Is Liberalism a Mental Illness?

I have come to believe that Liberalism may be a mental illness.

I could be wrong, but I don't think so.  Let's consider the facts...

My friends, and you are my friends, Liberalism must  be a mental illness.  There's really no other way to explain why some people, and perhaps a tad over half the people, they having been divided into little sub-groups by the Democrats over the eons, i.e., blacks, Jews, Latinos, the poor, the Lap Dog Media, college professors, etc., etc., have decided to embrace a philosophy which cannot by any means be defended by ordinary, everyday, presumably otherwise intelligent people.

In my erstwhile opinion, that is.

Think about it:  Liberals believe that there is income inequality and that it's unfair!  

Well, Duuuuuuuuh!  

Of course there's income inequality!  That's because some people are worth more for what they do than others!  If you can dance, or sing, or do magic tricks, or throw a fastball, or maybe create a company or a product or a service that everybody wants (think "Apple"), then you can command more money than if your only talent is sucking down Schlitz Malt Liquor and watching Jerry Springer reruns whilst sitting on your fat ass on your threadbare couch in your BVD's sporting a three day-old growth of beard.  

But Liberals, or as they are sometimes called, Progressives, or socialists, or communists, or even Democrats, believe that we should all be paid the same.

Think about it.  Back eight years ago or so, before Barry Obama had yet to become our Dear Leader, some of us went to college and got a degree and scored a job and went to work and earned a good paycheck.  And others didn't.  The ones that did earned more money than the ones that didn't. And nobody found that the least bit strange.  I mean, why would they?  No harm, no foul.  

But then Barry screwed the system by forcing through Obamacare without a single Republican vote, which obliterated the 40 hour workweek.  And it, along with an avalanche of onerous new rules and regulations that strangled businesses and killed the job market. Unemployment went through the roof.  Businesses stopped hiring. Middle class jobs all but disappeared.  And then little Johnnies and Suzies had to compete with middle-aged, newly-unemployed 'Muricans who had just been displaced from their well-paying jobs for minimum wage work by the realities mentioned above.  

And those policies have so far put 93,567,000 out of the workforce.  That leaves only 63.7% in the Labor Force Participation Rate (the LFPR is a Federal Government-provided statistic...they report to Obama, so this statistic must be accurate). That's a 40 year low, my friends!  And we now boast 43,000,000 on food stamps. That's 15% of the entire population!  Not good. No, my friends, not good at all...

And then there's the slowest recovery from a recession in the history of America. Never a year since Barry was immaculated that has the economy exceeded 3% growth. And in most it was much less.  Much less!  The growth rate for 2016 shows only a 1.2% growth rate, so far.  Anemic.  We need at least, at least, a 4% annual growth in the Gross Domestic Product in order to create enough jobs to keep pace with our growing population.  In Ronnie Reagan's time his GDP grew at an annual rate of 8% coming out of the recession he inherited.  But Libbies seem happy with Barry's performance. Mental illness?  You decide.

And Barry said that George W's $9 Trillion in debt was "unpatriotic."  But Libbies must be okay with his $20 Trillion in Federal debt.   And it's climbing.  Quickly. Obama hasn't created jobs, but he has created more Federal debt than all other presidents in our nation's proud history, combined!  Is that unpatriotic also?  

But Liberals seem happy with it.  They must, because they're all gleeful at the prospect of voting in Hil(liar)y to add another four-year or eight-year term to Barry O.'s Presidency. That's what they both are advertising.  Mentally ill?

And how about this:  The unions, having lost most all their membership over the years, decided to look to min-wage employers to gain new dues payers. I mean, after all, the union bosses need somebody to pay for their ultra-luxe, first-class vacations to the Bahamas, right?  The Service Employees International Union, the folks who represent the $8.00 an hour maids who make up your bed at the Holiday Inn, bet more than $50 Million of their members' hard-earned dues in a multi-year effort to shame McDonalds and other fast food joints into paying their employees $15.00 an hour. That's nearly double the current $7.85 min-wage. A wage bump, by the way, that would put almost all of them out of business. That's nearly twice the starting wage of a soldier in the United States Army!  Do you actually think that a burger-flipper should be paid twice what a soldier, who is required to write a blank check payable to you and me for a sum up to and including his life, should earn?  But hey, America, they're probably mentally ill, so that sort of thinking makes perfect sense to them.  Not to me, but apparently to them.

Annnnnnd then there's this:  How about the sort of mental acuity that would permit Liberals to actually believe that "climate change" is more dangerous to us that ISIS? You know, that band of Islamic jihadist killer murderous pond scum thugs who want to separate our heads from our bodies poses less of a risk to us, the Libbies believe, then "global warming," or "climate chaos," or "climate disruption," or whatever they're calling it these days. John "Lurch" Kerry, our Secretary of State, and our National Buffoon, just said so last week.  Are they stark-raving nuts? Seems so to me. How about you?

Hello Liberals!  The climate has been changing since there was a climate!  It gets hotter, then colder, then hotter again. California used to be covered with ice. It was called "The Little Ice Age."  But if you haven't noticed lately, it no longer is. That's because...wait for it...the climate changed!  And I'm thinking it will continue to change regardless of Liberals' die- hard effort to tax us into submission in an effort to stop it.  

Think about it:  There were no SUV's when Taxifornia was covered with ice.  And yet, the "climate changed," causing all that ice to melt, and without a single bit of carbon dioxide from the tailpipe of a Chevy Suburban assisting in the process. I think this kind of thinking actually does require one to be a bit loonie.  Agree?

Did you know that China and India are opening a new coal-fired electricity generating plant every week?  Between the two of them they have half of the world's population. And they need to generate power for their populations.  They know, and we know, that coal is the most efficient, and cheapest, source of power we humans have.  And we have a 200-year supply.  Buuuut, Liberals seem to believe that what happens there will stay there.  Kind of like Las Vegas, I guess.  

Maybe they think there's a 60,000 foot tall Plexiglas wall surrounding America, keeping out all the bad air that's generated on the other side of the planet.  But, Liberals don't seem to know that as the world spins on its axis the atmosphere (climate) circles the globe counter-clockwise. What's there today will be here next week.  But if you're mentally ill, you won't know that. Too bad, so sad.

And how about this?  That group of Liberal thinkers seems to believe that college should be free.  Yes, free!  And, since we know that nothing is free, then who, exactly, do they think should pay for this "free" gift from the Federal Gummint?  The 1%, that's who. And, since the 1% already pays 38.7% of all the Federal income taxes collected, exactly how much do the Libbies think those God-awful 1%-ers should pay?  50%? 80%?  110%?

Hil(liar)y Clinton was on TV this past Sunday telling the talking head that was interviewing her that she intended to get the money to pay for college and new roads and bridges and highways from the "1%."  Why?  Because, as she said, "That's where the money is."  Do you remember Willie "The Actor" Sutton, that infamous Depression-era bank robber? He said precisely the same thing when asked why he robbed banks. Clinton has, it appears, a good mentor.

