The Sociopathic Generation

There are times where I am absolutely appalled by the inappropriate reactions I receive from my students when I try to discuss some subjects in my 8th grade U.S. History class.

I am currently teaching them about the War Between the States of 1861-1865, and one of the key terms we discussed was the concept of Total War; as practiced, for example, by General Sherman in Georgia.

Just about every lesson of mine is accompanied by a Power Point slideshow that is heavy on images and photos. After showing them photos of General Sherman, the skeletal remains of buildings in Richmond, and a Sherman necktie, I went to some other slides showing examples of Total War that was carried out in World War II, which was the quintessential Total War. I showed photos of B-17s dropping bombs, the burned-out remains of the city of Dresden, and then this photo:

My students were dead silent as I explained to them that these were Soviet civilians who had been murdered by Nazi soldiers during Hitler's 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union. But then, when I added that the Japanese also carried out massacres like this against the Chinese, a good portion of my class (the last period of the day) began laughing hysterically.

I told the class that I didn't see what was funny about any of this, and that made them laugh some more. The more horrified I became at their laughing, the funnier they thought it was.

I finally sat down in the chair at my desk... defeated.

I clicked to the next slide, which had some bullet statements they needed to copy down. While they did that, the laughter started to subside as the students began to concentrate on copying down the information. As I sat there still in shock, my curiosity got the best of me, and I posed a question to the class.

"I don't understand why you guys started laughing when I told you that the Japanese did that to the Chinese. Someone please enlighten me."

A student blurted out, "We thought they was cousins!"

My God, what have we wrought?

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

Tax Freedom Day!

Congratulations! As of today, you are no longer working solely to pay your taxes for this year, you are now finally working for yourself and your family.

Yes, that's right: Ever since January 1, 2012, every last penny, nickel, and dime you have worked long hours to obtain has not gone to you but to your federal, state, and local governments to pay the myriad of taxes that have been levied upon us.

Think of all the hours of work you have put in from then until now. What I really love from the article I linked is that in 1913, when the travesty known as our federal income tax was established, Tax Freedom Day arrived on January 19th.

Kinda puts everything into focus, doesn't it?

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

I smell a kangaroo court trial coming

The Florida special prosecutor, Angela Corey, who was tasked with deciding whether or not George Zimmerman should be charged with a crime has gone All In with a 2nd-degree murder charge.

You don't have to watch the full 24 minutes of her press conference where she announces that charges have been filed, but just watching the first thirty seconds will give you a good idea of how all this is going to play out.

First, note her cheerful demeanor, and then her reference to Trayvon's "sweet parents" for whom she asked us to pray. And yes, that's "Trayvon." Apparently Corey is now on a first-name basis with him. I wonder if she will also call him by his other name: No_Limit_Nigga, which was Trayvon Martin's Twitter handle. For some real depraved entertainment and enlightenment, I dare you to click on the link and read some of No_Limit_Nigga's tweets. They paint a much different picture than the 12 year-old cherub whose photo the lamestream news media keeps running of Trayvon Martin.

I look at these charges against George Zimmerman to be a textbook case of democracy in action: If charges weren't filed, the mob would have most likely rioted. Now that charges have been filed, the mob will most likely riot if Zimmerman is not found guilty as charged.

Try getting a fair trial under those circumstances.

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

Cowards from National Review dismiss John Derbyshire for trying to have a Courageous Conversation

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a lengthy piece, entitled "'Courageous Conversations' in a 'Nation of Cowards,'" about the conversations I will need to have with my children about how they should handle their interactions with black people. I wrote that piece in response to several newspaper articles that profiled black parents and their perceived need to have a conversation with their kids about their future interactions with white people.

Lo and behold, not too many days after I wrote that piece, a similar article was written by John Derbyshire, who is (was) best known as a contributing writer to the so-called conservative publication National Review.

Derbyshire didn't actually write his article for National Review; it instead was published in an online publication called Taki's Magazine, or Taki Mag, for short.

As I did, Derbyshire acknowledged the many newspaper articles and blog posts about black parents having "the talk" with their kids about what they will need to know when they deal with white people throughout their lives. And as I did, Derbyshire then detailed a hypothetical conversation he would have with his kids about dealing with black people throughout their lives.

In all his points, Derbyshire provided links to back up what he was saying, but that did not matter. The left side of the blogosphere and media had a predictable conniption fit over Derbyshire's article. What saddened me was the reaction from the controlled conservative opposition at such places as HotAir.com, certain writers at AmericanThinker.com, and of course, National Review. Within just a couple days after Derbyshire published his article at Taki Mag, National Review wiped their hands of Derbyshire. By doing so, National Review simply proved the point I made in my piece about all those people out there who are too cowardly to have these courageous conversations such as Derbyshire attempted to start. What was sadly amusing is that most of the criticism of Derbyshire's article - from either side of the political spectrum - was rather short on substance, but long on emotion. For most critics, their concern did not appear to be that anything Derbyshire wrote was incorrect - like I said, he heavily sourced his article - their concern appeared to be that Derbyshire dared speak that which should not be spoken, no matter how truthful it may be. After all, feelings could be hurt!

As a prime example, just read the following from the blog post written by National Review's editor, Rich Lowry, in which he informed readers that NR had disassociated themselves from Derbyshire:

[Derbyshire's] latest provocation, in a webzine, lurches from the politically incorrect to the nasty and indefensible....

I see some critical statements there, but "incorrect," "wrong," "non-factual," and "liar/lying/prevarication" are not among them.

I am sorry that Derbyshire had to pay the ultimate professional price for expressing his views, but I respect him deeply for taking that plunge. It is one thing for these courageous conversations to be started like a nobody blogger like myself, but John Derbyshire of National Review magazine cannot be so easily ignored.

Unlike the bigwigs at National Review, John Derbyshire chose not to be a coward. My hat is off to you, Mr. Derbyshire.

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

Same speech, same stutter

I realize that political candidates often give the same stump speech on the campaign trail, but how about our Dear Leader using essentially the same exact budget speech this year, as he did last year, complete with flubbing the same exact word - disabilities - one year apart. You have got to see this to believe it:



Is the man a robot? Does his software have a glitch?

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

Spotted

A bumper sticker on I-80 on my way home from work this afternoon:

IF I WANTED YOUR OPINION, I WOULD READ YOUR ENTRAILS

That is some funny stuff right there!

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

Say hello to the newest member of my family

I recently posted a YouTube video of me shooting my other baby - my 7.62X39mm SKS. For my next rifle purchase, I thought I would dial down the power a bit and buy a rifle that I can use to teach my kids how to shoot, and the rifle you see pictured above is that purchase (I paid $148 on sale, with 10%-off coupon, along with a $25 background check fee).

Last Sunday, I took my son and daughter with me to Big 5 and purchased a Marlin 795 .22 Long Rifle. I had read reviews of .22's, and the consensus seemed to be that the Marlin was one of best. In fact, there seemed to be a mini-war going on between fans of the Marlin and the Ruger 10/22. The consensus was that the Ruger is superior if you are going to add a bunch of bells and whistles to it, but the Marlin was more accurate right out of the box.

