Eating is Racist, Seriously…

Looks like the next time you’re really craving Chinese you’re going to get a side order of ‘racist’ from the far-left.

Insanely left-wing website “Everyday Feminism” has written a guide titled “Being a Foodie Without Being Culturally Appropriative”.

From Everyday Feminism:

Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.

With food, it isn’t just eating food from someone else’s culture. It might not be appropriation if you’re White and you love eating dumplings and hand pulled noodles. Enjoying food from another culture is perfectly fine.

But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food.

It’s also harmful when the dominant culture controls the economic and material resources to produce that food for their own consumption and profit.

So it’s capitalism that’s evil as well. Gee, never saw that coming… 🙂

While food from Western Europe is still connected to ethnic roots, ethnic food has become reserved only for ethnicities that are perceived as exotic and foreign to White folks.

This is where her Social Justice Warrior seeing racism everywhere overpowered the dish like too much salt or garlic.

For example, what is now Vietnam had been occupied by China for a thousand years and then colonized by France. This period of colonization is also what led to things like banh mi (sandwiches) and banh ex (crepes). The use of spam in different parts of Asia and the Pacific Islands, like spam musabi or spam in hot pot, are a direct result of US colonization.

If you love a dish and think it’s delicious, great! If you’re searching for a place that serves a particular dish, also great!

However, seeking “authenticity” fetishizes the sustenance of another culture. The idea of the “authentic” food experience is separated from reality. It also freezes a culture in a particular place in time.

What hilarious is that ANOTHER group of Social Justice Warriors were wanting people fired for NOT serving a Banh Mi on the traditional French Bread and called THAT “cultural appropriation”.

So even the Social Justice Warriors think each other positions are a “cultural misappropriation”.

Oberlin College: The traditional Banh Mi Vietnamese sandwich that Stevenson Dining Hall promised turned out to be a cheap imitation of the East Asian dish. Instead of a crispy baguette with grilled pork, pate, pickled vegetables and fresh herbs, the sandwich used ciabatta bread, pulled pork and coleslaw.

“It was ridiculous,” Nguyen said. “How could they just throw out something completely different and label it as another country’s traditional food?”

Nguyen added that Bon Appétit, the food service management company contracted by Oberlin College, has a history of blurring the line between culinary diversity and cultural appropriation by modifying the recipes without respect for certain Asian countries’ cuisines. This uninformed representation of cultural dishes has been noted by a multitude of students, many of who have expressed concern over the gross manipulation of traditional recipes.

So she’s “cultural misappropriating” her own “cultural misappropriations”. 🙂

Food culture gets re-colonized by chefs seeking to make that “authentic” street food they tried more elegant. Often, these restaurants are inaccessible to the communities they’re appropriating from.

Quinoa, which is native to Bolivia is now too expensive for communities there. Last year, Whole Foods declared collard greens the “new kale.” Coconuts have now been packaged as high end, luxury water. Tofu, soy, and tempeh are now staples at organic, healthy food markets.

It’s all white, rich people’s fault that Quinoa is one of the few complete grains on the planet.

Essentially, the health food craze is racist and oppressive. 🙂  (but only to White People…and she’s not a “racist” for that either 🙂 )

This is food gentrification, where communities can no longer afford their own cuisines and sustain their traditions.

That’s how messed up in the head these people are.

So, if you wish to broaden your horizons and become open to other ethnicities through their unique food in the form of appreciation or celebration, you will be condemned as exploitative (if you’re part of that “white folk” group anyway). Presumably, the left would like “white folk” to eat only “white folk” food.

Whatever the F8ck that is…

Back to The Rebel:

We managed to stomach up the will-power to go through the ‘guide’ so you don’t have to. (I did though) Hat tip to Daily Wire.

It begins by saying, “Mainstream media has made a spectacle out of foods from seemingly exotic places. I’ve also observed a lot of White chefs create “Asian-inspired” dishes. When going out to eat, I notice many “Asian-fusion” themed restaurants where chefs combine all the countries and flavors in the vast and diverse continent of Asia and throw them together on both plate and menu.”

Sounds like the embodiment of tossed salad multiculturalism. Does the left have a problem with that all of a sudden?

The writer, Rachel Kuo, continues a few paragraphs down, “It’s frustrating when my culture gets consumed and appropriated as both trend and tourism.”

She rambles on, “When it comes to food, what’s appropriation and what’s not can be tricky to think about. Cultural appropriation is when members of a dominant culture adopt parts of another culture from people that they’ve also systematically oppressed. The dominant culture can try the food and love the food without ever having to experience oppression because of their consumption.”

So, you got all that? Trying tasty ethnic food is bad because you’ve never experienced oppression. I guess we should just let sushi and Mexican places go out of business.

Well, they are not only capitalist but “exploitative”!! Evil!! 🙂

VIDEO: “Modern Educayshun” perfectly mocks Social Justice Warriors

“But, food is appropriated when people from the dominant culture – in the case of the US, white folks – start to fetishize or commercialize it, and when they hoard access to that particular food. When a dominant culture reduces another community to it’s cuisine, subsumes histories and stories into menu items – when people think culture can seemingly be understood with a bite of food, that’s where it gets problematic.”

I watch a lot of Food Porn then, because I love The Food Network. The Playboy Channel for food “exploitation”. 🙂

Since when do only white people eat ethnic food? Can black people not like Asian food?

She then proceeds on with the ‘guide’ providing a step-by-step process of how not to be a racist when wanting to eat.

Step four titled “loving the food, not the people” states, “America has corporatized “Middle Eastern food” like hummus and falafel, and some people might live by halal food carts, but not understand or address the ongoing Islamophobia in the US.”

Is there no hope for intelligence from these people? Probably not. Me being and old white guy means I’m already evil so my opinion is worthlessn to these nutters.

