Monday, October 21, 2019

"4th Trimester Abortions"

Now that the Supreme Court has decided to take up a case concerning abortion, and reignited the firestorm that flares up anytime this subject goes public, I thought I might share with you, my loyal tens of readers, my concerns regarding this subject.  

As a casual observation, and in follow up to my recent posting on the same general subject, I'm continually surprised at the Democrat's efforts to do away with their future voters.

Consider that an alarming segment of those who the Progressives among us want to enjoy the "liberation of abortions" are poor welfare recipients.  40% of all abortions concern Black women, as an example, even though they comprise less than 9% of our population!  And since we know this category of Americans have historically been the most likely to vote Democrat, for some strange reason, their advocacy of abortions seems to me self-defeating.  18 years from now that future potential voter will still be...dead! 

And that assumes they're unsuccessful in lowering the voting age to, ummm, 12, or 10, or even maybe 8?

They seem dead-set (pun intended) on convincing their adherents that it's quite alright to abort those pesky fetuses if and when they become too much of a burden.  As in, any burden at all.  Flushing these "pre-borns" at anytime, anywhere, for any reason is the current thinking of America's Hard Left wing.  And maybe all of their wings.  And they regale us with that nearly every day.

Proudly!

Georgia just passed a very restrictive abortion law which states that once a heartbeat (the NYTimes calls it an "embryonic pulsation"...doncha' just luuuuuv pedantic obfuscation?) can be discerned, no more abortions.  For any reason.  That, my friends, was the declaration of War to the Democrats!  So far, over 100 Hollywood celebs have stated they'll no longer film in GA if this law stands.  Sophie Turner, as an example, late of "GofT," just pledged not to film there, even though Northern Ireland, where her hit show filmed, will happily give you life in prison for an abortion.  Hypocrite much?

Tyler Perry, a really smart guy who's made a $Billion being really smart, says "no" to this filming boycott.  He'll continue shooting in the Peach State, thank you very much.  Good on him.

BTW, didja' know there actually was a guy named Boycott?  Yeah, he was an English land agent during the late 1,600s.  He treated Irish immigrants very badly, often booting them out of their lodgings without reason or notice.  They ultimately "boycotted" this treatment, thus forming the basis for the future use of this now very common word... 

See what you learn by reading my scathing rants?  

Anyway, Bob Iger, Disney's CEO, has opined that filming in Georgia may not be possible in the future due to this action.  Imagine: Mickey and Tinkerbell are now managed by Goofy (LO very L).  So has Netflix, even though it's deep into production in places like Jordan and Egypt, where you'll be stoned to death for obtaining an abortion.  Or, my personal favorite, thrown off the top of a 10-story building.

They do that to gays, too...       

Imagine that; supposed capitalists giving the 10th Amendment the finger and attempting to force, via classic, unvarnished, mafiosi-style fascist measures, a sovereign state to kowtow to their wishes.  

GA gave Hollyweird more than $3 Billion in tax breaks in order to kickstart its nascent film industry.  And it's flourished ever since (duh!).  In fact, Georgia is now #3 in terms of all U. S. film production.  Apparently saving and making money isn't enough to convince these "stars," if you'll forgive me, to "live and let live."

It's truly amazing what can be accomplished by screaming loudly and stamping your little, Gucci-clad, well-pedicured feet!  Oh, and, threatening to rain down economic terror!

Now let me state right up front that, as the husband of a wonderful and faithful wife for almost 40 years, and the father of four fantastic daughters, I'm am all for women making up their own minds regarding reproduction.  Just not after that whole reproduction thingie has already occurred and their resultant progeny are relaxing in the delivery room.

All of our Democrat POTUS candidates, you'll be interested to know, have expressed their fervent desire that a woman should be able to choose to end her pregnancy at any time, for any reason, or no reason, including the period after the baby is born!  

Yes, after the birth of the baby...

