YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS AT WORK - STATE RUN MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE BOSTON MARATHON TERRORIST BOMBING

Here's an attempt by US taxpayer funded NPR (National Partisan Radio) to demonize "their enemies" on the right. Once again, they ignore historical and actual fact by implying that Hitler was a "right winger" although Nazism--(National Socialism and in German: Nationalsozialismus)-- is a form of Socialism.

 

The slur is partly true, but only because Nazis are to the right of traditional Socialists and Communists. This tag developed during German elections in the 1930s during Hitler's ascent to power. In one respect, our American news media resembles Josef Goebbels' propaganda machine in that they practice the "Big Lie" technique to perfection.

 

Here's our legendary news media in action as documented by Breitbard's Big Journalism! According to Big Journalism, "What a beautiful racket the left has going. Those of us who dare not be liberal are literally paying, through our tax dollars, for NPR to smear us like this:"

[Click on link above to see the Big Journalism/NPR video report.] 

Partial transcript:

"The thinking, as we have been reporting, is that this is a domestic, extremist attack and officials are leaning that way largely because of the timing of the attack. April is a big month for anti-government and right-wing individuals. There's the Columbine anniversary, there's Hitler's birthday, there's the Oklahoma City bombing, the assault on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco."

The NPR reporter is Dina Temple-Raston. John Nolte, the Big Journalism reporter wryly observed that her name "... makes sense. After all, don't most serial-smearers have three names?"
   

A GUIDE TO SUCCESSFUL JOB NETWORKING FOR LEFTISTS DESPITE THEIR PAST BAD ACTS

In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing and in true Liberal Fascist mode, the Libs are looking for their Reichstag moment. The Loony Bin at MS-NBC, Salon Magazine, Barney Frank, et al, are hoping against hope that it is a right wing American white male that committed this crime. Yet, some of the most heinous acts of recent domestic terrorism have been committed by the radical left. Examples include, the Gabby Giffords shooting by a Bush hater, the IRS Austin building plane crash by a Bush hater, and the take over of the Discovery Channel building by an Eco-terrorist, all testaments to the hate fueled rage of the irrational left.

 

     But American leftist domestic terrorists are routinely rewarded for their bad acts. The "Occupy Wall Street" thugs are celebrated by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama. Jerry "Yippee" Rubin, ended up as an investment banker living in a luxury penthouse at the time of his death. Weather Underground alums, William Ayers (Department Chair, Education Department, University of Illinois), Bernadette Dorn (tenured law professor at Northwestern Law School), and Kathy Boudin (adjunct professor at Columbia University who was hired almost immediately after being released after serving 22 years in prison for an armed robbery resulting in the death of two cops and a Brinks guard), have all landed on their feet after their bad acts.

 

     But American leftist domestic terrorists are not your usual criminals. Unlike their Euro terrorist-criminal counterparts, like the Baader-Meinhof gang, they have their own "Good Old Bomber" network that gets them good jobs, businesses, and careers after their radical days are over. It matters not that they committed heinous crimes. All is forgiven, because leftists of all stripes have the proper "public morality." But this concept has been  revised  by leftists  to trump all bad acts by their fellow travelers. 

 

     This revisionist concept came to the forefront during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.  Never mind that Bill Clinton committed perjury to cover up his extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky. Everybody lies about sex. So voilà!  We now have "perjury lite"--a victimless crime!  And we all know that it is almost always wrong to punish such "harmless" crimes. Under this rubric, we can reasonably infer  that as long as you have the politically correct "Weltanschauung," (Wall Street is immoral, partial birth abortion is good, etc.,)  just about any bad act committed to advance the leftist agenda is justifiable. But no such pass should ever be extended to a right wing white male. That would be against "public morality" after all.

 

___________

 

    For an example of the"Good Old Bomber" network, see http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/weather-underground/. You'll see that many of the Weather Underground "activists" ended up doing quite nicely.

