WHAT'S THIS "BLACK" CRAP?

I just saw another fallacious reference to our "first black president."

Why are Americans so illiterate? The correct term for B.O. is "mulatto," defined as someone with one white parent, one black. The president elect had one of each, right?, and from I know of them, it looks as if he got his ration of smarts from the white side, and I don't mean Sheridan. :-)

Happy New Year from Yves.

THE PANHANDLER SOCIETY

For one famous aphorism credited to him it was as with a number of aspects of John F. Kennedy; viz., only later did the truth become known. “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country,” was not of his devising, but it was very apt and, today more than ever, should be branded on each of our foreheads.

This became clear to me several days prior to November’s disastrous election. I happened to see on television one of John McCain’s town hall meetings somewhere in the Northeast. About 90% of the audience’s questions took the form, “Well, Senator, I’m a _________. If you become President, what will you do for ___________s?” Fill in the blanks with whatever occupation or special interest you like.

When and how did we become a nation of beggars? Was it by watching decades of unbelievable welfare programs, under which money was squandered in every direction without any sort of accountability requirements? With the economic sad tidings the panhandlers are crawling out of the woodwork; there are more open palms than one finds in Hawaii. Everyone, many that brought about their own misfortunes, is feigning helplessness and whining for gratuities.

Historically this country was noted for initiative, perseverance, ingenuity, and brutally hard work. Where have they gone? When did they sublimate? I once asked a man that was relating his difficulties during the Great Depression if there had not been welfare then. “Sure,” he said, “but most people were too proud to take it.” Nowadays whole groups of people are exhorted to be proud of attributes over which they have NO control. We should begin a national program of instilling pride, again, in qualities we DO control.

The other side of President Kennedy’s borrowed wisdom is that people should do things for their country – it should be required. With the abolition of the draft there is no requirement to contribute our time and talents for the benefit of the country. Many citizens do this, but most do not. We should be required to do something to preserve and improve these United States of America. Take a moment to think about other nations where you might be living and then consider whether or not this one is worth your effort.

MERRY CHRISTMAS, FRIENDS!

Or Merry whatever you celebrate this time of year - except Kwanzaaa, or however it's spelled, which is just a nonsensical, sham contrivance.

Best wishes for the New Year, too. I expect we'll need lots of luck.

Yves

AT LEAST IT WASN'T A RAPPER

Based on all the Internet circulants I see, Chicago must have about the worst public school system in the cosmos. Certainly, B.O., the Pres-elect, and Michelle, Worst Lady-elect don’t favor it for their children. (Ever notice how the wildest of the onager ( = a wild ass; if you were so unlucky as to have missed it, see a previous post here.) will throw more money at “education” (see if you can discover how much of it actually goes for that) than the “educational” bureaucracy can wisely spend and pass every law they can conceive to force your kids to attend them, their own little darlings go to private schools?)

At ny rate, B.O. has selected for his Educational Team Captain the boss of this purported WORST system! How can that be? Could the Messiah err? Voters, when you elect someone with no experience and only local, dubious contacts, whom do you expect him to choose?

Chicago is a s(t)inking ship, folks, but some of the rats seem to have sneaked down ropes to infest the shore. Better start checking into private schools, right?

SO THAT'S WATT HE MEANT!

I am relieved readers – if any. When B.O. promised change I could believe in –

Q: Can a dude that ends phrases with prepositions be trusted to meddle in education?

A: No!

- I, for one, was worried. Perhaps Jerry, the White-Hater, would be our U.N. Ambassador or Bill, the unrepentant terrorist turned distinguished, if disgusting, faculty member, might become Minister of Education.

However, it seems my fears were ill-founded, and B.O.’s concept of change is, in fact, a mundane, everyday thing. CHANGE, EDUCATIONAL REFORM, JOB CREATION, and ENERGY ENLIGHTENMENT have been packaged into a single, brilliant decision; all our schools need their light-bulbs changed!

Now, changing light-bulbs is believable even for us non-messianic citizens – I have done it several times – so we CAN believe in that change, right?

The rumor is that Reddy Kilowatt will be the new Secretary of Energy.

Yves Chauvire

P.S. I continue to feel anxious over just where Jerry and Bill will serve and hope B.O.’s “team” decides soon. Folks, when you voted for a know-nothing, you didn’t expect much in the way of solo decision-making, did you? I remember when B.O. derogated Pres. Bush for taking the advice of military advisors and said he would make such decisions himself – or did he say “hisself?” Heaven forbid!

WHATEVER BECAME OF DECENCY?

If you’ll scroll back through these gems of mine, you’ll find an entry exhorting everyone just to be a decent person and expressing the view that such a conceptually simple resolve would improve this or any other country about a thousand-fold.

Juxtapose that simple advice with the scene of a barbaric mob’s trampling to death a poor employee at a Wal-Mart, not a long bicycle ride from our advertised and self-declared cultural, artistic, and literary Capital.

How does one explain barbarism in such a Great Plain of enlightenment and purported civilization? Why, it’s an easy matter. Think of people raised and obtaining their values in front of tv sets and in U.S. – supported, God-proof schools, with parents too occupied to inculcate civilized behavior upon their progeny or to pay much attention to what those children are doing.

Wake up, BLOCKHEADS! Raise your children into DECENT PEOPLE! Resist contrary forces.

That alone would make our country great again. Try it and see.

Yves Chauvire

P.S. Don't forget Pearl Harbor Day. Whoever thought it would happen again - but it did. Therefore, don't for a moment suspect that September 11, 2001 was the last attempt.

2.5M NEW JOBS - THE INTELLIGENT WAY

I notice that our media-appointed and media-anointed Agent of Change plans to create 2.5M new jobs. Properly executed that would be an excellent idea, but since it’s highly unlikely that B.O., Michelle, (Worst Lady-elect), Jeremiah, (the hate-suffused Christian), Bill the Bomber, the Clintoon re-treads (change a-plenty there, I’m sure), and the Harvard advisors will manage that, I, Yves Chauvire, will share my plan.

My goal is a little different, in that I would concentrate on adding 2.5M NEW, U.S. CITIZEN EMPLOYEES to the work force.

Step 1. Round up and deport 2.5M employed, illegal aliens. Since that is a small fraction of the total infesting the country, finding that number should be trivial. They could probably be netted in Los Angeles, alone. Thus, immediately 2.5M jobs are vacant. If I were orchestrating the purge I would concentrate on places like New York City and San Francisco, whose mayors have decided them to be havens for these undesirables. Trampling down their cardboard, fake resolutions would be a great pleasure and, of course, legal for the feds.

The next step has various options, and one chooses depending upon other objectives.

Step 2a. To employ new people AND reduce welfare throw-away, not likely a consideration of a partial black from one of the welfare capital cities of the country, we insert able-bodied welfare slobs , a population also FAR in excess of 2.5M, so we can be choosy. This option has another, subordinate feature in that, having to work, these folks will have less time for lying on sofas, drinking beer, eating fatty foods(unhealthy for the body), being hypnotized by Oprah Winfrey (unhealthy for the mind), and creating a new generation of ABWS’s.

Step 2b. To realizing benefits different to those of 2a, we take a page from China’s success story – is anything made here now? - and substitute jail and prison inmates (quite a few also being illegal aliens, we’re told) into the jobs vacated by the illegal aliens. We still have the able-boded welfare slobs to support, but the inmates get no pay, so there’s a savings.

Step 2c. The most costly alternative is to hire out-of-work people that are neither incarcerated, IA’s, nor ABWS’s

Compute the costs and benefits of any of my plans and compare them to what B.O. & Co. eventually decide. If we still have a country in 2012, write in my name for Pres.; I’m a “bona fide,” born-in-the–U.S. guy, whereas there is doubt about B.O.’s credentials in this line of documentation, and can save us a bundle, not to mention restore what’s being frittered away.

If Step 2a. were implemented, and even if it isn’t, we still require secure borders. ABWS’s should be able to handle that task, as many of them are great, as crime stats show, at shooting people. Otherwise, I would execute another stroke and transfer most of the T.S.A. airport Nazi’s away from harassing crippled women in wheel chairs and fondling people with pace-makers and defibrillators and put THEM on the border.

Whatever we do down there, if it doesn’t involve armed guards, it’s no good. These laughable technological sensors aren’t worth a nickel, though they cost in the upper, multiples of millions, AT LEAST.

To summarize, if you still have the right to vote in 2012, my name is Yves Chauvire, and you needn’t even bother with the squiggle over the final “e.”

DISEASE RESEARCH SPENDING

Organized Queerdom, O.Q., agitates militantly for more research spending towards an AIDS cure. They resemble advocates for over-the-counter abortions and feticides; irresponsible people that crave remedies to fill the vacancies where their will powers, morals, and sense should be.

If you’ve been around Washington, D.C. you might have been disgusted by O.Q.’s marching and flaunting its AIDS quilt with a patch, supposedly (or is it like the six million?), for each fatality from it. If there were a breast cancer quilt it would cover the entire Capital, not just some grass on the Mall.

AIDS rightly has been called the world’s most preventable disease, and here’s how to avoid it.

1. Don’t use another person’s hypodermic needle.
2. Don’t accept/present a penis from/to a person or monkey that might have it.

Is that straightforward or not? Does it take more than a one-digit IQ to understand them?

The United States and Billionaire Gates squander boxcars of money on the so-called AIDS epidemic in Africa, whereas the only explanations possible for the ongoing problem there are irreversible stupidity or complete immorality. How many times must a person be told the simple rules for avoidance?

Is it any different in this country? The only two explanations for the continuation of the disease are the same as for Africa or anywhere else. As we must have learned from about a trillion unsuccessful projects in this country, spending money on the irreversibly stupid does not enlighten them, nor does tossing it at those without morals deliver them that commodity. Much of all the welfare throw-away falls exactly into those categories. Therefore, to hell with spending money and expertise attempting to find a cure for the trivially preventable. Let’s divert those research funds to a more worthy objective.

