This is not a joke, some perv in Fairfax Virginia has for going on almost half a year now been terrorizing malls and shopping centers by slashing girl's asses with either a razor or, more likely, a box-cutter.
They've got the suspect on the below video, and though you don't get a really good view of him, he is described as a short, fat Hispanic man. According to the report below, the police assume he is acting from some kind of sexual dysfunction. That is more than likely true. The perv could be impotent, maybe even a castrati. In any event this could be not only a release for him, but a way of "making his mark" so to speak. The Zorro of teenage asses.
I would also caution that, although probably unlikely, this could be some kind of Latino gang initiation ritual involving more than one suspect. There is one particularly violent Salvadoran gang that conducts hits by slashing the throats of victims, and they are becoming more widespread with every passing year.
Or, there is a possibility that is more likely. Whether he is or is not Hispanic, he could also be a Muslim. A significantly large percentage of that population (maybe the majority of them) go bat-shit insane at the sight of a woman's ankle or calf. A hint of breast or thigh could turn them into murderous savages, ie bring out their true natures.
The sight of a pretty young girls ass, even if seen only through the outline of tight, skimpy shorts, is probably enough to send some of them into the stratosphere. They have been known to toss acid into the faces of pretty girls who aren't considered sufficiently modest in their dress. In most countries where they are the majority they commit such acts with little if any fear of reprisals, legal or otherwise.
It's almost like they think a pretty young girl who dresses in such a manner as to arouse a man in public is worthy of disfigurement, and humiliation, if not outright death.
And there's the rub. This perpetrator could eventually escalate into ever more violent acts. He needs to be caught and prosecuted, and locked away before he possibly causes serious, perhaps permanent damage, no matter who or what he is.
H/T Always On Watch
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
The Magical Wonderland Where Only RINOs Make Sense
It's a madhouse over at Ace's place where the opinions seem more divided than at other blogs, such as at The Other McCain, who along with the vast majority of his readers seem solidly on the Tea Party side of the current Debt Ceiling debate.
Me, I think the Tea Party has fucked up a golden opportunity.I made no secret back a couple of weeks ago of my heartfelt belief that it would be best to Give Obama What He Wants. Granted, on the face of it, it might seem capricious, and duplicitous. Sometimes, however, a "principled" stand is not always the best one. We are now-to paraphrase Little Carmine of The Sopranos-"standing at the crossroads of a giant precipice".
You know what the worst thing about this shit is? Number one, basically the Tea Party people are right, and I mean R-I-G-H-T! But that's irrelevant. You can be right and you can be obstinate about it too. It's hard to justify hijacking the entire government process when you only control one third of it.
Now for bad news number one. If our credit rating is dropped, that means we're actually going to be paying MORE for interest on the debt, so all of this haggling over "principle" has been counter-productive, to put it charitably.
Bad News Number Two gets even worse. At this stage of the game, its probably too late to keep our credit rating from dropping.
Bad News Number Three-The Tea Party might well get the Lion's Share of the blame. They don't deserve the Lion's Share, but they do deserve at least, oh, maybe a third of it. Even if they end up getting no more than the share of the blame they deserve, that's still bad news for the Tea Party due to reason Number Three, which is-wait for it-
The Tea Party is as we speak shitting away what chance they ever might have had to wrest control of the Republican Party from the entrenched self-interest of the Beltway Establishment RINOs that now and probably at this point will forever control it.
What does this all mean? Just that a great many Tea Party Congressman who manage to win their primaries might not have such an easy time of it in the General Election when the Independent voters have their say in the matter. And as for those Tea Party candidates who might have been thinking about "primarying" current GOP politicians? My advice to them is, take up a new hobby. Macrame' might be fun.
Its too late for mine or any other solution, at this stage of the game we're fucked. But if I had to offer an alternative solution, just off the top of my head, it would be that if our credit rating is dropped, we might as well go ahead and default on the debt. But you know that's not going to happen because Obama is the one who is going to decide who and what gets paid. And he damned sure is going to make sure the interest on the debt is paid, because, of course, he wants to keep borrowing, even if it is at an increased rate of interest.
Oh, and by the way, that thing about him deciding who or what gets paid and doesn't. I think you can count on severe, serious cuts in border security.
Actually, I think we're already over the edge of the precipice, falling with no parachute, with nothing in fact but the wind at our backs to hurry us down. It's a long, hard fall, and I can see the nation's life flashing before my eyes. The future might well be one hard, painful SPLATT!
Me, I think the Tea Party has fucked up a golden opportunity.I made no secret back a couple of weeks ago of my heartfelt belief that it would be best to Give Obama What He Wants. Granted, on the face of it, it might seem capricious, and duplicitous. Sometimes, however, a "principled" stand is not always the best one. We are now-to paraphrase Little Carmine of The Sopranos-"standing at the crossroads of a giant precipice".
You know what the worst thing about this shit is? Number one, basically the Tea Party people are right, and I mean R-I-G-H-T! But that's irrelevant. You can be right and you can be obstinate about it too. It's hard to justify hijacking the entire government process when you only control one third of it.
