Friday, January 23, 2015

More Stupid Leftist Tricks (“Tricks with Twisted Logic”)


Max Blumenthal





For some reason the film American Sniper has ruffled the feathers of the Left and when Leftist feathers are ruffled logic gets twisted in knots and tossed out the window.

First the daffy anti-American film-maker Michael Moore (as his famous veteran’s tweet; Today, as every day, 22 American veterans will commit suicide. Happy Veterans Day,” attests) called Chris Kyle (the Navy SEAL the film American Sniper is based on) a “coward.”

Max Blumenthal upped the ante comparing Kyle to the “Beltway sniper’s junior partner,” John Lee Malvo; John Lee Malvo, another mass murdering sniper, would not be glorified on prime time.

Of course, the difference between a soldier protecting his fellow troops and a mass murdering criminal is the distinction between self-defense (defending your home and family from home invaders...a cherished and highly revered act) and a desperate stick-up man shooting a store clerk during a robbery.

The fact that the likes of Moore and Blumenthal don’t get that shows that; (1) very clearly there is a distinct ideological bigotry at work in America’s news and entertainment media and (2) English and history majors with little to no background in mathematics, tend to have some serious problems with logic, which in essence is a mathematical construct. Otherwise subpar intellects like these wouldn’t have, let alone maintain the high-profile media positions they occupy. Some people in some very high places have gone out of their way to make sure Michael Moore’s films get produced, which means that someone else with a very different ideological perspective isn't getting that same access.

Recently, WCBS radio aired an editorial comment comparing Muslim Jihadists to the Italian Mafia, decrying that “No one talked about the fact that most of these men were devout Catholics.”

Of course, the Italians in organized crime never killed in the name of religion, nor did they seek to impose a foreign and incompatible moral code (like Sharia Law) upon America.

You may well ask, “What is wrong with these people?” Self-defense and authorized police and military actions are vastly different (and yes, even worthy of praise) than criminal violence. AND yes, violent crime IS starkly different than terrorism.

Worse yet, dolts like Moore and Blumenthal know this. They both have no problem designating neo-nazis, KKK’ers, even harmless Tea Partiers terrorists and even justifying preemptive violence against such groups.

Interestingly enough, as misguided and odious as neo-nazis and KKK’ers may be, the bulk of today’s racial violence is caused by urban blacks, the African-American equivalent of hillbilly culture.

In fact, there are quite a few similarities between Jihadists and urban blacks in the U.S.; both groups have apparently hijacked a larger group - Jihadists have allegedly hijacked Islam, while urban blacks have apparently hijacked larger black culture. The latter is so much so, that blacks like Seattle Seahawks QB Russell Wilson, who DOESN’T speak in the urban vernacular, nor dress in the “hip-hop style,” nor endorse “thug life,” has been called out by other blacks for, “Not being black enough.” The equivalent of whites calling out Bill Gates for “Not being hillbilly enough.” Except that that never happens, because as giddily as whiter Leftists celebrate black dysfunction, they are threatened by such dysfunction among their own.


One of the horrific results of this tunnel vision is that black-on-white violence (a HUGE problem nationwide) has been ignored and even lied about, UNTIL Colin Flaherty’s relatively recent reporting brought this phenomenon to light. Flaherty has since gone on to write a number of books, including White Girl Bleed A Lot (http://www.amazon.com/White-Girl-Bleed-Lot-Violence/dp/1938067061/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1421942117&sr=8-1&keywords=white+girl+bleed+alot) and The Knockout Game a Lie? Aw Hell Know (http://www.amazon.com/Knockout-Game-Lie-Awww-Hell-ebook/dp/B00OQVFLVW/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8) that chronicle the wide disparity in inter-racial violence, virtually all of it attributed to blatant racial bigotry.

More On Religion



L. Ron Hubbard





I rarely talk about religion and when I do, most of the time I wind up deeply regretting it.

I’m not a “believer.” At least not in any organized religion. I AM spiritual, in that I am a Deist. I believe there is some organizing principle and some Creative Life Force or God of some kind. I just don’t understand it, but I don’t have to. I mean, who really understands concepts like “infinity,” or “eternity” and we throw those terms around all the time. I have never hated religion, nor do I take any offense at anyone else's beliefs, nor do I intend offense by my own lack thereof.

I gave up on my religion at about 11 years of age.

Back then (I’m OLD now) the Catholic Mass was said in Latin, which may as well have been Sanskrit, as far as I was concerned. Only the homily or sermon (whatever they call it) was said in English. What really burned me up (as a kid) was how intently all these adults, who I was pretty sure didn’t speak or understand Latin either, followed the priest so attentively. I’d grouse, “Mr. Bevins speaks Latin? Get out, judging from the way he speaks, he can barely understand English.”

Most of what I remember about Church was the day-dreaming. Yes, I had undiagnosed ADD...probably ADHD, because I was pretty hyper as a kid too. Anyway, I didn’t mind the day-dreaming so much because almost every time, I dreamed about me being incredibly, fantabulously rich and living in a huge home under some ocean (Hey, I was a kid!). But after awhile, I began to resent being mandated to waste an hour or more day-dreaming every Sunday morning, so at 11 years of age, I finally found the courage to ask my Dad if I could just stop going.

I asked after he made one of his often inciteful musings about how, “The minute some people get out of Church they can’t seem to wait to get back to being the bastards they were the rest of the week, cutting people off on the way out of the Church parking lot...” etc..

Dad acquiesced and I happily stopped going to Church to listen to a Mass I didn’t understand. Now, I didn’t become a full-fledged non-denominational Deist overnight, mind you, it took a bit of time. AND (for the record) it wasn’t just the Latin thing, there were all the weird teachings; an infant that died before being baptized being forever doomed to a place called “Limbo,” and the idea that an “all forgiving, all-knowing God,” who knew everything (presumably even what you and I will do before we do it) would consign people to HELL forever...a place where both Hitler and the kid who stole a cookie and lied about it would go.

As I grew and learned about other religions, I found most of them even more outlandish than my own.

Like when I came across Mormonism, founded by a guy named Joe Smith who allegedly found some gold or gold-plated plates in some woods in upstate New York and then was confronted by an apparition of John the Baptist, or some kitchen supplies salesman who, I guess, was a dead ringer for John the Baptist.

I’m pretty sure I know what happened from there. John the Baptist (or this kitchen supplies salesman) told Joe Smith he could use the plates for a month at no cost and at the end of that time could either keep them for $300 or return them “no questions asked.” Moreover, IF Joe kept the plates, he could take this sales pitch on the road (out West) and kind of franchise out this little plate selling scheme. You know this kitchen supply salesman had to be Jewish, right? I mean (1) it fits the mold (Jesus was Jewish, so was John the Baptist and that other John...and Mary and Joseph) and (2) the best sales people are all Jewish. Anyway, unlike someone like myself, who if I’d made 10 or 12 gold plates with some fancy writing on them, I’d despair...like,“Ahh, what did I do now?! I always go overboard! Who’s gonna buy a bunch of solid gold plates? What in the hell was I thinking?” this salesman looked for a “hook.”

He came upon this “religious experience” idea. Some might call it a scam, but it’s still an idea. Anyway, the idea was to leave them in a regularly traveled wooded area, then when a traveler begins picking them up, come out from behind a tree or bush or whatever and spring this franchise deal on them. I’d never have come up with such a great idea myself. I’d be too busy kicking my own ass off in some dark corner.

Joe Smith liked the plates...a LOT, but he didn't have the three-hundred bucks! Hell, people earned something like $5/week back then. So, old Joe came up with another idea (scam...idea, what’s the diff?), only Joe’s idea was to skedaddle with the plates and just head West. Hmmmm, I guess that IS a "scam," or at least a crime (like theft). Only Joe was wracked with guilt, which, oddly enough, manifested itself in some kind of weird “religious conversion.” Yup, Joe Smith started Mormonism, or the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints. Wow! Now that’s a mouthful, right there.

So anyway, the upshot is that I couldn’t get into a religion started by a guy named Joe Smith, who apparently picked up a bunch of gold plates and subsequently may have seen either John the Baptist, or John the kitchen supplies salesman. I couldn’t do it, but I honestly have no issue with anyone who does. After all, one of the Mormon teachings is, “In Mormonism, life on earth is just a short part of an eternal existence. Mormons believe that in the beginning all people existed as spirits or "intelligences," in the presence of God. In this state, God proposed a plan of salvation whereby they could progress and "have a privilege to advance like himself." The spirits were free to accept or reject this plan, and a "third" of them, led by Satan rejected it. The rest accepted the plan, coming to earth and receiving bodies with an understanding that they would experience sin and suffering.

