Monday, August 22, 2011

Maxine had more to say... don't cut her off!

All day long today, I heard about and read about Kleptocrat California Congresscritter Maxine Waters, who represents south central Los Angeles, saying during a speech to her constitutents and SEIU thugs that the Tea Party, "can go straight to hell."

I thought that was bad enough, but then on the way home from work, as I was listening to talk radio, Mark Levin was gracious enough to play the entire quote. Telling the Tea Party to go straight to hell is bad enough, but what she said a few seconds later was even worse. Ms. Waters waited for the applause to dissipate a bit, then then added that she intended to help the Tea Party get to hell.

Watch and listen to this vicious, hateful creature:

Again, for the record, the exact money quote to her minions from the lovely Maxine Waters was:
...You can't be intimidated, you can't be frightened; as far as I'm concerned, the Tea Party can go straight to hell! And, and I intend to help 'em get there!
And how was Maxine figuring she would send me and my fellow Tea Party members to hell? Did a sitting member of the United States Congress just say that she wants us dead and is going to try to make that happen? First, we are terrorists, and now we belong in hell. This just gets scarier and scarier. Seriously. Remind me again, what was it our Dear Leader, Barack Obama, said during his speech in Arizona in the wake of the the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords and several others? Oh yeah:
But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -- at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -- it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds....
Somehow, I don't think Maxine will be upbraided by the Messiah for that comment. On the other hand, I can see him giving her a nasty call about what she said in Detroit to a black audience a few days before telling the Tea Party where they can go:

Hear that? The Congressional Black Caucus is, "tired, y'all." They are tired of defending this president who, according to Maxine Waters, did not visit a sufficient number of black communities on his recent BlunderBus tour through Iowa, and she was practically begging the black audience to turn her and the CBC loose on the President in response to his inability to drag the black community out of their jobless morass in which they currently find themselves.

I wouldn't be surprised if Maxine made her Tea Party remark in order to take the focus off what she said about Obama in Detroit. When she made those remarks, she was messing with his most loyal voting bloc. On the other hand, the Tea Party remark will cost Maxine Waters and Barack Obama not a single thing.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Saturday, August 20, 2011

Back in the trenches

After a short staff meeting and spending the rest of the day setting up my classroom back on Monday, I just finished up my first week back teaching 8th grade U.S. History. I feel like a combat veteran with survivor's guilt. Last year, two of my fellow social studies teachers - who had been hired by our district just one year after me - were let go in the great budget crunch. One of the teachers taught all 8th grade, the other taught all 7th grade. They have been replaced by one teacher who is teaching half 8th and half 7th. With one fewer teacher teaching our subject, I have seen a significant increase in the number of students in my individual classes. My first clue that this was going to happen was when I first walked into my classroom and saw that the 32 desks that were in my classroom when I walked out two months ago had increased to 37. Uh oh.

Last year, I had a class that started out at 22, fell to 17 at one point, then rebounded to 23 by the end of the year. This year, my smallest class is 33 students. I teach 5 periods, so the total number of students I have right now is 178. Some of my fellow teachers have classes in excess of 42 students.

This is when some of members of the chattering classes - many of whom are, unfortunately, conservative - smugly tell us that in Japan, or Korea, or Singapore, teachers have no problems with classes of 40 or even 50 students, so what is my friggin' problem? Of course, these teachers across the vast Pacific don't have problems with their large classes! Their students are actually expected to behave, and the teachers and administrators of schools over there actually have the ability to make the students behave, or else. Due to a state education code that ties both our hands behind our backs and then lashes them to our ankles, we teachers and administrators here in California do not have the same classroom and campus management tools at our disposal.

Judging by the campus-wide behavior of our students so far this year - five students have already been suspended for fighting, including three of my students - I have a feeling I will have plenty of opportunities this year to lay out a sobering picture for you of just how dysfunctional our state's education system continues to be.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Jackson-Lee and Pelosi attempt to out-stupid each other

Last month, in the middle of the debt ceiling debate, Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) sidled up to the podium on the House floor and threw down the race card:
"I do not understand what I think is the maligning and maliciousness [toward] this president,” said Jackson Lee, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. “Why is he different? And in my community, that is the question that we raise. In the minority community that is question that is being raised. Why is this president being treated so disrespectfully? Why has the debt limit been raised 60 times? Why did the leader of the Senate continually talk about his job is to bring the president down to make sure he is unelected?”

Earlier in her speech, Jackson Lee said Obama has been targeted unlike any other president.
"I am particularly sensitive to the fact that only this president — only this one, only this one — has received the kind of attacks and disagreement and inability to work, only this one," said Jackson Lee from the House floor.

"Read between the lines," she continued. "What is different about this president that should put him in a position that he should not receive the same kind of respectful treatment of when it is necessary to raise the debt limit in order to pay our bills, something required by both statute and the 14th amendment?"
Michelle Malkin's guest blogger, Doug Powers, best summed up the obvious response to Jackson-Lee's bloviating with sarcastic flair:
And all this time I thought opposition to raising the debt ceiling might have something to do with the fact that Obama’s record so far on deficit spending is making even Bush look like a piker. I stand corrected.
But Jackson Lee’s frustration stems from the obvious: Democrats treated George W. Bush with great respect, always gave him the benefit of the doubt, didn’t block his appointments and always supported his requests to raise the debt ceiling, so she only wants Republicans to return the favor now that Obama is president.
Five years ago, Senator Obama said “America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. America deserves better.” Now, when people agree with Obama’s statement, Sheila Jackson Lee insinuates that they’re racists? Color me confused.
You would think that one would hear no more about this; that no one in his or her right mind would double down on this "Criticizing Obama is always racist" theme. Ahhh, but folks, statist stupidity knows no bounds. As the presidency of our Dear Leader, President Obummer, continues to circle the drain, Barack's sycophants become more and more desperate.

Now we have San Francisco's finest, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, making a speech to a group of Sheila Jackson-Lee's constituents where she agrees with Jackson-Lee's assessment of Obama's critics. Talk about being stuck on stupid:

What really disturbs me is the enthusiastic applause from the crowd. We really are becoming two nations, and I don't mean on racial lines; I mean political ones.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Friday, August 12, 2011

California's statist legislature is close to checkmating state gun owners

California has what are most likely the most stringent gun laws of any state in the nation. If you wish to defend yourself and your family by carrying a concealed handgun in California, you must endure a byzantine application process where your request is at the mercy of the Sheriff of your county of residence. You must show cause for your desire to carry a concealed handgun, and as far as I know, defense of yourself and your family is not considered a good cause. From what I understand, being a crony or good friend of the Sheriff and lining his pockets with a substantial financial contribution to his or her election campaign is a cause that is much more likely to get one's concealed-carry permit approved.

As the state law is currently written, if someone is not approved for a concealed-carry permit (and most applicants are not) one can still open-carry in California. What this means is that according to California Penal Code section 12031, you can carry a handgun on your person as long as it is visible and unloaded. Most open carriers have their unloaded pistol in a holster on one hip, and their loaded magazines in a magazine holster on the other hip, as the law states that your ammunition must be visible as well. Oh, and you cannot open-carry within 1,000 feet of a school. Oh, and a police officer can stop you and check to ensure your weapon is unloaded. So even though there are all kinds of nit-picky rules for open-carry as well, at least you do not need any kind of permit to do this. For now.

State Assembly member Anthony Portantino (Democrat, naturally) is currently guiding Assembly Bill (AB) 144 through the state legislature. Last I checked, it had cleared the Assembly, and is now being considered in the State Senate, which is dominated by Democrats. If it passes through the Senate (which it will in all likelihood), it will then go before our Democrat Governor, who is not a fan of the Second Amendment. Once AB 144 passes, then that is it. Checkmate. You cannot carry concealed; you cannot carry openly. You are totally disarmed.

For a good summation of all this, I urge you to view this 8-minute video put out by the Reason Foundation. They interview an Open-Carry advocate from San Diego who eloquently explains his position, and then they interview none other than Portantino himself, where he proceeds to display his absolute imbecility with the arguments he makes in support of his AB 144:

What is particularly frustrating is that there have been federal lawsuits in the past where citizens of California have tried to vacate or ease back California's concealed-carry laws, but federal judges have refused to do so, because after all, if you can't get obtain a concealed-carry permit, you can always open-carry. In a recent case out of Yolo County - Richards v. County of Yolo - in which plaintiff Adam Richards attempted to obtain a concealed-carry permit after being denied one by the Yolo County Sheriff, the judge found against Richards because after all...
Under the statutory scheme, even if Plaintiffs are denied a concealed weapon license for self-defense purposes from Yolo County, they are still more than free to keep an unloaded weapon nearby their person, load it, and use it for self-defense in circumstances that may occur in a public setting.
Hmmm, so if Portantino's unconstitutional travesty of a bill becomes law, then what? What do the law-abiding citizens of California do? Must we walk down the sidewalk carrying a rifle or shotgun? Or will Portantino then call for that to be outlawed as well? If AB 144 becomes law, I think people should break out their long guns and take a friendly stroll down the street (staying at least a thousand feet away from schools of course) and it goes without saying that the law would also need to be challenged in court. California's concealed-carry restrictions are bad enough, but to also outlaw open-carry and leave California's law-abiding citizens even more defenseless than they already are sickens me.

In case you are interested in letting Portantino hear your respectful thoughts on what you think of his attempts to kill all efforts of law-abiding Californians to defend themselves, here is his telephone number and a link to his Assembly website. Right now, he has a big feature on his homepage where he is bragging about his beloved AB 144:

(916) 319-2044

Should you also like to contact your State Senator and urge their "No" vote, since AB 144 currently resides on the Senate calendar, you can find the contact information to your State Senator here.

Oh, and one last thought on which to chew: In Vermont, you don't even need a permit to carry concealed, let alone open. Have you heard about any crime problems in Vermont lately?

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Idiotic Dems say: Unemployment benefits create jobs

Who knew? We now have two high-ranking Democrats in Washington going on record saying that the fastest and bestest way to economic prosperity is to keep handing out unemployment benefits.

Nancy Pelosi from last summer:
"[Unemployment benefits] injects demand into the economy," Pelosi said, arguing that when families have money to spend it keeps the economy churning. "It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name."
And now we have Obama's spokesmouth, Jay Carney, saying essentially the same thing just the other day:
There are few other ways that can directly put money into the economy than applying unemployment insurance... It is one of the most direct ways to infuse money directly into the economy because people who are unemployed and obviously aren't running a paycheck are going to spend the money that they get. They're not going to save it, they're going to spend it. And with unemployment insurance, that way, the money goes directly back into the economy, dollar for dollar virtually.
Seriously, how can people who are this ignorant make it that high into the upper echelons of power in this country? I mean, try to wrap your mind around their so-called logic: Perpetually paying people not to work creates jobs? This line of thinking begs the obvious question: If paying people unemployment benefits creates jobs, then why doesn't the government give EVERYONE unemployment benefits? I always think of the same thing regarding the minimum wage. If raising it from $5/hour to $7/hour with the stroke of a pen helps people so much, then why not force employers to pay employees at least $10/hour? Or even better $100/hour? That'll fix everything right? Quit pussyfooting around!

Please understand, I realize the immediate relief that people feel when they can fall back on unemployment payments while they ride a rough patch between the job they lost and their next job. However, if someone is unable to find another job after 99 weeks of supposedly (or actually) looking, then we have bigger problems facing the nation. Unemployment benefits do not create more jobs; employers who have the available capital and the confidence of consistent economic conditions unencumbered by excessive government taxation and regulation are the ones who create jobs. Keeping tax rates high in order to extend unemployment benefits does nothing but take more money away from the business owners and employers out there who could take that money and use it to hire more people.

Our government continuing to confiscate money and hand it to other people harkens to the old economic metaphor of scooping a bucket full of water from the deep end of a swimming pool and dumping it in the shallow end, with the expectation that it will improve the water level of the shallow end. What needs to happen is for government to put the bucket away and let the pool owners put in more water.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Time to fit me for an orange jumpsuit?

I consider myself a Tea Party member. I even have the t-shirt. According to the ubiquitous meme that I have been hearing all over the airwaves, however, I guess I should prepare myself to trade in that t-shirt for an orange Guantanamo jumpsuit.

It is one thing to be called a terrorist by the morons in the statist media, such as Margaret Carlson of Bloomberg News, Chris Matthews of MSNBC, Joan Walsh of Salon, and Thomas Friedman of the New York Times; it is quite another to be called a terrorist by our elected officials, who have the power of life and death over me.

When the Vice President of the United States is agreeing with the statist nutballs in the congress that Tea Party members are acting like terrorists, I have to seriously wonder what are the intentions of Biden and company? Are they laying the groundwork for something?

Pass it off as paranoia if you wish, but in this day and age, I am wary of putting anything past our imperial federal government.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson