Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Say What?!? President Obama Is “The World’s Most Admired Living Man” in 2013

Late in the work day yesterday, I stumbled across a rather ridiculous post on Yahoo! News.

Originally distributed by Reuters, it claimed that “Americans named President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the world’s most admired living man and woman in 2013, according to a Gallup poll released on Monday.”

Now remember: This is the day before New Year’s Eve that this article came out. Not April Fool’s Day. So knowing this, I have to conclude one of two things:

·         Gallup is insane.
·         Americans are insane.

Normally, I trust Gallup. If it says one thing, whether supporting my opinion or refuting it, I pretty much take it at its word. But I’m going to have to side with Americans this time. Because there is no way President Obama should be on that list after this year.

The last five years? (Apparently this is his sixth in a row to top the list.) Sure. I can buy that. Americans are stupid. I mean, we did reelect the guy after a miserably uninspiring first term.

But this year? Come on, people. We’re not that out of our minds!

Reuters did report that “the percentage of those surveyed who choose him as the most admired man fell to 16 percent this year, down from 30 percent in 2012.” I’d say that could be a concerted effort on the part of federal workers everywhere, but I don’t think they make up 16% of the workforce yet.

I think.

Maybe I’m wrong.

(Am I?)

Regardless, this is a President who only managed to eke out a 37% approval rating last month… In a CBS News poll! Translation: It’s a lot worse than 37%.

And even if people “approve” of a President, that doesn’t mean they simultaneously consider them to be “the world’s most admired living man.” Far from it. It just means that they like some majority of what he’s doing.

Notice the word “like,” as in a lesser version of “love,” which admiration (or at least this particular title of admiration) usually denotes.

Putting all of those pieces together and, again, with all due respect to Gallup… It’s insane.

Monday, December 30, 2013

Socialism Is Conquering Former Allies France, England and The United States

The old-school Allied powers aren’t looking so good these days in their current quest to establish socialism, the very economic and societal morass they fought to dethrone all those decades ago.

(And yes, Nazism was a direct result of socialism. So is Communism. What do you think happens when the government agrees to take charge of absolutely everything? Duh.)

In France, for one, President Francois Hollande got court approval to slam millionaires with a 75% tax. Technically, it’s only a 50% income tax. But that’s on top of pre-existent government thievery. So this latest move will rob wealthier citizens of three-quarters of their financial intake.

Yeah. ‘Cause that’s gonna solve the country’s debt issues. I’m sure the millionaires and billionaires will cheerfully submit instead of shutting down their business activities, reducing their income levels to just under the million-euro mark, or renouncing their citizenship.

It’s a full proof plan. Go Hollande! Hitler’s immediate predecessors would have been so proud.

Then there’s England, which is taking obese children away from their families. The UK’s Express reports:

“Increasingly social workers find youngsters being fed a high-fat, sugary diet, which can be just as bad for their health [as undernourishment]. The phenomenon is known as ‘killing with kindness’ because the child craves the unhealthy food and a loving parent feels unable to say no. Professionals say they have to make complex decisions in care proceedings and a family’s gross over-eating can be one of the factors that leads to them losing children.”

Now, that might sound like a good thing if you’re a mindless socialist. But those of us who utilize the thinking parts of our brains understand the dangers inherent in such decisions.

First of all, who determines what fat is? In Japan, after all, I’m considered borderline obese since I wear size eight pants. Secondly, if the government is going to extend the definitions of “abuse” and “neglect” that far out, what’s to say there won’t be other extensions made? First it’s weight, then it’s lifestyle and religion and education… The list could easily go on.

Move on over to The United States, and it’s barely better. Here, The Daily Caller tells us that President Obama has granted nearly $1 million taxpayers bucks to the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) since 2010. But this isn’t just any old slush fund.

Nope. This million funds “The Popular Romance Project,” which seeks to “explore the fascinating, often contradictory origins and influences of popular romance as told in novels, films, comics, advice books, songs, and internet fan fiction…” In other words, they’re studying pornography and tacky romance novels. On the taxpayer’s dime.

This, folks, is socialism: where the government decides what’s right and wrong, what’s worthwhile and worthless, and what we can and can’t spend our money on.

