Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Antiwar Myths and Global Warming Truth

While some may look at the Wall Street Journal as the Foxnews of print media I would argue they're an example of Fox's tag line of fair and balanced. Their news and op/ed pieces cover the political spectrum and their editors have done a great job (by way of performance) of making sure journalistic integrity is paramount. By contrast the New York Times stands head shoulders over the Journal in patently false stories and retractions!

Tuesday's journal had two opinion pieces covering two of the most emotionally charged and party dividing political topics of the day. Global warming and Iraq.

Global warming is happening. That is, we are clearly in a warmer cycle of the infinitesimally small amount of time man has been keeping temperature records. When you examine earths history via fossil and geologic evidence it is clear warming and cooling is cyclic. Most extreme changes, the evidence suggests, are a result of volcanic activity or meteor strikes. The evidence that man is causing the current warming, or that it the current warming is part of a potentially catastrophic change is speculative at best.

Pete du Pont's WSJ piece, "Don't Be Very Worried, The truth about "global warming" is much less dire than Al Gore wants you to think", lays out the chicken little nature of "lock box"Al Gore and the decide before you know what the evidence tells you warming bandwagon scientists.

Then there's Iraq. You can be sure most liberals will go from zero to completely irrational in a nanosecond if you're face to face with one and say Bush was right to go into Iraq. Bushdisdainitis kicks in and he lied, lied, lied. Sure an op/ed titled "Revisionist History, Antiwar myths about Iraq, debunked" by the deputy assistant to the president can be labeled as biased and self serving. However, you must first dismiss, with facts and evidence and not emotions, Mr. Wehner's arguments that are backed up by time lines and facts.

Both of these pieces are just two examples (I have blogged on others many times) of a logical presentation of thought and evidence in direct opposition to liberal position on these topics. Living on the left coast, in lefticon valley, I know hundreds of liberals who do not (and cannot) articulate the liberal position on these topics with any logical and factual precision. It seems these two topics will make up the cornerstone of the Democrat strategy in the coming elections....good luck.

Monday, May 22, 2006

I thought it was ice cream!

Pretty funny isn't it! Louisiana's Rep. William Jefferson (hence forth called "coldcash") got caught on video taking a bribe. Federal agents found $90k in shrink wrapped $10k bundles in his fridge! So of course he's innocent, we don't know the whole story and that the search of his office is an "intrusion into the separation of powers".

Ok, this isn't funny, this is unbelievably F'd up! The press on this story is a but a murmur. Since this story broke most news outlets didn't lead with this story. The press puts on kid gloves when a liberal politician is in a pickle....if they also turn out to be a minority they don big furry mittens! It's also interesting that when you read the print stories on ColdCash the tone is innocent until proven guilty.

If this video, if this frozen cash, involved a white republican the media would be exploding with the party of corruption mantra along with making a tie to the Bush administration...and they would do it with the fervor of an impending meteor strike that could bring the next ice age.

Bias, bias, bias...nope, don't see any here!

Friday, May 19, 2006

I'm think I'm gonna be sick!

Been busy, no time to blog....but I just got this feeling in my stomach and I'm looking for a moonbat POS (send me a note if you don't know what that means) to aim at in the event that the contents of my stomach turn into a projectile.

Harry Reid called a proposal to make English the official language "racist"

Thursday, May 11, 2006

I'm sure we'll be safe

Update (5/12):
And apparently most Americans (so that includes a lot of Democrats) approve of how the NSA is doing it now...so ask yourself why the MSM and the usual liberal blowhards are acting like this is a huge government overreach and destruction of individual freedoms?

Who do you want protecting you from Islamic nutjobs, from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, etc....Harry Reid and Nancy Peloci or Dubya?

My sworn enemies: MSM and Liberals

I've had it...if you're a member of the MSM or a dumb monkey face liberal then you're my sworn enemy. You're on the side of the terrorist! You're happy to tell them every move we make to try and detect, track and stop them. You're blinded by your Bushdisdainia and are now an honorary Jihadist.

Gateway Pundit has a nice round up and reaction to the latest NSA program no longer secret and therefore no longer effective at helping with the war on terror.

Says the GPundit:

"It's funny that the Left wasn't very upset when two Democratic operatives were stealing Steele's credit report!

