Thursday, September 29, 2016

Saudi Arabian Royalty Makes American Elites Look Like Pussycats

Who’s the most spoiled, stupid brat of an American you can think of off the top of your head?

Ariana Grande immediately comes to mind, but since she’s a media darling, let’s go with Paris Hilton instead – back in her heyday with that stupid show The Simple Life.

Now, Paris Hilton grew up with mega money and apparently didn’t hear the word no nearly enough considering what a pampered narcissist she became. That’s why:

·         In September 2006, she was arrested for drunk driving.
·         In January 2007, she was caught driving on a suspended license.
·         In February, she was caught driving on a suspended license going 70 mph in a 35-mph zone without headlights at night.
·         On May 4, she was sentenced to 45 days in jail for that string of transgressions but ended up spending two days there before being resentenced to mere home confinement, a ruling that was rescinded once again by another judge, who sent the little brat back to jail, prompting her to scream “It’s not right!” in anguished protest inside the courtroom.

And yet, even with all that pathetic-ness, Paris Hilton still has some maturity points to flaunt over the unnamed Saudi Arabian princess in France who just accused a decorator of unprofessional behavior, had her bodyguards bind and beat him, and then made him kiss her feet.

This all happened after she saw him photograph the workspace she’d hired him to trick out. Automatically assuming he was snapping pictures to sell online, the princess allegedly told her security team to “kill this dog. He doesn’t deserve to live.”

Because, as everyone knows, unprofessional behavior deserves the death penalty. That rule’s right up there with thieves get their hands lopped off and royalty gets to do whatever it wants.

This is hardly the first time Saudi royalty has behaved in an unacceptable and downright illegal manner. Last September, a Saudi Prince in California was accused of sexually assaulting a female employee; there was another royal-family-related rape accusation out in Utah; and a Saudi princess was accused of participating in a human trafficking ring back in 2013.

Those are just the ones that get publicized, of course. Plenty more get swept under the rug.

According to The Heritage Foundation’s Bret Schaefer, as quoted on Fox News, “There is no doubt there are instances of diplomats behaving badly. And the more repressive and dictatorial the government is, the more they feel like they can get away with that type of reprehensible behavior.”

That makes sense. And so does this:

Contrary to everything the liberal left likes to tell us, it seems that Americans – even spoiled, stupid American brats like Paris Hilton – aren’t the worst thing this world has to offer after all.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

While We’re Making Reparations to African Americans…

“The history of slavery in the United States justifies reparations for African Americans, argues a recent report by a U.N.-affiliated group based in Geneva,” declares a Washington Post article.

“This conclusion was part of a study by the United Nations’ Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, a body that reports to the international organization’s High Commissioner on Human Rights. The group of experts, which includes leading human rights lawyers from around the world, presented its findings to the United Nations Human Rights Council on Monday, pointing to the continuing link between present injustices and the dark chapters of American history.”

Okay. You know what? Let’s say they win.

Let’s forget how the “Group of Experts on People of African Descent” sounds like a pretentiously long name to obscure general uselessness. And let’s forget that the United Nations is an over-bloated bureaucracy that makes tons of money by shaking its head at the world’s grossest human rights violations.

Let’s even forget that African Americans kill each other a living hell of a lot more than cops do (just Google “Baltimore shootings” for proof), and that the U.S. runs welfare and affirmative action programs to pay for its past, and that it has an African American president.

Instead, let’s just say that, yes, today’s African Americans deserve reparations for what their ancestors suffered generations ago.

Fine then. In that case, Great Britain also owes a ton of blacks a ton of stuff. So does France. And Spain. And Portugal. And all those nations that colonized willy-nilly back in the day.

For that matter, the descendants of the Africans who sold their fellow Africans into slavery those hundreds of years ago need to pitch in. ‘Cause there were a lot of those jerks.

While we’re going down the list and making leaps of logic, Great Britain should help pay America’s costs on top of its own since America used to be British. Sure, we’re not anymore just like slavery doesn’t exist anymore. But there are consequences to formerly being British: a “continuing link between present injustices” and those “dark chapters of American history.”

Speaking of which, the British owe Americans in general for all the oppression they meted out to us during the Revolutionary War: We’re talking rapes, murders, lootings, appropriations, impoverishments… Not a shiny, happy set of circumstances.

Meanwhile, Great Britain and the U.S. should probably pay something to the Irish for kidnapping them, selling them as chattel, forcing them to procreate and ripping families apart.

And how about all those little kiddies during the industrial revolution we’re taught about? Weren’t they underpaid, overworked and subjected to hideously dangerous work conditions all for the profit of some corporate overlords?