Friday, December 20, 2013

Virginia State Senator Dick Black Says Husband-Wife Rape Isn’t Really Rape

Republican State Senator Dick Black of Virginia is an idiot extraordinaire… Like the kind of idiot who’s actually a danger to others and therefore has no business being in politics. 

Yet he’s considering running for a U.S. House of Representatives seat.

I won’t go so far as to say that’s the worst idea ever. In fact, it probably doesn’t even make the top million list considering how many awful, atrocious ideas there have been throughout history. But it’s still a notable mention when he’s prone to making comments like the following:

“I do not know how on earth you can validly get a conviction of a husband-wife rape where they’re living together, sleeping in the same bed, she’s in a nighty and so forth, there’s no injury, there’s no separation or anything.”

Now I’m not going to read into his statement and say he’s a rapist himself. I doubt he is. Nor will I speculate on whether he abuses his wife in any way, shape or form. For all I know, they’ve been happily married these last 42 years and he’s a model husband.

In fact, he might be so exceptionally, inexcusably egocentric in that happy marriage that he can’t understand anybody having something different. I have no clue, so I won’t bother guessing.

What I am going to do is freak out on him for those indefensible words that came out of his mouth. I mean, what the heck!

No, really. Who spouts that kind of idiocy?

Apparently, Republican State Senator Dick Black of Virginia does.

Just like I don’t have a clue about his general character, I have no idea what the context of that deplorable little speech was. But unless he was quoting somebody else to illustrate how insensitive, backwards and idiotic some people can be, there’s no excuse.

No is no, Mr. Black. And rape is rape. Those lines don’t blur after the wedding vows.


Idiot.

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Duck Dynasty Star Phil Robertson Attacks Liberals' Trending Pet Project

Duck Dynasty.

Yup, I’m going there. Just maybe not in the manner you think. To start, let’s note a few facts…

1.      Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson was interviewed by GQ, during which he expressed negative viewpoints about homosexuality.
2.      A&E, the show’s host network, immediately indefinitely suspended Mr. Robertson, stressing how “disappointed” it was at his expressed “personal beliefs,” which “are not reflected in the series” and “in no way reflect those of A+E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community.”
3.      Liberals like championing specific groups and causes at specific times, even if it’s to the detriment or disregard of other groups and causes.

Think Fact #3 has nothing to do with #1 and #2? Think again.

Once upon a time, women used to be the “minority” that mattered. Everything was an issue of sexism and inequality against the fairer sex (an insult in and of itself, since it was wrong to see that women are more attractive than men), who were always being battered and wronged.

But let’s face it: You can only cry sexism so many times before it begins to get boring. After a time, ladies were no longer hip to support, and so they took a backburner to…

Blacks. Suddenly, it was all about African Americans. Everything was an issue of racism and inequality against the darker skinned (an insult in and of itself, since we can’t admit that human beings come in varying skin shades), who were always seeming to be battered and wronged.

But guess what? You can only cry racism so much before it gets boring too. So as time progressed, African Americans became old hat as well to be replaced by…

The LGBT crowd. These days, it’s rainbow this and pride that. Everything is an issue of homophobia and inequality against homosexuals (now – I kid you not – an insult in and of itself, because… because liberals are nuts), who are always seeming to be battered and wronged.

But homosexuals shouldn’t get too comfy either. They’ll end up getting “boring” soon enough, likely losing their “battered and wronged” status to illegal immigrants, who are starting to trend.

None of these movements championing one group or another are at all based on compassion or nobility. They’re based on people desperately trying to fit in and feel good about themselves, which makes them entirely selfish. Otherwise, why does nobody care these days when women get treated like sex objects or blacks find it so much more difficult to make the cut on SNL?

I’m just saying… If Phil Robertson had said something against women or blacks, he probably would have received a much lighter reprimand, if any at all. Because liberals don't really care about their pet projects. If they did, they'd stick with them every once in a while.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Barbara Walters Admits to Piers Morgan She Expected Obama to Be “The Next Messiah”

Here’s a transcript of Barbara Walters on Piers Morgan Live yesterday, graciously provided to us by Newsbusters:

PIERS MORGAN: You have interviewed every president of my lifetime. Why is Obama facing so much opposition now? Why is he struggling so much to really fulfill the great flame of ambition and excitement that he was elected on originally in 2009?