The legislature of Illinois just took some time out from outlawing guns and punishing wealth and raising taxes and working overtime to cool the planet to decide that a woman should be able to abort her fetus at...anytime.  ANYTIME!  So did the State of  New York.  Ralph Northam, the Governor of Virginia, a Democrat and a neonatal surgeon, stated during a TV interview recently that killing a post-born baby is up the...mother.  Wow!  And, since they haven't dumped him, the rest of the VA Dem Party seems to be in lockstep with this guy's opinion.

I've been walking this planet for a long time, but this is really quite stunning!  Stunning!  

Of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that we, the U. S. of A. taxpayers, give Planned Parenthood more than $500 Million a year in taxpayer money, presumably for "health care."  And interestingly, Planned Parenthood turns around and gives the Democrat National Committee $450 Million a year90% of the tax money we give PP it then launders and gives it to the DNC!  Did you know that?  Do you think that might have anything to do with the Democrat's strident defense of abortion on demand?  

So, I ask myself, if this is the "new way" of doing things in the Democrat Party, why stop at just embracing the full nine-month period of gestation?  None of this first-trimester stuff for those guys.  No Sireeee Bob!  Why not jump the shark completely and extend that period to the immediate time after the birth?  Or maybe not so immediate?  And how about giving the new mommy even more time to decide whether this whole motherhood thing is "right" for her.  Instead of worrying about post-partum depression (do depressed people vote?), why not give the new mom the option of removing the cause of the depression entirely?

Why not, I ask rhetorically, extend the period for her "consideration" to, say, a few months?  You know, like say up until the age of 3.  Anytime the kid pisses off the mom, or pisses ON the mom, why not give her the option of "aborting" that kid just as if they were both still in the birth and delivery suite at the local hospital? 

Kind of like getting one of those infamous do-over annulments from the Catholic Church if the marriage didn't work out so very merry.  Louis XIV just loved that one...

It used to be that mainstream Democrat thinking was abortion should be "safe, legal and rare," as Billy Jeff "Blue Dress" Clinton once so famously said.  And I say "was," because that's no longer the generally accepted standard.

Now, it seems that abortion is a litmus test.  You're either against it, in which case you're a Troglodyte bible-thumping  redneck pickup truck-driving beer-swilling flag-waving toothless homophobic Islamophobic misogynist, or you're for it, in which case you're "woke," whatever the Hell that means.  It's just got to be up to the mother to do whatever she wishes with that blob of protoplasm at any point in time, we're told.  

Including, it seems, if and when that blob starts soiling diapers.  So let's just agree that if a little bit's good, a whole lot's just got to be better.

On the way out the door, I used to think there was no free lunch.  But now there's free abortions for residents of 49 of our states, courtesy of your (ever fewer) California taxpayers.  Did you know that?  Did you know that CA has just invited all pregnant women everywhere to come here to "enjoy" their free (to them, not us) abortions?  No?  Why?  Been watching the wrong news sources?    

Come to think of it, let's extend this whole abortion "consideration" option thingie all the way to puberty.  To my way of thinking, if you haven't killed them by then, you'll surely want to...  

Saturday, October 19, 2019

Let's Bring the Boys Home!

It seems that every now and then there's a yuuuuge kerfuffle over how many troops we have serving overseas, and when we should endeavor to bring them home.

Just lately it seems that POTUS Trump has engendered the enmity of every camp in D. C. over his decision to pull some of our soldiers away from the front lines in...somewhere.  Not sure whether they were in Syria, or Iraq, or Iran, or Kurdistan.  Maybe they weren't either...

Anyway, the Democrats, the Republicans, nearly every Hollywood script-reader and the blow-dried TV pundits all have their panties in a bunch over Trump's attempt to fulfill a campaign promise and "bring the boys home."  Yet, it seems that nobody, NOBODY wants that promise kept.  Not sure why, but ending a military conflict anywhere is anathema to the D.C. swamp-dwellers.  They luuuuuv conflict and want it to continue! 

Unless it's a Democrat doing the conflict-ending.  Then, they're just fine with the whole thing.  Think back when Obama pulled every single soldier out of Iraq.  After Bush had won the war.  Tens of thousands of them.  The vacuum they created by their departure paved the way for ISIS to take over and create their promised caliphate.  The same one Trump has worked tirelessly to decimate.  Which he has.  It's the "now what" that's confounding everyone... 