What makes these drooling fools think the "1%-ers" won't take some of that wealth and head off to the local airport, hop on board a nice shiny Gulfstream 550, and depart for Panama, or Costa Rica, or Belize?  I would.  Wouldn't you? In fact, wouldn't you have to be crazy not to? 

In fact, more than 1,000 higher earners turned in their U.S. passports last year and headed off for parts unknown, taking their wealth with them.  More are expected to join them this year.  When will the Liberals get a grip and figure out that they're killing the Golden Goose?  Or, perhaps we should just realize that they will never do so, because they're - hello! - mentally ill!   

Bringing this little soap opera drama closer to (my) home, California has lost more than 9,000 corporations over the past ten years.  Why?  Because the dummies in power up there in Sacramento don't seem to realize that overtaxing its citizens can - and does - result in their bolting for parts unknown.  What's that sound we hear?  It's the roll-up door on U-Haul trucks closing just before their tail lights start growing ever dimmer as they head East on the I-10 for Nevada, or Utah, or Arizona, or New Mexico, or Texas.

Example:  Toyota incorporated in Torrance, California more than sixty years ago. They've done quite well ever since. Yet, the once-Golden State has kept on raising taxes to the point it no longer makes sense to do bizz here.  So, that automotive icon has become one of those 9,000 corps that have escaped.  They relocated to Plano, Texas, taking more than 4,000 white collar execs with them.  And what did Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown, our Guv and Civil Servant-for-Life have to say about their move? "Good riddance," said he.  Nice, Jer.  Nice.  Mentally ill?  Me thinks so.

My theory is it won't be long before there's no one left here in Taxifornia except for sign twirlers and Starbucks baristas. But that's because those who are calling the shots are - you already know it - mentally ill.

And consider this:  Our military is the smallest it's been since the day before Pearl Harbor.  Barry has made it so.  Our Navy is half the size it was when Ronnie Reagan was President.  We've gone from an 800 ship Navy to just over 350.  Our Air Force is smaller than it was when it hadn't yet been named the "Air Force."  We've lost more than 300,000 soldiers in the U.S. Army alone. Smaller even than it was before World War 2.  Do the Libbies not know that our enemies attack us when we're most vulnerable?  Me thinks not.  Does anyone doubt that the Libbie's hate the military? I'd like to know who could possibly doubt that claim. Perhaps they really are mentally ill.

And, for my finale, the Liberals among us actually seem to believe that when really, really Bad Guys shoot up a school, or a mall, or a movie theater, then the absolutely reasonable and proper thing to do is to take guns away from gun owners who did nothing at all wrong.  They don't seem to feel the same about cars when drunk drivers kill people, or knives when crazies start slashing up a crowd, or pressure cookers when a jihadist murdering thug blows a number of innocent folks to smithereens during a marathon.  

But they are fixated on separating honest, honorable, red-blooded, God-fearing 'Muricans from their legally-purchased and legally-owned weapons, even though those gun owners possess them under the aegis of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, as the Supreme Court has affirmed under Heller v. D.C., absolutely guarantees them the Right of such ownership.

And more recently the Libbies have selected as their candidate for POTUS a woman who is advocating employing the "Australian form of gun control."  Now we all know that the Australians solved their gun "problem," if there was one, by forcibly confiscating all weapons.  Oh, they gave the now-defenseless owners a few bucks in exchange, but more than 800,000 of their guns were melted down, leaving only criminals with firearms.  

And the Libbies somehow believe that putting up signs saying "Gun Free Zone" will keep the guns away.  I'm guessing they also believe that putting up signs saying "Hurricane Free Zone" will prevent another Katrina.  

Think of it, my friends.  The Libs believe, deep down, that a sign - a sign - will turn some crazed dude around and cause him to rethink his plan to murder a bunch of innocents.  Hey Liberals!  Did you know that the Korean crazy that shot up Virginia Tech a few years back walked past a sign proclaiming "Gun Free Zone" on his way to the scene of his crimes?  Maybe the sign needed to be larger.  Or maybe it needed to be in "all caps."  Or maybe a different font was needed.  A sign?  Really?  Jeeeesh! 

This last factoid should be the ultimate piece of evidence that mental illness is rampant among those of Liberal persuasion. Could anything be greater proof that those on the Left, you know, the Liberals, the Progressives, the Democrats, are absolutely stark-raving lunatics?  

Orrrrrrr, maybe they're just trying to disarm the public to make them easier to manage when the Balloon Goes Up.  If that's the case, then maybe they're not mentally ill at all. Maybe they're just diabolically evil...

Buying handguns, computers and books...

And while we're on the subject of guns...

...during the memorial to the five murdered hero policemen in Dallas a week or so ago, our semi-retired, full-time vacationer -in-Chief POTUS was kind enough to hijack that solemn gathering and share with us, the Great Unwashed, his opinions regarding racial inequality, Black Lives Matter, police brutality, and teenagers and their purchasing choices.  Lucky us.

Here's a part of what he said, and I quote:  

"...We flood communities with so many guns it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock then to get his hands on a computer, or even a book."

Somewhat later in that interminable sermon, he said, "...We all know this to be true."

Well, Mr. Obama, may I say that we don't all know this to be true.  In fact, those of us who were wearing the tinfoil hats back in 2008 when you and your backers hipmotizzzzzed America, know that what you said that day was a bald-faced lie.  About one-third of us screamed at the TV, using all manner of nasty, unprintable comments. The other two-thirds nodded their likely unemployed heads in agreement, saying, "You tell 'em, Oh Sahib!"  

And there's only one question that must be asked: Did you actually believe what you said that day, or were you just bleating out another in a never-ending series of falsehoods so as to keep your mindless flock "oohing" and "ahhing" at your every utterance?  

If you actually believed what you said, then you are completely devoid of any semblance of common knowledge regarding the purchase of firearms here in what you've done your very best to make a once-great country.  And God knows, you've been superb at causing ordinary Americans to go out in force to buy guns of all kinds and types, knowing that you're on record as being dead-set on banning them from the landscape.

In order to purchase a Glock, or any handgun for that matter (it would have been nice if he'd actually described what a "Glock" is for the unfamiliar that day!), you must first undergo a comprehensive background analysis known as the "National Instant Criminal System," or "NICS" check. It will cost you $25.00 and the FBI will do a "right now" records search on you to make sure you are cleared to purchase and own a handgun. Or in some states, like the one from which I am unfortunately now blogging, any firearm. You may not own that shiny new Glock if you are a felon, or if you have a restraining order filed against you, or if for any reason the Feds have decided you are not a citizen in good standing and/or a danger to your community.  

You don't leave with your new Glock until that is done, no matter whether it's at a gun store or a gun show (there is no "gun show loophole," people!  It doesn't exist!).  This is what the Lefties among us have been clamoring for, and it's been in effect since 1996! Surprise, you weenies!  You've already got what you've been wanting!  Aren't you proud of yourselves?  What? You didn't know that?  Aren't you interested in finding out what else you don't know?  I guess not... 

