Category Archives: Humor/Satire

How CPAC Stacked the Deck on the Amnesty Panel

illegal-aliens-obamacatchreleasevoteHere’s a handy rule of thumb: If two of the four members of an immigration panel have Hispanic surnames you can bet it’s an amnesty panel in disguise. That was certainly the case at CPAC’s ‘Can There Be Meaningful Immigration Reform Without Citizenship?’

(This phenomenon is evidently peculiar to Hispanics. If two people named Schmidt and Kruger were on a panel it would be unfair to assume they enthusiastically support bomb damage reparations from WWII.)

Alfonso Aguilar and the Rev. Luis Cortes were joined by moderator Mercy Schlapp — a veteran of the Bush White House that was pushing amnesty until 9/11. The anti–amnesty speaker was Derrick Morgan of the Heritage Foundation and the afternoon’s advocate for the feudal system was Helen Krieble.

Schlapp set the tone when she remarked on the favor illegals were doing the economy by being here. Much like burglars boost an area’s GDP when they make the rounds of pawn shops.

Sbe was followed by Kreible, president of the Vernon K. Kreible Foundation, who said the debate should be about American principles: Equal treatment under the law, individual freedom and personal responsibility. So far so good, but then she reduced our choices to a false binary: Grant amnesty or do nothing.

The realistic option is removing the job incentive for illegals. But that is not a choice Kreible will ever entertain, because that would mean business can’t import serfs. She claims it’s wrong to set “artificial” limits on the number of workers you can hire. It’s Kreible’s belief that borders are a government matter, but workers are a business matter. In practice this means the federal government can keep Mohamed Atta out, unless he plans to mow your lawn.

What Kreible objects to is that ‘citizen’ word. She wants to implement a “red card” program that puts citizens in the penalty box. She would import workers without conveying citizenship or the right to remain after the job is over. This is similar to the wildly successful Turkish guest worker program the Germans had. Only problem is the Turks are still in Germany.

And while individuals should be “responsible,” American business is exempt. Right now if a US business thinks US workers want too much money, the business is free to open a subsidiary in Mexico and hire all the Mexicans it wants. But that’s a problem for agribusiness corporations, because shipping Alabama to Chihuahua would be a logistical nightmare. What’s more, sometimes the Mexican government seizes private business, you can’t trust the cops, ‘mordida’ cuts into profit margins and there’s always that decapitation problem.

So for Kreible the business solution is to flood the labor market by bringing Mexico here and let taxpayers deal with social costs.

Unfortunately for her there is no moral, ethical or conservative justification for bringing in foreign labor when unemployment in the US is over 7 percent and labor participation rates are at an all time low.

Alfonso Aguilar, director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, evidently believes the word ‘conservative’ is a verbal spice you sprinkle on leftist policies to make them more palatable for genuine conservatives. He wants conservatives to “own” the immigration issue by out–pandering the Democrats.

Aguilar contends the entire illegal problem is a result of “big government” setting quotas and holding the quaint notion that US jobs should go to US citizens. He recycles every lame, reverse racist amnesty cliché he could find, beginning with illegals are doing the jobs Americans won’t do.

After that howler he became incoherent. Aguilar says illegals taking jobs here “creates jobs for working class Americans.” He claims that illegals did not disregard the rule of law because they didn’t come here voluntarily. Instead business brought them here. This was genuine news to me. Who would have thought coyotes were members of the Chamber of Commerce?

Aguilar also introduced the concept of “circular immigration.” Letting illegals come here and return to their home country as many times as they and Greyhound wished. Although something tells me the circle would stop abruptly in the US when it came time to collect Social Security.

He was followed by the Rev. Luis Cortes who is the president of Esperanza. The organization’s website motto is: “Strengthening our Hispanic community” meaning it’s La Raza with a Bible. Cortes’ solution is to make citizens of anyone who ranks Cinco de Mayo ahead of the 4th of July. Otherwise, “it gives Democrats an issue.” And afterwards Democrats won’t need an issue because with 9 million or so new voters they’ll never lose another presidential election.

The most insulting aspect of the panel was how the pro–amnesty participants evidently believed using the word ‘conservative’ to describe leftist policies would somehow convince a gullible audience.

A conservative immigration reform would be built on trying something new: Enhancing the law we have now. Make it a felony to hire an employee that failed an E–Verify check or hire an employee without checking E–Verify. And strictly enforce the prohibition against illegals enrolling in any welfare or social programs.

Drying up the job market will accomplish two goals. First many of the illegals will self–deport. Second it will raise wages for US workers and lower the unemployment rate. Right now many jobs go unfilled by citizens because they aren’t willing to accept the prevailing wage scale in Juarez because they don’t live in Juarez. If employers were forced to pay wages high enough to attract US citizens, more citizens would work.

That’s a conservative, free market solution that’s good for the country and preserves the rule of law. Unfortunately the ‘C’ in CPAC now appears to stand for ‘capitulation.’

Perry, Paul & Huckabee at CPAC 2014

Gen. John Bell Hood, another Texan that could get a crowd moving.

Gen. John Bell Hood, another Texan that could get a crowd moving.

Gen. Robert E. Lee used Texas infantry as his reliable shock troops during the Civil War. If Hood’s division couldn’t drive the Yankees from a position, then no troops could.

Evidently CPAC schedulers are of the same opinion.

On both of the first two days of the conservative conference Texas speakers were used to soften up the crowd for all the speakers that followed.

On Thursday it was Sen. Ted Cruz (R–TX) and on Friday it was Gov. Rick Perry (R–TX).

Perry hit the stage cold to the tune of AC/DC’s ‘Back in Black’ and did so without anyone to introduce him. Perry is now sporting black nerd glasses that make him look more intellectual without softening him up so much that he looks like pajama boy in the Obamacare ad.

The governor began by stating that on the battlefield of ideas “a little rebellion now and then is a good thing.” Then there was a long pause, which started to produce debate flashbacks for me, but it proved to be just a slow Internet connection.

Besides being another step on the stairway to political redemption, the speech was a rousing defense of federalism. Perry says for the solution to the problems facing the country we should not look to Washington, but instead we should look to the states that “are laboratories of innovation.”

And the states provide a contrast between two visions. In the blue vision the state “plays an increasing roll in the lives of citizens.” Taxes are high, public employee pensions are out of control and jobs are leaving.

Perry contrasted that smothering philosophy with the red state vision where “freedom of the individual comes first and the reach of government is limited.” There taxes are low, spending is low and opportunity is high.

Then Perry did something surprising. On Friday when Chris Christie spoke the examples were mostly about him and about New Jersey. But that’s not what Perry did. He started off by giving other Republican governors credit for their good ideas and successful records.

He mentioned Nikki Haley in South Carolina, Bobby Jindal in Louisiana, Scott Walker in Wisconsin and Rick Scott in Florida. Then Perry proceeded to list accomplishments particular to each.

Perry was halfway through his speech before he even mentioned Texas. He spoke first of the common denominator among all red state leaders, “Conservative governors who know freedom of the individual must come before the power of the state…the contrast is crystal clear.” He then used an example from the world of transportation. “If you rent a U–Haul to move your company it costs twice as much to go from San Francisco to Austin as it does the other way around, because you can’t find enough trucks to flee the Golden State.”

Only then did Perry say, “Let’s pick a large red state, shoot let’s pick Texas” as he began listing his accomplishments. This is one of the reasons Perry is so likable: He doesn’t appear to take himself too seriously. He, in contrast to Obama, is not The Great I Am.

His speech was full of humor, substance and energy. Perry has been on the comeback trail now for two years and he’s making progress. His demeanor and energy level is in marked contrast to that of the disastrous 2012 presidential campaign.

I have no way of knowing if he’s a terror to his staff or if he kicks the family dog, but you certainly can’t tell it from his personal appearances. If it wasn’t for his squishiness on illegals, I’d almost be ready to vote for Perry today.

I can’t say that for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

Politically Huckabee is simply George Bush who can tell a joke. There are many things I admire about Huckabee: His faith, his conservative social values and his sense of humor in particular. But as president he would be spending at least as much as Bush and I see no indication that he’s ever seriously considered putting Uncle Sam on a diet.

And speaking of diets, Huckabee’s is evidently not going too well. In stark contrast to his former fit self, now if the occasion arose Huckabee could fill in quite nicely as Chris Christie’s body double.

