This blog will be about whatever suits my fancy. Chances are, it will concentrate on media misrepresentations of the American "Black community", Black politics, politics in general, and whatever else I want to mentally masturbate about.
The 43-member caucus is fighting through one of the most difficult
periods in its 39-year history, and some members and aides said they’re
getting far too little support from the nation’s first black president —
a man they once believed would be their strongest champion.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) told POLITICO
that White House officials are “not listening” to black lawmakers.
MOUNT DORA — A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to
be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door
telling patients who voted for President
Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."
"I'm not turning anybody away — that would be unethical," Dr. Jack
Cassell, 56, a Mount Dora urologist and a registered Republican opposed
to the health plan, told the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday. "But
if they read the sign and turn the other way, so be it."
The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama … seek urologic care elsewhere.
Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."
As I've written a few times, I'm not a fan of the "health care" bill, but I think all of the people cheering what the doctor posted are foolish and not thinking.
Suppose a patient of the doctor doesn't do well under the doctor's care. Suppose the patient then sues the doctor saying the doctor was against the "health care' bill while they, the patient, supported the "health care" bill and they think the reason why their treatment didn't do well is because of their opposing political views?
Believing in American Exceptional-ism is not being a conservative.
That's called being an American nationalist.
Open and free market capitalism is not a conservative principal.
Ben and Jerry founders are hard core liberals who believe in capitalism
as does Oprah Winfrey. Open an free market capitalism lead to Castro. It
also lead to the establishment of anti-monopoly laws in the U.S.
Defend the interests and ideals of America is defending the
Constitution. "By any means necessary" can sometimes go into ILLEGAL
means, meaning contradicting the Constitution. That's not being a
conservative. The end does not justify the means.
Believing in America is not being a conservative. Believing in
America is being a nationalist.
Conservative is a political belief system that must be constrained
by the laws of the land.
If you are a conservative, you should believe that government run
schools should not exist. It doesn't matter if it's locally government
run. The government should not be involved in education.
Finally, what percentage of so-called conservative ideals must a
person adhere to before they can be called a "real" conservative?
I finish up by writing, from what I can tell, most people who say they are a conservative, really have no clue to what all of that entails nor have they taken a hard look at if they fully live by and vote by those values.
Dan Rather hit a double double: said Obama was articulate AND mentioned watermelon by saying now, Obama can't sell watermelons off the back of a truck. Isn't it interesting how when people get older, they lose the ability to censor themselves? Or maybe they just don't give a damn.
"The right" shows how desperate they are by pointing out the liberal
Democrat who resigned under a cloud of sexual misconduct says it was
because of his stance against Obama-care.
In a Sunday radio appearance, he accused House Democratic leaders of
conspiring to force him out of Congress to lower the vote count needed
to pass a health care bill he opposed. On Beck’s program, he said no
one forced him to leave. “I wasn’t forced out. I forced myself out. I
failed. I didn’t live up to my own codes. I own this.”
Liz Chaney is spouting off saying the justice department shouldn't hire people who previously defended terrorist suspects and has named 7 such people as the A.Q. 7.
Ummmm... Isn't a chance at DEFENSE a major part of our court system? Isn't her stance, along with her cohorts, against the ideals of the Constitution?
I hate to mention Glenn Beck, but when that putz said people should leave a church that mentions "social justice" because it's equivalent to Nazis, he really went into the bowels of absurd asininity. If he's anti-abortion, that comes under "social justice." If he's against explicit sexual material on television, that's "social justice." SHOULDN'T the church take a stand against those things?
The Catholic Church is closing a number of schools in the Baltimore area. They blame declining enrollment for the problem. They are right about declining enrollment. That's a combination of the bad economy, and I think, an outcome of the priest child abuse scandal.There may be fear that the children in the school may be abused. But I think the bigger aspect of it is, the money that could be going to the schools in the area, is going towards paying off the sexual abuse victims.
The reason why I have some alignment with the Tea Party is because
with all of the government spending, we are destined to burden our
children with the debt being amassed under our watch. For those of us
who have been in serious debt and have worked our way out of it, I
view the use of the word enslavement as being appropriate.
When I had serious credit card debt, and realized that paying what I
thought was a lot, was really paying a few dollars over the credit
card interest and fees, I felt like a slave. What are we doing to our
In Maryland, when O'Malley gained office, the first thing he did was
spend down the rainy day fund to the legal minimum. He then gave
raises to people in his cabinet. This was despite the fact the
outgoing governor said there was a multi-million dollar structural
The next year, O'Malley kept up the spending spree along with the
state assembly. He said he "cut" government by not filling open
positions but filling new positions. They then has a "special session"
to cover the debt where they raised the sales tax and put slots on the
next election ballot. They also used one year inflows into the
government from the federal government to hide the deficit.