 

RANDOM THOUGHTS

Spreading the Wealth Around

How is it that in their drive to "spread the wealth around" that plutocrat Democrats still retain their wealth? Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway still owes the Feds $80M in back taxes. If Buffett believes that he should pay more taxes, then he should write a check for what he owes already. How much more taxes has Bill Gates, the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, and other super wealthy Democrats paid? Answer: 0.

Socialism in any of its many forms is designed to keep middle class people from entering the upper echelon of wealth. Prop 30 in California passed overwhelmingly in Marin County, arguably the richest county in California. No doubt their tax lawyers and accountants worked overtime to insulate their wealthy Liberal clients. No doubt they helped write trust fund "kid" Jerry Brown's Prop 30 to amend the California Constitution to pummel the middle class with oppressive taxes.

The ones hit hardest will be small businesses. They will be kept from growing and the old line corporations will be safe from competition. Coupled with the indolent, parasitic 47%ers, once again those of us in the middle will be repeatedly raped financially by this gang of thieves. The Democrats in the Senate have come up with a budget for the first time in four years. Guess what? They are asking for more money in taxes despite getting billions during the last fiscal standoff. When is enough… well enough?

 

What is Success?

I think that it was George Carlin that talked about 2d place (silver) as being the worst medal to get in the Olympics. According to him, it's like you weren't good enough to win the gold, but that 3d place (bronze) was okay. This shows a lack of perspective. What are needed are context and an emotional dictionary defining terms like success or victory. (I guess we can all look that up in our Funk & Wagnall's, (Apologies to Rowan & Martin.)

Being second place in an Olympic event may sound like you're "Second Hand Rose from Second Avenue," but in the context of being second place in the huge universe of world class athletes in your event, it's quite an accomplishment. A friend once told me that as a public defender, he was always depressed because most of his cases were losers. I told him that it depends on how you define winning. If you win a motion to suppress evidence, it's a victory. If a judge rules favorably on your trial objection it's a victory. I considered getting one of my clients work furlough, i.e., release to go to his regular day job and incarceration at a work furlough facility at night instead of going to the slam as a victory. He was glad to pay the cost of his stay at the work furlough facility in lieu of losing his job if he went to jail.

Do yourself a favor and take it easy on yourself.

From the Australian Tea Party...



... but only in a dystopian socialist paradigm, i.e., "You didn't build that!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PLAYING THE RACE PASS & OTHER MENTAL DISORDERS

Christopher Dorner, the ex-LA cop accused of three revenge killings is beginning to garner support from among the loony bin crazies of the Left. Several years ago, Michael Savage wrote an aptly titled book Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, which "savaged" the so-called Liberal intellectual mindset. (It is doubtful if there is any intellectual content there at all.) The book contains  the following passage chastising Liberals on page 203 of the book's Afterward:

In the end, your tolerance of the intolerable is actually a reflection of your loss of clarity; your tolerance of virtually everything and your "anything goes" attitude is not a mark of liberalism, it's a mark of the degeneration of your ability to judge anything.

Savage appears to be correct in his observation of the Liberal mindset.

 

     A CBS Sacramento website's news article notes that surprisingly thousands of people are supporting Dorner. The article also notes that it is hard to believe that people would support the "targeting of police officers," but there is a Facebook (FB) page called We Are All Chris Dorner (WAACD) FB page. Some of the comments written there would sound like ones that you might hear at a sociopath convention.

 

The following news link was shared on the WAACD FB page:

""The Los Angeles police captain who was chairman of the department's board of rights hearing that fired Christopher Dorner and may be one of the top targets in Dorner's list of enemies has not left his home since the manhunt for the ex-LAPD officer began on Monday..."