Huckabee’s speech began on a discordant note. He was given the same 10 minutes as Rick Perry, but he wasted some of the time complaining about only getting 10 minutes. In contrast to Perry’s upbeat and dynamic address, Huckabee came off as slightly petulant.

His speech was structured around a series of “I knows” that included, “I know the IRS is a criminal organization. I know that life begins at conception. I know there’s a God and this nation would not exist if He had not been the midwife of its birth.”

He even obliquely addressed homosexual marriage when he quoted Mrs. Billy Graham who said, “If God does not bring fiery judgment on America, God will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.”

Huckabee concluded with a final “I know” that brought back memories of his rocky beginning when he said, “I know my time is up and I must go.”

Diet jokes aside, he simply wasn’t a heavyweight on Day Two and if Huckabee is indeed running for president in 2016 this speech didn’t help his case.

Sen. Rand Paul (R–KY) was the other major league presidential candidate speech of the day. He had double the time allotted to Perry, yet I don’t think his speech had the same impact. They are two entirely different personalities. Paul comes off as somewhat remote and clinical when he speaks. He certainly says the right things and delivers a polished speech, but he doesn’t have the infectious enthusiasm of Rick Perry.

Personally I wonder how many of the reporters who pronounced Chris Christie as rehabilitated after the response to his speech the day before were around for Paul’s. The packed room was on its feet and cheering before the senator could say a word. Christie on the other hand had a much smaller crowd and response was polite until very late in his performance.

Paul’s speech was about liberty but it was also about sending a message to the Mitch McConnells, John McCains, Lindsey Grahams and other establishment RINOs. Paul asked the audience to “Imagine a time when our great country is governed by the Constitution. You may think I’m talking about electing Republicans, but I’m not. I’m talking about electing lovers of liberty.”

“It isn’t good enough to pick the lesser of two equals,” Paul explained. “We must elect men and women of principle and conviction and action who will lead us back to greatness. There is a great and tumultuous battle underway not for the Republican Party but for the entire country.

Then in a challenge to elected leaders and party supporters alike, Paul asked, “The question is will we be bold and proclaim our message with passion or will we be sunshine patriots retreating when we come under fire?”

Paul then focused on the NSA, data mining and the entire security mindset of the government, which he believes is dangerous. He referenced the Sons of Liberty from the Revolution who stood up to King George and predicted, “The Sons of Liberty would today call out to the president. ‘We will not submit. We will not trade our liberty for security. Not now. Not ever.’”

Getting down to cases with an audience that skewed toward youth and tech savvy, Paul explained, “If you have a cell phone, you are under surveillance. I believe what you do on your cell phone is none of their damn business.”

His other examples of government overreach in the name of security included detention without a trial, individual warrants applied to a class of people, credit card data collection, cell phone metadata and other violations of the 4th Amendment.

The senator stated flatly “Government unrestrained by law becomes nothing short of tyranny.” Then he used Daniel Webster to show the fight for liberty has been an ongoing struggle that must be continued today. “Daniel Webster anticipated our modern day saviors who wish to save us from too much freedom. He wrote: ‘Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It’s hardly too strong to say the Con was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.’”

Paul wasn’t giving so much a speech, as he was Peter the Hermit asking the young people to join in a crusade. He has passionate ideas and beliefs, but Paul’s delivery is simply not as winning as that of Perry. One can be serious without being sepulchral.

It will be very interesting to follow the arc of both campaigns as I see Perry being a bigger threat to Paul than the other Texan, Ted Cruz.

CPAC Day One Part 2

Chris Christie dolls were not for sale at CPAC.

Chris Christie dolls were not for sale at CPAC.

The Curious Case of the Leaf Blower that Didn’t Roar

Sen. Marco Rubio walked on stage and contrary to rumor, he wasn’t wearing a sombrero. In fact he gave what could be called a surgical speech, because he completely buried any reference to his amnesty mistake late last year.

In fact he talked about almost everyone’s border but that of the US. Rubio is for protecting Japan’s border. Ukraine’s border. Even Israel’s border, but not a peep about the border violations Mexico encourages. We’ve being invaded, too but no one but the taxpayers seems to care.

Rubio’s new focus is obviously on foreign policy, since amnesty policy was disastrous for him. He goes East and Easter, touching no points South. He touched on the tax code, regulations and energy. And he still has that problem with words–per–gallon. In a speech that was only 15 minutes long, Rubio still had to stop to take a drink.

Verdict: Nice young man, but not ready.

In a very fitting bit of scheduling, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie spoke just before lunch.

The bully governor used his bully pulpit to talk about his fight against public employee unions and the struggle to reform their pensions. Christie told the audience how he faced union members in their den as he went to the firefighter’s convention and walked through the crowd to get to the podium. But Christie misses the point. No one questions his courage. Conservatives question his convictions.

At the end of his firefighter’s speech he said two–thirds of the audience was cheering him. I don’t know if two–thirds of the conservative base will be cheering for a candidate who also favors amnesty. A topic Christie also failed to bring up.

Christie wants the party to start talking “about what we are for and not what we are against.” He contends that government is about “getting things done.” But that’s what intrusive Democrats say, too.

It was obvious from his speech that all the Sandy storm money is now in the bank, because the governor felt liberated to criticize his new best friend Obama, “What the hell are we paying him for, if he won’t lead?”

Christie summarized by saying under his administration there are fewer state employees, less spending and teacher tenure reforms. He added he’s pro–life but did so in the third person. But there was not a word about smaller government or less intrusive government. I get the feeling he’s Teddy Roosevelt with bariatric surgery. Activism got us in the mess we’re in today.

Christie got a standing ovation, but it was as he was leaving.

Bob McDonnell Discovers He’s Past the Sell–By Date

Baby McDonnell sell by memeIf you need additional proof that taking handouts creates dependency, look no further than the sad fate of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. McDonnell is currently under federal indictment and accused of trading government favors for money, loans and gifts from former Star Scientific chief executive Jonnie R. Williams Sr.

Williams is one of those ‘good friends’ politicians seem to acquire just about the time they win an office where it’s possible to dispense favors.

Federal charging papers list quite an inventory of gifts. They include a $17,000 NYC shopping trip for wife, Maureen, where the money was spent at Oscar de la Renta, Louis Vuitton and Bergdorf Goodman to buy various designer dresses and jewelry befitting a former Redskins cheerleader and current 1st lady.

Then there was $15,000 for catering at the daughter’s wedding — Maureen likes round numbers — a $10,000 wedding gift to another daughter, $120,000 in no–doc loans to shore up bad vacation home investments, free family vacations at the Williams’ getaway and a $6,500 Rolex watch for Bob. They even had Williams’ brother, Donnie, mow their lawn and do odd jobs for free around the house. Bringing the grand total in the indictment to $165,000, not counting Donnie’s sweat equity.

And all this occurred because it’s so tough to make ends meet on only $175,000 a year plus free room and board.

Naturally a politician so broke he essentially functioned as the foster child of his ‘family friend’ Williams is in no position to pay for his own legal defense. And Maureen is not about to settle for the tender mercies of the public defender’s office, so McDonnell founded the Restoration Fund and began soliciting donations for his defense.

The fund’s chairman, Stanley Baldwin, told the WaPost the ‘Restorers’ (not to be confused with Donnie Williams) are “long time admirers of Gov. McDonnell and his outstanding performance as Virginia’s chief executive.”

Evidently it’s a dwindling band. During all of 2013 the fund raised a total of $11,400. Of course if McDonnell mooched off the rest of his friends the way he milked Williams, it’s no surprise he’s only raising bake sale money for his defense fund.

Another variable at work is the hard and fast reality of the political sell–by date, which causes ‘good family friends’ to become scarce just when one needs them the most. During McDonnell’s campaign, when he was still fresh and, like milk, passed the smell test, J. Douglas Perry — co–founder Dollar Tree stores — gave $75,000. Perry’s contribution to McDonnell’s legal defense fund after he left office was only $2,500, which is quite a discount rate.

To put that $11,400 in perspective, the average billing rate for a high–powered DC law firm is $662/hour. Even if Bob grabs the entire treasury, he can only buy 17 hours of legal time and you can’t plead guilty for that amount.