“In Mormonism, the central part of God's plan is the atonement of Jesus Christ. Mormons believe that one purpose of earthly life is to learn to choose good over evil. In this process, people inevitably make mistakes, becoming unworthy to return to the presence of God. Mormons believe that Jesus paid for the sins of the world, and that all people can be saved through his atonement. Mormons accept Christ's atonement through faith, repentance, formal covenants or ordinances such as baptism, and consistently trying to live a Christ-like life.”

Now that’s some pretty cool sounding stuff, even though I still can’t buy a religion started by Joe Smith...and a lot of the other views that Mormons supposedly believe.

Then I came upon a religion that was started even AFTER Mormonism, called Scientology. Unfortunately that one was started by a science fiction writer named L. Ron Hubbard. That breeds some skepticism right there. He was probably an arrogant kind of guy, who read through the Bible and wasn’t too impressed with the stories and so far, I’m good with that. I mean the Bible isn’t great literature to me, although apparently William Shakespeare would disagree. At least that’s what a lot of English teachers claim...that Shakespeare’s works are derivative of a bunch of Biblical stories. Then again, to some of them, EVERY story is derivative of some Biblical story, in some way. For my money, if we look at literature as some kind of verbal Rorschach test, then that view is an epic fail. I mean, IF you can actually fail a Rorschach test, that’s a fail.

So, anyway, I’m guessing that this guy Hubbard gets kind of steamed that the Bible has sold so many more copies than every book this guy has ever written COMBINED. I’d have pointed out to L. Ron that the Bible DID have a hell of a head start, but that apparently either didn’t occur to Hubbard, OR he just resented a collection of what he saw as inferior writers so thoroughly kicking his proverbial writing ass.

So, L. Ron Hubbard decided to, in effect, write his own Bible and start his own religion...generally a REAL bad idea (think Jim Jones, Kim Jong Il and a bunch of other crackpots). Anyway his major book Dianetics was initially made into a form of counselling or psychotherapy, which BOTH the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association promptly rejected, so L. Ron shrewdly declared war on psychiatry, claiming that, “the practice of psychiatry is destructive and abusive and must be abolished.” Funny story, Kim Jong Il did the very SAME thing.

Anyway, sometime during the 1950s Hubbard started his “Church” in Camden, New Jersey, the garden spot (in the garden state) for all budding new religions.

For awhile L. Ron Hubbard actually inspired me. After all, I write some pretty crappy science fiction too.....OK, I really don’t, but I DO aspire to writing crappy SciFi...at least someday, whenever these creative juices really kick into overdrive.

But after a short period, I gave up on that dream. I mean, who’s gonna follow me? I’ve never even been to Camden!

But I haven’t totally given up on belief systems, not at all. I think something inside all of us struggles to understand (even if only in the most rudimentary way) what all this means, why we’re here and all that.

So, lately I’ve come across the idea of “Ancient Alien Origins!” That’s right, according to this great TV show (called, appropriately enough, "Ancient Aliens") humans were genetically created out of chimps or some other ancient primate by these advanced ancient aliens. Yeah, at first blush, it sounds absolutely ludicrous, I know, but how much more absurd is it than Catholicism, or Calvinism, or Mormonism, for that matter?

In fact, it has a lot going for it, in that it really would explain a lot. How about, “God obviously doesn’t care about us. Why else would God let so much bad happen to so many good people?” Ancient Alien Origins has an answer for that – “God doesn’t know about us.” That’s right, God created these ancient aliens and THEY created this talking ape...US. If you really get into it, maybe God created earlier Ancient Aliens who created other "Ancient Aliens" and they created us! WoW! If that's the case, then somewhere along the line, God is probably gonna be royally pissed! I mean, whenever this God gets around to finding out about all this.

Think about it and it all begins to make perfect sense. These ancient aliens get all technologically advanced, they’re cavorting around the universe, zooming through black holes and as always happens affluence and technology combine to make them lazy and self-centered. So, what do they do? Yeah, exactly what you and I would do, they hunt around for a subspecies to genetically alter so it can do the mining, the farming, basic transportation, the boring bookkeeping, maybe even some light housekeeping, perhaps. Yeah that’s US! The GREAT homo sapiens!