It's only when private information that could save American lives is looked at that Democrats scream "allah Akbar" or "bloody Christian" or whatever it is they scream."

So if you run into me on the street I suggest you do not disclose that you either work for the MSM or believe our president and NSA are spying on innocent civilians. That will identify you as an enemy of the state, an Al-Qaeda sympathizer, one who would rather see a Republican administration falsely demonize at the potential cost of more 9/11 like events. So upon realizing your allegiance I will use every means possible...my fists most likely...to snuff out your pathetic existence.

I've said this before....a new civil war is brewing and my side makes up nearly 100% of the NRA membership.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Liberalism's destruction of education

I can think of no example, so provide one if I'm wrong, of a good application of "political correctness". Everyone's walking around on pins and needles worried they will offend one of the "supposed" sensitive groups. Racism, sexism and hate is assumed by those who in fact know they're a corner case, an outlier or sometimes downright freaks.

The left has a fundamental belief that there is, or can be, a utopia. This belief is fundamentally flawed. People don't need to accept everyone else as equal (I'm talking values, morality and spirituality) and attempting to force it in fact further divides. Life isn't always fair and that should be taught. Things based on faith, and historic belief, and not undisputed fact shouldn't be taught as fact. Kids have the potential to be thoughtful, smart and discerning only if we give the tools to do so and also allow it.

Every adult should have a solid, and for the most part unchanging, personal ideology. This lifelong ideology shouldn't form until your probably around 30 years old. If you're not at least 30 you will not understand this. Most feel differently about the big issues once they've been responsible for their own life for a good 5 to 10 years. I might even be in favor of not letting anyone under 30 vote! As you experience real life (competition in the work place, no free ride, paying for a place to live, for food, for transportation, for insurance and taxes) your views on these aspects of life change. They have to. If they don't something is wrong! You've been so brain washed, or more to my point, ili-equipped to reason and learn from life what really makes sense.

Before you reach a few decades in age you can surely read about what a 1947 Cheval Blanc tastes like, or what it's like to sleep in a net hammock hanging on the face of Half Dome, or what its like to close on your first home, or the moment you hold your first child, or had someone close to you die, and the list goes on. But the understanding through words is a universe away from the actual experience. So why would anyone assume that prior to having enough life experience your ideology would be set?

If you're around, or over, 30 you have experienced some of the hundreds and thousands of experiences that form your view of life. You also then appreciate how many of those views are radically different from when you were younger. This is how it should be. Yes, it's possible your earliest and first views on abortion, the death penalty, personal responsibility versus entitlement, race, religion, when and were children learn about sex, when and why you go to war, climate change by man or nature, etc. stay your views for life...but that would either be an anomaly, or you had a very oppressive or manipulative childhood.

Childhood includes education and so a manipulative education is what California's public system is becoming. Let's call the k-12 experience what it is...it is brainwashing! That's what education can be at its worst. Facts, figures and tells the student what to think, what is definitively what is right or wrong. As opposed to teaching how determine the end result or right and wrong. The building of our children's intellectual base should be foundational and not deterministic. That someone will just hand you a fish is deterministic, that we teach you how to farm or catch fish is foundational. We don't know what kind of fish, or how many, or where you may grow or catch a fish...that you decide.

So here we are, faced with those who would force ideology on kids for the purpose of indoctrination. So afraid are those who believe in some anomalous, or fringe, view that they wish to not have its acceptance be your choice. If your view is right, righteous, humanly appropriate shouldn't it stand up to reasoned and intelligent scrutiny? Of course it should. What are you afraid of? We need to give our children a foundation to make a decision on their personal ideology on their own.

In California those in Sacramento, who "work for the people" only as a tag line, are considering rewriting history identifying the sexual preference of those who made that history. I blogged on this in April in my Gayifornia post as well. Of course sexual preference and orientation have nothing to do with any of the history any k-12 school should be teaching. So why should I know a historic figure was gay? Or left handed? Or like to cross dress? Or liked to get whipped?