And in spite off all the tribulations their attempt to join the ranks of the nouveau riche brought upon the family, Bob and Maureen still have his–and–her lawyers. Although I wonder who’s footing the bill for her defense as I hear Jonnie has blocked Maureen’s cell number.

Back in the statehouse leftist Democrats see this as a perfect opportunity to expand the nanny state and pass ‘ethics’ laws that increase the size of the permanent government bureaucracy. One proposal creates a state ethics advisory council — think of it as a taxpayer–paid conscience for spineless legislators — and limits gifts to a value of $250 each. Forcing future ‘family friends’ to purchase their politicians on layaway.

The good news for the easily corrupted is law doesn’t put a value on trips, tickets or other intangible influence peddling, so if you already have a watch it’s business as usual.

The fact is Virginia’s law could use an update, but it doesn’t require putting a dollar amount on gifts. All that’s required is for elected officials to issue monthly disclosure of any gift valued over $10, with a false filing resulting in a felony perjury charge. Those covered under the new rule should now expand to include anyone in the immediate family that receives a gift: Call it chain disclosure. And any ‘S’ corporations a politician is involved in would also disclose gifts and loans.

That way voters could decide for themselves if their politician has been bought and if so, evaluate the bargain he drove. There’s no need for additional bureaucracy and pettifogging rules.

This brings us to the real scandal sitting in plain sight: Dime–store political dynasties that think the office belongs to them. Democrat John Dingell is a case in point. He inherited the Congressional seat his father warmed and then served 53 years. During which Dingell was cashing countless federal paychecks, wasting tax dollars, inflicting bad ideas on the nation and enduring what appears to be at least one facelift that left him looking like a Rugby ball with a grin.

You’d think that would be enough for any family of leeches, but you would be wrong. Now wife Debbie wants her turn at the trough. She’s already had an influence–peddling job with the American Automotive Policy Council, where I’m sure listing Detroit Cong. John Dingell at the top of her list of references had no impact.

Now Debbie wants the congressional seat — the media is calling this obscene power grab a “Dingell hat trick” — and she’ll probably win it. The same contributors who rented John all those years like to stick with a name they can trust and the interest groups he pandered to will recognize the Dingell family brand on the ballot.

Virginia governors have to move fast if they want to cash in, because they only get a single term. The likes of Dingell and the rest of an arrogant political class get their corruption over the decades on the installment plan and that’s the real scandal no one is talking about.

The Olympics Are Bush’s Fault, Too

brian0

Are you watching the Olympics? It’s not doing too badly in the ratings; in fact, the ratings for the programming are outperforming US athletes!

The US beating Russia in hockey was a nice flashback to 1980, but, basically, we suck this time out. As of this writing, we’re 7th place in gold medals, our athletes are phoning it in, and one in particular (I’m looking at YOU, Shaun White) didn’t even try.

We should not be surprised. The performance of our athletes reflects the state of our country.

We have a poor economy, high gas prices, high unemployment, a lot of hard knocks; yet everybody has food, television, the mall parking lots remain packed, and life pretty much carries on as normal, because yes we can, it’s Bush’s fault, and you’re a racist. Why bother making the effort? The gubbermint done gonna be there to hep. This attitude is translating to our athletes, who are showing the world that the US is nothing like it used to be, but at least we’re not Mexico. Mexico didn’t even bother going to Sochi. What? Mexico ain’t got no snow? As usual, Mexico is full of excuses.

Speaking of excuses, the US athletes are full of them, too. The uniforms are too restrictive. The altitude is too high, man, I can’t get no air. If the ICO gave out gold medals for excuses, the US would be #1. There has been nothing exciting about the US performance at Sochi; about the only noteworthy thing people may remember next time around is Bob Costas and his Commie Pink Eye.

And all of this can be placed at the feet of Mr. Obama (Bless His Holy Name) who leads with the greatest example of mediocrity since Ulyses S. Grant.

I’m sure we’ve been up and down the list of medals before, but this time feels different. It’s one thing to give everything you have and win bronze; it’s another to not even try and then cry about it after, as in this example from Breitbart:

“Figure skater Jeremy Abbott’s high hopes came crashing down when he came crashing down on the ice. His performance for the media wasn’t nearly as graceful as his performance on the ice. ‘I just want to put my middle finger in the air and say a big “F-you” to everyone who has ever said that to me because they’ve never stood in my shoes,’ Abbott emoted in reaction to potential criticism of his twelfth-place finish. ‘They’ve never had to do what I’ve had to do.'”

Jeremy, pal, buddy, with all due respect, you finish 12th place and you bet you’re gonna get hollered at for it, because America is better than that. At least we used to be. And maybe if you spent a little more time practicing and less time pulling the poor me act, playing your X-Box or whatever it is you figure skater types do when you’re not dressed up in tights and looking like a 10-year-old girl, you’d have won something. Anything.

But at least we aren’t as bad as Mexico.

So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.*

 

*From THE GREAT GATSBY by F. Scott Fitzgerald.

Conservatives Ready for Sexual Cowardice

Mainstream media closely follows the Michael Sam story

Mainstream media closely follows the Michael Sam story

When does doing something — other than charging a machine gun nest — that has been done countless times previously stop being ‘courageous?’ Sally Jenkins of the WaPost has ruled that football player Michael Sam’s advice to people interested in dating him is a monumental story: “There are great courageous sports stories being played on the international stage at the Sochi Olympics, yet nothing has resonated like this.”

Ho hum. Pardon me if I’m not vibrating like Ms. Jenkins. If Sam doesn’t want awkward situations where female groupies try to make time with him, why doesn’t he just open an account on eHomony.com?

Other than the occasional soap–on–a–rope joke whispered out of Sam and the gaystapo’s earshot, he will have smooth sailing in the locker room. The Canadian Football League may be treating Sam comments as international hate crimes. (Winnipeg Blue Bombers defensive tackle Bryant Turner Jr.  was fined after tweeting: “Michael Sam locker room gonna come with complimentary robes.”)

But in the NFL he’ll be treated like Bao Bao, the new panda baby at the national zoo. For teammates and football fans, Sam will be just another seldom–seen species that has problems when it comes to reproduction. Maybe he’ll be able to share Internet bandwidth with Bao Bao after he gets his own Sam Cam.

I tell you what real courage would be in a situation like this. A married potential NFL draftee announcing that he’s open to adulterous relationships and no one’s wife, girlfriend or daughter is off limits. Now that takes some courage and would certainly create a frisson of sexual tension at home, the locker room and various team functions.

Sam, on the other hand, is just a me–too narcissist hoping for a spot as Grand Marshall in a ‘pride parade.’ He’s certainly not the first athlete to go public. You can’t throw a rock without hitting a figure skater that walks on the wild side. Then you’ve got Billie Jean King, Jason Collins, innumerable female softball players and gymnasts.

In showbiz there’s Ellen, Rosie, Jodie and Neil and that’s just the ones with ‘e’ in their name. Even superheroes are getting in on the act. Green Lantern only lets his love light shine for men. Society has reached a point where we can start hanging clothes in that particular closet because it’s now empty.

And for the sake of accuracy, Sam is in limbo right now. He’s a former college player who has yet to make an NFL team. And it’s entirely possible he won’t be the only homosexual player in the NFL, just the most vocal.

(If you ask Deacon Jones, he probably considers all NFL kickers to be gay, but at least they’ve made the team, in contrast to Sam who is merely potential.)

Besides, when is giving in to a compulsion courageous? How about a linebacker who holds a news conference announcing he’s only interested in 18–year–old cheerleaders? Is that brave? Would Woody Allen be courageous if he finally admitted to abusing Dylan? The statute of limitations is up and like Woody says, “The heart wants what the heart wants.” Which is pretty much the foundational philosophy of the alternate lifestyle left.

In the wake of his proclamation Sam’s NFL draft value dropped almost a hundred points. This will be blamed on homophobia, but the real reason is how many teams — other than the Dallas Cowboys — need another narcissistic exhibitionist?

If NFL teams avoided signing Tim Tebow because of the alleged ‘distraction’ factor, what director of player personnel is going to volunteer to draft the Michael Sam three–ring circus?

The Broncos’ John Elway volunteered to lead the ‘some of my best friends…’ caucus when he said he would have no problem with Sam on his team, which is easy for Elway to say since he’s retired and showers at home.