Needless to say, this guide is a good way to lose your appetite if you’re trying to lose weight. (The Rebel).

Now I can truly say without reservation, The Left makes me sick and wants me to lose my lunch… 🙂

This is racist: (and if you don’t make it 100% “authentic” that too is racist! 🙂

Enjoy 🙂

Global Cooling?

I’m so confused. First it was Cooling (1970’s), the Warming (1980s-early 2000’s) then “Climate Change” “Warming” (last few years).

Now it’s back to Cooling?

Just as all the little environmental dictators get together to have an Apocalyptic Warming Conference where they all agree that they should run everyone and everything and make everyone poor and only they’ll be rich. It’s for your own good. 🙂

They call the Conference by the telling name of COP 21. COP, Freaudian slip? 🙂

Ice-4-382335

SCIENTISTS claim we are in for a decade-long freeze as the sun slows down solar activity by up to 60 per cent.

A team of European researchers have unveiled a scientific model showing that the Earth is likely to experience a “mini ice age” from 2030 to 2040 as a result of decreased solar activity.

Their findings will infuriate environmental campaigners who argue by 2030 we could be facing increased sea levels and flooding due to glacial melt at the poles.

However, at the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales, Northumbria University professor Valentina Zharkova said fluctuations an 11-year cycle of solar activity the sun goes through would be responsible for a freeze, the like of which has not been experienced since the 1600s.

From 1645 to 1715 global temperatures dropped due to low solar activity so much that the planet experienced a 70-year ice age known as Maunder Minimum which saw the River Thames in London completely frozen. 

The researchers have now developed a “double dynamo “model that can better predict when the next freeze will be.

Based on current cycles, they predict solar activity dwindling for ten years from 2030.

Professor Zharkova said two magnetic waves will cancel each other out in about 2030, leading to a drop in sun spots and solar flares of about 60 per cent.

Sunspots are dark concentrations of magnetic field flux on the surface that reduce surface temperature in that area, while solar flares are burst of radiation and solar energy that fire out across the solar system, but the Earth’s atmosphere protects us from the otherwise devastating effects.

She said: “In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other, peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun. 

“We predict that this will lead to the properties of a ‘Maunder minimum.

“Over the cycle, the waves fluctuate between the Sun’s northern and southern hemispheres. Combining both waves together and comparing to real data for the current solar cycle, we found that our predictions showed an accuracy of 97 per cent.”

Research colleagues Simon Shepherd of Bradford University, Helen Popova of Lomonosov Moscow State University and Sergei Zarkhov of the University of Hull used magnetic field observations from 1976 to 2008 at the Wilcox Solar Observatory at Stanford University.

A Royal Astronomical Society spokesman said: “It is 172 years since a scientist first spotted that the Sun’s activity varies over a cycle lasting around 10 to 12 years. 

The theory is likely to infuriate environmentalists who fear the globe is heating up.

I HOPE SO. 🙂

“But every cycle is a little different and none of the models of causes to date have fully explained fluctuations.”

The “double dynamo” theory appears to support claims of researchers who argue Earth will soon experience major global cooling due to lower solar activity as the sun goes into a sustained period of hibernation.

Environmentalists meanwhile claim global temperatures will increase over the period unless we drastically reduce carbon emissions.

DO AS WE SAY OR YOU’RE ALL DOOMED! 🙂

The Pol on the website so far:

Do you think the world will get hotter or colder from 2030?

Yes, by the sound of it we are in for a very long winter   43%

No, I believe that the Earth is gradually heating up and we are responsible so have to cut carbon   3%

I think it could go either way and will carry on fluctuating   26%

Why worry, it is out of our hands   24%

Even if there is a mini ice age after it will keep warming in the long run  4%

Since the people ain’t buying it’s up to the Politicians to force them to, after all that’s how Science works. 🙂

 

 

 