Under that backdrop, I'd like to offer up some rather jarring data for your reading pleasure.  We, the American People, have something north of 170,000 active duty military personnel currently serving in more than 150 foreign countries!  Did you know that? 

Here's a partial list of foreign military installations staffed by U. S. soldiers, sailors and marines:

  -   Australia
  -   Iraq 
  -   Niger
  -   Somalia
  -   Afghanistan
  -   Belgium
  -   Bosnia-Herzegovina
  -   Bulgaria
  -   Cameroon
  -   Germany (34 facilities)
  -   Israel
  -   Italy (22 facilities)
  -   Japan  (18 facilities)
  -   Burkino-Faso (Where the heck's that?)
  -   Kosovo
  -   No. Macedonia (But not So. Macedonia?)
  -   South Korea  (No, not No. Korea)
  -   Kuwait
  -   Spain  (15 facilities)
  -   Guam
  -   Moldavia
  -   Bahamas  (There are worse duty stations)
  -   Bahrain
  -   Brazil
  -   Cuba (Guantanamo Naval Base)
  -   Djibouti
  -   Greece
  -   Iceland
  -   Greenland
  -   Denmark
  -   Portugal
  -   Qatar
  -   Romania
  -   Turkey
  -   United Kingdom (36 facilities)

Yes, my friends, we have more than 5,000 bases, including posts, forts, airfields, bases, camps and stations around the world.  5,000!  We have more than 18,000 stationed in Italy.  Another 35,000 in Germany.  3,500 in Spain.  28,000 in South Korea.  55,000 in Japan.  And most of these have been there for more than 70 years!  

We have troops everywhere they might be needed.  And we're pretty busy, as you might have noticed.  And that's on top of the 600 bases we feature within the borders of the United States.  We have some 2,141,900 total military, with 1,282,900 on active duty. 

That number represents, by the way, only 0.07% of our total population.  Less than 1% of our population is trained up, geared up, armed up and stationed up, ready, willing and able to protect you and me, 24/7/365.  And they do.  They are the folks who've written a blank check made payable to the Federal Government - you and me - for an amount up to and including...their lives.

Let that sink in...

So for those who are dumb enough to demand that we bring soldiers home from here or there, let's just remember that the 28 or so soldiers relocated from the no-man's land between Syria, Russia, Iran and Kurdistan, are but a small part of the heroes we have prepositioned around the Globe to save our bacon...

Some might think it wise to bring most, or all of them, home.  Others, myself included, look at these postings as an insurance policy against another 9/11.  In other words, you pay a little bit today so you don't have to pay a whole lot tomorrow.  And I'd call that a pretty good deal...  

What do you think?

Thursday, October 17, 2019

I just got to thinking...

The Leftists in our Great Country have their collective panties in a bunch over "gun violence." 

It seems that out of a country of 335 Million souls, with 100+ Million of them proud gun owners, the blame for the occasional mass shooting, however spurious and tragic and unpredictable and unnecessary, should now be laid at their feet, regardless of their lack of involvement.  

Let that sink in: legal gun owners must be punished.  For owning guns.  Got it?  

Okay, well then.  It seems we're all told by our "betters" to now refer to any negative action involving guns as "gun violence."  And that we desperately need "gun violence reform."  Got that also?  

So, I have a question: if violence involving a gun is now "gun violence," then is any violence involving a knife, "knife violence?"  Are all knife owners collectively guilty for the actions of a few?  Is any violence involving a car now to be referred as "car violence?"  And should we all now protest en masse to eliminate "knife violence" and "car violence," while we're trying to end "gun violence?" 

What you need to know is that while the anti-gun crowd works overtime to convince you that AR-style rifles are the primary source of "gun violence," nothing could be further from the truth.  According to the FBI's own statistics, murders by knife (including all types) totalled 1,607 in 2016 (latest year available).  That same year 374 people were murdered by rifles (including AR's) of all kinds.  So you're about five times more likely to be knifed to death than be shot by a rifle.  Surprised?   