But the real question is why announce now? Sam told his Missouri teammates that he was playing for the other side before last season. It was a simple statement that didn’t require a phone call to the New York Times. This current public relations campaign screams exploitation and not by the hetero community. It sounds like national homosexual advocacy organizations snooped into his private life and convinced Sam to take a stand that will benefit their fund raising.

If Sam has any doubts about his NFL future, and he’s not a sure thing, then his public statement guarantees a lucrative future career as a homosexual symbol. If he makes the NFL he demonstrates homosexuals are everywhere. If he doesn’t make the team he’s a living symbol of heterosexual bigotry. Either way Sam is on the speaking and interview circuit for a decade and national lobby groups stay current and in the news.

And while we’re discussing fanatics, the homosexual lobby is starting to remind me of some of the more zealous Mormons. There are groups of Latter Day Saints who baptize the dead by proxy so the deceased can enter into heaven in spite of the poor choices they made while alive. In like fashion homosexual scholars browse through history looking for notable figures they can recruit into the homosexual hall of fame.

Leonardo da Vinci comes to mind, along with Abraham Lincoln, my relative President James Buchanan and Janis Joplin to mention but a few. Something tells me activists are going to be taking a long hard look at unmarried early professional football players.

In the meantime, I’m ready for some sexual cowardice. How about returning to the days of a gentleman never tells? I know it’s unlikely, but one can dream.

So let’s close with a riddle: What do Michael Sam and Manti Te’o have in common? All their girlfriends are imaginary.

John Boehner’s Incremental Amnesty Surrender Strategy

130319-three-amigos-boehner-jeb-bush-rove5Mathematicians have long contended that if you give a million monkeys a million typewriters and an infinite amount of time, eventually the simians will produce the King James Bible. Maybe so, but why inflict such a difficult challenge from the get–go? It could severely damage monkey morale.

I suggest assigning monkey scribes the task of producing the House GOP leadership’s “Immigration Reform Principles.” They should be able to knock that out in about a day — even with frequent banana breaks — and if they don’t replicate the document exactly, what the monkeys produce can’t be much more incoherent than the steaming pile the House leadership authored.

The document begins by stating: “Our nation’s immigration system is broken and our laws are not being enforced.” Naturally, their solution is to jettison the law. I’ve already outlined why amnesty is a bad idea for Republicans in an earlier column located here. So I won’t belabor that point, but what I would like to do is analyze Boehner & Company’s strategy for any evidence that it will accomplish their misguided goals.

Based on statements to the media and the “Principles,” Speaker Boehner’s concerns focus on three main areas:

  1. Negative media coverage of Republican opposition to amnesty
  2. Pressure from farmers and corporate America who want cheap imported labor that considers insultingly low wages a big raise from what they got back home
  3. Overwhelming Hispanic voting support for Democrat politicians

What Boehner does not appear to be worried about is the loss of support from the GOP’s conservative base after amnesty is passed.

So to achieve his goal of improving the Republican image, getting lobbyists off his back and showing Hispanics that he’s a verdadero amigo, Boehner wants a “step–by–step” process that constitutes an incremental surrender to Democrats and other tribal advocates. Boehner’s document begins with a list of bromides the House GOP leadership uses in an attempt to pull the wool over conservative’s eyes: “zero tolerance,” “visa tracking,” “employment verification” and I think an end to chain migration, but the “Principles” are so vague on that point it’s hard to tell.

I guess we will have to await clarification from the monkey’s version of the document.

But the linchpin of the “principles” is the statement: “There will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws – that would be unfair to those immigrants who have played by the rules and harmful to promoting the rule of law.”

Instead Boehner unveils a grand public relations coup: Republicans propose to let illegals stay in the U.S. as Untermenschen. Whoops, sorry, I mean as legal residents but not citizens. They must pass background checks, pay “back taxes,” speak English (unless stopped by a policeman), give up any and all “rights” to welfare and be able to read the Constitution in Chinese. (No wait, that’s only if they want to vote in Alabama.)

This is like a land owner telling a trespasser who’s been on squatting in the house for years that he and his family can stay in the house he doesn’t own, but you won’t give him a clear title.

As they say in The Game of Thrones: You know nothing John Boehner.

After decades of being media whipping boys, elected Republicans not only don’t know how to advance an argument, they don’t even know how to avoid a public relations disaster.

Boehner — not the monkeys — will have recreated Exodus with Hispanics in the role of the Israelites. And just like the Jews trapped in Egypt, they can work all they want and the generous GOP will even give them straw for the bricks, but they will never have the vote or the dole.

And God help us, Chuck Schumer gets to be Moses.

As soon as the ink is dry on their 2nd class citizen documents, the formerly illegal are going to be demonstrating against Republican Apartheid. It’s going to be the story of the decade for the Mainstream Media and John Boehner gave it to them on a platter.

Every Election Day the 2nd classers will be demonstrating outside Republican polling places, yelling and brandishing signs for concerned network correspondents.

Queremos que el voto y lo queremos ahora! (We want the vote and we want it now!)

Estoy soñando con el voto (I’m dreaming of the vote)

Segunda clase es la ciudadanía apartheid (2nd class citizenship is apartheid)

Dicen a la familia a venir del Norte (Tell the family to come North)

Then there are the human tragedy stories that bring home the cost of Republican heartlessness courtesy of NPR. The grownup anchor babies who have to tell madre y padre they can’t go to the polls today and vote like they did in Venezuela under Chavez, because John Boehner says they’re less than citizens.

And don’t forget the groundskeeper who lost a foot to a runaway weed beater while working on some one percenter’s estate. He and his family are living in a Kelvinator box under a bridge abutment because he can’t work and he can’t collect U.S. disability checks thanks to Ebenezer Boehner. With tears in his eyes, Piers Morgan will tell viewers, “He was good enough to mow the lawn, but he’s not good enough to cash a disability check.”

That’s the kind of publicity that will have younger citizens leaving their Chipotle burritos uneaten as they run to the nearest party headquarters so they can register to vote Republican and grind the brown man down.

My prediction is six months max and Boehner will be throwing himself on Nelson Mandela’s grave and begging Obama to sign his Full Amnesty with Added Reparations bill.

Why endure the agony of an incremental amnesty? You can’t be half pregnant and you can’t pass a half citizenship bill. Boehner needs to either surrender now and line up a nice lobby job or finally start listening to his own disenfranchised conservative base.

Obama’s Trickle–Down Lawlessness

Virginia's new AG is following in the footsteps of America's #1 Constitution burner.

Virginia’s new AG is following in the footsteps of America’s #1 Constitution burner.

What Sen. Ted Cruz (R–TX) refers to as Obama’s “pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat” has trickled down to the new Democrat administration in Virginia.

On Saturday, January 11th Democrat Mark Herring was sworn in as attorney general of the Commonwealth. During the ceremony Herring recited his oath of office: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me as attorney general according to the best of my ability (so help me God).”

Then Herring proved he was a fast Obama study by violating that oath before he had completed his second week in office.

Instead of defending the Virginia Constitution, Herring began actively working to undermine it. He declared on the 23rd that he would not defend Virginia’s constitutional ban on homosexual marriage. “It’s time for the commonwealth to be on the right side of history and the right side of the law,” he proclaimed.

Then Herring compounded the offense by joining the case of the plaintiffs suing the state to overturn the ban. This is breathtakingly unethical. It’s like Zimmerman’s defense lawyer deciding George violated neighborhood watch guidelines and asking to join the prosecution team. An honorable man when presented with the choice of doing his job and defending the Constitution or “being on the right side of history” would have resigned his office, but we’re talking about Mark Herring.

By way of background the Virginia homosexual marriage ban is an amendment to the Constitution passed in 2006 by a favorable vote of 57 percent. Herring was in the Virginia Senate at the time and he voted in favor of the amendment. But you can’t hold that against him because he ‘evolved.’

But now Herring says he is relying on the precedent set by former AG Ken Cuccinelli. Except the situations are entirely different. Cuccinelli did not defend a newly passed law that allowed the state to take over failing schools, because it violated Virginia’s Constitution. Herring is saying the Constitution of Virginia is unconstitutional because it violates the Democrat party platform and makes Ellen DeGeneres sad.

In an interview posted on TheDailyPress.com, Herring explained, “What you have to do is look at the facts and precedents and ask yourself — If this went before the Supreme Court, how do I think they would rule?” But Virginia voters didn’t elect Herring to choose the winning side in a court case. They elected him to do a job he appears unwilling to perform.

