Conventional collectivist created authority is a deception in consciousness. You are your own Authority!

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

White chicks can’t wear braids

I’ve always thought that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but did you know that it is considered by many politically correct snowflake morons as extremely offensive and bad form for members of one ethnic group to “appropriate” the cultural aspects and practices of a different ethnic group?

Yes, it’s difficult to for me to imagine why someone in her right mind might become violently offended enough to physically assault another person simply because a hairstyle, for instance, was supposedly “culturally appropriated.”

But now it happens all the time.

Hampshire College student, Carmen Figueroa,  for example, recently assaulted a member of the Central Maine Community College girls’ basketball team over concerns that one of their players had “culturally appropriated” a hairstyle.

Cultural appropriation is defined as the “taking over of creative or artistic forms, themes, or practices by one cultural group from another. It is in general used to describe Western appropriations of nonWestern or nonwhite forms, and carries connotations of exploitation and dominance.”

Figueroa had the nerve to order white members of the Central Maine Community College girls’ basketball team to remove braids from their hair, claiming that their use of the hairstyle is black “cultural appropriation.” When they refused to comply with her ridiculous demands she reportedly assaulted one of them.

So you see, in today’s convoluted insane politically correct society, white folks can’t eat soul food; white folks can’t listen to blues music; white chicks can’t wear dreadlocks, because it might offend black folks; because that is offensive and exploitative; and, yes…


White chicks can’t wear braids. 

Sunday, April 23, 2017

Liberty criminalized in Michigan

Statist lawmakers in the state of Michigan have once again criminalized the fundamental constitutional right to liberty. That’s right. In Michigan it is unlawful to use your own property as you like on your own property when the statist government goons deem it so.

What would you think of a law that prohibited persons from leaving their own lawn furniture or any other personal property unattended outside on their own patio? How about a law that prohibits people from leaving their doors unlocked?  Or what would you say about a law that prohibits turning the lights inside your home off at night?

That’s ridiculous, you would say. It’s unconstitutional!

They can’t criminalize our liberty like that, can they?

Of course we can reason the statists. If you leave personal property unattended outside on your patio, thieves might be inclined steal it. If you leave your doors unlocked, you might be burglarized. If you If you turn off your lights inside at night, that might encourage criminals to enter your home and victimize you. The government has an obligation to prevent such crimes. So it can criminalize you for furnishing criminals with opportunities to victimize you.

That’s statist reasoning for you and the Constitution may be damned.

Nick Taylor, (no relation), committed a “crime” in Roseville Michigan by leaving his own car unlocked and idling unattended to warm up in his girlfriend’s driveway on a bitterly cold winter morning. "Every person warms up their car," he explains. "We live in Michigan!" Not that it should matter, but he didn't want his girlfriend's son, who has cerebral palsy, to get into a cold car on a freezing day.

Never-mind flimsy excuses croaked the Roseville cop who slapped Taylor with a $128 ticket for violating a city ordinance. "This is purely a public safety issue," claims Police Chief James Berlin. "You see it all the time, people hop in a running car and steal them. Something bad happens when that occurs."

Yes, we see it all the time; people walking outside on a public sidewalk with their own wallet in their back pants pocket enticing pickpocket’s to steal it. Yes, something bad happens when that occurs. So let’s pass a law to criminalize a pedestrian for carrying his own wallet in public. Let’s criminalize the victims of crimes for causing lazy police goons to have to do their jobs.

Let’s criminalize liberty in Michigan. 


Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Offensive speech makes snowflakes feel unsafe

The current trend among leftist snowflakes these days is to demand censorship of any ideas that “offend” them. Snowflakes are offended by any expression of ideas they don’t agree with. So they seek to shut down free speech rights by force on the grounds that offensive speech makes them feel “unsafe.

Can you imagine that? They’re sentiments are so delicate. They’re offended so easily. They irrationally melt with the slightest rise in ideological temperature. That’s why they’re called snowflakes.

Snowflake fascist protesters actually claim the right to muzzle any expression they don’t agree with because it makes them feel unsafe. They did it recently with violence in the city of Berkley California, for example, to conservative pundit Milo Yiannopolos preventing him from giving a public speech. His expression was canceled because it made the snowflakes feel unsafe.  