BARBARA WALTERS: Well, you've touched on it to a degree. He made so many promises. We thought that he was going to be - I shouldn't say this at Christmastime, but - the next messiah. And the whole ObamaCare, or whatever you want to call it, the Affordable Health Act, it just hasn't worked for him, and he’s stumbled around on it, and people feel very disappointed because they expected more.

It's very difficult when the expectations for you are very high. You're almost better off when they are low and then they rise and rise. His were very high and they’ve dropped. But you know, he still has several years to go. What does he have, three years, Piers? And, you know, there will be a lot of changes, one thinks in that time.

Sure Barbara. He only royally screwed up the first five years… lying to us how many times? Shifting the blame how many times? Lousing things up to the point of actually getting people killed how many times?

But yup! There’s still room for hope! I mean, he still has three years left to get it right.

This kind of faith is the stuff cults are made of. It’s also the definition of insanity.

Newsbusters Editor Noel Sheppard adds the following thoughts:

Walters “admitting that she and others expected Obama to be the next messiah” is “quite a thing to say on the very day a new poll found this president having the lowest approval rating of any since Nixon.

“It’s also worth noting that this came the day after the Washington Post said Obama was responsible for three of the top ten biggest Pinocchios of the year, and five days after PolitiFact awarded him the Lie of the Year.”

Obama might not be able to manage much in the way of meeting messianic expectations, but he certainly seems good at stooping to pathetic new lows.

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Fox News Beats Out Cable Competitors in a Landslide

The news for 2013 is out in more ways than one. And Fox News decidedly makes the cut.

While it and its competitors’ ratings did fall compared to the hype of election year 2012, Fox News still won out among cable-news networks with an average 1.774 million primetime viewers per day.

In comparison, MSNBC had a mere 645,000, CNN took third place with 578,000 and HLN (whatever that is) managed 142,000. So Fox brought in more daily viewership than its top three competitors.

Combined.

If you’re a Fox News fan, don’t celebrate quite yet though. While it may be nice to know that hatemongers like MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and CNN’s Piers Morgan are getting less and less attention, this is more than likely due to two different factors.

For one, yes: President Obama’s increasingly poor public image has woken some people up so that they’re throwing in the towel. They’re giving up on MSNBC, CNN and their fellow profligate propaganda pushers. Possibly, these viewers are even alert enough now to set aside their previous prejudices and give Fox News a try.

In that case, more power to them. Not that Fox News is the end-all and be-all of trustworthiness, but expanding your information-gathering antennae is rarely a bad thing.

What isn’t so much of a plus is this… I think the main reason the mainstream media’s numbers have tanked so badly over the last few years is because of the snowball effect, as it were. They set us down a slippery slope decades ago, and now they – and the rest of society – are paying the price.

Their style of intentional and militant ignorance cultivates more of the same. So in large part thanks to them, people are growing stupider by the day. And stupid people would much rather watch nothing but TV shows that don’t even pretend to make them think. It’s an epidemic.

Add to that a societal fixation on Hollywood-style sexuality and you’ve got a whole new mutant on your hands: one that could really, really, really care less about the world around it, since it’s too busy trying to “get some” to worry about getting anything else: like a fully-functioning brain.

So congratulations, Fox News. Just don’t get too comfy on that pedestal.

We still have a long ways to go.

Monday, December 16, 2013

Playing the Blame Game After 18-Year-Old Shoots Student and Self at Colorado School

Almost exactly one year to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, we get another one, this time at Arapahoe High School in Colorado.

It was a teenager who went off the deep end this time: 18-year-old Karl Halverson Pierson, who had allegedly just been kicked off the debate team. Because of that, he entered his high school armed with a shotgun, a machete and Molotov cocktails, ultimately putting 17-year-old Claire Davis into a coma and killing himself.