And in some states, such as New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Oregon, Maryland, Washington, and of course here in Taxifornia, which never met a gun control measure that it didn't wholeheartedly embrace, you must then put up with a several-day waiting period before you can actually take possession of your newly-bought firearm.  This is, as the "more equal than you" have put it, to give you a "cooling off" period just in case you were buying that there gun while hot under the collar so you can go straight home and do away with your significant other. Here, it's ten days.  Some places, it's three days.  It's unconstitutional, of course (remember that part in the 2nd Amendment about "...the Right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?"), but that doesn't seem to stop any Lefty legislators anymore, does it?  

See?  Not so easy, is it Barry?  And see, that crap that dripped from your community organizer lips a week or so ago was a demonstrable, unmitigated and fabulously fabricated falsehood (how's that for a nifty little alliteration?). 

Or, better put, it was us mid-westerners call a lie!

And if you said it to keep your flock in line, then it says quite a bit about those "sheeple" who follow your every word, doesn't it?  If you happen to be among the two-thirds of our populace that do not own a firearm (for shame!), and do not know that guns don't actually wake up in the morning, wash their little metallic faces, load themselves up with evil, hollow point, armor-piercing bullets and go out looking for some innocent little - probably Black - child to murder in cold blood, then take note of this little unassuming posting.  You have been lied to, you weenies! You have been misled, continually, by those who wish to render - and keep you - unarmed and defenseless.  The only question you should be asking yourselves is, why?

I'm thinking it just might be an effort to install a Federalized, armed military police force somewhere down the line to subjugate you and me just as soon as the judiciary is under the full and complete control of the Left.   As that old saying I learned in the Army goes, "If you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow."  And that cannot happen until or unless we as a society have been disarmed.  

As for the more than One Hundred Million of us who are armed and intend to remain that way (Google "Molon Labe" if you need a more descriptive term), we are quite capable of defending ourselves against all enemies, foreign or domestic. We know a lie when we hear it, and we know a liar when he stares unblinking into the camera and spews those lies with machine-gun rapidity. 

In the unlikely event that Mr. Obama happens to read this little blog posting, I hereby lay down the figurative gauntlet. Let's get together, you and me, at and time and place of your choosing.  I'll give you a couple of hours to come up with a Glock, a computer and a book. I'll even give you a couple of thousand of rapidly-depreciating dollars to pay for it all. That's about twice the retail price of those three items.  We all know "it's true" that you can buy a computer at Best Buy, and a book at Barnes and Noble. Since you seem to know so much about where to purchase a Glock, perhaps because of your experience while living in your "gunless" adopted home town of Chicago, where more people are shot each weekend than in beautiful downtown Baghdad, maybe you won't even need the entire hour...

And, since it's been a few years since I visited Foggy Bottom, it may be that D.C.'s so evil and dangerous that you need a CCW permit to secrete a laptop.  Or, to hide a Harry Potter book in your waste band (no, I didn't fail to spell "waist" correctly; I thought "waste" to be more appropriate. considering who the protagonist is in this little morality play). In which case you'll have to figure out which street corner to illegally buy either one.  

One more thing.  Don't you or any other weenie come to our house looking for some place to "shelter in place" when the fit hits the shan.  You'll find no such comfort among those of us who were smart enough to gird our loins and prepare for the coming "unpleasantness." 

Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away...

"Well of Course it was Guns! What Else Could it Have Been?"

"Praise be to God, and prayers as well as praise be upon the Prophet of Allah."

"...I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi of the Islamic State.  May God protect him on behalf of the Islam State and Allah."

These were some of the exact words uttered by Omar Mateen during his four calls to 911, while murdering and maiming more than 100 innocent folks out for a good time at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida over a three-plus hour period.

Yes, my friends, he  took a time out while committing his unspeakable acts to make sure that we, the infidels, knew exactly why he was killing and wounding all those people that night.  He was doing it for the glory of Islamic jihadist terrorist ideology. They have declared war on us, my friends. 

We have declared...ummm, ummmmm, well read below and see for yourself.

Within 6.4 seconds (only a slight exaggeration!) of the sound of the shots beginning to fade that night, one B. Hussein Obama, our semi-retired, completely unqualified, soon-to-be ex-President, managed to somehow pry himself away from the golf course and place himself squarely in front of the nearest TV cameras once again to blame the whole sordid thing on...wait for it...

GUNS!

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?

Now to be fair, Obama did mumble something under his breath about "radical extremism," whatever the Hell that is. But he stated that the blame rested unequivocally on "too many weapons of mass destruction," and "weapons of war," and "military-style weapons."  

You know, I searched high and low and couldn't find any reference where Mr. Obama placed that blame on "too many cars" when the Black crazy woman stalked and then repeatedly jumped the curb to murder 13 and wound another 30 on the sidewalk in front of the Hard Rock Hotel in Lost Wages a few months back.

Nor could I find any attributions of blame by Mr. Barry of "too many pressure cookers" after the Tsarnaev brothers blew up the Boston Marathon and killed a dozen and wounded and maimed hundreds more a few years back.  

And I couldn't find any mention by Him (capital "H" to show due deference to His Golferness) against "too many knives" after 7 were hospitalized and many more stabbed during a Neo-Nazi rally outside the Capitol Building in Sacramento, California a week or so ago.  The Capitol Building?  Don't we pay enough taxes here in Taxifornia to avoid such carnage and mayhem? I guess not. That's why the smarter ones of us are armed.

And (H)e didn't place any blame with "too many high-powered crossbows" like the one the obviously upset fellow in Philadelphia used to shoot his wife of nine days(!) at close range smack in the middle of her chest a few days back.  

Of course, there is no Right "to keep and bear cars," nor "to keep and bear pressure cookers," nor "to keep and bear knives," nor even to "keep and bear crossbows."  But there is a "fundamental, inalienable Right" to "keep and bear arms." The 2nd Amendment says so.  The Supreme Court has said so.  And we all know so.  

Well, all but Liberals.  They don't seem to know much of anything.

Maybe Barry, the infamous Constitutional law lecturer at Haaavud, has been playing so much golf on our time and our dime that he just hasn't noticed...

Or maybe he just doesn't care...

And then, believe it or not, and you'd best believe it, his soulless sycophantic sillies actually had the temerity to defy more than two centuries of House of Representatives rules to do what commie pinko dumbass liberal weenies called a "sit in" on the floor of that same august body a few days back. They actually sat down in the middle of the Well of the House and stamped their little Gucci-shod feet and held their well-manicured hands and sang "we shall overcome" off-key in an effort to force a vote on "gun control."  

Buuuuut, of course they knew that four separate gun bills had just been voted down the day before in the Senate, so no vote, even if taken, would have been successful.  They knew that.  So the protest they undertook was solely for show. Nothing more than a 27 hour fundraising effort.  A means to get wall-to-wall coverage on MSNBC, that Liberal TV outlet that has thankfully stopped calling itself a "news channel." They don't deal in news.  They deal in Left-wing propaganda. But then, that's what we've come to expect of them.  