This was also an interesting experience as it was my first ever gun purchase from an actual retailer. All my other guns have either been given to me or I purchased from a private owner. The paperwork involved was honestly not as bad as I anticipated. There was a rather thick form that needed to be filled out, but I only had to fill out the first page, and the dealer does the rest of it. I was rather perturbed, but not surprised, that I was levied a $25 fee for a background check. Golly gee, don't I pay taxes for the government to do things like this? What the fee essentially represents, is the government's petty piece of revenge - a punishment - for me buying a gun. They'll show me, right?

Oh, well. The fee is paid, my background is being checked, and I will be able to bring my newest baby home on April 5. Now I am saving up for a Ruger Mini-14!

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

"Courageous Conversations" in a "nation of cowards"

Although this post concerns issues that emanate from the controversy over the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman kerfuffle, it is imperative that the reader understand the background behind the two terms I have used in my title to this post.

As a public school teacher, I have been exposed many times to the term "courageous conversations." The term comes from a race-hustling "diversity" consultant named Glenn Singleton who is hired by various school districts across the country to advise them on ways to bridge the "achievement gap" in test scores and academic performance that exist between certain student demographics - especially between white and black students. Singleton often ends up embarrassing the districts that hire him, such as the Seattle public schools, where the district was ridiculed nationwide after posting on their website that - as Singleton instructed them - only whites can be racist, and that it is racist to expect minorities to have the wherewithal to plan for the future, as they do not have the same future-time orientation that whites have. Yes, really. Singleton is essentially known as a one-trick pony who blames the actions and attitudes of white people for all that is wrong or perceived to be wrong in minority - read: black - communities. He especially lays out these simplistic theories of his in a book he coauthored back in 2005 called Courageous Conversations About Race - if you consider the tired position of blaming whites for everything to be courageous.

Next, we have our illustrious Attorney General, Eric Holder, who, during a February, 2009 Black History Month speech, stated on televised record:

Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.

Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion, and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about things racial...

It is an easy thing not to talk about these things. It is a painful thing to discuss them....

Well then, everyone, let us not be cowards; let us have a courageous conversation about race relations, no matter how painful it may be to discuss.

The national news cycle continues to remain gripped in the clutches of the media's obsession with the shooting death of black 17 year-old Trayvon Martin at the hands of Hispanic 28 year-old George Zimmerman. Just in the last day or two, more information has been released about the interaction between the two men that shows Martin may have been the aggressor and Zimmerman the victim, and also information and photos that show Martin was not the innocent angel his friends and parents made him out to be. Like I said in my previous post, however, there is still not enough official information released to make a complete call on this incident one way or the other.

I did notice two different news stories released within days of each other that caught my attention. Just listing the headlines will alert you to the common theme of the two articles.

The first headline comes from Associated Press (AP):

Trayvon Martin, my son, and the black male code

The second headline comes from the Chicago Tribune, but ran nationally:

Parents of black teens find Trayvon Martin case hits close to home

Highlights from the AP article are as follows:

I thought my [12 year old] son would be much older before I had to tell him about the Black Male Code... [b]ut after the Trayvon Martin tragedy, I needed to explain to my child that soon people might be afraid of him...

As I explained it, the Code goes like this:

Always pay close attention to your surroundings, son, especially if you are in an affluent neighborhood where black folks are few. Understand that even though you are not a criminal, some people might assume you are, especially if you are wearing certain clothes...

From the Tribune article, I note the following:

When their son was about to enter his teens, Paul and Jeanne Miller of Flossmoor decided it was time to have the talk. As a black male, they told him, some people will make judgments about you and view you with suspicion based solely on your race... The [Martin/Zimmerman] case once again placed a spotlight on race in America and forced discussions about the negative perceptions some people have regarding black men... The reality is that many Americans...perceive young black men to be 'suspicious' individuals who will rob them, confront them and carry a firearm to threaten their safety, independent of whether it is true or not... Young black men go through the world being harassed, watched and stereotyped. They live with that every day, and far too many of us have ignored their reality...

Reading these two articles struck a chord with me, as I have also been planning to have "courageous conversations" with my 7 year-old son and my 5 year-old daughter when they get a little older. The difference is that the conversations will come from the opposite spectrum. As white children who will one day grow into white teenagers and then white adults, I feel it is my parental duty to warn them about the dangers they face from people of certain races who, quite unfortunately, commit violent crime out of all proportion to the percentage of their numbers in our society. The father in the first article tells his son to be aware of his surroundings; so will I tell my children to be aware of their surroundings. For instance, if they are walking down the sidewalk and are approached by several young black men dressed in "the uniform" of sagging pants, or hoodies, or flat-billed baseball caps worn jauntily on top of their heads, I will instruct my children that they should start walking the other direction, or cross to the other side of the street, or even run if they feel it is necessary.

I can hear some of you out there now: What are doing? You can't say this! What are you? Some kind of racist?

To that I say, don't start getting cowardly on me now! We need to continue this courageous conversation and not devolve into name calling!

There is a reason why so many people stereotype black men, perceive them as threatening, and have negative perceptions of them. That is because black men - especially young black men - commit a vast amount of violent crime in this country; an amount that is far out of proportion to their numbers in the population.

Let us look at just one example: Aggravated Assault.

The U.S. Justice Department periodically releases detailed crime statistics called the National Crime Victimization Survey. The survey for which I can find the most recent complete results is 2008, so that is the one from which I will quote. If you research the results of other years in this Survey, you will find that the numbers don't change all that much from year to year.

When researching racial crime statistics, one of the most useful sections of the Survey is Table 42. You can take my word for it regarding the numbers, or follow the link to the Survey and check the math yourself.

In the year 2008, there were 436,420 white victims of aggravated assault. In 61.9% of those cases, the assaulter was also white, and in 17.6% of those cases, the assaulter was black.

In the same year, there were 119,090 black victims of aggravated assault. In 62.9% of those cases, the assaulter was also black, and in 12.7% of those cases, the assaulter was white.

First, it is not unusual that in a vast majority of cases, the victim and perpetrator were of the same race - that is true across the board for most crimes in the survey. But since we, and the nation, are supposed to be having courageous conversations about interracial crime, then let's continue.

First off, you see a disparity already: 17.6% black-on-white, versus 12.7% white-on-black. So just based on percentage of the time, blacks commit more aggravated assault upon whites than whites upon blacks. But wait; the most important numbers have not been factored in, and those are the raw numbers of aggravated assault cases, which, again, are 436,420 white versus 119,090 black.

What you discover after doing the math is that in 2008:

76,810 white people were agg. assaulted by blacks.
15,124 black people were agg. assaulted by whites.

If the number of whites and blacks in this country's population were perfectly equal, the discrepancy in the above numbers would be horrific enough, but it is even worse than it appears, for don't forget that whites outnumber blacks in this country by a factor of 5. So, even though there are five times as many whites in this country as blacks, blacks still managed to agg. assault five times as many whites as whites did to blacks.

And that is just aggravated assault. The Victimization Survey shows similar disparities over and over when it comes to interracial violent crime.

Judging by the news we watch, you would never know this, as any white-on-black violence tends to be nationally reported and sensationalized (think the 1998 dragging death of James Byrd in Texas), while any black-on-white violence is usually kept restricted to local media coverage and is quickly dropped down the memory hole.