It’s sick and pointless and he’s probably in hell now. I don’t like saying that, but it’s probably true nonetheless. Regardless of whether this kid was or wasn’t a part of a Christian family, he behaved in a manner completely antithetical to Christian values that put him in direct opposition to the Christian God.

So don’t try blaming Christianity in this tragedy. God did not tell Pierson to do what he did.

Yet considering how this comes in the wake of too many other acts of violence committed by too many young people armed with guns, knives, bombs or merely their fists (as in the case of the knockout game sweeping the country… and yes, people have died because of it), I think I’m more than justified in asking…

What in the world is wrong with our culture!

Last month, I overheard a fascinating conversation by two retirees. The man was talking about his past in Catholic school, where he was beaten up by nuns on numerous occasions.

His conclusion? He flat-out stated that he didn’t condone the abuse whatsoever, but he learned how to handle his feelings through the experience… something he noted young people today don’t understand: “They don’t know how to handle anything. If somebody picks on them, they grab a gun, go into school and shoot it up or something.”

Now, admittedly, children don’t always do exactly that. Statistically speaking, we don’t have that many school shootings (though even one is more than enough). Yet the man is completely correct in noting the difference between his childhood and childhood today. The levels of kids and young adults who commit suicide or “have” to be put on drugs or turn to life of crime is exceedingly high.

What else can we conclude but that our youth aren’t learning to cope with life!

Again, you can’t blame the Christian God. Not when schools are going out of their way to avoid mentioning him. And don’t try blaming guns either… Back in the retiree’s day, gun ownership levels were much higher and school shootings were much, much, much lower.

So sure, let’s play the blame game when there’s plenty of blame to go around. But if we’re going to start pointing fingers, let’s at least do it right so we can avoid even more school shootings.

Friday, December 13, 2013

www.Fatherhood.gov Is One Giant Waste of Taxpayers’ Money

Did you know there’s a government website designed to train men how to be fathers?

Yeah, I didn’t know that either until I paid proper attention to a billboard I’ve been passing for weeks on my way to work.

It’s of Despicable Me’s villainous hero (or heroic villain) being all warm and fatherly with his three adopted daughters. The ginormous sign then reads: “TAKE TIME TO BE A DAD TODAY,” followed by the website domain: Fatherhood.gov.

Back before I noticed the “Fatherhood.gov” part, I thought the billboard was really quite cute.

Now I find it exceedingly sad, not to mention one giant waste of taxpayers’ money.

That might sound harsh considering the good and proper behavior it’s allegedly trying to promote, but think about it for a minute…

You really think that any significant number of irresponsible, absent or otherwise bad fathers are going to see that billboard, go to that website and have some significant change of heart?

Heck, the chances of them going to www.Fatherhood.gov at all, much less putting any of its words of wisdom into practice are doubtlessly exceedingly small when there are so many distractions and temptations out there to be a bad father. To name a few:

·         Pornography
·         Excessive alcohol consumption
·         Unhealthy commitment levels to work
·         Mounting disappointments that become so much easier to focus on than continuing to try

Like I said, that’s only a few and just off the top of my head. There are plenty of others.

And that’s among the middle class brackets. Sorry to say, but the whole physically absentee father thing is a heck of a lot more prevalent among the lower classes, while emotional vacancy is equally or more common among those better off.

A billboard or a website isn’t going to fix the problem when the problem is much deeper than ignorance. The problem is a societal fixation on all the wrong paths in the pursuit of fulfillment.

Considering that the government is one giant part of that problem, it stands to reason that it’s standing in the way of any solution.


Which putss www.Fatherhood.gov solidly into the Giant Waste of Taxpayers’ Dollars category.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

More Dirt on President Obama’s Bad Behavior at Nelson Mandela’s Memorial Service

Yesterday, I wrote about President Obama posing for Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt’s “selfy” at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service.

The article I based that post on was from the UK’s Daily Mail, a site I’m well used to by now. I’m comfortable with the quality of journalism there that I oftentimes use it as reliable source.

But that doesn’t mean I trust it completely. I don’t give any news outlet – or person, for that matter – my full faith. Everyone’s fallible with some level of agenda, which is why God gave us individual brains to use instead of one giant collective, socialist think tank.

