverty now than did during the Great Recession, according to a new report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation released Tuesday.

The 2015 “KIDS COUNT” report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation said that the percentage of children living in poverty jumped from 18 percent in 2008, the year Obama was elected, to 22 percent in 2013. It added that the rate dropped from 2012 to 2013, in line with the improving economy.

About 22% of children in the U.S. lived below the poverty line in 2013, compared with 18% in 2008, the foundation’s 2015 Kids Count Data Book reported. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Human and Health Service’s official poverty line was $23,624 for a family with two adults and two children.

“The fact that it’s happening is disturbing on lots of levels,” said Laura Speer, the associate director for policy reform and advocacy at the Casey Foundation, a non-profit based in Baltimore. “Those kids often don’t have the access to the things they need to thrive.” The foundation says its mission is to help low-income children in the U.S. by providing grants and advocating for policies that promote economic opportunity.

More “White Privilege”? 🙂

Evil, greedy “rich” people?

This has to be “racist” at some point, doesn’t it? 🙂

Among minority children and in some states, especially the South, however, the situation is dire. The report said, for example:

• The rate of child poverty for 2013 ranged from a low of 10 percent in New Hampshire, to a high of 34 percent in Mississippi.

• The child poverty rate among African Americans (39 percent) was more than double the rate for non-Hispanic whites (14 percent) in 2013.

The report also explained that a lack of jobs or good income above the poverty rate of $23,624 was the reason more children have grown up in poor families.

• In 2013, three in 10 children (22.8 million) lived in families where no parent had full-time, year-round employment. Since 2008, the number of such children climbed by nearly 2.7 million.

• Roughly half of all American Indian children (50 percent) and African-American children (48 percent) had no parent with full-time, year-round employment in 2013, compared with 37 percent of Latino children, 24 percent of non-Hispanic white children and 23 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children.”

Click to access aecf-2015kidscountdatabook-2015.pdf

Middle Class Economics

So where do you get the money to allegedly pour into the poor to allegedly make them richer (which hasn’t happened BTW-there are now MORE poor people), rich people.

But in the perfect scenario if the rich are getting poorer and the poor are getting richer who gets squashed in the middle?

The Middle Class. 🙂

The big challenge for President Obama — and for Republicans seeking their own agenda to woo the middle class — is that middle-income economic fortunes are driven mostly by private employers. The government can raise the minimum wage, but it can’t make employers raise wages for workers already making well above that. It can give out targeted tax cuts, but these can’t have large effects on the average family’s income without getting really expensive. It can impose labor regulations, but it cannot overcome the fact that employers are powerful when many workers chase a small number of jobs.

So you can make them pay $15/hr but they can lay off a lot of people to do it. 🙂

Contrary to the Liberal hoary and class warfare battle cry, government does not create private sector jobs.

The White House had a telling spat last month with the Tax Policy Center, a center-left joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution that produces estimates of the distributional impacts of tax proposals. Len Burman, the center’s co-director, who was a Treasury official in the Clinton administration, ran the numbers and found the president’s plan produced an average tax cut of just $12 for families in the middle quintile — a surprising result for a plan aimed at the middle class, and one that produced inconvenient headlines.

Inconvenient= Means they didn’t fit the Agenda driven truth. An Inconvenient truth, how ironic. 🙂

Treasury’s own numbers show the average middle-income family would get a tax cut of about $150 under the president’s plan. Whether $12 or $150, the average effects are small — much smaller than the several hundred dollars a typical family is saving this year because of falling gas prices, and much smaller than the raises Americans would get from a tight labor market that induces employers to offer higher wages. (NYT)

So that’s why Obama wants to raise gas prices! 🙂

It’s not just that he hates rich Oil companies in this country (in the middle east he’s just fine). That’s good to know.

“Many people in the middle class will get no benefit from the president’s proposal,” said Roberton Williams, a fellow at the Tax Policy Center. “Among the middle class, it’s targeted at people with kids and second earners. Virtually no single middle class people without kids will get anything.”

Far fewer middle class single and elderly taxpayers would benefit from Obama’s plan.

Only 12.5% of single filers would get a tax cut. Overall, this group would see a $61 increase, because nearly 7% of middle class singles would see their taxes go up and that skews the overall average.

Among the elderly, only 10% would enjoy a dip in their taxes. But because many in this group would be hit with another of the president’s provisions — that would require estates to pay capital gains on appreciated assets — they would pay an additional $152, on average. (CNN)

So you have to be the politically advantageous “middle class” to get any sucar from this government succubus that has spent $8 Trillion in less than 7 years.

But you have to play it like everyone gets it. Like the $2500 reduction in Health Care Costs from Obamacare.

Mind you, the NFL Player making multiple millions a year is not the target. The target is Corporate America. The evil rich people who make jobs for people.

After all, socialism is about the Government largesse not Private Sector largesse.

So you have to be Agenda approved.

In socialism there are only 2 classes, The Elites, and the Poor and they don’t meet. That’s is the Utopia the Democrats want to achieve.

And since Liberals have no capacity intellectually to believe they can ever be wrong about anything, ever, they if they don’t succeed they will just keep trying because it will always be someone elses fault that they didn’t succeed.

Divide and Conquer, eventually. Because they only way they succeed is to destroy all methods that do succeed and leave you with no choice but to d it their way.

And that’s Obama and The Democrats in a nutshell. My ideas can’t succeed but I will prevent any other ideas from even forming.

Orwell would be proud of you, my son.

The Ministry of Truth (even Inconvenient ones) stands ready to defend your right to fail miserably but blame someone for it and make everyone believe it.

You’ve been Data Mined

A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”

Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.

This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.

Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.

So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.

“There are no doubt complexities that come with White Americans working for racial justice. White privilege can lead to a chronic case of undiagnosed entitlement, creating poor listeners, impatient speakers who talk over others, and people unaccustomed to taking orders. Nevertheless, the movement for racial justice needs more White Americans to get involved. And it’s our responsibility to help each other get involved–and get involved productively,” Jon Greenberg  (High School Teacher) wrote, linking to a blog post that claims quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to black women is a violent and “cisheteropatriarchy” act.

Apparently that $5 word means: Cis- Hetero Patriarchy is class based oppression of gender and sex and racism is the class based  oppression of nationality and race and apparently they use “rape” analogies a lot. So quoting Dr. King to a black person is ‘mind rape’, apparently.  😦

Greenberg was the recipient of the Courage in the Pursuit of Social Justice Award from the the University of Washington chapter of the American Association of University Professors.

The fabric of our society, and consequentially our organizing spaces, are weaved together by the ongoing legacies of colonization, genocide, slavery, white supremacy, and cis-hetero-patriarchy. (Praxis)

So, Yea

I’m Male.

I’m White.

But I’m not a Christian.

But I dislike the Gay Leftist Control Freak Mafia.

I am a Fan of “The Dukes of Hazzard”

I value The Constitution.

So please, data mine this…

The granddaddy of them all is the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing database, which the Department of Housing and Urban Development rolled out earlier this month to racially balance the nation, ZIP code by ZIP code. It will map every US neighborhood by four racial groups — white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino — and publish “geospatial data” pinpointing racial imbalances.

The agency proposes using nonwhite populations of 50% or higher as the threshold for classifying segregated areas.

Federally funded cities deemed overly segregated will be pressured to change their zoning laws to allow construction of more subsidized housing in affluent areas in the suburbs, and relocate inner-city minorities to those predominantly white areas. HUD’s maps, which use dots to show the racial distribution or density in residential areas, will be used to select affordable-housing sites.

HUD plans to drill down to an even more granular level, detailing the proximity of black residents to transportation sites, good schools, parks and even supermarkets. If the agency’s social engineers rule the distance between blacks and these suburban “amenities” is too far, municipalities must find ways to close the gap or forfeit federal grant money and face possible lawsuits for housing discrimination.

Civil-rights groups will have access to the agency’s sophisticated mapping software, and will participate in city plans to re-engineer neighborhoods under new community outreach requirements.

“By opening this data to everybody, everyone in a community can weigh in,” Obama said. “If you want affordable housing nearby, now you’ll have the data you need to make your case.”

Mortgage database

Meanwhile, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, headed by former Congressional Black Caucus leader Mel Watt, is building its own database for racially balancing home loans. The so-called National Mortgage Database Project will compile 16 years of lending data, broken down by race, and hold everything from individual credit scores and employment records.

Mortgage contracts won’t be the only financial records vacuumed up by the database. According to federal documents, the repository will include “all credit lines,” from credit cards to student loans to car loans — anything reported to credit bureaus. This is even more information than the IRS collects.

The FHFA will also pry into your personal assets and debts and whether you have any bankruptcies. The agency even wants to know the square footage and lot size of your home, as well as your interest rate.

FHFA will share the info with Obama’s brainchild, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which acts more like a civil-rights agency, aggressively investigating lenders for racial bias.

The FHFA has offered no clear explanation as to why the government wants to sweep up so much sensitive information on Americans, other than stating it’s for “research” and “policymaking.”

However, CFPB Director Richard Cordray was more forthcoming, explaining in a recent talk to the radical California-based Greenlining Institute: “We will be better able to identify possible discriminatory lending patterns.”

Credit database

CFPB is separately amassing a database to monitor ordinary citizens’ credit-card transactions. It hopes to vacuum up some 900 million credit-card accounts — all sorted by race — representing roughly 85% of the US credit-card market. Why? To sniff out “disparities” in interest rates, charge-offs and collections.

Employment database

CFPB also just finalized a rule requiring all regulated banks to report data on minority hiring to an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion. It will collect reams of employment data, broken down by race, to police diversity on Wall Street as part of yet another fishing expedition.

School database

Through its mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection project, the Education Department is gathering information on student suspensions and expulsions, by race, from every public school district in the country. Districts that show disparities in discipline will be targeted for reform.