The Ruling Elite Exposed

One of the biggest scandals in American politics is waiting to explode: the full story of the inside game in Washington shows how the permanent political class enriches itself at the expense of the rest of us. Insider trading is illegal on Wall Street, yet it is routine among members of Congress. Normal individuals cannot get in on IPOs at the asking price, but politicians do so routinely. The Obama administration has been able to funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to its supporters, ensuring yet more campaign donations. An entire class of investors now makes all of its profits based on influence and access in Washington. Peter Schweizer has doggedly researched through mountains of financial records, tracking complicated deals and stock trades back to the timing of briefings, votes on bills, and every other point of leverage for politicians in Washington. The result is a manifesto for revolution: the Permanent Political Class must go.
For the Palin Deranged, let it be known he has worked for her and shares her ideas so you may want to consult your Thought Police Manual before continuing…Thank you.
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
The Point is not that it’s the Democrats or The Republicans doing it, it’s both!
The fact is NEITHER of them should be doing it is the point!
Martha Stewart went to Jail for “insider trading”.
Congress does it as matter of course. It’s a normal part of the day. Nothing special.
Perfectly Legal. They wrote the laws that say so! 🙂
They get opportunities that would send us normal people to jail, they can do it with abandon.
It turns out that it is not illegal for member of Congress to make stock trades using inside information they learn while working on legislation.
So they can use, say, the passing of Health Care Laws to buy and selling stocks that would be effected by it to enrich themselves.
Or an earmark for a major road to be built conveniently near property you just bought.
They could get out of the Stock Market before it crashed in 2008.
You could buy IPOs not available to normal people (Nancy Pelosi).
Conflict of Interest is not illegal for Congress. Everyone else, yes, Congress, No.
Political Intelligence groups data mine and gather the non-public info in Congress and sell it to Wall Street so they can all make money.
Yes, that evil Wall Street that is so “evil” and so is the subject of so much hypocritical demonizing.
Thus you may surmise that a political opposition to Big Brother Obama was psychologically necessary in order to provide an internal enemy posing a threat to the rule of the Party; the constantly reiterated ritual of the Two Minutes Hate help ensure that popular support for and devotion towards Big Brother is continuous.
So it’s Orwell’s  Hate Week is an event in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, designed to increase the hatred for the current enemy of the Party, as much as possible but now they have 24/7/365 newscasts and cable channels along with newspapers to keep it going ad infinitum!
But again, it’s Both Republicans and Democrats.
The Democrats tell the masses to hate Wall Street, but they are using Wall Street to get rich.
Rich people are evil.
Then they use info that would be a normal person a prison sentence to get rich.
They are the Political and Economic Elite.
They are in fact, the very thing they are saying is evil and that the class warfare is supposed to be about but they have re-directed it.
Class Warfare is a fraud. It’s a Diversion. It’s an Orwellian Hate ploy.
Fascinating. Disgusting. And perfectly Legal, for them.
One set of rules for the Ruling Elite. One set of rules for the peasants.
Is that Democracy?
No.
This is both Republicans and Democrats!
By the way: Mr. Warren “tax me more” ‘Darling of the Left’ Buffet is one of the major influences. Aw shucks…
One of the most damaging things reported by Schweizer is how Warren Buffett profited with millions from the government bailout programs he helped design. Wynton Hall, writing in Big Government says: In the wake of the $700 billion TARP bailout, Warren Buffett apparently shaped a plan to clean up toxic assets that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner later adopted–resulting in massive profits for Buffett.
Buffett proposed something he called a “public-private partnership fund.” For every $10 billion the private sector invested, Buffett said the government should put up $40 billion.
As the political debates surrounding the proposed $700 billion TARP bailout bill heated up, Buffett maintained an appearance of naivete, an “aw shucks” shtick that deferred to the judgment of politicians.  “I’m not brave enough to try to influence the Congress,” Buffett told the New York Times.
During the meeting, Buffett strongly urged Democratic members to pass the $700 billion TARP bill to avert what he warned would otherwise be “the biggest financial meltdown in American history.”
That soundbite sound familiar? 🙂
After Paulson’s exit, incoming Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tweaked the plan and rolled it out in March 2009. But according to quarterly reports from Buffett’s holdings company, Berkshire Hathaway, between the time the billionaire crafted his plan and Geithner adopted it, Buffett quietly purchased 12.4 million shares of Wells Fargo stock and 1.5 million shares of U.S. Bancorp. Once the government unveiled its “Public-Private Investment Program,” bank stocks jumped, resulting in large profits for Buffett.
In September of 2008, Buffett invested $5 billion in the over-leveraged investment house of Goldman Sachs, having obtained impressive terms: Berkshire Hathaway would receive preferred stock with a 10% dividend yield, and the option to buy another $5 billion at $115 a share.
Buffett had a strong financial interest in the bailout’s passage, says Schweizer. “If the bailout went through, it would be a windfall for Goldman. If it failed, it would be disastrous for Berkshire Hathaway.”

Yet Buffett had little reason to worry; his insider political connections afforded him two guarantees. First, many members of Congress were themselves investing heavily in Berkshire Hathaway throughout the bailout talks–a move that may simply have been a good investment in an unsteady time, or else a shrewd exploitation of unique information. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), for example, snatched up $130,000 worth of Berkshire Hathaway stock.  Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) also bought shares in Berkshire Hathaway, as did Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), who purchased half a million dollars’ worth just days after the Wall Street bailout bill was signed.  Second, Buffett knew he had an ally in the surging Barack Obama. Buffett had backed Obama in 2008. And as Obama has himself conceded, “Warren Buffett is one of those people that I listen to.”

When the TARP bailout passed, Berkshire Hathaway firms received a staggering $95 billion in bailout cash from U.S. taxpayers. In total, TARP-assisted companies made up almost a third (30%) of Buffett’s entire publicly disclosed stock portfolio. The payoff:  by July 2009, Buffett’s Goldman bet and his congressional jawboning had yielded profits as high as $3.7 billion.

Incredibly, in a breathtaking public relations move, Buffett publicly complained that the government bailouts had put his company at a disadvantage,  because funders “who are using imaginative methods (or lobbying skills) to come under the government’s umbrella–have money costs that are minimal.”  Rolfe Winkler of Reuters best captured Buffet’s audacity: “It takes chutzpah to lobby for bailouts, make trades seeking to profit from them, and then complain that those doing so put you at a disadvantage.”

Still, despite Buffett’s apparent, and brazen, display of crony capitalism and political manipulation to produce billions in profits, Schweizer says that the most egregious part is that his behavior appears to have been entirely legal. Buffett merely leveraged his unique and powerful political connections to turn taxpayer money into massive private profits.

Now, with the 2012 presidential election right around the corner, Buffett plans to back President Obama again. In August 2011, the two men vacationed together in the plush surroundings of Martha’s Vineyard. Shortly thereafter, Buffett hosted an Obama fundraiser in New York City where contributors spent $35,800 for VIP tickets and the chance to discuss the economy with the Berkshire Hathaway CEO.

If Buffett’s political track record is any indication, his time spent alongside President Obama was an investment intended to yield a high rate of return–at taxpayers’ expense. (Big Government.com)

Aw shucks, Tax me More Warren is part of the disease, what a shock. And of Course, Obama has his ‘full support’ $$$$

In January, Obama specifically said, “But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

We were told to change our rhetoric, to have a new “tone” of civility free of violent references.

Fast forward to now, and Obama’s Vice President Joe Biden, is telling unions they “fired the first shot” at a campaign events.

“Folks, you fired the first shot. It’s not about Barack Obama. It’s not about Joe Biden. It’s about whether middle-class people are going to be put back in the saddle again – because you are the people who make this country move,” Vice President Joe Biden said at a campaign event in Ohio today.

Thanks for leading by example, Biden.