I try to use my own personal individual brain whenever possible, even when reading dirt about people I don’t care for.

So I remained somewhat skeptical while I read the following paragraphs from the Daily Mail piece:

“As the trio posed for the mobile phone snap, Obama's wife Michelle sat alongside her husband looking somewhat stony faced.

“Her mood didn't improve as Mr Obama and Ms Thorning-Schmidt talked through the order of service and shared a joke.

“And it seems that the frosty faced First Lady was so unimpressed with her husband's behaviour that she eventually put an end to the fun.

“A photo sequence which later went viral online appears to show Michelle swapping seats to sit between Barack and Ms Thorning-Schmidt.”

(Sorry about the spelling and grammar “mistakes;” it is British after all.)

The article showed plenty of proof of Mrs. Obama looking rigidly irritated with the conduct, so I threw mention of that factoid into my blog. But it didn’t have any visual account of the “photo sequence which later went viral online… show[ing] Michelle swapping seats to sit between Barack and Ms Thorning-Schmidt.” So I refrained from making any such mention myself, figuring that the conservative publication was spreading rumors instead of reporting facts.

Thanks to today’s New York Post, however, it seems that my caution was understandable but ultimately incorrect. It has a snapshot of Michelle Obama sitting cheerlessly between her suddenly solemn husband and a Danish prime minister who’s engrossed with her phone.

And judging by the hundreds of hits my insignificant little blog post got yesterday, the whole entire world is talking about it.

Looks like somebody’s going to be sleeping on the presidential couch for a while.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Selfish Obama Poses for Selfy During Nelson Mandela’s Memorial Service

On Thursday, August 29, 2012, I wrote a blog about selfies, which are personally snapped pictures of oneself. Those can be fun and harmless, but I was focusing on the kind of selfy taken by inexcusably ignorant young people at exceedingly inappropriate places, such as the Holocaust Memorial, Chernobyl, Auschwitz and funerals.

Back then, I never imagined I’d be writing another article about selfies, only this time involving President Obama.

But I guess it makes sense, doesn’t it? I mean, only really immature, really egotistical… ummm… individuals would seriously contemplate documenting themselves smiling and laughing, looking cute or cool, at the site of a personal or global tragedy.

Put like that, I suppose I’m only surprised why I didn’t automatically peg the President for the selfish selfy type. He’s certainly got the arrogance and insensitivity for it.

Now, to be perfectly fair, he wasn’t the one who snapped the picture at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service in Johannesburg, South Africa. That would be Denmark’s Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who posed for her own smartphone camera with a grinning Obama and Great Britain Prime Minister David Cameron leaning in close on either shoulder for the shot.

But like I said, Obama is clearly a willing participant in this private little party. Judging by the pictures taken, he’s not feeling uncomfortable about this pose at all. Non-selfy photos from a reporter’s lens the three of them laughing over the picture like they’re three tipsy college students at a bar instead of three world leaders at a funeral.

Non-selfy photos from a reporter’s lens actually show them being something less than solemn a few times throughout the service, especially President Obama and Thorning-Schmidt.

Also worth noting is how First Lady Michelle Obama sat by in stony silence while these easy exchanges are going on.

Considering her own egotistical outlook on life, I’m going to say she wasn’t disapproving of her husband’s lack of respect per se. At least not towards Mandela and his family.

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Coldest Temperature Record Hit in 2010 With a Near Repeat This July

Since it’s snowing outside and Global Warming nitwits are still being nitwitty, I’m going to link to an AP story that starts out astoundingly intelligent. Even insightful, I dare say.

Starts, mind you, not finishes. But considering that these articles usually start out stupid and end equally inane, I’d say this break from tradition deserves an honorable mention. Or something...

“Feeling chilly? Here's cold comfort: You could be in East Antarctica which new data says set a record for ‘soul-crushing’ cold.

“Try 135.8 degrees Fahrenheit below zero; that's 93.2 degrees below zero Celsius, which sounds only slightly toastier. Better yet, don't try it. That's so cold scientists say it hurts to breathe.

“A new look at NASA satellite data revealed that Earth set a new record for coldest temperature recorded. It happened in August 2010 when it hit -135.8 degrees. Then on July 31 of this year, it came close again: -135.3 degrees.