There’s also the Native Americans to consider. And the French were utterly wretched to the British during the 12th century, treating them like serfs they could use and abuse at will. And the Japanese were utterly wretched to the Chinese just last century.

And how about the Jews? Their entire history seems to be one of people being utterly wretched to them or at least trying to be utterly wretched to them.

Nor can we forget African atrocities against Africans and South American atrocities against South Americans and Middle Eastern atrocities against Middle Easterners over just the last century or two.

So really, maybe the whole wide world should just put all its money into one big pot and hand it out to anyone who can claim any kind of injustice in their history.

And maybe the United Nations and its pretentious branches and affiliations should set a great example and empty their pockets first.

Friday, September 23, 2016

Terrorism and Riots: The United States of America’s “New Normal”

London’s first Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan, was visiting his Big Apple counterpart Mayor Bill de Blasio when the New York City and New Jersey bombings were all over the news mid-month.

Between that and London experiencing its own recent terrorist attack, it makes sense that the American media wanted to ask him questions about terrorism. What doesn’t make sense is the response he gave, which was that:

Terrorist attacks are “part and parcel of life in a big city.”

In other words, get used to the new normal.

That’s a downright unacceptable response from a leader, completely lacking in compassion for the victims and doing nothing to discourage future victimizers.

It’s that kind of mismanagement – or non-management – that makes terrorism the new normal, rather like how mismanagement – or non-management or evil management – has made rioting the new normal across the United States.

Our most recent riots, of course, have been down in Charlotte, North Carolina, which had to call on the National Guard last night after two previous nights of rioting following the shooting of Keith Lamont Scott, a black man, by a police officer.

Despite said police officer being black, too, here are some of the #BlackLivesMatter-style “protests” that ensued:

·         Two people were shot, with at least one of them being shot fatally by a fellow citizen.
·         Keith Lamont Scott’s brother went on record as saying, “I just know that all white people are f*cking devils. All white cops are f*cking devils, and white people.”
·         Rioters tried to throw a presumably white news photographer into a raging fire they’d either set or were doing nothing to put out.
·         Rioters brutally assaulted a man despite his pleas for mercy.
·         Rioters kicked in apartment building windows. Because, you know, that’s a great way to stick it to the police.

So basically, what happened in Charlotte is the same stuff that happened in Milwaukee, Baltimore, Ferguson, etc. Because, again, rioting – like terrorism – is the new normal.

If that’s how our leaders want to manage or mismanage their responsibilities, then here’s a new normal I’d like to propose:


Because this new normal certainly isn’t worth funding.

Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Another Black Man Shot by Police. Another Day of Riots. Let’s Face the Facts.

Down in Charlotte, North Carolina, we have another case of another police officershooting another black man and another neighborhood erupting into another night of violent riots.

According to the police, they were serving a warrant when the unconnected Keith Lamont Scott got out of his car with a gun.

According to protestors, Scott was disabled and got out of his car holding nothing more than a book.

Considering how intensely, intentionally and dangerously inaccurate the narratives that came out of the Trayvon Martin shooting in Florida, the Michael Brown shooting in Missouri, the Freddie Gray shooting in Maryland, the Sylville Smith shooting in Wisconsin and the extreme majority of the other high-profile police shootings in the last few years, let’s face it…

Keith Lamont Scott probably had a gun, not a book.

Regardless, the resulting riots are fueled by a false narrative: the narrative that America is inherently racist, that government-legalized and society-condoned black slavery still essentially exists, and that police go around shooting defenseless black victims because that’s their favorite sport.

According to rioters, cops wake up every morning, look in the mirror and say, “Gosh, I hope I kill a black man today!”

If that sounds ridiculous, it’s because it is. And so are these riots. Facts are facts, people. No matter if they want to be acknowledged, these realities hold true:

·         Police shoot bad guys who are hurting or trying to hurt others. That’s the rule. The exception is when they abuse their power to the extent that they destroy innocent lives. It happens, but it’s not the norm.
·         Inner cities, on the other hand – where most of these nationally broadcasted deaths are happening – are dangerous. Not because police are shooting average citizens but because average citizens are shooting and stabbing and raping and otherwise abusing their fellow average citizens.
·         Shouting “We out like the Taliban” while you’re rioting isn’t the best way to protest an alleged atrocity.
·         The cop who shot Keith Lamont Scott was black.

Those are the facts involved with the Charlotte, North Carolina shooting and riots.

Whether you like it or not.

Monday, September 19, 2016

New York City Marks Another Muslim-Related Act of Terror

It’s not a Muslim-related act of terror.