By contrast North Carolina’s Attorney General is also a Democrat who supported homosexual marriage, but he is defending his state’s law. Cooper issued a statement that said, “North Carolina should change its laws to allow marriage equality, and I believe basic fairness eventually will prevail. However, when legal arguments exist to defend a law, it is the duty of the Office of the Attorney General under North Carolina law to make those arguments in court.”

As Sen. Cruz pointed out in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, “Rule of law doesn’t simply mean that society has laws; dictatorships are often characterized by an abundance of laws. Rather, rule of law means that we are a nation ruled by laws, not men. That no one [or group] …is above the law.”

Herring’s legal operating theory is no different from jurisprudence and law in Venezuela or Mexico, where the question is not do you know the law? But rather whom do you know? The law under Democrats like Eric Holder, Barack Obama and Mark Herring is now a respecter of persons. Once feelings and fads replace the law and procedure we enter uncharted territory.

Naturally the Washington Post editorial page supports Herring’s switch. “We broadly agree with Mr. Herring’s reading of the law. The Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection cannot be reconciled with denying, on logically flimsy grounds, equal access to civil marriage for a group that has for centuries been singled out for discrimination.”

But the same ‘logic’ applies to other formerly acknowledged taboos including polygamy and incest. “Love is love” is a justification that can overturn almost every sexual prohibition.

The WaPost also claims that Herring is not abandoning his client because the two county clerks being sued have their own attorneys. Under this remarkable doctrine there is no need to expect the fire department to show up when your house is burning if a neighbor has already stepped in with his water hose.

To demonstrate Herring’s utter moral bankruptcy we will close with a look at his message during last year’s campaign. Herring repeatedly promised to “take politics out of the office” and he assured voters that he would not be an activist AG like Ken Cuccinelli.

That promise lasted exactly 12 days. Now he’s the newest member of Obama, Holder & Herring the law firm that specializes in picking and choosing which laws to follow and which laws to enforce.

TX Democrat Gubernatorial Candidate Wendy Davis’ Slip Is Showing

Wendy Davis memeWendy Davis is not the first Democrat to use a fetus pile as a stepping–stone to higher office. She’s only the latest. But Wendy is in such a hurry to run for governor of Texas that she’s left a lot of inconvenient facts behind.

Davis first came to prominence when she lead a filibuster on the floor of the Texas Senate in favor of allowing women to abort their child as late as three months into the pregnancy. She termed it a “human right.” In contrast to Senator Ted Cruz (R–TX) who read children’s books during his filibuster, Davis essentially read the unborn the riot act.

Although Davis is ruthless when it comes to the unborn, she expects Texas voters to have enough sympathy for her climb up from a hard–scrabble background to make her the first Democrat governor since 1995. She describes herself as a divorced teenage single mom who went from living in a trailer to Harvard Law and the Texas Senate.

Like Massachusetts’ Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Falseahontas), Davis believes that redneck chic is a real vote getter among women and low information voters. And just as Warren’s tale of adolescent privation and Native American ancestry didn’t hold up to scrutiny, neither does Wendy’s.

The only element of the tale that’s entirely true is she’s a woman, of sorts. As reported by The Dallas Morning News’ Wayne Slater, Davis was 21–years–old when she divorced. After the divorce she remained in the mobile home where she’d been living with her former husband. Although she may not have been too popular with neighbors since she also received three vehicles in the settlement.

Based on those qualifications I could be governor of Texas having lived in a trailer for an entire semester at college.

Davis didn’t stay single for long. Seeing an opportunity she morphed into a dress–wearing John Kerry. Wendy had her father approach a friend of his and ask, “How do you like younger women? My daughter wants to go out with you.” Husband–to–be Jeff Davis said in an interview. “I was flattered so I took her out. We dated two or three years, then got married.”

Jeff paid for Wendy’s last two years at Texas Christian University, although her spin is, “It was community resources. We paid for it together.” Sure, Jeff wrote the check and she cashed it.

Mother–of–the–Year Wendy then applied to Harvard Law School and was accepted. (I would really like to get a look at her application essay. It would no doubt move Charles Dickens to tears.) After her acceptance at Harvard, Jeff dutifully cashed in his 401(k) retirement account to cover the initial years and then took out a loan to pay for his wife’s last year.

In the meantime Wendy was faced with a dilemma regarding the children. Her daughter from her first marriage was 8 and the daughter with Jeff was 2, so it was obviously way too late to abort them. But how would it look for a hot little blonde to be toting children that reminded her of mobile housing?

So she left both girls with Jeff back in Fort Worth while she went to pursue her dream solo.

Wendy graduated in 1993 and returned to Fort Worth where one assumes her daughters asked to see a photo ID and then welcomed her home. In 1998, running as a Republican, Davis won a seat on the city council and began her climb up the political ladder.

Ironically enough, the day after Jeff made the last payment on the loan he took out for Wendy’s Harvard Law degree, she moved out and filed for divorce. Of course Wendy takes umbrage at the thought that poor Jeff was just another stepping–stone. Slater quotes her vehemently denying any exploitation, “I was a vibrant part of contributing to our family finances from the time I graduated to the time we separated in 2003,” she said. “The idea that suddenly there was this instantaneous departure after Jeff had partnered so beautifully with me in putting me through school is just absurd.”

Vibrant? Who talks like that and what does it mean? Wendy oscillated when she got a check? Here’s a rule of thumb from a media consultant: When descriptive words are excessive for the surrounding context it means they’re lying. Like when Obama talks about “robust diplomacy.”

For his part, Jeff wasn’t feeling so beautiful. The divorce filing listed adultery on Wendy’s part and he asked for a restraining order against Ms. Vibrant requesting the court require her to refrain from the use of drugs or alcohol “within 24 hours of contact with her children.”

The divorce allowed Wendy to again demonstrate her deep concern for children as she chose to give sole custody of her 12–year–old daughter to her husband; saying it just wasn’t a good time for her to have a daughter tagging along.

So there you have it. The darling of Texas Democrats and leftist abortion supporters nationwide is a liar who won’t even agree to raise her own daughter if it interferes with her overwhelming ambition. She’s used and discarded her way into Democrat political stardom.

Maybe Wendy Davis is simply the culmination of the decades–long feminist campaign to remake America. Now a woman can be as callous and unscrupulous as male politicians and still run for office.

For her part Davis realizes she’s going to have to do something about that biography. “My language should be tighter,” she said. “I’m learning about using broader, looser language. I need to be more focused on the detail.”

Or she could just trying telling the truth for a change.

The “N-Word”, Now There are 2 of Them!

n-word-1a-642x336

I’ve been sitting here trying to figure out what to write about that has nothing to do with the president’s lies, or the State of the Union propaganda that we will be asked to buy on Tuesday, up to, and including, global cooling. No, make that global warming. No, wait, climate change. Yeah, that’s the ticket, climate change.

Then I read an article about an elementary school principal who was suspended for using the N‑word. Well, she kind-of used the N-word. In a nutshell, the teacher was getting the kids ready for a play about Martin Luther King, Jr. After using the word “Negro” several times, one of the children said he was uncomfortable with that word and refused to participate in the play.

Ultimately the principal was called in for backup, and during the course of explaining the differences between the two N-words, “Negro” and “Ni***r”, ended up getting herself in trouble. She has been suspended pending an investigation. But why?

I am at a loss here, to a degree. The word “Negro” has been an acceptable “descriptor” for many years. I have had not a one black friend tell me that was a bad word. It’s the Spanish word for black. Martin Luther King, Jr used the word several times in speeches to help explain or add understanding.

But when the principal used the OTHER N-word, well, I’m not going to judge her attempted explanation. It isn’t available for us to critique. But if it went something like this, is this really a problem:

“Now, some people use the word Negro and some use the terribly, derogatory word NI***R. That second word is a word you should never call or refer to someone as. It’s a hateful word and has no place in society. It was used in a hateful and mean way in this country in at a time when slavery was practiced. It was used to try to make black people feel like less of a person, sub-human even. It wasn’t right then, and it isn’t right now, or EVER!”

I need help here. Educators have asked that the “Ni***r” word be removed from Huckleberry Fin and Tom Sawyer, but, if we don’t remind ourselves of the hate that was taught at a period of time in this country, how do we avoid it again in the future?

