Sunday Open Thread

Just some politically conservative observations from a right wing extremist for us to discuss this weekend:

– I think Friday’s IRS revelations could potentially be very harmful to the White House. When this story broke, the administration was hoping to convince people that it was the result of just a couple of rogue agents in the Cincinnati office. Friday, it was revealed that this story now goes all the way to William Wilkins desk – an Obama political appointee and only one of two appointees in the IRS.

– I think the bankruptcy filing by Detroit should be a wake up call for all Americans regardless of your political stripe. Just 50 years ago, Detroit had the highest per capita income, the strongest manufacturing base and was arguably the model city for America, but now it is bankrupt and it is not the only municipality to file for bankruptcy, it just happens to be the largest so far. Detroit has over $18 billion in liabilities and when they began to lose some of their economic base, the model became unsustainable. Period. Now while the powers to be argue over the legality of the filing, the fact remains that Detroit is broke, aided by over promising, over spending, mismanagement and corruption all by the elected officials, and that is a sober fact that all citizens should be outraged over.

– I think the George Zimmerman case has exposed a very distasteful element in our culture and our media, and one that needs to be resolved if we are ever to “progress” as a society. I am not discounting the fact there are still some remnants of racism, but let’s not forget that those remnants are found on both sides of the political aisle, and both sides of the racial aisle. Interestingly enough, I think Booker T. Washington gave us all food for thought over 100 years ago when he said:

“There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well.”

I think that “class of people” can also include many white people, who are forever trying to show their compassion by over looking so many “real” issues that plague the black community; namely out of wedlock births and the perpetual mindset of victimhood, of which Larry Elder had the courage to confront.

As a society, we have to confront some real hard truths if we are to move this nation forward in a positive direction and that will require all of us growing a thicker skin. We have to call out corrupt and incompetent politicians, we have to quit thinking in terms of who did what, and who said what, and start thinking in terms of identifying the problem and finding solutions, and when things aren’t going well, we have to lay down our political and economical biases, and  think of a new direction which is grounded in the Constitution. Unless and until we can stop the over emotional reaction to every thing that happens, and begin to approach the nations issues with clear eyes, we are destroying this great country that was given to us.

On a final note, while I didn’t care for her reporting or her politics, RIP Helen Thomas.

50 thoughts on “Sunday Open Thread

  1. neocon01 July 21, 2013 / 10:48 am

    helen thomas wont be missed

  2. neocon01 July 21, 2013 / 10:50 am

    I am amazed and saddened to watch the destruction of the greatest empire that ever has existed in the history of the world be destroyed by a single political party and it,s chi cago goons. It will take a sovereign act of God to put this country back together.

    • Cluster July 21, 2013 / 11:04 am

      It’s not being destroyed by a single party. The GOP is just as complicit. As are the emotionally immature legions of loons that walk this country. As we speak, the GOP congress is getting ready to add millions of low skilled workers to an over supplied market that will further exacerbate the federal treasury, meanwhile Bernanke admitted the other day that if he were to stop quantitive easing, the economy would tank. We are perilously close to losing reserve currency status, and if we do, the cash bubble implosion will make the housing crisis look like a spring storm.

      We all need to wake up and stop blaming the other side and figure out how we cerebrally approach these issues and find solutions. There has never been a better time to convince America of the perils of Keynesian economics and liberal policies, but that needs to be done in a calm, unemotional manner. Remember, these are children we are speaking too.

      • neocon01 July 21, 2013 / 11:15 am

        It’s not being destroyed by a single party. The GOP is just as complicit.

        GOP complicit? YES I agree, just as complicit? I totally disagree.

      • Amazona July 21, 2013 / 11:32 am

        And this brings me back to my same old same old—-it’s about POLITICS, or the system of governance, and not identity.

        You can call yourself a Republican, a Democrat, a Venusian, whatever, and none of it matters if how you identify yourself can’t be defined by a coherent political philosophy.

        And it is the philosophy of Leftism that is destroying the nation, no matter under what flag it is marching.

      • neocon01 July 21, 2013 / 11:38 am

        “And it is the philosophy of Leftism that is destroying the nation, no matter under what flag it is marching.”

        Perfectly stated

      • Cluster July 21, 2013 / 11:55 am

        Tell me how John McCain has helped out in the last 30 years? How about Olympia Snowe, Mitch McConnell, and Chris Christie? They just tell you what you want to hear, then they’re off to the next cocktail party and fund raiser.

      • neocon01 July 21, 2013 / 12:01 pm

        fortunately they are but a few in the GOP and yes THEY are just as bad. However we do have many that are not like them, but I cant say the same for the donks.

      • Amazona July 21, 2013 / 2:03 pm

        What you are really complaining about is not that the GOP is corrupt but that some people IDENTIFY as Republicans while acting in ways that dispute this identification, as their actions and words are in direct contradiction to the political philosophy the GOP allegedly represents.

        This is why the name, or identity, is so much less important than the actual political philosophy. And it’s not that hard.

        Do you believe that this nation is best governed by a small federal government, severely restricted as to size, scope and power, with most of the authority left to the state or to the people, OR do you believe that the federal government should not be restricted as to size, scope or power, and should be expanded to meet whatever needs or desires pop up at any given time, with less authority left to the states or to the people?

        Yes to the first, and you cannot be a Liberal. Yes to the second and you cannot be a conservative. After that all that is left is to make sure that the GOP is also conservative and not just latching onto the name while advocating Leftist policies, agendas and philosophies.

        As long as McCain, Snow, et al dodge that question, they can CLAIM to be Republicans and who can contradict them? The party has let itself be led into the quicksand of “issues” so if anyone lays claim to a certain “issue” associated with the party he or she can also lay claim to the identity of “Republican”.

        Drop the “issues” and stick to pure politics and you will weed them out.

      • ricorun July 24, 2013 / 6:25 pm

        Amazona: Do you believe that this nation is best governed by a small federal government, severely restricted as to size, scope and power, with most of the authority left to the state or to the people, OR do you believe that the federal government should not be restricted as to size, scope or power, and should be expanded to meet whatever needs or desires pop up at any given time, with less authority left to the states or to the people?

        What if you don’t believe either?

      • Amazona July 24, 2013 / 8:10 pm

        “…What if you don’t believe either?…”


        What other choices are there?

        There is the limited federal government as laid out in the Constitution, or a federal government that is not restrained by the Constitution.

        Do you have some “pragmatic” alternative?

  3. neocon01 July 21, 2013 / 10:51 am

    Psalm 109:8

    • bardolf2 July 22, 2013 / 3:53 pm


      I was thinking about this as well and think it’s clear we need to tone down the militarization of the police. Get rid of 95% of all SWAT teams, no 100% of them. As you stated long ago, part of the problem in the Martin case was that GZ was a cop wannabe. That’s because there is a gap with the cops wanting to be military wannabes.

      I also think the GOP should push legalization of many recreational drugs to end a lot of the showdowns and defang most of the cartels, gangs, etc. The only people who are using military style weapons in crimes are drug dealers and they are the only ones justifying a militarized police. Legalization would also end the ‘discrimination in drug sentencing against minorities’ that the democrats pretend to worry about.

      The truth is violent crime is down dramatically, but the public feels less safe. That is partly the media’s responsibility and partly politicians responsibility. End the war on drugs which Nixon undertook in an honest attempt to help the poor, but which only served as a barrier to entry into a market.

      • neocon01 July 22, 2013 / 6:07 pm


        In Buffalo last week at a farmers market several black outfitted ninja dressed “cops” in in the area, full regalia, bullet proof vests, leather gloves, a belt of goodies that would make batman jealous, 9mm’s, tazers, sticks, cuffs, black baseball hats the whole nine yards.

        I asked my bro in law whats that all about?……answer, they are AUXILLARY’s there to help with traffic……….a real WTF moment…SS.storm troopers in the making this is getting out of hand fast.

      • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 7:00 pm

        dolf, is the ‘neoconehead’ thing really necessary? The tone of the blog has improved so much since we got rid of the trolls, it is a shame to see you carrying on their tradition.

        I am getting pretty tired of people acting as if wanting to be a cop is somehow to be held against someone. The sneering “cop wannabe” thing is getting old.

        Just what is wrong with wanting to be a cop? Oh, I know, in this case it has led to a whole (invented) narrative in which Zimmerman, being a cop wannabe was then acting out as a vigilante, blah blah blah blah blah.

        However, the facts don’t support this nasty invention. Sure, he wanted to be a cop. And I suggest that while some aspire to this for pathological reasons, most simply feel called to serve. We have to weigh the rest of what we have learned about Zimmerman to know how to evaluate this tiny tidbit of information—that he wanted to be a cop.

        So…what was his history? Was it a history of bullying? Of posturing as an authority figure or person with power over others? If there is, I have not seen it. Is there a history of reaching out to help others? Oh, yeah—from mentoring some disadvantaged youth to replacing the broken lock on a door after the home of an older woman was broken into to—yes—-volunteering to serve as a neighborhood watch person.

        So he had a gun. So do millions of others, and while some have volunteered their OPINONS that this was to make himself feel more powerful, the fact is that most who do have a CCW are not nuts or bullies.

        What did he do as a neighborhood watch volunteer? He practiced Situational Awareness, teaching himself to see what was out of place in any given scenario. So he saw someone acting differently–out walking in heavy rain, and not on the sidewalk but closer to homes. This is exactly what people are told to notice. And then what did he do? He OBSERVED, and called a special number (not 911) for people like him to report suspicious behavior.

        BTW, as a woman who has lived in big cities, I have learned and paid attention to this Situational Awareness concept, and it has served me well. It is a matter of knowing what belongs and what does not, what is normal and what is not, what is a little out of kilter and requires a little more attention.

        He had taken martial arts classes but evidently gave them up when his teacher said he was weak. By all accounts he was timid, non-confrontational. He seems to have found the right approach to doing what he wanted, given his limitations.

        But enough already with this sneering “wannabe cop” crap. Would you be so dismissive of an EMT, calling him a “wannabe doctor”, or someone volunteering at an adult literacy center for being a “wannabe teacher”?

        You’ve made this wild connection, based upon your own suppositions—that “the problem” was that Zimmerman was a “wannabe cop” and then from that to real cops being “wannabe military”. That’s a lot of imagination.

        Now—to neo’s comment about the ninja types in Buffalo. Get used to it. Anyone who has studied history can see that this is the next step. We had a hint of what Barry wanted when he promised us a “civilian security force as large and well funded as the military”. Just what did people think he meant?

        But really—at a farmer’s market? Tricked out like this to provide help with TRAFFIC? Worried about a fight over zucchini?

      • bardolf2 July 22, 2013 / 8:03 pm


        Good natured ribbing ala ‘neoconehead’ isn’t the same as name calling. I assume neo took it as such since it is one of the few times I have used it in a while. I also didn’t call GZ a cop wannabe as much as agree with an old old post of Neo’s which hypothesized as much right after the incident, here on B4V. Neo’s hypothesis occurred long before we found out GZ had applied to the academy and been denied. Neo’s hypothesis was stated long before we found out GZ had been charged with assault on a police officer (just a push in a bar, but not exactly the model of restraint either).