It’s not a Muslim-related act of terror.

That was the official report out of New York City after an explosion in Manhattan yesterday and another one in New Jersey, which bore similar enough markings to make them look connected.

And so, while the chances seemed 99 to 1 that it was a Muslim-related act of terror, I held off on writing this blog.

Yet sure enough, the Daily News is now reporting that “Ahmad Khan Rahami, 28, is the first person identified in connection with the incident. New York City Mayor de Blasio said Rahami is believed to be armed and dangerous.

“Rahami is a naturalized United States citizen who was born in Afghanistan, according to the FBI.”

What more is there to say? Really?

Hasn’t it all already been said?

Isn’t it obvious?

We have a problem with Muslim-related acts of terror.

And after the who-even-knowns-how-many times the United States alone has suffered under terrorist attacks in just the last eight years, anyone who doesn’t have their hands over their ears and their eyes squidged shut knows that we have a major problem here.

It’s a national tragedy that our leaders refuse to acknowledge the truth.

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Homeless Encampments Growing in a Supposedly Health Economy

This summer, on my way down Route 40 into the heart of Baltimore city, I’ve noticed a little homeless encampment of maybe seven tents that never used to be there.

They’re pretty much permanently parked too. Out for all to see, they maybe move once every month or two when – I assume – they’re told to pack it up and vacate public property. But give it a day or two, and they’re right back there all over again.

Then, this morning, I stumbled onto an article on Zero Hedge, which says:

“Just like during the last economic crisis, homeless encampments are popping up all over the nation as poverty grows at a very alarming rate. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, more than half a million people are homeless in America right now, but that figure is increasing by the day.”

Moreover, “it isn’t just adults that we are talking about. It has been reported that the number of homeless children in this country has risen by 60% since the last recession, and Poverty USA says that a total of 1.6 million children slept either in a homeless shelter or in some other form of emergency housing at some point last year.”

And here’s what I felt to be the real kicker: “Yes, the stock market may have been experiencing a temporary boom for the last couple of years, but for those on the low end of the economic scale, things have just continued to deteriorate.”

The reason why I found that particularly profound was because of what I addressed in yesterday’s article: I watch the stock market for my 9-5. And what it’s telling me is that the rich with their investment portfolios and the shrinking middle class with their 401(k)s, whatever those are worth, are completely dependent right now on the Federal government’s heavy-handed interference in the Federal Reserve’s decision to keep national interest rates near zero.

As for the growing numbers of poor Americans? They’re apparently not worth any serious attention from our policymakers.

None of this is any indication of a sign of a healthy economy. It doesn’t point to a 4.9% unemployment rate either. And it’s certainly not a sign of successful policies coming from our leaders.

What it is? It’s pathetic. And so is our government.

Monday, September 12, 2016

What the Fearful Markets Seem to Say About the U.S. Economy

My 9-5 job is working for a financial publishing company, so I follow the markets on a regular basis. And this morning, as I was taking a peak at the markets on Yahoo! Finance, I noticed something.

Now, at the time, the Dow was down 116 points. It’s since climbed to a negative $35, so it might still end the day positive. But it did drop almost 300 points on Friday on no news other than the Federal Reserve talking about hiking interest rates.

That’s the same news that’s affecting the U.S. markets today, which tells me something scary.

The U.S. economy isn’t anywhere as strong as we’re told to believe it is.

The stock market is supposed to go up and down based on two factors: individual business news and larger economic news. But for the last eight years, it seems that businesses have made their news on political plays, especially the supposedly non-partisan Federal Reserve’s decision to leave interest rates at non-existent levels, as if we’ve been in a recession all this time.

This begs the question… Have we been in a recession all this time?

To be fair, one of my company’s editors made the reasonable point that the markets often overreact. Driven by fear and greed, they’re emotion-based and therefore can be wrong.

But it’s still interesting how quickly fear takes over every time the Federal Reserve so much as hints it might raise rates. Whether wrong or right, we’re clearly not dealing with a confident economy here.

It’s almost like we know we’re building around a house of cards.

Thursday, September 8, 2016

Toddler Gets Bitten by Other Toddler, but It’s Not His Fault?

This morning, Yahoo is featuring the story of a Florida toddler who was bitten so badly at daycare that he had to be taken to the emergency room.

The article reports that the understandably hysterical child “was covered with more than a dozen marks. His face, limbs and back were swollen and raw” after one of his peers savaged him.

The issue started last month when the daycare let the toddler’s parents know he’d been bitten.