Consider the myriad, devastating diseases, often with tongue-twisting names – let abracadabritis = ACB denote any one of these. Two conditions will be true of it.
(a) A SWAG (Scientific Wild-Ass Guess) is as close as anyone can come to its aetilogy.
(b) No one has even much of a SWAG about what might assuage its symptoms, let alone cause them.

ACB comes out of the blue, ravages anyone from a baby to a senior citizen, ruins his life, possibly kills him, and not enough research money is devoted to ACB even to help someone with it.

Let’s start working to cure innocent disease victims that merit help and write off the morons and wantons.

EARLY WARNING

Given the cognizance of reality and the sense of righteousness they apparently lacked, the majority of our voters already would have doubts about the sagacity of their presidential preference.

First, B.O., leader, with Harvard “experts” and Clintoon hacks, of Revolutionary Change rather fumbled the ball with Poland, but I understand he dispatched canny Joe Biden to try and recover. Lately, he broadcast his profound ignorance, if not stupidity, in wondering about his medical benefits after bailing out of the senate seat he occupied a time or two. This is the person that will revamp our system of medical insurance? Whoopee. Does the Architect of Change even know how to apply a Band-Aid to the foot already in his mouth?

Don’t lose heart yet, though, majority of voters. B.O.’s Senior Advisor is a real estate agent from Chicago that once hired the charming Michelle and worked with Mayor Daley! Those are credentials to inspire confidence. If B.O. is boggled by his medical insurance forms, the definition of a missile, negotiations with Putin, or other everyday obligations, he may get advice from Century 21 or Re/Max.

Lots of people lament, at least when it’s profitable, belonging to a minority, but I’m pleased to be free of the ignominy of having voted with the BLOCKHEAD majority.

OPEN SEASON ON THOSE BETWEEN -9 MONTHS AND ZERO

The 141-day wonder, B.O. by name and President-elect by decree of the majority of our population voting in the recent election, has begun making his predicted and predictable rumblings.

STEM CELL RESEARCH! Let’s murder some babies so that people that have had good lives might, far from certainly, have a little more. Christopher Reeve, tragic poster-boy for this thrust, was an idolized millionaire, had a terrible accident and a miserable road to death. We notice, though, that he clung tenaciously even to the life apportioned him. Apparently, he favored that life more than he longed for an end to it. Would you rather have had his existence or that of a helpless, blind, living, breathing little creature murdered surgically or chemically and tossed into a wastebasket or a research lab? Would you like to be one of those abortion-surviving babies subject to experiments while still alive? If you voted for B.O. there’s just one way to infer your answers.

Do you take comfort that your vote spelled certain death for LIVING persons that, permitted the INALIENABLE RIGHT to LIFE, may have grown up to improve life a thousand-fold for all the people? B.O. voters that bandy about the word “right” should think carefully about that.

If you have the heart and the stomach for it, look at www.nrlc.org for some graphic illustrations of the procedures your boy, along with “Catholics” like Pelosi, Kerry, and Biden, champions.

EASE OF ABORTIONS ABROAD! On this front, too, B.O. will executive-order lots of death, he promises. Need I say more?

AA FOR AA'S - A LONDONDERRY AIR

Several days ago I read on Yahoo or another coastal, revolutionary webtrashpage that B.O. is quite relaxed when speaking on the topic of race. What a revelation! Well he might be, for race is the ONE and ONLY attribute that propelled him into the White House! Bereft of that ½ blessing the guy would probably be, through Affirmative Action, merely another of our jillion or so pettifoggers. Totally deprived of AA that particular AA might be riding on the backs of garbage trucks!

I was instantly reminded of a magazine cover, picturing semi-actor Danny Glover above a quotation along the lines of, “Every day of my life, I realize what it is to be black.” Oh, poor Danny Boy! If you weren’t, no one ever would have heard of you. You’d probably be repainting cars, completing tax forms for H & R Block, teaching something in some sort of school, mowing lawns, working for the BLM, HUD, the DoD, retired, drawing unemployment, or holding down another sublunary job like the majority of us never splashed on magazine covers.

You and B.O. have reaped valuable harvests from the curse of being non-white. The difference is that when you turn in a bad or mediocre performance, who cares? You’ve done it repeatedly without loss of income or status. With B.O. at our helm, though, you and I might be out raking through the rubble of what were once our shares of a great country.

Truly, I’ve had a belly full of Affirmative Action and watching incompetents soar above their talents then bungle their jobs, while we’re supposed to be content that they feel well about themselves and are doing “their bests.” However, the voters, such as they are, have spoken or, at least, attorned to the likes of Yahoo, Public Television, and Oprah Winfrey.

WHO DID THE DAMAGE?

If you’ve suffered the loss of a loved one, you certainly also know the spirit of incredulity that haunts for a long time afterward, perhaps forever, the recollection of that person.

“Surely she’s not dead; she just CAN’T be!”

It’s the same, cold disbelief that grips my realization that, come January, Curious George will occupy the oval office (or after 141 days or so, will he start running for Pope?): that in the East Room, personable, patriotic Michelle will preside over glittering dinners for heads of state; and that Air Force One will transport someone about as capable to lead and make decisions as a random pick from Roosevelt Road in Chicago. Believe it or not, though, it’s true. A considerable majority of the voters embraced the image that ungodly expensive television commercials and love-sick news sources bludgeoned into their weak heads.

I thought it would be interesting to consider his perceptible characteristics, his campaign rhetoric, his mostly “present” voting career in the Illinois legislature, and his less than 5-month association with the U.S. Senate and attempt to infer just who would have voted for him. Not necessarily in order of importance my conclusions follow.

Career panhandlers. B.O.’s frequent pledge to allocate what you’ve worked to earn among those that studiously avoid work was a powerful inducement to this crew.
Individuals with Harold Washington or Edwin Edwards – electorate/ O.J. Simpson - murder trial jurors’ rationality. “So what if he’s a felon?” “So what if he’s a murderer?” “Damn the evidence; full speed ahead.” One wonders, in fact, if voters like these don’t find something attractive about certain known criminals and support them BECAUSE of their sins. Perhaps voters like these have the same tendencies to crime.
Baby-murderers. It is in relation to abortion that B.O.’s only assertive Illinois vote occurred. It wasn’t “present” for the issue of life support to a wretched little baby-murder survivor, it was “make damned sure the creature doesn’t survive.”
Unpatriotic people, especially those that vociferously condemn their country or that work violently to injure it.
Those that would prefer to battle terrorism in Washington, D.C., New York City, Denver, or Dallas than in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, and the like.
Citizens that, despite its inglorious collapse and failure in much of the civilized world, persist in longing for Communism or something close.
Empty heads that allowed Oprah Winfrey, PBS, ABC, CBS, Yahoo, etc. to tell them how to vote. This category deserves to lose the right to vote.
“Fringies” is my best effort at a name for this group, but it consists of people that will champion ANY notion, so long as it exceeds the bounds of decency and reason in this country in contemporary times. Both groups 6 and 7 may have as objectives mere vandalism; i.e., ruthlessly tearing down what we have for no particular reason, just for the joy of unprincipled revolution, or there may be $ in it for them. At any rate, here we find people such as former Supreme Court disasters as William O. Douglas, Earl Warren, and Thurgood Marshall; Gary Trudeau, world’s least humorous but most rabidly leftwing cartoonist (Gary, Sweetie, had I been President, your representation of me via a swastika would have earned you my visit, at which I either would have pounded with my fists your scummy ass into the dirt or made you retract in public your slanders – your choice, of course.); Hugh Heffner, wealthy pornographer and intellectual moron, or most anyone belonging to the ACLU or to Horrywood. The boundaries between 6. and 8. are blurred, and I may have misclassified some specimens. The reader is invited to make his own adjustments.
Perpetual Race Debtors. These misguided souls believe that after more YEARS than B.O. served DAYS in the U.S. Senate before someone persuaded him to cash in on the ranks of the gullible, they STILL owe blacks and partial blacks some sort of compensation for what their dim (meaning in long-passed times) ancestors suffered.

Regarding these categories of electors I can best all the political pundits and, at this early date, predict the winner of the 2012 presidential election – assuming that B.O. has not programmed our destruction and that we still exist and have one. Of course, it’s B.O. again! FOUR MORE YEARS! The reason is obvious; his crucial basis for support, enumerated above, are GUARANTEED to propel him into office again. Life forms in those classes, caring nothing for what he has done and not done, will not give two hoots what he has done and not done between 2009-2012. Once again they will vote according to the group attributes enumerated above.

Recently the Worst Lady – elect decided that her worthless husband’s nomination was the first time she had ever been proud of her country. (Apparently when Princeton eliminated a qualified applicant in favor of a stupid, affirmative action pig that had failed her entrance exam didn’t count.) I would like to counter that B.O.’s election was the first time I had NOT been proud of my country, but there were two others; when it elected the obscene, womanizing clown from Arkansas. I didn’t want to continue living among people that would elect a known jerk, but unlike Horrywood gutter balls like Basinger and Baldwin, who swore they’d abscond if G.W. Bush became President, I couldn’t afford to move.

My present loss of pride in my country, though, is orders of magnitude greater than it was then. I am ashamed, ill, and angry to be one of them.

A MEMORABLE ADDITION TO THE LIST

DECEMBER 7, 1941
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001
NOVEMBER 4, 2008

... AS A THREE-DOLLAR BILL

Fellow citizens,

Scarcely a day passes without a new, louche feature of B.O.'s life surfacing. Credential-wise, of course, he has no business running for any office, let alone the Presidency, but now there is a suspicion that he fails even to meet the Constitution's criterion of birth in the U.S.! Further, we see why he's so reticent on the topic of illegal aliens - his aunt IS one!

Every aspect of the man proves to be fake, phony, and false, if not outright deplorable. There's nothing good there. He's a face and a voice on television, but every fact that filters through the concerted attempts to hide them reveals a new doubt, a fatal flaw.

Think for yourselves! Don't cripple our country with that charlatan. Vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin. They are people of substance and not the fabrications of public relations manipulators.

