Public School To Investigate Intent Behind Groin-Kick

Stop sexually harassing that pole!

Well, it’s come to this.  Society’s obsession with political-correctness (or is it just the public schools’ obsession with sex…hmmmm…) has turned the Bureaucracy of the Bored and Useless, i.e., public school administrators, on a seven year old kid for defending himself.

A 7-year-old boy is being investigated by his South Boston elementary school for possible sexual harassment after kicking another boy in the crotch.

[...]

Lynch’s son, Mark Curran, said the boy that he kicked had been bullying him on the school bus ride home from Tynan Elementary last week.

Sexual harassment?  For a kick to the  family jewels?  By a seven year old?  Did the kid perform some sort of ninja-cupping action with his foot in the process?  The school’s explanation:

‘Your son kicked a little boy in the testicles. We call that sexual harassment,’ Lynch said the school told her.

I call it an unnatural obsession with testicles.

This is dumb.  What happens if the B.B.S. finds that the seven year old actually acted with the intent of sexually harassing the bully?  What if he was just being insensitive to the bully’s feelings?  Is he then branded a sexual harasser?  And what then?  Does it go in the dreaded permanent file?  Is there a special board in the school where the testicle-kickers are listed for purposes of scorn and mocking?  Are there multiple boards?  What about the “titty-twister” board?  Or the “insensitive rhymes” board?  I used to love the old “Chinese, Japanese, Dirty Knees, Look at These” chant.  I don’t think I sexually harassed anyone.  Of course, I was ten, so I’m not sure I knew what either sexual or harassment were, let alone what constituted sexual harassment.  If I had known though, I wouldn’t have wasted my opportunity on the school bully, if you know what I mean (that was a veiled reference at holding hands.  So calm down mom).

In any event, another wonderful example of your tax dollars at work.

Being a Road Construction Barrel

September 16, 2010, 6:30 a.m.

-sigh- Another day another dollar.  At least it’s raining today.  I’ll finally be able to wash off that McDonald’s milkshake that the guy in the Prius tossed on me last week.  Real environmentally friendly dill-hole.

Well, everyone looks pissed again.  Not that I blame them.  My buddies and I have been sitting in these spots for going on four months now.  Plus, there are signs everywhere requiring everyone to slow down for the construction zone.  Does my mere existence in this lane really constitute a construction zone?  Not like it matters though…no one can drive faster than ten miles/hour anyway.  And while the drivers mutter under their breath about ramming stuff, my buddies and I are occupying this perfectly good lane for miles just hoping that some day, actual construction will take place next to us.  I’m afraid many of us are now beginning to lose that hope.

Yesterday seemed like it would be different.  An orange IDOT truck pulled up next to me.  I thought construction may actually start!  But it was not to be.  Instead of actually beginning to improve the roadway, two guys jumped out of the truck, rolled that measuring wheel thingy, laughed about something, and then got back into their truck and left.  I was, I’ll admit, disappointed; and confused…did they really think the measurement changed since they took it a month ago?

My buddy Herb told me that he had actually spoken to a barrel further down the road that said construction was actually occurring.  He said it was really strange because after all of these big machines tore up the road, everybody left for a couple of months.  He said something about workers striking.  He and I both thought it would have been nicer if the workers had decided to stop working before tearing up the road.  But what do we know?  We’re just barrels.

I still remember being placed here in the spring.  I was so excited!  I figured I’d get to watch some cool machines construct a road.  When the drivers creeping past me first became angry, mumbling about the same construction being done last year, I smiled, because I knew the construction would be done in no time.  But here I sit.  Taking up a perfectly good lane when there hasn’t been construction equipment anywhere near me yet.  Seriously, why close a lane for miles, when only about 10 feet is getting worked on at any given time?  I mean, I know my brain consists of a flashing light, but it would seem that only closing the road being worked on would be a smarter idea. 

However, after talking to my buddy Gilbert yesterday, I do think the drivers are being a little hard on the government.  Apparently there are spots where the road isn’t being torn up at all.  In fact, Gil told me that all of the toll lanes are still open, and there are lots of those.  It could be worse, right?

It’s our money dill-hole.

 

Is this surprising?

Remember Peter Orszag?  You know…the director of the Obama White House Office of Management and Budget that skipped town after realizing that he was about as useful in fixing the economy as my six year old daughter?  Well, he’s now one of the New York Times‘ esteemed Contributing Columnists.  In his first Op-Ed, he argues that Congress should extend all of the Bush tax cuts for two years, and then dump them all permanently.  In doing so, he presents the liberal position that has been thrown about for so long that it’s simply met with a shrug.  In short: at some point, we need to raise taxes because the government needs to buy stuff…because, as we all know, buying stuff is fun; especially when it’s someone else’s money.  I continue to find this logic absurd and worthy of endless ridicule.