“The old record had been -128.6 degrees, which is -89.2 degrees Celsius.

“Ice scientist Ted Scambos at the National Snow and Ice Data Center said the new record is ‘50 degrees colder than anything that has ever been seen in Alaska or Siberia or certainly North Dakota.’

“‘It's more like you'd see on Mars on a nice summer day in the poles,’ Scambos said, from the American Geophysical Union scientific meeting in San Francisco Monday, where he announced the data. ‘I'm confident that these pockets are the coldest places on Earth.’”

Shocking that they still exist at all, huh? I mean, what with global warming happening and all. Fortunately, the story addresses this very question I have several paragraphs later…

(I don’t know what I would have ever done if it hadn’t!)

“Just because one spot on Earth has set records for cold that has little to do with global warming because it is one spot in one place, said Waleed Abdalati, an ice scientist at the University of Colorado and NASA's former chief scientist. Both Abdalati, who wasn't part of the measurement team, and Scambos said this is likely an unusual random reading in a place that hasn't been measured much before and could have been colder or hotter in the past and we wouldn't know.

“‘It does speak to the range of conditions on this Earth, some of which we haven't been able to observe,’ Abdalati said.”

So wait. I’m confused. He’s saying that scientists don’t know everything?

Considering how brilliant they’ve been about such matters as global warming while it’s snowing – again – in early December, I never would have guessed they were less than omniscient.

Monday, December 9, 2013

Liberals Are Always Right… About Global Warming… About Obamacare… About Everything!

Liberals are always right.

No ifs, ands or buts about it. They’re always right. Even when they’re wrong.

Actually, they’re right especially when they’re wrong! Which makes them right all the time.

The snow we’re experiencing along the East Coast today after the Midwest got coated last week? That’s all thanks to global warming. Britain’s Daily Star reports that “many people could die as extreme weather” – including crazy snowstorms – “becomes common” over the next thirty years.

So it’s snowing because it’s getting so darn hot out there?

Where’s my bikini and beach towel!

Then again, better leave those in the closet where they belong. Not because it’s snowing though. To quote Alice in Wonderland’s Mad Hatter, “Don’t let’s be silly.” It’s because of Obamacare.

If I get sunburned while tanning out under the snowy skies (or if I get frostbite despite the underlying balmy temps we’re told about), I might not be able to get treated by my doctor.

Along with jacking up prices astronomically, outlawing entire previous plans and featuring one really incompetent website, Obamacare offers limited access to decent doctors and hospitals.

They’re just too expensive for a piece of communist propaganda to uphold, you see.

But that doesn’t mean the President or any of his minions lied! Nope, they were right in everything they said about it before it debuted as a dangerous debacle; and they’re right now when they say whatever they’re saying now.

Obamacare architect Zeke Emanuel went on Fox News yesterday, where Chris Wallace had this exchange with him (transcript provided by The Weekly Standard):

Wallace: President Obama famously promised, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Doesn’t that turn out to be just as false, just as misleading, as his promise about if you like your plan, you can keep your plan? Isn’t it a fact, sir, that a number, most, in fact, of the Obamacare health plans that are being offered on the exchanges exclude a number of doctors and hospitals to lower costs?

Emanuel: The president never said you were going to have unlimited choice of any doctor in the country you want to go to.

Wallace: No. He asked a question. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Did he not say that, sir?

Emanuel: He didn’t say you could have unlimited choice.

Wallace: It’s a simple yes or no question. Did he say if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor?

Emanuel: Yes. But look, if you want to pay more for an insurance company that covers your doctor, you can do that. This is a matter of choice…

Yup. Totally. Choice. For the ultra-wealthy only. But that’s beside the point.

The point is that liberals are right. Even when they’re so incredibly, outlandishly, gravely wrong.

Friday, December 6, 2013

College Students and Other Young Adults Are Getting Sick of Obamacare

It looks like college students and recent to semi-recent graduates are finally waking up and smelling the Obamacare… which doesn’t smell anything like roses.