ONLY ONE CHOICE

John McCain and Sarah Palin are capable, decent, experienced people with the personal values which have made this country what it is. Their associates and relations are the same kinds of people, there is nothing obscure or guarded about their pasts, and their records are public and not concealed by the press.

A vote for their opposition is an invitation to disaster.

With all sincerity,

Yves Chauvire

THE O.J. SIMPSON JURY

I refer to the first one, not the two that found honestly and correctly.

If you recall, that infamous dozen concluded essentially, “Since the DNA evidence proves the murderer’s guilt, we’ll just ignore that.”

I seriously doubt that all the evidence against B.O. has surfaced, and the news media that are so in love with him do their best to bury or conceal the many incriminating findings. However, there is more than enough proof for a conviction.

Among segments of the electorate, though, there is indication of the O. J. Simpson jury’s neglect for truth. Hopefully, enough sensible voting booth jurors will rally to send him back to the Senate – better farther away and lower.

Y.C.

BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE, THINK! READ!

BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE, THINK! READ!

Those of you that believe what you see in the New York Times – to cite a single example of the lying, distorting, concealing, lunatic liberal press – ought to glance at page 26 of the November 3, 2008 National Review.

According to B.O. and his news toadies, he MAY have bumped into Bomber Bill Ayers a time or two, way back when, but the truth of their relationship is far different. For one example, B.O. chaired the board of Ayers’ 6-year, $160M “education reform” package, which sent millions of $ to leftist projects.

Still proud of his terrorist exploits, Ayers is no less a revolutionary than when he was exploding bombs. He’s a regular Che Guevara of education, folks, and as recently as 2006 was down in Venezuela absorbing the admiration and approbation of Chavez and the Commies for equating education to revolution.

I’ve suggested before that you investigate how many of Ayers’ ideological descendants and clones are operating in your schools. Now, I’ll recommend, PLEASE, that you defeat the presidential ambitions of another of them.

Read that piece! Think! Discover the true colors of the person-of-color candidate. Whatever your eyesight, they are NOT RED, WHITE, and BLUE.

Whatever you do, don’t vote for a crew whose mantra is the destructive radicalization of our fine country.

ABSENTEE MAKES THE HEART GROW NERVOUS

I’m seriously concerned about absentee ballots; i.e., about the security thereof. In the packet sent me were an instruction sheet, two envelopes, and the ballot itself. The procedure was to mark the ballot, seal it inside the smaller, security envelope – it was called – and then seal that inside the mailing envelope. On the back of this last was a printed label with my name and a space for my signature, which was required.

Experience has taught me to mistrust the Postal Service on most points, so I didn’t mail it. Between sender and recipient various people handle a letter, and what if one of them should recognize my name and, having voting sentiments opposite mine, throw it away? What’s to prevent that? Similarly, what if an unscrupulous person, not acquainted with me, in the chain knows that people in my area generally favor Party A and is, himself, an adherent to Party B? What’s to hinder his disposal of my ballot?

When I delivered my letter in person at the place designated I asked the clerk just what becomes of it from that point forward. She said the office verifies the signatures, accumulates envelopes in a larger envelope, and delivers that to the vote-counters. With that she placed mine on a desk and walked away.

This is vote security? Of course, to the extent of their ability to catch forgeries, they can stop someone else’s using my ballot, but, again, what happens to it before transfer to the counting house? Couldn’t she, as soon as I walked out, have flushed mine down a toilet? In that office, anyone that wants to eliminate my vote and has an opportunity, which did not appear to be lacking, can do it. The moment I handed her that envelope she should have recorded in a log of some sort that Yves Chauvire’s ballot arrived. Then, when the absentee ballots are tallied, if mine is not among them, alarms should sound.

In this country there is no shortage of people that will attempt to cheat in every situation. We need better voting security systems, and they would be simple to design and implement. Often we hear about “one man, one vote;” it looked to me as if I could prove to be “one man, no vote.”

REFERENCE

It isn't my aim to act as a distribution center for other people's work and ideas, but I believe the article identified below addresses a number of issues that I've broached previously.

By the way, my surname is pronounced "show vee RAY." The final "e" has a little mark over it, but that's not available on this keyboard. It's French and approximately Chauvire', you know.


http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html

WHERE DID THEY ALL GO?

When I first learned that B..O.’s friend, B.A., Bill “the Bomber” Ayers, was on the faculty at the University of Illinois – Chicago, I was amazed that it had taken B.O.’s candidacy to popularize the fact and that our objective and industrious press had failed to broadcast it long before. Immediately, then, I began wondering what had become of all Bill’s COMRADES in arms, the flag- and building-burners, bomb manufacturers, saboteur wanna-be’s, filthy speech revolutionaries, campus rioters, junkies, and other vermin of his time. If Bill had bubbled up into the frothy cream of education (OK, U of I – C is not stellar, it’s even a long mark from the best in that city, but it’s academically reputable), what about the rest of the infestation?

Do you suppose any of yourselves, your children, your grandchildren were or are being instructed by that dreadful crew? What kinds of gems do you suppose Bill the Bomber has passed along to his students?

This is not to advocate your charging out to demand background checks for all the teachers of you and yours – though it would probably be a good idea. No, for those of you with descendants still in school, I recommend your monitoring closely just what they’re being taught. Hopefully, you already do that. Don’t take for granted that because government has its thumb in that pie, too, everything is A-OK. Discuss the material with the students and find out just what is being inculcated upon them, and I don’t restrict that to the textbooks’ being used. Further, you should discover where the teachers were students and in what their degrees are. You check into your physicians’, attorneys’, and dentists’ credentials, don’t you? Are your descendants’ educations of lesser importance?

Not all the crazies of Bill’s days are still street people. Where did they all go?

Hmm. Now I’m wondering just how many drifted into news reportage.

Y.C.

SEMI-COLIN

SEMI-COLIN

From the visible aspects of his military career I thought Colin Powell intelligent and capable. The same seemed to be true of him as Secretary of State, though not since Richard Nixon has a president given one of those much to do. Therefore, it’s not obvious if Powell was good at that job, but he looked respectably in the position.

Therefore, what’s happened to him? Like most statements in support of B.O., his are nonsense remarks, worth less than the sums of the individual words.

First, he likes B.O., because he’s a “transformational figure.” Hmm. I guess that’s what Hitler, Stalin, Ho, Chou, Pot, Khomeini, and Mao were; they managed to TRANSFORM reasonably good countries into epitomes of hell. Talk about CHANGE, folks! Now, those fellows were among the greatest agents of change the world has ever seen, and every bit of it was not just bad, it was horrific. Is that what Powell admires; the potential for disaster?

Secondly, he claims not to approve the directions in which the GOP is moving. This is equally absurd. By all indications it is moving towards doing constructive things for the economy; protecting the LIVES (yes, they’re alive, and SCIENCE proves it) of the unborn; trying to guard us and others from terrorists; advocating traditional – and correct – concepts of family and marriage; maintaining a strong defense, adhering to the Bill of Rights … What’s there to disapprove? I admit these are not the directions endorsed at Hollywood and Vine, Berkeley, Columbia U. or by Ayers, Farrakhan, Wright, and similar patriots, such as the heads of state of Iran, Russia, and Venezuela.

It’s eye-opening and HIGHLY disappointing to see that Powell has sunk into that muck, which explains the title of this piece.

Has he, though? The day after his proclamation he was vaulted into the provisional, revolutionary government by B.O. himself. Was it, then, that Powell was merely panhandling for a job?

Another possibility, and there are other signals of it, is that the election is being transformed into a matter of race!

Q: Who’s doing that?
A: The Democrats

Q: What’s that called?
A: Racism

Conclusion: However you cut it, Colin Powell’s endorsement isn’t worth a farthing.

Recommendation: Vote AGAINST racists and FOR decent, healthy directions; i.e., FOR Sarah Palin and John McCain. THEY ARE DECENT PEOPLE.

THE BILL OF WHAT?

In truth, it’s not pertinent to ask what’s become of the First Amendment. That’s addressed to government’s law-making, whereas the assaults on it are consequences of a guerilla war of government coercion and of private intimidation.

Examples are so rife it’s nearly impossible to know what was the latest affront, but a very recent one was a sports announcer’s apologizing for a reference to Adolph Hitler in relation to comments regarding leadership.

Who knows all the background details? Perhaps it was merely stupidity that caused the man to believe he should grovel or perhaps he’s just so shell-shocked from reading of similar circumstances that he figured he’d be taken to task for the remark. That is, maybe no one leaned, mobster style, on him, though it has that stench.

In recent history there was a remarkable figure named Adolph Hitler, and if anyone has an inkling of doubt about his leadership abilities, look at the films of hundreds of thousands of screaming devotees just dying, and quite prepared literally to die, to do anything he asked. Compare what he asked to what they did. Was that not leadership? Tragically, catastrophically, he used his power to lead them in vile directions.

Where’s the harm in stating historical facts? Are we into Newspeak? Jewspeak? This probably was not a case of the latter, because Jews are always talking, even in jocose contexts such as The Producers, about Hitler. Is it that non-Jews are not supposed to mention him or was it mention of him in association with a quality generally admired that was wicked? Nothing is too far-fetched to be plausible these days, so perhaps it was because the commentator has a German name.

Whatever it is/was I wish everyone would go read the First Amendment, ignore all the word-burning fanatics that spurn what it says, and also have the guts to tell the fanatics to stuff it if they’re offended by inoffensive statements.

That’s my opinion.

Y.C.

MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT

Following are a few demonstrable attributes from a person's past and present.

1. Junkie
2. Winner of an election where the opponents' names are mysteriously stricken from the ballot.
3. Rewards his constituents by rarely casting any sort of meaningful vote; is strongly assertive on only one issue - see 4. below
4. A persistently vicious foe of the unborn
5. The chum of an admitted domestic terrorist
6. Married to and mentored by outspoken America-haters
7. Seen honoring our flag only after criticism for demonstrating his honest sentiments towards it

If credentials like these are what you want in a President, DON'T WASTE YOUR VOTES ON B.O.! Write in Fidel Castro, Osama bin Laden, Hugo Chavez, or Robert Mugabe. If you've any reason to disfavor one of them, select a random lunatic wandering the streets of San Fran, D.C., or Boston, all hotbeds of the sentiments itemized above. (This can be justified by observing the way these constituencies' choices vote.)