Now I know you know this, oh loyal, intelligent and insightful reader, but it must be stated that guns are inanimate objects.  They just sort of lay there looking, ummm, all black and shiny, until somebody picks them up and loads them and then puts them to work.  

And so are knives.  They must be unsheathed and brandished before they become dangerous.  And cars are inanimate as well.  You have to put the key in them and start them before they are ready to go out and murder a number of innocent motorists.  And Louisville Sluggers are the same, as are frying pans, and rolling pins, and X-Boxes, and wood chippers.  And anything else anyone one could possibly use to inflict damage upon another.  They are all just a collection of molecules artfully stuck together so as to form a...whatever.  Guns, knives, cars, wood chippers, etc.  Just tools we use to make our lives easier, or simpler, or more efficient.  

Or in the case of guns, safer!  And freer!

Take issue with that last statement?  Ask any citizen of Cuba, or North Korea, or China, or Venezuela, or the United Kingdom, or any of a dozen other countries if their lives might be a bit better if their guns hadn't been confiscated.  

I'd guess they'd respond in the affirmative...

NOTE:  There were 56 knifings in gun-free London just this past week...

Monday, October 14, 2019

The Redistribution of Misery...

All you have to do is watch any of the Democrat POTUS 2020 debates to know that they intend to give you, the prospective voters, anything you want in exchange for your votes.

Anything.  No matter what.  Anything at all!

So the corollary of that must be that the reason everybody doesn't have everything already, is because the "rich" are selfishly keeping us from it.  And if those awful rich folks get something nice they must have taken it from some poor Black Arkansas sharecropper, perhaps.  

Those bastards!

And they tell you that all the "free" stuff they'll regale you with will be paid for by these so-called "rich."  Those evil "rich" people, who have waaaaay more than enough, should be "asked" to pay "just a little bit more," and everybody everywhere could have everything!  Simple! 

Bernie proclaimed recently that nobody should be a $Billionaire.  Nobody!  Ever!  And you'll be (un)surprised to learn that our Bartender-In-Residence, the Bronx Representative with too many names, agrees with him.  So, since it seems our candidates think some of us have too much already, let's take a look at how the candidates plan to "spread the wealth" around once it's been scooped up so it's distributed more fairly: 

  -   Andrew Yang (who's he again?) wants to give everyone in America $1,000 a month.  Legal or illegal, no matter.  Wants to work, or not.  Okay, yeah.  That's novel, Andrew.  Most politicians try and buy votes the old fashioned way; quietly, hush hush, under the table, backroom stuff, doncha' know.  Maybe you should try that instead...  

  -   Kamala Harris, California's very own Jamaican/Indian-American Senator, says she's gonna' give us a $103 Billion plan to assist Black families to purchase homes.  That's One Hundred Thousand Million Dollars!  And only Black folks.  No one else.

That's not racist, is it?    

  -   Liz Warren, better known as "Fauxcahontas," (in)famous American Indian Senator, wants to give every kid in the U. S. - legal or not - freebie day care from birth to 5 years old.  She says it will only cost $1 Trillion!  To be paid for once again by the "rich."  

  -   And Bernie Sanders wants to do away with your private health insurance, all 170 million of you, and replace it with "Government Health Care."  Estimated cost over 10 years:  $93 Trillion!  What could possibly go wrong with that?  

(Just a thought: giving the same people who run the Post Office and Amtrac total dominion over your health should give one pause...)

Oh yeah, and not just the "rich" get screwed; he wants to up your tax rates to 70% to pay for it. 

Oh yeah again, and Bernie again, he wants you to go to college for free!  Any one you desire!  Freeeeeee!  That would only cost us all about $2.5 Billion a Year, which ain't bad if you're not doing the paying. 

  -   Cory Booker, better known as "Spartacus," thinks you should get "reparations" for being "Black."  So does every other Dem candidate.  He wants some of us to get paid by some others for something no one alive has ever done to anyone,  ever.