But then again, The Unions are the Brownshirts, the army of this Adminstration and as has been chronicled in this blog many times, the incestuous $$ partners of Democrats.

So the Circle of Sleeze continues. But don’t worry, it’s <fill in the blank>’s Fault! 🙂

Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain…

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Welcome to Armageddon

Welcome to Armageddon Day, Aug 2nd. 🙂

“Any doubts that this country has an insular, inept, and cataclysmically dysfunctional political class were erased long ago, but it bears repeating that only in certain elite precincts could any of the debt ‘deals’ discussed over the last month be seen as anything but a juvenile, cosmetic solution to a real and titanic problem. That problem isn’t going away simply because the political crisis may be pushed (the president hopes) beyond the 2012 election…

“Members of the political class pat themselves on their backs for coming up with a deal that is ‘the best deal they could get.’ The dominant media coo about the statesmanship and sobriety that supposedly pulled the nation from the economic brink, permitting us all to return to our mundane pursuits. But the spending will increase and the liabilities will mount. The day of fiscal reckoning will continue to approach.”

Under the latest “deal,” we are told, federal spending will be cut approximately $2.7 trillion. That’s false. We’re going to pretend to cut $2.7 trillion, which is somehow meant to be a greater achievement than pretending to cut $1.5 trillion, but not as great as pretending to cut $4 trillion, which is what the rating agencies would prefer. In reality (that benighted realm that exists outside the District of Columbia), spending will increase by about $6,000,000,000,000. (Peter Kirsanow).

It’s a Political Solution, NOT an economic one. Which is all Washington and their attendant monetary drug addicts and co-dependent partisans understand.

But it’s only math. It’s not like Democrats actually understand it or the Republican really want to fix it. Money is blood Washington and they aren’t going to slit their wrists, just ours. But we’ll feel good doing it, at least they hope so.

“The first part of this agreement will cut about $1 trillion in spending over the next 10 years….The result would be the lowest level of annual domestic spending since Dwight Eisenhower was president.”

Do you smell a new Democrat Talking Point? 🙂

The Weekly Standard apparently has more people that understand both math and history:

Under Eisenhower, non-defense spending averaged 7.5 percent of GDP. In the pre-Obama era, the all-time record for non-defense spending was 17.7 percent of GDP, set 20 years ago (in 1991) under the first President Bush. This year, under Obama, the tally for non-defense spending will be an estimated 20.2 percent of GDP, and under the proposed debt-ceiling agreement, non-defense spending would eclipse the pre-Obama record every single year for the foreseeable future. (Meanwhile, defense spending has dropped markedly as a percentage of total federal spending and will soon drop far more.)

So perhaps what Obama meant to say was, “Under this agreement, domestic spending will remain higher throughout the next decade than it ever was before I took office, easily doubling domestic spending during the Eisenhower administration — even as a percentage of GDP.”

Well, if they could do math and history at the White House, that is. (townhall.com)

By the way, even if Obama meant discretionary spending, he’d still be wrong:

But We still have our Dear leader. The one who was very close to just raising the Debt Ceiling because, He personally, felt like it. His idea of a take charge attitude is not lead, but to dictate.

Last week, when President Barack Obama spoke to the National Council of La Raza (“The Race”), he said something that should alarm every American. He confessed that he’d like to “bypass Congress and change the laws” on his own. He added, “Believe me; the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you.”

He doesn’t need to promise us. We believe him, because we’ve been watching his rogue behavior since the moment he entered office.

Way back in February 2010, even The New York Times unveiled his modus operandi, in its report “Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power.” It summarized, “With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.”

Obama’s unauthorized war in Libya was just one more wayward decision in a long line of executive-power-run-amok choices, taken despite the fact that top Pentagon lawyers considered his unilateral Libyan invasion to be illegal “hostilities.” And according to congressional testimony, his own lawyers in the Office of Legal Counsel were asked to soft-pedal their views so as to curb any further violation allegations.

What alarms me is that these perversions of power are coming from not only the highest office in the land but also Obama’s advisers and team (including his lawyers). In his speech to the National Council of La Raza, the president also explained that he was taking his cues from others: “I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own.”

Of course, Obama knew that to do so at the outset of the debt debates would have ensured his political downfall. On the other hand, swooping down in the last hour on Capitol Hill from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. with his Democratic majority in the Senate to save the economy from hopeless partisan gridlock would surely put him on the front page of Savior Daily!

Speaking of the press, what’s equally tragic is that the Obama-mania media are jumping on the executive-power runaway express. Just this past Thursday, CNN’s website ran an article by Jack Balkin, a constitutional law expert at Yale, titled “3 ways Obama could bypass Congress.” (Do you think CNN would have extended the same clemency from Congress to former President George W. Bush?)

As The New York Times reported at the beginning of last year, Obama’s exploits to bypass Congress are intended to “advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.” We now can add America’s border problems to those, as Obama also elaborated last week that the temptation to bypass Congress includes “not just immigration reform.” No wonder the crowd began to chant “Yes, we can!” (Tragically, it seems that too many citizens want a (SET ITAL) Fuhrer (END ITAL) more than they do a president.)

Do we really want a power-hungry rogue president who continually is tempted to bypass Congress? Will we continue to allow unilateral power to our president to follow his own political whims and desires? Do we want a supreme leader who constantly seeks ways to justify dodging our bicameral government — the very checks and balances of our republic? When he avoids Congress, is he not also trampling on the Constitution and its mandates for separation of powers and teamwork among our three branches of government?

Has the president forgotten his oath of office, “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”?

Mr. President, I strongly suggest you meditate upon the legal genius of Joseph Story, a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1811 to 1845 (appointed by President James Madison). Justice Story wrote: “The duty imposed upon (the president) to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed, follows out the strong injunctions of his oath of office, that he will ‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.’ The great object of the executive department is to accomplish this purpose.”