“We weren’t upset. That happens with children,” his mother, Amanda Beebe, said, assuming the offender would be more carefully monitored going forward. But then three days later, she had to rush to the daycare to rush her son to the hospital.

Now, she’s seeking justice, something any loving parent would want to do. I’m not blaming her for that. What I am blaming her for is espousing the idiotic stance cited at the article’s end:

“She doesn't blame the other child. She blames the adults. She chose this daycare because it was one of the few she could afford, and it had cameras. They allowed her to watch a recording, but because of the angle, she couldn't see her son being bitten, only that there appeared to be no adult in the room for about 20 minutes as her son came into view, crying.”

She doesn’t blame the other child? The other child savaged her son! It was his fault, and he deserves a darn good spanking!

Moreover, he needs a darn good spanking! How is he ever going to grow into a functional adult if he doesn’t learn to respect that other people have rights, including the right to not get bitten by another human being?

Yes, there should have been an adult in the room with the children. So the daycare should be held accountable for failing miserably at its job. I’m pretty sure it’s illegal to leave children unsupervised like that. But even if that’s not true, the business has an ethical obligation to its paying customers and a moral responsibility to the children it says it’s safeguarding.

There’s plenty of blame to go around. But part of that blame definitely deserves to fall on the aggressor’s toddler-sized shoulders.

Children need guidance. They need boundaries. They need discipline. They’re prone to bad and even dangerous behavior, and it’s adult’s responsibility to properly teach them that such behavior has equally negative consequences.

Otherwise, they could turn into societal terrors. Or the next worse thing to selfish, stupid Millennials.

Or maybe even daycare employees who don’t care to check on their wards.

Tuesday, September 6, 2016

China Doesn’t Respect President Obama at All

What to talk about today? What in the world to talk about…

How about China’s utter lack of respect for President Obama?

That’s not conservative conjecture, people. It comes right out of the liberal horse’s mouth. Obama just visited China, and even MSN reports that “the problems began as soon as” he landed, starting with how the Chinese didn’t have stairs waiting for Air Force One.

Just for the record, this isn’t the first time a U.S. president has visited. China knows the routine.

Then, “as Obama’s staffers scrambled to get lower-level stairs in place for him to disembark, White House photographers… tried to get in their usual position to mark his arrival in a foreign country, only to find a member of the Chinese welcoming delegation screaming at them.”

That irate individual told the press members to get lost. And when a White House official responded with what MSN translated as, “This is our president and our plane, and the media isn’t moving,” the man yelled right back, “This is our country!”

Which, let’s face it, he had a point. A very good one too.

To say otherwise? Talk about arrogant Americans.

MSN went on to note the trip’s “flare-ups and simmering tensions throughout – a fitting reflection of how the relationship between these two world powers has become frayed and fraught with frustration. Over the past seven years, strained ties with China have colored and come to define Obama’s foreign policy in Asia.”

Which is kinda weird considering how unified Obama was supposed to make the world. Personally, I don’t remember this kind of thing happening under our last president. Do you?

MSN certainly doesn’t seem to. It didn’t mention Bush once. What it did say was that “the world’s two largest economic powers have failed to bridge increasing hostilities and intractable disputes over maritime issues, cybersecurity, trade and human rights. The yelling and screaming Saturday in many ways illustrated… how little has changed since Obama’s troubled first visit in 2009.”

For anyone who forgot, 2009 was when the newly minted president and all-but god tried to schmooze China with lots of sweet talk and promises to bend over backward. Which, as any relationship-savvy individual (or anyone with an iota of common sense) will tell you, is a great way to get screwed.

Back then, as MSN put it, “He decided not to meet with the Dalai Lama to avoid angering Beijing…” Yet since Obama’s world view revolves around liberal propaganda, which labels America a transgressor and everyone else morally superior, “his administration was taken aback by how completely the Chinese controlled all aspects of that visit.

Because, you know, nobody knew China was ridiculously regulated before.

“‘He wasn’t allowed to say much at all,’ said Orville Schell, a longtime China scholar who was in China during the visit. ‘The Chinese kept him from meeting certain people, from taking questions or even radio broadcasts. He didn’t know quite how to respond. He didn’t want to be impolite. It took the U.S. a while to understand that this was the direction China and the relationship was headed.”

But it didn’t have to take a while to get that. It shouldn’t have taken any time at all to understand how power-hungry China is.

If President Obama hadn’t been such an opinionated egocase, he would have studied up on the country before he went there. That way, he would have known how badly it tramples on human rights, which would have led him to conclude that China doesn’t want to play nice. It has to be coerced into behaving.

