The 1%

The Sith Lords of The Left (except when they are Democrats or Socialists like George Soros then they are ok). 🙂

Debunking the Myth of the “1%.” Who’s Really “The Rich?”

Rich bastards! It’s time to spread the wealth around! If you’re part of the 1%, you’re part of the problem!

Or… is it?

Perhaps the greatest economic misconception of the 21st Century is the idea that 1% of the world’s population are greedy jerks who keep the other 99% of the earth living in poor houses made of mud and tears.

Think the top 1% are billionaires? Nope. Millionaires? Nada. Well, they’re at least cracking $750K, right? Wrong again. In fact, YOU are probably far more affulent than you realize. And you disgust me for it. Let’s look at the numbers, American style:

If you make more than $100,000, you’re in the top 20%.

If you make more than $149,000, you’re in the top 10%.

If you make more than $522,000, BINGO, you’re a 1%’er. You’re probably a greedy jerk too, so screw you.

This is just a guess, but even if you don’t fall into one of these categories, chances are, you at least know somebody who does fall into any of the above categories. Which makes you a second-hand 1 percenter. That’s like a second-hand smoker only more vile. You probably don’t even think of those friends as being rich, but they are compared to the rest of the world. And these are the people leftists tell us are causing all the world’s problems, including the diminishing bee population (not really, but maybe one day), who need to do more for the country by paying their “fair share.” Except, that top 1% of earners already pays more in taxes than the bottom 90% (that’d be EVERYONE making less than $149K) COMBINED. Behold, graphs:

who are the wealthy

Oh, and by the way? If you’re under 31 and make over $300,000 – you’re in the top 0.1%. For realzies. Check out this chart from The Atlantic:

wealthy

But let’s take things a step further. If we expand the comparison globally, you become waaaaay wealthier than imagined. Like Scrooge McDuck from Ducktales, swimming in a vault of coin.

The average yearly income on a global scale? $1,225.

Yeah. You’re rich. Bastard. How does it feel to cause global warming? Even if “your” money is sent to you on a bi-weekly basis from the US treasury… you’re rich. And kind of a succubus, but that’s for another article.

If you make more than a whopping $34,000 a year? You are in the top 1% of the world’s wealthy.

Over half of the world’s 1%’ers (those making $34K+), live in the United States.

the wealthy

Maybe you’re not so bad off after all, Mr. college hipster making $15 serving coffee, huh? Maybe life isn’t so bad climbing the corporate ladder for “just” $75K a year, is it? Also, a nutless monkey could do your job. You mad? Please leave room for cream.

Saying the wealthy need to pay more (paging Bernie Sanders), is really saying we all need to pay more.  Because really, you’re rich. If you’re an American, you’re rich. Like, super, ridiculously rich. Period. Also, you have running water, a flushing toilet, probably a phone of some kind, a flat screen, and maybe a Netflix subscription. So please, stop the whining. It’s getting old.

SO, how rich are YOU?

Here’s a fun tool created by Giving What we Can: you punch in your income and household size, they tell you how rich you are compared to the rest of the world. You’ll probably be shocked. And that’s a good thing. Seriously. Go try it. Like, right now, money-bags.

Go ahead, I Dare you! 🙂

Lesson? If you’re living in the USA, you’re a greedy one-percenter and a bastard for it. Screw you with your flushing toilet and your five figure annual income. All this comes down to dollars, common sense, and perspective. The United States is a bastion of wealth, even for the “poor” Americans binge watching Orange is the New Black. Our top income earners aren’t paying their “fair share,” they’re paying YOUR share too. So get the numbers, memorize them, and every time you hear a gender-studies hipster talk to you about the one percent and shares and fairness and the latest iPhone, tell them about the real facts. If they’ll listen. (Steve Crowder)

But we all know that Liberals do not respond maturely to facts. 🙂

And if Democrats didn’t have the Envy Card, The Hate Card they would be just a husk of nothing floating on the winds. 🙂

But I want us to be super careful when we use the language “hard worker,” because I actually keep an image of folks working in cotton fields on my office wall, because it is a reminder about what hard work looks like. So, I feel you that he’s a hard worker. I do. But in the context of relative privilege…”- MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry.