This year? No new taxes, but again the budget included one year
inflows from the federal government. Now, ALL state legislators are
saying they are going to have to "revisit" the budget next year --
AFTER THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE -- and that "deep cuts" and "revenue
enhancements" will have to be a part of the "discussion." This means,
they are going to raise taxes.
This is happening on the federal level only it is much much worse. And, seriously, I
wonder, and fear, the idea that future tax increases as well as the use of "fees" and other
things, will negatively affect my living standard just because I'm
"wealthy", whatever arbitrary level that is.
The AMT is unfair and will hit the middle class hard. The
congress-criters know it and don't do anything to seriously revamp it
because they depend on the money the AMT brings in.
This CAN'T continue. Greece is our future.
And I haven't even mentioned Social Security going into the red much
sooner than estimates given, or the under funding of pensions, or the
under funding of the government pension insurance, or...
Simply put, the congress-criters start the session, pass so many
laws that I bet you can cross the street, eat a nice meal, fart
afterwards, come back to where you started, and you have broken a
number of federal laws.
The congress-criters, in their bids to maintain power, send pork the
way of their supporters, and create programs that need to be funded,
for life because there is rarely, if ever, a sunset provision. The
costs of these things builds up and builds up and builds up to the
point where taxes are going to have to be raised, and there is ALWAYS a
point where those who get hit by the taxes, start to do things to avoid
them. Even the "every day man", who can, itemizes his income tax return
to get more money back/pay less taxes.
Add that to the fact that the Social Security tax income limit is
going to have to be removed, and then they are going to have to raise
the minimum age, AGAIN, and probably means test it, so that it doesn't
go bankrupt, and the mutual fund 401(K) market has to go boom with the
continued sale of stocks for retirees, and you have yourself a coming
generational war that is coming that will not be pretty.
I'm really not gloating. I just hope you smart people take off the
ideological rose colored glasses and look at the reality of the
We're being screwed in our backsides without benefit of AstroGlide.
I have to pee in the pool, cuz' I gotta go, NOW!!!!
Am I the only person who remembers that after Katrina, the Red Cross received so much money DESIGNATED for Katrina relief, that the Red Cross decided to use the money for other purposes, saying the Red Cross is within its rights to do so?
With all of the money being donated towards Haiti earthquake relief, how about the same money, or better yet, time, being used at home to meet some of our challenges?
If the Haitian immigration policy change doesn't happen after the devastation in Haita, I think President Obama's ghetto passed will be revoked.
Looking at a Kwanzaa card we received, I laughed because I realized there was not the barrage of anti-Kwanzaa opinion pieces this year. Could it be that critics realized it's not widely practiced and not worth mentioning? Could it be because Kwanzaa celebrations are falling? Or could it be the critics were too busy gunning for big bad Negro number one, President Obama?
I want to make a quick point about political categorization.
Recent polls "show" that those polled Americans are now more likely to classify themselves as "conservative." During the Bush administration, those polled Americans were most likely to classify themselves as moderates or independents.
I often challenge people who label me "liberal/progressive/conservative" because I don't think those applying the label can honestly define what the label means. I think these polls show the same thing. The people labeling themselves are doing so NOT because they have an understanding of what the labels really mean and have taken time to see to which they more closely align, they are doing so as a REACTION to things they don't like.
The media are starting to push for "a title" for the end of the decade. I don't understand the need to label the decade, but if they are going to do that, then why not the "Terrorism Decade"?
Think about all of the changes that have happened BECAUSE people flew two planes into the World Trade Towers. Think about the loss of some civil liberties. Think about the fear that still exists, today. Think about the pending changes, I think, that are in store to "tighten security" in this country.
Harry Potter, the iPod, the iPhone, the Blackberry, the housing boom, and the financial bust have NOTHING on that, IMO.
If I remember correctly, right after 9/11, Osama bin Laden stated they will attack the U.S. and use the openness of the U.S. against us. I think about that from time to time. I thought about that hard when the Muslim college students from the Virginia area were arrested over seas attempting to join al Queda.
There has to be a Constitutional show down over religious freedoms and security of citizens of the United States. It's been clear, to me, that some forms of Islam just doesn't blend well with the culture of the United States and actually needs to destroy the culture of the United States in order for Islam to thrive. The fact that there are U.S. citizens and/or legal residents who adhere to those forms of Islam, is problematic. This is going to come to a head at some point and it will most likely come to a head when an attack happens or a big attack is thwarted and the extent of the planned attack becomes known.
I ain't mad or bothered about Tiger cheating on his wife. I'm not a member of his family, so I have nothing to be mad about.