Here's a typical crazy leftist illiterate low information voter reaction:

I hope he gets him next and everyone in that list y is there's cops protecting cops what they can't protect them self and we are supposed to depend on them to protect us they can't even protect them selfs[.] (sic)

Here's some more unedited and uncorrected  WAACD FB comments. Please try to ignore the bad grammar and vulgarities  from the nuanced thinking Democrat voting base:

-Crooks in uniforms that's the police for you

 -I hope he gets away fuck pigs!!!!!

-Oh yea...he's a AA male so its ok. No its not OK! We don't know IF HE EVEN KILLED THOSE PEOPLE!!!! WE JUST HAVE THE WORD OF A CORRUPT LAPD AND MSM! 

-It's almost been one year since trayon Martin, the tide is changing this is what happens after years and years of bullshit and asking begging pleading for justice! Now it's fuck justice people getting blood thirsty

-GOD BLESS CHRIS DORNER & HIS FOLLOWERS NATION UNDER GUERRILLA WARFARE

The illiteracy and illogical thought processes displayed by these "nuanced thinkers" in their FB comments is immoral. If this isn't an indictment of the American education system that is dominated by Liberal teacher's unions I don't know what is.

     A friend of mine described what Liberalism is doing to America as, "keep 'em dancin', keep 'em high" so they don't know what's being done to them. It's already been done for forty years of indoctrination through the educational system, the news media, television and motion pictures. Of course, Dorner is getting the "Victim" as well as the "Teflon Obama pass." Any criticism of this Black Avenger will be seen as racism. But murder knows no race. If Dorner was so aggrieved, there is a civil law process. But we have a President that wipes his feet on the Constitution daily. Why should we expect anything different from Dorner?

 

IS THERE ANY SAFE HAVEN FROM POLITICAL CORECTNESS?

It was only a matter of time before the Super Bowl became yet another battle ground for "politically correct" social causes. Apparently no aspect of American Life is immune from the political correctness crowd's guerrilla antics.  NewsBusters cites New York Times columnist Frank Bruni's story about Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo's desire to promote gay marriage at sport's biggest venue--the Super Bowl.  Super Bowl XLVII may become another soapbox for gay marriage. Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo wants to celebrate a Ravens victory in the Super Bowl by dancing with Ellen DeGeneres on her daytime talk show. 

 

      According to Bruni, Ayanbadejo’s support for gay rights comes from childhood connections to a diverse group that included many that were openly gay or lesbian. He once lived in an LGBT dorm at the University of California, Santa Cruz, where his stepfather was the resident director.  “I was raised around gay people in a very liberal society,” Ayanbadejo told Bruni during an interview in September. “Discrimination was never allowed” (NN comment: except when practiced by Libs against Conservatives or Christians.)

 

      Full disclosure:  In mid-1980s, I lived in a diverse neighborhood called University Heights in San Diego near the Hillcrest district of San Diego, which is analogous to  the "Castro District" of San Francisco, California. I called my neighborhood "Baja Hillcrest" because it had a diverse population that included Gays, Blacks, Latinos, and Whites.  I got along very well with my gay next-door neighbors and frequently socialized with them. While I didn't endorse their chosen lifestyle, I didn't judge it or them either. It simply was none of my business.  My current opposition to gay marriage stems from not wanting to bestow valuable economic rights--e.g., tax filing status--to a group because of whom they prefer as sexual partners. This is opposed to validating the grant of such valuable economic rights because of an immutable genetic imperative, e.g., race or gender. For all you Libs looking for more tax revenue, Gay marriage isn't it.

 

     The Supreme Court has recognized race, national origin, religion and alienage as suspect classifications; and it therefore analyzes any government action that discriminates against these classes under a strict scrutiny standard.  The Supreme Court has established standards for determining whether a statute or policy's classification requires the use of strict scrutiny. The class must have experienced a history of discrimination, must be definable as a group based on "obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics," is a minority of "politically powerless," and its characteristics must have little relationship to the government's policy aims or the ability of the group's members to contribute to society.
 