And remember in  the FY 2015 the government took in more tax money than anytime in it’s history and still ran a deficit!

elect me d5c6f-democrats6

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

Sowell Issue Part 2

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

One of the secrets of successful magicians on stage is directing the audience’s attention to something that is attractive or distracting, but irrelevant to what is actually being done. That is also the secret of successful political charlatans.

Consider the message directed at business owners by Senator Elizabeth Warren and President Barack Obama — “You didn’t build that!”

Assuming for the sake of argument that a man who owns a business simply inherited it from his father, what follows? That politicians can use the inherited resources better than the heir? Such a sweeping assumption has neither logic nor evidence behind it — but rhetoric doesn’t have to have logic or evidence to be politically effective.

The conclusion is insinuated, rather than spelled out, so it is less likely to be scrutinized. Moreover, attention is directed toward the undeserved good fortune of the heir, and away from the crucial question as to whether society will in fact be better off if politicians take over more of either the management or the earnings of the business.

The question of politicians’ track record in managing economic activities vanishes into thin air, just as other things vanish into thin air by a magician’s sleight of hand on stage.

Another of the magic feats of political rhetoric in our time is to blame “a legacy of slavery” for problems in the black community today. The repulsiveness of slavery immediately seizes our attention, just as effectively as the attractiveness of a magician’s scantily clad female assistant or the distraction of a flash of light or a loud noise on stage.

Here again, rhetoric distracts attention from questions about logic or evidence. The “legacy of slavery” argument is not just a convenient excuse for bad behavior, it allows politicians to escape responsibility for the consequences of the government policies they imposed.

Although the left likes to argue as if there was a stagnant world to which they added the magic ingredient of “change” in the 1960s, in reality there were many positive trends in the 1950s, which reversed and became negative trends in the 1960s.

Not only was the poverty rate going down, so was the rate of dependence on government to stay out of poverty. Teenage pregnancy rates were falling, and so were rates of venereal diseases like syphilis and gonorrhea. Homicide rates among non-white males fell 22 percent in the 1950s.

In the wake of the massive expansion of the welfare state in the 1960s “war on poverty” program — with the repeatedly announced goal of enabling people to become self-supporting and end their dependence on government — in fact dependence on government increased and is today far higher than when the 1960s began.

The declining rates of teenage pregnancy and venereal diseases in the 1950s both reversed and rose sharply in the wake of the 1960s “sexual revolution” ideas, introduced into schools under the guise of “sex education,” which claimed to be able to reduce teenage pregnancy and venereal diseases.

Black labor force participation rates, which had been higher than white labor force participation rates in every census from 1890 to 1960, fell below white labor force participation rates by 1972 and the gap has widened since then. Homicide rates among non-white males reversed their decline in the 1950s and soared by 75 percent during the 1960s.

None of this was a “legacy of slavery,” which ended a century earlier. But slavery became the rhetorical distraction for the political magicians’ trick of making their own responsibility for social degeneration vanish into thin air by sleight of hand.

Political charlatans are not the whole story of our social degeneracy on many fronts. “We the people” must accept our own share of the blame because we voted these charlatans into office, and went along with their ever-increasing power over our lives.

When it came to charlatans taking ever larger amounts of our own money to finance ever more big government programs, we stood still like sheep waiting to be sheared. We remained as meek as sheep when they turned schools into places to propagandize our children to grow up accepting more of the same.

All the while we had the power to vote them out. But we couldn’t be bothered to look beyond their magic words. Even now, many are too absorbed in their electronic devices to know or care.

I’m sorry I just got a text about cats… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

The Darnedest Place

You find things of value in the darnedest places. I was doing research for my Star Trek Club’s 40th Anniversary when I ran across a clip from an episode I hadn’t seen in many years, “The Savage Curtain” (1969).

It would give the Politically Correct apoplectic shock if they could get their Political Correct brains around Star Trek, that is. They couldn’t handle “The Dukes of Hazzard” after all. 🙂

LINCOLN: What a charming negress. Oh, forgive me, my dear. I know in my time some used that term as a description of property.
UHURA: But why should I object to that term, sir? You see, in our century we’ve learned not to fear words.
KIRK: May I present our communications officer, Lieutenant Uhura.
LINCOLN: The foolishness of my century had me apologising where no offense was given.
KIRK: We’ve each learned to be delighted with what we are. The Vulcans learned that centuries before we did.
SPOCK: It is basic to the Vulcan philosophy, sir. The combination of a number of things to make existence worthwhile.