        A person who was rejected from med school because he lacked discipline, carried around a stethoscope while volunteering at the blood bank would be a doctor wannabe. There is no glory in education and taking a degree is so easy that the whole idea of a wannabe teacher is comical in nature.

        And Neo doesn’t have to get used to the ninja nonsense which has nothing to do with the federal government as much as it has to do with mayors and citizens wanting a bit of the military dynamic in their own home town. Think Bloomberg boasting of having one of the largest armies in the world, think SWAT teams on the local news. Get rid of the war on drugs and all the excuses for these ninjas vanish.

      • neocon01 July 22, 2013 / 9:21 pm

        Dr B
        Good natured ribbing ala ‘neoconehead’ isn’t the same as name calling. I assume neo took it as such since it is one of the few times I have used it in a while

        HEY!!!!!!! Im a vewwwwry sensitive guy! 🙂
        I actually liked the cone heads, thought the skit was a riot. I have NO problems with some friendly kidding involving my screen name, and you are correct, I fell for the early narrative in the beginning that tra von was a 10 kid killed by a condo commando…….until the TRUTH came out in full blossom.
        Thank God for the internet, barry and the boyz cant keep the truth hidden no matter how much the Pravda’s of our country try to conceal it.

      • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 10:12 pm

        “Get rid of the war on drugs and all the excuses for these ninjas vanish.”

        This kind of reminds me of the “solution” to the high crime rate in Dade County—-just stop calling them crimes and as if by magic the crime rate goes down.

        “Chief Charles Hurley of the Miami-Dade School Police Department (MDSPD) in 2010 had implemented a policy that reduced the number of criiminal reports, manipulating statistics to create the appearance of a reduction in crime within the school system.”

        Put Hurley in charge in Chicago and pretty soon the murder rate will go down. Oh, the same number of people will die, but it won’t be registered as crimes any more. So easy…………..

        However, I tend to agree with you about decriminalizing personal drug use, with the caveat that selling drugs, at least to minors, has such a major penalty that it makes current drug penalties pale by comparison. I am not in favor of a nanny state that tries to protect people from their own stupidity but this would have to be restricted to personal decisions to use drugs, not making them available to others or advertising them or glamorizing them in any way.

        As for what drugs to legalize, it is hard to know where to draw the line. The sad fact is that most drug use is fueled more by the thrill of breaking the law than by the desire to get high, so I believe no matter where that line is drawn this kind of pathology will drive people to indulge in the next level, that of whatever is still illegal.

        I do agree that legalizing drugs would cut gangs off at the knees, and result in billions of dollars being made available for education and rehabilitation and eventually for other uses. But it would probably take at least a generation of serious loss of human life for the idea of drug use to lose its appeal. The good thing about that would be that so many of these people would be removed from the gene pool, hopefully before they have had a chance to reproduce.

      • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 10:20 pm

        I’ve heard lots of things about the successes of decriminalizing drugs in the Netherlands and decided to do a little research. I was very interested in learning that the country which has actually legalized drug use is Portugal, and that the Cato Institute has published a very interesting paper on how that has been working.

        “The paper, published by Cato in April, found that in the five years after personal possession was decriminalized, illegal drug use among teens in Portugal declined and rates of new HIV infections caused by sharing of dirty needles dropped, while the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction more than doubled.

        “Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success,” says Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research. “It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does.”
        The Cato report’s author, Greenwald, hews to the first point: that the data shows that decriminalization does not result in increased drug use. Since that is what concerns the public and policymakers most about decriminalization, he says, “that is the central concession that will transform the debate.”,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz2ZpaQvrG6

      • M. Noonan July 23, 2013 / 1:02 am

        There are two rational ways to go on the matter of drugs – either complete legalization, or completely draconian. Start rapidly executing major drug traffickers and giving 20 lashes with a bullwhip to petty dealers and pretty soon you’d have a lot fewer takers for that line of work. But I mean it, it’d have to be draconian – within ten days of a person being caught with a small amount he’d have to be tied up in front of City Hall and whipped and within 30 days of being caught with a large amount, he have to be hanged. Such policies work because criminals are lazy cowards and are in it for quick profits – I’m not in favor of such a course of action. But its either do that, or legalize…keeping to what we have now with drugs rampant, jails full and cops militarizing is frightful.

      • Amazona July 23, 2013 / 11:47 am

        Mark, I don’t know if you know anyone whose life has been damaged or destroyed by drugs. I do. Most recently, a young man I mentored on my ranch, taught building skills, and trusted implicitly, a young man known for his responsibility, who was a ski patrolman and head man on river rafts in dangerous white water, went into a death spiral of self-destructive behavior. He had started a construction company, thanking me and my late husband for giving him the basic skills he needed to get his foot in the door as a building manager, and became quite successful. But evidently this went to his head and he seemed to equate success and financial achievement with moving into the getting-high world as well. He has lost his business, his friends, his home, and if I had chosen to prosecute him for his thefts from me he would have lost his freedom.

        I don’t know anyone who hates drugs more than I do.

        Yet I come back to the adage that insanity is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different outcome, and to me the approach of the United States to drug control is proof of this. We’ve tried it, it has failed, and we have created whole new classes of criminals in the process.

        I am not as worried as dolf is about those imprisoned for actual drug usage and/or sales. They made their choices knowing the possible consequences. The thing that bothers me is the number of innocent victims—for example, the young men (for the most part) already crippled by the destruction of the black family by Leftist policies, who then get lured by the promise of big money into gang activity. I truly believe that legalizing drugs would cut off gangs at the knees, because then all they could offer would be the replacement for strong male authority figures lacking in the day to day lives of too many young black men. While this is powerful, it can be addressed, but the entire drug culture that goes from easy money to easy sex to glamorization through various cultural media such as songs and movies and even TV would be undermined and probably die off.

        I am not sure how legalization would affect the other innocent victims, those trapped in the production of drugs. Obviously, merely saying “drugs are now legal” would not be enough. There would have to be some sort of way to control how drugs are acquired to completely strip away the veneer of glamor and desirability—-I imagine drugs being sold in buildings like the old Safeway stores, with dim lighting and faded brown and gold linoleum tiles, staffed by women who look like they should be working in 1960s school cafeterias. You can get ’em but it ain’t glamorous. No advertising, no possible way to try to glam them up. If you want to get high, you have to go buy your own—no reselling. And having just a few laws—no reselling, absolutely no providing to minors—would make it possible to have seriously draconian penalties.

        With government intervention in the sales process, taxes could be levied, and then there could be economic control over drug sources, which would severely impact foreign drug cartels.

        And there are some things I would still outlaw—meth, for one. It is far too destructive, is hardly ever used as a recreational drug, and it is just too damaging on too many levels.

        I have seen people die from alcohol abuse, my mother being one. And it is not the charming quirky lifestyle portrayed in the movie “Arthur”—which I found so disturbing and offensive I walked out after a few minutes. It is losing everything, followed by dementia and organ failure. They never showed Arthur as incontinent, wearing diapers, not knowing his own name. We don’t see that because it is end-stage alcoholism and most die before they get to that stage, but it tends to be a terminal illness in one way or another. And when we factor in things like drunk driving fatalities and injuries (to others, not to the drunks) and fetal alcohol syndrome and the tragedy of alcoholism on Indian reservations, we see a pattern more destructive than that of drug use.

        Yet most of us have liquor in the house, have a beer or two at night or during a football game, order wine with dinner, get in the mood for a mixed drink every now and then. Clearly for all the damage alcohol does, it is something that does not automatically destroy all who come in contact with it. I think we would come to the same outcome with drugs.

      • M. Noonan July 23, 2013 / 12:08 pm


        Drugs took my oldest brother – and it was the saddest thing. You can never tell how the mixture of two parents will come out in their children, but somehow the mixture of my mom’s intuitive intellect and my father’s analytic brilliance combined in George for a phenomenal intellectual ability married to practical mechanical skill. He could have been another Edison. But while still developing, he managed to get a job which provided him a great deal of money and it was the 70’s and cocaine was considered at the time a harmless, recreational drug. He fell in to that and never recovered – eventually to wind up beaten to death over nothing when he was 51 years old and living as a street person.

        It is true that by some means drug use must be controlled – this can take various forms of prohibition and aid to the addicts, but it cannot be allowed to run free…it cannot, that is, be considered something as morally licit. The Libertarians are wrong when they say that as long as it harms no one else, its ok – because drug use harms everyone, if by no other means than by crippling a person who should be a productive, contributing member of society rather than a drug addled parasite. I’m in favor of legalization and massive drug treatment programs – as well as proper police patrolling of our neighborhoods to ensure that vagrancy and petty crime are controlled to the point where drug addicts cannot become a sociological crisis.

      • Amazona July 23, 2013 / 4:44 pm

        Mark, I am so sorry to hear the tragic story of your brother. And I agree with your concerns, because they have been my concerns as well.

        But it seems to me that when there is no real solution, the only thing left is to come up with an approach that takes that into consideration and just does the best it can.

        You make an excellent point about the dangers of letting drugs become “licit”. This would be a terrible mistake. No, any legalization of drugs would have to be accompanied by a massive preparation and ongoing message delivery that drugs are dangerous, that taking them is stupid, and that understanding that the efforts to keep people from using them by making them illegal has not worked is not at all the same thing as saying they are OK.

        Have you seen any of the billboards about meth? I don’t think I have seen any in Colorado but there were a couple in Wyoming and they were very powerful. They showed a beautiful young girl, or a handsome teenaged boy, and their appearances after a few months of using meth—-lost teeth, horrible skin, thinning bedraggled hair, etc. While a constant drumbeat of information about the dangers of drug use, the stupidity of drug use, etc. will not solve the problem, it can make a difference.

        Just look at how the attitude toward smoking has changed in just the past ten or fifteen years. It has become tacky, icky, a dealbreaker in a prospective new relationship. I know you smoke, but you still have to admit it is now considered to be not cool, but kind of low-class.

        Sometimes you can’t get a job if you smoke, or rent an apartment. Your used car is worth more if you never smoked in it. Your insurance rates are lower. Society simply has a poor attitude toward smoking, thinking that it is, for lack of a better word, a stupid thing to do.

        If drugs are decriminalized, they can still be ostracized, made to appear to be a very stupid and low-class choice, very unattractive, and counterproductive. If using a drug will make it harder to get a job, that will be a consideration. If we could find the backbone to make all government payments conditional upon a clean drug and alcohol test that would eliminate that as a source of income.

        When you are training a horse, the first thing you have to realize is that you really can’t MAKE the horse do very many things, unless you abuse it so badly you essentially destroy it. So what a good trainer does is let the horse do what it wants to do—but makes what the trainer wants the easier choice. I’d use the same approach regarding drug use.