What the Democrat lawmakers undertook that day was very simply an effort to try and keep up the pretense that the murders and mayhem visited upon us all in Orlando was the work of "too many guns" instead of "too many Islamic terrorist jihadist pond scum bastards" right here in our midst.  Nothing but an effort at "misdirection." 

They're really good at it.  Unfortunately.

So, those of you who are predisposed to vote come November, please take note of the raging, rampant and ridiculous hypocrisy apparent in this little act of civil disobedience. And then please vote to put an end to it by putting an end to the service offered up by the commie pinko weenies who participated in this lunacy.  

Can you imagine that there will be those who just don't bother to actually learn the truth about such matters and will believe the crap being shoveled their way by the Lap Dog Media?  I do.

Thank you, and good night...

"Brexit:" The U.K. Declares Independence From the EU.

240 years ago the "United Colonies of America" declared independence from Britain and the tyrannical reign of King George the Third.  

Actually, independence was declared on July 2nd, but hey, it's not up to me to decide when we celebrate it.  Look it up if you doubt me.

Anyway, we all know (except for Millennials) the reasons why:  "Taxation without representation," Tax Stamps, the (very first) Tea Party, The shot heard round the world," "One if by land, two if by sea," "The battle of Concord," etc., etc.  Suffice it to say, the Mother Country wasn't making colonization work so well for our forebears.  So the pulled the plug, and the rest, they say, is history.

Flash forward to now.  Just as we declared our independence from the tyrannical reign of Great Britain, a major chunk of the United Kingdom just declared its independence from the tyrannical reign of the European Union.  It was called "Brexit" for short, as in "British exit."  And unless you're happily retired and have plenty of time on your hands to research arcane matters such as this one, you might now know exactly why. 

I am, and I do.

So, my friends, and you are my friends, I'm about to tell you exactly why.  And why our Limey friends' decision could well turn out to be a precursor as to what might transpire here in good ol' 'Murica come November.

Suppose, for a moment, that the U.S., Canada and Mexico all decided to get together and form the "North American Union."  And then suppose that the Headquarters of that Union were to be placed in Mexico City.  Yeah, Mexico City would be in charge of deciding what goes on in the North American Union.  Who buys what, who sells what, and who whom, and who pays for what, and how much.  Mexico City. Hmmm.

Can you then imagine that perhaps the decisions that would come out of Mexico City might be a bit slanted toward the benefit of Mexico?  Me too.

Oh wait.  Is there anybody left in Mexico City?  I kind of figured they all had left and are living in Los Angeles, Utah, Arizona and Nevada. But then again, maybe not. 

Anyhow, now let us take a look at the European Union. There are, or rather were, 28 countries in the European Union. It was crafted to knit together countries with differing interests, languages, political leanings, religions, wealth, natural resources, histories and agendas.  Many of these countries had been warring with each other for more than 1,000 years. They had undergone the Hundred Years War.  The War of the Roses. The Napoleonic Wars.  The War of British Succession.  And World Wars One and Two, to name just a few.  There's an area between France and Germany, for example, called "Alsace-Lorraine."  It's a stretch about 30 miles wide and a hundred miles long that reflects what happens when two countries fight wars with each other over a period of a millenia.  The residents of this patch of dirt all speak French and German, because one country or the other had "owned" this land at one time or another over a millennia. 

So these 28 disparate countries decided that banding together into one large economic group could benefit them all financially through enhanced trade, while also removing any chance they would take up arms against one another ever again. Kind of a"mutually assured prosperity" thing.

That's what we call one of them there good ideas on paper, that just don't work out so very well in practical application. 

So the EU got going in 1973 and picked up speed, adding more and more countries, until just this past week.  That's when the fromage, as they say, got binding.

Countries, you see, are kind of like people.  Some are self-reliant, hard-working, self-sufficient, penurious and proud. Some are quite the opposite, being often lazy, self-centered, boneheaded, drunken partying spendthrifts, desiring that their more focused and hard-working neighbors provide them with support. Count Germany among the former, and Greece among the latter. 

So over the years Germany and Switzerland and the United Kingdom had to pony up $billions in aid to the countries that overspent and overindulged.  That group would include France and Spain and Portugal and Italy, in addition to the aforementioned Greece.  We're talking bailing out those countries with $billions in foreign aid so they wouldn't have to go bankrupt!  Kind of like what the U.S. is now going through to help Puerto Rico keep from pulling the plug. 

And where were the rules and regulations being made and passed down to their member countries?  Brussels, Belgium. 

Brussels, a big town in a small country, most notable for being the location of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the armed forces that protect it, called "USAREUR," for United States Army - Europe. 

But Belgium was small potatoes in terms of gross national product, or the ability to contribute the big tax receipts necessary to cover the costs of running the EU.  And the Big Time Countries, Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, were on the paying end of that equation.  Think of the United States and its relationship to the United Nations: We pay 30% of the entire costs of running that Band of Bozos.  Why? Beats me.

And so the "paying countries" were growing ever more weary with that situation.  Plus, Brussels was demanding that their member countries take more and more Syrian Muslim refugees.  

As you likely know, the flood of Syrian refugees resulted from Barry Obama's little "Red Line in the Sand."  He drew it when Bashir al Assad, Syria's Prez, started making a hobby out of gassing his people.  To death.  Barry took issue with that. Told Assad, he did, that if he didn't stop, he would come across that Red Line and smack him around a little.  Assad didn't stop.  Barry went golfing.  Seems he does that a lot.

So the flood of Syrian refugees reached a fever pitch. Hundreds of thousands of them began streaming into Europe.  The EU demanded that its member countries take them. Some blanched at having their ethnic, economic, democratic and religious makeup changed forever by an influx of tens of thousands of mainly mid-twenties, uneducated, poor Muslim men.  Too bad, the EU said.  Get over it.

They haven't. 

And so the United Kingdom decided to have a referendum, which is a vote on whether their good folks wanted to continue in the EU, coughing up $billions to their lesser neighbors, or exit ("Brexit"), regaining their sovereignty once again. And that referendum took place a week ago.  And the Brits, in a squeaker, decided to bid adieu to the EU.  Let's take a deep dive into why they felt that way:

  -  The Banana Regulation:  Yes, you read that right.  A 1994 Brussels regulation dictated that fruit could not be too curvy or it could not be sold.  That reg specified that fruit must be "free from abnormal curvature."  Why?  Don't know.  But there just could not be bendy bananas or crooked cucumbers.  Make sense?  Not to me.  Not to them.

  -  EU regs out of Brussels started phasing out incandescent light bulbs in 2009, starting with 60w bulbs.  By 2011 they were all phased out.  The EU didn't like them because they "wasted energy."  We did the same, and for the same reason. But many folks over there started reporting an uptick in epileptic fits due to the flickering of the florescent bulbs. Perhaps their differing voltage standards has something to do with that.