Wow, how Justice Story’s words fly in the face of President Obama’s thoughts about bypassing Congress.

No wonder Thomas Jefferson passionately proclaimed: “I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution … taking from the federal government the power of borrowing.”

God, lead Obama not into doing-things-on-his-own temptation. (Chuck Norris)

But when you have drug addicts running the show, what else would you expect but a solution that says methadone is a good first step! 😦

The Ruling Class Propaganda Machine

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Did you hear the one about the 55 jobs that were saved or created by using $111,000,000?

No? Just ask Los Angeles.

More than a year after Congress approved $800 billion in stimulus funds, the Los Angeles city controller has released a 40-page report on how the city spent its share, and the results are not living up to expectations.

“I’m disappointed that we’ve only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million,” said Wendy Greuel, the city’s controller. “With our local unemployment rate over 12 percent we need to do a better job cutting red tape and putting Angelenos back to work.”

According to the audit, the Los Angeles Department of Public Works spent $70 million in stimulus funds — in return, it created seven private sector jobs and saved seven workers from layoffs. Taxpayer cost per job: $1.5 million.

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation created even fewer jobs per dollar, spending $40 million but netting just nine jobs. Taxpayer cost per job: $4.4 million.

Greuel blamed the dismal numbers on several factors:

1. Bureaucratic red tape: Four highway projects did not even go out to bid until seven months after they were authorized.

2. Projects that were supposed to be competitively bid in the private sector went instead went to city workers.

3. Stimulus money was not properly tracked within departments

4. Both departments could not report the jobs created and retained in a timely fashion..

And this bureaucrat went on to give themself a B- grade for their performance!!

And these are the bureaucrat types who are going to be in charge of your Health Care and whether you live or die?

God Help us All!!

But the Stimulus is a compete and glorious success. Just ask the Mainstream Media and Press…

And Now the Ministry Of Truth Cheerleading of The Week Story:

Diane Sawyer (Anchor, ABC News Tonight) announced the “President’s stimulus program” of $818 billion was “designated to create or save millions of jobs” and though “Republicans say it’s been largely unsuccessful,” the “White House is firing back, and our Jon Karl has a look at the top of the list, the ones that have worked the best.”  Previewing a report to be released Friday by the Vice President’s office, “100 Recovery Act Projects that Are Changing America” (AP dispatch), Karl trumpeted how “the White House will detail the top 100 stimulus programs in the country. We have an exclusive list at what they considered the greatest hits of the stimulus program.”

Karl began with a project in New Jersey “where a toxic area contaminated by an old electronics plant is being transformed into a new industrial park, thanks to $30 million stimulus dollars” and, he raved, “the project has already created 68 jobs.”

Showing the effort to which ABC went to produce the advertisement for President Obama, the Washington DC-based Karl showed himself at the site of his second example in New York City, to which he credited 120 jobs: “The White House is also touting the $175 million in stimulus funds being spent here at New York’s Staten Island ferry terminal, replacing nine bridges like this one that are in a dangerous state of disrepair.”

Next, after noting Senator John McCain’s claim the spending has been a waste, Karl cited “230 jobs created” by “$51 million for a new facility for injured veterans at Fort Bliss, Texas” and, finally, without any job creation claim, “$25 million in tax credits for GE to build a new plant for energy efficient appliances in Louisville, Kentucky.” That would be a little corporate welfare for MSNBC’s owner.

Karl concluded that adding up all the jobs in the 100 projects in the White House list, though he did not cite a total claimed number, “comes to $250,000 per job, but the White House says the actual cost per job is much lower, because each of these projects will have ripple effects, creating many more jobs in the future.”

Sawyer then reiterated the White House line: “So they say these are facts, too, and these are the facts that show it’s been working.”

And these are the facts that show there is no Journalism anymore in the Mainstream media, just Propaganda for Big Brother.

“I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.”–Former Gov. Mick Hucakbee (2009).

Just the Facts, Ma’am! 🙂

*****************

Our New Orwellian Phrase of the Week:

From the administration that brought you “man-caused disaster” (terrorist attack) and “overseas contingency operation,” (war) another terminology change is in the pipeline.

The White House wants the public to start using the term “global climate disruption” in place of “global warming” — fearing the latter term oversimplifies the problem and makes it sound less dangerous than it really is. (FOX)

So from Global Cooling…”inadvertent climate modification.”….to Global Warming…To Global Climate Change… to Climate Change…to Global Climate Disruption?….. 🙂

And when that fails to dull the minds of everyone to their fake threat then what?

But Republicans predicted that re-branding the issue would have limited effect on the legislative effort. GOP strategist Pete Snyder said he doubts the term is going to change hearts and minds. “Are they going to change the name of weathermen to disruption analysts?”

Especially, after Climate Gate it was very apparent that science was taking a back seat to Progressive Liberal Politics.

*****************

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) turned an already fractious midterm election cycle on its ear, defying her own party to launch a write-in campaign for her Senate seat after losing to Tea Party Republican Joe Miller in the primary.

I guess her Ego just couldn’t handle losing to an insignificant little dweeb in the Tea Party.

This is what’s wrong with the ruling political classes on BOTH sides. They are too comfortable with their Marie Antionette “Let Them Eat Cake” attitude that they are so much better than the little people.
Yes, even Republicans.
Remember, I am a registered Independent. I am also a Conservative, first.

“We cannot accept the extremist views of Joe Miller,” she said, admitting that she did not “swing back” when under attack in the primary, but promising to do so with relish now.

“The gloves are off,” she said.

Her Ego must have really been bruised. Now she sounds like MSDNC, or the NAACP or Huffington Post.

The ruling class has been hurt by the little people.

“The Peasants are revolting, sire”

“Yeah, I know, they stink on ice” (Mel Brooks History of the World Part 1) 🙂

Then there’s Chrisitine O’Donnell, the “kooky” candidate Tea party nominee in Delaware that upset the apple cart by taking out a RINO (Republican in  Name Only) who was well loved by the ruling class because he had an (R) next to his name but was in fact a Liberal. But he was one of “them”.