        Sure, you won’t get arrested for using drugs. But if you ignore the societal messages of use being a sign of low-class stupidity, and very uncool, then you have to go to a certain place to buy your drug, and you can only buy what you yourself want to use so if you want to make your drug use a social event then everyone will have to go buy his own. The purchase will not be fun—there are no posters of pretty girls or fast cars, there is no advertising, there are just plain brown-wrapper stores with no music playing, where you go in, you say what you want, you pay your money, and you leave. Your purchases are portioned, so you can’t buy a bunch to provide for party guests.

        You do so knowing that a positive drug test can get you kicked out of your apartment or fired from your job. Don’t get me wrong—you can DO it, it’s just not that much fun any more. And let’s face it, part of the fun was the feeling of getting away with something, a feeling that has been taken away and replaced with simply engaging in a transaction no more exciting than getting an oil change.

        If you get caught driving while high, it’s a mandatory first-offense sentence of five years.
        Second offense, 25. Sell or give a drug away, ditto. Sell or give to a minor, 25 years. You can get high a dozen times a day if you want, completely without legal penalty, but you have to go back to buy one high at a time.

        Take away the glamor, take away the thrill of doing something illegal, make it dull and boring and a sign of being a loser, and you take away the fun. After that all that are left are the hard-core addicts, who will get what they need no matter what, and will probably commit crimes to get the money.

        I am a stunningly white (nearly glow-in-the-dark) middle class woman of a certain age, and if I wanted, I could probably get any drug I want within a few days, and after establishing a source could get it daily if I wanted it. As much as we all hate the possible message of saying drug use is no longer a crime, we have to accept the fact that drug use CANNOT be stopped.

        So I suggest just going with that, making it clear that not being a crime does not make it smart or cool or acceptable,and let it all shake out. And in the meantime weighing, against the possible negatives, (disproved to some extent in Portugal) the positives of cutting the foundation out from under domestic gangs, international drug cartels, drug smuggling using people as disposable mules, the equivalent of slavery in drug-growing countries where the cartels force people to grow and process their crops, border violence due to smuggling, etc.

  4. M. Noonan July 21, 2013 / 12:28 pm

    The quote from Washington is very appropriate – indeed, it works towards the theme of my upcoming book (promise to have it finished one of these days!): that the problems of the world are caused by people who use lies to obtain power and wealth they refuse to earn by honest effort. If the racial problem if solved, then Jesse Jackson and a host of racial grievance-mongers are out of a job.

    Aside from having a black President, we have blacks who are senior cabinet members, justices, governors, Senators, House members, CEO’s of major corporations, billionaires, movie stars, sports stars…blacks are in every possible walk of life in the United States and hold positions from the highest to the lowest. If Racist Amerikkka is out to get black people, its doing one heck of a lousy job at it.

    Of course, the black community is also disproportionately mired in crime, ignorance and poverty – while the black middle and upper classes are in some measures actually better off than the national average, the black underclass tends to be worse than the average run of poverty in America. This, though, is because the black underclass has been completely under the control of liberalism for decades – which took a strong, vibrant community of poor people and turned it in to a weak, failing community of poor people. It was, in short, those who claim to be the least racist in America who have done the worst things to black Americans…in the most muddy dreams of the KKK there wasn’t the level of practical evil which has been done to black America by liberalism…and a liberalism which now fights desperately to keep any change from occurring in the black underclass because what liberalism requires is a dependent, poor and ignorant class of people to mine for votes.

  5. Jeremiah July 21, 2013 / 8:18 pm

    Liberals have America in the choke-hold, and the more we try to compromise with them, the tighter their squeeze becomes…just as a python’s prey breathes out, the python squeezes tighter.

    Talking to the snake to try to get it to let go is like asking a tree to move out of the way….the only recourse is to forcefully remove the snake, as you would cut a tree to get it out of the way.

  6. Jeremiah July 21, 2013 / 8:24 pm

    The GOP needs a TNT mentality…lol…

  7. dbschmidt July 21, 2013 / 9:14 pm

    In alignment with Ama there is little disagreement—this is an ideological battle. It is not black nor white, Democrat vs. Republican, nor capitalist versus socialist. It is a fight for the very foundation of this nation. Even though it would take pages to expound on the “wrongs” perverted against the Constitution over the last hundred years—it should be rather obvious to those that do not want the “shining city on the hill” to fail.

    The race baiters are in full force but fail to mention the exact same crime occurred; however, 4 blacks on 1 white during the Zimmerman trial. I will not go into how extreme the examination of the background of Zimmerman was but everything Martin did was glossed over. The race baiters mention “profiling” and “stand your ground” laws that were not part of the actual trial while excusing themselves from the very reason or means of their livelihood. I was a juror on a very similar case and we returned a verdict of 1st degree murder but it was due to the facts—not emotion. There was a “white” Hispanic sent to prison for life for killing a black and wounding two others.

    Even though I am a registered Libertarian—to me it has more with how someone will govern the nation and not their allegiance when I vote. I really do not believe in the (D), (R), (I) or (L) after their name—tell me what you plan to do and how you will do it. I do not vote party—I vote people. Just to jerk Mark’s chain—technically we have the first “white” black President just as we now have “white” Hispanics.

    Detroit is a long time coming from the corruption, public unions and a few other disasters that were well noted but kicked down the road until failure. What should scare people is two items. 1) The US as a nation is farther along than Detroit is by several basis points, 2) Only the Federal government can print money which further debases its value. When a very noted Progressive like FDR had a problem with public unions—you know there has to be a problem.

    This is just a glimpse of the Progressive utopia that the slackers of this country want for us all. At least the pushback is starting.

    “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” but do not render to Caesar what is within God’s domain less we follow the path of the Romans. It was not the barbarians at the gate that felled Rome—it imploded from within via “bread & circus” in addition to corruption.

    Interesting times.

    • Amazona July 21, 2013 / 9:47 pm

      “I do not vote party—I vote people. ”

      I understand the rationale for this, and it sounds quite thoughtful—-except it essentially throws away your vote.

      My argument is that the party which purports to support allegiance to the Constitution has to appeal to people on the basis of that philosophy, and not on “issues”. That means that we do everything we can to make sure that party nominates true conservatives, and campaigns on asking people to choose a model of government rather than a personality. THIS is where we make our stand—not after a candidate is chosen.

      Because we have to look at the reality of politics. So what if you happen to think that a Dem sounds more line with what you believe, so you “ not vote party (but) vote people… ” ? And what does this accomplish?

      Well, it accomplishes putting a person into office who will, no matter what the campaign rhetoric may have been, become a part of the Dem coalition. It will weight the number of Dems in the House or Senate, possibly leading to a majority, which means committee chairmanships, etc. You might feel quite noble in voting for the PERSON who seemed the more ethical, the more aligned with the Constitution, etc. but what you have done is contribute to the gaining and retention of political power by the opposition.

      Party trumps person, once you get past the nomination process. Because once the goal of only nominating the best person is either accomplished or at least behind you, the next goal is to get your party into power. Period.

      • dbschmidt July 22, 2013 / 8:37 am

        I really need to learn to develop my thoughts better in media (email, postings, that does not offer that ability without effort. Your argument is my argument just more elegant. I want constitutional conservatives to regain the majority in both houses as well as the Presidency. More Rand Paul’s, Ted Cruz’s in lieu of John McCain’s and Olympia Snowe’s. This is where the Tea Party went when the “great demise” was the talk of MSM. We started to back and elect true conservatives to local offices as well as backing those on a national scale.

        Even when I was a Democrat, a Republican, and now as a Libertarian—I have trended Republican in my voting because voting “person” does throw away a vote—mine. I am not an “American Idol” voter. I vote for those who will return us to a smaller, more effective Constitutional style of government where freedom reigns and the government serves the people—not the other way around.

        The only thing on my “wish list” is that one day I can once again (not since Reagan) vote for someone and not for the lesser of two evils; nevertheless, there is a great sense of hope because I have seen it here in my little State of NC and the bench looks good at the national level. Now, if we can only reign in those flapping monkeys of the Democratic candidate—the evil witch of Benghazi.

      • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 11:37 am

        “…the evil witch of Benghazi….”

        Yet NO ONE CARES !!! According to the Complicit Agenda Media, she has a huge approval rating. ??????? Her Benghazi thing was a hat trick of incompetence, betrayal of Americans to advance a political agenda, and utter dishonesty, but do the sheeple of the Left care? Not a whit. She is one of theirs, and they are all about personality and identity and couldn’t care less about the things the rest of us find important—-competence, honesty, integrity, decency.

        Look at the empty suit they still seem to adore…..

        Speaking of which, what do you think about his latest race-baiting woe-is-me-the-rich-and-powerful-black-man-whining-about-discrimination antics?

        I truly believe that this nation has, for the most part, gotten past the idea of judging people solely by the color of their skin. Sure, there was a time when this was common, but that was before the nation became so exposed to different races and nationalities. Now we have a nation that doesn’t look much different from one town to another, with chain stores and fast food operations making us all pretty much the same. And now we see black people as teachers, doctors, business people, police and soldiers and pilots. I think it is now rare to find someone who believes that the single fact of dark skin makes one inherently inferior.

        Oh, we still have racism, no doubt about it. But now it is based on how large groups of any one race ACT, not just on the color of their skin. And behavior is a choice.

        If people suspect black people of being criminals, it is no longer just because they have dark skin, but because so many black people are criminals. Duh.

        I don’t call it “racism” but “culturalism” and I not only think it is common, I think it is wholly understandable. I myself have become very disgusted by the black culture in our society today, and on the surface it might look like racism. But a little more examination would show that I do not have disdain for people because of the color of their skin but because of the way they act, from Black Liberation Theology to the New Black Panthers to the whole institutionalized black victimhood that is used to justify violence, bullying, and a slew of antisocial and hateful pathologies.

        While Dear Leader, the product of a pampered multi-racial life in which his race was either no big deal or the source of special consideration, is really enjoying using his bully pulpit to further the grievances of the victimhood culture, I wonder if he will ever get around to explaining just WHY people might tend to be a little more suspicious of some black people.

        He doesn’t seem to consider the possibility that if he is “followed” in a store, it might be because he looks, dresses and acts not just black, but like people who have stolen from that store. Like George Zimmerman, if I know that black people have been burglarizing homes in my neighborhood, I am going to notice black strangers walking next to houses and not on the sidewalk—not just because they are black, but because they fit the description of criminals in both appearance and behavior in my area.

        I suggest that if black people don’t want to be seen as criminals, they stop committing crimes. If they don’t want to be seen as ignorant, they can start speaking like other people do, learn to pronounce words properly and in general stop working so hard to appear less intelligent. If they don’t want to be seen as lazy, they can work harder in school (and stop worrying that good grades will make them appear “more white”) and get jobs, instead of lining up at the government trough. If they are tired of being seen as dangerous, they can stop projecting the image they work so hard to create and maintain, with their songs about n***rs and calling women whores and beating women and shooting cops, etc.

        Respect is earned, and it is not earned by playing gangsta or talking like a moron with some corrupted language or worshiping a drug and criminal culture or bragging about beating up women or calling them whores and bitches or producing litters of illegitimate babies to be reared by others or promoting hatred of others because of the color of THEIR skin.

        The reason races tend to get along better in the military is because they are all held to the same standard, and must follow the same rules.

      • dbschmidt July 22, 2013 / 11:39 pm

        Really do not like stereotyping an entire group of people but I can find hundreds of cases like this without effort.

        Not guilty: Armed black adult kills unarmed white teen, claims self-defense…

        “…in 2009 in Greece, N.Y. After 19 hours of deliberation, a jury there returned a not guilty verdict for Roderick Scott, a black adult, who had charged in the shooting death of Christopher Cervini. a white teen. As though the parallelism were not sufficiently striking, Cervini was 17 at the time of his death–the same exact age as Trayvon Martin.

        It was verified during Scott’s murder trial that he called 911 before the bloody confrontation took place. It was also determined that he opened fire with his legally owned firearm only as a last resort when he reasonably believed his life was in danger.

        Still another similarity between the two cases was Scott’s testimony that there had been a rash of break-ins in the area.”

        I am sure the police and quite possibly the national guard were on stand-by in case the whites or even white-hispanics were going to riot over the outcome.

  8. Retired Spook July 22, 2013 / 11:39 am

    A really interesting (with some humorous overtones) article about climate change at MarketWatch this morning. One of the more interesting parts:

    But the scientific evidence shows that hurricanes have not increased in America in frequency or damage since 1900. Cyclones have not increased since 1970. Floods have not increased since 1950.

    Professor Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado, said that “it is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or droughts have increased in climate timescales either in the United States or globally. It is further incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouse gases.”

    If extreme weather events were happening, it is to be expected that insurance companies would be concerned. Franklin W. Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, testified that adverse climate events are of substantial concern to insurance and reinsurance companies. The Association recommends that Congress provides tax credits — no doubt refundable — to Americans to mitigate extreme weather and climate change. This will reduce claims.

    Nutter did not mention Lloyd’s Risk Index for 2013, published every two years, which puts climate change at 32nd place in terms of business risks. Climate change came after piracy, sovereign debt, and pollution and environmental liability.

    Topping the 2013 risks in the Lloyd’s Risk Index is high taxation, up from 13th place in 2011. Fifth on the list is “excessively strict regulation.” So President Obama and senators who hope to solve the problems of climate change through regulation and a carbon tax are increasing risk, rather than reducing it.

    Next in order of importance after piracy — too funny!!

    • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 12:28 pm

      “…Climate change came after piracy, sovereign debt, and pollution and environmental liability….”

      But where did they place sharks falling out of the sky after being carried overland by huge tornadoes created by climate change?

      I was on the phone the other night and also looking for a TV show recommended to me, and I happened across the last ten minutes or so of “Sharknado”. It was extremely interesting.

      For example, did you know that if a shark is somehow launched through the air from a tornado (which is, by the way, absolutely FULL of sharks !!!!) in the direction of a helicopter it will bite the helicopter?

      I didn’t know that.

      Or if a shark comes flying at you from the sky with its mouth open you can dive right down its gullet and then cut yourself out with the chainsaw you are holding? And then reach in and pull out a beautiful woman who is still alive ??!!!!! And then want to kiss her even though her face is covered with shark belly stuff and blood?

      I think this movie makes it clear that the effects of GLOBAL WARMING !!!!! are much more far-ranging and complex than we realize.

      • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 12:31 pm

        Jonah Goldberg suggests that this movie is best appreciated by people who have to write TGIF on their sneakers—meaning Toes Go In First.

        I may not have qualified when I started my ten minutes of Sharknado, but I did feel my brain cells dying off as I watched, and it is possible that watching the whole thing might make me qualify.

      • neocon01 July 22, 2013 / 5:55 pm

        test test

      • neocon01 July 22, 2013 / 6:50 pm

        If a person ‘cannot stand his ground, what can he do?

        Read more:

        I want to thank all the Americans of African heritage that did not buy into the gutter politics of al, je$$ah, tra von obama and “my people” holder and rampage, burn, loot, commit murder and mayhem as called upon to do.
        Maybe we have crossed into the reality these things hurt race relations and the innercity communities not help them. Maybe the glory days of the race pimps and race hustlers are finally behind us in America THANK YOU BLACK AMERICANS for avoiding what could have been a national catastrophe.

    • Retired Spook July 22, 2013 / 7:41 pm


      Don’t hold your breath that Obama will EVER make such a speech.

  9. bardolf2 July 22, 2013 / 8:11 pm

    In addition to the GOP ending the drug war I believe there is another avenue for growing the party. It occurred to me that farmers tend to be more inclined to vote Republican and so why not raise the number of ‘local’ farmers? (no Amazona I won’t call them wannabe farmers!)

    By this I mean try to get laws enacted which allow e.g. chickens, small goats and large gardens in places like Detroit. Perhaps the TEA Party could teach the basics of food independence as a prerequisite to other forms of independence. Exciting things are happening in New Orleans e.g.

    • neocon01 July 22, 2013 / 9:29 pm

      Dr B
      In addition to the GOP ending the drug war I believe there is another avenue for growing the party.

      The GOP does not hold the WH, the senate, and has only a small majority in the house….HOW can it end anything?
      If you mean decriminalizing marijuana? im with ya.
      Cocaine? meth? crack? heroin? oxy’s? sorry I cant be on board with that.

    • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 9:49 pm

      Do you understand that the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) “Party” is a POLITICAL movement, not a social engineering scheme?

      If it does its work well, people will have the freedom to engage in small-scale farming, or to teach others about it.

      And you did a terrible job of excusing your sneering disdain for a man whose entire life has been about wanting to serve others by calling him a “wannabe cop”. It is a denigrating term which has no place in reality and anyone other than a wannabe real man would just admit he was wrong and move on.

      • bardolf2 July 23, 2013 / 12:05 am

        I’m not excusing myself from the term ‘wannabe cop’, because unlike Neo, I still think it rings true in GZ case. I’m surrounded 24/7 with people who think they are ‘saving’ the world so I’ve got a pretty good feel for the character and Zimmerman fits the profile well.

        OTOH I might be projecting, since I have a hero-complex myself.

        Finally, a doctor is a real doctor not by rhetoric, but by what he has accomplished. A man is a real man by what he has done, not by some rhetoric on a message board. Rhetorical flourish is what makes a woman a real woman. Hence you are a real woman.

      • Amazona July 23, 2013 / 7:49 am

        ” Rhetorical flourish is what makes a woman a real woman. Hence you are a real woman.”

        What an intriguing, albeit somewhat creepy, insight into your attitude toward women. Sometimes, dolf, in your eagerness to get the last word, you reveal more about yourself than you might realize.

        However, out here in the real world, outside that too-often disturbing little internal universe of yours, real men are not afraid to simply admit when they are wrong (unless it involves driving directions 🙂 ) and real women are defined by far more significant criteria than “rhetorical flourish”. You are obviously far too old now to change this oddly dismissive and demeaning view of women, but I have a feeling it has shaped a lot of your relationships with them.

      • dbschmidt July 24, 2013 / 12:37 am


        “I’m not excusing myself from the term ‘wannabe cop’, because unlike Neo, I still think it rings true in GZ case. I’m surrounded 24/7 with people who think they are ‘saving’ the world so I’ve got a pretty good feel for the character and Zimmerman fits the profile well”

        Pretty amazing that you can do this from limited testimony during a trial (ever been on one that was a 1st or 2nd degree murder one?) and having never personally met the guy. I am sure all of your friends have walked the exact same life that GZ has so therefore you have a wide selection of “similar” folks to choose from. BTW, when did becoming a law enforcement officer become a bad thing?

        Personally, I like a strong woman but I may be in the minority. Nevertheless, Ama, I solved my “directions while driving” issue with a download of the “Gunny” from Full Metal Jacket to my GPS. Aside from the trip—I am “proud” when I arrive at my destination and he tells me

        Un-F**king-believable. You managed to get us here alive.

        among other NSFW responses. Now, I do change it when there are youngins in the vehicle but as far as I go—I have technology to overcome my lack of ability to ask for directions. 🙂

    • Amazona July 22, 2013 / 9:51 pm

      The kids at Blair “feed ghosts…” ?

      Interesting school.

      Interesting program.

  10. dbschmidt July 24, 2013 / 1:46 am

    BTW, I will take a look at the ACA (ObammaCare) a year after the folks like Oprah, Bon Jovi, Hutson and others surrender their current health plans and “welcome” the exchanges without riders–right along with all members of Congress, the President and all members of their staffs.

  11. Amazona July 27, 2013 / 11:26 am

    It’s nearly a week after the SUNDAY open thread was opened, but I just want to comment on the latest advance in racial equality.

    That is, we now have a black Cindy Sheehan.

    We now have another grieving mother clambering into the spotlight over the grave of her dead son.

    Trayvon’s mama, hitting the TV shows and the talk circuit about not wanting any other boy to be killed as hers was, somehow manages to duck any responsibility at all for what her son really was, why he was where he was on the night he was killed, what his life had become, etc. She neglects to mention that she had kicked him out of her house, which meant he didn’t really have a home he could count on. She neglects to mention that except for the decision of the county sheriff to tweak crime statistics by simply not prosecuting some crimes, her baby boy would probably have been in jail instead of on a drug run that led him through a neighborhood that had been so victimized by other young black men.

    No, she has wrapped herself in the flag of Martyred Mother, and is playing it up for all it is worth.

    Oh, I don’t doubt that she is deeply and profoundly saddened by the death of her son. I don’t question that. But I am deeply and profoundly offended and disgusted by her grandstanding and her utterly dishonest efforts.

    Just when the original Cindy Sheehan, another failed mother who used her dead son’s name to advance herself, was finally fading into oblivion, she has been reincarnated. And this time instead of an anti-Bush anti-war motif, it is ever so much bigger and more appealing—now it is about race.

    • tiredoflibbs July 27, 2013 / 2:17 pm

      Ama, I remember one of the lefty trolls coming here and saying that, by pointing out all the black 17 yr olds that have been killed by other blacks, somehow “cheapens” what happened to Trayvon.

      And yet, we have the media “reporting” the death as one of a “racial killing” (for ratings) does not cheapen what happened to Trayvon.

      The race pimp stirring up emotions (and “donations”) to their cause does not cheapen what happened to Trayvon.

      The pResident also making this issue one of race by injecting himself into the middle of it by stating that Trayvon could have been his son, 35 yrs ago he could have been Trayvon while telling other politicians to “butt out” does not cheapen what happened to Trayvon.

      His mother trademarking his name does not cheapen what happened to Trayvon.

      Despicable – all the way around.

Comments are closed.