I have to give Orszag credit on one issue that the “progressives” fail to acknowledge: ending the Bush tax cuts for anyone, even those evil rich people who have stolen all of their money from the rest of us without creating any jobs (that’s sarcasm for those of you who are new to this blog) would actually hurt an already crappy economy.  It’s his next points that cause me great consternation.

Many conservatives are even worse: they’d make the tax cuts permanent for the likes of Warren Buffett, even though he’d prefer they didn’t. Making all the tax cuts permanent would expand the deficit by more than $3 trillion over the next decade.

Ah Warren Buffett…how I disdain you.  You of statements like (and I’m paraphasing here), “it’s not fair that my secretary pays more in taxes than I do.”  Look Warren, I know you like to look at the man in the mirror every morning and wax poetic about how gracious that person is, but you’re the one drinking fifty year old scotch out of a golden goblet.  In other words, if your secretary is paying more taxes then you, then stop paying your lawyers and accountants to find ways to shelter your money…or stop paying your secretary so much.   Plus, if you really want to pay more in taxes, feel free to write the IRS a check…I’m certain it won’t be sent back.

But I digress.  My point is this: the only way tax cuts could increase the deficit is if the government DOESN’T CUT ITS OWN SPENDING.  See, the government isn’t entitled to whatever amount of revenue it wants so that it can do rad stuff like give grants to scientists to prove cats hate showering with naked people or to prove global warming exists by cherry picking climate stats.

Orczag continues,

Let’s look at the facts. The projected deficit for 2015 is 4 percent to 5 percent of G.D.P., depending on whose assumptions you use. A sustainable level is more like 3 percent or lower. So we need deficit reduction of 1 percent to 2 percent of G.D.P., or about $200 billion to $400 billion a year by 2015. These figures are uncertain, but they’re the best we have (and they may well turn out to be too optimistic).

These are only “facts” if you’re Nostradamus.  In other words, you need to know what the budget will be in 2015.  Since there is no budget for 2015, you’re simply assuming it will be more or less the same as it is now.  Why not assume that the government will decrease its spending in 2015? 

The federal government, and those employed by it, decided long ago that they were entitled to whatever amount of taxes they decided were appropriate and that they found to be politically palatable.  It began with FDR and his New Deal and Social Security and continued largely unabated through Johnson’s Great Society.  Each time the American people were told the government needs more money for the betterment of society; except society never asked for it.  So now we have Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid…and Obamacare.  Liberal entitlement programs forced down America’s collective throat that amount to little more than theft.

Orszag asserts that Social Security needs reform…no kidding.  Will it get the reform it needs?  Well, being that the reform it needs is to, at the very least, allow Americans the opportunity to opt out of it and invest their money themselves, it’s  not likely.  How about Medicare and Medicaid?  Orszag asserts that Obamacare has resulted in substantial savings to both programs.  Considering the net effect of Obamacare will be to increase government spending, simply moving money from column A to column B and calling it savings seems a bit dubious, yes?

Simply put, our government has marched us slowly towards more and more taxes in the name of social progress.  Now we’re told we can’t “afford” to keep more of our own money.  Well, to that I say: I’m pretty sure we can.  Plus, Warren’s willing to pay more.

I Can’t Think Up A Witty Title.

Well, it’s September.  I haven’t posted in a while because there’s been nothing going on.  August was hot.  Congress wasn’t in session.  The Tigers’ season has been over for a while now.  And I’ve been waiting for football to start.

But NOW, we’re officially into football and election season.  WOO-HOO!  While I could talk about football forever, this is not a football blog, and I’m not starting one now.  This is primarily a political blog, and it’s a political time of year.  And I can’t remember an election cycle that has been potentially more important than this one.  Let’s review:

The economy still sucks.  In fact, it’s worse then it was the last time I posted.  Unemployment is up to 9.6%; we’ve lost another 54,000 jobs; and Christina Romer, one of Barry’s chief economic “experts” who is leaving the administration, has recently let all of us know that they’ve had absolutely no idea what they’ve been doing re: the economy.

She had no idea how bad the economic collapse would be. She still doesn’t understand exactly why it was so bad. The response to the collapse was inadequate. And she doesn’t have much of an idea about how to fix things.

That’s disheartening…and also completely obvious.  Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has taken to authoring op-eds in the USA Today to try and convince America that the Democrat’s handling of the economy doesn’t resemble a monkey with a rubic’s cube. 