Those that don’t comply will be punished. Several already have been forced to revise their discipline policies, which has led to violent disruptions in classrooms.

Obama’s educrats want to know how many blacks versus whites are enrolled in gifted-and-talented and advanced placement classes.

Schools that show blacks and Latinos under-enrolled in such curricula, to an undefined “statistically significant degree,” could open themselves up to investigation and lawsuits by the department’s Civil Rights Office.

Count on a flood of private lawsuits to piggyback federal discrimination claims, as civil-rights lawyers use the new federal discipline data in their legal strategies against the supposedly racist US school system.

Even if no one has complained about discrimination, even if there is no other evidence of racism, the numbers themselves will “prove” that things are unfair.

Such databases have never before existed. Obama is presiding over the largest consolidation of personal data in US history. He is creating a diversity police state where government race cops and civil-rights lawyers will micromanage demographic outcomes in virtually every aspect of society.

The first black president, quite brilliantly, has built a quasi-reparations infrastructure perpetually fed by racial data that will outlast his administration. (NYP)

McMinimum

Let’s get one thing straight. We live in America. A country built on free enterprise and capitalism. If you have a good idea and the the drive to see it through to completion.

Just because you make minimum wage doesn’t mean you HAVE to make minimum wage.

America wasn’t built on the backs of men and women who whined about not having enough until they got it.

It was built by men and women who demanded this life give them more than what it had originally allotted them, and they didn’t give up until they got it.

What this mass protest does show is that if enough people get together and yell and complain, they probably will have their demands met by a country that continues to cater to those who complain when they don’t get their way instead of actually finding something better.

What ever happened to making the most of yourself and working hard for something more than a job flipping burgers? I personally thank McDonald’s for replacing these people. Maybe now they will strive to do more with their life.

I read an article on TheBlaze a few weeks ago with the title, “Fast Food Workers: You Don’t Deserve $15 an Hour to Flip Burgers, and That’s OK”. this writer is 100% right.

Here’s an important quote from the writer…

“You think the jobs I had when I was 16 should have provided me with the comfortable living I just established in my late 20s? Frankly, I think you’re delusional.

To understand how delusional, consider that a $15 an hour full-time salary would put you in the same ballpark as biologists, auto mechanics, biochemists, teachers, geologists, roofers and bank tellers.”

This kind of wage hike for an entry level food job just adds fuel to the entitlement mentality that is increasingly rising in our nation.

But all they wanted was $15 per hour?

Until 5-10 years from now when $15/hr will be “slave wages” that is…

Hillary Clinton Declines To Support A National $15 Minimum Wage

Clinton says she supports raising the national minimum wage, but adds that “what you can do in L.A. or in New York may not work in other places.”

How hilarious is that? Mrs. “One of you” Populist (who said basically the opposite once already).

If raising the minimum wage were cost-free, why stop at $10 or $15 an hour? Why not go straight to $25 an hour, the average hourly wage? That might be considered fair, because no one would have to earn less than today’s average.

The answer, of course, is because some people are displaced at any minimum wage. It is obvious to the general public that increasing the minimum wage to $25 an hour would displace workers. It is less obvious when amounts are smaller. But when the minimum wage is raised, employers hire higher-skilled people, or switch to different forms of technology such as placing orders through touch screens.

Forbes:

As we keep trying to point out to people there really isn’t anything even remotely resembling a free lunch when it comes to the discussion of wages and labor. Meaning that just because well meaning liberals wave their magic wand and decree that wages will rise there will indeed be countervailing effects. And in San Francisco, where the minimum wage was recently raised we did indeed see that comic book shop insisting that it just couldn’t survive. And now we’ve another tale, this time from Chipotle. Beef prices have been rising around the country so they’ve raised the prices, around the country, of their beef products. Wages in San Francisco have been rising strongly so they’ve raised the prices of all their products in San Francisco strongly. There really is no free lunch. A rise in wages will come out of either less labor being employed, lower profit margins (and fast food doesn’t have those wide enough to take the strain) or price increases to consumers.

And it’s that last which is happening as Mark Perry points out:

• In our weekly survey of ten of Chipotle’s markets, we found the company implemented price increases in half of the surveyed markets this week—San Francisco, Denver, Minneapolis, Chicago, and Orlando. In most markets, the price increases have been limited to beef and average about 4% on barbacoa and steak, toward the lower end of management’s expectation for a 4% to 6% price increase on beef.

• San Francisco, however, saw across-the-board price increases averaging over 10%, including 10% increases on chicken, carnitas (pork), sofritas (tofu), and vegetarian entrees along with a 14% increase on steak and barbacoa. We believe the outsized San Francisco price hike was likely because of increased minimum wages (which rose by 14% from $10.74 per hour to $12.25 on May 1) as well as scheduled minimum wage increases in future years (to $13 next year, $14 in 2017, and $15 in 2018).

A rough guide to the finances of the fast food industry is as follows. 30% goes on wages, 30% of revenues goes on ingredients and the other 40% is everything else. Rents, advertising, capital costs and, of course, profits. Those profits are pretty low. 5% of revenues isn’t an out of order estimation of the net profit margins in the business (and, of course, that’s an average, as some locations and some whole chains lose money).

So, if we by legislative fiat raise the price of one of those inputs then something, somewhere, has to give. Those profit margins are already pretty thin and so they’re not going to be where that extra cost comes from. More than that if we reduce the returns to capital in a particular line of business then less capital will be invested in that line of business in the future. This means fewer jobs in that line of business: This is one of the ways that a rise in the minimum wage destroys jobs. Fewer will be created in the future than would have been in the absence of the rise in the minimum wage.

It’s possible that employers will be encouraged to deploy their labor in a more productive manner as a result of the price increase. This is the same statement as fewer jobs will be created. For if I go and raise labor productivity then by definition I need less labor for any given level of output. Or of course employers could just automate the process a little more and that also means fewer jobs.

So, if employers either economize on labor or profits, there will be job losses: the minimum wage rise does reduce employment.

Or there is this final method: raise prices. Which also causes job losses: for the more money that consumers are spending on reasonably priced Mexican food (although now less reasonably priced Mexican food than it used to be) the less they have available to spend on other things. We might think that there could be an interesting overlap between those who consume reasonably priced Mexican food and those who frequent comic book shops for example. If the food now costs more then there might well be less being spent in the comic book shop: again, we see reductions in the number of jobs.

And just to head off at the pass one of the more insane points that people try to make. That if the workers at Chipotle are now making more money then they’ll spend more at Chipotle, and the company’s profits will rise! This doesn’t even pass the basic math test, let alone any economic one. For note above the split in revenues. About 30% of revenue is spent upon labor. The other 70% is spent upon other things, including that 30% or so on food ingredients. So, if Chipotle raises wages by $100 (just as an example) and all of those wages are then spent in the same store, it is impossible for profits to rise. Think about it for a moment: the wage bill has just gone up by $100. Revenues have just gone up by $100. But the food bill has also gone up by $30. So, the increase in costs is $130 (even in the very best, best, case) while revenues have gone up by $100. This is known to the cognoscenti as a loss, not an increase in profit.

There really is no such thing as a free lunch. Only lunches of variable cost. And if we increase the cost of one of the major inputs into such lunches then something else will give. Here, as a result of the rise in the minimum wage Chipotle has raised prices in that specific location where the minimum wage rise occurred.

This doesn’t help minimum wage earners: some unknown but knowable reduction in sales of reasonably priced Mexican food will take place as a result of this price rise. Demand curves really do slope downwards. Thus some unknown but knowable number of people will not be employed to produce said food.

As we’ve been saying all along: a rise in the minimum wage really does destroy jobs.

Finding the effects of raising the minimum wage is challenging, because 97 percent of American workers now make above the minimum wage—not because it is the law, but because employers have to pay higher compensation packages to retain workers. That is one reason that some academic studies do not find major negative effects of minimum-wage increases.

Those who would be harmed by increasing the minimum wage are young people. Half of minimum-wage workers are under 25, and 24 percent are teens. This group’s unemployment rate is already higher than the 5.3 percent overall rate. The teen unemployment rate is 18 percent, and the African-American teen unemployment rate is 32 percent. The youth unemployment rate is 10 percent. (Federalist)

But the Left will continue with their class warfare because that suits THEIR Agenda, so what if you get hurt in the process, like that matters. The end justifies the means, remember. 🙂

Uncle Sam’s Haul

The federal government raked in a record of approximately $2,446,920,000,000 in tax revenues through the first nine months of fiscal 2015 (Oct. 1, 2014 through the end of June), according to the Monthly Treasury Statement released today.

That equaled approximately $16,451 for every person in the country who had either a full-time or part-time job in June.

Are these just the jobs Americans “will do”? 🙂

The percentage of Americans working or looking for work fell to 62.6 percent in June, after 432,000 people dropped out of the labor force. That’s the lowest rate since October, 1977, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

It is also up about $178,156,270,000 in constant 2015 dollars from the $2,268,763,730,000 in revenue (in inflation-adjusted 2015 dollars) that the Treasury raked in during the first nine months of fiscal 2014.

Despite the record tax revenues of $2,446,920,000,000 in the first nine months of this fiscal year, the government spent $2,760,301,000,000 during those nine months, and, thus, ran up a deficit of $313,381,000,000 during the period.

So they have record tax collection but yet they still run a deficit! (but Obama would say that they run less of a deficit than when he started so that’s ‘progress’).

Anyone else see the flaw in the tax slaw?

The debt is now 18.3 Trillion and climbing.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, total seasonally adjusted employment in the United States in June (including both full and part-time workers) was 148,739,000. That means that the federal tax haul so far this fiscal year has equaled $16,451 for every person in the United States with a job.

In 2012, President Barack Obama struck a deal with Republicans in Congress to enact legislation that increased taxes. That included increasing the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, increasing the top tax rate on dividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent, and phasing out personal exemptions and deductions starting at an annual income level of $250,000.

An additional 3.8 percent tax on dividends, interests, capital gains and royalties–that was embedded in the Obamacare law–also took effect in 2013.

The largest share of this year’s record-setting October-through-June tax haul came from the individual income tax. That yielded the Treasury $1,167,500,000,000. Payroll taxes for “social insurance and retirement receipts” took in another $771,048,000,000. The corporate income tax brought in $255,453,000,000.

But don’t worry, if you take this seriously, you have to be a “hater” of Obama, right?

The truth doesn’t matter any more, remember. 🙂

 

Greece II?

Employment: Will the last worker in America please raise your hand? We ask this because Thursday’s Labor Department report for June found yet another record collapse in the number of working Americans.

The June US jobs report is out, and while the unemployment rate is down, part of the fall in unemployment came from a 0.3 percentage point drop in the labor force participation rate to 62.6%, the lowest rate since October 1977. Americans are considered to be in the labor force by the Bureau of Labor Statistics if they are employed or actively looking for work.

The labor force participation rate steadily grew between the 1970s and the 1990s, reaching its peak of 67.3% in 2000. During the 2000s, and especially since the Great Recession, the participation rate began to drop. Part of that drop was in response to the economic crisis that started in 2008, and part of the drop comes from demographic factors like the aging of the US population and the retirement of the baby boomers.

Over the past year the number of working-age Americans who have dropped from the civilian labor force has risen by 1.5 million. During Obama’s presidency, the population of these Americans increased by nearly 16 million — while the labor force grew by under 3 million.

But you’ll never hear that from the Democrats, oh no, we’ve had years of growth and the unemployment rate is lower, etc. because you’ll only get the statistics that make them look good.

All this is “An Inconvenient Truth”. 🙂

The labor force participation rate for those 16 and over dropped from 65.7% at the start of the Obama presidency to just 62.6% last month. If this rate would have remained steady, the labor force would have been nearly 14 million stronger.

Hello! Is anyone in Washington paying attention to a trend that’s becoming a national emergency?

NO. Because they are too busy lying and covering it up.

Obama doesn’t seem to get it.  (His ideology prevents it) He’s touting the unemployment rate decline to 5.3% as he celebrates how he has supposedly resurrected the U.S. economy. Here’s what he isn’t telling us: For every three Americans added to the working age population (16 and over), only around one new job has been created under Obama.

But look at the unemployment rate, ignore all the rest, it’s just partisan propaganda from the right to make him, “The First Black President” look bad.

Where is the great American work ethic? At this pace, America will soon officially have no unemployment whatsoever. Only a few Americans will be in the labor force, but they will all have jobs. Hooray.

And Left will tout that as a great accomplishment.

There are now 102 million Americans over the age of 16 who are not working. Usually when the economy picks up, American workers who have been laid off stampede back into the workforce to earn a paycheck.

Not now. The longer the recovery lasts, the larger the number of nonparticipants in the job market.

This is partially explained by baby boomers retiring — at the pace of nearly 10,000 a day. But the largest reduction in the workforce has been among those under the age of 29. Today the labor force participation rate for the 16-24 age group is 55.1%, down from 60.8% a decade ago and from more than 66% back in the late 1990s.

Millennials continue to exit the labor market — and millions have never even held a job.

Why are workers disappearing? Minimum-wage increases are pricing the young out of the workforce. The myriad welfare programs are effectively paying the young not to work.

Tens of millions of Americans have high school and even college degrees that are next to worthless to employers, because these young entrants into the labor market lack useful skills. The jobs that America should be creating — for example, in the energy industry — are being strangled by regulation and taxes.

But we have lots of “liberal arts” and “Women/LGBT/Minority Studies” grads. Lots of Environmental activists and people with degrees in how to be a better Liberal.

It’s simple: America can’t grow and prosper if Americans aren’t working.

Barack Obama famously told the nation that massive welfare benefits were a “stimulus” to the economy. No, getting Americans working is a stimulus.

This president — who thinks he can stop the rise of the oceans — refuses to make jobs and work a priority. The next president better, or we’ll go the way of Greece. (IBD)

The New Amerika

Welcome, all you sheep to The New America.

To paraphrase Lincoln (but with a modern tweek): “…and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall perish from the earth.”

2015 Version: Government of the Government, by the Government, for the Government, shall not perish from this Country.

Welcome, Citizens, to Orwell’s Nightmare.

I pledge allegiance to the New Flag of the Disunited Politically Correct States of Amerika, and to the Socialist Empire for which it stands, one Nation under Government control, indivisible, with no liberty and social justice for only the politically correct.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that Government creates equality, that the people are endowed by their Government with certain human Rights, that among these are Life under Micromanagement, Liberalism and the pursuit of Entitlement.

We the Government of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Disunion, establish Social Justice, insure Political Correctness, provide for all redistribution equally, promote the general Social Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Government to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Empire for the DisUnited States of Amerika. In Political Correctness We Stand.

All Power shall rest with the Government. Period. End of Discussion. All decisions and wishes of Government are final and cannot be challenged under penalty of heresy.

The New Bill of Rights (2015)

1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of  religion,and mocking or hindering the free exercise thereof is required and sanctioned until that religion is sanctioned by The Government itself; or abridging the freedom of LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE speech, or of the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE press; but abridging those who
are not us  is always in the interest of the good of society; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to worship the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES and protest it’s enemies, any assembly otherwise in opposition must therefore be “terrorism” “bigotry” or “racism”, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances against ANYONE who
defies us, has exercised “White Privilege”,  and to seek “social justice” at all costs.

2nd Amendment: Repealed.

3rd Since there are no wars (except class & race wars), this is repealed.

4th Repealed, because unless you’re guilty you don’t need any protection and the guilty are not to be protected that’s why they are guilty to begin with.

5th Only the guilty need protection so as long as you are not guilty you don’t need it. And if you are guilty then you aren’t entitled to it anyhow because you’re  a “hater”  or a Thought Criminal and guilty anyhow.

6th In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, Then summary judgement shall rule in favor of the State.

7th Trial by jury shall consist of the State’s mandated jurors and in the cases of “hate” crimes or Thought Crimes the accused is guilty until guilty, especially if they are White.

8th For what the State determines to be a “Hate Crime” or a Thought Crime Excessive bail shall be required, excessive fines imposed,  cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

9th The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the State at their discretion.

10th  The powers not delegated to the DisUnited States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the US Government only.

The other 16 don’t matter anymore as The Government is the final arbiter of all Elections and Judicial cases anyhow so it doesn’t matter anymore.

“White Privilege” is outlawed.

Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength
Class War is Peace.
Fear is Hope.

Big Brother is Watching YOU!

Blackwhite is defined as follows:
“     …this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink.     ”—Orwell, 1984

The word is an example of both Newspeak and doublethink. It represents the active process of rewriting the past, control of the past being a vital aspect of the Party’s control over the present.
The ability to blindly believe anything, regardless of its absurdity, can have different causes: respect for authority, fear, indoctrination, even critical laziness or gullibility. Orwell’s blackwhite refers only to that caused by fear, indoctrination, or repression of one’s individual critical thinking (“to know black is white”), rather than caused by laziness or gullibility. A true Party member could automatically, and without thought, expunge any incorrect information and totally replace it with true information from the Party. If properly done, there is no memory or recovery of the Incorrect information that could cause unhappiness to the Party member by committing thoughtcrime. This ability is likened to the total erasure of information only possible in electronic storage.

Welcome, Citizen, to The New Amerika. 🙂

How to Underwhelm The People

The new Republican-led Congress is drawing harsh reviews from the public – including most Republicans. Just 23% of Americans say congressional Republicans are keeping the promises they made during last fall’s campaign, while 65% say they are not.

And yet they don’t really care what you think either…

Nearly four-in-ten (37%) say the new Congress has accomplished less than they expected, while 4% say it has accomplished more than expected. About half (53%) say its accomplishments are in line with what they expected.

Well, The Republicans have caved on basically everything so not much has changed has it?

On both measures, the public’s views are far more negative than they were of the Democratic-led Congress in March 2007, after the Democrats regained control of both chambers following several years of Republican control. Views are also much more negative than they were in April 1995, shortly after the GOP had gained control of the House and Senate for the first time in four decades.

The new national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted May 12-18 among 2,002 adults, finds that just 22% approve of the job performance of Republican congressional leaders, little changed since the summer of 2011. Ratings for Democratic congressional leaders are somewhat better (33% approve).

Unlike after some previous partisan turnovers on Capitol Hill, negative assessments of the new Congress now cross party lines. Today, just 41% of Republicans approve of the job their party’s leaders in Congress are doing. By comparison, in April 2011, 60% of Republicans approved of GOP leaders’ job performance and in April 1995, 78% approved of GOP leadership’s policies and proposals.

And just 37% of Republicans say their party’s leaders are keeping their campaign promises, while 53% say they are not. In 2011, after the party won its House majority, 54% said GOP leaders were keeping promises. And in April 1995 — as the Republican-led Congress hit the 100-day milestone — fully 80% of Republicans said this.

Democrats were also relatively upbeat about their party’s leaders at the 100-day mark in 2007, when 60% said Democratic leaders were keeping their campaign promises.

Currently, Republicans (36%) are about as likely as Democrats (38%) or independents (38%) to say Congress is accomplishing less than they expected.

Public evaluations of the congressional leadership of both parties remain negative. Today, just a third (33%) say they approve of the job Democratic leaders are doing, while even fewer (22%) say they approve of GOP Congressional leadership.

Ratings for the Congressional leadership of both parties have been relatively stable over the past few years. Though the job approval ratings of both GOP and Democratic leadership rose slightly earlier this year, current ratings are now on par with attitudes last spring.