Y.C.

TWO QUOTATIONS

"The longing of the poor," thought Serena, "for nothing short of the best is sometimes overwhelming."

"Serena Blandish" by Enid Bagnold

**************************


"Then along came B.O. with lavish promises to satisfy those longings."

My Blog by Yves Chauvire

ETERNAL VIGILANCE IS THE PRICE OF -

On the National Archives Building, where the declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and other critical documents – as yet, one can’t punch “2” for Spanish versions – are housed, the sentence ends

“LIBERTY.”

For the present and for November, 2008, I should like to propose that

“A FAIR ELECTION” is also a pertinent object of the preposition.

Among other maneuvers, ACORN, B.O.’s Sturmabteilung of vote fraud, has already been caught in the act, and I believe, as one hears in the opening of “Showboat,” this is “Only the beginning, folks; only the beginning.”

The Democrats are old pro’s at stealing elections. The presidential one of 1960 saw an unprecedented number of reports of “voting irregularities,” and, not surprisingly, many were in states with large numbers of electoral votes, which, not surprisingly, Kennedy won. One was Illinois, where the father of Chicago’s present mayor ruled for years and boasted of his ability to “deliver the vote.” Irishman Richard J. Daley had an inveterate love affair with the Kennedy Klan, important in Chicago. (Read up on R. Sargent Shriver, a member of that nobility.) Around that city jokes about whole cemeteries’ voting and one man- twelve votes got laughs, but the implication of the corruption of a democratic (small “d”) process is not amusing.

Another hotspot of voting oddities that year was Texas, from which the President-in-waiting ruled the Senate.

Yes, in my view the Demo’s swiped that close election, and it also led to Richard Nixon’s downfall. There he was, about as certain to clobber whining McGovern as B.O is to change his mind tomorrow, when his guys are burgling those Watergate offices! Why on Earth? In my opinion, because he feared more Demo Dirty Election Tricks.

More recently we had the paper punch – “deus ex voting machina” ploy the Demo’s attempted in Florida. Fortunately for us, there were sane courts to trample their enurectic, factitious plaints into the dirt.

At any rate, Kennedy’s political offspring are champing at this election bit, believe me.

My recommendation to the Republicans, then, is to be certain you have IDEOLOGICAL, not just NOMINAL, representatives of your party close to where every would-be voter identifies himself, every voter votes, every vote is tabulated, and every conceivable place there might be tampering with people or their votes. Watch like hawks, and if there’s a hint of chicanery, CHALLENGE, BLOW THE WHISTLE, STAND UP FOR A FAIR ELECTION!
If you allow this one to proceed as in Mugabe-land, we may well end up with another Mugabe.

DESPERATE FOR AMMUNITION

Did you ever notice that if a critic has a prejudice for or against something – a painting, a piece of music, an article of literature, a scientific theory – he can always invent reasons to justify his “a priori” conclusion? The New Yorker magazine, for example, is invariably chock full of laughable, hyperbolic praise for works of “art” in various media that sensible people would flush down the toilet or refuse to see.

The same illogical bigotry is focused by the more rabid Democrats against Sarah Palin. Lately I heard imaginative reasons to dislike her offered by two mature – at least in years – women.

One was that, whereas Sarah would be quite capable at handling the affairs of a state, the person couldn’t picture her dealing with foreign statesmen (statespeople?). Surprisingly, this same thinker had been able to visualize a womanizing clown from the same level of government in Arkansas fulfilling that role.

The second odd proscription came from a woman with a B.O. banner stuck in her front yard. It was that women with children should not occupy the office of President, nor Vice-President, either, now that she’d thought about it.

This, too, was a strange thing emanating from a devout feminist, but, then, unreasoning women, inaccurately calling themselves “feminists,” flocked to vote for the womanizing clown from Arkansas. Liberals, isn’t it, that favor dads that stay at home while the moms work outside and baby-changing stations in men’s rooms? Consistency is never a strong point with the rabid.

She’s the only one of the four top candidates with experience at governance, and, if it came to it, whom would you rather see face to face with a foreign head of state; Sarah Palin or a wimp that shouts “present” and hides his head?

GEDANKENEXPERIMENT

According to the web this interesting nonce word was first used by Hans Christian Oersted, whereas I first learned it in relation to Ernst Mach – as in velocities relative to the speed of sound – who popularized it.

The translation is simply “thought experiment,” and the definition is “a mental exercise performed when an actual, physical experiment is impossible or impracticable.” As an example, suppose one has an idea for constructing a space vehicle to travel near the speed of light. Clearly, he can’t try out the scheme, but he can test the principles – vis-à-vis known physical laws – in his mind. Thus, he gets an idea about what might be correct and what wrong in his plans. It’s a simple concept, right?

What I want to propose to you is a Gedankenexperiment that is conceptually easy to perform and not awfully difficult physically but which, for social reasons, one might say, would meet with opposition. It follows below.

Pick a random age in years between 7 and 70 and a random sample, world-wide, of 500 each of white males, white females, black females, and black males.

The concept of true randomness is everyday stuff to statisticians, and this would be conceptually simple, but the samples must be random; i.e., drawn without any sort of bias. I admit that making the selections world-wide might be a bit tricky, as there are no lists of everyone in the world, but I rely upon statistics to proceed in an impartial and mathematically reasonable way.

Insofar as “black” and “white” are concerned, the samples must exclude people of mixed races, and capable molecular biologists can examine DNA and, relative to the present state of knowledge, make this judgement. Thus, in reality, our experiment becomes more costly to perform, but we operate here on the plane of thought.

Next, each person in each group is given two tasks; he or she takes a standardized IQ exam and runs 50 yards.

Don’t worry about a random person’s being physically unable to take an IQ exam, as, for example, by reason of blindness or of being incapable of moving 50 yards, as for a crippled person. We simply eliminate those people from the tests, and since statistics tells us that samples of size 30 almost certainly suffice for drawing conclusions about averages, we’ll have more than enough if we begin with 500.

Therefore, we perform the tests, and the reader’s Gedankenexperiment is to decide how the average results for the groups appear. Before looking down the screen or page, stop and give this some thought. Further, tell why you answered as you did.

Personally, I believe the black males and females would show lower average running times as well as lower average IQ scores. Why do I conclude that? It is simply because of a lifetime of observing various athletic contests and achievements and from a lifetime of observing intellectual contests and achievements.

Next, do the whole experiment 500 times; i.e., select a random age, pick the four random samples, do the tests, and examine the average performance figures. How do you suppose those results would look? I think that blacks would prevail in running times a significant number of times and that whites would do the same in the IQ tests.

If it turned out the way I predict, then Science would have demonstrated ways to improve certain aspects of everyday life. Consider the following scenario. The school board sits discussing the latest achievement scores. Why the devil is it that District W, predominantly white children, scored higher than those of District B, mostly black? They scratch their heads and decide it MUST be a difference in the quality of teaching or the quantity of something and that increased expenditure in B is the sole recourse. Does this occur frequently? Does Barack Obama change his tune often?

If it’s been proven that the difference is attributable to factors beyond the power of dollars to eliminate, then let’s save money. Another healthy implication would be that we could stop the harmful nonsense of lowering standards so that EVERYBODY scores x%, which implies pitching education to the bottom students, and allow the best students to reach their potentials. They, after all, will be the ones that have to accomplish things for us. We don’t neglect or deny resources to less capable students, whatever their races or other attributes, but, simultaneously, we don’t draw others down to that level. Neither do we spend disproportionate quantities of present resources in attempts to make improvements we know to be impossible.

At least two Nobel Prize winners have alluded to a genetic difference in the respective intellectual capacities of those two races. William Shockley, who helped invent the transistor, was rather blunt and mentioned explicitly the OBSERVED differences in standardized intelligence test scores. Naturally, there was a terrific furor over this, but those assailing him were not in his mental class and could hardly refute the statistical evidence. (Apparently simplified versions of our experiment have already been conducted.) More recently James Watson, who did most of the work in deducing the shape of the DNA molecule was admonished and punished for his well-reasoned comments on the topic. That’s the way of uneducated, American liberals, right? If one can’t argue intelligently against a point, try to discredit the person that made it and wail “Foul Play” as loudly as possible. Does that happen frequently in America? Does Jeremiah Wright hate his country?

Their models of the world, however unsupportable, MUST be correct; there MUST be some inscrutable factor that justifies their position, and if they can’t identify it exactly, well, so what? They MUST be right, anyway.

There are other cases of known intellectual differences between groups of mammals. For example, the marsupials, the pouched animals, are demonstrably less intelligent than the placentals. Therefore, why the big deal?

If my series of experiments, performed objectively and according to my specifications, turned out to show blacks’ average intelligence higher than that of whites, it wouldn’t affect my activities, accomplishments, or frame of mind any more than if I learned that most blacks my age can run faster than I. I consider myself an individual, able to influence my future and make of myself the best that I can. I am not roped to any properties of a group to which I happen, beyond my control, to belong.

At any rate, if you doubt my predicted experimental results, why don’t we get out of the realm of Gedanken, ja?

PROBLEM SOLVED!

“Is a puzzlement!” the King of Siam might have declared when observing B.O. become the darling, the favored bed companion, of the various news media bombarding us. They, you must understand, are all part of Horrywood (q.v., a previous post here), and if anyone doubts that news is entertainment, he should ask himself how there could be such amusing, expensive competition over reading into a camera and selectively distorting events occurring in the world?

At any rate, I, Yves Chauvire, (pronounced approximately as SHOW vee ray – this computer lacks the accent mark over the “e.”) solved the puzzlement, and it was only necessary to reflect a little on Horrywood’s harvest. Once again, I’ll use the abbreviation, “p.b.” to mean “partial black” and to designate people that are all or partially of the black race.