Considering how Obama has been so busy showing America’s underbelly ever since he took office, China doesn’t see any incentive in doing anything but what it wants to do.

Why show respect to such a weak leader?

That’s the question. And China is making its answer known loud and clear.

Friday, September 2, 2016

If Colin Kaepernick and Others Want to Talk About Race, Then Let’s Talk About Race

Joining San Francisco 49ers’ quarterback Colin Kaepernick in sitting down for the U.S. national anthem is Seattle Seahawks’ cornerback Jeremy Lane.

While I don’t think Lane has made any formal statement about the decision, Kaepernick definitely has, declaring that he’s “not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.”

This is in response to the spate of high-profile shootings of black men by police officers. Kaepernick’s – and quite possibly Lane’s – seated stance is to protest the perception of racist cops, racist support for those cops and an overall racist America.

Presumably, his actions are meant to inspire conversation and ultimately change.

Okay. Fine. Let’s go there. If he wants to talk about race issues here at home, let’s talk about race issues here at home.

Like how about the race of the president who’s presided over this country for almost eight years now, a timespan that has easily covered (we’re talking Obama’s second term, here) all of these high-profile deaths Kaepernick is so upset about, including Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida; Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri; Freddie Gray in Baltimore, Maryland; and Sylville Smith in Milwaukee, Wisconsin?

Or how about the typical race of both perps and murder victims in Baltimore, which recently recorded its 200th homicide victim for the year? (Hint: The vast majority of them aren’t white.)

Or how about the typical race of both perps and murder victims in Chicago, which experienced 90 murders in August alone, its deadliest month in 20 years? (Hint: The vast majority of them still weren’t white.)

By the way, that body count included Nykea Aldridge, a cousin of NBA star Dwayne Wade.

Thirty-two years old, she was pushing her baby in a stroller as she went to register her other three children at school. That’s something she’s never going to do again. Because she’s dead. Murdered. The victim of black-on-black violence like so many other victims that Colin Kaepernick and the race-baiting mainstream media refuse to really acknowledge.

So if we truthfully want to talk about race in America, let’s get factual and actually discuss it.

Otherwise, any change we’re looking at is only going to be for the worse.

Thursday, September 1, 2016

Singer John Legend Tweets Utterly Bizarre Support for Colin Kaepernick

John Legend just called “The Star-Spangled Banner” a “weak song,” in response to people’s outrage over San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the U.S. national anthem.

Legend tweeted, “For those defending the current anthem, do you really truly love that song? I don’t and I’m very good at singing it. Like, one of the best”, and then threw out his vote for “America the Beautiful” to replace “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

I have three immediate responses for Legend:

1.      Yes, I actually “really truly love that song.” I feel a rush of emotion every time I hear it. So according to your utterly bizarre logic, that means I can criticize Kaepernick all I want.
2.      Changing the national anthem isn’t going to change Kaepernick’s mind, much less solve America’s racial problem. Even if I was on the #BlackLivesMatter side of the argument, this proposal would make no sense.
3.      It’s OK not to like a song. There are plenty of songs I don’t care for that everyone else finds inspiring, including your “All of Me.” (No, seriously, I’m not being snippy. I think that song is overwhelmingly sappy and borderline obsessive.) But assuming that nobody else likes something because you find it “weak” is really egocentric. Get over yourself.

As for your link to The Intercept’s article about “The Star-Spangled Banner” not only being “a musical atrocity” but also “an intellectual and moral one” that “literally celebrates the murder of African-Americans”… well, it shows an appalling lack of historical understanding.

First off, your assertion that “the War of 1812 was a war of aggression that began with an attempt by the U.S. to grab Canada from the British Empire” is blatantly false. The U.S. was hardly perfect, but the war began because of British greed and jealousy over the rising economic star that was its former colonies, plus its refusal to respect U.S. sovereignty on the high seas.

The British were attacking our ships and stealing our sailors, including (by accident, I’m sure) George Washington’s nephew. And the British-held Canada was the easiest way to strike back after years and years of peace attempts failed miserably.

Second of all, do you know how many freed African American sailors and volunteers helped fight during the War of 1812, especially in protecting Baltimore, which inspired “The Star-Spangled Banner?”

Why? Because they loved their country! For that matter, so did many African American slaves. They just hated slavery (which no longer exists, people. It hasn’t for a while). That’s why many runaway slaves – which The Intercept refers to – joined the British to attack Washington D.C., helped burn it down and were afterwards relocated to some lovely island… yet still proudly called themselves American!

I’m not even kidding.

So John Legend and The Intercept, try learning your history before you try to use it in a debate.