Now for bad news number one. If our credit rating is dropped, that means we're actually going to be paying MORE for interest on the debt, so all of this haggling over "principle" has been counter-productive, to put it charitably.
Bad News Number Two gets even worse. At this stage of the game, its probably too late to keep our credit rating from dropping.
Bad News Number Three-The Tea Party might well get the Lion's Share of the blame. They don't deserve the Lion's Share, but they do deserve at least, oh, maybe a third of it. Even if they end up getting no more than the share of the blame they deserve, that's still bad news for the Tea Party due to reason Number Three, which is-wait for it-
The Tea Party is as we speak shitting away what chance they ever might have had to wrest control of the Republican Party from the entrenched self-interest of the Beltway Establishment RINOs that now and probably at this point will forever control it.
What does this all mean? Just that a great many Tea Party Congressman who manage to win their primaries might not have such an easy time of it in the General Election when the Independent voters have their say in the matter. And as for those Tea Party candidates who might have been thinking about "primarying" current GOP politicians? My advice to them is, take up a new hobby. Macrame' might be fun.
Its too late for mine or any other solution, at this stage of the game we're fucked. But if I had to offer an alternative solution, just off the top of my head, it would be that if our credit rating is dropped, we might as well go ahead and default on the debt. But you know that's not going to happen because Obama is the one who is going to decide who and what gets paid. And he damned sure is going to make sure the interest on the debt is paid, because, of course, he wants to keep borrowing, even if it is at an increased rate of interest.
Oh, and by the way, that thing about him deciding who or what gets paid and doesn't. I think you can count on severe, serious cuts in border security.
Actually, I think we're already over the edge of the precipice, falling with no parachute, with nothing in fact but the wind at our backs to hurry us down. It's a long, hard fall, and I can see the nation's life flashing before my eyes. The future might well be one hard, painful SPLATT!
Monday, July 25, 2011
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Friday, July 22, 2011
When Public Servants Become Public Tyrants
Cops as a general rule don't really seem to like the idea of gun rights for citizens, especially so-called concealed carry laws such as have recently been enacted in various states, including OH, where the video below was shot.
People might be tempted to think this is understandable, and based wholly on the rigors, demands, and dangers of their job. No doubt that is a part of it, especially in some areas, but there's a lot more to it than that.
There is in fact another aspect that is greatly overlooked. Let's just call a spade a spade here. If you have an armed citizenry, a professional police force is nowhere near as vital or necessary. You will still need a minimum number of uniformed police officers at the state and local levels, of course. That will always be the case.
However, there can be no doubt that if you legally arms all honest citizens, those that wish to be armed, the ultimate long-term result will be that in most places you can cut your police force substantially.
Police unions, like the Fraternal Order of Police, don't like the idea of gun rights for the average citizens. After all, the more cops on the nation's city and state police forces there are, the more members thus the more clout for the police unions and organizations, and the more appropriations they can get for their respective police forces. And of course the more they can get in the way of union dues. If you have ever wondered why certain police unions like the FOP have come out in support of Democrat candidates, wonder no more.
Cops like this are actually a greater argument for gun rights than criminals are. Watch the below video carefully and ask yourself, even if you didn't have a gun or any other means of self-defense, would you trust this cop in a situation where you needed assistance? I damn sure wouldn't. Nor am I going to go on record as saying that the majority of cops are "not like this". The point is, how can you know what the majority are like, or, more importantly, what they would be like in the future, in a world where the 2nd Amendment has been interpreted in such a manner as to mean it does not apply to private citizens?
But if private citizens are allowed to have weapons, crime will drop exponentially. Sure there will be unfortunate incidents, accidents, some involving children of careless or irresponsible parents, some involving criminals stealing unsecured weapons, etc., but in the overall greater picture, crime will drop and it will drop substantially. You have empowered honest, law-abiding citizens, and the criminal element knows they have to proceed with a great deal more caution. Some might even find a new line of work. We all benefit, for the most part with a few exception. One of these exceptions is the nation's police forces.
So you should watch this video. It's a long one, but worth your time. When you watch, think of how a barber might feel towards a person who cuts their own hair. Or an auto mechanic, plumber, electrician, etc, towards someone who knows how to do their own installations and repairs.
And then ask yourself-was this cop really that worried about this civilian possibly shooting him?
H/T The Blaze
UPDATE-Join the open Facebook group North Cascade Patriots today.
People might be tempted to think this is understandable, and based wholly on the rigors, demands, and dangers of their job. No doubt that is a part of it, especially in some areas, but there's a lot more to it than that.
There is in fact another aspect that is greatly overlooked. Let's just call a spade a spade here. If you have an armed citizenry, a professional police force is nowhere near as vital or necessary. You will still need a minimum number of uniformed police officers at the state and local levels, of course. That will always be the case.
However, there can be no doubt that if you legally arms all honest citizens, those that wish to be armed, the ultimate long-term result will be that in most places you can cut your police force substantially.