As much as possible I avoid network television, but now and then a friend, relative, medical office, or hotel room perpetrates it on me. More often than that, though, I watch Horrywood films, and I’m learning interesting, surprising lessons from all these sources.

Every group of people doing something together includes p.b.’s; put a collection of people in a room, and there will be a p.b. guy and a white girl on a couch, while others are distributed variously (It’s as if tax-evading Spike Lee’s one and only theme dictates all the ridiculous TV commercials.); the chief of the superhumanly intelligent research team is a p.b., as is the head cop dictating to and masterminding the activities of all the other cops, or, for that matter, the head anything dictating to all the other anythings.

To me and my experience this is Horrywood Fantasyland at its most erroneous; it’s nowhere I’ve ever lived, and I’ve lived and worked all over this country of ours, in all points of the compass and in everything from little towns to monster cities.

What I conclude, therefore, is that along came a p.b. candidate wanna be, on whom Horrywood, in its Affirmative Action frenzy, pounced to convert to a candidate. Now it is working frenetically – truth, ethics, sense, security, standards, economics, justice be damned – to promote him, under its freakish vision of the world, to the Presidency.

After understanding the news media romance with B.O., I began thinking how Horrywood would present the cinematic version of his ascendancy. It would be produced by Spielberg, except that Spike Lee would have responsibility for the sex scenes. Background music would be by Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen, 2 Live Crew, and Ludicris. Mike Tyson and Peggy Lipton would play his father and mother, respectively, with Osama bin Laden as her second husband. Dustin Hoffman would have the title roll with Queen Latifah as the personable Michelle and Kim Basinger her stand-in for the erotic scenes. (By the way, where has the good wife gone? Do the Demo strategists have her in a cage somewhere with a rag stuffed in her mouth?) Madonna and Paris Hilton should be able to handle the roles of the Obama children. Robert Mugabe would play Jermiah Wright, Alec Baldwin, Bill Ayers, and Jeremiah Wright would have the dual roles of Mayor Daley and the Chaplain of the U.S. Senate. I can see Jesse Jackson as Joe Biden and Al Sharpton as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Horrywood, as usual, would take some liberties with the facts as known.

I want to say “God forbid!” to the concept of B.O. as president of as much as my county garbage commission, though as an official nation and a government brandishing “In God We Trust” as a motto, we affront God a thousand times a day. Why would He listen to us, or perhaps is all the woe besetting us lately the result of such observation? Still, deliver us from the Horrywood disaster of an Obama nation, which I still cannot help seeing as an ABOMINATION.

I should add that I do not dislike black people. Any having had dealings with me have been treated as kindly, congenially, and equitably as all others. On the other hand I tend to bristle when some agency or another seeks to stuff something down my throat.

B.O. IN LITERATURE

I’ve discovered a literary figure embodying B.O.’s behavioral characteristics; it’s Curious George, star of many children’s books and animations.

George has the inclination to meddle in matters beyond his comprehension and control. “The cutest little monkey,” as he is called in song, repeatedly gets himself and others into sticky situations by yielding to his curiosity. He invariably redeems himself by performing, in the midst of the turmoil he’s created, some very beneficial act.

What worries me about Curious - rather, Ambitious - Barack., however, is that, so far as I know, there is no author to pin “deus ex machina” parachutes on him to break the falls he is risking and towards which he would drag the rest of us.

AN ANCIENT BLUEPRINT FOR DECENCY

I didn’t read the novel, The Bonfire of the Vanities, but years ago I saw a film version. While I didn’t find this a landmark of the cinematic arts, one line of dialog is indelible in my mind, and the longer I live, the more often I recollect it and the more relevant it seems.

Towards the end, a judge tells, to the best of my faulty memory, a courtroom of agitated spectators,

“Go home; go home and be decent people.”

I must believe that if we all practiced this – or, at least, tried our best to practice it – our country, any country, all countries, would improve by a percentage greater than that of Zimbabwe’s inflation. If we were conscientious about it, then our children would learn decency, perhaps without requiring extensive lectures on the subject. They, then, would grow up decent people, and the rule of decency would be self-propagating through the generations.

There are people that apparently find it advantageous to be indecent, but I believe a large-scale commitment to decency would eventually extinguish them. For an example, if a drug pusher finds many potential customers averse to his wares, he has to leave the trade. The same would apply to a porn peddler, possibly a Horrywood producer, whose sales drop dramatically before a largely decent population. How about a lobbyist that encounters decent legislators unwilling to accept bribes, or a corrupt contractor whose lines of municipal influence suddenly are blocked by decent administrators?

If decency doesn’t interest you, STOP READING.

All right! Decency interests you! “How, then,” you will ask, “does a person get to be decent?”
“Easily,” I answer. “Just follow the Decalogue, the Ten Commandments.”

If you’re not a Jew or Christian, PLEASE DON’T STOP READING. THIS IS NO SERMON!

Ten? In different parts of the Old Testament, the list of rules has different numbers of items, but, for the sake of discussion, let’s take the ten found in the New Testament. In Yves Chauvire’s opinion, even if one ignores the ones mentioning God, what remains constitutes a blueprint for decency.

Decent people don’t kill, steal, commit adultery, tell serious lies about others, dishonor their parents, or vitiate themselves envying what others have. Personally, I believe the ones about graven images and having other gods applies to excessive, unhealthy pursuits of material things, but you decide. Don’t you think that if we just concentrate on the six that are purely secular, we’d become a better people, a better world? For a bonus goal, and even if you don’t believe he was divine, what if we’d try to adopt Jesus’ recommendation about loving neighbors as we do ourselves? If you think “love” is too ambitious, will you buy “like” or “don’t harm?” We wouldn’t lead others astray, then, would we?

What say we give it a try?
YC

OBJECTIVITY

I see that tonight's debate, advertised as Sarah Palin's "facing voters that don't think she is qualified" and featuring a large photo of Biden looking as fatuous as usual, by the left-wing news service that pollutes my Internet homepage, is being "moderated" by someone from NPR, where the word "moderate" is as foreign as most cab drivers in this country. If they wanted the DNC to do the job, why didn't they go out and recruit Truthful Teddy? Wonderful NPR coincidentally picked today for a big spot on former Alakan Sen. Stevens, thus sneaking in another swipe at Mrs. Palin. What a sleazy outfit, part of Horrywood. (See previous blog entry)

Larger questions to me are why Republicans agree to Democrat machinations and why they don't blast our shamefully biased excuse for a press.

Go out there and kick his butt, Sarah!

YC

STANDARDS

The Democrats find themselves in the unusual position of having to claim that, whereas being Governor of a state qualified Clinton to be President, being Governor of a state does not qualify Palin to be Vice-President. Truly rabid liberals have no difficulties shrugging off their laughable affronts to logic and reason, of course, and perhaps it was that Clinton’s extra-marital adventures were the credential that endeared him to the Kennedy worshippers.

In the case of Palin one is justified in accusing them of variable standards, and in that of B.O., of a total lack of them.

HORRYWOOD

In Spielberg’s film, 1941, it’s what a sailor on a Japanese sub gasps when he glimpses our Glitter Capital’s famous sign. I thought it sounded funny and shall use it here.

Everyone knows that nowadays not all our movies, television programs, music, and diversity of audio/visual amusements are created in that section of Los Angeles, but I’d like to use “Horrywood” to designate that empire irrespective of geography. Similarly, “Wall Street” encompasses more than those few blocks.

I also need to introduce a medical definition of the term “epidemic:” a cluster in time and space, meaning a significant number of events at about the same time and in the same place. For example, whole countries of Africa are said to be experiencing epidemics of AIDS; there are numerous cases in a single area. There were virulent epidemics of plague at various times and places in Europe and a devastating one of influenza following World War I.

What I’d like to claim, then, is that Horrywood has for some years been experiencing an epidemic of cesspool sleaze. Too much of what is produced there is downright pornography - redeeming social value, my *** - bloody violence exceeding that of a battlefield; destruction; scatology; maculation of the values of decent people; exaltation of the worst the world has to offer; militant derogation of Christianity, especially Catholicism; and corruption from a broadband spectrum of types. If you don’t need examples, please skip the next four paragraphs.

Lately I paid an afternoon visit to a home, where, as often and detrimentally in this country, the television set is allowed to burn electricity, hence probably oil, day and night. I’d heard of The Sopranos but was dumbfounded to observe part of an hour’s devoted to the graphic abuse of women, one eventually beaten to death by a man’s fists. This was neutralized, I suppose they thought, by his later murder by a another faction of savages. Many of the less exciting scenes appeared to take place in a whorehouse. Good grief, do people in your household watch this educational medium? Looking at statistics of rape and abuse of females, I guess it IS educational.

I was anxious to watch a movie, starring Juliette Binoche and Richard Gere, called Bee Season , purporting to deal with spelling bees, when, in fact, it was it was nothing more than Jewish propaganda that escalated rapidly into a blatant attack on Catholicism. I sailed the dvd into the backyard darkness, its proper domain.

For another instance from a virtually, not virtuously, endless list, consider the day-time spectacles often blaring, unwanted by the ill, in physicians’ waiting rooms. Purported husbands and wives, shack-up pairs, any admixtures admissible, the more grotesque the better, show up and, after several minutes of gruesome, screaming diatribes, provide, to the utter delight of a cheering mob of degenerate spectators, an epitome of Saturday Night Wrestling.

Have you watched music vids? Listened carefully to the scurrilous chants known as rap? Noticed the private lives and exploits of these and other “artists?”

Apparently being intended for adults equates to being sleazy, so the purveyors of the entertainment arts intentionally sully what is not utter gutter bait to win the coveted “R = Watch this one, folks; this is really disgusting.” If all else fails, they can take something of quality and perforate it with obscene language so as to descend to R status. I noticed a wonderful example of this form of marketing in a recent People (Peep Hole?) Magazine, the cover of which celebrated Ellen Degenerate’s sham union. It was an ad for a television program called Gossip Girl. The lead marketing feature was a purported quote from the Parents Television Council, “Mind-blowingly inappropriate,” quite a selling point, indeed. “Come and get it, kids! This is naughty and bad, and don’t take our words for it, just see what the P.T.C. said.”

I could go on and on, but I feel it’s trivial to demonstrate that much of what percolates up from Horrywood should have stayed down in the septic tank.

Next, consider how many of the Horrywood citizens lead the sorts of lives their products highlight. If one believes half the grocery store and physician office literature, it’s QUITE a few. Even our supposedly unbiased, unbigoted news sources suggest there are MANY Horrywood denizens living what they portray and peddle.

You’ll understand, then, that when large numbers of Horrywoodians rally about a person or a concept, I write off him or it as something defective and undesirable – Birds of a Feather and all that. If a person is sleazy himself and worships someone or something, then I infer that someone or something is also sleazy, or at least compatible with the objectives of the sleazy.

Thus, when Horrywood adores Barack Obama = B.O., I know that B.O. = B.N. = Bad News. Is that logical or what?
Y.C.

the LOUD speaker

The nuttiest of liberals’ efforts to malign Sarah Palin has spread through their scrofulous ranks like a renegade bacillus on a Petri dish.

The other day I saw a newspaper item that reported Pelosi’s pontificating that Sarah was too inexperienced to occupy the “heartbeat from the Presidency” slot. Pelosi is an exotic beast, a pro-abortion Catholic that fabricates her own theology. She speaks as if she has a two-digit IQ, but her most significant credential is her constituency. Have you ever attended or seen (hopefully not) the Folsom Street Faggot Fest in San Fran? That scum is what re-elects good old Nancy every biennium. Whenever she says anything, please to remember that, and if you want to focus on a truly frightening contingency, remember that this loony is just one additional heartbeat from that office! Good grief! Obviously, the brilliant architects of our Constitution never imagined a Pelosi.

Compare the governing experience of the Chief Executive of our largest state to that of an occasional senator whose closest approach to a bill is when some rich buddy pays one for him. Talk about desperate; Time, Newsweek, or one of that ilk – they’re all so similar I can’t distinguish them - lately reported that B.O. has picked up lots of experience by campaigning! Wow! In other words, by running around saying he wants to be President, he’s learned how to command the armed forces, negotiate with Putin, and all that. Who would have guessed?

By the way, why do the Demo’s persist in comparing B.O. to Sarah? Answer: Because B.O. is a minor leaguer, better, a semi-pro, compared to McCain, and they’re desperate to manufacture a weak GOP link. They can’t play the Joe Biden card, because that’s a joker, a multi-term, liberal hack attempting to flourish as a wizard of change. In my view B.O. couldn’t change a tire or his clothes by himself, and, just perhaps, not so much needs changing, anyway. I rather like my existence here. How about you?

SILENCE?

It appears that many are remembering this ghastly anniversary with moments of silence, whereas I believe loud proclamations and questions are in order. To me September 11, 2001 was a tragedy much greater than that of December 7, 1941, because the attack seven years ago came from within, and our own negligence and incompetence permitted it to occur.

First to my mind comes the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Have you noticed that agencies that fail us often label themselves as "services?" We have the postal service and the internal revenue service, for two good examples. Leading up to September 11, 2001 we also had working for us the Central Intelligence Service, the Federal Service of Investigation, and our National Security Service.

Neither must we forget forces from the private sector, such as airline security, or lack thereof, that slept while the murders of thousands of our people were being planned and executed.

No, it's hardly a time for silence; it's a time to say a prayer for all those poor people, to shout NEVER AGAIN! at the tops of our voices, and to work hard towards that goal.

LITTLE HOUSE ON THE MARKET

Here is my take on the financial turmoil over housing.

1. In a lengthy period of continuously escalating house prices, insouciant buyers projected that trend far into the future and felt secure taking loans that stressed their abilities to pay. They would peddle the houses, make bundles of money, and be free of the debt. Many of these optimistic purchasers were mere profit-seeking speculators and not people requiring places to live.
2. In the same lengthy period of continuously escalating house prices, insouciant lenders projected that trend far into the future and felt secure making loans to less than sterling silver - qualified borrowers. They would peddle the houses, pay off their obligations, and the lenders would earn bundles of money.

BANG! PSSSSS …

Those were the respective sounds of a balloon’s being punctured and of its going flat as the air rushes out of it.

Prices collapsed, Panglossian, unqualified borrowers could not make their payments, and Panglossian, business sense –deprived lenders came a cropper.

HURRAH!

That was the collective cheer of the two groups of morons when our executive and legislative branches of government rushed to an election year rescue with – what else? – bail-out dough from the inexhaustible federal supply of dollars.

I say the morons should all go down for the count.
“Yer pays yer money, yer takes yer chances.”
That’s the way of a healthy economy; I’m sick of moribund, welfare floundering.
No one ever came to my assistance when I made unfortunate investment decisions, and I’ve made some beauties.

CLACKETY – CLACK – CLACK

That was the sound of an inexhaustible federal supply of dollars; it is called a printing press. We print more money, so each unit of it decreases in value.

HURRAH!

That was the sound of my reaction to your correct answer to the quiz question, “Who’s paying to rescue the morons?”

HISTORICTOMY?

On the morning of August 28, I turned on my computer, and a news service told me we’d had a historic night. Later in the day a newspaper headline reiterated that sentiment. (Do you ever get the feeling there aren’t too many different news sources? Do you ever feel they’re often as objective as Gary Trudeau, for whom “Dad, it’s 1985,” is about as hilarious as the last-panel punch lines get? Do you ever ask yourself why generally unfunny left-wing propaganda like that is insinuated into the funny papers? Is that a commentary on your newspaper?)

A little recollection, though, persuaded me that, by golly, it HAD been a historic night, at least insofar as concerns my own memory and typical, American lack of expertise in Clio’s domain. I think it was the first time in history that a person with absolutely no experience in governance or command, no more than a brush of acquaintance with a branch of federal government, and NO demonstrable credentials for the office was nominated for the Presidency. (I think it’s 50-50 that they could have walked out on a sidewalk, nabbed a random passer-by, and got an equal nominee.)

Historic, yes, but so were April 15, 1865; December 7, 1941; November 22, 1963; September 11, 2001; June 28, 1914; and April 17, 1961. God save us from another historic night in November, but let’s not just trust in God – Pelosi and pals haven’t switched our motto yet, have they? – let’s WORK, WORK, WORK to defeat B.O. and keep America-haters from positions of influence.

NO MORE AA FOR AA's

After seeing him the favored object in most every news medium (I have a theory as to why these sources always are biased towards Democrats, but that’s for another day.), reading someone’s views, and babbling about change more than a store clerk or somebody with a flat tire, what do you think of B.O.?

When he’s not hypnotized by the teleprompting device he strikes me as about as intelligent as an old-Chicago brick. “How does an old-Chicago brick get into Harvard’s law school?” one then might ask.

In recent years it has seemed to me that, excluding athlete-students, who have top priority everywhere, there are three classes of people admitted into Our Most Prestigious University.
1. Brilliant students, though not all brilliant students are accepted.
2. Students belonging to one or another MINORITY.
3. Students able to pay the price of attending.

From what I see of B.O., he was not in category 1, unless law school there depleted his genius, for, away from the teleprompter he sounds like a Head Start dropout; aside from voting “present” a remarkable number of times, he contributed nothing notable to the Illinois State Legislature; and in his legendary 140+ day U.S. Senate career he managed to travel a bit and author, most likely with ghostly help, a book about himself though nary a bill.

His considerable fortune appears to have accrued after Harvard, not to mention with almost magical celerity, so we must eliminate 3 above.

Therefore, since any athletic prowess he possesses must be more latent than what he truly feels about most topics, his was a category 2 admission.

It is a great deal simpler to classify wife, Michelle. She failed Princeton’s entrance exam but nevertheless was allowed to enter an institution where the likes of Einstein, von Neumann, Goedel, and Turing once trod. Yet, this wealthy product of American welfare has the gall to stand up and deplore the way her country has treated her!
Along with most legal residents of the U.S., I’ve had a BELLY FULL OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. It has eroded, at times destroyed, our standards, once the highest in the world. STOP THE EROSION! We don’t want an Affirmative Action President and Worst Lady

TOO SLOW ON THE DRAW!

I had this composed some days ago, but demurred posting it and got scooped by events. I like it, though, so here it is.

The presidential primaries and B.O.’s announcement of his lamentable choice for V.P. have deprived us of some of our usual breathlessness over the conventions. I’m certain, nevertheless, the TV networks will foment all manner of hot, though sham, controversy, rather in the fashion that they invent news. Rememebr Ace Reporter and Anchorperson, Honest Dan Rather?

I shall crawl way out on a low limb, however, and make a prediction about the NPR, that is to say, the Democratic National, Convention. (I never can avoid the conviction that “public” radio is an arm of the Democratic National Committee and wonder why, when they controlled both Houses for a dozen years, the Republicans didn’t torpedo that propaganda budget.)

I predict that Edward M. Kennedy, Patriarch of America’s Only Royal Family – they had the effrontery to invent armorial bearings for themselves; the archetypal lunatic liberal, booted out of college for cheating; the Midnight Cowboy whose playmate perished but was rewarded by endless new terms; alcoholic; philanderer; a “Catholic” that thinks abortion is just fine will be rolled or otherwise transported to center stage to anoint B.O. Applause will be deafening, because many of his party lack standards.

“Win one for the Tippler, Barack Hussain; win one for the Tippler.”

Evelyn Waugh wrote that it was a triumph of medical science to locate the only part of Randolph Churchill and excise it. Perhaps it was the same for Toad Kennedy, but at least he fared better than the poor sister Joe Senior had lobotomized. I don’t wish him ill, I just wish he were elsewhere, Angola or Zambia, for example. Say, I may get my wish, since, if B.O. wins, those countries will zoom in priority, and Kennedy may accept an ambassadorship in one or the other!

Y. C.

POST FACTO PREDICTION

I had this composed some days ago, but demurred posting it and got scooped by events. I like it, though, so here it is.

The presidential primaries and B.O.’s announcement of his lamentable choice for V.P. have deprived us of some of our usual breathlessness over the conventions. I’m certain, nevertheless, the TV networks will foment all manner of hot, though sham, controversy, rather in the fashion that they invent news. Rememebr Ace Reporter and Anchorperson, Honest Dan Rather?

I shall crawl way out on a low limb, however, and make a prediction about the NPR, that is to say, the Democratic National, Convention. (I never can avoid the conviction that “public” radio is an arm of the Democratic National Committee and wonder why, when they controlled both Houses for a dozen years, the Republicans didn’t torpedo that propaganda budget.)

I predict that Edward M. Kennedy, Patriarch of America’s Only Royal Family – they had the effrontery to invent armorial bearings for themselves; the archetypal lunatic liberal, booted out of college for cheating; the Midnight Cowboy that was rewarded by his playmate's death with endless new terms from a promiscuous electorate; alcoholic; philanderer; a “Catholic” that thinks abortion is just fine will be rolled or otherwise transported to center stage to anoint B.O. Applause will be deafening, because many of his party lack standards.

“Win one for the Tippler, Barack; win one for the Tippler.”

Evelyn Waugh wrote that it was a triumph of medical science to have located the only non-malignant part of Randolph Churchill and excised it. Perhaps it was the same for Toad Kennedy, but at least he fared better than the poor sister Joe Senior had lobotomized. I don’t wish him ill, I just wish he were elsewhere, Angola or Zambia, for example. Say, I may get my wish, since, if B.O. wins, those countries will zoom in priority, and Kennedy may accept an ambassadorship in one or the other!

Y. C.

FIDELITY

Does the existence of a walking, talking, contradiction of an object, calling itself a “pro-choice Catholic,” disturb you? What about when they, Pelosi and Biden, for two examples, invent their own catechism and argue up and down that receiving Holy Communion, strictly forbidden by Church law to such a one, is perfectly correct?

Even if a person doesn’t give a hoot for Catholic teaching and principles, he must find such a person in public office to be repellant, even frightening. The reason is that someone so facile and brazen at violating the rules of his personal life is likely as loose with those governing his public function.

It is the same as with John Kennedy and William Clinton; how could a man so frivolous of his marriage vows be expected to adhere to his oath of office?

It was gratifying to see bishops assert themselves and slap down the heretics. Voters should do the same.

QUIZ

A: LOCOMOTION




Q: In committee meetings what does Boxer, Feinstein, or Pilosi always make?

BY ANY OTHER NAME?

Not that it’s poetic, but B. O.’s rhetoric shares an attribute of some contemporary poetry, concatenations of agreeable-sounding words designed to conjure up big visions, but when decoded sum to meaningless excrement of a male bovine.

May I paraphrase? “… a tale told by an inexperienced pretender, full of dung and roses, signifying nothing.”

The decline of English comprehension in this country, a schooling phenomenon which B. O.’s election would accelerate, abets his strategy, but if you’re dazzled by meaningless excrement, hearken back to your 7th, 6th, 5th grade language classes and scrutinize his pronouncements. What do they mean? If you’re not sure, don’t give the man the benefit of the vote.

LET'S BROADEN AND DEEPEN THE STRIP SHOW

I notice that the International Olympic Committee is reaching its relentless, unfettered arm as far back as 2000 to deprive junkie athletes – and anyone so unfortunate as to be teamed with them – of medals. As the guilty are mainly Americans, I naturally wonder about the objectivity, often questionable, of that Euro-centric group, but that’s another topic.

I don’t object to proven cheaters’ having their accolades stripped. Examples are Mr. Landis, of Tour de France in-fame, and the 1993 University of Alabama football team, the record of which was officially recorded by the NCAA as 1 – 12 - 0 after it was discovered they had failed to notice an ineligible player that participated the whole season. In fact, other proven cases of dishonesty still await penalties, as in the case of the Boston Patriots. (Thankfully the original Boston patriots were more honest.)

To return to the Olympics, though, I wonder why the long, muscular extremity of athletic rectitude has not stretched back to the DDR = GDR = German Democratic (ha ha) Republic (hee hee) = East Germany. For years the Olympian entries of that piss-ant puppet, 1/9 – GET THAT – ONE NINTH – the size of Texas were generally acknowledged to be as much pharmaceutical representatives as athletes. Some of their female sportspersons were frequently mistaken, from a distance and outside the locker room, for male sportspersons. When European Communism disintegrated the word was that the GDR’s chemical trainers had gone to work for China. Are all these records lost? No, there are always traces, tracks to follow, and some of the guilty might even be willing to tell the truth now.
Someone authoritative ought to demand that a new series of investigations focus on that bogus nation and, evidence supporting the conclusion, beginning denuding them of their badges of victory. I’m quite certain, too, that scrutinizing the stratagems of Russia and several others would be equally productive. No, we don’t want ex-post facto applications of new laws, but I suspect that what has changed most over the intervening years are detection methods, not drug usage. If we’re exhuming past crimes, there should be no limits on the ground we search or the depth we dig.

MORE THAN A PUN

If the Democrats win the Presidency, would we have an Obamanation?

Would the homophone pun, “Abomination,” be much different, do you think?

Before you vote consider carefully propelling into The White House an inexperienced, unpatriotic, part-time, short-time senator, surrounding himself with professed America-haters.

If it’s your bent to elect an enemy of the country, why go halfway? Write in bin Laden, Chavez, or Ahmadinejad. They offer the advantage, at least, of having views that are generally unvarying and avoiding meaningless double-talk.

Please, no Abominations for us.

GET OUT!

It’s an organization I wish existed. The acronym represents Get Every Thug Off Our Teams, and is a reaction to the disgustingly commonplace news of so-called student-athletes’ arrests and convictions for a great range of crimes. More disturbingly, very often the criminals have been hired, by means of athletic scholarships, which are publicized, and often bonuses and perks, which are clandestine.
The Oxford English Dictionary definition of “university” is rather simple and refers to two classes of people, students and faculty; athletes are not mentioned. Looking at the world, in fact, shows that the American model of a university as a training ground for professional athletes, many of them scarcely associated, aside from ubiquity, with their institutions, is rare. In most countries, universities have no teams, none at all. Athletes with no interest in education may attend sports colleges, where those are the subjects taught, or join sports clubs, devoted to particular endeavors of that sort. Another option for them, of course, is to secure athletic scholarships in the U.S., and quite a few do just that.
Despite the fact that athletics have no definitional part in colleges, I have absolutely no objection to them. I have exercised regularly all my life, have enjoyed watching some university athletic contests, and my children were intercollegiate athletes. I object very strenuously, however, to participants’ being paid to perform, and, regardless of what euphemism is attached to the payment, that is what it is.
For what are called major sports the universities function as no better than minor league teams. The usual, specious argument to justify this is that athletic scholarships permit some that otherwise would not, to “get a college education.” For the major sports this is entirely laughable. Trivial courses and feeble, useless programs of study are formulated for those whose presence is solely for the purpose of running around the fields and courts. For many, the most popular major must be Student Union, because, when not indulging in their professions, that is where many are often to be found.
The actual reason for the practice is, as with much corruption in this country, money. Buying more capable players helps XYZ U to win, which attracts television money, bowl game money, ticket and souvenir revenues, etc. Most of this return, naturally, goes back to athletics, and winning teams gratify old grads, the pecunious of whom will donate money to XYZ to propagate the cycle. One has only to review the graduation statistics for athletic scholars in the big money sports. How many graduate in reasonable time? How many graduate at all, and, if so, in what – Playground Management or African or Women’s Studies? Observe what a lie is the “get a college education” excuse for importing them.
If you’ve spent any time around a school with a large athletic “program,” which designation is appropriate, since it’s all entertainment, you’ll have noticed that the athletic department budget is an enigma, a sacred cow, the horns of which never get trimmed. When financial troubles develop, the Library will have to eliminate research materials the faculty need, whole academic departments may be erased, staff and faculty forego raises, but football never takes a hit. It’s also important to recognize that at some schools the abuses are not with basketball and football, for hockey, lacrosse, and other sports are the big attractions at other places.
I shall describe the sensible way for university athletics to work. Students take entrance exams and present other academic credentials. If accepted for a valid course of study, they matriculate, and, in interested, try out for the team(s) of choice. They are first students, secondly athletes – just as the bogus, hyphenated term indicates – and receive no special consideration for that activity. It’s the same as the Knitting Club, an amateur drama group, or the Mechanical Engineering Society – extra-curricular activities taken up by those with the interest, ability, and time for them. What is better than this about the uncontrollable monster of the semi-pro to full-pro system we have today?
Next, to the subject of crime. It is far from uncommon that some of those engaged to represent the schools, with which they are so tenuously connected, are criminals. The ways by which university administrators – also not mentioned in the definition – deal with the phenomenon bear examination.
Some months ago news reports from the University of Montana, a place not ordinarily construed as a football factory, told that part of the team broke into an apartment to steal some of the illegal drugs in use there. Whether the whole squad is armed or not is unknown, but these representatives were, and in the course of the felony a woman was slugged over the head with a revolver barrel.
The school’s president determined that the root problem was not having thugs in to play football, but rather that the criminals had not been provided adequate “mentoring,” to employ his own, fashionable terminology. In short, the felonious behavior was the university’s fault! Consequently, a new, salaried position was added to the budget and a person engaged to attempt to inculcate civilized behavior upon any barbaric student-athletes. If this is representative of logic at places of advanced learning, we should bail out after eight years, and, by the way, do you think high schools are less tolerant of high-performance, low morality student-athletes?
The University of Texas is an institution more closely identified with major league athletics, so it was less startling to see it distinguished in a column headed “Book ‘em, Horns” and leading off with reference to its new honor system; “Yes, your Honor.” “No, your Honor.” After six weeks of a season the Austin team had four wins and six arrests. The crimes included burglary of a vehicle; aggravated robbery and tampering with or fabricating physical evidence; aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon; beating up a witness to one of the foregoing crimes; driving while impaired; and drug possession. How did the team deal with the offenders? Hardly with rigor; one criminal transferred to another, lucky school, two were suspended indefinitely – meaning?, and two were reinstated after three-game suspensions. Wasn’t that severe?
After the University of Florida won it’s so-called national football championship, it had had nine players arrested by the middle of the following season. Want additional evidence? Just open your newspapers.
To digress a moment, parents of children shopping for colleges should be cognizant of incidents like these, whether on or off the confines of a campus, and should also research the institution’s crime data, which schools are never anxious to advertise but which federal law compels them to gather and make available.
Let’s assume that a school is so eager for glorious victories and the even more glorious dollars as to perpetuate the present system of paid amateurs. It is still possible, in fact, simple to operate in a sane, circumspect fashion.
The first step is to ascertain more carefully the backgrounds of candidate recruits, because it is unlikely that exposure to a university and the “college education” that explained his presence converts a civil young person into a thug. People with histories of behavioral problems or previous police records should be avoided. Concurrently, much grief can be avoided by the obvious tactic of utilizing existing information. List the chief attributes of athletes that have been guilty of crimes, discover the types that have caused trouble, and refuse to offer any inducements to bringing them. Universities are well staffed with statisticians and information technology specialists to make the development of such a system an easy task.
Further, those that hire university athletes should be made responsible for their decisions; if a person that available information marks as a risk proves to have justified that label, then whoever brought him or her should be fired. This policy would immediately ensure more sensible recruiting of athletes, and university presidents, boards of regents, and the like should promulgate it. In the Montana example, some football coach should have been kicked out on his ear for indirect responsibility for the muggings and larceny. A firing or two, and we’d not find such unacceptable nonsense peppering our newspapers. Like it or not, anyone that pays taxes pays to support the operations of one or more universities. Make yourselves heard. “GET OUT!” should be a battle cry.