Imagine the politically correct not being “offended” by mere words!!!  The mind boggleth.

The left without fear mongering. Not afraid of words.

Now that is a utopian vision for you.

Written for a show about a vision of hope.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.”- Dr. Martin Luther King (1963)

Some on the left consider this “mind rape” and race baiting by the white patriarchy.

How is possible that the 1960’s could be MORE tolerant in many ways than the “enlightened” 21st Century?

The politics of power.

There is no actual power in equality or celebrating actual diversity. Only in division. And there is more division now than there has been in 50 years or more.

The Progressive Left celebrated it’s victory at Ferguson, MO one year ago. Where they took an aggressive black man who attacked a white cop and made not only Cops the bad guys but White People in general.

Many in the crowd in Ferguson wore T-shirts emblazoned with Brown’s portrait and the words “Choose Change.” Others carried signs, including one that read: “STOP killing black children.”

What Change? White people stop killing black people, of course.

NAACP president Cornell William(I always love these guys because their organization’s own name is Politically Incorrect, oh the irony)

He urged passage of laws against racial profiling by police and support for reforms requiring body cameras, independent prosecutors and retraining of US police departments.

Cops are politically incorrect to shoot black people, especially White cops and they must be retrained to be think of Political Correctness first and their safety and the safety of the public, second. If that gets them killed, oh well, their only cops… Cops Lives Don’t Matter. 🙂

“No accountability, no justice. Police are still killing us — it’s a crisis that’s going on,”-Erica Snipes, the daughter of Eric Garner.

#Blacklivesmatter becoming its rallying cry. (Yahoo)

Everyone else, screw off you racists!

They stormed the stage of Socialist Bernie Sanders, he’s more “progressive” than they are. (they even stormed the ultra-ultra-ultra Liberal Netroots Convention)

“I was going to tell Bernie how racist this city is — with all of its progressives — but you’ve already done that for me. Thank you.”

“If you care about Black Lives Matter, as you say you do, you will hold Bernie Sanders specifically accountable for his actions,” Johnson continued.

He may be the biggest socialist in Congress and the biggest one running for President, but he’s evil. He’s white!

But, don’t worry, it’s only “Star Trek”, no one really cares about that. 🙂

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Or in the case of the Progressive those who refuse to learn continue to strive for the perfect division so that there power is perfected and if you don’t succeed keep doing it until you do.

Say one thing, do the opposite.

The end justifies the means.

And that is the Progressive Left in a nutshell.

The Past isn’t as Perfect

Some Democratic Party groups are renouncing their once-egalitarian idols, the renaissance genius Thomas Jefferson and the populist Andrew Jackson. Both presidents owned slaves two centuries ago, so they’ve suddenly deemed unworthy of further liberal reverence.

The Ministry of Truth has spoken. Anything else is a thoughtcrime.

In Connecticut, the state Democratic Party has removed the two presidents’ names from an annual fundraiser previously known as the Jefferson-Jackson-Bailey Dinner.

There are lots of strange paradoxes in the current frenzied liberal dissection of past sins.

But since they are orthodoxy, there can be no paradoxes because The Ministry of Truth has decreed it so. Anything else is a thoughtcrime.

One, a historic figure must be near-perfect in all dimensions of his or her complex life to now pass progressive muster. That Jefferson is responsible for helping to establish many of the cherished human rights now enshrined in American life apparently cannot offset the transgression of having owned slaves.

The modern Democrats were prominent slave owners of that day. The Republican Party was formed in opposition to slavery.

But don’t tell that to the Ministry, for that is a thoughtcrime.

Two, today’s moral standards are always considered superior to those of the past. Ethical sense supposedly always improves with time.

And if it does, then The Ministy’s job is enforce that it has anyways.

However, would American society of 1915 have allowed a federally supported agency such as Planned Parenthood to cut apart aborted fetuses to sell infant body parts?

Ivy League enrollment figures suggest some of these universities have capped the number of Asian students. Is this really much different than the effort to curtail Jewish enrollment at Ivy League schools in the 1920s?

Three, the sins of the past were hardly all committed by racist, sexist, conservative white men.

The truth does not matter to The Left. Period. The “truth” matters. 🙂

Under the new morality, should we not also condemn the Aztec king Montezuma as a Hitler-like war criminal? No society prior to the Nazi Third Reich had so carefully organized and institutionalized the machinery of mass death that each year executed tens of thousands of human captives from conquered neighboring tribes.