Everything President Trump says offends them and makes them feel unsafe. They’re calling for his impeachment because his ideas make them feel unsafe. They simply cannot stand to hear any ideas they don’t agree with. They melt into apoplectic rage.

Now the snowflakes are in another escalating uproar complaining bitterly over the fact that former Indiana governor and currant Vice President of the United States, Mike Pence, is scheduled to deliver a commencement speech in South Bend, Indiana at the University of Notre Dame. The poor pitiful students claim that his mere presence on campus will make them feel unsafe.

The poor little snowflakes are walking around protesting with signs containing quotations attributed to Pence which they deem “racist, sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic.” Pence makes them feel so unsafe. “For me personally, [Pence] represents the larger Trump administration,” whined one student.

“His administration represents something, and for many people on our campus, it makes them feel unsafe to have someone who openly is offensive but also demeaning of their humanity and of their life and of their identity…  I know that during his time as governor of Indiana and also during his campaign trail, along with Trump, he has made offensive statements towards minority groups that affect me, like women and African-Americans,” he explained plaintively.

Pence’s ideas contradict with the school’s Catholic mission complains the snowflake. “I feel that is offensive to such a large population here at Notre Dame, and I also believe it goes against certain Catholic Social Teaching, which is something the University likes to broadcast that it stands behind, but it picks and chooses when it wants to stand behind them,”


You see, offensive speech that they don’t agree with makes snowflakes feel unsafe.

Sunday, April 16, 2017

Was this wicked witchy woman cursed with ineffective assistance of counsel?

A nasty old lady was convicted in Oklahoma recently on a plea of guilty to multiple counts of felony child abuse for terrorizing her 7-year-old granddaughter while dressed as a witch. Few would argue, least of all me, that this wicked witchy woman deserved to be dealt with severely, but where was her lawyer when the judge cursed her with a sentence of three life terms in prison?

The 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights which guarantees to even the worst wicked and depraved of criminals the right to a lawyer for her defense, and that right has been interpreted to include the “effective assistance of counsel.” In short, the accused is entitled to a competent attorney to provide an effective defense.

Geneva Robinson, 51, admitted that she dressed up in a mask as "Nelda" the witch with her hands painted green to scare her granddaughter. She scratched the child’s neck, struck her face, hit her hand with a rolling pin, and cut her hair while she slept according to court records. 

"What she did was horrific and what she did will forever impact this child and her siblings," said the Assistant District Attorney. "She deserves the same amount of mercy that she showed this child, and that's none."

OK, maybe this nasty witch indeed deserves a large dose of the same medicine she administered to her granddaughter, and perhaps even a prison sentence too, but life in prison; Really? Under these circumstances that seems way too harsh to me, especially in view of the fact that granny says she’s receiving treatment and taking medication for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.  

What does her lawyer have to say about all this?

Tanya Jones, Robinson's defense attorney, said Robinson lacked resources to control the child. "She understands she went too far,"

Is that all? Is that the sum and substance of her defense? Is that effective assistance of counsel? Do you think that a plea of insanity or diminished capacity might have been advisable? 

Do you think that counsel might have offered a case for a more reasonable sentence all things considered? I guess not. This lawyer simply advised her client to plead guilty and watched her get hauled off to prison for life. My goodness; many murderers don’t get life sentences.

Joshua Granger, Robinson's boyfriend, was also sentenced after pleading guilty to one count of felony child abuse. He is expected to serve 30 years in prison.

What’s wrong with this picture? 

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Elizabeth Warren’s leftist feminist hypocrisy

Of all the leftist feminist lawmakers in Congress you might think that Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is the most vociferous champion of equality for women, especially equal pay for women who perform the same work as men. Perhaps she is indeed the most vociferous of them all but that only serves to make her the biggest hypocrite as well.

“I cannot believe I have to give another speech fighting for equal pay for equal work for women,” Warren tweeted in her Senate account. Apparently the Senator likes to talk the talk but she doesn’t exactly walk the walk.

According to a recent report Warren’s female staffers made more than $20,000 less than their male counterparts last year. In fact, the pay gap between male and female staffers in her office doing the same work is about 10 percent wider than the national average.

So her female staffers will have to wait a good bit longer than most women across the country in order to recognize Equal Pay Day, created two decades ago by the National Committee on Pay Equity. Warren pays them just 71 cents for every dollar paid to men. Her female staffers averaged $52,750 last year while the guys pocketed $73,750 on average according to Senate data.