Have the word police gone too far? So many terms and words have become taboo. But why? I am not suggesting all words are OK to use in general conversation. What I am saying is that we have gotten so concerned with hurting someone’s feelings and how they perceive us that we want our kids to avoid unpleasant things.

I am an American of Italian decent. My grandparents spoke and wrote Italian. It was their first language as was my mom’s. When my mom moved me to a “white” neighborhood so I could have a better life I was called all kinds of colorful names, “dumb Dego”, “Wop”, “Guinea”, and ”Greaseball”. (Sorry if that offends, but it is my column, and it really is what they called me!) Did they make me feel good? No. Did I think it was no big deal? No! Do I want them taken out of references in today’s literature and books? No!

Let’s get one thing straight. I am not comparing my school experience with slavery. I am comparing hurtful words. I want a generation 100 years from today to know how others were beaten down with words, Italians, Japanese, Irish, blacks, and others. I want them to read about it in books, on tablets, via text, and Tweets so they can see, and maybe feel, for themselves how distasteful it is and was and will continue to be.

Think of all the horrible things that have happened in history. The Holocaust has gone from a full chapter in many history books to a page or a few paragraphs. How do our kids learn and understand the impact in that short account? The Japanese internment camps that were here, in this country, are down to a bare mention because they are distasteful and uncomfortable for our young kids. The history of slavery and the way we treated black people in this country is also being taught less and less.

History no matter how uncomfortable needs to be taught. Our kids and their kids need to know the mistakes of the past to ensure they don’t repeat them in the future.

When I hear the word “Ni***r” spoken, whether from a black to a black or someone trying to start a fight or even just be funny, I cringe, not out of fear but because I know what that word represents. It isn’t funny. It’s hate. Plain and simple.

Our youth need have that same feeling. These words aren’t cool. They’re cruel and they need to know that.

Keep watch America, get involved or lose it!

Jesus is All Right With Abortion

baby

Recently a comedian named Sarah Silverman posted a video on the internet where she interviewed Jesus, or, really, a white person pretending to be Jesus, because we all know the real Jesus was an average-looking Jewish man. Sarah Silverman is obsessed with abortion, and she asked this incarnation of Jesus if killing babies was OK. Pretend Jesus said sure, no problem, kill ‘em all and I’ll sort them out, ha ha ha. Pretend Jesus is so funny.

I don’t know much else about Sarah Silverman other than that she once dated Jimmy Kimmel, and when he dumped her for Matt Damon, Kimmel announced that Damon had bigger boobs. But she appears to be a darling to liberals, and they eat up her allegedly funny skits such as this one. It’s controversial. It’s edgy.

No it isn’t.

If Sarah Silverman really wanted to be controversial and edgy, she wouldn’t interview Pretend Jesus. She should have interviewed Mohammed and asked him why it’s okay in Arab culture to smack women, and why it’s okay in Arab culture for a father to attempt to and/or murder his daughter when she becomes too Westernized. If she had Pretend Mohammed say something outrageous like, “The skins of our dead women make great lamp shades,” we’d have some controversy. But Sarah Silverman, an obvious Jew, won’t do that because she doesn’t want her next Internet video to feature her getting beheaded by ski-masked Muslim terrorists, because that’s what Muslim extremists do when you make fun of Mohammed.

If Sarah Silverman really wanted to be controversial and edgy, she wouldn’t interview Pretend Jesus. She should have interviewed an actual aborted fetus and asked how the procedure went. If the aborted fetus said something outrageous like, “It was better than Splash Mountain at Disneyland and I’m sorry I can’t be aborted again,” there would be outrage and gnashing of teeth.

Instead, Sarah Silverman, an untalented, unimaginative liberal who keeps failing to sell shows to outlets like NBC and HBO, does what is safe. Interviewing Pretend Jesus won’t get her head cut off, and, at this point, since Christianity is always a target, nobody but your humble correspondent really noticed. One has to wonder why she bothered, but since liberalism is a mental disorder, we can assume she was off her meds. Liberals do crazy things when they’re off their meds.

 

BRIAN DRAKE is the author of The Rogue Gentleman, a thriller in the tradition of Brad Thor and Vince Flynn, available in both paperback and ebook.

I Pity New York, But Not New Yorkers!

Business-leaders-aren't-laughing-about-Weiner-and-Spitzer

I guess it’s kind of in my DNA being from Boston. That rival between New York and Boston is almost natural, like it is between the Angels and Dodgers in Southern California.

However, being an American takes priority over being a Bostonian or a Republican. New York is one of the first things that pops into your head when you think of America, along with freedom, mom, and apple pie.
New York was among the first of our foundational cities in our fight for freedom from oppression and tyranny. It was where many fought and died for freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and just plain freedom! (Queue Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address.)

If you want to take a swipe at America, you attack New York! New York has always been a micro history of this great country… Well, NO MORE!

New York and its politics is becoming a symbol for the very things this country has always fought against. Freedoms in New York are being lost at an alarming rate. New York’s government leaders must be “inhaling deeply” when they pass the pot shops on the corners.

Where to begin without running out of space on the paper?
The Twitchy.com staff summarized Governor Andrew Cuomo best as basically saying, attention all wingnuts bitterly clinging to the “extreme” notion that there’s a “right to life,” there’s “no place” for you in the state of New York!

Well thank God! (Yes, I used the “God” word) I certainly wouldn’t want to be with a group of progressive, left-leaning, closed-mind, extreme elitists that see Governor Cuomo as an asset to New York. (Did I insult them all? If I left anyone out, I’m sorry. I’ll try to get to you later.)

Here’s what the Governor said about New York state elected Republican representatives:
“Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”

There is a very large number of New Yorkers who are religious, God-believing, right-to-life-believing people and, obviously, voters. Many of whom just simply want to go about their business and let people live their lives. Those people are about to get bitten. Between Cuomo and DeBlazio they are almost guaranteed that there really is no place for them in New York.

Where’s the outrage that the Governor called conservatives who stand for the right to life “extreme”? Can you imagine if a conservative or Republican dared to say that “there’s no place in California for “extreme liberals” who are pro-choice and pro-abortion”? There would be a virtual media bloodfest! Oh, the humanity! The outrage of every liberal would be on him like we have recently seen with Governor Christie and President Obama.

Obama. Twenty-two issues. Christie. One issue. Yet, as usual, the media can only see fault in the Republican (and not even a conservative at that!) Hypocrites!
So, there is a right-to-life for bald eagles. We protect the right-to-life for tigers, whales, sea lions, dolphins, and leopards but not humans.

Even as more and more stories and studies come out as to the viability of the unborn, we still turn a blind eye. In a recent story, a 19-week “baby” (or as some of you call it, a fetus) survived outside the womb for a while. Many hospitals try, and succeed, at saving the lives of “preemies.” Should they stop doing that? Do they have a right-to-life? Do the parents have a right to let them die? Let’s hope they aren’t traveling through New York when the time comes!

Then there are those “extreme conservatives who are …. pro-assault-weapon.” Oh wait! Those are actually “pro-Constitution” Americans, both on the extreme right and the extreme left, who believe in a republic (not a dictatorship where the governor decides what the rules are).
“Assault weapon” is a term being thrown around like “racism” and “global warming.” What does it mean? Five rounds in a clip? Ten rounds? Some states say it’s any gun that can carry a clip! This is the real lunacy. Gun violence has gone down in this country over the last 30-50 years as gun ownership has increased and gun technology has improved. Talk about fear mongering!

And the best one… “extreme conservatives who are … anti-gay.” Really?! This is like the word game the Democrats play with the term “illegal alien.” They say “people can’t be Illegal.” NO REALLY?! But people can do illegal acts.

Many of those religious conservatives (some are even Democrats, oh my!) don’t believe in the “gay lifestyle.” They don’t hate gays, PERIOD. Which means they are not “anti-gay.” But if you must label it, it would be more accurately termed “anti-gay lifestyle.”
As if that weren’t bad enough for the state of New York, there is the Democrat-socialist, card carrying, Castro and Chavez loving, Mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio. You New Yorkers are soooo screw…..d!
You loved Rudy Giuliani, a Republican! He cleaned up the streets, both crime and garbage. Got the economy cranking again and made New York City a great place to do business again. No Bible, religious, anti-gay, anti-gun, extreme conservative talk. Just good government policies.