We’re the only ones who think we’re hot shit! And that’s only because we don’t know any better. We’ve never met a more advanced species than ourselves, so we imagine ourselves to be “top of the heap.”

I know what you’re thinking, “If no one’s ever seen these ancient aliens, how do we know that they exist?”

Good one...BUT that just adds the critical component of “plausible deniability.” EVERY religion needs that.

Oh yeah and another good thing about ancient alien origins is that there’s no Church on Sunday, or Saturday...or ANY other day AND you don’t so much pray, as you curl up into a fetal position and HOPE (in abject terror) that you never run into one of these super advanced ancient aliens.


The more I think about it, it’s sort of a win-win...at least for me, right now.

Thursday, January 22, 2015

The REAL Problem With America’s Policing...


Adrian Schoolcraft (NYPD)






What’s so interesting about the recent wave of anti-police demonstrations is how they run so completely counter to the prevailing reality.

In the early 1990s a New York City Housing Police Lieutenant (Jack Maple) caught Housing Police boss, Bill Bratton’s attention with a program centered around the recording and tracking of various crimes committed, so as to be able to target police resources accordingly.

When the next Mayor, Rudy Giuliani took office, he moved Bratton from Housing Police Boss to NYPD Commissioner and Maple’s program, known as CompStat took hold in New York City and eventually spread to many large police departments around the country.

However, CompStat was NOT immune to problems, especially the primary problem of human nature.

The recordings of NYPD cops like Adrian Schoolcraft in Brooklyn and   in the Bronx show that CompStat, a program initially designed to track crime rates across a city in order to better allocate resources and target enforcement, morphed into a numbers game that required BOTH ever increasing numbers of summonses and minor crime arrests AND at the SAME time ever decreasing numbers of major crimes.

Those very SAME flaws that surfaced in New York City, also surfaced in other cities across the country as well. Ironically enough, the problem with policing under CompStat has NOT been “over-policing,” but actually UNDER-policing...at least under-policing, under-reporting of more serious, or major crimes.

In such cities, major crime victims are often victimized again by the police, seeking to downgrade their complaints to misdemeanors or less. That often turns law-abiding productive citizens against the police, while at the same time, the focus on an ever increasing number of summonsable offenses and minor crimes (public drunkenness, disorderly conduct, etc.) alienated the predominantly younger population targeted for these offenses, leaving the police, as they say, “fresh out of friends.”

Adding to CompStat’s woes is the fact that Stephen Levitt (of Freakonomics fame) and others have documented an equivalent reduction in crime rates even in cities that DIDN’T use CompStat.

A great book chronicling the Adrian Schoolcraft tapes (he recorded thousands of hours of roll calls and instructions by police superiors on downgrading major crimes and was actually whisked off to a Queens Mental Hospital, by NYPD Brass, over this) is a book called The NYPD Tapes by Graham A. Rayman (http://www.amazon.com/NYPD-Tapes-Shocking-Cover-ups-Courage/dp/0230342272/ref=sr_1_1_twi_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1421866392&sr=8-1&keywords=The+NYPD+Tapes).


The tragedy here is that the numbers that SHOULD’VE been used to target crimes and allocate resources, became a veritable “points system,” for promotion, which encouraged outright manipulation of the numbers.

Thursday, December 25, 2014

The Line Between Free Speech and Social Media Abuse is CRYSTAL Clear....



Crystal Eschert of the Charlotte, North Carolina Fire Department





In the recent spiral of racial polarization, fueled by both long-time racial arsonists and Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and SEIU, “Anarchists” & misnamed “Progressives,” there have been a number of cases of actual internet crimes (the making of actual threats, planning attacks, etc.), which have rightfully resulted in some serious penalties. Unfortunately, there have also been a few examples of Municipalities that have abused their own social media policies.

First, there is the case of Aaron McNamara (an auxiliary police officer with the Fairview Park Police Department), who, according to the Cleveland Scene, resigned after getting caught commenting on multiple YouTube videos, referring to African Americans as "jungle monkeys," and other racially charged language. On a YouTube video titled "Hood fight." He also posted, “Abolishing slavery was the worst thing we could have done. These people should be exterminated. Unbelievable." (http://www.cleveland.com/fairview-park/index.ssf/2014/12/fairview_park_police_volunteer.html)

Those are horrific views that certainly make it clear that this person shouldn't be doing police work. It's to the good that this occurred when he was an Auxiliary Officer and wasn't yet on the Police payroll.