The top five highest paid staffers in Warren’s office were all men who earned between $113,750 and $156,000, while only one woman earned a salary of more than $100,000 in 2016. Among employees employed the entire year, only one woman, Warren's director of scheduling, earned a six-figure salary, at $100,624.88.

Five men -- Warren's director of oversight and investigations ($156,000), legislative director ($149,458), deputy chief of staff ($119,375), Massachusetts state director ($152,310), and deputy state director ($113,750) -- earned more than Warren's highest paid woman staffer in 2016.

This is the same Sen. Warren who said on last year's Equal Pay Day that the American workplace was "rigged against women" and called it a "national day of embarrassment" for the nation. 

"Today is Equal Pay Day, and by the sound of it, you would think it's some sort of historic holiday commemorating the anniversary of a landmark day that our country guaranteed equal pay for women,” said Warren. "But that's not what this is about. Not even close."

Of course, Warren is not the only leftist feminist politician who talks equal pay for women and then pays women less than men. Guess who one of them is. Yes, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton paid women about $15,000 less than men as a senator, then paid women $16,000 less than men as secretary of state, and paid women $7,000 less as presidential candidate. Women working at the Obama White House also regularly earned less than men.


How’s that for leftist feminist hypocrisy? 

Sunday, April 9, 2017

You get what you pay for

The ultra-left-wing socialists in Congress, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass, are introducing the so-called “College for All Act” this week intending to make a college education free for all U.S. citizens, regardless of income or demographic. It’s another proposed government sponsored give-away-free-for-all.

And as we all know so well, when you get government stuff for free, you get what you pay for. The value of higher education in America will swiftly drop to the lowest common denominator. If everyone gets a free education, how much do you think it will be worth?

More to the point, do you really think that everyone should seek a college education? Should house maids, garbage collectors, street sweepers, gardeners, and burger flippers and welfare queens all have college educations?

What is the progressive socialist statist motive to make college education free? Will it actually be valuable higher education or just more post public school indoctrination? "Education should be a right, not a privilege," Sanders said on the campaign trail. "We need a revolution in the way that the United States funds higher education."

Free stuff is a right.

Let’s have a revolution and declare that everything shall be free.

New York Federal Reserve Bank President William Dudley thinks so. He says it may be time to consider making college tuition free because of the impact of student debt on the economy. Student debt has negative impact on household spending power. Well, yeah, that sound about right.

You see, if students have to borrow money to buy a higher education, they’ll have less money to buy other stuff, so maybe we should just make all stuff free. “To the extent that student-loan growth inhibits homeownership, this could obviously have significant consequences for the economy, because when someone buys a home, that can lead to more home construction, which has a pretty high multiplier,” says Dudley. 

Studies have indicated student debt holders are less likely to buy homes even though college graduates have a higher probability of buying a home than those without a college degree. Well, perhaps the obvious answer to that problem is to simply make both college and home ownership free, right?


Yes, and studies have also shown than when stuff is free you get what you pay for. 

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

$10 Trillion: Where are you?

$10 Trillion in taxpayer dollars is gone? Disappeared? No one knows where it is? WTF? Are you kidding me?

Apparently, during just the last twenty years, our Pentagon military brass have lost track of $10 Trillion dollars, and no one, not even the Department of Defense, knows where it has gone or on what it was spent.  

Yes, for more than twenty years, since all federal departments were ordered to submit to financial audits, the DOD has never complied, and now $10 trillion is missing.

Auditing us would take too long and cost too much insist DOD officials. Meanwhile, the DOD budget allocated by Congress has more than doubled, and President Trump is proposing another $54 billion be added to the mix. Is it any wonder that our national debt is now at $20 trillion? It looks like the DOD alone is responsible for half of it.

What are you going to do about this, Mad Dog?

What are you going to do about this, Donald?

Do you think that there might be a bit of corruption going on here?

Do you think that the pockets of a few slimy swamp creature military industrial complex contractor parasites have been lined with some cash here?

It seems to me that some heads should roll; some prison cells should find new occupants; and a few $trillion in restitution should be paid.

How about it? We the people want our money back.

$10 Trillion: Where are you?