Police unions, like the Fraternal Order of Police, don't like the idea of gun rights for the average citizens. After all, the more cops on the nation's city and state police forces there are, the more members thus the more clout for the police unions and organizations, and the more appropriations they can get for their respective police forces. And of course the more they can get in the way of union dues. If you have ever wondered why certain police unions like the FOP have come out in support of Democrat candidates, wonder no more.
Cops like this are actually a greater argument for gun rights than criminals are. Watch the below video carefully and ask yourself, even if you didn't have a gun or any other means of self-defense, would you trust this cop in a situation where you needed assistance? I damn sure wouldn't. Nor am I going to go on record as saying that the majority of cops are "not like this". The point is, how can you know what the majority are like, or, more importantly, what they would be like in the future, in a world where the 2nd Amendment has been interpreted in such a manner as to mean it does not apply to private citizens?
But if private citizens are allowed to have weapons, crime will drop exponentially. Sure there will be unfortunate incidents, accidents, some involving children of careless or irresponsible parents, some involving criminals stealing unsecured weapons, etc., but in the overall greater picture, crime will drop and it will drop substantially. You have empowered honest, law-abiding citizens, and the criminal element knows they have to proceed with a great deal more caution. Some might even find a new line of work. We all benefit, for the most part with a few exception. One of these exceptions is the nation's police forces.
So you should watch this video. It's a long one, but worth your time. When you watch, think of how a barber might feel towards a person who cuts their own hair. Or an auto mechanic, plumber, electrician, etc, towards someone who knows how to do their own installations and repairs.
And then ask yourself-was this cop really that worried about this civilian possibly shooting him?
H/T The Blaze
UPDATE-Join the open Facebook group North Cascade Patriots today.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Hey, That's No Lady, That's-
We have a feud now in Washington between Democratic Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Florida Republican Congressman Colonel Allen West, who called his colleague "vile", "despicable", and "not a lady" after Schultz harangued him on the floor of the House of Representatives in his absence. Democrats are up in arms over this, of course, while the GOP defends West. Schultz has of course complained, but West insists he will not back down nor will he apologize. And so it goes.
I just want to hear Debbie Wasserman-Schultz say one thing, and only one thing. Please, if somebody reading this happens to know her, please tell just to say this one thing to West. She should point at him first, and then jab her finger towards the floor in a downward motion and then say the following-
NIP IT! NIP IT IN THE BUD! IN-THE-BUD!! NIP IT!!
I just want to hear Debbie Wasserman-Schultz say one thing, and only one thing. Please, if somebody reading this happens to know her, please tell just to say this one thing to West. She should point at him first, and then jab her finger towards the floor in a downward motion and then say the following-
NIP IT! NIP IT IN THE BUD! IN-THE-BUD!! NIP IT!!
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
WTF Wednesday featuring-The Stand
I would make this a caption contest but that might seem cruel.
Oh WTF go for it. Or just see if you can figure this out. Is it some sort of heinously cruel punishment directed as much at the child's family as it is the child itself? Or is it some kind of fucked up tribal initiation ritual? Maybe a really, really strange dance move? WTF is going on here anyway? For the answer, go here
Oh WTF go for it. Or just see if you can figure this out. Is it some sort of heinously cruel punishment directed as much at the child's family as it is the child itself? Or is it some kind of fucked up tribal initiation ritual? Maybe a really, really strange dance move? WTF is going on here anyway? For the answer, go here
Tea Party GOP Presidential Debate On Twitter
GOP Pres Twitter debate at Townhall starting at 3pmEST with-Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, McCotter, Johnson @TheTeaParty_net sponsors. Following is the candidates Twitter accounts-
@THEHermanCain @TeamBachmann @newtgingrich @ricksantorum @ThadMcCotter and @GovGaryJohnson
Be there!
@THEHermanCain @TeamBachmann @newtgingrich @ricksantorum @ThadMcCotter and @GovGaryJohnson
Be there!
More Than A Gaffe-The Real Reason The Romneylan Supports Global Climate Change Alarmism
If you ever wondered why Mitt Romney believes in Man-Made Global Climate Change, wonder no more. He stands to make millions off green technology through his consulting firm Bain & Company or through its spin-off company Bain Capital. Here's the entire story.
Granted, this probably comes from a source that probably is a supporter of another candidate, maybe Pawlenty, or possibly Bachmann. But that does not in and of itself negate the validity of the charge.
And doubtless, Romeny will try to downplay the significance of the story. He'll spin it. He will say something to the effect that of course he and his company have a perfect right to make money off of green technology, but if anything the fact that they are willing to invest in it proves the sincerity of Romney's stated beliefs.
But of course this would be an obfuscation of the fact that, in all of Romney's written and oral statements in support of the alleged science of Man-Made Climate Change, he has never once issued any kind of qualifying statement of full disclosure as to his potential financial interests in green energy technology.
Look for him also to come out strongly against any of the Cap And Trade Legislation which has ever been considered in the past, and especially look for him to lambast the Administrations enforcement of environmental Cap And Trade Laws through the EPA without Congressional authorization.
But no matter what he says or does, no matter how he obfuscates, or denies, that doesn't change one simple fact-the Romneylan has some 'splainin' to do.
Granted, this probably comes from a source that probably is a supporter of another candidate, maybe Pawlenty, or possibly Bachmann. But that does not in and of itself negate the validity of the charge.
And doubtless, Romeny will try to downplay the significance of the story. He'll spin it. He will say something to the effect that of course he and his company have a perfect right to make money off of green technology, but if anything the fact that they are willing to invest in it proves the sincerity of Romney's stated beliefs.
But of course this would be an obfuscation of the fact that, in all of Romney's written and oral statements in support of the alleged science of Man-Made Climate Change, he has never once issued any kind of qualifying statement of full disclosure as to his potential financial interests in green energy technology.
Look for him also to come out strongly against any of the Cap And Trade Legislation which has ever been considered in the past, and especially look for him to lambast the Administrations enforcement of environmental Cap And Trade Laws through the EPA without Congressional authorization.
But no matter what he says or does, no matter how he obfuscates, or denies, that doesn't change one simple fact-the Romneylan has some 'splainin' to do.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Why Does George Bush Keep Wreaking Havoc On Our Chances For Economic Recovery?
I guess by now most people have heard how Nevada casino mogul Steve Wynn feels about Barak Obama. Is it safe to assume he speaks for probably the majority of American businessmen? Yep, let's do that. Here's what he says-
The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don’t invest, their holding too much money. We haven’t heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody’s afraid of the government and there’s no need soft peddling it, it’s the truth. It is the truth. And that’s true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I’m telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he’s gone, everybody’s going to be sitting on their thumbs.
This message brought to you by a Democrat businessman and Harry Reid supporter who didn't get the "It's Bush's fault" memo. Or, well, he probably got it and said, "fuck Obama's bullshit excuses". You know, pretty much like more and more people are saying everyday.
H/T Prof Jacobson at Legal Insurrection
The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don’t invest, their holding too much money. We haven’t heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody’s afraid of the government and there’s no need soft peddling it, it’s the truth. It is the truth. And that’s true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I’m telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he’s gone, everybody’s going to be sitting on their thumbs.
This message brought to you by a Democrat businessman and Harry Reid supporter who didn't get the "It's Bush's fault" memo. Or, well, he probably got it and said, "fuck Obama's bullshit excuses". You know, pretty much like more and more people are saying everyday.
H/T Prof Jacobson at Legal Insurrection
Earth To Sheila Jackson Lee-The Sixties Are Over
Sheila Jackson Lee accuses all us Obama opponents of being racist against a man who's only true connection to African Americans is that his white ancestors owned black slaves, and his African ancestors very likely sold them. Funny stuff
She also reminds us how every President before him-for example, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush-were all treated with respect. Damn, I didn't know that.
Hey you know what, I think I've finally got this shit figured out. Because Obama is "black" we're supposed to kiss his ass, right?
She also reminds us how every President before him-for example, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush-were all treated with respect. Damn, I didn't know that.
Hey you know what, I think I've finally got this shit figured out. Because Obama is "black" we're supposed to kiss his ass, right?
Friday, July 15, 2011
Give Obama What He Wants-Everything He Wants
Everybody is weighing in on the so-called negotiations for deficit reduction, including now Newt Gingrich, who pretty much pulls the typical GOP party line. The Republican House and Senate should stand firm and tough on any idea of further tax increases as well as any further spending increases.
He's right of course. They are all right. To raise taxes (which is what allowing any past tax breaks to expire is tantamount to) at any time is going to serve to put the breaks on job creation and economic growth, even during good times. But in an economy such as we have now, it could be devastating.
As for any further spending increases in the form of any kind of so-called stimulus, we've already been there. No amount is ever enough to do anything other than to dig ourselves a deeper hole.
But god damn it enough is enough. Go ahead and give Obama what he wants and let the country find out for themselves what by now should be blatantly obvious.
There's no reason to imagine things will improve if we go the Democrat way, but I will promise you one thing-if the GOP gets their way, or mostly their way, and things improve, the Democrats will damn sure take the credit for it.
Let me clue you in to the cold hard facts of life. The American people by and large have the attention span of a mosquito. Because of that, we have a world where the economic boom of the 1990's is called "The Clinton Economy". Ask yourself, how many people have you heard refer to the nineties as the Newt Gingrich-Republican Congress Economy? Shit Newt Gingrich is running for President now and I guarantee you if you mentioned his name in a casual conversation without offering specifics most Americans would say something like "Newt Gingrich, isn't that a Doctor Seuss character?"
That is just the level of ignorance that we're dealing with here. The fact that the nineties economy was due mainly to the Republicans restraint of Clinton's spendthrift, liberal inclinations does not compute. And look what happened. People weren't even paying attention then. Times were relatively good, that's all people noticed, and since Clinton was the President, that's all they needed to know.
And you actually think they're going to think any differently if things go the same way? Make no mistake, if things go good for whatever reason Obama will find a way to take credit for it, and the people will fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
I repeat, give Obama what he wants. He wants to end the Bush era tax cuts, do it. He want to raise more taxes on top of that, hell, why the fuck not? He wants to raise the debt ceiling another two trillion dollars, and promptly proceed to spend it on some package of boondoggles that he calls a "stimulus".
Well, why the hell not? "Go for it, Obama" should be the watchword of the day.
Then when things go to hell in a handbasket, its not going to be so easy for him to blame it on Bush. Oh, but he'll try.
He's right of course. They are all right. To raise taxes (which is what allowing any past tax breaks to expire is tantamount to) at any time is going to serve to put the breaks on job creation and economic growth, even during good times. But in an economy such as we have now, it could be devastating.
As for any further spending increases in the form of any kind of so-called stimulus, we've already been there. No amount is ever enough to do anything other than to dig ourselves a deeper hole.
But god damn it enough is enough. Go ahead and give Obama what he wants and let the country find out for themselves what by now should be blatantly obvious.
There's no reason to imagine things will improve if we go the Democrat way, but I will promise you one thing-if the GOP gets their way, or mostly their way, and things improve, the Democrats will damn sure take the credit for it.
Let me clue you in to the cold hard facts of life. The American people by and large have the attention span of a mosquito. Because of that, we have a world where the economic boom of the 1990's is called "The Clinton Economy". Ask yourself, how many people have you heard refer to the nineties as the Newt Gingrich-Republican Congress Economy? Shit Newt Gingrich is running for President now and I guarantee you if you mentioned his name in a casual conversation without offering specifics most Americans would say something like "Newt Gingrich, isn't that a Doctor Seuss character?"
That is just the level of ignorance that we're dealing with here. The fact that the nineties economy was due mainly to the Republicans restraint of Clinton's spendthrift, liberal inclinations does not compute. And look what happened. People weren't even paying attention then. Times were relatively good, that's all people noticed, and since Clinton was the President, that's all they needed to know.
And you actually think they're going to think any differently if things go the same way? Make no mistake, if things go good for whatever reason Obama will find a way to take credit for it, and the people will fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
I repeat, give Obama what he wants. He wants to end the Bush era tax cuts, do it. He want to raise more taxes on top of that, hell, why the fuck not? He wants to raise the debt ceiling another two trillion dollars, and promptly proceed to spend it on some package of boondoggles that he calls a "stimulus".
Well, why the hell not? "Go for it, Obama" should be the watchword of the day.
Then when things go to hell in a handbasket, its not going to be so easy for him to blame it on Bush. Oh, but he'll try.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Well, When You're Bored
With the perfect music accompaniment. At one point he seems to be keeping time to it.
Baby's First Birthday
Today marks the first year anniversary of the discovery of Neptune, one year ago in Neptune years. It was discovered 165 years ago today, July 12th, 1846. In all that time since, Neptune has as of today completed one orbit around the sun. To get an idea just how long that is, if the day Neptune was discovered was somehow the actual start of a Neptune year which only now ended today, that year would have started three years before the Mexican American War.
Oddly in a sense it might have been on or close to the beginning of the Neptune solstice that it was discovered, as it was likely at or near the point of its closest approach to the sun.
As you can tell the planet is blue and I assume this was why it was named after Neptune the Roman Sea God, although I'm not sure if this is a coincidence. I find it hard to believe the planet's blue hue would show up to early astronomers, but maybe it did. However, though this inspired its name, its unlikely to contain much if any water. Neptune is more than likely a mix of methane and ammonia, like its fellow gas giants Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus. The peaceful, beautiful blue color is just another element of the mystery and illusion surrounding the planet.
The picture above is of Neptune as seen from its largest moon, Triton.
Oh, one thing more. Neptune is also apparently undergoing the effects of Global Climate Change. LOL
Sunday, July 10, 2011
A Real Brother, A Twitter Account, And A Schtick
That's the only sense I can make of Theron K Cal who a few years back made a documentary movie called The Sell-Out Diaries. The premise of the book is about how black culture is undermined by African American men and women who would rather be enmeshed in the white culture-associating, dating, and marrying whites, than stick with their own race. Sound familiar?
Theron insists these African American individuals are self-hating folks who can't comprehend that blacks are considered inferior by the whites they so worship.
It gets worse. Everything in his world view revolves around racism of whites against blacks. If you oppose Obama, for any reason whatsoever, you hate him because he's black. He will accept no alternative explanation. You say Obama is a progressive and a Democrat, and you are a conservative or a Republican, therefore your opposition to Obama is ideological?
Nope, he's not buying that argument. To him, conservative is nothing more nor less than a code word for "racist" and the vast majority if not all Republicans are either white racists or, in the sense of Herman Cain, Allen West, etc., they are self-hating sell-outs.
Before long you have descended into a frenzied world of sheer lunacy, a world in which 80% of black women are black man hating lesbians due to some ingenious plot by black lesbians-in the nineteen fifties, no less-to indoctrinate black women into black man hating lesbianism on college campuses. Again, I can't stress enough this was supposed to have transpired in the nineteen fifties when the percentage of black women on college campuses was probably miniscule in relative terms to today. You almost wonder if Theron K Cal is going out of his way to make black people look bad. Even if he might be a potential stalking horse for Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachmann or even the self-loathing sellout Herman Cain.
He was recently banned from the Huffington Post of all places for an extended diatribe against the physicist Steven Hawking, who recently posited about the likely outcome of an encounter with an advanced race of space aliens. Hawking said it would likely lead to our enslavement, which Theron resented greatly. Hawking he claimed was a white supremacist who was projecting the white racist mindset onto an advanced race of aliens who, according to Cal, would more than likely be like blacks or oriental. In other words, they would more likely be peace loving people who would have never survived, let alone advanced enough to conduct interstellar travel if they were white people.
So what's this all about? Is it a schtick meant to increase sells of his DVD or otherwise further his career? Or is he truly as loony, as deranged as he sounds? Read his blog, and make sure to read an excerpt from his novel (note to Cal, I hope for your sake this is a first draft. A hint-needs work), and once you are through there be sure you read his Twitter feed.
Fair warning though, if you do engage him out of the naive hope you might make some kind of breakthrough you will probably be wasting your time. Moreover if you aren't a racist now there's a good chance you might find yourself becoming one. Which is probably why none other than Oliver Willis, of all people, banned him from following him on Twitter and probably on his blog or anywhere else Willis holds any kind of sway. After a few rounds of engaging with Theron, Willis probably said to himself "Got Damn if I ain't starting to hate fucking black people". Seriously, Real Brother, as he likes to call himself, is that exasperating.
That in fact is what the fine folks on BET found out when they made the mistake of having him on as a guest once on Oh Drama. Following is the first of three parts as uploaded to YouTube. Warning-watching and listening to Theron K. Cal, like engaging him on Twitter, might be damaging to your brain cells. I know I feel several orders of magnitude dumber having interacted with the man. You've been duly warned.
Theron insists these African American individuals are self-hating folks who can't comprehend that blacks are considered inferior by the whites they so worship.
It gets worse. Everything in his world view revolves around racism of whites against blacks. If you oppose Obama, for any reason whatsoever, you hate him because he's black. He will accept no alternative explanation. You say Obama is a progressive and a Democrat, and you are a conservative or a Republican, therefore your opposition to Obama is ideological?
Nope, he's not buying that argument. To him, conservative is nothing more nor less than a code word for "racist" and the vast majority if not all Republicans are either white racists or, in the sense of Herman Cain, Allen West, etc., they are self-hating sell-outs.
Before long you have descended into a frenzied world of sheer lunacy, a world in which 80% of black women are black man hating lesbians due to some ingenious plot by black lesbians-in the nineteen fifties, no less-to indoctrinate black women into black man hating lesbianism on college campuses. Again, I can't stress enough this was supposed to have transpired in the nineteen fifties when the percentage of black women on college campuses was probably miniscule in relative terms to today. You almost wonder if Theron K Cal is going out of his way to make black people look bad. Even if he might be a potential stalking horse for Mitt Romney, Michelle Bachmann or even the self-loathing sellout Herman Cain.
He was recently banned from the Huffington Post of all places for an extended diatribe against the physicist Steven Hawking, who recently posited about the likely outcome of an encounter with an advanced race of space aliens. Hawking said it would likely lead to our enslavement, which Theron resented greatly. Hawking he claimed was a white supremacist who was projecting the white racist mindset onto an advanced race of aliens who, according to Cal, would more than likely be like blacks or oriental. In other words, they would more likely be peace loving people who would have never survived, let alone advanced enough to conduct interstellar travel if they were white people.
So what's this all about? Is it a schtick meant to increase sells of his DVD or otherwise further his career? Or is he truly as loony, as deranged as he sounds? Read his blog, and make sure to read an excerpt from his novel (note to Cal, I hope for your sake this is a first draft. A hint-needs work), and once you are through there be sure you read his Twitter feed.
Fair warning though, if you do engage him out of the naive hope you might make some kind of breakthrough you will probably be wasting your time. Moreover if you aren't a racist now there's a good chance you might find yourself becoming one. Which is probably why none other than Oliver Willis, of all people, banned him from following him on Twitter and probably on his blog or anywhere else Willis holds any kind of sway. After a few rounds of engaging with Theron, Willis probably said to himself "Got Damn if I ain't starting to hate fucking black people". Seriously, Real Brother, as he likes to call himself, is that exasperating.
That in fact is what the fine folks on BET found out when they made the mistake of having him on as a guest once on Oh Drama. Following is the first of three parts as uploaded to YouTube. Warning-watching and listening to Theron K. Cal, like engaging him on Twitter, might be damaging to your brain cells. I know I feel several orders of magnitude dumber having interacted with the man. You've been duly warned.
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
The Casey Anthony Murder Trial-What Happened And Why?
A lot of the punditocracy are totally outraged at the Casey Anthony verdict, which I could have predicted in the event of a Not Guilty verdict a lot easier than I could have predicted the verdict itself. A lot of the comments are so over the top they aren't really worthy of serious response. I'm halfway expecting Nancy Grace to call for the jurors to be investigated by child protective services on the grounds they would have to be unfit parents, grandparents, or even unfit to be in the same neighborhood as small children. Another extreme reaction might be to suggest they should have to hire Casey Anthony as a baby-sitter. Don't be surprised at anything you might hear over the course of the next few days.
But like it or lump it, it is what it is. Thanks to the arrogant attitude of the lead prosecutor in the case, his dismissive and at times even overtly derisive attitude towards the defense, no one was willing to listen to him objectively to start out with. Moreover, this was a typical case of judicial overreach. If the DA had been content to go for a second degree or a manslaughter charge, with maybe a secondary charge of abuse of a child, there is a very good chance Casey Anthony would be sitting in a prison for at least the next thirty years.
Granted, the jury could have found her guilty of those charges anyway, but the capitol murder charge sucked all the oxygen out of the room. That was the focus of the prosecution, and because of that, it became the focus of the jury. In other words, the jury did their job and followed the case the way it was presented to them. And unfortunately for the prosecution team, they came up short.
I would remind everybody of one other very important fact. These jurors lived, ate, and breathed this case. They were sequestered and had no outside contact with any views or reports pertaining to this case, and I suspect precious little of anything else. Because of this, they were focused on every single aspect of the case, and were up close and personal to the defendant and to both sides.
Translation-they saw the case uncut, unadulterated, and in its entirety. The rest of us saw it piecemeal through the eyes of a lynch mob media driven by ratings and the quest for advertising dollars. Because of this, they presented the most sensationalistic parts of the case, and the evidence, and I am of a mind that they did so in a good many cases out of context, possibly even out of all connection to reality.
Because of all of these things, Casey Anthony will be a free woman soon. Does that mean she is innocent. No, it just means the prosecution didn't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
It might be depressing, maddening, unfortunate, and even in a sense unjust-but the jury did the only thing they could do in their heart of hearts.
And frankly, I would take that any day over the show trials of the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, or for that matter even over the relatively civilized and advanced system of Great Britain. There, the burden of proof isn't on the state or government. The burden of proof there is on the defense to prove their innocence.
That to me is a sobering thought. We are possibly the only country in the world-if there's another one I am not aware of it-where the burden of proof is on the state to prove their case. Our founding fathers made it that way purposely, in order to insure that a capricious or vengeful state could not single out political enemies for unjust prosecution, over any charge they might dream up.
Thus, as mad as you might be at the idea that a woman you are convinced is guilty is going to go free, you might want to take a deep breath and be grateful that our system made it so difficult, when the law is followed, for the state to throw her-or you, or me, or your family-in prison, or to death.
And again, bear in mind that a great deal of this trial, from the prosecution perspective, was political in its own right and media driven, which was doubtless the reason for the overreach. If this case had not drawn anymore than moderate regional attention, I can promise you it would have gone a lot differently, and would be very unlikely to have been tried as a capitol murder case. The result would probably have been a lot different as well.
As for what I think might have happened, I expounded my own theory here. Having followed the case to some extent since that post, I would have to amend certain parts of it, particularly the possible complicity, albeit innocently, of unknown parties. Otherwise, I stand by my theory as the most likely explanation for what happened to Caylee Anthony. It explains how she died, why there was no forensic evidence to speak of, and even explains why Casey acted in such a bizarre fashion in the immediate aftermath of the child's horrible, untimely and. yes, accidental demise.
And I would repeat, if the case had been investigated along these lines, and prosecuted that way, the chances are very good Casey Anthony would be in prison for a great deal of her life, perhaps up into her middle age, and maybe even beyond.
But hey-there's just something sexy about a capitol murder case, huh? It's a great way to pad your resume, sell a book or two, and maybe one day become a member of that most these days renowned of personages-the cable news network legal punditocracy.
But like it or lump it, it is what it is. Thanks to the arrogant attitude of the lead prosecutor in the case, his dismissive and at times even overtly derisive attitude towards the defense, no one was willing to listen to him objectively to start out with. Moreover, this was a typical case of judicial overreach. If the DA had been content to go for a second degree or a manslaughter charge, with maybe a secondary charge of abuse of a child, there is a very good chance Casey Anthony would be sitting in a prison for at least the next thirty years.
Granted, the jury could have found her guilty of those charges anyway, but the capitol murder charge sucked all the oxygen out of the room. That was the focus of the prosecution, and because of that, it became the focus of the jury. In other words, the jury did their job and followed the case the way it was presented to them. And unfortunately for the prosecution team, they came up short.
I would remind everybody of one other very important fact. These jurors lived, ate, and breathed this case. They were sequestered and had no outside contact with any views or reports pertaining to this case, and I suspect precious little of anything else. Because of this, they were focused on every single aspect of the case, and were up close and personal to the defendant and to both sides.
Translation-they saw the case uncut, unadulterated, and in its entirety. The rest of us saw it piecemeal through the eyes of a lynch mob media driven by ratings and the quest for advertising dollars. Because of this, they presented the most sensationalistic parts of the case, and the evidence, and I am of a mind that they did so in a good many cases out of context, possibly even out of all connection to reality.