Then there's the case of Aaron Hodges, the former Nordstroms employee, who was fired after making what appear to be actual threatening (therefor CRIMINAL) posts/utterances on his Facebook page. A screen captured post of his said, “Instead of slamming the police...every time an unarmed black man is killed, you kill a decorated white officer, on his door step in front of his family." (http://time.com/3636220/nordstrom-aaron-hodges/)

Mr. Hodges has since said, “(The comment) is out there to make them see the humanity of the other side.” He’s admitted that the post was outrageous, but he said it wasn't meant to be taken literally.

And THAT’S the problem with draconian social media policies. While there are the very rare dangerous EDP’s (emotionally disturbed persons), like Ismaaiyl Brinsley, who posted actual threats to police on Instagram before actually carrying out such horrific acts, far more common are people (perhaps like Aaron Hodges and Aaron McNamara), who respond to other provocative, even irresponsible posts in anger...akin to “road rage.” It’s so ubiquitous that now-a-days, it probably should be called “internet rage.”

I am and have always been uncomfortable about draconian “social media policies,” not only because they’re too often unevenly applied and open to far too much “interpretation,” BUT that they appear to be open to some highly contentious and also highly profitable (for plaintiffs) litigation.

In the case of Mr. McNamara, I think it’s best that he NOT work in policing, although in the case of Mr. Hodges, he had the good sense to take the post down relatively quickly. A “screen shot” was sent to his employer (Nordstrom’s), resulting in his firing. I am more uneasy with the draconian outcome, in his case. YES, The comment was reckless, irresponsible and inciteful, but he did NOT directly threaten anyone, therefor Mr. Hodges committed no actual crime, AND, unlike Mr. McNamara, very quickly took his post down, signaling that upon reflection, even he could not stand by those statements.

I personally believe that NEITHER Mr. Hodges, nor Mr. McNamara literally meant what they initially posted in obvious anger, BUT how can we tell? Who wants to be the person who seemingly had “no issue” with the next Ismaaiyl Brinsley?

The views that Mr. McNamara posted are actual “hate speech” and aren't merely “offensive,” but indicate a deep antipathy for specific ethnic groups. So, while offensive speech is primarily what the 1st Amendment protects, there are some views that should bar an individual from certain specific occupations. His would seem to make him a bad fit for policing, perhaps not as much for the EPA, or for Forestry work, just as an African-American who believes that the rural poor, in places like Appalachia, “just can’t learn,” is probably unfit for teaching, but perhaps not unfit for the small business administration, or the Social Security Administration.

The problem public employers face is that while a private employer may be able to terminate an individual over “controversial remarks that reflect poorly on the company,” a Municipality or government agency MUST be more far more cautious, as firing by such an entity comes very close to government abandoning its 1st Amendment commitments, UNLESS the speech (A) rises to the level of a crime (threatening, or libelous speech), or (B) makes clear that that employee is unfit for their current employment assignment.

In yet another case of a cop posting angry, San Jose Police Officer Phillip White was suspended after officials learned of statements he made Saturday, December 16th, from his Twitter account. In one of his tweets, White said: "Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you. #CopsLivesMatter."

OK, angry, but a legitimate response to a perceived threatening post...if that's indeed what that was. There ARE numerous posters who've actually advocated killing police officers. Nothing criminal, nor even “offensive,” about that post by Officer White. Besides, anyone who would threaten a cop deserves to be more than merely “offended,” they deserve to be arrested and prosecuted for such “terroristic threats.”

However, in another Tweet, Officer White said, he would be off-duty, at the movies with his gun if anyone "feels they can't breathe or their lives matter." Mmmmmm...now THAT'S somewhat more...not merely "insensitive," but vaguely, albeit amorphously (like Mr. Hodges' post), threatening. THAT post probably would be rightly troubling to those running the San Jose Police Department. However, that post too, SHOULD have to be looked at in the context of the overall online dialogue. IF another poster threatened or baited Officer White, that should probably, at least to some extent, ameliorate his own intemperate response.