While the overall ratings of Republican congressional leaders over the last few months have dropped a modest four points, Republican ratings of their own party’s leadership have moved in a significantly negative direction over the first few months of a GOP-controlled Congress.

Today, more Republicans say they disapprove (55%) than approve (41%) of the Republican congressional leadership’s job performance. In February, Republican evaluations were more positive (50% of Republicans approved of the GOP leadership’s job performance, 44% disapproved). And this shift in opinion is primarily seen among conservative Republicans: 54% approved of GOP congressional leaders’ job performance in February, today just 41% approve. By contrast, Democratic views of their party’s congressional leadership are substantially more positive and are little changed over this time. Currently 60% of Democrats approve of the job performance of Democratic leaders, while 35% disapprove.

Independent views of the two parties largely track those of the overall public: Just 19% approve of GOP leaders’ job performance, while 27% approve of Democratic congressional leadership.

While the overall ratings of Republican congressional leaders over the last few months have dropped a modest four points, Republican ratings of their own party’s leadership have moved in a significantly negative direction over the first few months of a GOP-controlled Congress.

Today, more Republicans say they disapprove (55%) than approve (41%) of the Republican congressional leadership’s job performance. In February, Republican evaluations were more positive (50% of Republicans approved of the GOP leadership’s job performance, 44% disapproved). And this shift in opinion is primarily seen among conservative Republicans: 54% approved of GOP congressional leaders’ job performance in February, today just 41% approve. By contrast, Democratic views of their party’s congressional leadership are substantially more positive and are little changed over this time. Currently 60% of Democrats approve of the job performance of Democratic leaders, while 35% disapprove.

Independent views of the two parties largely track those of the overall public: Just 19% approve of GOP leaders’ job performance, while 27% approve of Democratic congressional leadership.

By contrast, Democrats are more positive about their own party’s performance on these three issues than are Republicans. About six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic leaners (62%) say the Democratic Party is doing a good job representing their views on same-sex marriage, while just 30% say they are not doing a good job. Views are more mixed when it comes to illegal immigration and government spending. Overall, 51% of Democrats say their party is doing a good job on the issue of illegal immigration, compared with 43% who say they are not doing a good job. On the issue of government spending, as many Democrats say their party is doing a good job representing their views on the issue (47%) as say it is not doing a good job (47%). Democratic views have shown little change on these measures since the questions were last asked in September 2014.

And amid debate over the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade proposal, 39% of respondents say they approve of Obama’s handling of international trade, while 44% say they disapprove; 17% do not offer a rating of his performance on trade.

But the Republicans want to pass it anyways!

That’s why “Jar Jar” Boehner and his Dumber Cousin are the Democrats best hope for a complete takeover of Congress and the Monarchy for Queen Hillary.

Real Tragedy

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.—Martin Luther King, Jr.

Sorry, Dr. King, there’s no money or power in that so forgettaboutit!

Walter Williams: Hustlers and people with little understanding want us to believe that today’s black problems are the continuing result of a legacy of slavery, poverty and racial discrimination. The fact is that most of the social pathology seen in poor black neighborhoods is entirely new in black history. Let’s look at some of it.

Today the overwhelming majority of black children are raised in single female-headed families. As early as the 1880s, three-quarters of black families were two-parent. In 1925 New York City, 85 percent of black families were two-parent. One study of 19th-century slave families found that in up to three-fourths of the families, all the children had the same mother and father.

Today’s black illegitimacy rate of nearly 75 percent is also entirely new. In 1940, black illegitimacy stood at 14 percent. It had risen to 25 percent by 1965, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action” and was widely condemned as a racist. By 1980, the black illegitimacy rate had more than doubled, to 56 percent, and it has been growing since. Both during slavery and as late as 1920, a teenage girl raising a child without a man present was rare among blacks.

Much of today’s pathology seen among many blacks is an outgrowth of the welfare state that has made self-destructive behavior less costly for the individual. Having children without the benefit of marriage is less burdensome if the mother receives housing subsidies, welfare payments and food stamps. Plus, the social stigma associated with unwed motherhood has vanished. Female-headed households, whether black or white, are a ticket for dependency and all of its associated problems. Ignored in all discussions is the fact that the poverty rate among black married couples has been in single digits since 1994.

Black youth unemployment in some cities is over 50 percent. But high black youth unemployment is also new. In 1948, the unemployment rate for black teens was slightly less than that of their white counterparts — 9.4 percent compared with 10.2. During that same period, black youths were either just as active in the labor force or more so than white youths. Since the 1960s, both the labor force participation rate and the employment rate of black youths have fallen to what they are today. Why? Are employers more racially discriminatory today than yesteryear? Were black youths of yesteryear more skilled than whites of yesteryear? The answer to both questions is a big fat no.

The minimum wage law and other labor regulations have cut off the bottom rungs of the economic ladder. Put yourself in the place of an employer, and ask: If I must pay $7.25 an hour — plus mandated fringes, such as Social Security and workers’ compensation — would it pay me to hire a worker who is so unfortunate as to possess skills that enable him to produce only $5 worth of value per hour? Most employers view that as a losing economic proposition. Thus, the minimum wage law discriminates against the employment of low-skilled workers, who are most often youths — particularly black youths.

The little bit of money a teenager can earn through after-school, weekend and summer employment is not nearly so important as the other things he gains from early work experiences. He acquires skills and develops good work habits, such as being prompt, following orders and respecting supervisors. In addition, there are the self-respect and pride that a youngster gains from being financially semi-independent. All of these gains from early work experiences are important for any teen but are even more important for black teens. If black teens are going to learn anything that will make them a more valuable employee in the future, they aren’t going to learn it from their rotten schools, their dysfunctional families or their crime-ridden neighborhoods. They must learn it on the job.

The bulk of today’s problems for many blacks are a result of politicians and civil rights organizations using government in the name of helping blacks when in fact they are serving the purposes of powerful interest groups.

And if you disagree with them,you’re just evil old “racist” anyhow so gives a crap what you ignorant idiots think! 🙂

Magna Carta 2015

History Lesson today….

Did you know that June 15th is the 800th Anniversary of the Magna Carta, the first document about the Rule of Law and that the King is not above the Law?

“Foul as it is, hell itself is made fouler by the presence of King John,” wrote Matthew Paris in the 1230s.

Someone should tell King Obama that one.

From the 1215 Magna Carta:

(38) In future no official shall place a man on trial upon his own unsupported statement, without producing credible witnesses to the truth of it.

+ (39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.

+ (40) To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice. (The British Library)

Just 3 of the points the Rebel Barons (who were self-serving in their own right at the time).

The Magna Carta has survived and even thrived for 800 years because it is the cry on the oppressed upon a government that oppresses them.

Like King George III:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.(The Declaration of Independence)

A most politically incorrect document for the Progressive Left because their solution to everything is to tax the people more and have government control of the people. How Very King-y of them. 🙂

But if you think the Republican Establishment is going to save you, well, just remember the Magna Carta was “forced” on King John by Barons who pissed off at him for taxing them to death and being such a horrible fighter as King- he lost just about everything his ather gained and more (Obama?). He was taking everything from THEM, not the people.

The Republican Establishment is a just a bunch of Rebel Barons, not saviors. Especially with John “Jar Jar” Boehner is in charge.

He taxed the rich and kept it for his ego wars in France. Obama taxes us to death for his own Ego driven agenda.

King John was single-minded, petty, cruel and manipulative and did things for political expediency and thought himself above The Law. Sound familiar?? 🙂

The IDEA of the Magna Carta is what has survived 800 years and it’s the idea of a people free from the absolute rule of their government that needs to be put forth.

That is the trust that needs to be restored.

The people also have to want it, and I’m not sure after a couple of generations of Liberal Progressive “education” and “media” that they are capable of even understanding. But education would still be key.

In an Orwellian way, you can’t miss what you never knew you had in the first place.

Besides, disagreeing with a Liberal is “hate Speech” and you’re a “racist” and a “bigot” if you do.  🙂

King John Died in 1216 (he came to the thrown because he’d locked his chief rival and then in drunken stupor killed him. “Mysterious deaths” were a Medieval euphemism for assassination and murder in reality), most likely of an illness but many, especially his  future history allies he’d never meet  (usually anti-catholics like Foxes’ Book of Martyrs (1563) where King John was a good just man who stood up against the Church had been done wronged and assassinated by an evil Pope) which is funny because one of his allies was Pope Innocent III who was an enemy of King John until he made the Pope Overlord of all England then he got all the power he wanted and nullified the Magna Carta within 2 1/2 months which started a war!).

The “Peace maker” ends up with even more war. Nobel Peace Prize 1215 for King John!! 🙂

Lost war after war, just like Obama Who unlike Jhn doesnt really want to fight them badly, he’s just too single-minded to care).

Does that make Islam our Overlord, unofficially, since they can do wrong in the eyes of Liberals? or are they just incompetent like King John was in battle but instead of swards the Liberals just appease them and get the people killed in  a different way nowadays.

As overlord of the kingdom, and protector of a king who had taken a crusader’s vow, Innocent III had already sent a string of letters to England berating the barons. Now he explained how, ‘by such violence and fear as might affect the most courageous of men’, they had forced John to accept an agreement ‘illegal, unjust, harmful to royal rights and shameful to the English people’. The Pope declared Magna Carta ‘null, and void of all validity for ever’,

Sound like a Liberal to George W. Bush anyone? 🙂

Just goes to show you some politics  and strange bedfellows haven’t changed in 800 years. 😦

See more at:magna-carta–law-liberty-legacy?ns_campaign=magna-carta-exhibition&ns_mchannel=bl_website&ns_source=carousel&ns_linkname=magna-carta-exhibition_title_link&ns_fee=0

and magnacarta800th.com

The Case For Hillary

1) After being accused of racism every time they disagree with the President, Americans will enjoy the change of pace by being accused of sexism every time they disagree with the President.