While the news media and the nation wring their hands and obsess about George Zimmerman (who is not even white!) shooting Trayvon Martin, I ask if any of the following cases from the last few years have gotten even a fraction of attention from the national media and usual race hustlers that the Martin/Zimmerman case has received:

• Last month, a 13 year-old white high schooler in Kansas City was followed to his home by two black teenagers who also attended his school. As the white boy struggled to unlock his front door, the two black boys grabbed him, doused him with gasoline, and set him on fire while yelling, "This is what you deserve! You get what you deserve, white boy!" Reverse the races in this incident and tell me that there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.
• In 2009, at least 32 black gang members were arrested for committing dozens of racially motivated beatings and muggings of whites and Hispanics in downtown Denver, Colorado. These gang members would often film their misdeeds and post them online. Reverse the races in this incident, and tell me that there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.
  
• In the city of St. Louis, dozens of white and Asian people have been attacked by roving packs of black boys and young men who are engaging in a "game" called Knockout King. The object of the "game" is to walk up to a random person on the street (who somehow is never black; just white, Hispanic, or Asian) and knock the person unconscious with one punch. There have been two especially notorious incidents involving Knockout King. In the first, an elderly Vietnamese man named Hoang Nguyen was struck in the face and died after his head hit the pavement. He was also repeatedly hit and kicked while he lay unconscious on the ground. In a second notorious incident, a white man named Matt Quain was attacked right in front of the mayor of St. Louis, who came to Quain's aid. Even with a witness like that, charges against Quain's seven black teenage (alleged) attackers were dropped, to the cheers of the (alleged) attackers and their family members. Days later, some of the (alleged) attackers began threatening Quain. Reverse the races in all these incidents and tell me there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.
  
• Just this month, a 90 year-old husband, Bob Strait, and his 85 year-old wife, Nancy, who had been married for 65 years, were severely beaten by 20 year-old home invader Tyrone Woodfork. Bob, a WWII veteran of the 101st Airborne Division, is still in the hospital with critical injuries, but Nancy was beaten to death by Woodfork. Reverse the races in this incident and tell me there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.
  
• At the Wisconsin State Fair in the summer of 2011, white fairgoers were accosted and pulled out of their cars in the parking lot and beaten by a mob of blacks that numbered in the "dozens to hundreds." Reverse the races in this incident and tell me that there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.
  
• At the Iowa State Fair in the summer of 2010, dozens of blacks rampaged through the fairgrounds, attacking random white fairgoers in what the participants called "Beat Whitey Night." Reverse the races in this incident and try to imagine the national news media and the good Reverends Sharpton and Jackson ignoring a "Beat Blackie Night" by dozens of rampaging white people.
  
• In Knoxville, Tennessee in 2007, a white couple in their early 20s, Christopher Newsome and Channon Christian, were carjacked and kidnapped by five blacks. The couple were kept in the home of one of the perpetrators for two days where they were tortured, raped, beaten, and eventually murdered. Newsome was shot and his body was set on fire. Christian had bleach poured down her throat, and then she was stuffed into a trash can where she suffocated. Reverse the races in this incident and tell me that there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.
  
• In Wichita, Kansas in 2000, two black brothers went on a crime spree in which they eventually killed, robbed, and/or raped five white people and left a sixth for dead. The last five victims were kidnapped together at their townhouse where they were either raped or forced to have sex with each other and then taken to a snowy soccer field where they were forced to kneel and then shot in the head execution-style. One of those victims survived being shot, seeking help by walking a mile, naked in the snow, with a bullet wound to her head. Reverse the races in this incident and tell me that there would not be national outrage and marches in the street.

In addition to these outrageous acts that don't elicit a response from the two Reverends or our President, I am struck by the relative lack of interest by these and other race hustlers in the murder and chaos happening in our inner-cities where blacks are killing and maiming other blacks. In Chicago - the home turf of Barack Obama and Jesse Jackson - during the same week that the Martin/Zimmerman story was heating up, the Windy City saw one weekend in March of this year in which 40 people were shot and 10 of them were killed. Most of these shooting victims were black, as were their attackers. Nationwide, according to the FBI, 53% of the murders committed in the United States in 2010 were committed by blacks, while blacks made up about 50% of the murder victims. Keep in mind that blacks only make up about 13% of our nation's population, and also keep in mind that most of these murders were committed by young black men who make up somewhere around 5-7% of our nation's population - according to the FBI's 2010 statistics, 58% of black murder offenders and 51% of black murder victims were between the ages of 17 and 30. Where are the marches in the street over that? Instead, Sharpton, Jackson, the New Black Panthers, and thousands of blacks wearing hoodies are down in Florida marching in honor of Trayvon Martin because he was shot by a Hispanic with white ancestry. The selective outrage is simply astonishing.

I want to stress that I would never tell my children to simply avoid black people. Some of the greatest people I have ever met in my life were black, starting with Drill Sergeants Coe and Chatman, when I went through Army basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina in 1993. Add to that such people as Lt. Col. and Congressman Allen West; Economists Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams; Tea Party activists Herman Cain, Lloyd Marcus, and Alonzo Rachel; educator and author Booker T. Washington; Abolitionist and author Frederick Douglass; not to mention the dozens of black students whom I have had the privilege of teaching over the years - students who are leaders, scholars, and not afraid to defy the low expectations of their peers. I have nothing but praise for these individuals and any like them who work hard, contribute to a more productive and civilized society, and provide a positive example. I expect this of anyone, no matter what their color, and I sing their praises to my children at every opportunity.

In light of all this, these black parents mentioned in the AP and Tribune articles are free to have courageous conversations with their kids and tell them to watch their backs. In the meantime, in courageous conversations of my own, I will tell my kids to do likewise.

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

Martin and Zimmerman: I don't know what happened, and neither do you.

I have been carefully following the saga of the alleged shooting of Trayvon Martin at the hands of George Zimmerman down in Florida. It has been an amusing chain of events to observe.

To begin the timeline, we start with the perplexing fact that the incident itself happened back in late February, but somehow the lamestream news media did not become obsessed with it until the middle of March - coincidentally right around the time that the media-manufactured reporting about the Republican "war on women" was fizzling out after conservative pundits and bloggers began pointing to the plethora of examples of lefties like Bill Maher and Ed Schultz saying far worse things than Rush Limbaugh could imagine. Sooooo, on to the next media attempt at deflecting public attention to the horrific job that Obama is doing as our president. Since the "war on women" turned out to be a flop, I guess the news media is now trying a "war on blacks" meme instead. The Martin/Zimmerman affair is just what I believe to be the opening salvo.

When the national reporting about Martin and Zimmerman began, Zimmerman was repeatedly referred to as a "white neighborhood watch captain." This was most likely based on the initial police report of the incident that described Zimmerman as white. Media sites began scrubbing the word "white" once a photograph of George Zimmerman was released and it was painfully obvious that he was not White - he was Hispanic/Amerindian. Of course, common law enforcement practice is to describe Hispanic crime victims as Hispanic, but Hispanic crime suspects as White.

Then, since the shooter turned out to also be a minority, the news media who had jumped the gun and tried to make it a black/white thing, simply downplayed the fact that Zimmerman is Hispanic, and tried to make the 17 year-old Trayvon Martin seem as innocent as possible by only showing outdated photos of him and emphasizing that he was only walking home armed with Skittles and an iced tea, and that he was accosted by the overzealous neighborhood watch captain, Zimmerman.

That last description seems to have been the one that seems to have stuck over the last week or so, as just about everyone in the chattering class - Statist or Conservative - has condemned George Zimmerman for his allegedly aggressive and racially profiling ways.

But now, even that story might collapse, as a witness to the incident is now affirming that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of George Zimmerman, and that Zimmerman was yelling for help. Additionally, the same police report that the media depended on to describe Zimmerman as white also stated that a responding police officer found Zimmerman's back wet with dew and grass stains, and the back of his head and his nose wet with blood. If Zimmerman supposedly shot down Martin in cold blood, as many protesters seem to attest, then how did Zimmerman sustain these injuries?

The bottom line, is that I have know idea what happened; I wasn't there. Yet I see my TV screen filled with the faces of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, and their many sign-carrying minions talking and acting as if they do know what happened.

I have more to say on this topic, but once a post reaches a certain length, I know a lot of people give up and either skim or skip. In the meantime, people around the country need to cool their jets on this one and stop trying to turn one person into a saint and another into a sinner. Life is rarely that simple.

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

Look in my eyes; what do you see? The Cult of Personality.

This is just sick. It is sick someone would make a flag like this, and it is sick that someone would fly it:

I am speaking of course of the flag on the bottom with Obummer's visage disgracing the blue field. Until it was taken down under pressure, that Obama flag was flying outside a Democrat Party headquarters in Lake County, Florida. Once local Veterans found out about it, they gathered in protest outside the building, and after some resistance, the director of the HQ took down the flag. Of course, this director, one Nancy Hurlburt, couldn't let the issue go without this whopper of a statement to a local reporter:

“It leads me to believe it’s not about the flag … Certain elements cannot accept Barack Obama as president.”

Thaaat's it: When in doubt, play the race card. For some people, the race card trumps all. Yes, that's right... we don't like that flag being up there because President Obama is partially of African heritage. It would have nothing to do with the tradition we have in this country of not going down the road of flying flags like this:

Or this:

That Che flag, by the way, is hanging in no ordinary location. I actually copied and pasted that image from one of my own posts that I wrote back in February of 2008 during Obama's first run for the presidency. That flag was hanging in one of his campaign headquarters in Houston, Texas.

In the end, these Obamabots shouldn't be flying a flag with their Messiah's image on it, as he has made it known that he isn't much of a flag fan anyway:

Well, I guess it depends on the flag.



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

This... is a meltdown on CNN

Of all the interviews I have ever watched on cable news (and there have been some barn burners), the one I have attached below is the most astonishing I have seen to date.

As Andrew Breitbart promised before his untimely demise, his website empire (see blogroll) would release video of President Obama during his college days, engaging in typical politically radical behavior. The first video was released last week. It showed 29 year-old Harvard law student, Barack Obama, at a rally/protest introducing, lauding, and physically embracing Harvard law professor Derrick Bell. Bell, who died last year, was a racially radical, white-hating professor who created and adhered to a belief system called Critical Race Theory. For more on Bell and his crackpot ideas, read a profile of him here.

In the video, which was suppressed during the 2008 election by another radical black Harvard professor, Charles Ogletree, Obama turns the microphone over the Professor Bell after urging the crowd to "open your hearts and your minds to the words of Derrick Bell." With a video like that, Obama can't claim he sat in the pews for 20 years without hearing a word, like he did with Jeremiah Wright.

With Andrew Breitbart now deceased, one of his able lieutenants, Joel Pollack, went into the belly of the lamestream media beast to be interviewed by racialist CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien. The interview that followed between Pollack and O'Brien was like nothing I have ever seen, with O'Brien setting new definitions for condescension, obtuseness, feigned ignorance (I think it was feigned), smirking, and generally throwing a hissy-fit. And then there was O'Brien's race-baiting compatriot, washed-up former actor turned radio talk show host, Jay Thomas (hockey player Eddie from Cheers), asking Joel Pollack why he hates black people, while not realizing that Pollack is married to an African woman. And the whole time O'Brien and Thomas were having a meltdown, Pollack kept his cool demeanor and just continued to dismantle them. The 11-minute video was one big train wreck for CNN, and you really need to watch all 11 delicious minutes of it... seriously!



There! Now aren't you glad you did? By the way, O'Brien somehow forgot to mention that she is a big fan of Derrick Bell's writings, and actually twice lamented his passing on her Twitter account the day Bell died in October, 2011.

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

(Hopefully) coming to a classroom near me

God Bless the Japanese. Since the end of World War II, they have come out with many electronic gizmos, but this one takes the cake! Here is the headline and synopsis from a Fox News article:

JAPAN INVENTS SPEECH-JAMMING GUN THAT SILENCES PEOPLE MID-SENTENCE

Japanese researchers have invented a speech-jamming gadget that painlessly forces people into silence.
Kazutaka Kurihara of the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, and Koji Tsukada of Ochanomizu University, developed a portable "SpeechJammer" gun that can silence people more than 30 meters away.
The device works by recording its target's speech then firing their words back at them with a 0.2-second delay, which affects the brain's cognitive processes and causes speakers to stutter before silencing them completely....

You know how teachers are always complaining about having to pay for classroom supplies out of their own pocket? In this case I would gladly dig deep in order to get my hands on one of these devices! I would get one for my wife, too. She teaches a bunch of inner-city first graders who are even more verbose and disruptive than the middle schoolers with whom I deal every day.

Yeah, yeah - so the device is a little Orwellian. C'est la vie.

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

RIP Andrew Breitbart: A tragedy on so many levels

I was as shocked and saddened as anyone this morning upon hearing the news of the untimely death of conservative media warrior Andrew Breitbart.

First and foremost, as a husband and father myself, I don't even want to imagine what his family is going through this morning. My heartfelt prayers are with them as they enter this time of grieving.

Secondly is the blow to the conservative cause for which Breitbart so unashamedly fought. I loved to watch this guy operate. Whether it was being interviewed by statist "journalists", confronting statist activists, or giving it back to those activists upon being confronted, I can think of few conservatives out there in the public eye who were less afraid of the proglodytes out there. Where they were used to their political adversaries shrinking away upon being called nasty names like "racist," "sexist," and the other usual garbage, Breitbart would laugh in their face and call them out on their hypocrisy.

Not surprisingly, Andrew Breitbart drove the statist left absolutely bonkers precisely because he refused to abide by their self-serving rules of so-called debate, and wouldn't back down to their hostile tactics. My hope is that Breitbart's Big Hollywood/Government/Journalism/Peace websites (see my blogroll) will continue under the able hands of the editors who Breitbart hired to run these sites. They are one of my, and many others', daily stops on the Web. It is also my hope that Breitbart was on the scene long enough for conservatives out there to get a clue and discover that the world doesn't end when the Left calls you nasty names in an attempt to shame you into silence.

Thank you, and God Bless you, Andrew Breitbart for all that you did, and may your legacy continue.

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

First the loggers, now the other owls

I grew up in the tiny northern California town of Happy Camp. It started as a gold mining town in the early 1850s, but when the gold didn't pan out anymore, the dominant local industry quickly switched to logging. When I moved to Happy Camp in 1981, there were still several logging mills operating in the area; by the time I moved away to go to college in 1990, there was only one mill. Now there are none. No greater reason exists for this death of the local logging industry than federal logging restrictions that were put in place to protect the Northern Spotted Owl, a fragile bird that supposedly could only exist in old growth forests.

Now that the logging industry in Northern California has been killed off, it turns out that it may all have been for nothing anyway, as the Northern Spotted Owl is still dying off - to the tune of a 40% drop in numbers in the last 25 years. In fact, another species of owl is now being lined up for sacrifice much the same way the loggers were... all to save the Northern Spotted Owl.

The Washington Post reports that the Obama administration is all set to begin killing Barred Owls because they have been taking over the lands occupied by the Spotted Owl.

Judging by the tone of the Post piece, I get the feeling that the reporter is trying to soften the landing of this shoe being dropped. At one point the reporter tries to justify the killing of the Barred Owls by pointing out that in the past, the federal government has killed one species in order to save another species:

The plan to kill barred owls would not be the first time the federal government has authorized killing of one species to help another. California sea lions that feast on threatened salmon in the Columbia River have been killed in recent years after efforts to chase them away or scare them failed.

Here's the problem with that line of reasoning: We humans eat salmon, so there is a legitimate reason to beat back the onslaught of the sea lions. Spotted Owls, however, are not regularly on the menu... unless of course, as the old bumper sticker says, "I love spotted owls... especially fried in Quaker State!"

Happy Camp now relies on tourist dollars and swag from Uncle Sugar. I remember all the good people who moved away when the government caused the logging to dry up. What a shame that it turns out that this town was killed in vain.

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

Attempt to poison your teacher, and you get "expelled"

Out of Fresno, California comes this all-too-typical story of an example of today's wayward youth:

Three California fifth-graders who confessed to using rat poison in attempts to harm their teacher are being moved to other schools.

The three students at Balderas Elementary School in Fresno admitted lacing the teacher's coffee and a cupcake with rat poison in two separate incidents, according to the Fresno Teachers Association and published reports.

First of all, the semi-happy ending:

Miraculously, the teacher never took a sip of the coffee or a bite of the cupcake.

One of the three accused students apparently had a change of heart and knocked the coffee cup out of the teacher's hand before she could drink from it.

Thank God.

Now the infuriating part, and yet another example of all that is wrong with our educational system:

All three students have been expelled and moved to other schools, according to KFSN. The two boys are being transfered to the Phoenix Academy, which does not sit well with at least one of its teachers.

"They should not be placed at another campus where now other staff and other students have to worry about," Phoenix Academy teacher David Coss told KFSN.

"Certainly like a campus like ours where these kids are going to be elevated to gods to many of our kids, they're going to say this is great 'maybe I can do something similar to a teacher or an adult.'"

The Fresno Teachers Association is also troubled by the case.

“This is but the latest example of the dangerous conditions that exist in Fresno Unified due to inconsistent enforcement of discipline and lack of consequences for students daily,” FTA President Greg Gadams told KMAS Radio. “Something has to be done and this is a prime place to start insuring teacher safety and student accountability.”

So many people don't realize this, but expulsion from school is not what it used to be. Nowadays, expulsion really isn't expulsion - it is really either a transfer to another school district, or an extended suspension that ends with the school year, and after a leisurely summer break, the student is free to return to the same school for the next school year. How do I know this? Duh, I'm a middle school teacher; this very thing has happened to me. I have watched students be expelled from my school, and then in August, at the start of the new school year, there they were, back at my school. Ah, but had they learned their lesson? Had they seen the light and cleaned up their act? Shee-yah, right.

OK then, if the school district won't do anything about these little miscreants, then at least they can face the long arm of the law for attempting to murder their teacher? Can't they? Sigh:

No criminal charges have been filed against the two boys and one girl, according to ABC's Fresno affiliate KFSN. The Fresno Police Department is continuing to investigate, but says there is little or no physical evidence remaining from the December incidents. The Fresno County district attorney's office will decide whether to press charges against the children.

Remember, we teachers are responsible for these kids' test scores.

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

The miracle of modern technology

My sister-in-law is currently in India, staying the city of Chennai, which is in the southeastern tip of the country. She is there for ten days on work-related business.

Tonight, I watched my wife converse with her sister on Skype. My sister-in-law was on her iPad in her hotel room, and my wife was on our laptop in the office of our Sacramento home.

Web cams made it possible for the two of them to look at each other, and the sound was of such quality that it sounded like my sister-in-law was in the room. What really amazed me was the lack of delay. They were having an instantaneous, real-time conversation.

And she was in India. Absolutely amazing.

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

Says the man who owed $26,000 in unpaid taxes

26 seconds of wisdom from our Treasury Secretary, Timmy Geithner:



The Obama-ites are really pushing this "rich need to pay their fair share" meme, aren't they? When Obummer has nothing else to run on, the class warfare card is about the only thing he can play.

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

President Obama "doubles down" on stupidity and racism

The hits keep on coming so "fast and furious" from our illustrious Dear Leader, that I can barely keep up. Think of this post as a clearing house of Obysmal's latest and greatest idiotic statements and actions... at least for the last three days.

First up we have this statement from The Chosen One regarding his obsession with spending government money (read: your money) on "clean" energy:

“A century of subsidies to the oil companies is long enough,” Obama said. “It’s time to end taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s never been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.”

Did he really use the term "double down" in his speech to describe the spending of our tax dollars on his personal pipe dream? I most often hear the term "double down" used in describing gamblers who have just lost a boatload of money, but bet even more the next time because, by golly, this time they're gonna hit the jackpot! Technically, the term "double down" is most often used in the game of Blackjack when someone doubles their bet in return for receiving one more card in an effort to beat the dealer. If it pans out, you double your money; if not...? Either way, Obummer is using a gambling term in reference to the spending of my sweat and toil. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy, doesn't it? And Obama's administration has been doubling down quite a bit lately. If you don't have time to watch the entire 4+ minutes of this CBSNews report, then watch just the first 45-seconds to get the gist of what I am talking about.



Next on the list comes Bam's blatant racial pandering to one of the most hilariously unnecessary political action groups in American history: African-Americans for Obama. This is not a joke. See for yourself:



I can think of some other groups along these same lines: How about Catholics for the Pope? Why not Fish for Water. Ski Resort Owners for Snow. The Toddler Coalition for New and Better Toys. I mean, seriously? Of course, the obvious question is what the reaction would be to Mitt Romney making a promo video for White-Americans for Romney, or Newt Gingrich promo-ing European-Americans for Gingrich. You know there would be hell to pay in the lamestream media. This Obama video, on the other hand? Meh. Even with his absolute amateur hour of a presidency, Barack Obama still enjoys his greatest support from black Americans. One would think that a group like African-Americans for Obama is just a bit of overkill. The basic message in Obama's promo you just watched is pretty simple though, is it not? Vote for me because I am black like you and I will give you free stuff that I have taken from other people.

I could write about this stuff all night, but I will limit myself to three examples this evening. The next stupid soundbite from our Dear Leader came today when he was mocking Republicans/Conservatives/Sane People who propose the shocking notion of increasing the supply of domestic oil out there as a way to bring down the price at the pump:

“Since it’s an election year, they’re already dusting off their three-point plans for two dollar gas. I’ll save you the suspense: Step one is drill, step two is drill, and step three is keep drilling,”

Straw Man much, Barack? Yes, that's all we call for is drill, drill, drill. First of all, you bet your a$$ that we call for that. We also call for the construction of more refineries. We also call for the importation of more oil through avenues such as the Keystone Pipeline that would have brought crude into the U.S. from Canada, who was more than willing to sell to us. Canada, if you recall, is not one of those desert-like countries in the Middle East that hates our guts and uses money from its oil profits to fund violent hatred of the United States. Hell, we even call for the private development of alternative energy solutions that work.

What is Obama's solution to high gas prices? I refer you back to my first item, which involves "doubling down" on the "clean energy" industry with our hard-earned tax dollars.

How anyone can continue to support this joke of a president is beyond me.

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

ABC's Jake Tapper questions Obama administration's integrity; NPR flunky shows her displeasure

What a classic piece of video this is. Jake Tapper of ABC News is one of the few reporters in the lamestream media who is known to actually question the status quo that is the federal government and some of the corrupt practices in which they engage; practices that are carried out in great part because the Obama administration can be quite confident that they won't be questioned by the lamestream media.

Watch as Jake Tapper asks Obama press flunky Jay Carney about a bit of hypocrisy being committed by the administration. The questioning of Carney is entertaining enough, but the look of shock and disdain on the part of the female reporter who is sitting behind Tapper's left shoulder says all you need to know about the lamestream news media. That female reporter is Mara Liasson, who works for National Public Radio (NPR) and is a contributor on Fox News. It is quite evident that she did not appreciate listening to Tapper bite the hand that feeds her:



Don't you just love the faux-intellectual elitist look with her glasses perched on the tip of her nose? Remember folks, your taxes pay her salary!

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

My son, the right-wing ad man

I had Friday and Monday off for the Presidents Day/Washington's Birthday weekend, but my wife and kids have this entire week off.

When I got home from work this evening, my wife handed me a piece of paper upon which my 7 year-old son had written the following during his afternoon Quiet Time:


That's my Boy! I guess the apple didn't fall far from the tree, eh? I guess he has been listening when I go off on my frequent politically oriented rants.

Oh, and bless his heart, but for the record that's www.buckhornroad.blogspot.com

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

Update time: And the girl was suspended for how long?

A couple posts back, I told you an all-to-typical story of an encounter I had with an 8th-grade female student in the hallway outside my classroom where she slung the F-word at me and refused to identify herself to me. Just to refresh everyone's memory (BAD LANGUAGE ALERT!):

...The student refused to give me her name. I repeatedly instructed the student to not walk away from me and to tell me her name. The student repeatedly refused. In all, I asked the student at least 15 times to tell me her name, and she refused. The only things she said in response to my request was, “Get away from me,” and “I ain’t tellin’ you my fuckin’ name.” By this time, the student was walking down the outside stairwell on west end of the building. I couldn’t follow her, as my classroom door was open and my 8th period students had already begun to enter. As the student continued to walk down the stairs away from me, I informed her that her refusal to identify herself to a staff member at this school could get her suspended, and her response was to tell me, “I don’t care; fuckin’ suspend me then!”

In that post, I mused about what would have happened to this girl in American schools decades ago, and what her likely punishment would be today. I hate how right I was.

The punishment this student received was... wait for it....

One (1) day of suspension.

One day. People want to know what is wrong with our educational system today? That about sums it up.

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

Republican dogs once again spit out the Romney pill

I have always found Democrat strategist and former Clinton crony James Carville to be a repugnant human being. I do have to give him kudos for the best description yet uttered about how conservative Republicans feel about perennial presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Carville had to this to say after Romney barely won (and has since lost) the Iowa Caucuses while receiving fewer votes in 2012 than in 2008:

I think there’s one screaming huge story here tonight, and that is these Republicans just don’t want to vote for Mitt Romney. I mean, it’s like you’re trying to give a dog a pill that keeps spitting it out.

After Romney won the primaries in New Hampshire, Florida, and Nevada (and for awhile looked like he won in Iowa), so many Rockefeller Republican cheerleaders were ready to hand Romney the nomination already (or fellate him; it's hard to tell).

The primary and caucus elections last night in Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado, where Rick Santorum swept those elections, have certainly shown that Romney is not the lock that his sycophants in the GOP and in the media want you to think.

To that, I say Thank God!

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum ended up winning in Iowa over Romney, and has now added Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado to his swagger stick. Do I support Santorum for the nomination? No. Would I choose him over Romney? In a heartbeat. Would I vote for Santorum over Obama in the general election? Yes. Would I vote for Romney over Obama in the general election? No. Would I vote for Obama instead? Hell no.

Confused yet?

I know I am but one lowly blogger, but I am also a voter. Here is my official endorsement:

Of the Republican candidates still in the hunt, my preferences from first to worst are as follows:

Ron Paul

Rick Santorum

Newt Gingrich

Mitt Romney

The line I hear from many of my Republican friends is that they agree with Ron Paul on economic issues but they disagree with him on foreign policy. At issue is the question of what exactly our foreign policy is supposed to be. Our country's current foreign policy has strayed from our traditional foreign policy so far and for so long, that many have forgotten, or don't know, that the policy has been anything but what we have now and have had since the 1890s (with a slight timeout from 1920 to 1940). Ron Paul's belief is that we can no longer afford the expense and ill-will that we often cause from sending our troops all over the world to fight. As such, he is often accused of blaming the United States when we are attacked, such as on September 11, 2001.

What I have never heard addressed is that if our foreign interventions elsewhere had nothing to do with 9/11 and we would have been attacked that day regardless, then why not dispense with our foreign interventions and still deal with attacks like 9/11 when they happen, rather than wasting blood and treasure on foreign interventions that do not concern the security of the United States? That is Ron Paul's position. The more dishonest types out there have tried to paint Representative Paul as some pacifist peacenik who would never fight any war at all. That simply is not true. Paul simply adheres to the constitutional requirements of our foreign policy such as a declaration of war from Congress before our military is sent out to fight. When was our last officially declared war? World War II. How many U.S. troops have we lost in undeclared wars since the end of World War II? About 120,000. Paul believes in the constitutional role of our military, which is to defend our country from invasion, and protect American interests abroad, such as when Thomas Jefferson asked Congress for permission to send the U.S. Navy to the Mediterranean to protect American shipping from the Barbary Pirates. Notice though that when our Navy was sent to the Med, it was to protect the interests of the United States. When Clinton sent U.S. troops to the former Yugoslavia (I served 6 months with the United Nations in Macedonia) what exactly was our interest there? And why exactly are we still in Afghanistan, and have been since 2001? We removed the Taliban from power and defeated al-Qaeda in the caves of Tora Bora in early 2002. Why have we been there ever since? What exactly did we accomplish in Iraq? We got rid of Saddam? There are murderous strongmen all over the world. Why are they still in power?

Just like government programs never go away, even after they have outlived their usefulness, our wars seem to follow the same pattern. After all, we still have troops stationed in Germany and South Korea, and probably would still have them on the border of South Vietnam had we not folded up our tent and let the North Vietnamese take it over.

Do I agree with every one of Ron Paul's views? No. I think he underestimates the resolve of hardcore Islamists in the middle east with their desire to spread Sharia law throughout the world, but he does not underestimate the responsibility of the President to protect our shores from that kind of encroachment. And to tell you the truth, I am more worried about the loss of my liberties from my own government in its response to possible Islamic terrorism, than from Islamic terrorism itself. As talk of expanding TSA authority to our roads and railroads marches on, and my inability to carry a concealed or unconcealed weapon continues in my beloved state, I have a lot more immediate concerns here at home.

If you disagree with me on my views on Ron Paul, that is fine. However a debate we cannot have if Mitt Romney is preordained as the Republican nominee even before the state primaries have gotten into full swing.

Ultimately, if Mitt Romney ends up as the Republican nominee, I will vote for neither him nor Obama. I will vote for Ron Paul. If Santorum continues to surge and ends up with the nomination, I will think it over. Not that it matters anyway; the chances of Obama losing California's popular vote and 55 electoral votes are slim to none, no matter which Republican's name I mark. If you actually read up on Romney's positions, you will ultimately not see much of a difference between his and Obama's anyway. Whether we are talking health care, minimum wage, or taxes, do you honestly think we would see much of a change? Ask yourself: Do you think a President Romney would roll back the mess that Obama has created? He might stop (or more likely merely slow) the forward progress, but roll it back? Sheee-yeah, right. The same goes for Gingrich and Santorum. They will merely slow down the inevitable. Only Ron Paul talks about truly cutting the size of government, and abiding by the original intent of the Constitution. Based on his 40-year voting record, you know that he means it.

I endorse that.

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

Fun with Guns

My son and I spent today with a friend and his son at my friend's 2000+ acre family ranch located in the Sierra foothills between Sacramento and Stockton. We caught lots of bass at one of the many ponds located on the ranch, ate lunch, then shot guns; lots of guns. I don't often get the chance to find a place to really stretch the legs on my SKS, but today was one of those opportunities. Watch:



By the way, my aimed shots were fired at some huge floating grapefruit that we tossed in the water, and for the record, that pond is not the same one in which we fished!

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

Just another day at the asylum...

I thought you all would find enlightenment from this email I sent to the administration. All names have been changed or deleted to protect the innocent and not-so-innocent. Be warned that bad language follows... none of it uttered by me:

Good Afternoon,

During the passing period before the start of 8th period, I heard a commotion right outside my classroom that sounded like a fight brewing.

I got out in the hallway just in time to see the potential fight beginning to subside, but the two girls who were having words were still facing off at each other. I identified one student as *****, who I have as a student during 3rd period. I did not know the other female student with whom ***** was facing off. As soon as I got between the two students, ***** turned around and walked away without a word, but the other student continued to taunt *****, saying over and over again something to the effect of, “That’s right, Bitch,” or “You better walk away, Bitch.”

Due to her profanity and her efforts to make a fight still happen, I walked up to this student, showed her my ID tag, and told her to come with me. The student refused and began walking away from me. I followed her down the hallway and again identified myself as a staff member at this school and then asked her to identify herself, as I didn’t know who she was. The student refused to give me her name. I repeatedly instructed the student to not walk away from me and to tell me her name. The student repeatedly refused. In all, I asked the student at least 15 times to tell me her name, and she refused. The only things she said in response to my request was, “Get away from me,” and “I ain’t tellin’ you my fuckin’ name.” By this time, the student was walking down the outside stairwell on west end of the building. I couldn’t follow her, as my classroom door was open and my 8th period students had already begun to enter. As the student continued to walk down the stairs away from me, I informed her that her refusal to identify herself to a staff member at this school could get her suspended, and her response was to tell me, “I don’t care; fuckin’ suspend me then!”

As I entered back into the west side of the third floor, I met up with Mr. *****. I asked him if he knew this student, but he said he hadn’t caught a glimpse of her. At that point, he ran down the west end stairwell in an attempt to catch up with her. On my way back to my classroom, one of my students told me that the student with whom I had been dealing was named “*****nique.”

This was later confirmed by many other of my 8th period students, and then Mr. ***** himself, who confirmed that the student’s full name is *****nique ********.

*****nique’s repeated refusal to identify herself to me (in spite of the fact that I repeatedly identified myself as a staff member at this school), and her use of profanity directed toward me and the other student with whom she almost fought is absolutely unacceptable, and per CA Education Code Section 48900(k), I request an appropriate punishment be administered to *****nique *******; namely an out-of-school suspension.

Regards,

W.R. Chandler
Social Studies Teacher
Nameless Middle School

When I describe hostile encounters with students like this one, my standard rhetorical question is to ask what would have happened to this student in, say, 1959, if she had exhibited the same behavior that she did to me yesterday? It's called EXPULSION! No ifs, ands, or buts. In today's topsy-turvy, largely responsibility-free world, I will be astonished if this student actually gets even one day of the out-of-school suspension that I requested she receive.

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

Spotted...

In the past day, I have spotted on I-80 two bumper stickers featuring our current President while I was both going to, and coming home from, work. One made me laugh, and the other gave me an incredulous shake of the head.

The first was on a big Dodge HEMI-type pickup. The left-hand side of the sticker showed a photo of Obama with his chin sticking up in the air in one of his classic Mussolini poses. Next to the photo, the sticker said DOES THIS ASS MAKE MY TRUCK LOOK BIG?

I love it!

The next sticker I saw was on the back of a Toyota Highlander. This one also featured a photo of Obama, only the photo was as flattering as possible. Next to the photo, the sticker said GIVE HOPE A CHANCE.

Good Lord, talk about a hopeless true believer. I think we have given Caesar Obummus more than enough of chance already, don't you?

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

Thank God no one will have to read that horrible prayer anymore

I found out tonight about the story of Jessica Ahlquist, a busybody high schooler in Rhode Island who decided to impose her atheist beliefs on her fellow students at Cranston High School West.

For years, Cranston High had a banner hanging in the school that featured a prayer that students were free to look at (or not). After I read what was written on that banner, I guess it's a good thing that Jessica decided to wage her personal jihad on this banner and save her fellow students from its evil and corrupting influence. Witness now the text of the prayer that offended young Jessica so much that she convinced a U.S. District Judge into ordering it removed. You might want to tell your kids to leave the room if you plan on reading it out loud:

Our Heavenly Father,

Grant us each day the desire to do our best. To grow mentally and morally, as well as physically. To be kind and helpful to our classmates and teachers. To be honest with ourselves, as well as with others. Help us to be good sports, and smile when we lose, as well as when we win. Teach us the value of true friendship. Help us always to conduct ourselves so as to bring credit to Cranston High School West.

Amen

Whew! Thank God that Jessica came along when she did. Who knows what kind of violence and mayhem that prayer might have caused her fellow students to commit.

On second thought, don't thank God for anything - Jessica might get offended.

This whole sad situation reminds me of one of my favorite verses from the Bible (Isaiah 5:20), which more and more shows Isaiah for the prophet he was:

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.

Woe unto you Jessica Ahlquist. You have declared this good and beautiful prayer to be evil, and even worse, you convinced a federal judge (Reagan appointee, unfortunately) into shoving your beliefs down everyone else's throats by having the prayer banner removed.

And our country continues to circle the drain.

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

The Debates: What the hell is the Republican Party thinking?

In the days leading up to the New Hampshire Primary, I found out that a Republican debate would be moderated by ABC News talking head George Stephanopoulos. It is bad enough that a Republican debate would yet again be moderated by a news-critter who is on the other side of the political spectrum from the Republican candidates, but what made it that much worse was that George Stephanopoulos was no ordinary news-critter; he was President Bill Clinton's communications director and chief spinmeister. Not surprisingly, his political partisanship came through loud and clear during the debate. At one point, he was even booed by the audience.

Media Research Center's Brent Bozell has much more to say about the idiocy of the Republican Party, and its willingness to agree to have hostile leftists moderate their debates.

Bozell begins his piece with some rather poignant questions:

"Who in the GOP in his or her right mind invites a historically shameless Democratic spin controller like Stephanopoulos to "moderate" a primary debate like this — ever...?"

"Why must the Republicans keep handing over their debate stage in the primary season to the people who desperately want them all to bumble, stumble and fall on their faces on national TV?"

Read the rest here.

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

How bad is our debt problem? Watch and laugh (and cry)

Imagine a household budget composed of the following numbers:

Total Household Debt: $140,000

Household Income: $21,700

Household Spending: $38,200

Annual Household Deficit: $16,500

Amount of Spending Cut: $380

Doesn't work, does it? But just add a whole crap-load of zeroes to these figures, and you have the budget numbers for the United States of America. Taking away all of those zeroes really makes it all seem so painfully clear, does it not? For further perspective that tragically illustrates the impossibility of this situation, watch this humorous video of a man with this household budget going to his local bank to see about raising his debt limit:



Don't you feel for the poor kid? Mine are in the same boat. Oh, and keep in mind that this video is already out of date. That household debt is now over $150,000! Oh, you didn't know that our national debt has now topped $15,000,000,000,000?

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

Just like a movie... complete with techno-assassins and bumbling, wishy-washy U.S. bureaucrats

Imagine this scene being in a movie:

An Iranian university professor who is involved in Iran's nuclear program is driving down a Tehran street. All of a sudden, two men on a motorcycle pull up alongside the professor's car, attach a magnetic bomb to the door of the car, and then speed away. Seconds later, the bomb explodes, killing the professor. And talk about a personal hit: the bomb is just powerful enough, and is shaped in a way to only kill the intended target - the other two occupants in the professor's car are left with non-life-threatening injuries.

Forget movies; what I just described really happened earlier today. When I read the article, I could totally picture the whole scene in my mind as it would play out in a movie, but believe me when I say that I realize that this isn't a movie, and a man died for real. On the other hand, this man was apparently helping to realize the nuclear dreams that the mullahs of Iran have had for quite some time. Or for all we know, this poor sap was balking at helping the mullahs, and they had him killed as an example to the other Iranian nuclear scientists.

Either way, that doesn't change the limp response from a spokesman from the Obama administration about the incident:

White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said the U.S. "had absolutely nothing to do" with Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan's death and the U.S. condemns "all acts of violence, including acts of violence like what is being reported today."

OK, denying U.S. involvement in, and condemning this particular assassination is one thing, but for the Obama spokesmouth to say that the U.S. "condemns all acts of violence" is a bit of a stretch, wouldn't you say?

Killing Osama bin Laden would be a considered an act of violence, would it not? A Navy SEAL sniper taking off the head of a Somali pirate is an act of violence, is it not? Our continued operations in Afghanistan, where we kill Taliban members all the time, is an act of violence, is it not? How about Obama's Justice Department allowing guns to be taken into Mexico to be used in the murders of over 300 Mexican citizens and 2 U.S. law enforcement agents? Does that qualify as an act of violence?

I swear, Obama and his minions never miss an opportunity to make asses of themselves. If only the lamestream news media would actually report it.

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

And I went to high school because...?

I have never been a big fan of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). As usual, it was seemingly passed by Congress and signed by President George H.W. Bush with seemingly the best of intentions. But as laws like this often demonstrate, the unintended consequences of legislation is an afterthought, or is not considered at all.

Very quickly, the ADA was used by ambulance-chasing lawyers to extort and shake down businesses that had the slightest violations of the law - whether it be a bathroom sink that was a few inches too high, or a step that blocked wheelchair access to an insignificant section of the establishment. Not to mention the fact that while the ADA was meant to stop workplace discrimination against handicapped employees, all the law did was to unintentionally encourage employers to not hire handicapped workers to begin with.

Now we have a new reason to despise the ADA. Apparently, the law is being violated when an employer requires a high school diploma. I will give you a link to a newspaper article about the particulars, but you really need to read the wording of the actual policy letter posted on the website of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). This is freedom and prosperity-snuffing bureaucracy at its finest:

Under the ADA, a qualification standard, test, or other selection criterion, such as a high school diploma requirement, that screens out an individual or a class of individuals on the basis of a disability must be job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity. A qualification standard is job related and consistent with business necessity if it accurately measures the ability to perform the job’s essential functions (i.e. its fundamental duties). Even where a challenged qualification standard, test, or other selection criterion is job related and consistent with business necessity, if it screens out an individual on the basis of disability, an employer must also demonstrate that the standard or criterion cannot be met, and the job cannot be performed, with a reasonable accommodation. See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(6); 29 C.F.R. §§ 1630.10, 1630.15(b) and (c); 29 C.F.R. pt. 1630, app §§ 1630.10, 1630.15(b) and (c).

Thus, if an employer adopts a high school diploma requirement for a job, and that requirement “screens out” an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the ADA’s definition of “disability,” the employer may not apply the standard unless it can demonstrate that the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity. The employer will not be able to make this showing, for example, if the functions in question can easily be performed by someone who does not have a diploma.

So, the high school diploma requirement is only a violation of the ADA if the requirement has nothing to do with the job duties. Right? Oh, wait, the letter goes on:

Even if the diploma requirement is job related and consistent with business necessity, the employer may still have to determine whether a particular applicant whose learning disability prevents him from meeting it can perform the essential functions of the job, with or without a reasonable accommodation. It may do so, for example, by considering relevant work history and/or by allowing the applicant to demonstrate an ability to do the job’s essential functions during the application process. If the individual can perform the job’s essential functions, with or without a reasonable accommodation, despite the inability to meet the standard, the employer may not use the high school diploma requirement to exclude the applicant. However, the employer is not required to prefer the applicant with a learning disability over other applicants who are better qualified. [Yeah, right!]

The EEOC lawyer takes his time with the legalese, but he finally gets around to essentially saying that if the job applicant had some sort of learning disability in high school, you can't require a diploma from him whether it is related to the job or not.

Oh, but worry not! The letter ends with this meaningless statement:

We hope this information is helpful. This letter is an informal discussion of the issues you raised and should not be considered an official opinion of the EEOC.

Sincerely,

/s/

Aaron Konopasky
Attorney Advisor
ADA/GINA Policy Division

It may not be an official opinion of the EEOC, but I think we are versed well enough with our Imperial Federal Government that when they "suggest" that you do something, you damned well better do it. For example, the government still insists that we pay our income taxes voluntarily. Hmmm... just watch what will happen to you if you volunteer not to pay them.

In the meantime, a proclamation like this from the EEOC is like chum for those sharks with law degrees who see a whole new lawsuit industry popping up that is just waiting to be exploited.

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

A lesson on how to handle the lamestream media

I don't support Rick Perry for the Republican presidential nomination, but I must give kudos to his handling of leftist tool Mike Allen of Politico.com.

Politico is rather notorious for using unnamed sources to carry a spurious story forward (see Cain, Herman), but when Allen tried this tactic on Perry, the Texas governor wasn't having it. Watch and learn, kids:



Whenever a reporter uses the term, "some say," be very wary.

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