BIRDS OF A FEATHER

Do you recall when commercials exhorted us to defeat B.O.? Today, it’s more vital than before, when all one had to do was lather up his or her bod with Lifebuoy soap. Today, suppressing B.O. means voting for John McCain or some other alternative to B.O., Barack Obama.

To me the most significant as well as most frightening aspect of B.O. is the number of America-HATERS with whom he has chosen to surround himself. Among others, we have his great spiritual leader and mentor, Jeremiah Wright (Wrong?), who DAMNS America; we have Bill Ayers, who did his best to DYNAMITE America; and we’ve got Michelle, aspiring to the position of Worst Lady, who is ashamed of the country that propelled this Affirmative Action Princess into prominence. Birds of a feather, folks, birds of a feather.
GOOD GRIEF! THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE! This is a good, a great, country, and it deserves better than being piloted by an inexperienced opportunist that despises it.

A PENNY WAITING FOR ...

There was he, B. O., Barack Obama, grinning only slightly less broadly than he was waving, above a podium placard that read, “Change We Can Believe In.”

The poor placement of the preposition disturbed me less than his foolish grin, itself better than the implication that change is some sort of sure-fire catholicon. Am I averse to change? Why, certainly not. When I ring up the dermatologist’s office and discover the waiting time to an appointment is three months, it seems to me the AMA should change its quota system and allow more of that specialty to trickle though the system; when I’m driven off the roadway by a mammoth truck with an “oversize load” sign as license, I figure the laws that allow my brush with death should be changed; whenever the local high school library looks and sounds like a zoo, I feel that behavior tolerances should be modified there; and when I see a high school grad functionally illiterate or unable to make change for a $5 bill, I’m assured that what passes for education at places in this country needs drastic alteration.

I’ve lived enough years, however, and not many are required, that the fraction of things that change for the worse is too high, and that if government engineers one, the odds on improvement are about 12-5 against. Therefore, anyone that blabbers about the virtue of change for its own sake earns my instant mistrust. Too often it’s “Out of the frying pan, and you know what else.” Furthermore, I feel that those that say, “There are things I don’t like, and B. O. wants change, so I guess I’ll vote for him,” are too irresponsible to have that right. All in all, I feel I have things rather well and have no intention of risking the sacrifice of a good life for a politician’s idle claims.

Change is B. O.’s trademark, though, for his own stated views shift so frequently and drastically, he’s a regular chameleon.

When it comes to exactly what he longs to change and the means by which these revolutionary improvements are to be effected, B.O. is generally enigmatic, if not downright evasive. We must await his election to be informed of the panaceas in store for us. In one category of tactics, however, he has been explicit; like a political Robin Hood, he will tax the living daylights out of most of us. Flushing money down problem holes is standard liberal practice, after all, and in his evanescent Senate career, he has shown himself to be near the top of that heap.

In Yves Chauvire’s opinion, this fellow raises more alarms than were heard on September 11, 2001.

EVEN THE VENUS DE MILO?

Recently I was delighted when a majority of the Supreme Court proved it could read and understand the Second Amendment.

It seems to me the U. S. Constitution is generally a very clear and simple document, and I believe it was composed with clarity an objective. As an example, consider that very amendment; "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to bear arms should not be infringed."”

The colonial army began as a militia with people’s bearing their personal arms, kept in their homes. It seems to me that a person would have to feign obtuseness to suppose that the Second amendment did NOT guarantee the right to keep firearms in one’s home. Surprisingly, however, the loftiest court in the land confirmed the obvious by the narrowest of margins, a single, tenuous vote! Thus, it must be that education at a high-class law school followed by years of judicial experience are, in some cases, sufficient for vitiating common sense.

At any rate, thank goodness, the Supreme Court, in toto, interpreted accurately what the Constitution tells us dummies. Naturally, the right is still abridged by numerous, other, unconstitutional laws, and perhaps some of these soon will be challenged and defeated.

In the post-decision news reporting, journalists concentrated on its implications in CITIES. I wish someone would explain to me why the impact of this ruling – as if criminals had hesitated to store guns in their homes until the Supreme Court had told them it was legal – should be different in Chicago, New York, and Washington, D.C. than it is, say, in Wheatland, Wyoming, Ipava, Illinois, and Canton, New York. All I can imagine is that law-breakers have a predilection for cities; what do you think?

Finally, I wonder about the appellation, “liberal.” After the definition that corresponds to liberal arts, my dictionary shows the following meanings, in order, for the adjective. 2. "Free in bestowing; bountiful, generous, open-hearted.” 3. “Free from restraints; free in speech or action.” 4. “Free from narrow prejudice; open-minded.” It is a great inconsistency, one might say an irony, that, liberal politicians and judges, far from acting in bountiful, restraint-free, open-minded ways, are eternally doing their damnedest to SHRINK OUR RIGHTS! This misnomer is about as far-fetched as a minority faction’s electing to designate itself “Bolsheviks” or a murderous terrorist’s claiming to adhere to a faith named “peace.”

NO ONE PICKS UP THE TAB FOR MY BLUNDERS

I hear there’s a bipartisan stampede to waste my money on rescuing another class of morons. This time it’s the clowns that sought to capitalize on the ever-ballooning housing market. They took loans with payments so large they had no hope of maintaining them, but the tactic was to re-sell them quickly and make oodles of money, so that payment magnitude would never become an issue. Surprise! The ever-ballooning housing market got punctured, they couldn’t sell, the payments crushed them, they lost the properties, and all manner of woe ensued.

Our intrepid legislators, though, are out to purchase votes by throwing green lifelines, woven partially of my dough, to the sorry speculators. No one cushions me when I make bad investments. No one rewards my poor judgment.

I’m sick of doling out welfare to all the enurectic losers, of which there is a surfeit, in this country. When did we become a nation of panhandlers?

LIFE, LIBERTY, AND ?

Have you noticed we scarcely require imported terrorists to assassinate us? While a small army of airport myrmidons deprive 80-year-old women of their shoes and poke their fingers into potentially explosive chocolates, our neighbors may be mass murderers. There are enough homicidal lunatics in this country that al-Qaeda would be smart simply to hire them as contractors and forget infiltration.

Evidenced by recent news one is jeopardized in schools, churches, courtrooms, farmhomes, offices - you name it. None of our citizens has contrived a way to annihilate thousands of us simultaneously, but they have scored in the hundreds, and it's a matter of time until one breaks into the big time.

Thomas Jefferson numbered among our inalienable rights life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I wonder what he would think of their evolution. More and more, life is at the whim of vicious psychotics, liberty is constrained by misdirected measures to thwart foreign terrorists, and try pursuing happiness when a berserk citizen has consigned a loved one to a premature casket.

Government is such a ubiquitous octopus that a person can’t turn around without running afoul of its tentacles. Government or another agency should formulate ways to restore to us what has gone alienable.
Floundering here, we stridently advocate rights the Constitution never recognized while Jefferson’s ideal evaporates. In “Death of a Salesman” Willy Loman shouts, “The woods are on fire!” They’re on fire here and now, and means must be found to quench the conflagration

DO WE NEED A GRAY SCALE?

What’s all this about the first, black, presidential candidate? It seems to me the adjective is applied to many people that are no more black than white. Obama, for instance, had one white parent, one black, so he is accurately described as a mulatto, not a black.

Similarly, there are other words, also not derogatory, for certain other mixes: a person with one black, three white grandparents, is a quadroon, whereas if one has one black, seven white, great-grandparents, s/he is an octoroon. Clearly, this terminology is insufficient for all white/black mixtures, so “partial black” and “partial white” are informative and correct. In its days of minority rule, didn’t South Africa advocate “colored?” Of course, there is another major race, and one can’t neglect American Indians and others, so precision would require additional nomenclature.

In our country, however, we’re continually exhorted, if not rigorously constrained, not to pay undue attention to a person’s race. Some news sources distribute their attention to the attribute in a bifurcated way; if a black or partial black, probably designated “black” in either case, has done something creditable, race is remembered but, otherwise, neglected. Perhaps, then, the best way to reference candidates or any other classes of people is to omit parentage, which is beyond our selecting, anyway.

Whatever you decide to do, don’t call Obama and other partial blacks “black.” Doing so marks you as an illiterate and/or some sort of racist.