At least we’d get rid of “race relations” being the problem. We’d replace it with “gender relations” and White Males would STILL be the ultimate enemy!! 🙂

2) America’s military would be unstoppable because of three little words that Hillary would bring to the White House, “Flying Monkey Legions!”

Vast Right Wing Conspiracies would be true. 🙂

3) It would be terrible for our first black President to be the worst POTUS of all time and Hillary can take care of that problem.

4) Americans LOVE dynasties! Next it’s Jeb Bush’s turn. Then Chelsea Clinton. THEN Michelle Obama. Then Jenna Bush. Then Malia Obama and so on and so on into infinity. If Americans didn’t like being ruled by royal families, then you’d think there would have been some small indication of it in our history by now, right? 😉

5) We Americans take pride in giving good value for the money that’s paid to us and all those foreign governments that paid off Hillary when she was Secretary of State would REALLY hit the jackpot if she became President.

You wouldn’t have to worry about whether the President was corrupt because you’d already know she is BEFORE you elected her so nothing would be a surprise. The media wouldn’t would have to cover it as a “scandal” because that would just be Hillary being Hillary so nothing out of the ordinary there.

6) She’ll be a fantastic role model for young women who’ll learn that as long as you marry the right man and ride his coattails at every opportunity – you, too, can succeed!

7) Well, if she could handle being Secretary of State with no problems, then obviously…oh wait, she didn’t, did she?

8) Eight more years of complete and utter servile capitulation to a President of the United States should be enough to destroy the whole liberal mainstream media’s reputation for good.

9) If Hillary were to win, then all the people who tell America how incompetent she’ll be will be able to enjoy being proven right about her over and over again just as they have been about Barack Obama.

10) It’s long since time that small children were shown The Vagina Monologues before the White House Easter Egg Roll.

11) Everybody THINKS he can be President, but for hundreds of years, Americans have insisted on choosing Presidents based on “merit” and “accomplishments.” If both Obama and Hillary can be President, then that proves any undeserving idiot can do the job as long as he or she checks the right diversity box.

12) Despite the many credible claims that the money she made was part of a shady bribe, obviously parlaying $1,000 into $100,000 in highly speculative commodity market trading proves that Hillary Clinton really is…THE SMARTEST WOMAN ON EARTH!

13) Who could possibly be a better role model for young women in America than a politician who has been endorsed by Larry Flynt AND Hookers for Hillary?

14) Replacing Air Force One with a broomstick would mean tens of millions in savings for the taxpayers!

15) Like duh, she’s an incompetent lying socialist who will drive the final nails in America’s coffin after 8 years of Barack Obama and…oh wait, the goal here IS to destroy America, right? Oh, wow…it’s not? Then maybe she’s NOT the right candidate. (John Hawkins)

Naw, she the only one LEFT according to the Media… 🙂

And imagine how how annoyed the Jihadists will be with a Woman in charge! How dare we do something so vulgar and such a heresy! Maybe we can get her to wear a Burka. 🙂

Imagine what Bill could do for fundraiser for her re-election in 2020! The Hookers For Hillary could become his extended family, especially with Bill around to “entertain” them.

Imagine his School Lunch program. Wieners for everyone!

Think of the possibilities! Maybe even get Monica Lewinsky for a Cabinet “position”.

The Geller Apocolypse

Everything you need to know about the leftist bias in the media:

“Pamela Geller says she has no regrets about Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in 2 deaths” (AP)

It was HER fault that two jihadists were killed by police after they drove a 1000 miles to kill her and anyone in her general vicinity.

The Fatwa was HER Fault.

The dead jihadists are the victims!!

OMG! How F*cked up is that!

So let’s trash her!

A master of rhetoric and clearly comfortable in the spotlight, the 56-year-old former media executive shifts easily from charming to combative. Her critics have called the cartoon contest needlessly provocative, practically an invitation for violence. But Geller argued that any blame should be focused on extremists who can’t be criticized or lampooned without resorting to violence.

“Cartoons are political critique. It’s a cartoon,” she said. “Is that what we want to outlaw? We want to outlaw humor? We want to outlaw comedy? If you want to know who rules over you, find out who you cannot criticize.”

Her activities have prompted the Southern Poverty Law Center to add her to its extremist files, calling her “the anti-Muslim movement’s most visible and flamboyant figurehead.”

In an editorial Thursday, The New York Times said Geller “has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims” and called the Garland event “an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom. … To pretend it was motivated by anything other than hate is simply hogwash.”

Wow, no bias there!!

As head of an organization called the American Freedom Defense Initiative, she took in $960,000 in donations in 2013, paying herself a salary of $192,500, according to tax filings.

Donations pour in from the PayPal button on her website, Geller said, adding that she has “no idea” how much money she has raised.

Oh, and her main donor is a <<<evil music sting>> A CONSERVATIVE Foundation! OMG! THE Apocolypse is upon us all. She’s another Anti-Christ!

Yet, no one at the Liberal Media is even remotely worried about The Clinton Foundation and all that money. $500,000 per speech for Bill “gotta pay the bills”. Ha! Ha! That’s funny Bill.

Pam Geller makes money, that’s suspicious and evil.

The Clinton Foundation rakes in Millions to Billions, no one on the Left cares. They think it’s a good thing!

Hillary takes in money from dubious sources. No one cares. They let Bill have the pithy comebacks like “I just work here” and they laugh it off and  go on there merry way.

But Freedom Speech, naw, who gives a crap about that.

Hillary wants to buy the election with $2 BILLION  (3 times what Obama raised) and that’s a good thing.

The U.S. State Department will not review the breaches of the 2008 ethics agreement Hillary Clinton signed in order to become secretary of state after her family’s charities admitted in March that they had not complied, a spokesman said on Thursday.

“The State Department has not and does not intend to initiate a formal review or to make a retroactive judgment about items that were not submitted during Secretary Clinton’s tenure,” Rathke told reporters. (Reuters)

Muslim jihadist try to kill Americans on American soil, not only is it her fault but SHE’s THE BAD GUY for ‘upsetting’ them.

America, What a Country!

The daily threat is the Sharia-flavored assault on our liberties, the kind of pressure exerted by reasonable-sounding Islamists in communities across America, under the guise of fighting “Islamophobia.”

It was just such an event that attracted attention in January in the same convention center attacked by Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi on May 3. Dubbed “Stand With the Prophet,” it featured elements of earnest concern about Islam’s image in America. But it also featured moments of scurrilous slander against anyone who would speak boldly against the terrorist wing of the Islamic faith.

Employing the first rule of political correctness, the “Stand With the Prophet” event brimmed with the fascist sentiment that assertive words against radical Islam must be branded as hate speech.

Sadly, this is the same noxious logic the Southern Poverty Law Center uses in its reckless designation of Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative as an anti-Muslim hate group.

It is neither a hate group nor anti-Muslim. It is anti-free speech repression. Muslims willing to tolerate America’s heritage of free expression will taste no quarrel with Geller’s AFDI.

Her group mounted the cartoon contest not from a general distaste for Muslims, but as a ballsy response to Jihadist habits of suppressing expression that rattles their fragile sensibilities. The most extreme example of this thin skin is the recent tendency of some hard-liners to take up arms against those who have drawn images of the prophet Muhammad. The Charlie Hebdo attacks in January and the widespread riots protesting Danish cartoons a decade ago reveal a facet of Islam’s advance that poses a dire threat to all societies cherishing freedom of expression.

So, seeking to put a stick in the eye of such an affront, the Geller event sought to make a point that we will not be told what we can and cannot draw— or say, or write, for that matter.

By the time the day was over, another lesson had been delivered. Unlike the sitting ducks in the Paris office, in Texas, we shoot back. One hopes the growing ISIS fan base will be somewhat dampened each time its adherents are killed before they take out one infidel.

 

That lesson has been so popular that it has drawn many to approve of the whole cartoon-contest idea, fancying it as a method to smoke out the next wave of twisted souls seeking to spread the caliphate by challenging Americans engaged in free speech.

But here is where a line is drawn, between standing up for groups like AFDI as they hold such events, and actually advocating them.

That line is beyond the grasp of many. Soon after the January event in Garland had attempted to bully and berate anti-jihad speech, I heard of the plan for the Muhammad cartoon contest. I may have audibly groaned.

I am as ready as anyone to take the battle to the terrorists, whether by bombing them into oblivion in the Middle East, or defending America against violence or ancient repressions here in America.

But the cartoon contest was problematic at several levels. It was clumsily broad and needlessly hurtful to countless people who are guilty of nothing.

Remember, the cartoon-fest was not just a show of defiance to the rioters and murderers who react violently to Muhammad on paper; it was a massive back of the hand to the entire Muslim world and its article of faith that says not to draw its prophet.

Some folks cared not one bit about collateral offense. “These people killed our countrymen on 9/11,” one radio caller told me. “I can’t get real worked up about getting them steamed about a stupid cartoon.”

Not an unprincipled view. But as we hopefully move toward a new era of rejoining the war our enemy has never stopped fighting, it is time to note the need to fight hard, but fight smart.

Our war effort should do two things: obliterate the enemy militarily, and make clear that we have no dispute with Muslims willing to peacefully coexist in free societies.

The Islamic rules against depicting Muhammad are no skin off anyone’s nose, and that belief deserved better than to be savaged by some righteously offended Americans looking to score points against radical views recommending violence to prevent such depictions.

Let us focus our energies not on flipping giant birds in the general direction of all Muslims, but rather a concerted effort to vanquish the portion of Islamic culture that gave birth to murderous overreactions to art.