  -  In 2014 the EU banned the purchase of vacuum cleaners over 1,600 watts and hair dryers over 1,000 watts as part of a drive to reduce the use of electricity usage. Somehow forcing the U.K. to use less so that others could use more didn't sit well with our British friends.

  -  Would you believe that the EU doesn't believe that drinking water does not prevent dehydration.  Whaaaat? That's right.  If you're dehydrated, the Boys from Brussels tell you "don't drink water."  The EU won't let those who sell water in plastic bottles state on the label that it will reduce dehydration.  This is what's called micromanagement via bureaucratic interference.  It's also called stupid.

  -  In 2011 the EU adopted laws that state diabetics who have had two or more episodes of hypoglycemia, or light headedness due to low blood sugar, could lose their driving privileges.  They would be forced to report such episodes to the "Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency," which could then require that you fork over your license. And no, I'm not making that Orwellian title up. 

  -  In the EU it's illegal to eat your pet horse.  You read that right.  In 2009 a new law was dumped on the Great Unwashed over there specifying that it had been reported that up to two million pet horses were being eaten every year, and that could not be permitted to continue!  Thus, every pet horse, as well as ponies, donkeys and zebras (!), would be required to have a "Horse Passport."  And on this Passport the owner would be required to list whether the horse was a pet and whether it would be eaten at the end of its useful life (!).  The Passport could not be changed later.  As if somebody would actually want to.

  -  In 2010 a new directive came forth relating to fruits, jellies, jams, marmalades and sweetened chestnut puree intended for human consumption.  The EU's rules stated that a preserve must contain at least 60% sugar to be called a jam. Anything containing less had to be called a "fruit spread," while a low sugar jam with less than 50% sugar was to be called a "conserve."  Are these people for real?

  -  And lastly, for this little exercise, the EU decided three years ago that restaurants could no longer refill their glass jars containing olive oil from their tables.  It seems that restauranteurs would refill those dispensers each day with fresh oil for the next shift. This angered the EU-types for some strange reason.  They decided that only plastic non-refillable olive oil dispensers could henceforth be used, meaning that the restaurants had to toss out the unused oil at the end of each day.  Olive oil costs money.  But it doesn't cost the EU dictators anything, apparently.

Now you know how the majority of Brits felt going into last week's election.

Theirs was a battle between the forces of nationalism vs. globalism.  Their pride in making their own decisions as opposed to having those decisions made for them from afar. 

And of unfettered immigration vs. maintenance of the status quo.  In other words, preventing potentially dangerous uncontrolled immigration of hundreds of thousands of primarily Syrian Muslim men, as demanded by their overlords on the Continent, or maintaining control of their borders and their cultural equilibrium.  Perhaps you've heard about people being beheaded in broad daylight on the streets of London. Would have a tendency to cause one to want to retain their cultural identity, wouldn't it?

They chose to bolt.  And the world went nuts!  Stock markets plummeted!  Dire predictions of doom and desperation were bandied about by all sorts of talking head pundits! Pissed off EU dandies who saw a major chunk of their funding going away fussed and fumed in disgust!  It was as if the U.S. voted to get out of the U.N., and the U.N. came to the realization that their sugar daddy had finally cut off the allowance. Even a chunk of Scotland, which voted to remain in the EU, threatened to leave the United Kingdom. Many, but not most, of the Brits were against the move.  But the "most" were overjoyed to finally see a light at the end of the tunnel...that was no longer the headlight of an oncoming train.  

The U.K. voted to take control of their country once again. And a parallel can be drawn with what's now happening here in America.  The election that looms in front of us will tell us whether our populace is happy with our headlong dive into globalism, and socialism, courtesy of the Obama Administration, or a return to more America-centric immigration, military, energy, environmental, taxation and spending policies of the good ol' days.     

The Brits have voted.  It's our turn come November...

And so, my friends, I wish you a very happy Independence Day!  Go forth and consume mass quantities of burgers and hot dogs!  And remember, were it not for the sacrifices of our Founding Fathers...and Mothers...today we would be noshing on bangers and mash...

"AR-15:" The TRUTH...for a Change *

I don't know about you, but I've grown weary of Left-wing politicians, know-nothing Hollywood celebrities, and Lap Dog Media talking heads preaching to you and me about guns in general, and the AR-15 in particular.

And this is true especially right after some crazed killer shoots up a mall, or a movie theater, or a church, or a Paris concert house, or a gay nightclub using any firearm, but especially an AR-15.  Or, a weapon we're told was an AR-15, but wasn't.  More on that later.

And it is also true that the most dangerous place on the planet - maybe the entire universe - is between one B. Hussein Obama and a TV camera after such a shooting takes place.  Right after an Islamic terrorist jihadist murdering pond scum dirt bag thug shot up the "Pulse Nightclub" in Orlando, Florida early last Saturday morning, Barry O graced our TV sets within minutes once again to minimize the role that radical Islamic terrorism played in the event, and to maximize the role that guns played in enabling it, nay, even causing it to happen.  

I am sickened that more than 100 innocent folks, out only for a good time, were killed or maimed.  And I am sickened that our President and his Sycophants cannot - or will not - place the blame where it truly belongs. And it does not belong with the AR-15, or any other gun.  You have been lied to, my friends.  You've been told that this rifle is "weapon of mass destruction."  And a "weapon of war." And an "automatic" weapon. And a "machine gun."  And an "assault weapon." Well, I'm about to set you straight. 

Here are the facts:

The Fairchild ArmaLite Corporation of Chicago, Illinois, invented and patented what they then called the "AR-10" rifle in 1958.  No, this is not some new-fangled way to separate you from your life.  That was nearly sixty years ago, folks! It was a fairly revolutionary rifle for its time, but is a bit long in the tooth by now.  

The "AR" simply stands for "ArmaLite Rifle," and not "Assault Rifle" as some Lefties would like you to believe.  It was conceived to be a small, lightweight (less than 6 pounds), entirely new design, composite (aluminum and polymer) modular rifle that would use small, light, high velocity .223 caliber ammunition.  This cartridge is kind of like your daddy's .22 but on steroids. They began manufacturing and selling it to the public in 1959. Financial problems caused them to have to sell the weapon and the patent to the Colt Manufacturing Company soon thereafter.  

The U.S. Army, desiring to find a successor to the M-14 shoulder-fired infantry rifle, itself a successor to the famed M-1 Garand, used so successfully during WW2, and the weapon I qualified with in the Army,  asked U.S. arms companies to offer up designs for its consideration back in 1960.  Colt won that competition and began selling the gun to the military, after some modifications, as the "M-16" in 1963. 

That weapon offered both semi-automatic (one pull of the trigger, one shot) and with the click of a switch, full-automatic (pull the trigger and the weapon fires until the magazine is empty).  The latter was available only to the military. They subsequently began selling the semi-automatic-only version to the general civilian public later that same year as the "AR-15." 