I ain't disappointed in Tiger not taking his vows of marriage seriously. I ain't his wife and I have no personal stake in his life nor he in mine.
I ain't mad at the home wreakin' skanks who knew Tiger was married and still were willing to throw open their legs and anything else. I ain't even mad that they are now mad at Tiger for cheating WITH OTHER SKANKS so now they are ready to get their pieces of silver by telling or not telling about their bumpin' uglies with a married man.
I ain't even mad about the lack of shame.
I ain't mad because I didn't put the man on a pedestal and realized he has a great golf game but who knows about his character outside of the game of golf.
I ain't even mad that, so far, his lack of desire for Black women, doesn't have a sistah proclaiming without shame that she's a home wreakin' skank.
I AM a little pit perturbed that the women are getting called out of their names but some are calling Tiger a ho.
I have a question about "climate change" and carbon credits.
If you are convinced that "climate change" is a direct result of human energy consumption, then why are you not raising a ruckus over carbon credits? Here is what I don't understand. If someone burns energy that compares to 1.5 times "normal use", and another person only burns energy at a level of 0.5 "normal use", why is it reasonable to allow the person who burns "too much" to "buy carbon credits" from someone who doesn't burn energy in a wasteful way?
I'm going to make an observation about the prison industrial complex (PIC).
First off, on the AFROAM-L email list, I used to write that the people moaning and complaining about the PIC were focusing on the wrong thing. The existence of the PIC could go away in years if the Black people, primarily men, would stop doing the crimes that landed their behinds in jail. If that were done, there would be no money to be made in the PIC.
Having written that, I find it interesting that Illinois Congress-criters seem to be upset about the possibility of having GITMO detainees jailed there and complaining that an economy should not be created because of the existence of prisons, when many rural governments are trying to do just that. They are trying to expand the local economy by building prisons and then getting other areas to send their prisoners to them.
A man in the military says he is opposed to a certain military action and it is known to his upper command. What upper command would send the man to serve duty in the action to which he is opposed?
That is the situation with the Ft. Hood terrorist. How does sending a man to duty in an area to which he is opposed, a "P.C." action?
Some media have been doing stories of the military sending people back into service although the people claim or have documented they are suffering from PTSD. If that history with the military didn't exist, I would more strongly consider the "P.C." angle of this, but since the military has been sending people off to fight who should not fight, the "P.C." angle is discounted, to me.
Please pray for the families of the victims of terrorism.
[ UPDATE ]
Let me give you the relative time line of events on that Thursday.
I heard about it on the radio, and that it involved 3 people.
The body count started rising.
The terrorist was said to be among the dead.
The terrorist was identified.
Online, The Washington Post identified the terrorist as a devout Muslim.
It was reported the terrorist was still alive.
I'm now at home and the network news is saying he is a devout Muslim who has been outspoken in his views and that he didn't want to go to Afghanistan.
And pundits/commentators want to say the network media didn't or were slow to report he is a Muslim?
I need to know how the Fort Hood terrorist assassin was only able to do it because of political correctness. That's what I keep hearing but I don't understand how that is the case.
If the media is to be believed, the terrorist assassin had conflicts with other military people concerning his terrorist beliefs. But, so far, it appears those people didn't report his views.
If the media is to be believed, the terrorist assassin told the army that he wanted to get out and didn't believe in the war. But, it appears his attempts to exit the army were turned down.
If the media is to be believed, he posted terrorist assassin beliefs on a board under his own name. [ UPDATE ] And, if the media is to believed, it was brought to the attention of LAW ENFORCEMENT officials.
Remember when one of the Dixie Chicks spoke out against Pres. Bush? Remember all of the calls for boycotting the group's concerts and CDs? Weren't many of them politically aligned with Limbaugh?
Remember the effort by K. Mfume to get a syndicated talk show and how he was attacked for doing so? Remember how people said he was ideological and that his attempts to get a show seemed shady because the NAACP was saying media doesn't have enough Black faces?
Remember people like Jesse Lee Peterson going after sponsors of Jesse Jackson, Sr's Wall Street initiative? Remember the out cry because of Jackson, Sr's comments and his "shake down" of corporations?
We know there are people and organizations that are trying to turn things around in troubled neighborhoods, but there are not enough people actually helping out. Here is the question not asked by pundits, especially in light of the Chicago killing of Derrion Albert, an honor roll student.
How do we get more people to get involved in what we are doing?
If anyone answers, "find some way to blame the white man" or some form of it, I follow it up by saying, Black women proportionally have more abortions than white women, even with anti-abortion proponents saying a white racist supported Planned Parenthood. Since that doesn't work, your response is nonsense and you are automatically dismissed.