We also find liberals attempting to stupify a high school diploma! Well maybe they already have since SAT scores of applicants to California's University system have dropped dramatically. And this is a mystery to them? And to make sure each holder of that illustrious California HS diploma has no shot at higher education, a decent job or the ability to form their own ideology lets lower the bar! Can you imagine a high school exit exam? God forbid we actually measure, at least in some form, the foundation we laid. And those who look at this as a punitive measure are idiots...it's the opposite...it's to ensure we did the job before we turn them loose. Nonetheless idiots claim this to be unfair and are challenging it in court.

Note how the LA Times piece on the court challenge mentions the total of 47,000 California 12th graders who fail but not that about 470,000 passed! At least the SJ Merc was more honest and added that "Although nearly 90 percent have passed the exam, only 83 percent of low-income seniors have passed, and only 71 percent of seniors who are still learning English have passed."

That result makes perfect sense...do those who cry fowl think a good test is one where everyone passes? Oh sure part of their complaint is those who don't have good English skills are at a disadvantage...DUH! Geez, stop letting them use that as a crutch! If you forced them into 100% English starting back in Kindergarten you wouldn't have a problem and you would have better prepared them for life...Isn't that what the F we are doing here?

Back to the gay agenda in our public schools.....I have an idea. Since apparently the gay community wants historic figures who were gay (and I'm sure that's easy to prove right) lets identify all those in the present who are gay! That way when we want to recognize a good deed that we witness, or a good presentation at work, or a great athletic achievement in sports, or an excellent thespian performance, we will know the accolades are being directed at a gay person. And since California schools already embraced some symbology for this previously, they surely wouldn't object to using these same symbols now to identify all the gays among us for this purpose! I can't wait to see all those Nazi inspired pink triangles so I can better know who is, and who isn't gay!

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Memories of a 7 yr old

When I was a really tiny, in the 1960's, we took in a few SF Giants games. My recollection was that Candlestick Park (the only name I use for that cold windy sorry excuse for a stadium) was packed full back in the days when you could load a Detroit iron station wagon with 8-10 kids sliding around in the back without those damn belts to restrict our fun.

I was oblivious to what I was watching. In those days I was more interested in going to the San Jose Bees (a farm team for the LA Angels then, now called the Giants and a farm team for the SF Giants) . At the Bee's games we would go into a service area just past the outfield fence, which was just plywood, and peer through holes to watch for home runs...all we were after was a ball. We didn't even pay attention to the score.

But I do remember the first time I walked out of one of the tunnels into the upper deck where our seats were at Candlestick and the blue sky, the sea of fans, the smells and sounds, and a pristine ball field expanded below me. It was like a real life IMAX experience. I don't even remember who the Giants were playing. My memory of the experience just didn't record it...or more likely I don't know how to access that memory location anymore. I also remember either going for a hotdog, or being in the bath room, and hearing on the PA system that Mays just hit a homer...I ran out to the nearest tunnel and out into the seats and got to see him rounding 2nd as he headed for home. Mays had an unmistakable way of running and I remember it from that very first big league game.

Willie Mays is still considered the best all around player, most importantly by the players of the day, and it was great to see him play several times. I also got to see other special Giants players; the great leg kick of Juan Marichal, the "stretch" Willie McCovey, Jesus Alou of the amazing Alou baseball family, and Barry's dad Bobby. We also did the occasional A's game over in Oakland were I watched Rollie Fingers, Catfish Hunter, Bert Campaneris and "Mr. October" Reggie Jackson.

From going to Giant's and A's games in the late '60's I got to see greats from the visiting teams, players like; Johnny Bench, Steve Carlton, Don Drysdale, Pete Rose, Tom Seaver, Rod Carew, Willie Horton, Harmon Killebrew, Mel Stottlemyre and Carl Yastrzemski.

Two additional players I got to see are relevant to the reason I wrote this post. Mickey Mantle by all estimates still holds the record for the longest home runs ever hit. Two are estimated at 565 ft. and 643 ft. And then there is the home run total champion Hank Aaron.

I guess that's how some experiences in life go. You don't know until years later how special they were. While Bond's is likely to tie Babe Ruth's home run total in tonight's game I don't think the 8 year olds at the park will be thinking about how special this is, or that there is a steroid asterisk next to a number in the record books. Things like mortgage payments, property, income and capital gains taxes, kids and the affect these things have on you over decade or more tend to make us cynical and jaded. I think we need to remind ourselves of what it's like to see events through the eyes of an 7 year old and how that memory lingers later at mid life. I'm not suggesting the steroid use is ok or that Bond's hasn't acted like an ass nearly his whole career (he has). I'm saying this will be a great memory for a bunch of kids at the ball park years down the road.

I've been to Giant's and A's games throughout the years but those experiences in the late '60's and early '70's are more impactful to me today. So if Barry's steroid use, and not his natural talent, is responsible for his move past Ruth and baring injury past Aaron I'll cut him some slack because it reminds me to be sure and create some of those memories for my kids. Besides, I suspect before I die, steroid use in sports won't be the issue...it will probably be someone claiming an athlete's parents did some bioengineering, some kind of generic alterations, on the egg or embryo that enhanced or created athletic ability.....I wonder if there will be a way to test for that?

Friday, May 05, 2006

I'm late for a vote!

While I'm not a fan of kicking someone when they at least appear to be down I'm going to make an exception (I make this exception easily when those down on their luck are libs).

Wouldn't be nice that while on your way to or from work you were exempt from arrest? Well The United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 6 looks to do exactly that:
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their
services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United
States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same;

I found this on Wizbangblog where he points to yet another blogger called Fausta who points out this get out of jail free card in the constitution.

In the case of a possible DUI having the cops arrest be delayed is tantamount to a free pass to drinking and driving. Do the police in and around D.C. and all the Senators and Representatives know and use A1, Section 6 in this way? Hmmmmm?

Ok, here is the kicking the downed man part....you must be kidding. Patrick Kennedy must think we are all idiots. Later in the morning after he had his little crash he recounted in precise detail what happened earlier in the morning. Check the above two blogs who have more than the gory details. Then today he says he doesn't even remember what happened and that he has an abuse problem with pain killers (which the two things he said he was on are not).

Honestly I had never even heard of Patrick Kennedy until this happened....and wouldn't you know he has a history of issues like this.

Come on people! Could you imagine if a prominent Republican family had a scandal like this where OBVIOUS special treatment was given? Oh, say swap Jeb Bush for PK. The MSM and liberal blog would be beside themselves. I visited a few well know liberal blogs who either had nothing on this story or are treating it with kid gloves.

The Kennedy family has for 40 yrs been through so many scandals they would define a statistical anomaly were it not that they are all blood relatives.

Thursday, May 04, 2006


That's the sound at the IRS who's seeing record revenues from the taxes dollars rolling in. I've included a full copy of a piece in today's Wall Street Journal at the bottom of this post. It's an example of how the trickle down effect works with certain tax incentives. While I think any tax structure keeps more dollars in the individuals (and not the governments) hands stimulates the economy, one in particular is proven by the SEC revenues illustrated in the WSJ piece.

The capital gains tax tends to keep those who hold stock doing just that, hold. Being in the startup world, and sitting in its Mecca, its more than just anecdotal that huge numbers of shares are not sold because they're in the short term capital gains tier. So you sit on them until you're into the long term capital gain tax rate...and even then you might just sit. Why does this matter so much. Because, when I sell those shares guess what I do? I buy a car, or a house, or I buy different stock, or invest in a CD, or a startup, etc....in all cases that stimulates the economy. When I turn a stock cert into cash no matter what I do with it the money goes into a system where it helps all economic levels...from CEO to the mailroom guy, from the car dealership owner to the car dealership car wash dude, and so on.

"capital gains receipts from 2002-04 have climbed by 79% after the reduction in the tax rate from 20% to 15%." That's huge!

The other interesting statistic here is that 3% of us pay almost the same in taxes as the other 97% in combined! The good news is the number of us in the 3% grew by 19%+ . And while many liberals (and many border on being socialists) claim the rich don't pay their fair share, enjoy tax benefits the poor don't, blah, blah....it is interesting that "The richest income group pays a larger share of the tax burden than at anytime in the last 30 years with the exception of the late 1990s -- right before the artificially inflated high tech bubble burst."

So I have an interesting question. Maybe those of use in the 3%, who pay the lions share of the tax in this country, should get more say on how that money is spent. 100% of the those who can vote can vote people into office who will decide to tax the hell out of me and have those in the lower 97% pay almost nothing. Seems only fair if I'm going to pay so much more than someone else my input on how we spend should count more.

Seems unfair otherwise doesn't it? Do I really use more of the public schools than someone else?Do I use more of the military than someone else? In fact, shit...I create jobs and help keep more people away from public assistance of all types....none of my tax dollars should go towards welfare or other hand out programs!

Ok, this is partially in jest....but lets face it...the guy who makes $100k who has some deductions but nothing fancy pays $20k in federal income tax. Then there's the guy who makes $1M and can take advantage of more complex deductions so say their rate is only 15% (which would be unusual, not many who make $1M would be that low) so he pays $150k. If you make $45k a year you probably think F both this guy who makes $100k and $1M....they're rich. But you see, the reason the guy who makes $45k even has a job is because of both of them.

All of us have the opportunity to be in the top 3% or in the $1M+ a year camp...nobody but you blocks you from that. We wouldn't have 97 jobs if we didn't have 3 in this $200k and up income level. If we had 100% parity in our economic system we would have communism...and of course everyone contributes equally so that would work just fine!

Supply SideHow to Soak the Rich (the George Bush Way)
By STEPHEN MOOREMay 4, 2006; Page A14

With the House and Senate preparing to vote on extending George W. Bush's investment tax cuts, it's no surprise the cries against "tax giveaways to the rich" grow increasingly shrill. Just yesterday Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid charged that the Bush tax plan "offers next to nothing to average Americans while giving away the store to multi-millionaires" and then fumed that it will "do much more for ExxonMobil board members than it will do for ExxonMobil customers."

Oh really. New IRS data released last month tell a very different story: In the aftermath of the Bush investment tax cuts, the federal income tax burden has substantially shifted onto the backs of the wealthy. Between 2002 and 2004, tax payments by those with adjusted gross incomes (AGI) of more than $200,000 a year, which is roughly 3% of taxpayers, increased by 19.4% -- more than double the 9.3% increase for all other taxpayers.

Between 2001 and 2004 (the most recent data), the percentage of federal income taxes paid by those with $200,000 incomes and above has risen to 46.6% from 40.5%. In other words, out of every 100 Americans, the wealthiest three are now paying close to the same amount in taxes as the other 97 combined. The richest income group pays a larger share of the tax burden than at anytime in the last 30 years with the exception of the late 1990s -- right before the artificially inflated high tech bubble burst.

Millionaires paid more, too. The tax share paid by Americans with an income above $1 million a year rose to 17.8% in 2003 from 16.9% in 2002, the year before the capital gains and dividend tax cuts.

The most astounding result from the IRS data is the deluge of revenues from the very taxes that were cut in 2003: capital gains and dividends. As shown in the nearby chart, capital gains receipts from 2002-04 have climbed by 79% after the reduction in the tax rate from 20% to 15%. Dividend tax receipts are up 35% from 2002 to 2004, even though the taxable rate fell from 39.6% to 15%. This is as clear evidence of a Laffer Curve effect as one will find: Lower rates produced increased revenues.

What explains this surge in tax revenues, especially at the high end of the income scale? The main factor at play here is the robust economic expansion, which has led to real income gains for most tax filers. Higher incomes mean higher tax payments. Between 2001 and 2004, the percentage of Americans with an income of more than $200,000 rose from 12.0% to 14.2%. The percentage of Americans earning more than $50,000 a year rose from 40.8% to 44.2% -- and that's just in two years. While these statistics are not inflation-adjusted by the IRS, price rises were relatively modest during these years, so adjusting wouldn't alter much.

We can already hear the left objecting that the rich are paying more taxes simply because they have hoarded all the income gains, while the middle class and poor wallow in economic quicksand. But, again, the IRS data tell a more upbeat story of widespread financial gains for American families. The slice of the total income pie captured by the richest 1%, 5% and 10% of Americans is lower today than in the last years of the Clinton administration.

So how can the media contort these statistics to conclude that the Bush tax cuts only benefited the affluent? The New York Times claims that the richest 0.1% got 5,000 times the tax benefit than those with less than $50,000 of income. That figure can only be true if one assumes that there were no economic benefits from the tax cuts whatsoever; and that lower taxes on income, capital gains and dividends resulted in no changes in the real economy -- not the value of stocks, not business spending, not employment, not capital flows into the U.S., not corporate dividend payments, not venture capital funding -- nothing. The underlying assumption of this static analysis is that tax cuts don't work and that incentives don't matter.

Of course, in the real world, financial incentives through tax policy changes matter a great deal in altering economic behavior. And we now have the evidence to confirm that the latest round of tax cuts worked -- five million new jobs, a 25% increase in business spending, 4% real economic growth for three years and a $4 trillion gain in net wealth. So now the very class-warfare groups who, three years ago, swore that the tax cuts would tank the economy rather than revive it, pretend that this robust expansion would have happened without the investment tax cuts. Many Democrats on Capitol Hill recite this fairy tale over and over.

One final footnote to this story: Just last week, the Department of the Treasury released its tax receipt data for March 2006. Tax collections for the past 12 months have exploded by 14.4%. We are now on course for a two-year increase in tax revenues of at least $500 billion, the largest two-year increase in tax revenue collections after adjusting for inflation ever recorded. So why are the leftists complaining so much? George Bush's tax rate cuts have been among the most successful policies to soak the rich in American history.

Mr. Moore is a member of The Wall Street Journal's editorial board.

Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Hardest job but it DOES NOT cost $134,121

Mom's are the best. Sorry Dads, if your kid skins their knee, or is throwing up, or has an issue with another kid...they want comfort from mom first and foremost. They are just better at the touchy feely nuturing that kids want and need. Dad is WAY better at wrestling on the floor, playing catch, helping with math, building new toys, fixing old ones, and so on.

Dad's, well most of them, can barely even handle watching the kids (especially when kids=2 or more) for a few hours. If you're one of those dads who can good for you...I can't. My family and friends know that I can't and my famous line on this is that I would rather go fight in Iraq than have to be the sole custodian of my two kids for an extended period. I think it stems from me having basically what I'll calling engineer DNA in me. I want things to be in order, for most actions and reactions kids (and adults) have to be logical. To be able to reason with those around me....ok, I know you're laughing at this point, but there's more.

I can pick up the kids from school, take them to the doctor, I can clean, I can do laundry and if we are going to eat something tasty or complex or just downright amazing I'm the one who cooked it (sorry honey, but you know that's true). BUT, except for cooking, I would rather someone else do those things. Yes, along with being engineering anal I'm also selfish. Well, I accept my flaws and know I'm not going to change. Thank God my lovely wife accepts this as well.

When I saw the various articles about a study released today on what it would cost to pay someone to do all the things a fulltime stay at home mom does I saw two problems with it. First is the jobs the study used as a basis for the $134,121 they come up with. I'm sorry but very few moms I know even come close to having the skills to be called facilities manager, computer operator, and a few of the others that I'll just ignore so as to get in less trouble with this post! It's almost never the case that mom alone is acting in those roles. Dad is often fully responsible, even in my case, for some of those duties.

The real hard work of being parents of kids in the range of time zero to 12 years of age (I think by 12 you start putting them to work!) is picking up the house, all the hardcore cleaning, the grocery shopping and cooking and the laundry. Well, we had a great person who would do all of that (although we didn't have her do all of it) for about $2k a month. We wouldn't, and most shouldn't, want anyone other than mom or dad to do the other duties the study used as its basis for value....else you might as well sell your kids since you're not participating in their lives!

So the first thing wrong was the duties they include as part of mom's value and we deleted some of those. The second thing wrong was the shopping factor. You see, if mom has hired help and works guess what two requirements she has met for her to be the consummate shopper? Time and money. The hired help gives her the time, and the job gives her what feels like her own discretionary money (regardless of how you do finances, it feels different to them).

My analysis says a working mom with hired help costs more than the sum of the cost of the hired help and mom's salary. I realize this might only be a valid analysis for me since my wife has affairs with someone named Louis Vuitton, Mark Jacobs and Miuccia Prada (the later suggests she goes both ways!). And in real dollars a full time stay at home mom replacement (for the jobs my wife and I would have someone do) is around $24k a year...and by the way that is not for an illegal alien thank you very much!

In the end my wife, my kids mom, performs the priceless task of holding all of together. She allows me to be who I am and provide the best for my family...she provide most importantly for me, selfish me, who needs lots of attention. So whatever the cost, the value, you attach to mom it's not enough. In virtual dollars she's worth more than retired Exxon Mobile chief Lee Raymond.

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

The New Black Panthers?

Here is the face of the real enemy of the black men and women of this country! I had never heard of the "New Black Panthers Party For Self Defense" until various media thought it was news that the group showed up on the Duke campus to make demands in the lacrosse team rape case. The NBPP (that's what we'll call them) apparently made 8 demands of Duke and the police...not sure why they (like the illegal immigrants) are in a position to demand anything. The leader of the NBPP is one Dr. Malik Zulu Shabazz, or ATTY. MALIK ZULU SHABAZZ, or Malik Zulu Shabazz, or Attorney Shabazz, but I guess you can't just call him Malik or Mr. Shabazz! Just call him Paris Lewis since that's his birth name. Apparently he's ok disrespecting his parents choice for a name, or maybe he didn't like sharing his first name with Paris Hilton!

Two of the demands bitter Paris made throw out the notion of innocents until proven guilty, rush to judgment and seek to claim blacks are above our system. He called for the accused players to be expelled from Duke and that they be tried and convicted. He demanded they be convicted! I physically laughed when I read this. Nothing like saying crazy foolish idiotic things to give your group credibility and remove all hope of being taken seriously!

But the Duke demands, while ridiculous, are quite small compared to the demands the NBPP have in their 10 point platform. Here are the highlights in their words exactly, caps where they put them:
  1. We want freedom. We want the power to practice self-determination, and to determine the destiny of our community and THE BLACK NATION.
  2. We want full employment for our people and we demand the dignity to do for ourselves what we have begged the white man to do for us.
  3. We want tax exemption and an end to robbery of THE BLACK NATION by the CAPITALIST.
  4. We want decent housing, fit for shelter of human beings, free health-care (preventive and maintenance).
  5. We want education for our people that exposes the true nature of this devilish and decadent American society.
  6. We want all Black Men and Black Women to be exempt from military service.
  7. We want an immediate end to POLICE HARRASSMENT, BRUTALITY and MURDER of Black People. We want an end to Black-on-Black violence, snitching, cooperation and collaboration with the oppressor.
  8. We want freedom for all Black Men and Black Women held in international, military, federal, state, county, city jails and prisons.
  9. We want all Black People when brought to trial to be tried in a court by a jury of their peer group or people from their Black Communities, as defined by white law of the Constitution of the United States.

I especially love #8....ya, every one of them is innocent! The text I left out, and found elsewhere on their site, is disturbing. I can only assume that anyone with some education, some ability to read and decide on their own, would only follow this group if they have other issues that cloud all reason and common sense.

I find it interesting how many of these self appointed black leaders and rabble-rousers have the title of "Dr." Have they really received a doctorate from an accredited university? I suspect not. This is likely an example of the loose standards these groups and individuals apply as evidenced by the frequent and fictitiousus use of the label reverend or minister. In the case of the Paris Dr. Malik Zulu Shabazz Attorney at Law Lewis the bio on the NBPP site doesn't provide any background on the "Dr." title. I think I'll start adding spurious self serving addition to my name...like Tiny Esq.

I think having read the NBPP website and seeing that Paris surrounds himself with members dressed in military style garb, and are apparently armed when they can be, labeling them militant is appropriate. It is truly sad when a person, or group, is given a national stage to promote divisive ideas and prey on the naive, uneducated and poor to build a following. Paris, and many pseudo black leader not as militant, would have you believe that white America, and Jews, and especially those in power, are knowingly and systematically preying on blacks day in and day out. To hear Paris Lewis (as in this ), to read the NBPP material, suggests that the situation for todays black is worse than the country MLK knew. A vast conspiracy oracismim and hatred of the blacks by the entire white establishment...give me a break. You may have never met real hate...well I'm sorry to say I just introduced it to you.

Monday, May 01, 2006

Silicon Valley Impresione Cero

This morning I put out my American flag and drove to work. I saw the gardeners I see every Monday mowing and blowing. I saw a crew building a house down the street working away. I drove by the local hardware store where ever morning there are 20 or so waiting for a local trade person to pull up and pick up a few workers...that crowd was smaller. I didn't notice any reduced traffic on the way to work. The dozen coffee houses (Starbucks, Pete's and independents) I pass buy were all busy and looked normal.

Got to work and everyone I expected to be there was there. Had various calls and meetings...and one customer conference call with the with the 2nd largest airline in the world..all that were suppose to be on the call were. I went to lunch at a golf course/driving range....it was busy and the burger was excellent.

The stock market had a small sell off, the DOW and Nasdaq closed down slightly but are still at record highs. The MSM seems to be at work....putting out stories that today's anti-citizen pro-illegal events demonstrate the economic power of immigrants. I'm confused though as the AP story flips back and fourth on whether it was largely illegal or legal immigrants who took off work today, or who has an impact?

This entire stunt proves nothing and will be a PR disaster for the illegals cause. People like me see this as a slap in the face of what America stands for. The unpatriotic display of Mexican flags and Spanish signs and sayings. The demand of rights for illegals! And then there is the extremist elements who told participants to bring weapons or who propose the goal is to take back California.

The bottom line is that today only impacted LA and a few other spots around the country. LA we could do without anyway. In fact the businesses this impacted should be the targets of the INS and the employers investigated. They clearly don't do a good job filling out I-9's and validating employee data.

So, Silicon Valley Impact Zero...well except that now I see that many illegals, and many legal Hispanics, really don't want to be truly Americans. They don't want to be loyal law abiding citizens that take from our opportunity but also pay to take. They want a free ride without the responsibilities. They want our police, our fireman, our military, our nurses and doctors, our teachers....to protect, take care of and teach them but they don't want to fully participate in supporting them.

So, go ahead...stop working indefinitely...go home, prove you are so vital and that our way of life can't survive without you...be my guest. Yes some industries will be impacted, but only for a very short time. It will actually create new economic growth in other areas. We can easily automate, with technology, nearly every job that is abusing illegal labor today. We can do the garmet work, the chicken preparation, the strawberry picking and even the fast food drive up window with machinery, robotics and software. For the businesses that rely too much on this labor pool there has been no incentive to modernize previously. So please, please, please...stop working permanently and go home. Prove me wrong.

Update: Hey Splash Two..you must be proud of those gays in Chicago who support immigrant rights! PULEASE!.
Does the guy in the hippy shirt look like a young Dr. Emmet Brown?(Christopher Lloyd)


I got an email from Glock26, who got it from his sister, that is a great position on today's protest, or ralley, or whatever it is. The email author is unknown and I found a blog for a Palm Spring's newspaper where a person commented they got this very same email. Regardless of the source of these thoughts on a "Day without an Immigrant" they work for me...although we should try a week or a month without (and lets label it correctly) illegal immigrants. The email follows:


May 1st is the planned "Day Without an Immigrant" boycott by illegal immigrants here in the United States. They plan on boycotting work, thus showing how many jobs for which they provide cheap labor. They plan on boycotting our stores, thus showing how much money they provide for the economy. I am fine with this tactic.

I have one additional suggestion: Please boycott our hospitals, schools, jails, and highways. Let us see what our health care system would be like without an overcrowded emergency room full of illegal immigrants using it as a free clinic to treat non-emergent ailments. Let us see what it would be like to have people who the hospital actually expects to pay for treatment. I wonder if the costs for health insurance would drop.

Let us see what it would be like to reduce the size of our classrooms. Let us see what it would be like to have to spend taxpayer dollars to teach in English only. Let us see if our schools test score averages increase. Let us see what it would be like to not be victimized by an illegal immigrant and then have to pay for the incarceration of that illegal immigrant. The Los Angeles County Jail system would be alleviated of thousands of inmates. Those incarcerated might actually do 100% of their sentences rather than the 10% that they have been doing.

Let us see what our highways would be like. Let us see if traffic is reduced without their presence. Let us see if the number of unlicensed, uninsured, unqualified motorists drops and the number of traffic collisions also drops proportionally. Maybe our car insurance rates would see a decrease as a result.

Maybe the May 1st "Day Without an Immigrant" boycott should be encouraged so the rest of the citizens can fully appreciate what benefits and burdens illegal immigration creates.