Note:  The sale of fully-automatic weapons has been outlawed in the U.S. since 1934 to all but select, Federally-approved and -vetted purchasers, and only after a major license fee is paid, months or even years pass waiting for approval, and an exhaustive qualification process is undergone. These weapons are not even available at your local gun store.  So when Lefty Progressive-types try to tell you that "automatic" weapons need to be outlawed, hey bozos! They already are! I guess you got your wish! Congratulations!

The rifle became so popular, primarily due to the hundreds of thousands of Army vets returning home from Viet Nam after having used them in that little "police action" over there, that civilian sales skyrocketed. Now, the off-patent AR-15-type design is manufactured by more than 50 companies world-wide.  It has become the single most popular rifle in all the land.  It is now designated as the "Modern Sporting Rifle." There are more than ten million of them in service.  And by the way, sales of them are currently skyrocketing following Orlando due to the belief that they might once again be banned.  That happens every time Barry gives us one of his little speeches on the need for more "gun control."

The modularity of the AR-style platform is pretty much like the process of making a pizza.  You start a pizza with the dough.  You start an AR with the receiver.  That's the part that the cartridge goes in and the bullet leaves from.  To the pizza you add a sauce of your choice, and some meat and veggies and cheese.  To the AR you add a stock, folding or fixed; a grip, pistol or otherwise; a barrel, long or short; a barrel shroud to protect your hand from the heat; and a sight system, such as a laser or telescope optics.  That's how you customize this rifle for the purpose you intend to use it, and that's why it's so popular with its owners.  Weapon of war?  I don't think so.    

Did you know that the number of guns here in America has more than doubled since Barry O was immaculated?  They have, my friends, from just over 150 million to more than 300 million.  As many as 20 million were sold just last year!  Barry gives us another of his speeches about the need for more gun control and the sales of guns go through the roof!  And that's why he's been designated by gun enthusiasts as the "Best Gun Salesman of all Time." 

Funny.  For a guy who so loudly proclaims his hatred for guns, he's become the gun manufacturers' very best friend.

The AR-15 is used for marksmanship training, competitive shooting and training, hunting of all types of game from squirrels up to Alaskan Brown Bears, and personal and home defense. Its versatility is why it has become so very popular.

School is not yet out, kiddies, so pay attention.  

The AR-15 is not an "assault rifle." There's no such thing as an "assault rifle."  There are only rifles used in assaults, and those that aren't.  There are "assault weapons," but they are necessarily fully-automatic in function, such as would be used only by the military.  See above if you're still confused.

The terms "assault rifle" was coined by San Francisco Lefty Senator Dianne Feinstein back in the early 1990's when she decided, all by her lonesome, that "assault rifles," the name she adopted for all scary black guns that for some reason evoke abject fear in the hearts of liberal politicians, should be outlawed. And they were, under ex-Prez Billy Jeff "Blue Dress" Clinton, for a ten-year period, starting in 1994.  

That ten-year period expired in 2004 after statistics proved that banning them had no significant effect on crimes committed using such weapons.  So if banning them then didn't help then, why ban them now? 

Exactly.  

Yet, Barry and his True Believers are once again banging the drum to outlaw them. One has to ask why?  Perhaps it's no more than an effort to change the subject away from failed foreign and domestic policies that have put our Country at risk.  From the rise of ISIS, which didn't exist when he came into office, or before he ordered our forces out of Iraq without leaving a "tripwire" security military force to prevent exactly what has happened.  From unnecessary rules and regulations that have pushed 94+ million folks out of the job force. From the worst recovery from a recession in American history.  From the unconstitutional imposition of Obamacare that has made full-time work harder and harder to get. From a more than doubling of our National Debt.  From years of almost nonexistent GDP growth.  From the fact that the Lefties have to protect Obama and Clinton in the face of a mountain of evidence that their policies have led us to our current miserable situation. 

Misdirection works well for magicians, why not politicians?

Gun control as a response to crazed Islamic terrorist jihadi killer thugs who want to cut off our heads?  They want to kill us right here at home and Barry wants to take away one of the ways we might use to defend ourselves from them? Barry is comfortable giving the Iranians The Bomb and the billions they will need to pay for it but isn't comfortable with us having the means to protect ourselves.  Really?  Why is it, one must ask, that any time a killer uses a gun to kill, Obama wants to take guns away from those who broke no laws at all and might need them to rebuff potential future threats? Think of it: 100,000,000 American gun owners didn't kill anyone last Saturday, but need to be punished because somebody else did.  Is this bizarro world, or what?

Omar Mateen, the killer, was employed by an international security firm, G4S (successor to Wackenhut), whose major client was the Homeland Security Department!  He'd been there for nine years, held numerous security licenses and a concealed carry permit. He'd been to Saudi Arabia to visit Mecca twice, once in 2011 and again in 2012.  Apparently that raised no red flags within the Justice Department. He'd been investigated by the FBI for numerous suspected terrorist leanings both in 2013 and again in 2014. He'd been placed on the Terrorist Watch List as a result. After the investigations were completed, he was inexplicably taken off that List just in time to buy the weapons he used to kill the folks at the Pulse Nightclub.  He bought those weapons legally, with full Federal background checks.  The same background checks the Lefties are clamoring for us to adopt. Are you seeing a pattern here?

The System worked exactly as it was supposed to...except that perhaps political correctness has tied the hands of the FBI and ATFE so they can't keep bad guys from using our System against us.  Perhaps we need to insure our elected leaders use that System the way it was intended for a change.

You should also be aware that the "No Fly List" that Lefties want to use to deny people their 2nd Amendment Rights is deeply flawed.  There are more than 800,000 of us on that List!  Are there 800,000 terrorists lurking in America?  I seriously doubt it!  And no one knows just how you get placed on that List, or who does it, or who's in charge of it, or how you get off of it if erroneously placed thereon.  As an example, Senator Ted Kennedy was on the List for more than two years before he bitched loudly enough and got removed. And so was Nelson Mandela.  And an 8 year-old Boy Scout. And a 19 month-old infant who self-identified as a female (a little joke there).  And Steve Hayes, Senior Writer for the Weekly Standard Magazine.  Could it be that Hayes' conservative leanings had something to do with that decision?  It took the hiring of several attorneys and seven months to get him removed from the List.  

But what about you and me?  What if it were you and you didn't have the horsepower of a major media source backing you to pry yourself loose from the clutches of the Federal Government? How would you get yourself off?  The Democrats want that List used to block gun sales.  And gun purchases.  And they want to use it without first granting you your 5th Amendment Right to due process.  No arrest, no indictment, no trial, no conviction.  Just guilty until proven innocent.  What do you think about that?

Just remember:  It's the Government's responsibility to prove you belong on that List, not your responsibility to get yourself off of it.  Yet, it's the Government that wants you to just lay back and leave everything to them.  They'll watch out for you. They'll take care of everything.  Riiiiight!  

Note also that the use of long guns of any type, rifle or shotgun, single-shot, bolt-action or semi-automatic, constitute less than 2% of all shootings!  The weapons of choice for Bad Guys are pistols, not rifles!  In fact, more people were killed last year with clubs and rocks than by rifles!  But hey, why let facts get in the way of good, solid, left-wing, Lap Dog Media-supported propaganda?  