Yesterday, National Review Online’s John Fund reported growing dissatisfaction about the healthcare mandate among young adults. Since he listed a lot of important information, I’m not even going to bother trying to summarize the article. Instead, here are the five most telling paragraphs:

“At the heart of the health-care law is the following premise: Enough young and healthy people will sign up for new health insurance through the government’s excuse for a website to provide enough income for insurance companies so the planned subsidies to older and sicker uninsured people can keep flowing.

“About 40 percent of those who sign up for new plans will have to be under 35 for this cost-shifting scheme to work. If they’re not, then to avoid having everyone’s premiums start to dramatically spike upwards, Obama may have to bail out insurance companies, the least popular and least trusted private-sector provider of services outside of used-car lots. Explaining that to voters may be beyond anyone’s rhetorical gifts.

“Obama’s most pressing problem is that young people aren’t buying into his sales pitch. A new Harvard University Institute of Politics poll of those under 30 years of age has devastating news for Obamacare.

“Only 29 percent of uninsured young people say they will definitely (13 percent) or likely (16 percent) enroll in new plans via the exchanges. Despite an avalanche of public-service ads, thousands of ‘navigators’ – glorified sales reps – recruited from Obama-friendly nonprofits, and numerous celebrity endorsements, the product isn’t moving.

“The Harvard study found that the president’s job approval among young people is down to 41 percent. A full 57 percent of young people now oppose Obamacare, with those believing it will lower the quality of health care outnumbering those who think it will improve the quality by more than two to one.”

It’s nice to see they’re starting to acknowledge reality.

It’s just overwhelmingly sad it took something as disastrous, destructive and demeaning as Obamacare to get them to this point.

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Why Don’t More Novels Depict Abortion as a Good Thing?

I was reading a few pages of the latest novel from my to-be-read stack this morning, when an interesting thought about abortion came to mind.

The book in question, “When in Doubt, Add Butter” by Beth Harbison, isn’t really all that well written, I’m sorry to say. The character’s thoughts and philosophies often contradict themselves and Harbison uses a lot of run-on sentences that muddle up the story’s flow.

(Incidentally, this critique is coming from someone who used to consider herself the queen of run-on sentences. Apparently, I’ve been deposed.)

Yet the last few pages presented some interesting philosophical thoughts to consider, including a few on abortion. Because, you see, the main character shares how she got pregnant at 17.

Her boyfriend was less than supportive and told her to “take care of it.” Yet, despite how scared and lost she felt, she kept the baby anyway.

Now I’m a bookworm. I read a lot of books every year. Modern fiction, fantasy, sci-fi, historical, mystery, chicklit… You name it and I’ve probably been there, read that.

Even so, I can’t say I’ve ever read a novel where abortion was referred to in glowing terms. Which is surprising, considering how the theme of unwanted pregnancies is hardly underused.

Almost always, if a character does get inconveniently pregnant, she ends up keeping the baby. If not, then she loses it through natural means instead of murder. In one case that comes to mind, she’s forced into a doctor’s hands by bad parents.

In fact, I can only think of a single book where a main character – or a character at all – came even close to thinking it a good thing. Sadly, I can’t remember the name of this novel, but I remember the heroine being forcibly given something to end her pregnancy and then doling out similar drugs to more willing women, feeling badly every time she did.

But why?

If abortion is such a beautiful option, a right women are supposed to claim regardless of whether we ever actually act on it or not, then why doesn’t our entertainment reflect such notions? Why don’t we depict our heroines as proudly or even casually walking up to their local abortion clinics fetus-bound and walking out free and happy?

Why isn’t it a commonplace feature in comedies and dramas alike?

Maybe it’s because abortion is such a decided horror that it takes a decidedly horrible person to even think about putting it out there as anything but what it really is.

Which is murder.

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

TipsForJesus Rewards Servers With Insane Amount of Money!!

Ok, I have to say it…

Aw!!!!!

I’m actually tearing up right now as I write this, which is why I’m going to keep the post as brief as possible.

Somebody with an insanely high credit limit is going around leaving excessively high tips for servers, stamping each signed receipt with @tipsforjesus.

Now when I say excessively high tips, I’m talking about excessively high tips. Like $3,000, $5,000 and even $10,000 a pop.