     Gays have been wrongly discriminated and subject to unjustified violence for years. I believe in prosecution to the full extent of the law for such discrimination and wrongdoing.  But I am waiting for scientific evidence that homosexuality is genetic. At that point, I will be at the front of the line advocating for gay marriage. Civil unions have substantially accomplished much of what the Gay community has been seeking in terms of equality of  treatment.  But there are dissenters to this view.

 

     However you might feel about the subject, marriage has been traditionally defined as being between a man and a woman involving extended family and children. Marriage was designed to afford legal protection to the wives and children of a union between a man and a woman against a wastrel husband and father. Once children come into the picture, the man and the woman are forever bound to each other and there needs to be a protective legal paradigm for the children of such a union.

 

 

___________________________ 

 

 

     The NFL is not immune from the pressures of the PC crowd's zealotry on any issue.  In what has been cynically described by some as a marketing scheme to appeal to women, the NFL began promoting breast cancer awareness. Three hundred pound players and coaches wore pink shoes, pink hats, pink gloves, and pink ribbons to show their "concern" over breast cancer. Never mind that prostate cancer kills more men than breast cancer kills everyone. Don't be surprised, breast cancer affects men also although there is not as many victims as women. Notable male celebrities that suffered breast cancer include Shaft star, Richard Roundtree and The Price is Right announcer Rod Roddy.  Yet, because of marketing concerns and a slavish adherence to following the political correctness fad of the day, the NFL is trying to become a "politically correct" sport. But the NFL's descent into political correctness and becoming an arm of the political Left has been evolving in recent years.

 

 

     In 2009, Roger Goodell and Indianapolis Colts owner, Jim Irsey  were vocal in their opposition to Rush Limbaugh approval as a potential owner of the St. Louis Rams NFL football club. Never mind that Left wing antagonistic George Soros was part of the group seeking to purchase the Rams.  So Left wing nuts are okay as owners with NFL, but not Conservatives? Absolutely no way is that right! But Goodell's anti-conservative stance might stem from the fact that his father, U.S. Senator Charles Goodell was defeated by Conservative Party candidate James Buckley for the New York Senate seat in 1970.  Now Goodell seems be leading with the campaign to make football more "civilized" (see below).
 

     There may also be legal considerations by the NFL inasmuch as several lawsuits have been filed against the NFL. The suits sound in tone as the litigation against big tobacco.  For example, the lawsuit by the Seau family against the NFL for the wrongful death of suicide victim Junior Seau mirrors the "I didn't know it was bad for me" assertion that was common in the Big Tobacco lawsuits.  But there is a concept in the law called "assumption of the risk." One popular legal resource  defines assumption of the risk as:

(1) An affirmative defense in a negligence case, in which the defendant claims that the situation (taking a ski-lift, climbing a steep cliff) was so inherently or obviously hazardous that the injured plaintiff must have known of the risk, but took the chance of being injured. (2) The act of contracting to take over a risk, such as buying the right to a shipment and accepting the danger that it could be damaged or prove unprofitable.

I played high school football during the Neolithic (Neanderthal to some) period of football in the late 1960s. I knew and assumed the injury risks associated with the game of football. Back then the rules were looser. There were crack back blocks, chop blocks, and physical intimidation, i.e., physical contact, e.g., until the ball was in the air, receivers were subject to physical contact.  I still have residual injuries from playing high school football 40 years ago. And every once in a while my lower back locks up, my Achilles tendon hurts, or my ribs ache, but it goes away with aspirin and/or Salonpas patches. But I got more severe injuries, including two concussions, while playing the "politically correct" non-contact game of soccer.  Yet, I wouldn't trade a minute of any of my sports participation experiences  for a gold ingot.
 

 

     Team sports teach people to work together successfully under a plan  (read the mission statement) while cooperating with people that you may not like (read crappy co-workers) and your coach (read a crappy boss).  They may have not realized back then, but our coaches were teaching us valuable life lessons. And maybe back then, we were much more practical  than today's sensitive new age ball players.  Today's leftist ball players seem to be a bunch of whinny candy asses, (a favorite term of endearment used by my JV football defensive coach).  So please just shut up and play the game. I really don't want to hear about your politics at the Super Bowl.  If you have a grievance, then write your Congressperson or Senator instead.  Read Out of Their League on your own time, not mine.  I'm interested in watching pro football, not watching some 1960s style teach-in. 

 

 

THE JACK BOOTS ARE COMING

 

Self-censorship is wrong when it is done to avoid retribution by the State and its henchmen. Self-censorship is the beginning of tyranny. First the Statists were after the Second Amendment and now they're turning their sights on the First Amendment. Exhibit A: Phil Mickelson backs off (read an ersatz retraction of) his comments about excessive taxes. I don't know what spooked Mickelson to disavow his legitimate concern and right to protect from confiscatory taxes what he has lawfully earned. But it's scary to think of the possibilities with this Liberal-Fascist bunch. They're good at subtle intimidation. Do you hear the jackboots yet?

 

     Golf rival Tiger Woods apparently agrees with Mickelson's earlier expressed desire to leave California and its high taxes; "Well sort of..." according to the Los Angeles Times. The Times quoted Woods as saying, "Well, I moved out of here [California] back in '96 for that reason," Woods explained. "I enjoy Florida, but also I understand what he was, I think, trying to say. I think [that] he'll probably explain it better and in a little more detail. "  

 

     The unwillingness to pay one's "fair share" of taxes is rapidly becoming an issue with the Liberal-Fascists in D.C. Vice-Presidunce Biden extolls the patriotic virtues of paying taxes in an pre-election interview.  Here's the offending video of that interview. He calls paying taxes as doing your patriotic duty. Huh? I thought that unjust excessive taxes were part of the reasons that we fought the Revolutionary War against King George "the Insane" III. 

 

      Well I, for one, am tired of paying higher taxes to redistribute wealth to people that: (1) didn't pay attention in school so that they could get a better job; (2) didn't work hard and diligently at their jobs to get promotions and pay raises; (3) didn't save or invest their money wisely; or (4) didn't come up with next "big" idea.

 

      Items (1) and (2) requires self-discipline. But given today's lower job and educational standards, a modicum of effort will probably pay off handsomely.

 

     Item (3) is easy if you start young, e.g., start saving a dollar everyday. Increase the amount as you earn more money. At a minimum, you have $365 in savings every year. Anytime is a good time to start saving.

 

     Item (4) doesn't require even a BS or BA degree. Mrs. Fields and the man formerly known as Famous Amos made fortunes baking cookies. Steve Jobs built a better computer. Bill Gates created a standard operating system for computers. Ron Popiel was worth $100,000,000 selling gadgets on TV when he passed on.

 

     But did you ever notice how a lot of those jokers calling for higher taxes always get to keep their wealth? Answer: They do it through foundations--all perfectly legal--but why do they want to deny the right for you keep your hard earned money? The answer could be explained with extensive psychological examination and analysis, but the short answer is the term "control freak." For example, plutocrat and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to control the amount of soda pop you drink. That's freaky.  The essence of tyranny is control.  

 

     Socialism, Marxism, Communism, Fascism, and Liberalism are social, political, and economic systems created to protect the plutocracy and the oligarchy through control by using a class (read caste) system and onerous taxes upon wage earners and emerging small businesses. The latter protects the established businesses of crony socialists. Utopian scams like these have been suggested or tried from the time of Plato's Republic to Marx's Communist Manifesto and its bastard child, the modern day Nanny State. Look at all of the socialist countries in the world and ask yourself why do they all still have millionaires and billionaires in supposedly egalitarian economies? (It's sort of like asking an evolutionist, "If we're descended from apes, why are there still apes?") 

 

Remember that Freedom is not Free. Free people are not equal. Equal people are not Free.

 

 

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

The U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time, read it and weep. Then wait for your government check.