Far more troubling is what the Charlotte, North Carolina Fire Department did recently in terminating fire investigator, Crystal Eschert, who is white, for two seemingly innocuous Facebook posts to her personal Facebook page; the first read: “White guy shot by police yesterday near Ferguson...Where is Obama? Where is Holder? Where is Al Sharpton? Where are Trayvon Martins parents? Where are all the white guys supporters? So WHY is everyone MAKING it a racial issue?!? So tired of hearing it’s a racial thing. If you are a thug and worthless to society, it’s not race – You’re just a waste no matter what religion, race or sex you are!”

OK, FIRST of all, the post is factually accurate, in that an unarmed white male was indeed shot by a black police officer in Mobile, Alabama. (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/27/white-teen-gilbert-collar-killed-by-black-cop-trev/?page=all). The white suspect apparently DID resist arrest and was also allegedly impaired by narcotics use.

In BOTH of the cases that she referenced (Trayvon Martin & Mike Brown) Grand Juries came to the independent conclusions that, (1) Mr. Martin attacked had physically Mr. Zimmerman before being shot and (2) that Michael Brown attacked officer Wilson inside his police cruiser, struggled for the officer’s gun (attempted murder) and was shot and killed attacking the car yet again. In short, her “concluding opinions” appear to be backed up by both those jury verdicts.

In another post Ms. Eschert wrote: “In my opinion, racism is so stupid, and I think that if you commit the crime, you’re a thug. I have a cousin who I say is a thug.”

OK, here again there’s nothing even remotely “offensive,” let alone "intemperate," as she DOES NOT even reference any specific case, but merely asserts that “racism is stupid,” (YES, it IS) and that it’s wrong to turn violent felons into Civil Rights heroes (that’s ALSO very true).

Ms. Eschert is suing the city of Charlotte, the Charlotte Fire Department and the Charlotte City Manager over “wrongful termination,” claiming that she was, in fact, fired over whistleblower activities she previously engaged in. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/charlotte-fire-investigator-fired-facebook-comment-article-1.2053556)

If that is indeed the case, Charlotte’s going to be in for a rough time in the courts. Our “Whistleblower protections” have been pretty iron-clad as of late...AND they should be. HOWEVER, I don’t believe that’s the ONLY liability that the city of Charlotte has in this case.

As to the whistleblower violations, Charlotte City Councilwoman Claire Fallon said, “They hunted her down.” Marty Puckett, vice president of the Charlotte Fire Fighters Association noted that, “It’s no worse than other stuff I have seen other firefighters say in public posts.” IF the city of Charlotte did go after Ms. Eschert because of some unwanted “Whistleblower activity” on her part, they may be best served by seeking to “settle up” with her ahead of a costly and disastrous trial. (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/11/25/5342208/fired-investigator-says-city-retaliated.html)

HOWEVER, even if such an accord is reached, I would strongly encourage Ms. Eschert to keep ALL of her other litigation options open. The firing, in this case, seems completely unjustified, unwarranted and unsupportable and makes the city’s “social media policy” appear entirely capricious and arbitrary, which itself SHOULD amount to criminality. Even the former local NAACP chairman and the city’s first black mayor has said that the termination was too harsh.

This COULD and probably well SHOULD wind up as a double jackpot for Crystal Eschert...and unfortunately a punch to the gut to Charlotte’s taxpayers.


In such an event, those taxpayers SHOULD be made aware that the (probably) coming fiscal calamity is entirely the fault of incompetents in local government, and not Ms. Eschert.

Monday, December 15, 2014

In Defense of The POLICE

The venting of anger at the NYPD — and at city officials — leads Timothy Cardinal Dolan, 'grandson of a policeman,' to call for calm and solidarity during the holidays.



The police aren't "oppressors"!

They exist because a significant number of us can't seem to "play well with others."

Moreover, ALL real freedom is built on a foundation of economic freedom - the free market. We abandoned that for our current Corporatism back in 1913. For all those people who correctly assert that, "Socialism CAN'T work because the Command Economy has never worked," YES, that's right, BUT Corporatism (the partnership between big business and big government) CAN and does work. It may not be as innovative, as dynamic, as unequal and prosperous as the free market system, but it CAN work. A BIG part of the Corporatist system we all live within are all the "entitlement programs," from WIC and other forms of public assistance, to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, etc. People DO NOT want to give that up! I don't blame them, BUT a people relying on government entitlements are NOT a "free people."

Dependent people are NOT free.