There have been multiple lessons in recent days, groupable in a folder one might call Free Speech 101 in the Age of Islamic Repression. Its highlights:

— Strict Quranic interpretations are incompatible with American law in many ways. Few examples are more valuable than Sharia’s call to shut down offending speech by the sword.

— In America, some folks believe that free speech is supported only if the words are embraced and praised. I cannot be more clear: Ms. Geller has the right to hold a daily Muhammad cartoon contest if she wishes. But if that tactic is not my cup of tea, no one should suggest that my defense of her rights is somehow timid.

— Vast cross- sections of America need a refresher course on free expression. The First Amendment exists to protect precisely those types of speech that rankle some sensibilities. Safe, sanguine speech requires no protection. There are exceptions for fighting words and incitements to violence, but the Garland event exemplified neither. It was a private event that forced no unwitting souls to gaze upon the Prophet. As for incitements, they are actual invitations to do specific harm. The mere crafting of words or images that are infuriating to some are the problem of the offended party, not the artist.

Those knocked off-kilter by the free expression of others have the responsibility to learn a skill set: First, let it go like big boys and girls, realizing that freedom means occasionally running across things that can anger, provoke, even infuriate; Or second, engage in more free speech in return. Explain why you are offended, call for self-restraint in the creation of incendiary images, and then just walk away. Such entreaties may prevail, they may not. Such is life in a free society.

Every Muslim in America should know that a free society is what they have chosen to enter. Our incredibly tolerant and resilient nation mounted no national wave of retribution even after Islamic terrorists ripped our hearts out on 9/11.

But clear-eyed assessments of our war against radicals are not hate speech. And the occasional edgy stunt designed to highlight the jihadists’ hostility to American law and culture does not warrant an armed attack.

In today’s America, we cannot even know the name of a heroic police officer who mowed down the two Garland terrorists before they could kill a single Texan. The reason: too many concerns about his safety.

We will know we have rejoined the battle when ISIS is more worried about its safety than the brave Americans who occasionally mow down an ISIS operative.

Meanwhile, let us marshal any passion for more cartoon contests and channel it toward something genuinely constructive: the election of a President who is serious at all levels about fighting radical Islam, fending off both its terror tactics and repressive instincts. (Mark Davis)

Word Games

“Like most political topics [in the US] the debate is relatively non-existent.  Once you identify pro or con on the subject, the other side assumes they know your feelings and arguments and immediately begins either attempting to convert you or demonize you for your beliefs.”

This struck a cord with me because of how true I feel it is. Why is this? What is a society that does debate more productively? What would you like to see happen and might it happen? Any thoughts are welcome.

My definition of debate; respectful conversation that might lead one or both sides to see the full scope of an issue and agree on a best choice in the matter. -Timothy A Walker

Advocacy is the norm.  Unlike debate, advocacy can be effective sans facts.  Good advocacy works on our reason, emotion and the character of everyone involved is a consideration too.

Unlike debate, advocacy shares a lot of common ground with propaganda and is very easily abused.

There has been a consistent reduction of clarity in news, linked to misinformation, that favors advocacy forms of dialog.  Infotainment is advocacy.

The lack of clarity norms renders debate lofty,inaccessible and boring essentially.

We need advocacy and we need debate.  I believe the real answer to this is a sharp increase in clarity norms, which would favor good advocacy and frame it as the gateway to debate instead of being the gateway to misinformation and polarization is most often is now.

Clarity is a non partisan common interest we all should have.—Doug Dingus

In the 1980s there was a TV show called “Not Necessarily The News” on HBO that featured something called “sniglets.” (Hosted by Bob Saget). Although it’s probably a hate-crime to say the word “sniglet” out loud now and will get you accused of homophone-a-phobia, a sniglet is a word that should appear in the dictionary but doesn’t. Sniglets have all but disappeared, but the dictionary itself might as well be thrown out too. Words that had unambiguous meanings for decades or even centuries have seen those definitions changed by progressives in the name of political correctness.

To make sure you are up to date on which words and phrases are now permissible, I’ve assembled a few here that have seen their definitions change so you don’t get accused of being an “Ist-a-phobe” at the water cooler come Monday.

Thug: noun.
Old meaning: a violent criminal.
New meaning: a racial slur; the same as the “n-word.”
Source: Tonight Show band leader Questlove in a tweet this week and pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: upriser, revolutionary, victim, misguided young people, Democratic Party voter.
Acceptable uses: When referencing the bad guys in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and when talking about white hockey players Food Stamps: noun.
Old meaning: a small document that is given by the government to poor people and that can be used to buy food.
New meaning: a racial slur; “code” for black people.
Source: Democrats in the 2012 election deemed pointing out the fact there are more people on food stamps under President Obama than at any point in American history to be “racial code.” It being a fact was deemed irrelevant.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: economically challenged, differently fed, Democratic Party voter.
Acceptable uses: When calling for greater funding for the program or when accusing a Republican of wanting to “gut” the program.

Budget cut: noun.
Old meaning: the act of reducing budgeted expenditures.
New meaning: a reduction in the rate of increase in spending where more money is spent than the prior year but slightly less than previously projected; draconian gutting of vital programs, particularly for poor and minority people.
Source: The Democratic Party and the mainstream media.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: There is no alternative; reducing, or even proposing a reduction in the rate of increase of government spending, is racist.
Acceptable uses: The term is not only allowed to be used when talking about spending on national defense, it is required.

Urban: adjective.
Old meaning: of or relating to cities and the people who live in them.
New meaning: racist code for “black people.”
Source: Every progressive everywhere.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: Underrepresented communities, victims.
Acceptable uses: Only when giving the full name of a country singer or talking about an awful store selling clothes for white suburban hipsters.

Progressive: adjective.
Old meaning: Political philosophy based on the belief that some people are intellectually and genetically superior to others and should, therefore, be able to exercise power over everyone else, up to and including who can live or reproduce.
New meaning: tolerant, loving, smart, caring.
Source: The Democratic Party (which also was the source of the original definition but now chooses to pretend otherwise) and pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary None. Even though the philosophy was created by those who literally advocated for the extermination of “undesirable” people (minorities and poor, uneducated whites), people proudly call themselves progressive without consequence.

Tolerance: noun.
Old meaning: willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own.
New meaning: Conformity; the belief that the only acceptable thoughts are those that adhere to a progressive philosophy.
Source: The Democratic Party, College professors, pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: None. There is no need to remove this word from your vocabulary, but it is important to remember it means only the new definition. Any deviation from the new meaning to the old one will be met with protests, boycotts and potential massive fines from government.

Diversity: noun.
Old meaning: the quality or state of having many different forms, types, ideas, etc.
New meaning: different colored, like-minded drones. It no longer applies to the ideas or thoughts, only skin color. This word particularly does not apply to black or Hispanic conservatives.
Source: The Democratic Party, the mainstream media and pretty much everyone on (the mostly white) MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: None. You must not question this concept, only blindly accept it. To point out the hypocrisy of rich, white liberal progressives living in gated communities extolling the virtues of diversity is a near hate-crime.
I hope this small but important list helps you navigate our brave new world. Should you find yourself violating these suggestions by saying something like, “Well, progressive Democrats and their policies have pretty much had unfettered reign in the most violent and economically depressed areas of the country for generations and things have only gotten worse,” the only hope for redemption is a donation to a progressive organization that sells “indulgences.”

The most popular indulgence sellers are the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. Donations are tax deducible and you can rest assured that your money will be put to good use, not wasted on frivolities like accurate record keeping or paying taxes. (Derek Hunter)

Don’t do as They do, do as they say. OR ELSE!

And the Childish Shall Lead

Humanity has wondered throughout its history “what is this world coming to.” And every generation believes that those coming behind it are doomed because of their long hair, loud music and curious conduct.

So far, every end-of-the-world prediction has been wrong. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t some things we need to be concerned about.

Here are five recent developments that make us wonder if America is not only in decline but is reeling sharply toward disorder, where up is down, down is up, and character, honor and decency have become anachronisms:

* Riots are becoming more commonplace and, so far, the worst ones have been based on nothing, touched off by uninformed reaction rather than the facts. We don’t yet know why Freddie Gray died. But even if it were police negligence — or, worse, police malfeasance — rioting is not a civilized response. Yet the riots are being excused.

* Worse, the riots are apparently organized events rather than spontaneous acts. An analysis of social media shows that there are links between the Ferguson, Mo., riots of last year and the Baltimore riots. How long can a peaceful society exist under these circumstances, when professional rioters incite violence and promote unrest at whim?

* Meanwhile, University of the District of Columbia Law School Dean Shelley Broderick has told students they can delay taking one final exam if they help protesters with their legal troubles. It’s a hallmark of our legal system that everyone charged with a crime is entitled to legal representation. But this woman is singling out (suspected) violent protesters as virtuous members of the community deserving of special protections. Would she offer the same deal to help right-of-center groups that need representation because they’ve been targeted by the IRS?

* California Gov. Jerry Brown is threatening fines of $10,000 a day — $10,000! — for those he thinks use too much water as the state withers from drought. Meanwhile, the state of California has dumped millions of foot-acres of fresh water into the Pacific Ocean for irrational environmental reasons while people, livestock, crops and lawns parch.

* Our universities are no longer institutions where free thought and open discourse are welcome and encouraged. Those whose ideas differ from the thinking that is required by campus bullies — a league of students, professors and administrators — are shunned. Dissenting voices are shut down and chased off of campus. A focus on trigger warnings, microaggressions and safe spaces has replaced attention to academics.

Also since the government essentially owns the Student Loan market the Universities can just raise tuition because they want to build a new $2 Million statue and then complain that they are underfunded. The Liberals then up the amount for student loans so more people can get in deeper debt and the University can build their statue AND get more money and since they have no incentive to not continue doing more and more of this the tuition goes higher and higher and more people get loans they can’t pay back and it spirals upward until at some point it will crash and their will be a bailout and the cycle can continue.