I sometimes identify as "Black."  Do I get some of them there "reparations?"

  -   Marianne Williamson, one of those "famous for being famous" folks (who's she again?), wants to give everybody a wind chime and some of those magic crystals.  And a whole lot of love...

At least wind chimes and magic crystals are cheap...

  -   Joe Biden, a man who's been in D. C. since "The Flood," wants you to know he'll give you everything all the others will, plus a whole lot of other stuff yet to be named, and don't forget he and Barack are besties!

Except maybe good ol' Barry may have failed to notice that.

And all sixty-three of these folks want to embrace the "Green New Deal" which is guaranteed to make  China's and India's air cleaner, but without their help or involvement or assistance.  Or contribution.  It would cost us a whopping $110 Trillion, BTW, which is, ummm, a lot of money.  

But for their penultimate pander, their very best,  they would throw out the Welcome Mat and offer free health insurance to illegal aliens!  All of them, everywhere!  At a cost, of, well, nobody knows for sure!  But I'm kind of guessing it would a lot!  A whole lot!  I mean, what might it cost to provide health insurance to Africa?  And Asia?  And they're keen on ripping down all those racist walls and borders and barriers and ushering in the Entire World!  

"Give us your poor, your tired, our future voters!"

BTW, California's new Governor, San Fran Nan Pelosi's nephew, just signed this little giveaway into law.  He says it will only cost his legal taxpayers, like me, and maybe you, $90 Million more dollars a year to cover these law-breakers.  He probably got that estimate from the same folks who told him our still-unrealized "Bullet Train" would cost $10 Billion, $95 Billion Dollars ago, and would be done last year.

It wasn't.

In fact, if you add up all the various giveaways being touted by the Dem candidates, they total well in excess of $300 Trillion Dollars!  Considering our GDP is around $20 Trillion, that's, ummm, more than 15 x our Gross Domestic Product!  

You can be sure that the mere fact of offering all this largesse is proof positive that they are unserious, know nothing about economics, are blatant panderers and are seemingly unaware that the folks out there in Real America thinks they're all complete fools...

Except, these otherwise-unemployables somehow fail to mention that there's not enough money in the Entire World to pay for all the free stuff they're promising.  Not by a long shot!  And if you only watch CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/MSNBC/PBS/NPR, and therefore believe the "rich" have enough cash stuffed in their mattresses that they could give everybody everything, here's a few statistics:

Gross Domestic Product, U.S.A. (2018):  

$20.515 Trillion Dollars

Income, Top 1% Wage Earners (2018):

$2,033 Trillion Dollars

Percentage of all Income Earned by Top 1%:

19.72%

Percentage of all Income Taxes Paid by Top 1%:

37.32%

So, as these numbers reflect, the evil "rich" are already paying far more than "their fair share."  And taking 100% of every nickel those evil "rich" make wouldn't even pay for U. S. operations for a single year.  Lemme' say that again:  The Top 1% don't earn enough to pay half our bills So, even if we took it all, do you think these same folks would go back to work after having their pockets picked by Uncle Sugar and then earn some more so we could take it from them again?  

I somehow doubt it.  

In other words, it would be a one-shot deal; you can only take everything from everyone...once.  Thereafter, those who've been robbed blind will be standing in line for their handouts along with all the other socialist supplicants...

Think of it this way:  When more and more folks decide to ride in the wagon instead of pulling it, pretty soon everybody's gonna' be riding in the wagon and nobody's gonna' be pulling it...

So, fellow Pilgrim, let me leave you today with a friendly, slightly-tweaked admonition:  "As always, if it seems too good to be true, it's just your friendly Democrats out campaigning again..."  

Friday, October 11, 2019

All You Need to Know About Planned Parenthood.

This posting will intentionally be bereft of extraneous verbiage.  Which is not the norm for me, The Chuckmeister.  I usually pontificate to the max.  But not today.  No, not today.  So here goes...

Planned Parenthood (PP), the Number One abortion provider in the U.S., receives more than $500 Million Dollars a Year from you and me, the U. S. taxpayers.