Then you chose Michael Bloomberg! Mr. Nanny himself. He made you nuts but he, too, kept the city safe, clean, and brought new business in. Unfortunately, he went off the rails regulating guns and food and, as a result, really seemed to lose traction during his last days in office. But he did make important strides in safety and the economy.

Now, how de Blasio is going to save New York City, I don’t know. And why? What was so bad?
He is going to save the horses by banning them from being used to pull horse-drawn carriages because it’s mean? No, not really. The real backstory is it’s because one of his real estate friends wants the property where the stables are located to build an apartment complex.

De Blasio is also going to make sure there are more Planned Parenthood locations by giving them space in city-owned buildings and shutting down all the “choice”-type pregnancy centers. Sounds like a fair and level approach, not! Giving taxpayer space to a group that already gets taxpayer money to perform abortions as its main source of revenue, isn’t extreme if you’re Mayor de Blasio.

Oh, and while Governor Cuomo is freezing taxes for 10 years on new companies moving into New York, Mayor de Blasio is raising taxes to fund many of the programs he wants to implement. Glad to see they’re working together.

So New York, you deserve what you voted for. Well, at least what about 40% of you voted for. Those of you who didn’t vote, you got what you didn’t vote for and you earned it through your apathy. Congratulations!
The once great city of New York will eventually be the mirror image of Detroit… Hopefully local officials can salvage the rest of the state.

Americans (and especially New Yorkers!) wake up! You’re losing this country little by little!

Amnesty: The Next GOP Leadership Betrayal

House GOP leadership prepares to negotiate amnesty with Democrats.

House GOP leadership prepares to negotiate amnesty with Democrats.

House Republican leadership is preparing to betray the base. Again. To illustrate the magnitude of the sellout I was going to use a hypothetical analogy with Democrats and their base. Initially I was going to posit that Sen. Tim Kaine (D–Secular) had changed his mind about abortion.

For years Kaine has said that although he’s personally opposed to abortion, he is not willing to impose his beliefs on a ‘woman’s right to choose.’ Essentially confessing that his Catholic faith is not strong enough to get in the way of his political ambitions. (In his last campaign he became even more weaselly, saying he didn’t want to stand in the way of a woman exercising her “constitutional choices,” unless the choice involved a handgun.)

In my hypothetical Kaine would announce he had decided that what the Catholic Church teaches and the Bible says is the truth and he will no longer support any abortion unless it is to save the life of the mother. Kaine would also declare that he will no longer vote for any taxpayer dollars to be given to Planned Parenthood since both his beliefs and opinion polls show Americans don’t think tax money should pay for or help support abortion facilities.

It’s a great analogy but it has one problem: No one would believe it. The analogy is too fantastic for even temporary suspension of disbelief. Brent Bozell, chairman of ForAmerica, put it nicely this week: “So what’s the difference between Boehner and Pelosi and McConnell and Reid? Answer: The Democratic leadership honors its promises. Republican leaders have abandoned theirs.”

This House GOP leadership betrayal is passage of an amnesty bill, probably before the November election. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R–Sellout) says leadership supports an amnesty bill for 12 million illegals that includes tighter border enforcement as a sop to conservatives.

Boehner pays far more attention to agitation from people who shouldn’t be in the country than they do to conservative citizens. And unprincipled businessmen who want a steady supply of imported serfs are far more influential than mere voters.

National Republicans are forever pursuing the ‘independent voter’ at the expense of the base. Democrats on the other hand solidify their base first and then move to the independents. You think that might be why they win elections?

Besides the betrayal of the base, which is bad enough, what political goal do these masterminds in House leadership (to borrow an adjective from Mark Levin) think they are going to accomplish?

Boehner has picked an issue that was a failure the last time Republicans supported it. Ronald Reagan signed a one–time–only–amnesty–that–will­–also–seal–the–border–tighter–than–a–teenage–miniskirt.

The results of that amnesty were fourfold:

  1. Granted citizenship to people who came and stayed illegally
  2. Produced millions of new votes for Democrats
  3. Legalized low–skill labor for employers & reduced wage rates for citizens
  4. Attracted another 12 million illegals who want their amnesty now.

Does Boehner expect amnesty to attract Hispanic voters? California Hispanics now make up the largest ethic group in the state as a result of amnesty and Democrat failure to seal the border. There is not one Republican statewide official. California is a GOP desert as Hispanics proved singularly ungrateful.

Does Boehner think amnesty will improve the party’s image? A Gallup poll lists a total of 3 percent of the populace ranking immigration “reform” as a top priority and I’m guessing all their names began with Jesus.

Does Boehner think amnesty will mean more contributions from big business? Possible and it may last a cycle or two, but once the amnestied voters gravitate to Democrats, Republicans will start losing. And the Business Roundtable doesn’t back or finance losers for long.

Immigration polling, which has evidently frightened the GOP leadership, is dishonest. Respondents are offered unrealistic or nebulous choices. For instance the Public Religion Research Institute proclaims, “Support for a path to citizenship has remained unchanged…an identical number (63%) supported a path to citizenship for immigrants currently living in the United States illegally.”

Yet their poll offers three choices that are false or too general to be useful: “become citizens provided they meet certain requirements,” “become permanent legal residents but not citizens” or “Identify and deport them.”

“Certain requirements” is not defined and therefore is useless in determining public policy. Poll respondents can interpret “certain requirements” in a number of ways ranging from “learn to speak English like Tom Brokaw” to “stand in a long line for an autographed photo of Obama.”

“Legal residents but not citizens” is an outcome that creates a permanent helot class that won’t survive the first Democrat Congress. And no sane conservative has ever advocated mass deportation. We believe they got here under their own power and they can leave the same way.

I have yet to see a poll that asks a question that offers a conservative choice. For instance: Do you support a step–by–step approach to the immigration problem that begins by removing the economic incentive for illegal immigration thru a law that makes it a criminal offense for employers to hire illegal aliens?

If illegals can’t work and they can’t collect welfare or rebates from the IRS then the invasion will begin to reverse. Presto the “immigration problem” solves itself! Sure the bill won’t pass the current Senate, but so what? It offers a conservative alternative to the amnesty now crowd and it preserves the rule of law, but that pales in comparison to Boehner’s dreams of campaign contributions from the Business Roundtable.

Before elected officials — Republicans again — got cold feet in Prince William County, illegals were fleeing after an anti–illegal enforcement act was passed. The county saved millions as they fled to nearby “sanctuary” cities and states. The same can happen in a nation that takes its own immigration laws seriously.

Unfortunately that is not this nation and it’s not this Republican Party.

Government Mathematics 101a

GovMath

No wonder our kids need remedial reading and math upon entering college in many states and also why we are number 47 in the world in math.

The way the government works, a number is not from another world but another dimension (insert the “Twilight Zone” theme here.) Just amazing!

Nancy Pelosi says, “Every dollar we spend on unemployment puts two dollars in the system.” Really? In what universe? Under government math, if Susie has 3 pieces of cake and Johnny only has 1 there is an obvious inequity. The fact that Susie’s daddy is a banker and Johnny’s daddy is a cab driver obviously means that Johnny hasn’t had the same opportunities as Susie. This means we need to find Frankie because he always has 4 pieces of cake. He’s looking a little chunky so we need to save him from himself and give one of his pieces to Johnny. Then we need to take one from Suzie and give it to Johnny as well. Now Johnny won’t feel bad because based on government math, everyone has been equalized. Confused? I am writing it and I’m confused.

But this is government math!

They want us to believe that over 92 million people have left the work force. They will tell you it’s because many have retired, some are on disability, and other moronic excuses. We need to create 200,000+ jobs a month to maintain a level of economic misery that’s tolerable. Last month we created 73,000 jobs. Most were temporary jobs, go figure, Christmas, holidays, and all that. But, 535,000 people left the work force bringing that number to over 91 million. Wait a minute, what?

Did a million people leave the planet, die off, hit the lottery, crawl under a rock? Will they be needing government help? Can anyone explain this to me?

Government math is the only way this works. The same guys who say more taxes will create more jobs. Yup, that logic means, taking money out of the pocket of employers will give them more money to hire people.