Freedom is NOT "doing whatever we like, so long as we don't harm others." That's License...and NO ONE I’ve ever known has fought for license. Freedom is the grinding burden of personal responsibility. Most people revile actual freedom because they must depend on themselves and others they align themselves with, NOT on government. It's easier, FAR easier to get free stuff we didn't earn from government.

Here's the rub, a people who are dependent (and 99% of us are dependent on one or more...mostly MORE government programs) have to be closely monitored and policed. Policing is the flip side of the coin of handouts. You TAKE government's gifts and you ACCEPT (like it, or not) the extra surveillance, the petty rules, etc. that come along with them.

THAT'S simply reality...the reality we all live in every day.

We are far from a free people because we've CHOSEN to be a dependent people.

Here's the thing, I've been very FORTUNATE to have been a firefighter for the past three decades. I've met some of the best people one could ever know. Interestingly enough, in NYC at least, about 20% of the FFs are former cops. Police work sucks! Even though they actually help a LOT more people and help most of those people a LOT more than we do, because violent crime is far more prevalent than fires are. It's the poor and elderly, the most defenseless people in those urban areas that NEED and DEMAND protection from lowlife mutt, thugs like Mike Brown and the guy in the recent Sacramento police video, Mr. Reyes. These mopes are predators. I don't have much sympathy for them at all. My sympathies are with the little kid, or the old lady that will fall victim to a skell like that.

I've read over the testimony and evidence in the Mike Brown case. I KNOW that Dorian Johnson's "hands up" testimony was impeached by his claiming that Brown was "shot in the back." One lie impeaches all the rest of that testimony...moreover, Johnson recanted much of his initial testimony before the Grand Jury. Mike Brown was a predatory thug.

Even Eric Garner, a much more sympathetic character, was actively resisting arrest. A black, female NYPD Sergeant supervised the incident. She had a taser (NYPD Sergeants carry tasers), they also had pepper spray available. BOTH those tactics were considered too risky for a morbidly obese, asthmatic by that Sergeant, so the quick take-down (which put the police at greater risk of injury) was utilized. Mr. Garner was NOT "choked out at the scene." He lived for over an hour before succumbing to a heart attack in the hospital.

ALL of these cases amount to the SAME kind of false meme as did the recent UVA rape hoax. The agenda behind the false rape story at UVA IS the agenda many radical feminists have of making a woman's rape accusation all the evidence one needs to convict a man of rape. That's a horrifying prospect considering that at least 20% of all rape allegations are false.

It's the same thing here. The agenda of those who are anti-police is to unleash the predators (the Mike Browns and others) on all those little kids and old ladies. My preference would be to defend those little kids and the old folks those marauders will target first.

Bottom line IF ANY of these protesters really WANT to change things, then start with yourselves. Put your money where your mouths are. Take the next police exam and become cops and change policing from WITHIN. YOU BE the CHANGE you WANT to see.

I can assure all of you, the view is very different from the other side.

Defending a False Meme...With FEEEELING!


I read Lawrence Otis Graham’s tear-jerking account of his prep school son’s first encounter with anti-black racism…and I came away as unconvinced as I was by some of Mr. Graham’s other accounts, like his 2009 memoir, A Member of the Club (http://www.amazon.com/Member-Club-Lawrence-Otis-Graham-ebook/dp/B000UOJTU8/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1416250306&sr=8-2&keywords=lawrence+otis+graham), or his earlier work chronicling his “undercover” work as a caddy in a wealthy Country Club, Our Kind of People (http://www.amazon.com/Kind-People-Lawrence-Otis-Graham-ebook/dp/B000GCFWVY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1416250306&sr=8-1&keywords=lawrence+otis+graham).


Lawrence Otis Graham


The prevailing social meme remains that white males maintain “privilege,” merely by being white that even wealthy, well-connected, Ivy educated African-Americans do not.

It’s not only a ridiculous and indefensible meme, but it’s pernicious in that its goal is to mask very real privilege (the kind Mr. Graham was born into) and to configure actual “victims,” like poor, rural whites from Appalachia and elsewhere (people who truly have neither any privilege nor connections) as “oppressors.”

There can be a no more dishonest, disingenuous and destructive social construct as that, but it benefits the likes of Mr. Graham to perpetuate it and so many of them do so with gusto!

