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 🙂

The Best and Worst of 2015

Derek Hunter: As far as years go, 2015 certainly was one of them. The news was not wanting for content, and we columnists were not wanting for material. It was a year of tragedies and triumphs bookended by terrorist attacks in Paris. A reality TV star became the leading candidate of a major political party, “Star Wars” returned, and I got married. Yep, 2015 was quite a year.

I had a health scare that resulted in a pacemaker and a different view on mortality just months after my Dad died.

Not the best of times by far.

Politics:

The Best

Donald Trump. For all his problems, and they are legion, and the bluster, and it is constant, he’s done more than anyone in recent years to get people to pay attention to politics and just how corrupt the media and the Democrats have become. He’s been battering the media since the start, slamming his opponents since and changing how politics is done.

While, I’m still not a full on Trump guy I do like that he makes the Left and the RINOs crazy and just doesn’t give a damn. That really shakes them up.

Trump has been holding a clinic on how to run against Democrats and the media since his announcement. Aside from momentary flashes, none of the rest of the field appears to have learned a thing.

Because they are all stuck in their ways. They can’t see doing it any other way. Especially, Democrats, they have one playbook and they go to it every nanosecond of every day.

Expect all out nuclear war again on the Republicans. No atom will be lest un-nuked, no ethic or moral will not be cr0ssed in the quest for the Coronation of King Barack’s successor Queen Hillary.

The Republican RINOs are just plain lost.

If Trump is the nominee, Democrats may well win, but they will have been so battered and bruised they’d be hard-pressed to govern with any effectiveness. If he isn’t the nominee, whoever is will have learned how to be locked in a box with a rabid spider monkey and survive. The eventual nominee, whoever it ends up being, will be a much more devastating candidate thanks to Trump’s entry into the race.

The Media is still setting up the Coronation of Queen Hillary I like they have for 4 years now. I doubt they are going to change.

But maybe, just maybe, the sleeping stupid will recognize it for what it is.

That,and just maybe, the Republicans will actually run a campaign to WIN this time. Maybe.

 

The Worst

As awful as she is, Hillary Clinton is not the worst person on the national political stage. Until he leaves office, Barack Obama’s head wears the crown.

In a post-9/11, post-Paris, post-San Bernardino world, the president of the United States managed to go 12 months in which he used the words “radical Islamic terrorism” only to chastise others for saying them.

Well, you’re talking about his friends and mentors, the Muslims. They can’t be evil. That’s like Lule finding out Darth Vader is his Father…. 🙂

The economy continues to falter, our enemies are on the march, and the president has improved his short-game. The Obama presidency is a hilarious joke, but sadly it’s not the funny kind of joke.

But the Democrats continue to self-delude themselves that everything is awesome and we just need to get rid of those naybobs negativity.

One more year…

11 Months+ a few days. Don’t make it any longer than it has to be. Though if Queen Hillary wins we’re all doomed and you might as well close up shop and move to Fiji because it’s over.

Lie Of The Year

The “winner” of this category is obvious, which is why it hasn’t won any of these “awards” from the mainstream media: Hillary Clinton’s ever-evolving claims about classified material on her secret, unsecured email server.

Though I think her saying that the Benghazi families who have been ripping her for years about her You Tube cause of the incident are now lying because she never said it was pretty close.

“What Difference Does it Make?”

Her original statement at her press conference at the UN, was, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” High-stakes divorce settlements are less carefully worded.

Note how she specifically said she didn’t send any classified material, and how there “is” nothing classified on her server. She’d wiped it by then, though not thoroughly, so, in using present tense, she was telling her version of the truth.

After that original statement, Hillary’s story “evolved” at least two more times to she never “sent or received anything marked classified at the time.”

After that lie the media lost interest. Why wouldn’t they? Their candidate is ensnared in an FBI investigation that, were it anyone else, already would have led to an indictment and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees by now.

But we aren’t named Clinton; we haven’t been selling, or at least renting, our positions for sums of money that rival the worth of third-world economies, and a president of her party still controls the prosecutors.