Karl Rove attacks her savagely, sounding like Chris Matthews  or Rachael “Madcow” Maddow on MSDNC.

Charles Krauthammer, who anyone who reads this blog will know I have great respect for, attacks her.

Why?

Because it’s a numbers game to them. Winning at any cost is just politics.

And that’s all that matters. The Power. Not the principles.

But if we happen to get conservatives in at the same time, that’s a bonus. Not the actual benefit.

And isn’t that ass backwards??

“The verdict is in,” O’Donnell proclaimed. “The small elite don’t get us. They call us wacky. They call us wing nuts. We call us ‘we the people.’” What is happening in America today, she said “is a love affair with liberty.”
“The constitution is making a comeback,” O’Donnell said. “Americans want our leaders to defend our values, our culture, our legacy of liberty and our way of life — not apologize … They have rejected the narrative that has been imposed on them by the D.C. cocktail crowd.”
Many voted for “Hope and Change” and what they got was a Hope of what the Progressive Liberal Democrats wanted to Change this country into.
“Yes We Can” meant the Democrats changing America into Europe.
And the ruling classes of politicians are ok with it, as long as they are the ones in power.
“I don’t want the majority back if we don’t believe anything,” Sen. DeMint said on Fox News. “So I think if we want the numbers, if we want the majority, then we’re going to have to stand on some principles that the American people believe in.”
And neither do I, because then you’re just trading one slave master for another.
The political animal has not changed his spots.
So we have to change them for him or her.
Simple.

Reality is a Dish Best Served Cold

Optimists think that if we manage to turn a few things around, their kids may have it . . . almost as good. The country they inherit may be . . . almost as good. And it’s kind of a shock to think like this; pessimism isn’t in our DNA. But it isn’t pessimism, really, it’s a kind of tough knowingness, combined, in most cases, with a daily, personal commitment to keep plugging.

But do our political leaders have any sense of what people are feeling deep down? They don’t act as if they do. I think their detachment from how normal people think is more dangerous and disturbing than it has been in the past. I started noticing in the 1980s the growing gulf between the country’s thought leaders, as they’re called—the political and media class, the universities—and those living what for lack of a better word we’ll call normal lives on the ground in America. The two groups were agitated by different things, concerned about different things, had different focuses, different world views.

But I’ve never seen the gap wider than it is now. I think it is a chasm. In Washington they don’t seem to be looking around and thinking, Hmmm, this nation is in trouble, it needs help. They’re thinking something else. I’m not sure they understand the American Dream itself needs a boost, needs encouragement and protection. They don’t seem to know or have a sense of the mood of the country.

And so they make their moves, manipulate this issue and that, and keep things at a high boil. And this at a time when people are already in about as much hot water as they can take.

To take just one example from the past 10 days, the federal government continues its standoff with the state of Arizona over how to handle illegal immigration. The point of view of our thought leaders is, in general, that borders that are essentially open are good, or not so bad. The point of view of those on the ground who are anxious about our nation’s future, however, is different, more like: “We live in a welfare state and we’ve just expanded health care. Unemployment’s up. Could we sort of calm down, stop illegal immigration, and absorb what we’ve got?” No is, in essence, the answer.

An irony here is that if we stopped the illegal flow and removed the sense of emergency it generates, comprehensive reform would, in time, follow. Because we’re not going to send the estimated 10 million to 15 million illegals already here back. We’re not going to put sobbing children on a million buses. That would not be in our nature. (Do our leaders even know what’s in our nature?) As years passed, those here would be absorbed, and everyone in the country would come to see the benefit of integrating them fully into the tax system. So it’s ironic that our leaders don’t do what in the end would get them what they say they want, which is comprehensive reform.

When the adults of a great nation feel long-term pessimism, it only makes matters worse when those in authority take actions that reveal their detachment from the concerns—even from the essential nature—of their fellow citizens. And it makes those citizens feel powerless.

Inner pessimism and powerlessness: That is a dangerous combination. (Peggy Noonan)

And as one who was not abundant, and still isn’t, when I see what I see and the complete disconnect from reality that is the Twilight Zone at the Beltway around D.C. I do wonder about this.

I have no kids, I probably never will.

But that doesn’t mean I don’t look at the kids I see on the street and wonder what life is going to be like for them when they are my age.

And I don’t think it will be that good, certainly not like their childhood.

And that is a sad legacy.

But to pick up on Mrs. Noonan’s point about Arizona. (as an aside, where is the lawsuit against Missouri for slapping the government in the face? Are there not enough Latinos in the state to warrant it?).

IBD: In federal lawsuits, defendants may answer litigation filed against them with a counterclaim against the plaintiff for damages or other relief.

The Constitution of the United States mandates at Article 4: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of government … that the United States shall protect each of them (the states) against invasion and … against domestic violence.”

“Republican form of government” is defined as a republic that is a system of government in which the people hold sovereign power and elect representatives to exercise that power.

To “guarantee” means to warrant or undertake that something has happened or will happen. The term “invasion” is (regarding a country or territory ) a hostile incursion.

The term “shall” used in the third person singular denotes an imperative, without discretion or choice. Thus, the phrase “shall guarantee” leaves no wiggle room.

Remedies for breach of guarantee are damages (expenses incurred in repairing guaranteed product) or rescission (return of product for refund of purchase price — i.e., “money back” guarantee).

Recently, the federal government — the present regime in particular — has not only violated the guarantee of republican form of government and the pledge to protect Arizona from invasion and domestic violence, but has actively worked to achieve the exact opposite result.