Because of all of these things, Casey Anthony will be a free woman soon. Does that mean she is innocent. No, it just means the prosecution didn't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
It might be depressing, maddening, unfortunate, and even in a sense unjust-but the jury did the only thing they could do in their heart of hearts.
And frankly, I would take that any day over the show trials of the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, or for that matter even over the relatively civilized and advanced system of Great Britain. There, the burden of proof isn't on the state or government. The burden of proof there is on the defense to prove their innocence.
That to me is a sobering thought. We are possibly the only country in the world-if there's another one I am not aware of it-where the burden of proof is on the state to prove their case. Our founding fathers made it that way purposely, in order to insure that a capricious or vengeful state could not single out political enemies for unjust prosecution, over any charge they might dream up.
Thus, as mad as you might be at the idea that a woman you are convinced is guilty is going to go free, you might want to take a deep breath and be grateful that our system made it so difficult, when the law is followed, for the state to throw her-or you, or me, or your family-in prison, or to death.
And again, bear in mind that a great deal of this trial, from the prosecution perspective, was political in its own right and media driven, which was doubtless the reason for the overreach. If this case had not drawn anymore than moderate regional attention, I can promise you it would have gone a lot differently, and would be very unlikely to have been tried as a capitol murder case. The result would probably have been a lot different as well.
As for what I think might have happened, I expounded my own theory here. Having followed the case to some extent since that post, I would have to amend certain parts of it, particularly the possible complicity, albeit innocently, of unknown parties. Otherwise, I stand by my theory as the most likely explanation for what happened to Caylee Anthony. It explains how she died, why there was no forensic evidence to speak of, and even explains why Casey acted in such a bizarre fashion in the immediate aftermath of the child's horrible, untimely and. yes, accidental demise.
And I would repeat, if the case had been investigated along these lines, and prosecuted that way, the chances are very good Casey Anthony would be in prison for a great deal of her life, perhaps up into her middle age, and maybe even beyond.
But hey-there's just something sexy about a capitol murder case, huh? It's a great way to pad your resume, sell a book or two, and maybe one day become a member of that most these days renowned of personages-the cable news network legal punditocracy.
Friday, July 01, 2011
North Korea Assumes Leading Role In UN Conference On Nuclear Disarmament
You read that right. If you want the details, here is the link to the whole story, and here is the link to the current membership, along with the reactions of former members, including the outgoing Chairman.
Is it any wonder the UN is not taken seriously by anybody, probably even by many of those who outwardly support it, if the truth was known. Yet, we fund this monstrous exercise in international hubris to the tune of 22%. Why? It doesn't make us look like the well-intentioned good guys, it just makes us look like the international chumps of the world, even to our allies. Just because they don't come right out and say that doesn't mean its not true. A great many of these people should never be allowed within our borders. And some that are should be accompanied by an armed guard, accompanied by the word "Ready, Aim, Fire!"
I can't get completely behind any of our elected leaders, not even the best of them, who won't call for the dissolution of this outrageous organization.
H/T The Colussus of Rhodey
Is it any wonder the UN is not taken seriously by anybody, probably even by many of those who outwardly support it, if the truth was known. Yet, we fund this monstrous exercise in international hubris to the tune of 22%. Why? It doesn't make us look like the well-intentioned good guys, it just makes us look like the international chumps of the world, even to our allies. Just because they don't come right out and say that doesn't mean its not true. A great many of these people should never be allowed within our borders. And some that are should be accompanied by an armed guard, accompanied by the word "Ready, Aim, Fire!"
I can't get completely behind any of our elected leaders, not even the best of them, who won't call for the dissolution of this outrageous organization.
H/T The Colussus of Rhodey
Kahn Job
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the French Socialist and head of the IMf who was recently accused of sexual assault against a New York hotel worker, has now been released on his own recognizance. It seems like the woman, an African immigrant and reputed HIV carrier, made up the rape allegations in order to, apparently, take advantage of a recent immigration law that allows an alleged rape victim to remain in the country until the case is adjudicated. In the meantime, according to the NYPD, who now say the woman lied constantly and is not credible, the woman received 200,000 dollars from "shady characters", apparently drug dealers, to tide her over, evidently expecting a big pay day from the wealthy and influential Frenchman.
Nothing is written in stone yet, but if the story works out the way it is shaping up so far, I and a great many others owe Strauss-Kahn one hell of an apology.
But before the Left crows about any rush to judgment, I have to point out that it is our lax immigration laws that have helped this scam to take shape. It also doesn't help that a woman who accuses a man of rape is automatically given a kind of credence that no other accuser is given. For all their protestations to the contrary, when it comes to rape, or any other kind of sexual abuse, including child sexual abuse, presumption of innocence is for all intents and purposes out the window.
For that we can also thank the Left. So after they get through crowing, they might want to help themselves to a double dose of humble pie.
Most ironically, Strauss-Kahn himself is probably a supporter of these very policies that almost cost him his money, family, career, and reputation.
Regardless of that, and how we might feel about Strauss-Kahn's socialist leanings, common decency demands that we reflect on our rush to judgment, and express our condolences to what he was put through as well as gratification that, in the end, the truth, and justice, prevailed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)