That’s insane!

It’s also one of the sweetest things I have ever heard. As a former server myself, I can’t help but smile thinking about the men and women who got those humongous surprises.

I hope it puts a smile on your face too!

(If you're frowning skeptically instead, don't take my word for it... Read more about @tipsforjesus right here.)

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

We Know It’s Bad When CNBC Reports Actual Facts About Obamacare

This morning, I want to quote the first few paragraphs of a CNBC article about Obamacare.

Because it is a CNBC article, we know there isn’t a conservatively designed word in it. So when it reports a critical analysis of anything Obama instead of its usual free-spirited opinion, we know we can take it about as seriously as anything that comes down the mainstream media pike.

And with this article, starkly named “No security ever built into Obamacare site: Hacker,” CNBC has gone really, really critical.

“It could take a year to secure the risk of ‘high exposures’ of personal information on the federal Obamacare online exchange, a cybersecurity expert told CNBC on Monday.

“‘When you develop a website, you develop it with security in mind. And it doesn't appear to have happened this time,’ said David Kennedy, a so-called ‘white hat’ hacker who tests online security by breaching websites. He testified on Capitol Hill about the flaws of HealthCare.gov last week.

“‘It's really hard to go back and fix the security around it because security wasn't built into it,’ said Kennedy, chief executive of TrustedSec. ‘We're talking multiple months to over a year to at least address some of the critical-to-high exposures on the website itself.’

“According to the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversaw the implementation of the website, the components used to build the site are compliant with standards set by Federal security authorities.”

First of all: Ouch! Writer Matthew J. Belvedere might be about to get fired for that factual display! Worse yet, CNBC could lose its creditability among truth-hating liberals.

Secondly: I’d say “what the heck” but nothing surprises me anymore about this stupid law or this stupid website. It’s a disaster. It always was a disaster. It always will be a disaster. Moving on…

Third: There are three immediate and glaring red flags raised by that last sentence I quoted, each of which – on their own, much less put together – explain just why this website is such a failure:

·         “According to the Department of Health and Human Services…” – It’s involved. Enough said.
·         “… which oversaw the implementation of the website…” – It’s really involved. Even worse!
·         “… the components used to build the site are compliant with standards set by Federal security authorities.” – And it’s working off of federal regulations. So basically, this thing ain’t ever gonna work.

Hey, don’t blame me for the negative report. I’m just quoting CNBC.

Monday, December 2, 2013

The African American Label Is a Dangerous One

There’s a humongous mural painted on the side of a building I pass going into the city.

Considering its location, it’s not at all surprising that it only features black people. But what is much more striking is how it includes a giant globe turned to show the entire continent of Africa.

That placement depicting American citizens in an American city isn’t a coincidence, of course. It’s a blatant and unhappy reflection of the education of the African American mind.

Sorry if that’s offensive.

It’s true nonetheless.

Blacks in America are trained to automatically first focus on the color of their skin. They’re told to put their genders, personalities, gifts and abilities, preferences and location on the back burner to being black.

That makes them different from all of the Caucasians, Asians, Native Americans, Middle Easterners, etc. who share this country of ours. For better or – usually – worse, blacks living in the U.S.A. are not Americans; they’re African Americans.

This distinction keeps them – and anybody who insists on following that same flawed focus – from truly enjoying life.

Because yes, some of us are black and some of us are white. Some of us have certain facial features and some of us have others. But that’s just one facet of what makes us who we are. We’re each a giant hodge-podge of characteristics that ultimately make us individually unique.

For instance, there is no other person out there who has pale skin, dark brown curly hair, strong nails, a penchant for writing, a hatred of the Baltimore Ravens, a love of Tinkerbell, a sarcastic sense of humor and a strong faith in God, who has written seven full-length novels and runs her own side business at www.InnovativeEditing.com.

Moreover, that’s the short list! Clearly, there’s so much more to me than just my pale skin, just like there’s so much more to every other American – or person in general – regardless of pigmentation.

We are doing a giant disservice to our society by focusing on skin color over everything else. And I don’t understand why this error isn’t more obvious.