By the federal government’s determined resistance to enforcing existing federal law against illegal immigration and attempting to penalize Arizona for attempting to cope with illegal immigration on its own, the federal government has crassly flouted its obligation to guarantee a republican form of government for the state of Arizona.

One of the most effective means for destroying a republic is to bankrupt it and beggar its people.

It’s the only thing Obama & Co ARE good at.

This is what befell Rome, which went from a republic to what would now be called a dictatorship as a result of the financial drain on the country resulting from the empire.

In the case of Arizona, recent figures disclose that illegal immigration costs the state $2.5 billion annually. This amounts to approximately $400 for every man, woman and child in the state, which has a population of less than 7 million.

The federal government has not only filed litigation against Arizona, but informed an association of Arizona sheriffs that it intends to prosecute as an example at least one deputy for enforcing Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration legislation (SB 1070).

There are reports the administration is seeking ways to cease doing business with Arizona and is encouraging other states to do the same, to exercise economic coercion on the state.
The administration has praised the efforts of states such as California for economically boycotting Arizona. The sanctions the administration has imposed on Arizona are hardly less draconian than those that the same administration has imposed on Iran to prevent Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. All this for Arizona’s daring to exercise its republican form of government and passing widely popular legislation in a manner completely consistent with Arizona’s Constitution.

The Obama administration has thus tried to take control of Arizona and abridge/suppress its republican government in substance and in process.

Also violated by the federal government is the pledge to protect Arizona from invasion. The enormous influx of illegal immigrants into Arizona—uninvited, demanding and belligerent—clearly constitutes a hostile incursion.

The surge in illegal immigration has brought with it crime and violence. Phoenix is now the kidnap capital of America as a result of the Mexican gangs that have invaded Arizona using kidnapping as a form of turf acquisition and protection.

Notably, on the Independence Day weekend this year a Mexican drug gang announced that the border with Mexico and Arizona was “moved” several miles into Arizona whereby Interstate Highway 8 would now be the border. There was no response to this by the Obama administration.

I feel I should point out that Insterstate 8 is not “several miles from the border. It is a LOT of miles from the border!!

Interstate 8 starts/ends at  Interstate 10 just south of  Casa Grande, AZ. THAT IS 40 Miles from My house in South Phoenix!!!!

That is 134 miles from the Nogales, AZ on the border!!!

What we do have at the border are signs warning Americans to stay away from the gangs and cartels!!


It is undeniable that the federal government has shamelessly and willfully violated its guarantee and pledges under Article 4, constituting suitable grounds for counterclaims by Arizona against the federal government.

The question is whether the remedy for such violation should be rescission or damages. If the latter, a figure of $2.5 billion annually could be employed per the latest studies projected backward as well as forward. As to the rescission alternative (the “money back” guarantee, whereby the contract is undone or rescinded), this would constitute rescission of the breached agreement whereby Arizona entered the union in 1912.

Gaspers in disbelief regarding rescission/secession should know that there is nothing sacrosanct about the federal government; only the Constitution is inviolable. When the federal government willfully refuses to comply with a constitutional mandate, the Constitution can be upheld only by implementing its provisions, in this case the “money back” guarantee.

An independent Arizona can contract with the federal government for defense, as do small cities with the counties in which they are located, for police/fire protection. The outsourcing of defense by an independent Arizona might be expensive, but with the money saved from illegal immigration, Arizona could afford it.

The federal government might even make money on the deal and, for the first time, turn a profit on something.

To those who would label this “draconian,” the answer is this is a race to a precipice with a sheer drop greater than that of Arizona’s crown jewel, the Grand Canyon.

Personally, we’d go for damages. What’s 10 or 20 billion nowadays anyway? If the verdict came down in the early-ish morning, the Obama administration could have the money printed up by lunchtime.

After all, after the $4 Trillion Dollars in 19 Months with nothing to so for it,so what if they’d spend what another few billion…

It’s not like it’s real money to them anyhow…

Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality. –Martin Luther King, Jr.

The challenge that is already with us is the temptation to accept as true freedom what in reality is only a new form of slavery. —Pope John Paul II

The Political Class

The frustration that voters are expressing in 2010 goes much deeper than specific policies. At a more fundamental level, voters just don’t believe politicians are interested in the opinions of ordinary Americans.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% believe the nation’s Political Class doesn’t “care what most Americans think.” Only 15% believe the Political Class is interested in the views of those they are supposed to serve. Another 17% are not sure.

Skepticism about the Political Class interest in voters is found across just about all demographic and partisan groups. However, self-identified liberals are evenly divided on the question.  Eighty-eight percent (88%) of conservatives and 64% of moderates reject the notion that the Political Class cares.

Adults over 40 are more skeptical than younger adults about the Political Class. But even among voters under 30, nearly half (47%) don’t think the Political Class cares what most Americans think. Only 18% of these younger voters think the Political Class does care, while 35% are not sure.(Rasmussen)

America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution

By Angelo M. Codevilla from the July 2010 – August 2010 issue American Spectator

(Excerpts)

As over-leveraged investment houses began to fail in September 2008, the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties, of major corporations, and opinion leaders stretching from the National Review magazine (and the Wall Street Journal) on the right to the Nation magazine on the left, agreed that spending some $700 billion to buy the investors’ “toxic assets” was the only alternative to the U.S. economy’s “systemic collapse.” In this, President George W. Bush and his would-be Republican successor John McCain agreed with the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. Many, if not most, people around them also agreed upon the eventual commitment of some 10 trillion nonexistent dollars in ways unprecedented in America. They explained neither the difference between the assets’ nominal and real values, nor precisely why letting the market find the latter would collapse America. The public objected immediately, by margins of three or four to one.