Why?  Because Democrat-led PP cheerleaders in our Legislature have been demanding it for decades.  And the feckless Republicans have been going along with it.  Why don't Republicans put a stop to it?  You'd have to ask them...

PP then turns around and gives more than $450 Million Dollars a Year of that gift from you and me to the Democrat Party.  In other words, 90% of all the money it receives from the taxpayers, you and me, it launders neatly and then gives to Democrats. 

Surprised?  If the MainStreamMedia did its job, you wouldn't be.  Maybe you've been watching the wrong TV channels... 

Is there any doubt why the Democrats fight so hard to keep on shoveling money to PP every year?  Is there any doubt why PP keeps fighting so hard to keep receiving that tax money every year? 

So whether you believe in abortion or not, you'd have to agree that many of our taxpayers object to the use of Federal funds to pay for them.  And they work hard to try and minimize such payments, or even eliminate them altogether.    

But such funding is going to be hard to eliminate if you're a politician or a lobbyist or a poverty pimp who's on the receiving end of all that cash, of course... 


News Flash!

You'll be interested to know that the CEO of PP just announced, in a major press release yesterday, that it intends to spend at least $45 Million Dollars next year in an effort to flip the Senate to Democrat control and turn the White House blue.  Their exact words.  They don't like The Donald and they want everybody to know it.  They've therefore publicly admitted their favoritism for the Democrats, and I'm waiting for the MSMedia to report that fact.  

I'm still waiting...

So PP is using 10% of the tax money they receive from us, the taxpayers, to defeat those of us who don't agree with their business or their agenda.  Trump just cut more than $90 Million Dollars a Year from our payments to them because they wouldn't agree to certain minimum patient care protections in their clinics.  That made them particularly mad.  So mad they're using another $45 Million - of our money - to try and punish both him and us.  Are you reading this, people? 

Think of it: we're paying them lots and lots of our tax money to buy TV ads against us so that we'll be forced to give them more of our money.  Ummm, what?  

This, my loyal readers, is but another example of Federal waste, fraud and abuse, and a finger in the eye of taxpayers everywhere.  But that's just my opinion.  Yours may differ.  That's what makes America so great.  But you may differ on that as well... 

Tuesday, October 8, 2019

Racial Politics...

Those of us who for some reason aren't Democrats, or "Progressives," or Leftists, or socialists, or even all-out commies, the same folks who seem to be in charge of our societal norms these days, are currently labeled "racists."  

That's it.  Just the one word.  If you choose to disagree with them.  About anything.  Anything at all.  If you do, then you're accused of racism.  And probably being misogynistic, and homophobic and Islamophobic.  And triskaidekphobic (look it up).  And yadayadaphobic, as well.

Don't bother looking it up.

But you're primarily labeled a "racist," by those on the "Left" whenever you don't kowtow to their way of thinking, because anything you do or say after that point becomes moot; you're dialed out of the conversation.  Out of the equation.  Out of humanity entirely.  That's what they've done to our society, Mr. and Mrs. and Ms. (and any other pronoun you prefer) America.  They've so dumbed it down in an effort to outlaw "hate" speech, which is any speech they find annoying, that half the country has been effective neutered.

And boy are they ever pissed!

An old friend stopped by the other day.  He asked, "Mr. Chuckmeister, sir, how did we all get to this sorry place?"

I thought about it for a few minutes and then "unleashed" some of my infamous hoary wisdom.  Wisdom borne of years of study and quiet contemplation, now dutifully and artfully ensconced in an absolutely free, no obligation opinion.  Here goes:  

Racism had diminished dramatically in America since our efforts to eradicate it starting in the mid-Sixties.  That whole Viet Nam unpleasantness and Summer of Love and Black Panthers and Chicago riots and busing crap had all subsided as we moved into a sort of post-racial truce.  LBJ's "Great Society" programs had pumped more than $Six Trillion Dollars into the poorest parts of the U.S., primarily older, decaying, Democrat-run cities, trying to "fix" our racial problems.  Assuming they could be fixed.  Which we were told they could.  