Perhaps San Diego State University should stop using the nickname “Aztecs” for its sports teams, given the fact the Aztecs practiced slave-owning, human sacrifice and cannibalism.

The Zulus are often portrayed as saintly indigenous people, brutally colonized by rapacious British imperialists. That’s not quite the whole story. Earlier in their pre-British history, the Zulus’ King Shaka adopted military imperialism and internal police state that would have made Josef Stalin proud.

By the time of his death in 1828, Shaka’s army had killed more than 1 million Africans through imperial conquest and mass executions.

Applying the morality of the present in crude political fashion to ferret out the supposed race, class and gender immorality of the past is a tricky thing. Picking saints and sinners can boomerang in unexpected ways.

Senator Robert “KKK” Byrd anyone? Al Gore’s father, the segregationist. And we already knw that some extreme lefties consider Martin Luther King a bad person because he said many un-PC things, like actual tolerance and acceptance of everyone, not just the sanctified Progressive Liberal.

Will Democrats now also damn America’s most openly racist president since the pre-Civil War era — the liberal saint Woodrow Wilson?

Wilson successfully led the U.S. in World War I, tried to organize a global League of Nations — and was an unapologetic Southern racist in word and deed. It was Wilson who fought the integration of the U.S. military and did his best as president of Princeton University to deny talented African-Americans admission.

Should Princeton focus only on that disreputable aspect of his legacy and thus change the name of its vaunted Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs?

Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren is worshipped as a progressive icon who through his work on the Supreme Court helped enshrine a liberal agenda. But no American was more responsible for incarcerating Japanese-Americans in internment camps when he was California’s attorney general.

Should we regard civil rights advocate Malcolm X as unworthy of attention or a complex historical persona? By present ethical standards, was Malcolm more than just a convicted thief and avowed Communist who dismissed Martin Luther King Jr. as “chump,” declared that he was “glad” when John F. Kennedy was assassinated and talked of black superiority as he condemned whites as “devils.”

Enter Louis Farrakhan talking about black killing whites…

The architect of Planned Parenthood was the feminist family planner Margaret Sanger. Shouldn’t Planned Parenthood denounce Sanger’s legacy, given her eugenics agenda that deliberately sought to focus abortions on minority communities?

The past is not simplistic “gotcha” melodrama in which we convict figures of history by tabulating their sins on today’s moral scorecards. Instead, history is tragedy. It is complex. Moral assessments are dicey. With some humility, we must balance past and current ethical standards, as well as the elements of the good and the bad present in every life.

But Liberals are simplistic and narcissistic. Not to mention, selective. After all it was the Southern Democrats who were against The Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s and fought a War FOR slavery.

We must avoid cheap, politicized moralizing that often tells more about the ethics and ignorance of today’s grand inquisitors than their targets. (Victor Davis Hanson)

Yes, it does. And no, The Ministry of Truth doesn’t care. “We are at war with Oceania and always have been…” — 1984 By George Orwell.

The truth of the moment is what ever the Party deems to to be. If it changes 5 seconds from now that is to be ignored because the Party is always right and The Ministry will see to it that history records it accurately, even if that mean revising what it says as they say it.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Just Ban Everything!

dear haters pc

Well, one is about National Socialists (NAZIs) and the other is about Southerners (of which the Confederacy was DEMOCRATS)  but one is Politically correct, one is not.

That’s all that matters to the Left.

The Agenda is the Agenda. And never let a crisis go to waste, especially when you can brand anyone who disagrees with you as either a bigot or a racist.

Kevin Sorbo:

“Hey PC crowd! You guys are nuts! Insane! Crazy!” the “God’s Not Dead” actor wrote. “Banning The Dukes of Hazard? Really? The Confederate Flag on the car? When does this stop? Then get rid of Hogan’s Hero’s, The Jeffersons, All in the Family, etc. (And I love all of them). The list goes on. Chocolate is racist then. So are marshmallow’s. I am offended by everything should be the Lefts slogan.”

It already is. They are even offended that you disagree with them. That simply can’t be allowed. And if they haven’t come after you or what you love, give them time (unless you ARE them that is).