When this majority discovered that virtually no one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them, the term “political class” came into use. Then, after those in power changed their plans from buying toxic assets to buying up equity in banks and major industries but refused to explain why, when they reasserted their right to decide ad hoc on these and so many other matters, supposing them to be beyond the general public’s understanding, the American people started referring to those in and around government as the “ruling class.” And in fact Republican and Democratic office holders and their retinues show a similar presumption to dominate and fewer differences in tastes, habits, opinions, and sources of income among one another than between both and the rest of the country. They think, look, and act as a class.

Although after the election of 2008 most Republican office holders argued against the Troubled Asset Relief Program, against the subsequent bailouts of the auto industry, against the several “stimulus” bills and further summary expansions of government power to benefit clients of government at the expense of ordinary citizens, the American people had every reason to believe that many Republican politicians were doing so simply by the logic of partisan opposition. After all, Republicans had been happy enough to approve of similar things under Republican administrations. Differences between Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas are of degree, not kind. Moreover, 2009-10 establishment Republicans sought only to modify the government’s agenda while showing eagerness to join the Democrats in new grand schemes, if only they were allowed to. Sen. Orrin Hatch continued dreaming of being Ted Kennedy, while Lindsey Graham set aside what is true or false about “global warming” for the sake of getting on the right side of history. No prominent Republican challenged the ruling class’s continued claim of superior insight, nor its denigration of the American people as irritable children who must learn their place. The Republican Party did not disparage the ruling class, because most of its officials are or would like to be part of it.

Never has there been so little diversity within America’s upper crust. Always, in America as elsewhere, some people have been wealthier and more powerful than others. But until our own time America’s upper crust was a mixture of people who had gained prominence in a variety of ways, who drew their money and status from different sources and were not predictably of one mind on any given matter. The Boston Brahmins, the New York financiers, the land barons of California, Texas, and Florida, the industrialists of Pittsburgh, the Southern aristocracy, and the hardscrabble politicians who made it big in Chicago or Memphis had little contact with one another. Few had much contact with government, and “bureaucrat” was a dirty word for all. So was “social engineering.” Nor had the schools and universities that formed yesterday’s upper crust imposed a single orthodoxy about the origins of man, about American history, and about how America should be governed. All that has changed.

Today’s ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters — speaking the “in” language — serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct. Many began their careers in government and leveraged their way into the private sector. Some, e.g., Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, never held a non-government job. Hence whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America’s ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.

The two classes have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another than did the 19th century’s Northerners and Southerners — nearly all of whom, as Lincoln reminded them, “prayed to the same God.” By contrast, while most Americans pray to the God “who created and doth sustain us,” our ruling class prays to itself as “saviors of the planet” and improvers of humanity. Our classes’ clash is over “whose country” America is, over what way of life will prevail, over who is to defer to whom about what. The gravity of such divisions points us, as it did Lincoln, to Mark’s Gospel: “if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.”

The ruling class had sunk deep roots in America over decades before 2008. Machiavelli compares serious political diseases to the Aetolian fevers — easy to treat early on while they are difficult to discern, but virtually untreatable by the time they become obvious.

Its attitude is key to understanding our bipartisan ruling class. Its first tenet is that “we” are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained.

When Woodrow Wilson in 1914 was asked “can’t you let anything alone?” he answered with, “I let everything alone that you can show me is not itself moving in the wrong direction, but I am not going to let those things alone that I see are going down-hill.”

Sound Familiar? It’s for your own good.  “I”  know better…

March 17,2010: President Barack Obama said he’s confident his health-care plan will pass Congress because it’s “the right thing to do” for the country and that he isn’t concerned about criticism of Democratic legislative tactics.

And anytime this President says he is putting aside politics (for any reason) I want to reach for the barf bag.

As the saying goes, they came to Washington to do good, and stayed to do well.

Confident “knowledge” that “some of us, the ones who matter,” have grasped truths that the common herd cannot, truths that direct us, truths the grasping of which entitles us to discount what the ruled say and to presume what they mean, made our Progressives (the worst form of Liberal Democrats) into a class long before they took power.

Our ruling class’s agenda is power for itself. While it stakes its claim through intellectual-moral pretense, it holds power by one of the oldest and most prosaic of means: patronage and promises thereof. Like left-wing parties always and everywhere, it is a “machine,” that is, based on providing tangible rewards to its members. Such parties often provide rank-and-file activists with modest livelihoods and enhance mightily the upper levels’ wealth. Because this is so, whatever else such parties might accomplish, they must feed the machine by transferring money or jobs or privileges — civic as well as economic — to the party’s clients, directly or indirectly.

Which is why before this blog on chat rooms during the 2006 Congressional and 2008 Presidential campaigns and the Democrats only real thought was to harp on Republican “corruption” I said repeatedly, they just want to replace the republican corruption with their corruption.

Switch out the cronies.

And that’s what we have. You have to be a minority and/or a union worker to get anything from this administration besides the back of their hand.

If you’re rich and successful, you are a demon, unless the government “deems” you useful or wants to take over your business that is.

Like Fannie and Freddie who were excluded from Financial Reform.

The Trial Lawyers were excluded from Health Care Reform.

Both are cronies of the government and the Trial Lawyers are the biggest cronies of Liberals.

As I said last week in a blog, the Liberals love to sue you into submission.

Rasmussen: “The American people don’t want to be governed from the left, the right or the center. The American people want to govern themselves,” says Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports. “The American attachment to self-governance runs deep. It is one of our nation’s cherished core values and an important part of our cultural DNA.”

But self-governed people are bad for the government busy bodies and their cronies who want to run your life for you because you’re an idiot and can’t do it for yourself.

They just know deep down, you’re a moron and they have to take care of you.

So Let Them Eat Cake! 🙂

Oh, sorry, Cake is politically incorrect because it has so much sugar in it and that’s bad for you.

So let them Eat Cookies.

Nope, not that either, cookies are the spawn of the devil  and lead to bad health habits…

So Let them Eat Tofu!

Without any help it’s flavorless, bland, or not very appetizing.

PERFECT! 🙂