You see, the kind of blatant bigotry he writes about his son encountering (being asked if he was “the only nigger” at his prep school) is so exceedingly rare, as to be virtually non-existent today, while sadly other forms of racial bigotry are much more common...and at least partly because of the meme that Mr. Graham among others defend...more accepted.

Those (more socially accepted bigotries) don’t have to be “fictionalized” (The name of the boarding school has been fictionalized. This essay is adapted from a story in the Oct. 8 edition of the Princeton Alumni Weekly) as Mr. Graham’s “story” was.

Just this past week, a New York Lawyer and Chair of the BAR Association’s Medical Malpractice Division, Andrew Barovick, was forced to apologize and then resign (AFTER the BAR Association initially defended him) for tweeting “inappropriate” and “racist” comments about Chemung County Sheriff Christopher Moss, a black Republican who ran for lieutenant governor this year. (http://nypost.com/2014/11/12/lawyer-resigns-from-bar-association-after-racist-tweet/)

One inane tweet read; “In light of election loss, [Sheriff Moss] mulling offers to be new spokes model for either Cream of Wheat or Uncle Ben’s rice.”

Upon his resignation he apologized, “As you know, I made a grave mistake by attempting to use humor to personally convey my frustration with the New York Republican Party through a tweet that upset a great number of people.”

WHAT?!

That’s not at all clear. What, exactly, is Mr. Barovick frustrated over? The NYS GOP running a black man for Lieutenant Governor, or that a black man would be a Conservative, or a Republican to begin with?

It becomes a LOT LESS clear when Mr. Barovick’s history of such bigoted comments comes to light;


Whoops! Say it ain’t so Andy;




Then there was Rep Charlie Rangel who derided Tea Party members as “white crackers,” and later steadfastly defending it as “a term of endearment.”

Enough said, apparently Rep. Rangel would rather people be convinced he’s an idiot, rather than a racist. Well, OK. (http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/10/charlie-rangel-i-called-tea-party-white-crackers-as-term-of-endearment-video/)

Then there was Vinita Hegwood, the Texas schoolteacher who was fired over inflammatory tweets relative to the Ferguson, Mo situation and her racially offensive, “Crackers...Kill yourselves.” (http://newsone.com/3071087/vinita-hegwood-resigns-over-mike-brown-related-tweet/)

Interestingly enough, I didn’t have to fictionalize anything, nor resort to anecdotal accounts, the way Lawrence Otis Graham did with his “story.” In fact, I didn’t even need to look further back than the past week’s news feeds to come up with these few examples of the much more socially accepted bigotries we ALL live with today.

I think that pretty much proves my point.


Rape Coach SHOULD be Prosecuted


While only controversial, offensive, even radical and revolutionary speech NEEDS the protections of the 1st Amendment, speech that incites, or guides people on how to conduct and get away with criminal behavior is NOT protected speech.

In 2011 Phillip Greaves was extradited to Florida for writing, publishing and selling a controversial book considered a “how-to” for pedophiles. Mr. Greaves pleaded no contest to the criminal charges brought against him for publishing that work.

Tragically Greaves only got extended probation (a travesty), but it clearly demonstrates that such cases CAN and SHOULD BE prosecuted despite the squeamishness of some prosecutors.

Hmmmm, where are the likes of Ronnie Earle, Rosemary Lehmberg and John Chisholm (various D.A.’s who found the stomach to prosecute mere disagreement with their own preferred ideology) when you need to “push the envelope” a little?

All this brings us to self-professed “dating coach,” Julien Blanc, a disgusting rube, who apparently makes a living as a “rape coach,” only euphemistically calling himself a “dating coach.”





Julien Blanc with his “Diss Fatties, Bang Hotties” Tee

CNN had him on this morning (a questionable strategy, as thugs like this crave attention), so Julien Blanc could make his public mea culpa, despite a plethora of online videos that show him demonstrating how to manhandle women.

Yes, instructing guys on “how to rape,” SHOULD BE as easily prosecutable as instructing pedophiles on “how to abduct children.”

Since Julien Blanc claims he’s never raped or assaulted a woman himself, then apparently, he’s a rape coach, who gets off on teaching others how to rape and otherwise abuse women.

As the Phillip Greaves case clearly shows, such instruction CAN be prosecuted criminally...and it SHOULD BE!

THIS amounts to instructing on rape and abuse;





American Ideas Click Here!