No, we’re civilians, bound by truth, and she’s Hillary, utterly unburdened by such trivialities.

As we wind up 2015, I think we’ve dwelled enough on politics. So a few notes on a couple of other things.

Sports

The year started with a great Super Bowl. What a game! But it will be remembered as the game that gave us Deflategate. Tom Brady won – everything. He continues to live a charmed life, and good for him. Unless you bet against him.

And the Seahawks created a blunder for the ages that will be talked about until Liberals outlaw football altogether sometime later in the Century.

 

The Super Bowl was the highlight of the year for New England sports fans, but the rest of the world had to suffer until the World Series. After decades of miserable losing, New England (particularly in Boston) started winning. And their fans, both in baseball and football, became even more miserable to be around during a game. And I say that as someone with many friends who fit this description.

But the highlight of the year was the World Series.

The Kansas City Royals are a lot of fun to watch. They scrap and scrape together runs in a way no other team does.

Arizona Cardinals anyone? Anyone?? 🙂

Movies

I love “Star Wars,” saw it three times the weekend it opened. But it doesn’t win for movie of the year with me. There were a lot of great “art house” movies, and I’m sure one with $48 in box office receipts will win the Oscar. But “The Martian” was the most enjoyable movie of 2015. If you haven’t seen it yet, do yourself a favor. Even if you don’t care for Matt Damon (and I wouldn’t blame you), you’ll enjoy this movie.

I love “Star Wars” but I still think either Jurassic World or Avengers 2. I never saw “The Martian”.

Television

“The Walking Dead” remains TV’s best drama.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

The zombie aspect might turn your off, but it’s much more than that. Moreover, it’s a show that generates true suspense, in which no one knows what’s going to happen from week to week and no character, no matter who they are, is safe.

DOCTOR WHO! 🙂

If you’re a comic book nerd, or if you don’t mind super hero movies, might I also suggest checking out “Jessica Jones” on Netflix. It’s a surprisingly good series with humor, action and a great anti-hero. And, unlike “The Walking Dead,” you can binge-watch it over a weekend.

Haven’t got around to it yet. And that shows you how technology has changed so much.

I’m not sad to see 2015 go, though it does seem like it went fast. With 2016 being an election year, it will fly by as well. While I work and play in the first half of this column, life happens in the rest. Hope you had a great 2015, and I hope you have as much fun as possible in 2016. 

Here’s to 2016. The Hope of the future of our Country rests on your shoulders.

No pressure. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Star Wars Matters
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

United We Fall

A “Healthcare Workers for Obamacare” sign hangs torn in a parking lot in New York on Oct. 31, 2012.  AP

President Obama repeatedly promised that his signature health law, the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, would reduce insurance premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.

ObamaCare: United Healthcare’s surprise warning that it may scrap participation in federal health care exchanges is more than bad news for consumer choice. It’s a broader sign of an unsustainable system.

The nation’s largest health insurance provider surprised the markets Thursday by saying losses from its 550,000 individual ObamaCare exchange enrollments were sharply cutting its bottom line. That’s notable because ObamaCare exchange participation only forms a small slice of the $105 billion company by market capitalization.

Yet it was enough to make the giant company and all the value it creates throughout its many operations suffer enough to trigger, as IBD market reporter Jed Graham wrote, “a surge of red ink.”

The company forecast $425 million less revenue in the fourth quarter and cut its full-year 2015 earnings-per-share forecast to $6 from $6.25-$6.35.

Not surprisingly, its stock fell 5.6% by the close of trading Thursday, and other health care and hospital companies such as Aetna, Anthem, Tenet, Cigna, Humana and HCA took similar hits.

“We see no data pointing to improvement,” UnitedHealth Group CEO Stephen Helmsley said on a conference call. Patients, he explained, were using their plans more than the company had anticipated and, worse still, were dropping coverage when they got well.

Bad as that is for company profits, it’s a predictable outcome given the structure of the law and what it permits.

What Helmsley described was a company caught up in the classic “death spiral” that IBD and reputable economists have been warning about: Insurance policy sales going in the main to the sickest patients who use the most health care services, while the high prices of the larded-up government-mandated packages continue to drive off younger, healthier consumers.

DOH!  It’s not like it was predictable or anything… 🙂

In short, the ObamaCare master plan of having young and healthy consumers subsidize the oldest, sickest patients isn’t working as the White House’s central planners and self-proclaimed experts claimed.

<<chuckle>>

Not that the ideologically rigid Obama and The Democrats will care. They will continue to hammer on it until you give in to government control of who lives and who dies and the Insurance companies go bankrupt leaving only the government left.

That’s Democrat “compassion” for ya… 🙂

What’s striking here is that UnitedHealth is no tiny startup ship with a narrow margin of error riding the big ObamaCare regulatory waves. It’s the biggest of the big, a conglomerate that’s the product of the consolidation of the industry — Anthem and Cigna, UnitedHealth and HCA, HCA and private investors — that was supposed to enable the sector to absorb the blow of higher costs of insuring more customers and still continue to do well.

That’s not happening.

What’s more, UnitedHealth was in the ObamaCare exchanges for only a year, during a window of time when the government was supposed to cushion insurers against losses in the ObamaCare transition. The cushion ends next year, leaving companies on their own.

(Insert “Jaws” theme music here) 🙂

Will smaller health care companies really be able to make a profit in an atmosphere that even UnitedHealth found impossible to sustain a profit in? There’s plenty of reason to wonder, as the markets did Thursday. (IBD)

“We cannot sustain these losses,” CEO Stephen Hemsley said in an investor call Thursday morning. “We can’t really subsidize a marketplace that doesn’t appear at the moment to be sustaining itself.”

Several nonprofit insurance cooperatives that were supposed to compete for customers on the exchanges have folded. Meanwhile, some big publicly traded insurance companies, including Anthem, Aetna, Cigna and Humana, say they are enrolling fewer people than expected or even losing money.

A recent report by McKinsey & Co. found that the industry lost a total of $2.5 billion, or $163 per customer, in the individual market.

Insurance companies have had trouble attracting healthy customers to the exchanges to purchase their insurance products, many of which have deductibles of thousands of dollars.

The industry’s troubles are reflected in the insurance products being offered on the exchanges during the current enrollment period, reports The Wall Street Journal:

“For these plans, which will take effect in 2016, many insurers have raised premiums in order to cover the medical costs of enrollees, which have run higher than many companies originally projected, fueling this year’s losses. Insurers have also shifted to offering more limited choices of health-care providers”

Still, no other big insurer has signaled its intention to leave the exchanges. (NPR)

YET. But it will come. But don’t worry Obama and The Democrats are from the Government and they are here to help you! 🙂

The average premium for medium-benefit plans offered to 40-year-old non-smokers will rise 10.1% in 2016, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

 

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.

evolution of the left

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. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
But you’re just a “hater” if you disagree.
 crazy old socialist
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

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! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Cure for Poverty

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

Much of Washington’s ongoing economic policy debate focuses on reducing poverty, with many arguing to raise the minimum wage and expand government programs. But this focus ignores two simple truths.

But it doesn’t ignore the Divide and Conquer, Rich Vs. Poor Class Warfare Rhetoric that says that if you’re against paying people more you must hate the poor. It’s marketable.

The Labor participation rate and the nearly stagnant economy is not politically sexy. And it doesn’t play to the Liberal Narrative that banyone opposed to them is a “hater”, in this case, the poor.

So it doesn’t ignore the ideological. It just ignore any solution that isn’t politically  and ideologically correct.

First, poverty arises from sagging employment, our nation’s greatest economic challenge today and for the next several years. Most of those aged 18 to 64 who were in poverty in 2012 didn’t have as much as a single week of employment. Only about 11 percent had full-time employment.

Second, government spending does not reduce poverty—jobs do. In fact, there has never been a drop in the poverty rate that wasn’t associated with a rise in the employment rate; and since the late 1990s, an increase in the employment rate is the only thing that has reliably reduced poverty.

Since that is politically and ideologically incorrect, it must be untrue, right? 🙂

Since the end of the Great Recession, the United States has experienced an unprecedented disengagement from the labor force. While some of the decline in labor force participation was expected due to an aging population, most was not. In 2013, participation was at its lowest point in more than 20 years for every age range between 20 and 54 years old. So, it is not retiring baby boomers but prime working-age individuals who are giving up on finding work.

And turning to the government succor for their daily bread. Then asks them to vote for more of the same. Trapped like a fly in a spider’s web of hopelessness and “hate”.

After all, the other guy is a mean, heartless asshole for wanting you to get a job.

This problem is far worse than previously anticipated by government forecasters. A recent economic forecast made by the Congressional Budget Office  prior to the Great Recession projected that the aging U.S. population would hold the potential labor force down to about 160 million people in 2013. Instead, the United States had just 155 million people in the labor force last year—a decline in the participation rate 75 percent greater than anticipated.

The diminished labor force has serious implications for the economy. Using CBO’s methodology, last year’s five-million worker shortfall was equivalent to a $557 billion (or 3.3 percent) shortfall in last year’s potential national income.

Do you think the Democrats actually care about anything other dependency and ideological warfare?

To make matters worse, the evidence shows that new laws, such as the Affordable Care Act, and proposed new laws, such as an increase in the minimum wage, will make the workforce—already at a 35-year low—even smaller.

But opposing them is evil, greedy, insensitive, and racist! 🙂

CBO recently found that the ACA will significantly penalize work, causing an exodus from the labor force the equivalent of more than 2 million full-time workers in just a few years. The CBO also recently found that raising the minimum wage will increase employers’ cost of hiring and throw hundreds of thousands more Americans out of work.

The adverse effects of joblessness are real for American families. Studies find that even those who secure employment after losing a job experience reduced earnings for nearly 20 years afterward. The loss is even greater for the long-term jobless who stand the real risk of never returning to the labor force.

But they’ll vote for more Democrat social welfare programs. 🙂

Throwing more government dollars at this problem won’t solve it. Despite record spending on programs to help the needy, a record 46 million Americans were in poverty in 2012. Federal spending alone on these programs was $750 billion in the 2011 fiscal year, up more than 30 percent from 2008.

But if you even cut 2% of an increase in spending (The Sequester) The Democrats and The Liberl Media will be howling about starvation, greed, and how mean you are 24/7.

Imagine how much they’d howl if you ACTUALLY cut something? OMG!, Armageddon would rain fire and brimstone down upon us all!

Even in a highly polarized political environment, the importance of encouraging rather than deterring work is a principle well understood on both sides of the aisle. Earlier this year, President Obama’s National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling stated, “Both Democrats and Republicans have learned you have to … make sure about the incentives you’re creating, and that policies are better if they’re designed to reward work.” The White House also promoted its proposal to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit by arguing that it would “encourage and support work, especially among a number of groups with falling or low labor force participation rates.”

But they have to do it, ideologically.

Keystone could provide massive numbers of very well paying jobs for a long time, but those jobs are politically and ideologically incorrect so they can’t be allowed.

But as evidence proves time and again, policies that either raise the cost of hiring or reduce the incentive for work are counterproductive to fostering employment. Going forward, our economic policies must focus on avoiding and correcting such counterproductive policies and reengaging the millions of Americans who have left the workforce. Failing this, we will have permanently lower economic growth, slower income growth, and a continuing rise in the number of Americans in poverty. (The Hill)

But you’ll find that if you take the yoke of regulations of businesses Liberals will scream and holler about Exploitation which is hilarious since that is precisely what they are up to 24/7. Fascinating, isn’t it. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

A Means to an End

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

The question is extremely simple: If Congress agrees to meet the president’s demands and hike the debt ceiling without any preconditions, what dollar figure and/or time frame would the president like to see in the legislation?  Increasing the debt ceiling isn’t a hypothetical or symbolic action.  It involves extending the government’s ability to borrow a finite amount of money — you know, actual dollars and cents.  Carney doesn’t even try to answer the reporter’s basic and reasonable question; instead, he reverts back to mindless repetitions of Obama’s exhortations for Congressional action.  Yeah, we got all that, Jay.  Your boss prattled endlessly about it on Monday.  So what’s going on here?  I see two possibilities:

(1) Carney was caught off-guard by the simplest of questions and honestly didn’t know the answer, so he tossed himself up a meaningless word salad and made a mental note to get that information for tomorrow.

(2) The White House has made a calculated political decision that high-ranking administration officials should avoid saying the dollar amount on camera.  Explicitly talking about trillions in new borrowing authority may not necessarily be the soundbyte they want floating around as as they try to downplay the severity of the nation’s debt crisis.  The president seemed to adopt this approach when he David Letterman asked about the specific size of our national debt prior to the election.

If Carney can’t or won’t answer this strikingly basic question in the coming days, we’ll have our answer. (Townhall)

I vote for #2.

Median household income (adjusted for inflation) is lower than it was in 2009. And more Americans live below the poverty level than they did four years ago.

U3 Unemployment is the same as it was 4 years ago. U6 has gone up.

The federal public debt has increased from $10.6 trillion in Jan. 2009 to $16.4 trillion now.

But if we actually don’t raise the limit the President says we’ll default and look like losers who can’t pay their bills (and he threw in the obligatory scare tactic of “not paying Social Security”).

Yeah, when you not only max out your credit card but you go way over it the best thing to do is up your limit and just keep on going with what you were doing!

So, there’s that. Six trillion dollars, and we have the exact same unemployment rate (with the bonus of a much smaller workforce), no more people with health insurance even though Obama has put the nation and the health care system through the wringer implementing his foolproof, expensive plan to get us all insured, and more people in poverty and on food stamps.

And that’s why the people re-elected him. He was better than an evil rich white guy! 🙂

Ben Shapiro: But that’s all the left’s got on issues ranging from gun control to the debt ceiling: appeals to emotion and to the supposed moral shortcomings of their opposition….It’s President Obama, who held a press conference on gun control flanked by small children who had written him letters about violence using guns, then trotted out the grief-stricken parents of one of the children who murdered at Sandy Hook. “[M]ost of all,” Obama intoned, ” I think about how when it comes to protecting the most vulnerable among us, we must act now, for Grace, for the 25 other innocent children and devoted educators who had so much left to give; for the men and women in big cities and small towns who fall victims to senseless violence each and every day; for all the Americans who are counting on us to keep them safe from harm.”

Obama’s implication is clear: disagree with him, and you are fine with what happened in Sandy Hook.

That’s a vile, despicable Maury Povich tactic. It’s daytime talk show material, not honest political discussion about how to solve the problem of murder by guns in the United States.

But here’s the dirty little secret: this isn’t about preventing another Sandy Hook for the left. It is about political posturing. If the left really wanted to be true to its own philosophy, it would simply attempt to repeal the Second Amendment and go for a total British-style gun ban. The vast majority of murders committed with guns in the United States are committed with handguns. Yet the left insists that it wants to leave private handgun ownership in place, while targeting so-called “assault rifles.” That’s not an attempt at a solution, even from the left. It’s just preening for the cameras while pointing to the bodies of shooting victims.

But that’s all they want out of it. More Power. More agenda-driven satisfaction. And making their political opponents look bad.

What else would they want. NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE.

It’s not about solving the crisis, it’s about what THEY can get out of it Politically.

That’s all that really matters.

Live or Dead, children are just a means to an end.

But the left doesn’t want to have that discussion. They just want the warm glow of moral righteousness in their breasts, even as they invade the rights of law-abiding citizens while making children less safe than they otherwise would be.

They want “school resource officers” aka Mental health enforcers of the Liberal agenda not actual cops or trained armed personnel.

They want to stop deviant thinking, not deviants.

ALL HAIL BIG BROTHER!

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
 Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

The Obama Cabinet Awaits You! 🙂