“By the way, we should ban the American Flag,” Mr. Sorbo continued. “It represents the pillage of Native Americans. Also Washington, DC??? What. George Washington owned slaves! So we need to change the name there, too. ‪#‎racism‬ ‪#‎tvland‬ ‪#‎stupid‬ ‪#‎ridiculous‬ ‪#‎flags‬ ‪#‎government‬.”

Some on the Left want to do just that because its a sign of “oppression” and “imperialism”.

TV Land’s decision also drew the ire of former “Dukes” star Jon “Bo Duke” Schneider.

“I am saddened that one angry and misguided individual can cause one of the most beloved television shows in the history of the medium to suddenly be seen in this light,” he told The Hollywood Reporter. “Are people who grew up watching the show now suddenly racists? Will they have to go through a detox and a 12-step program to kick their Dukes habit? ‘Hi … My name is John. I’m a Dukesoholic.’ “ (WT)

The Washington Post:

Did you know that this newspaper is named for a slaveholder? It’s right there on our masthead, the name of a man who for 56 years held other human beings in bondage on his Virginia plantation — a man, according to the official Mount Vernon Web site, who “frequently utilized harsh punishment against the enslaved population, including whippings.” This dreaded symbol of oppression is delivered to the doorsteps and inboxes of hundreds of thousands of people each morning.

Sure, George Washington also emancipated his slaves in his will, won our independence and became the father of our country — but no matter. It is an outrage that this paper continues to bear the name of such a man.

It is time to rename The Washington Post!

Think that’s stupid? You’re right. But there’s a lot of stupid going around today. The latest example: The TV Land network has pulled the plug on reruns of one of America’s most beloved shows, “The Dukes of Hazzard,” because the car in the show, the General Lee, bears a Confederate flag. There is nothing racist about “The Dukes of Hazzard.” It is a show about moonshine, short shorts and fast cars. What is accomplished by banning “The Dukes of Hazzard”? Nothing.

Our country is in a miasma of political correctness. So where does it end? Are we going to rename our nation’s capital (and Washington state for that matter)? Should we close the Jefferson Memorial (named for a man who never freed his slaves)? How about renaming Arlington (which is named after Robert E. Lee’s estate) . . . or Washington and Lee University (names for not one, but two slave owners) . . . or Fort Hood (named for Confederate Gen. John Bell Hood) and Fort Bragg (named for Braxton Bragg, military adviser to Confederate President Jefferson Davis).

This impulse to wipe away history is Stalinist. Just like Joseph Stalin once erased people from photographs, we’re now erasing people from our collective history.

These historical purges are not only wrong, they are also completely unnecessary. If you want to see where race relations are in the South, just look at how the people of Charleston, S.C., reacted to the shootings at Emanuel AME Church. There were no race riots. The city didn’t burn. People came together — black and white — to mourn and heal together. The white mayor of Charleston joined hands with the state’s black senator and its Indian American governor to pray. Thousands of people of all races, creeds and colors formed a “unity chain ” that stretched two miles across the Ravenel Bridge to honor those who died.

What a testament that is to how far the South has come since the days of segregation. The alleged Charleston shooter, Dylann Roof, wanted to set off a race war. Instead he set off an amazing display of unity and love. It was a beautiful sight to behold.

Now come all these self-righteous liberals from cities such as New York, Los Angeles and Washington, doing what the Charleston shooter failed to do — sowing division and discord where none exist.

Let’s be clear: The recent criticism of the Confederate flag is really not about a flag — it is about the people of the South. It is driven by the notion that most Southerners are a bunch of racists who agree with the Charleston shooter’s murderous actions. As we saw after the shooting, nothing could be further from the truth.

And the fact that most Southerners of that era and even upto the 1960’s Civil Rights deniers were DEMOCRATS is a historical irony that is lost on the PC mafia frenzy.

According to the FBI’s Hate Crimes database, in 2013 — the most recent year for which there are statistics — there were just five homicides in the United States that were classified as “hate crimes” and only one found to be anti-black. By contrast, that same year there were 2,491 recorded homicides of African Americans, of which 2,245 (or 90 percent) were committed by other African Americans. Meanwhile, of the 3,005 white people killed that year, 2,509 (or 84 percent) were killed by other whites. So most whites are killed by other whites, and most blacks are killed by other blacks — and almost none are killed in hate crimes.

In other words, there is no race war in the United States today.