Only with government math will raising minimum wage to $15.00 per hour create more jobs and stimulate the economy. In most cases, it would double the total payroll for a company. And the government thinks that will compel employers to hire more employees because people will have more money to spend and they will need extra staff for the increased spending. HUH! That’s government math

Participation rate (the number of people who are able to work but, for whatever reason, do not) is the worst it’s been since 1978. Mr. Obama, this is your mission accomplished moment. This does not include people on disability or those retired on government pensions.

People, there are approximately 350 million American citizens in the U.S. (and an unknown number of other human inhabitants.) Let’s make it easy and round the numbers, because I don’t have enough fingers or toes to count on. To start with, take 100 million away for those that have left the workforce. Next, figure that at least 75 million of the 350 million Americans have at least 1 child who doesn’t contribute to the tax rolls. That puts us at around 175 million tax-paying Americans. That means companies (employers) are paying for over 175 million people receiving government aid. It CAN’T WORK!

And to add insult to injury, CNBC now reports that, according to the government, there are ONLY approximately 155 million employed people. Hello!!! Some of those 155 million employed are only part-time workers! (there is a 20 million people chasm between my numbers and theirs, but hey is government math)  People, we are closer to a 25-30% unemployment rate. Even the government’s real rate, as shown in the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows it closer to 13.2 %. So not only can’t they add (or calculate percentages), but they couldn’t find the truth in a bag marked “Truth” if you put both their hands on it!

Let’s break it down to smaller numbers for illustration. Say there are 20 people on your street and you have all vowed to take care of each other in every way, communal living. Say 10 people decide that they really don’t want to work. They want to hang out and raise their families, work on their homes, cars, or maybe start a new career. That means the other 10 have to provide for the whole group of 20. They may need to cut back on food, get rid of a car to save on insurance, use less electricity, buy less clothes, and make other adjustments. WHY? Well, if you’re using government math (and logic,) everyone has to share. No one should go without food, shelter, cable, or cellular service. And no one should be forced to work until they decide to and even then only at a job they are satisfied with.

Come-on! Does this make sense to anyone?

Government math has gifted us with a “real” unemployment rate of over 25%, a $17 trillion deficient (and climbing), and one of the worst education systems in the world (you can’t just throw money at it to fix it).

People, wake up or we’re going to lose our country!

Spare No Expense & Bill the Taxpayer

Artist’s rendering of the Lynn family’s preferred reburial site.

Artist’s rendering of the Lynn family’s preferred reburial site.

Prince William County, VA recently witnessed a heartwarming episode that ended in a charming example of public – private cooperation. Not too far from where I live the county is constructing a new high school that will feature all the modern conveniences for students: Olympic–size swimming pool, state of the art football field and hot–and–cold running grief counselors.

Plus it’s also a Gun Free Zone!

Last summer during preliminary construction a ground survey team discovered what appeared to be 10 to 12 abandoned graves in an overgrown portion of the site.* And making that discovery before the bulldozers arrived wasn’t easy. The plot was located in a remote area south of Manassas and covered by a tangle of third or fourth growth woods, making it impassable for vehicles and a tough slog on foot.

The graves weren’t marked with headstones, instead there were only rough fieldstones, without any inscriptions, and rectangular sunken areas in the ground. They concluded the site was an abandoned family cemetery that had not seen a burial in over 100 years.

Once the graves were discovered the school board contacted the Virginia Department of Historic Resources to obtain permission to disinter the remains. The board also followed the letter of the law and published a required legal notice in the Washington Post.

Since the high school was budgeted to be the most expensive in county history both proponents and opponents of construction had been following progress closely. After the graves were discovered the school board took the advice of community busybodies and contacted local historians to see if they could determine who was buried in the plot.

Researchers found the land had been owned by the Lynn family from approximately 1840 until the late 1890s when it was sold. Three of the graves have been identified as John Henry Lynn and his parents, William and Codelia (Keys) Lynn.

What’s more, Lynn family descendants still living in the county were surprised and gratified when the school board notified them of the discovery. After consulting with the board, Lynn representatives agreed to have the graves moved to a nearby site that would not interfere with construction.

At the conclusion of a brief, tasteful reburial ceremony Carolyn Lynn — ironically a local genealogy buff that writes a blog on Prince William County history — said, “I’m so impressed with the respect the school board demonstrated for my ancestors and my family. We had no idea there was a cemetery on the high school site and now not only do we know where the Lynns are buried, the new site is accessible and will be maintained by the county. I just want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart.”

Wow, I’m going to have to take my wife’s advice and stop smoking crack. It’s interfering with writing my column.

Of course that’s not what happened. This is 2014, not 1965. When notified of the discovery the Lynn family was outraged the school board found graves they hadn’t bothered to visit for a century!

How dare they! To make up for 100 years of disinterest family did everything but wrap their arms around the bone fragments and demand the high school be canceled. And the Lynns did it without the tiniest, most infinitesimal bit of embarrassment or gratitude, which is a way of life in the 21st Century.

Maybe it’s just me but if I’d lost the location of pee–paw’s mortal remains for the last 150 years, I’d be embarrassed if the county found him abandoned in an overgrown poison ivy preserve. I’d also be hoping the county wasn’t going to stick me with the bill for digging him up. As far as I’m concerned you buy the plot you buy grandpa, too. Besides, some bureaucrat might decide great grandpappy operated a ‘shine manufacturing business and declare the grave a Superfund site.

No one escapes that clean up bill. Just ask Monsanto.

But the Lynns didn’t feel the least bit chagrined as they went on the offensive.

Carolyn Lynn, the genealogist with the missing cemetery, at first said she was “elated” about the discovery of the family plot, but now she’s described as “disappointed and angry. [She] want[s] to know why Prince William school officials didn’t do more to accommodate the cemetery or notify area residents about plans to disinter the graves, a process that began on Veterans Day. When they were interred, that was their home. They expected to be there forever,” Lynn said of the 11 to 13 Lynn family members – including four small children — believed to be buried at the site. “Nobody thought somebody would build a football stadium over them.”

Well, yes and no. I’m also sure the dear departed didn’t figure someone in the family would take the money and run when outsiders offered to buy the plot.

On the board’s behalf, it could have been they figured if the Lynns didn’t care enough to visit the site sometime during the last century — or at least send an illegal with a weed–whacker by — why should the board jump through hoops for the family?

Other long–lost relatives took an even harder line. Derek Lynn wants the entire cemetery restored and all the vegetation and brush the Lynn family ignored for 100 years removed and the grounds restored at taxpayer expense. “These [people] spent their whole lives trying to improve the county, and now they’re out there trying to dig them up. … All we want is for the grave sites to be put back the way they were and left alone,” Lynn explained.

No word on whether or not Derek wants interpreters wearing period clothing onsite to explain the cemetery’s evolution from burial site to briar patch.

The modern Lynns would have no problem with the county paying between $3 and $9 million dollars (depending on how fast the process went) to return the remains to the original burial place and move the high school, but I certainly do. I suppose I should count taxpayers lucky that the final resolution of the problem saw the bodies reinterred at a spot on the site that is not in the construction zone. The initial tab for this solution is $30,000, but that doesn’t count continuing maintenance or the costs of previously running Prince William CSI as an archeology firm was hired, DNA was scanned and relatives tracked down.

After the dust had settled leave it to PWC School Board Chairman Milt Johns to miss the point. His hand–wringing statement was, “I hope that these steps will help to heal any wounds inflicted by the unexpected discovery of the cemetery and the process that followed. We are certainly very sorry for the dismay that resulted.”

Note to Milt: IT’S NOT YOUR FAULT, and statements like this only serve to encourage the hypersensitive.

The people that lived on the land were named Lynn; they knew the most about the deceased and possibly helped dig the graves. But evidently they didn’t give a damn about what happened after the land sold. If they cared about the future of the cemetery they could have added a deed restriction. So why should taxpayers have to pay for the Lynn family’s shabby treatment of their own relatives? And why do weak elected officials allow themselves to be buffaloed by the ‘feelings’ crowd?

If our sensitive, modern–day Lynns have a beef with anyone, it’s the ancestors who let the burial plot become a chigger playground. My suggestion is visit their graves, assuming you know where they are, and give them a piece of your mind.

 

*Facts and quotes contained in this column come from extensive reportage in The Washington Post, InsideNOVA, Northern VA Times and the Potomac Local News, to give attribution where attribution is due.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »