http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4bxz2RSkrI
James O'Keefe A.K.A abusive pimp, shill for the Muslim Brotherhood, Irish Heritage Foundation community organizer.
I am proud to identify myself as an Irish American, basking in the warm identity politics light of Mr. James O'Keefe. James O'Keefe is a very busy guy. For those of you living under a rock, James is the lad who got Ron Schiller to articulate some very unsurprising sentiments about various Americans who fund NPR. Personally, I was delighted to hear Mr. Schiller brand me "racist", hastening the day when NPR will be found only on satellite radio along side Howard Stern. However, I am curious to know how Schiller devises ways to avoid deeming himself as "racist' as well? Perhaps he accepts as fact that some types of racism are superior or more justifiable than others? Despising members of the racist, racist Tea Party is passe - everyone knows they are awful working class white people. Everyone knows!! No matter - NPR will soon join Acorn in the dead letter office and all the upper middle class "white" people who must hear the ironically titled "All Things Considered" will have to pay for the privilege to do so.
While exposing the wide and deep hypocrisy at NPR, Acorn and Planned Parenthood required both guts and skill, most of us are unaware of O'Keefe's early groundbreaking work while a student at Rutgers. O'Keefe organized "Irish Americans" at Rutgers University to demand the removal of Lucky Charms from the cafeteria!! As he clearly states in the video, to portray Irish Americans as little green gnomes is offensive and hurtful, even though the offense occurs on a cereal box, and to do so during the blessed month of March is beyond the pale. (You know, once you decide to organize a community there is no limit to what can be accomplished.) The earnest black woman, taking notes in the video, is bureaucratically hard-wired to be sensitive to any and all demands, even those that are seemingly ridiculous. Without resorting to violence, unlike the public employees in Wisconsin's, the Irish Heritage foundation's demands were met and the cereal was removed. Rest assured that the ground breaking "zero tolerance" movements started at American colleges and universities give all of us hope that we will never, ever be offended, insulted, slandered, excluded or dissed again. A life free from offense is now the American Way. My green bowler hat is off to James O'Keefe.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
What a Long, Strange Trip it's Been .... Grateful Dead
Actually, not long, but definitely strange. Down the rabbit hole strange.
Obama's speech at the National Archives in May 2009:
"Rather than keeping us safer, the prison at Guantanamo has weakened American national security. It is a rallying cry for our enemies. . . . By any measure, the costs of keeping it open far exceed the complications involved in closing it. That's why I argued that it should be closed throughout my campaign, and that is why I ordered it closed within one year."
Well, well, well. I guess Obama's math methodology, as seen by his belief that cutting 4.6 billion from the 2011 budget constitutes a measurable reduction in federal spending, empowers him to recompute the length of "one year". I understand his enchantment with executive power is typical of the office, underscored by his "ordering it closed" in Cesarean fashion. And though I actually agree that Gitmo should not be closed, I do not understand why we hear only feeble bleating from the left on this shameful about face. Could it be that there are different standards for different leaders? Or could it just possibly be that the steady increase of "lone wolf" attacks by the shouters of "Allah Akbar" has frightened the likes of Couric and Krugman and Matthews who are secretly relieved that many lone wolves will continue to languish in Gitmo?
We all wind up disappointed in politicians. As a matter of fact, other than Ron Paul, who is regarded by people who know more than me as a very marginal politician, when members of the House and the Senate move from the minority to the majority party, e.g. Boehner, they start doing and saying things that surprise the people who elected them. This has been true for a long time. The difference now is that is harder to deny a former position/comment/campaign promise with the various tools available on the Internet, YouTube and twitter to track their every move. Every pissed off Josephina Blow, myself for instance,can watch Boehner on Cavuto complain about Obama and his profligate spending. Now, as majority leader, we hear him mew that making cuts needs to be done carefully, with caution, since so many depend on federal spending, NPR included, and we (they) don't want to damage the tender recovery. But, Dear John, that is not the charter you were given by the angry electorate who pushed the Democrats out. You. Were. Hired. To. Cut. Spending. I am sorry that your job is so difficult but not as sorry as I am that lifting the debt ceiling only worsens the terrible problem created by this cowardly Congress. Here is some math not yet learned by Congress; regardless of tax rates imposed by Congress, the American economy yields no more than 18.6% of GDP in tax receipts. Therefore, spending in excess of 18.6% of GDP must be borrowed. We are approaching 26% of GDP in federal spending; a measurable gap of 7.4%. Every bit of it borrowed. So.
So back to my original subject; the war on terror and Obama's morph into a hawk as revolutions hop from one middle eastern dictatorship to the next - is Gitmo the rallying cry of our enemies? Can Obama, two years into his own dictatorship, clarify to any one's satisfaction who America's enemies are? As he mutters threats at Qaddafi about a no-fly zone the goodwill he was to have generated with his metro sexual style among the Europeans seems in short supply as they decline to enforce the no fly zone themselves. Very disappointing. By my bitter computations things can and do go from bad to worse. Bad - unemployment of 9.8%. Worse - escalating inflation. Bad - an unknown outcome in Libya and Egypt. Worse - the US military interrupting the Libyan revolution, spilling more American blood and creating a new "rallying cry" for our enemies. Bad - Obama for two more years. Worse - Obama for six more years.
Obama's speech at the National Archives in May 2009:
"Rather than keeping us safer, the prison at Guantanamo has weakened American national security. It is a rallying cry for our enemies. . . . By any measure, the costs of keeping it open far exceed the complications involved in closing it. That's why I argued that it should be closed throughout my campaign, and that is why I ordered it closed within one year."
Well, well, well. I guess Obama's math methodology, as seen by his belief that cutting 4.6 billion from the 2011 budget constitutes a measurable reduction in federal spending, empowers him to recompute the length of "one year". I understand his enchantment with executive power is typical of the office, underscored by his "ordering it closed" in Cesarean fashion. And though I actually agree that Gitmo should not be closed, I do not understand why we hear only feeble bleating from the left on this shameful about face. Could it be that there are different standards for different leaders? Or could it just possibly be that the steady increase of "lone wolf" attacks by the shouters of "Allah Akbar" has frightened the likes of Couric and Krugman and Matthews who are secretly relieved that many lone wolves will continue to languish in Gitmo?
We all wind up disappointed in politicians. As a matter of fact, other than Ron Paul, who is regarded by people who know more than me as a very marginal politician, when members of the House and the Senate move from the minority to the majority party, e.g. Boehner, they start doing and saying things that surprise the people who elected them. This has been true for a long time. The difference now is that is harder to deny a former position/comment/campaign promise with the various tools available on the Internet, YouTube and twitter to track their every move. Every pissed off Josephina Blow, myself for instance,can watch Boehner on Cavuto complain about Obama and his profligate spending. Now, as majority leader, we hear him mew that making cuts needs to be done carefully, with caution, since so many depend on federal spending, NPR included, and we (they) don't want to damage the tender recovery. But, Dear John, that is not the charter you were given by the angry electorate who pushed the Democrats out. You. Were. Hired. To. Cut. Spending. I am sorry that your job is so difficult but not as sorry as I am that lifting the debt ceiling only worsens the terrible problem created by this cowardly Congress. Here is some math not yet learned by Congress; regardless of tax rates imposed by Congress, the American economy yields no more than 18.6% of GDP in tax receipts. Therefore, spending in excess of 18.6% of GDP must be borrowed. We are approaching 26% of GDP in federal spending; a measurable gap of 7.4%. Every bit of it borrowed. So.
So back to my original subject; the war on terror and Obama's morph into a hawk as revolutions hop from one middle eastern dictatorship to the next - is Gitmo the rallying cry of our enemies? Can Obama, two years into his own dictatorship, clarify to any one's satisfaction who America's enemies are? As he mutters threats at Qaddafi about a no-fly zone the goodwill he was to have generated with his metro sexual style among the Europeans seems in short supply as they decline to enforce the no fly zone themselves. Very disappointing. By my bitter computations things can and do go from bad to worse. Bad - unemployment of 9.8%. Worse - escalating inflation. Bad - an unknown outcome in Libya and Egypt. Worse - the US military interrupting the Libyan revolution, spilling more American blood and creating a new "rallying cry" for our enemies. Bad - Obama for two more years. Worse - Obama for six more years.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
In War Truth is the First Casuality - ~Aeschylus
Now that the recession is over, notably without stimulation, we can all breathe a huge sigh of relief. The worst is behind us and we have the Father, the Son and Barak Obama to thank. Unless of course you are obese or hungry or both - then brace yourself for the "good war" on obesity and hunger. And in this war truth is definitely the first casualty. Barak and Michelle Obama are determined to save you from yourself by insinuating themselves into how much and what you and your kids eat so that you won't be hungry or fat or both.
The family is an unwelcome intrusion in the war on hunger and obesity among the "it takes a village crowd". This is certainly true in Boulder where the food renegade Ann Cooper was drafted, from Berkley, CA no less!, to serve as a general in the good war to save Boulder's children from the bad and wrong food choices made by their parents. BVSD parents have been treated to letters from the food general begging us to have our children eat breakfast and lunch at school as a means of eliminating that old stubborn achievement gap. Her last missive cheered the fact that "more kids are eating at school". Children cannot achieve if they don't eat the food Ann Cooper and Michelle Obama think they should eat which includes, strangely, more fruits and vegetables and ice cold milk. Who knew? Haven't parents been imploring their children to eat fruits and vegetables for years, decades and centuries? Not all decades of course. In the Great Depression parents did not have to beg their kids to eat cooked carrots or lima beans because those kids were hungry and there were no Fritos in the cupboard. There was no nothing in the cupboard. Families and children living in the Dust Bowl, if they didn't die from particle pneumonia, ate pickled thistle. Pickled thistle.
According to the USDA "food insecurity" affects approximately 35 million people in America. Food insecurity is defined specifically as reduction in food selection and or total calories at some point during the year typically due to financial pressures. Food insecurity is usually episodic and recurring, as opposed to chronic, and is defined in numbers of days without eating. Most of the families experiencing "food insecurity"are defined as low income and qualify for the Food Stamps program which is part of the $980 billion in food, housing and health care transferred to the poor annually by the federal government. Seventy-five percent of all people on Food Stamps are obese including the children. A typical explanation for why poor people are fat is that they "eat too much of the wrong food because it is cheaper than nutritious food". Per the USDA this is empirically not true and insulting to anyone who thinks logically. Specifically, calories per dollar are 5 times higher in soda than milk, soda being devoid of nutrition.
"Snack foods such as potato chips and donuts cost two to five times more per calorie than healthier staples such as beans, rice, and pasta. Families truly seeking to maximize calories per dollar of food expenditure would focus not on junk and snack foods but on traditional low-cost staples such as beans, rice, flour, pasta, and milk. These foods are not only less expensive but actually have below-average energy density and therefore a lower potential to promote weight gain.[16]" Barbara Rolls "The Volumetric of Weight Controls", 2000.
Obama vowed to spend $10 billion to help feed the poor and the overweight, ostensibly not because they are hungry but because their parents are incompetent at parenting. So why do the food policies for low income people include remedies that arguably make the problem worse; giving the poor more free food? Because this administration would rather micro-manage your food choices and foster dependency than allow you to improve it yourself in a bigger more real way. Michelle reaffirmed support for the Childhood Nutrition Act, i.e. spend more government money, to help with childhood obesity. This program consists of school programs run by educators to end injustice,getting kids to move ...yada yada yada; the money pours out while the kids grow fatter.
"Healthy Schools Campaign’s approach to environmental health and wellness in schools includes a special focus on the role that school environments can play in combating health disparities and promoting environmental justice." Healthy Schools Campaigns
Obamacare has provisions that will mandate BMI, body mass index, calculations on children which will certainly help kids lay off the chips. Oh, and Obama spent $400 million on the Healthy Food Financing Initiative which includes forcing grocery stores into low income neighborhoods and mandates that convenience stores have more wall space for refrigeration units so they can offer apples that the low income patrons may or may not want to buy.
The mind boggling array of dollars spent to combat what should be called malnutrition, or bad nutrition, can only be described as depressing. Bad nutrition is a cultural problem and is not purely driven by economics but socio-economics. Many kids today, including mine and poor kids who are not starving, would rather eat Oreos and Frito's which explains why some kids today are big fat fatties, to quote Glen Beck. How does one fight a culture war? Should the federal government fight a culture war? What would I do if I were Queen Michelle? I would put to rest once and for all the lie that the poor in this country are starving and that their hunger is driving the achievement gap. Many things drive the achievement gap, including but not limited to bad parents who don't care about education as well as by bad schools run by very bad and highly protected teachers. If I were Queen Michelle I would lean hard on Barry to transfer funds out of the Childhood Nutrition Act into the Race to the Top program, provided the Race to the Top guru Arne Duncan did an about face and supported school choice. Giving poor parents access to public funds and school choice via vouchers is the only long term solution out of this mad mess of throwing billions of dollars at the wrong problem. Since this will not happen with Barry at the beck and call of the National Education Association the only thing left to do is serve pickled thistle at school lunches. Pickled thistle.
The family is an unwelcome intrusion in the war on hunger and obesity among the "it takes a village crowd". This is certainly true in Boulder where the food renegade Ann Cooper was drafted, from Berkley, CA no less!, to serve as a general in the good war to save Boulder's children from the bad and wrong food choices made by their parents. BVSD parents have been treated to letters from the food general begging us to have our children eat breakfast and lunch at school as a means of eliminating that old stubborn achievement gap. Her last missive cheered the fact that "more kids are eating at school". Children cannot achieve if they don't eat the food Ann Cooper and Michelle Obama think they should eat which includes, strangely, more fruits and vegetables and ice cold milk. Who knew? Haven't parents been imploring their children to eat fruits and vegetables for years, decades and centuries? Not all decades of course. In the Great Depression parents did not have to beg their kids to eat cooked carrots or lima beans because those kids were hungry and there were no Fritos in the cupboard. There was no nothing in the cupboard. Families and children living in the Dust Bowl, if they didn't die from particle pneumonia, ate pickled thistle. Pickled thistle.
According to the USDA "food insecurity" affects approximately 35 million people in America. Food insecurity is defined specifically as reduction in food selection and or total calories at some point during the year typically due to financial pressures. Food insecurity is usually episodic and recurring, as opposed to chronic, and is defined in numbers of days without eating. Most of the families experiencing "food insecurity"are defined as low income and qualify for the Food Stamps program which is part of the $980 billion in food, housing and health care transferred to the poor annually by the federal government. Seventy-five percent of all people on Food Stamps are obese including the children. A typical explanation for why poor people are fat is that they "eat too much of the wrong food because it is cheaper than nutritious food". Per the USDA this is empirically not true and insulting to anyone who thinks logically. Specifically, calories per dollar are 5 times higher in soda than milk, soda being devoid of nutrition.
"Snack foods such as potato chips and donuts cost two to five times more per calorie than healthier staples such as beans, rice, and pasta. Families truly seeking to maximize calories per dollar of food expenditure would focus not on junk and snack foods but on traditional low-cost staples such as beans, rice, flour, pasta, and milk. These foods are not only less expensive but actually have below-average energy density and therefore a lower potential to promote weight gain.[16]" Barbara Rolls "The Volumetric of Weight Controls", 2000.
Obama vowed to spend $10 billion to help feed the poor and the overweight, ostensibly not because they are hungry but because their parents are incompetent at parenting. So why do the food policies for low income people include remedies that arguably make the problem worse; giving the poor more free food? Because this administration would rather micro-manage your food choices and foster dependency than allow you to improve it yourself in a bigger more real way. Michelle reaffirmed support for the Childhood Nutrition Act, i.e. spend more government money, to help with childhood obesity. This program consists of school programs run by educators to end injustice,getting kids to move ...yada yada yada; the money pours out while the kids grow fatter.
"Healthy Schools Campaign’s approach to environmental health and wellness in schools includes a special focus on the role that school environments can play in combating health disparities and promoting environmental justice." Healthy Schools Campaigns
Obamacare has provisions that will mandate BMI, body mass index, calculations on children which will certainly help kids lay off the chips. Oh, and Obama spent $400 million on the Healthy Food Financing Initiative which includes forcing grocery stores into low income neighborhoods and mandates that convenience stores have more wall space for refrigeration units so they can offer apples that the low income patrons may or may not want to buy.
The mind boggling array of dollars spent to combat what should be called malnutrition, or bad nutrition, can only be described as depressing. Bad nutrition is a cultural problem and is not purely driven by economics but socio-economics. Many kids today, including mine and poor kids who are not starving, would rather eat Oreos and Frito's which explains why some kids today are big fat fatties, to quote Glen Beck. How does one fight a culture war? Should the federal government fight a culture war? What would I do if I were Queen Michelle? I would put to rest once and for all the lie that the poor in this country are starving and that their hunger is driving the achievement gap. Many things drive the achievement gap, including but not limited to bad parents who don't care about education as well as by bad schools run by very bad and highly protected teachers. If I were Queen Michelle I would lean hard on Barry to transfer funds out of the Childhood Nutrition Act into the Race to the Top program, provided the Race to the Top guru Arne Duncan did an about face and supported school choice. Giving poor parents access to public funds and school choice via vouchers is the only long term solution out of this mad mess of throwing billions of dollars at the wrong problem. Since this will not happen with Barry at the beck and call of the National Education Association the only thing left to do is serve pickled thistle at school lunches. Pickled thistle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)