Yeah, sure.  

From Detroit to Newark to Chicago to Baltimore, "affirmative action" efforts were undertaken.  Many of them worked.  Most didn't.  But no one can say we didn't try.  Go to any older big city and drive past the enormous vacant, crumbling housing projects you'll surely find, if you want some proof.  

And by the 80's and 90's, racial enmity had pretty much passed us by.  Thankfully.  A part of that I think is due to the equanimity of that very Viet Nam unpleasantness, which conscripted us all without consideration as to race.  And that adventure produced millions of guys just like me who'd quite possibly shared a foxhole with every color human God ever made, without ever having taken notice of it.  That Conflict, coupled with the two preceding ones, helped produce a homogenized America.  In effect, those conflicts served to put us all in a giant blender and produce a close proximity of equality.    

With exception of the L. A. Riots, and the never-ending south side Chicago gunfights, and the unsolvable Baltimore gang wars, which continue unabated 'til today, I can't recall hearing or reading much of anything back then concerning serious, ongoing racial divisions anywhere in the Country. 

Until we elected Barack Hussein Obama, that is.  

Mr. Obama made the subject of race a central focus of his campaign, and later of his Administration as a whole, plus pure, unvarnished, unmitigated "class warfare."  He intentionally pitted the rich against the poor, the old against the young, the urban against the country-dweller, the religious against the non-believer, and mainly, Blacks against Whites.  

Remember early in his reign when a white cop "mistreated" a Black Ivy League professor?  And how Obama preached to us all that this was just a White cop "behaving stupidly?"  And how Barry invited them both to the White House for a beer summit?  To tamp down the firestorm he, himself had ignited?  

Yeah, his whole Presidency was marred with similar occurrences.  Remember five days before he was inaugurated when he said, "America is the greatest country in the world.  Join with me now as we begin to fundamentally transform it?"  Two things:  One, I wonder why no "journalist," if they actually still exist, took the time to ask him what he actually meant by that; and two, I'd say he did a pretty good (meaning bad) job of achieving that transformation he was promising.  To our mutual disadvantage, I'd argue.

All of a sudden there was racial discontent all over America.  A skinny, Black, teenage, petty thief chooses to fight an armed, Hispanic neighborhood watchman.  The watchman kills him.  All of a sudden it was a hate crime involving every White and Black American, with the flames fanned by Obama for as long as he could.  It was (Dinosaur Media) Page One news for months.  

An enormous Black kid robs a convenience store, assaults the owner, and then picks a fight with a cop...who shoots him...in self-defense.  Obama chose to blame the White cop, starting a firestorm within his Black and Progressive base.  He sends his entire Cabinet to St. Louis to whip up hatred among his Black constituents, led by Eric Holder, then-Attorney General, his Black, self-confessed "wingman."  That results in riots and the firebombing of entire neighborhoods.  Thanks, Barry!      

Remember that whole DACA fiasco?  The one where Obama told us 27 times, by actual count, that he couldn't make them all citizens, that he lacked the authority?  The one where he then decided, unilaterally, and unconstitutionally, to turn 800,000 of the offspring of illegal aliens into "almost Americans?"  Thus igniting racial animus between Whites and Hispanics?  So do I.  And we STILL don't have a satisfactory resolution to that screw up.  

I could go on forever.  And some of my friends think I do.  The Bottom Line is that we don't have a racial problem here in America.  With exception of certain "Progressives" who are fundraising off of perceived racism, that is.  Such as every single Democrat member of Congress.  And Black activists, like tax cheat Rev. Al and Baby Daddy Jessuh Jackson, who are loudly banging the racial drum to get more donations from guilty White Democrats.    

What we really need is for the poverty-pimps and race hustlers and pandering politicians to shut the Hell up and leave us all alone.  We Americans don't automatically hate anyone.  That's no longer in our nature, if it ever was.  We've learned over time to accept others as they are.  Plus, as an incentive, the vast majority of us believe that so long as the medium of exchange in our Great Country are those little, 6" x 2 and 1/2" green pieces of paper with numbers on them, we'll CHOOSE to be colorblind in our daily dealings.  We'll CHOOSE to comport ourselves in that fashion because it's to our own, mutual advantage.  And we CHOOSE to act that way because it's the right thing to do. 

To paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill, "Racism doesn't feed the bulldog."

What's your opinion?

Saturday, October 5, 2019

Maybe You Could Help Me Out a Bit...

So I've got this problem, see?  And maybe, just maybe, you can help me out.  Let's find out together...

One Ms. Lorrie Lightfoot, brand spanking-new Mayor of Chicago, the "sanctuary city" where guns are pretty much illegal but with more gun violence and deaths than any other in America, just formally announced that she ordered her police department not to assist, help out, or provide back-up in any way, shape or form for any Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers who may request it in her city.

Ummmm, what?  

I thought ICE officers were a part of our Federal Government!  I thought ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) was an integral part of Homeland Security, dedicated to looking for, rounding up and arresting criminal illegal immigrants.  The ones who have somehow managed to slip through our almost impenetrable (cough, cough) border.  That would be the Bad Guys, to you.  Murderers.  Child molesters.  Rapists.  Drug dealers.  Criminals.  Felons.  Those who've been formally convicted of a crime, have been through our court system, likely previously imprisoned, have served out their sentences and have now been adjudged wanted on warrants and requested detained by ICE, a Department of the Federal Government. 

So what's supposed to happen is that these Bad Guys are snagged by our police or sheriff's deputies or a marshal or two and held in a cell somewhere, okay?  Those who are wanted for criminal activity, or those who've just completed a jail or prison sentence and are still wanted by the Feds for another crime, will have a "detainer" issued to their jailers by the Feds.  So the local cops are supposed to then contact ICE and let them know they're ready to kick a felon out the back door; that they're being released and please come and take them off our hands.

At least, that's what's supposed to happen.  As in, what's been happening for decades, or at least until Trump got elected.   

Except more than 250 Federal jurisdictions, states, counties and cities have decided, unilaterally, to simply ignore the law, declare themselves "sanctuary cities," and discharge these criminals without providing ICE with the notice they need to come and get them.  So they let these Bad Guys go, out onto the highways and byways of America, and now ICE has to track them down in houses or apartments or back alleyways or fleeing cars, where they can put up resistance, and even take up arms, often placing our ICE officers at great bodily risk of harm.

We've lost a number of ICE officers this way, and it was totally preventable.  

So what's better, I ask rhetorically?  Quietly transferring a jailed prisoner into the custody of an ICE officer, or turning that jackleg loose and then having our men and women of ICE trying to track them down?  I think you know the answer.  So why doesn't Ms. Lightfoot?  Perhaps because she's consumed by political correctness?  Infected with Democrat Looneyness?  Playing to her far Left base?  Dumber than a bag of rocks?  Me thinks so...  

Perhaps the fact that Lightfoot is a woman, and Black, and midget-short, and openly gay, and a flaming Liberal, helps a bit.  All that has helped prepare her for her stint as Police Commissioner for a City where Democrats have been in charge for more than 70 years.  A position which she is now openly and willfully using to violate Federal law.

If you live in California, as I unfortunately do, then you know we have our own example of Lightfoot.  His name is Gavin Newsom.  He's our newest Governor, hand-picked and paid for by a six uber-wealthy families.  His aunt is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, if you'd like an example.  His Godfather was J. Paul Getty, at one time the richest man in America, for another.

Newsom has gone Chicago one better.  Or worse, as the case may be.  He's declared CA as a "sanctuary state," effectively seceding our once-Golden State from the Union.  I wonder just what would happen if the Federal Government decided to fight back in this little battle.  How about the Feds withholding matching funds to California?  That would equal several hundred million dollars a year.  How about the Feds ignoring plaintive calls for help in emergencies or natural disasters?  How about Trump deciding to build his Great Wall between CA and the rest of our Great Country?  Would that be enough to cause this snarky bozo to actually obey ALL the laws, not just the ones he likes?  

Might be fun to find out...