None of this means students have become delicate daisies who wilt in the face of anything they find even mildly offensive. They have actually become more aggressive toward those with differing views, and this is the way they are telling them to shut up.

No, the country isn’t going to collapse due to these five issues. But they are examples of troubling behavior, of an unhealthy trend. It seems fewer and fewer adults are in charge while childish and intemperate acts, and twisted thinking are becoming dominant in our culture.

And I would add what I call “unenlightened narcissism”. It where you think the universe not only revolves around you and what you want, but that it MUST do so.

That everything you want you are “entitled” to because you want it or some government bureaucrat/politician told you you were “entitled” to it for their own narcissistic reasons.

But it sounded good. “Free” always sounds great until the real price is paid. But since the world revolves around you and only you you don’t give a damn.

And if all else fails, just call them “racists” or “bigots”. 🙂

Justice Served on a Political Platter

Well, the Maryland State’s Attorney came up with a solution to the Lose-Lose Scenario, it’s called the Political Red Meat Game.

Well, what if they are guilty? Fine, let the facts bear that out. But this was a Political Sacrifice. (they at least could have all been White Males that would have been so much juicier for the Leftists! 🙂 )

The Evil 6

Cheers erupted as City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced that charges were being filed against the six officers involved in the apprehension, arrest and death of Freddie Gray. That feeling of elation reverberated through the streets of Baltimore, and especially the Penn-North neighborhood that was the scene of Monday’s riots, as residents applauded the decision to indict.

RED MEAT! RED MEAT! THE GODS ACCEPT YOUR SACRIFICE!

“The city is phenomenal right now. Right now, it’s like Baltimore, thank you for listening, thank you for everyone constantly protesting for the betterment of the good. Everyone that’s being negative needs to stop being negative, it’s so simple as smiling at a baby, to let go of the nonsense,” he said. “It’s awesome, it’s super great.”

Thank you for rioting, looting and burning down and destroying businesses. Thank you for destroying lives and property.

You love me, you really love me!

“The state’s attorney, she’s the next best thing next to grape Kool-Aid. You could tell she was fed up. She was real about it, everyone on her team was real about the situation, and they made sure they got justice and justice prevailed,” he said

Notice, he thinks they’ve already been convicted. “innocent until proven guilty” isn’t even on their tiny minds.

The head of a group that is holding a march Saturday says it will now be a “victory rally” after a prosecutor charged six officers in the death of Freddie Gray.

Malik Shabazz, president of Black Lawyers for Justice, said he was pleasantly surprised by the charges and commended State’s Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby “for standing up for justice and setting a standard for prosecutors all over the nation.”

NO VENGEANCE NO PEACE!

Within days, the State Attorney’s office determined, prosecuted, and convicted 6 people of Second Degree Murder and other charges.

Fraternal Order of Police head Gene Ryan brings up Mosby’s “personal and professional relationship with Gray family attorney” William Murphy. Murphy gave $5000 to Mosby during her campaign last year. Ryan also says, “It is clear that your husband’s [Baltimore councilman Nick Mosby] political future will be directly impacted, for better or worse, by the outcome of your investigation.”

But Progressives thrive on conflicts of interest, as long as it’s in THEIR INTEREST to do so. She said “honorable” law enforcement would “work” with her, after all. 🙂

Next up, she’ll be running for Governor soon, after all apparently “When she was growing up in inner-city Boston, her 17-year-old cousin was mistaken for a drug dealer and killed outside her home by another 17-year-old.” (NBC) So she’s not a biased Social Justice Avenger at all! Maybe she’ll run for President after Hillary.

“To the people of Baltimore and demonstrators across America, I heard your call for ‘No Justice, No peace,’” she said. “Your peace is sincerely needed as I work to deliver justice on behalf of this young man.”

Sounds like a Campaign speech to me.

Amazing!

Second Degree Murder: Definition. Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as: 1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable “heat of passion”; or 2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender’s obvious lack of concern for human life.

Let’s go out and kill us some black people!! 🙂

Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter:

1. Someone was killed as a result of act by the defendant.
2. The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life.
3. The defendant knew or should have known his or her conduct was a threat to the lives of others.

That’s a steep hill to climb, but NO VENGEANCE NO PEACE!
“I just heard the comment on the bus, that we’re happy, there won’t be no more fires or looting. The decision to even take the officers to court, that’s a relief off the street people, off the people in the projects, the ones who feel like we’re victims,” one man told a reporter for a local CBS affiliate in Baltimore.

“It’s absolutely a joyous occasion, some right has been done, some wrong has been righted — so far,” another resident said. “I think we’re finally getting some results.” (CBS)

THEY GOT THEIR POUND OF FLESH. THERE HAS BEEN A HUMAN SACRIFICE TO THE POLITICAL GODS.

Did it solve anything?

Only the immediate political problem and it throw 6 people to the wolves of racial politics to torn apart for the show.

“It’s symbolic not just of police brutality,” Ray said. “Maybe we are progressing toward the equality that we should have been moving toward decades ago.”–University of Maryland Sociologist Rashawn Ray.

Yeah, I think Dr. Martin Luther King would agree. 🙂

Well, what if they are guilty? Fine, let the facts bear that out.

But what if they don’t?

Will the rioters return for more Vengeance! Of course they will. It’s like a volcano that has the magma boiling under the surface and the pressure builds until it erupts. It calms down and the pressure builds up again.

Or will the State be forced to convict them no matter what so they don’t have to face the wrath of that possibility?

The “innocent until proven guilty” presumption is totally out the window. They are guilty and everyone’s happy now.

Is that how Justice works in America now?

It didn’t take the Race Baiter Supreme long to get into the act:

Rev. Al Sharpton called for the Justice Department to “take over policing in this country” and stated “we’re going to have to fight states’ rights” in comments recorded by the Baltimore Sun on Thursday.

Damn that evil 10th Amendment! We should abolish it in favor of complete Federal Control of everything and everyone!

Sharpton said, “we need the Justice Department to step in and take over policing in this country. In the 20th century, they had to fight states’ rights in — to get the right to vote. We’re going to have to fight states’ rights in terms of closing down police cases.”

Ah, The National Police run by a Progressive Liberal Justice Department that selectively ignores laws when it doesn’t fit with their Narrative or Agenda, yeah that’s the ticket.

The THOUGHT POLICE!

Think the wrong thoughts and they will come for you too. That makes me feel so much better! 😦

The Lose-Lose Scenario

The City of Baltimore is in a Lose Lose Scenario thanks to their incompetent “it’s only property” ‘give them room to destroy’ Liberal Mayor and 40+ years of liberalism that has made people “victims” who chant “No Justice No Peace” but really they mean “No Vengeance No Peace”.

A Far, far, cry from the ideals of Martin Luther King, Jr.

The lose-lose scenario goes like this:
If the report exonerates or doesn’t convict the cops the Narrative driven thugs will riot and there will be much gnashing of political teeth.

If the report convicts the cops the Narrative driven thugs will riot and there will be much gnashing of political teeth.

Either way, more looting, more violence and absolute no “healing” or resolution. But that doesn’t matter.

The evidence won’t matter. The Narrative matters.

It will be more like a volcano that has had it’s magma chamber filled to bursting so it erupts to release the pressure but the volcano is still active an will re-erupt at another time. The next Freddie Gray, Travyon Martin, etc.

This is world Liberalism has created. A rocky, volcanic landscape that will erupt at any moment  with the right human sacrifice to trigger the Wrath of The Liberal Gods. And you’re supposed to supplicate your yourself to them in appeasement.

The fact that they are the one’s creating the magma, stoking the magma, and then complaining when the volcano erupts that it’s YOUR Fault! is something you’re not supposed to talk about you racist pig-dog!

That is the post MLK world where you ARE judged on the color of your skin and content of your character only matters if you’re not a Liberal. Then, they are to exploited and you are guilty of racism, homophobia,islamophobia & greed for “oppressing them” until proven Liberal enough to repent for your sins. If you’re a Christian, well, you’ve all ready gone to Liberal Hell and can’t be redeemed.

This Week on the New Black Panther Party’s “Black Power Radio,” national chairman Hashim Nzinga said since America has “declared war on us,” evidenced by “military police in the black neighborhood” protecting the rich, the New Black Panthers should be looked upon as Founding Fathers who declare war and are “willing to die or kill to save our babies and to save a black nation that is dying before our eyes.”

Nzinga said, “America is about protecting the rich and the powerful.”

He added, “We pay taxes. They have declared war on us and it’s nothing but state racism.”

“So if we say we are at war, we should be applauded like George Washington,” Nzinga continued. “We should be applauded like Thomas Jefferson. We should be applauded like the Founding Fathers of the country.”

“This is not the hate hour, this is the love hour,”he added. “We have to love ourselves enough to be willing to die or kill to save our babies and to save a black nation that is dying before our eyes.” (Breitbart)

The only winners are the Narrative set up to be advantageous to Liberal Politicians and “activists” and disadvantageous to everyone else.

Anything else would be racist, after all. 🙂

It’s A Trap!

John Hawkins: When liberals look at the poor, first and foremost, they see people who will vote for them in exchange for goodies. This gives liberals a perverse incentive to keep as many Americans mired in poverty as humanly possible.

This is why liberals are always willing to make a government handout a little bigger, easier to qualify for, or to make sure as many people as possible are using it. They want poor people to remain poor – and no wonder. Show me a ghetto in America and I will show you an area that votes heavily Democrat despite the fact that its condition never seems to improve.

Incidentally, that’s just how liberals like it. If you’re poor today, they’d like you to remain poor next year, the next ten years or even for the rest of your life. Then, not only do liberals get your vote, they get to feel better about themselves because they’re “helping” a “pitiful, helpless failure” like you. It’s the best of all worlds for liberals: they get to feel “generous,” it helps keep them in power, and other people pick up the bill.