And further, there is absolutely no difference between AR-style rifles and say, the Remington model 750 semi-automatic deer rifle, or the Ruger Mini-14 semi-automatic Ranch Rifle...except they both have wooden stocks and don't look so awfully scary to Lefty weenies.  But were all semi-automatic, shoulder-fired, magazine-fed, gas-operated rifles somehow outlawed, overruling the 2nd Amendment in the process, the two referenced hunting rifles, and all the many others like them, manufactured by companies around the world, would be outlawed as well. What are these bozos thinking?  

Or maybe they know exactly what they are doing and they just want for some nefarious reason to disarm us, the General Public.  Ask yourself why "They," whoever "They" are, those who want to micro-manage our lives, want us disarmed?  Or maybe you'd rather not know the answer.  

Remember, you're not paranoid if they're really after you...

Lastly, I wish all politicians who wouldn't know an AR-15 from a private-sector employment application would finally understand that criminals do not obey the law! Penalizing ordinary God-fearing, law-abiding, red-blooded 'Muricans when criminals break the law makes no sense at all.  Except to them, I guess.  

And also, if these bozos who control our lives really want to end mass shootings like the one in Orlando, they should simply outlaw gun-free zones!  All but 3 mass shootings here in America since 1950 occurred in gun-free zones! And, even though Florida is one of America's most gun-friendly states, where around 6.5% of its population of 20,000,000 are currently permitted to carry concealed weapons, including the shooter Omar Mateen (!), the Pulse Nightclub was a gun free zone!  Like most of the nearly 40 states that offer "shall issue" concealed carry permits, Florida lets businesses "opt out" and deny their patrons the right to arm themselves. Pulse was one such business.

Pulse was a very big box with one door in and the same one out.  No windows, either. And no guns. Nothing but a shooting gallery just waiting for a would-be jihadist killer looking to make his bones with ISIS. And he did.  At the very least, Pulse should have provided for sufficient armed resistance at the entrance to dissuade any would-be killer from choosing that location.

Hello!  Are you completed addled?  Do your synapses not fire?  Are you without any vestige of common sense? Don't you realize that announcing there are places where the public is going to be assembled and disarmed just advertises where would-be terrorists and murderers can count on no defensive measures being taken to thwart their evil intentions? Don't you understand it does nothing but make it easier for a killer to kill?  The litany of "gun free zone" failures is legion:  Fort Hood; the Navy Yard; Aurora, Colorado; Sandy Hook; Charleston; Garland, Texas;  And on, and on.  

Jeeeeeesh! 

Annnnnnnd, for those who hold out hope that if we'd just outlaw all guns, you know, confiscate them, like Barry O and Pelosi and Reid and Feinstein and Biden, et. al., are all on record as stating they'd really like to do, if they just could, etc., etc., it would solve all the so-called "gun violence" problems, think about this: One of the largest "gun free zones" in the world is Paris, France.  Remember what happened there a few weeks ago? A crazed Islamic jihadist terrorist thug killed 140 and wounded another 350 more in a concert house using a fully-automatic assault weapon! One that is illegal and isn't even available in France, or Europe, for that matter. Guns are illegal in France! Yet, it happened.  You think outlawing guns here in 2nd Amendment America would have a different result?  I hope the answer to that question after you've read this posting is a resounding "NO." 

Yesterday, four separate gun control/gun rights bills was taken up by the Senate. Two were offered up by Democrats, and two by Republicans. None of them, none of them, would have prevented what happened in Orlando, or San Bernardino, or the Navy Yard, or Fort Hood, or even Sandy Hook, for that matter.  Even those who are presenting them will tell you they offer nothing substantive, and had no chance of passing.  Then why were they being offered? Simple.  Democrats want to gut the 2nd Amendment, and Republicans want to shore it up.  It was the "Dance of the Politicians." Sad this is happening in my America.

And while we're on the subject of "rewriting" the Bill of Rights, have you notice that the 2nd Amendment follows immediately after the 1st?  That's because our Founders wanted you to be able to hop on a soapbox and spew any idea that happened to cross your Colonial mind to all who might listen by use of the 1st, and then be able to protect yourself from any harm that then might come your way using the 2nd. Lefties want to gut the 2nd.  They also want to "re-imagine" the 1st.  Those of the Leftist persuasion want you to be able to say anything on your mind, so long as it comports with their worldview.  They want you to have an opinion, so long as it's theirs.  "Freedom of Speech" in 2016 America no longer means freedom of speech. It means the managed supervised freedom to say only what is politically correct...and the Lefties are doing their level best to define what constitutes "politically correct."

By the way, the rifle used by Omar Mateen to kill and maim was a Sig Sauer Model MCX. Although similar cosmetically, it shares no parts or pieces with an AR, uses a different operating system, is much more modern and costs more than three times as much. A comparison between it and the AR-15 begins and ends with the fact that they are both rifles.  But hey, the media and our POTUS will never let facts get in the way of a very bad story.

On the way out the door, metaphorically speaking, I apologize for this rather lengthy posting.  But hey, I warned you.  There was a lot to say, and I took the time to say it.  In depth.  But finally, consider this:  When a guy attacks somebody with a knife, we blame the the attacker.  When a drunk driver kills with a car, we blame the driver.  When a bomber blows up a Marathon, we blame the bomber. Then why, when a guy shoots up a gay nightclub, or anywhere else, do we blame the guns?  

Cogitate upon that, my friends. Get back to me when you come up with the answer...

*    (If you know somebody who has been hipmotizzzed by the misinformation currently aimed at you and me by the politicians and the celebrities and the media, feel free to pass this little missive along.  It never hurts to try to educate the sheeple, even if it's likely to do very little good.)

The Inexorable Push to Increase the Min-Wage...

So lemme' see here.  Obama is seven and one-half years into "fundamentally transforming America;" good, middle-class jobs have disappeared; 93+ million out of the work force, a forty-plus year high; min-wage jobs which used to be a training ground for pimply-faced teenagers who needed a few extra bucks to buy video games or put gas in the family truckster are occupied by ex-middle-class, middle-aged workers who have been displaced by creeping socialism; and now the unions are picketing MickeyD's in an effort to browbeat this fast-food giant into getting behind the bump to $15 an hour. * 

Huh?

And the unions, most particularly the Service Employees international Union (SEIU), which represents mostly the maids who make up your bed at the Holiday Inn and janitors at the local high school, really need them to get that raise so they sign them up as members, collect their monthly dues and continue taking their first-class vacations to Bermuda.  

The unions, you see, are at an all-time low in terms of membership.  From a high of nearly 50% of the American workforce at the end of World War Part Deux, they are now at around 6% of all private-sector jobs.  And falling.  They are looking for a new source of dues-paying members like a Timber Wolf looks for a baby goat.  Over the past few years they have invested...are you ready for it?...more than fifty million of their members' dues dollars in trying to influence min-wage payers to adopt a more than doubling of the pay rate.  From an average of about $7.65/hour nationwide right now, they want it to jump, over night, to $15.00! Whaaaaaat?

They are lobbying Congress.  One has to ask why, given that what a private-sector business pays its at-will private-sector employees should be their bizz and their bizz alone.  It shouldn't be the Federal Gummint's!  Or even a state Gummint's!  Hey, you bozos, let the free market work its magic!

Yet, there they are, banging their drums, waving their signs and demanding, demanding that min-wages be doubled.  Is this going to happen?  Only in commie pinko dumbass liberal weenie states like Taxifornia, where I happen to still reside, although I wish I could convince Mrs. Chuckmeister to leave it behind (notagonnahappen with the kids and the grandkids still here!).  And in New York, and likely New Jersey, and probably Connecctticuttt, or however that weenie state is spelled.  Red-blooded "red" states, like Texas, which has produced almost 90% of all private-sector jobs in the past 10 years, is having none of it. And neither is Utah, or Arizona, or Kansas, or Montana, or the Dakotas, or Oklahoma, or Florida, etc., etc. They leave what a bizz pays its workers to the bizz-zes.  As they should.

Why, I ask rhetorically, do the lefty weenies somehow feel it's any business of theirs to decide, unilaterally, that the Korean grocer down the street, or the Mexican family that owns and operates a local restaurant, or the lumber yard or gas station or launderette, or private bizz of any kind, must hike their workers' pay?  In effect, pick a businessman's pocket?  Pick it so as to redistribute the forcibly extricated "wealth" to new union members, and thus, likely to new Democrat voters?

It's simple, in my opinion.  It's because they just cannot STAND it that anyone, anywhere is left to their own devices about anything!  As I often say, the Left wants you to have your own opinion...so long as it's theirs!  Lefties don't want you to decide where to live or to work or play, or whether or not to have kids or how many, or how they should be educated.  They want to be involved in every aspect of your life, for one simple reason: They think you're too damn stupid to make such decisions for yourself. Because if you did, you might decide to come down on the side of reason, and self-determination, and self-reliance, and self-actualization, and...wait for it...freedom.  Sad.

The Left will tell you that such a major bump in the min-wage is good, because the newly-found wealth thus "created," actually stolen, will result in the newly well-paid being able to buy more stuff, thus boosting the economy for everyone.  

Of course, what they fail to realize, or maybe actually already know but simply choose not to admit or to care, is that the Korean grocer or the Mexican restaurant family are not rich; they are probably teetering on the edge of insolvency month-by-month. But the Left believes that everybody, everybody, who is a business owner is a millionaire or a billionaire.  And that simply taking a "small portion" of their undoubtedly gargantuan earnings won't hurt them so very much while helping the Great Unwashed so very much.   

And that it's their right, nay their obligation, to be a social justice warriors.  It's their "right," even though the result might cause major disruption in the economy as a whole. But hey, screw them!  They deserve it. They chose to start a business and get rich, so the Lefties will make it their cause celibre to just take their money and play Robin Hood.  After all, they're nameless, faceless bureaucrats who can hide behind legislation in the face of any outraged backlash.  It's not like the newly-poor businessmen will hunt them down and exact revenge, right?   

Hey Lefties!  If a fast-food franchisee is barely eeking out a 5% or 6% profit on his sales, which is the average, doubling his Number One expense, which is labor, could very well put him out of business unless he increases his prices.  And if he increases his prices his sales would most likely plummet. And plummeting sales would put him out of business.  He's in a no-win situation.

So he has no choice but to find other alternatives to hiring either pimply-faced teenagers or displaced middle-class workers at more than they're worth for the job that they do, and go out of business in the process.  He'll look to opening fewer hours, which would hurt sales, or even investing in high-tech mechanized robotic labor to do the job.  Wendy's, Burger King, McDonalds, Carl's Jr. and KFC have already announced they'll move to non-human answers to lower their need for high-priced human labor. A robot to take your order could cost as little as $35,000, and pay for itself within a short period.  Applebee's is already using I-Pad ordering with no waitresses involved.  Buh bye jobs!  A robot burger-cooker can make 250 an hour, error-free, at an investment of about $250k, with a pay-back of just over a year.  And need no days off or time off or sick days.  Which means the SEIU's chancy effort to force businesses to knuckle under will no doubt backfire. It serves them right.

What about the newly-rich min-wage recipients?  How would such a "windfall" effect their lives?  At $15.00 an hour, should a worker work 40 hours a week, which is highly doubtful under current Obamacare rules, he/she would earn just about $31,000 a year. And at that rate, he/she would earn too much for many aid programs, could no longer qualify for food stamps, might then owe income taxes, and would surely have to pay union dues.  The result?  They'd likely be worse off then now.  But don't try to tell them that. They probably won't believe you.  

Oh, and just so we have something to compare that to, the starting salary for an enlisted solider in the military is just about $18,000 a year.  So a burger-flipper makes $31,000 and one of our finest, who could be dodging bullets, makes $18,000.  See anything wrong with this picture?

And how should we help grow these people out of the minimum wage doldrums?  Just like we have forever.  They should get an education, or get some specialized training, or sign up for an internship so they can get some on-the-job training.  Then, and ONLY then, will they get their chance at the American Dream.  Remember, here in America you're entitled to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."  You ARE NOT entitled to happiness.  Just the pursuit thereof... 

in the final analysis, I've done a little research on this subject and can tell you that a doubling of the min-wage would cost the average McDonald's more than $100,000 per year.  And that's just about what such a franchisee makes.  The Left doesn't care. Predictably, the franchisee does. One MickeyD's franchisee I spoke to told me a burger/fry/Coke combo, which now costs about $5.50, will soon have to go to $8.50 -$9.00, or even more, if this min-wage hysteria continues. Think it will affect sales?  I do.

So how's it working?  Santa Monica has already voted to require all bizz to pay $15/hour.  And they've lost more than 10% of all their small businesses, and most of the remainder have indicated they will cut back on hours and hiring.  The Sea-Tac Airport, which serves Seattle-Tacoma, WA, has done the same.  They've lost more than a quarter of their businesses and many companies that had planned to open there have decided not to do so.  San Francisco, predictably the most business-unfriendly city in the U.S., and Berkeley, just across the Bay, did the same.  With the same result. They're losing businesses by the score.  There are many other early examples, but hey, you get the idea.  It seems, however, that the Progressive social engineers just don't care.  

If you were a small bizz owner, and were facing this onslaught on your profitability, which has, and will, drive all success, all hiring, all job creation and all stability in our economy, what would you do?  

Exactly...

*  NOTE:  The Chuckmeister is a highly-trained and -experienced, real honest--to-God economist, and an entrepreneur with more than 40 years' of bizz formation, operation and management experience, so he really knows what he's talking about. Although, that's not absolutely necessary for him to offer up his very valuable opinions. Never has been, never will be...