Moreover, none of this political correctness is helping African Americans at all. Getting rid of the Confederate flag or banning “The Dukes of Hazzard” won’t save a single black life. It won’t do a thing to help the nearly one quarter of young African American men who are unemployed — or to lift up black kids trapped in failing schools. Instead of sowing division with historical purges, let’s celebrate how far our nation has come — and focus our energies on actually helping those who have been left behind.

And when it comes to symbols of the past, perhaps we should take our example from Abraham Lincoln. After the South surrendered, Lincoln addressed a crowd gathered on the White House lawn and asked that the band play “Dixie,” which he said had always been one of his favorite songs.

Bo Knows Dukes

Amen. The focus should be on the people murdered by a crazy SOB. But the Left never passes up a chance to push their Agenda, after all, the ends justify the means in their tiny control freak little minds.

And the spineless reactionary fear of these Agenda Nazis is no better.

And the fact that these Confederates, wer in FACT, Southern DEMOCRATS!  The irony is lost on The Left, The Leftist media, the mindless and the spineless. Which is most everyone it seems.

So what will the Thought Police go after next, and when will they come after you!

In a 2001 documentary about the making of “The Dukes of Hazzard,” show creator Gy Waldron said the Confederate flag that appears on a car featured on the show — like the Good Ol’ Boys themselves — was never meanin’ no harm.

“Painting the Confederate flag on the roof of the car was done very innocently,” Waldron said, “because in the ’50s and ’60s it was very common to find Confederate flags painted on cars. There was never a political statement to be made by it. It was just part of the tradition. And once we had put it in there I saw no reason to bow to any pressure groups. We’re not making any statement regarding slavery or post-slavery or integration or anything like that.”

John Schneider — that’s Bo Duke to those who follow the Good Ol’ Boys — agreed that the General Lee, as the car is known, was far from a symbol of hate.

“It amazes me that anyone could take offense to the General Lee,” Schneider said in the documentary. “… If there was ever a non-racist family, it was the Dukes of Hazzard.” (WP)

Hollywood Reporter: The Duke boys are being put on the bench.

TV Land has pulled reruns of Dukes of Hazzard in light of the recent uproar over the Confederate flag, which is emblazoned on the roof of the show’s iconic General Lee 1969 Dodge Charger, The Hollywood Reporter has confirmed.

The show has faced criticism over the depiction of the controversial flag in the wake of the June 17 shooting in Charleston, S.C., that left nine dead, and what many viewed as South Carolina’s delayed decision to take the flag down.

Confederate merchandise has since been dropped by Walmart, Target, Amazon and other businesses after the shooting, which took place at a historic black church.

Shortly after the attack, photos surfaced showing alleged shooter Dylann Roof burning one American flag and stepping on another, while waving and posing provocatively with Confederate banners.

Warner Bros.’ consumer division announced on June 24 that it will stop licensing toy cars and models featuring the General Lee with the flag.

In a recent interview with THR, Dukes of Hazzard star John Schneider defended the series’ use of the flag. “Labeling anyone who has the flag a ‘racist’ seems unfair to those who are clearly ‘never meanin’ no harm,'” he said. His co-star Ben Jones has also come out in defense of the flag, saying it represents the “indomitable spirit of independence.”

The Parents Television Council weighed in TV Land’s decision Wednesday. Although the organization said they did not oppose the reasoning behind TV Land’s actions, the council blasted the network and its parent company, Viacom, for “blatant hypocrisy” they say the media company demonstrated.

“When media companies are criticized for marketing programs that glamorize drug and alcohol use, or for sexualizing minors in television programs and movies, or for selling violent entertainment to children – despite overwhelming evidence of harm – or for trivializing rape, child sex abuse and pedophilia, all in the name of ‘entertainment,’ they are quick to wrap themselves in the banner of Free Speech,” wrote PTC president Tim Winter.

“Restraint and responsibility do not infringe on the First Amendment and do not encroach on Free Speech rights. If TV Land is willing to pull The Dukes of Hazzard, out of concern for its harmful impact on our society (and it is good that Viacom is publicly acknowledging its programming can have a harmful impact on our society), they cannot then hide behind the First Amendment to refute the compelling evidence of harm from the violent and sexualized media content they continue to produce and air with impunity.”

Dukes of Hazzard ran on CBS from 1979 to 1985.

It’s all about “tolerance”, remember. 🙂

“Fundamentally transform America” — Barack Obama.

The Thought Police are Watching you!

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