Of course, it’s certainly not the best of all worlds for the poor.

Having been poor, I can tell you that it’s no picnic. Nobody likes living in a dangerous neighborhood, struggling to pay the rent or not knowing where the money will come from if his car breaks down. This is where liberals try get the fishhook in your jaw. They offer “free” money, “free food,” “free” housing. When you’re struggling, that looks pretty good.

While I have also been desperately poor in my life I have never taken government assistance while I was poor. I was nearly homeless for several years while working 129 hours a day 5 days a week because of debts accumulated. It never occurred to me to seek assistance from the government. It just wasn’t my mind set. It was my problem, It had to be my solution, not expecting other people to “fix” it for me.

But, what many poor people eventually realize is that all the “free” things liberals want to give them are part of a trap. Sure, government benefits make life a little easier, but they also help keep you poor long term. Being on the dole undercuts your motivation to change your situation. It encourages you to treat receiving handouts from the government as a primary source of income. In fact, many people start to worry that if they do TOO WELL, they’ll lose their “free” benefits.

On the other hand, conservatives don’t believe anyone is destined to remain poor.

We believe if you make good decisions, work hard and are willing to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, you can at least join the middle class. Unlike the Democrats, Republicans get most of their votes from the middle class; so unlike them, we’re incentivized to help poor Americans improve their situation financially. The same poor person who won’t vote Republican today may vote for the GOP tomorrow if he is off the dole, has a better job and is living in a better neighborhood.

And that doesn’t involve being a career burger flipper and expecting my employer to pay me $15/hr to do it. IMHO.

So conservatives do believe in a social safety net, but we believe it should be temporary.

It’s not a hammock on the beach where they serve you mai tai’s until dawn. It’s a net, not a bed.

We don’t want anyone to become dependent on the government or to take advantage of the system. In other words, we don’t want the safety net to become a hammock.

🙂
That’s why we want people to work for welfare, think drug addicts should be ineligible and believe there should be limits to how long someone can stay on a program.

We agree with Ronald Reagan who once said, “I believe the best social program is a job.”

Want to know why conservatives oppose high corporate taxes and want to keep taxes low in general? Why we don’t like the minimum wage? Why we try to cut regulations as much as possible?

It’s mostly about jobs. If the economy is growing, thriving and creating lots of jobs, it helps everybody, including the poor. Increasing the minimum wage to $15 may help a few people live more comfortably in poverty, but it will also lead to the loss of starter jobs for millions of poor people who desperately need the experience so they can improve their situations.

The government will NEVER lift you out of poverty, but a good job can. That’s where we believe we should be focusing our efforts. That’s why conservatives have long touted enterprise zones that allow businesses to have tax breaks in poor neighborhoods. The more businesses that move into low-income areas, the more poor Americans can get jobs.

Conservatives also believe in being tough on crime and protecting the Second Amendment rights of Americans. Nobody benefits more from that than the poor who are often trapped in crime-ridden neighborhoods that Democrats haven’t bothered to clean up, despite being in charge for decades.

They just get you to blame white rich people who obviously “hate” you. Vote for me, here’s a handout to show “I care”. 🙂

Conservatives don’t believe there’s anything shameful about being poor, but we also believe the best thing we can do to help poor Americans is to make it possible for them leave poverty behind for good. A liberal “success story” is someone who gets lots of government benefits while he lives in poverty for decades. A conservative “success story” is a poor American who no longer needs government benefits because he got a good job and moved into the middle class.

That’s why liberalism is for poor people who are content to remain poor and conservatism is for poor people who want to make a better life for themselves.

Amen.

Just remember, to a Liberal that means you’re mean, you hate poor people, woman and children, you kick the dog and steal candy from babies and push grandma out of her house and over a cliff because your Snidley Whiplash and you are greedy, heartless, and maniacal. 🙂

Taxpayer Money

Jack Dunphy: On Thursday, the Los Angeles Times told of a report from the City Administrative Officer titled “Homelessness and the City of Los Angeles.” Among the revelations in the report is that 15 different city agencies and departments spend more than $100 million each year on providing services to the homeless. “In July 2014,” the report says, “the Mayor pledged to end veteran homelessness by December 2015 and chronic homelessness in Los Angeles by December 2016.” As with any report from any government bureaucracy, this one says these goals will be achieved through the spending of even more money to be extracted from the taxpayer.

The report also contained recommendations, including this: “Treatment of the homeless with dignity, and clarity on their rights.”

Dignity and rights, they say. Well, sure, who isn’t for dignity and rights? But reading the report put me in mind of interactions I’ve had with some of the city’s homeless people, about whom “dignified” is not among the first thousand adjectives one would use to describe them. Here is a story about one of them:

Los Angeles is a popular destination for the homeless, not least for the great stacks of money spent on them, but also for the city’s pleasant climate. If you’re going to sleep outdoors, it might as well be in L.A. But that climate can at times turn inhospitable to those on the streets, and it is in those times that cops and firefighters see an upsurge in calls from homeless people claiming to have this or that malady, one that requires a trip to a hospital, a clean bed, and a meal. We call these people “frequent flyers.”

When I answered the radio call one day, the temperature in L.A. was nudging 100 degrees. The woman who had called 911 claimed to be suicidal, necessitating the response of multiple police units. “I’m going to kill myself,” she said. “You have to take me to the hospital.”

I recognized at once that this was a case of a frequent flyer, and by inquiring at the nearby homeless shelter, I learned that the woman had just that day been expelled from it for unruly behavior. She was too much of a bum, I was told, even for the other bums.

I explained to the woman that I was sorry she was feeling so blue, but she would not be getting the ride to the hospital she had hoped for.

“But you have to take me,” she said, “or I’ll kill myself. That will be on you.” That would be unfortunate, I told her, but I was sure I would get over it quickly enough. She went on at some length and with great vigor to condemn my callousness, and she threatened to haunt me from the grave. Call me heartless, but my decision was final.

To her credit, she was resourceful. She had a Plan B, which was to march right over to the same pay phone she had used earlier and call 911 again, this time asking for the Fire Department. She was connected to an LAFD dispatcher, to whom she reported symptoms of an affliction of some kind, and in due course there appeared noisily at the scene an ambulance and a fire engine, thus bringing the number of city employees in the little drama to about 10.

To these firefighters she again reported her “symptoms.” (She had now abandoned all suicide talk – that would have made her a police problem, and she knew she was getting nowhere with us.) The Fire Department protocols, based on her claimed symptoms, demanded that she be taken to a hospital, so with great resignation the firefighters loaded her onto a gurney and collected her “belongings” – a whole shopping cart full of trash, from what I could make of it – into plastic bags to be carted along with her.

And she was then delivered to some hospital in or around downtown L.A., there to waste the time of doctors, nurses, and other staff while she enjoyed the air conditioning, the clean sheets, and a free meal, and perhaps passed the time chatting it up with some other homeless person who had put a different group of cops and firefighters through a similar charade. All of it was paid for by the taxpayers of Los Angeles, and I’ll bet she does it every time she finds the weather not to her liking.

GOMER: Medical slang for a patient who “has lost–often through age–what goes into being a human being” (quote from Samuel Shem’s “The House Of God”). Typically an old demented non-communicative patient . Stands for “Get Out Of My Emergency Room”.

The term has been used several times on the television shows Scrubs and ER.

I highly recommend if you can fins a copy of this movie or the book to get it.

“To do nothing for the gomers was to do something, and the more conscientiously I did nothing the better they got.”
― Samuel Shem, The House of God

“Gomers are human beings who have lost what goes into being human beings. They want to die, and we will not let them.”
― Samuel Shem, The House of God

To turf (verb: to find any excuse to refer a patient to a different department or team)

Or is that “they want to be entitled and we let them” 🙂

Based on this report from the Administrative Officer and the mayor’s pledge to “end homelessness,” the city will no doubt commit even more money to the problem. (Perhaps they can fund it by running a unicorn farm.) And in two, five, or ten years there will be another report expressing wonderment and frustration as to why, after spending all that money, there are still so many homeless people in Los Angeles.

I’m grateful I don’t live there anymore.

I’m glad I never lived there. But isn’t this just how liberals work. How every problem’s solution is more and more of YOUR money. And since it never works, they have to keep doing the same insane thing over and over again expecting different results.

And if you don’t let them do it you’re a “racist”, a “bigot”, “heartless”, “hate women and children” “hate poor people and love rich people” or “a denier”. And because you don’t want to be that you turf their Gomers and the Gomers turf themselves in a very co-dependent relationship with YOUR money.

And remember, The Stimulus that didn’t work by Obama was because it wasn’t BIG enough.

Who turned out be Democrat operatives.

FEED ME!!!

FYI:This year, National Tax Freedom Day falls on April 24, or 114 days into the year.

So you still have 9 days more (on average) to pay off Uncle Sam for THIS year. 🙂

3 Years ago it was April 13th. 🙂

But it varies by state.

Arizona is April 11th.

It takes you more than 100 days this year before the money you earn is truly yours. That’s roughly a third of your income every year that never makes it into your pocket. In fact, you’re likely spending more on taxes than you will on food, clothing, and housing — combined.

The earliest Tax Freedom Day is in Louisiana, where taxpayers are liberated after April 2. Connecticut residents aren’t done working to pay their taxes until May 13.

Americans are expected to pay a total of $4.85 trillion in taxes in 2015 — $350 billion more than last year. About $1.5 trillion is divvied up among local governments and the 50 states. Washington gets the other $3.3 trillion — the most ever collected by the IRS.

But yet they managed to spend it all, and more.

So don’t worry, when in Debt, SPEND EVEN MORE!