The Recovery Act saved millions of American jobs — keeping health care providers in hospitals, teachers in classrooms, and police and firefighters on the beat. But the benefits weren’t just in the public sector. During the past eight months, the economy has averaged 95,000 new private sector jobs.

While I’d love to see her support for that last sentence, it doesn’t really matter.  Unemployment will continue to go up until new jobs exceed 120,000/month (population increase).  More importantly, there is no doubt that the economy is slowly getting worse.  

The ”summer of recovery” is followed by the ”autumn of reality.”  Let’s face it: if the Dems had any idea what to do about the economy, they would have done it by now.

B.O. has recently begun getting rid of the “drove it into a ditch” meme, and replaced it with “it’s taken us 10 years to get into this mess, so it’s unreasonable to think we could get out of the mess in 18 months” nonsense.  Did it take us 10 years to get into this?  I don’t know.  I suppose one could reasonably argue it took one year, or even thirty-three years (the Community Reinvestment Act, which gave birth to the housing boom and bust, was enacted in 1977).  I also don’t care how long it took us to get here.  What I do care about is what is the current Administration doing about it?  Well, it’s been 18 months and the answer is: spent a lot of money for nothing.  Things haven’t improved, and the Dems are out of ideas.

So what should be done?  Well, first and foremost, vote against the Dems in November.  I know, I know…you don’t like the republicans either!  O.k.  Then go vote for the Green Party and pat yourself on the back for being ”principled.”  After that you can have your juice box and sandwich with the crusts cut off and take a nap.  For the rest of us adults, we’ll choose a candidate with a chance of winning. 

Simply put, there is job-creating capital out there waiting to be invested.  It’s not being invested because no one has any idea what’s coming from this administration.  For example, if you were a business owner with money, would you be spending it to reinvest or hire new employees if you thought your taxes were going to go up in January?  Of course not.  Doing something as simple as throwing the Dems out of the House would improve the fragile psyche of the economy.

But simply voting Republican isn’t enough.  Pressure needs to be applied to those we vote for to do things like extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone.  Other taxes need to be cut…payroll and capital gains, for example.  Enact legislation which gives people the option to opt out of the slush fund that is Social Security.  Limit Medicare to those that need it; not simply those that are old enough to get it.  Significantly amend Obamacare and gut Fannie and Freddie. 

Until we get the economy back on-track, nothing else matters.  And there’s a lot going on that needs to be addressed beyond the economy…like why we’re ignoring Iran’s getting all nuclear and stuff.

It’s September…the kids are back in school, I get to drink new seasonal beer, and I get to watch football.  More important, however, is the election coming up.  We need to vote the Dems out…and then get ready for 2012, when we can vote out the guy who looks silly riding his bike.  And don’t worry…I’ll be posting a lot more than I did in August in an effort to get you through these tough times.

First time unemployment up…again.

Barry (while riding his unicorn):

‘But here’s what I can tell you: After 18 months, I have never been more confident that our nation is headed in the right direction.’

Reality:

New U.S. claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly climbed to a nine-month high last week, yet another setback to the frail economic recovery.

Sigh.  I’ve come to the rather grim conclusion that the economy won’t improve until we rid ourselves of this charlatan.  Why?  Contrary to B.O.’s assertions, it isn’t because of how deep the ditch was.  It’s because no one with a business has any confidence in any of his decisions on the economy.  The same goes for Nancy Pelosi, Tim Geithner, Harry Reid, etc. 

We’re not headed in the right direction.  In fact, I’m not sure we’re headed in any direction.  What is the president/Congress doing to create jobs?  Can anyone tell me?  So far, we’ve had several different deficit-driving stimulus packages, which only propped up state governments, or hired more government employees, or paid some pension funds.  None of that did anything to improve the economy, and anyone with an eighth grade education knew that it wouldn’t before it was attempted. 

What else?  We’ve passed healthcare legislation which the government admits won’t control costs, and is directly responsible for current premiums going up.  The new financial regulation law will significantly increase the size of the federal government, and impact just about every financial transaction that anybody takes part in.  Oh, and it does nothing to deal with HUD, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac, all of which caused the housing bubble and started the domino effect of economic collapse.

Our economy isn’t in a malaise.  It isn’t stuck.  And there are no green shoots.  It’s simply waiting.  Waiting for the anti-business, anti-private property, pro-big government liberals to lose their control over the direction of this country.  Unfortunately, while it waits, more small businesses shut their doors, more big businesses downsize, and more people lose their jobs. 

In supporting mosque near Ground Zero, Barry proves (again) that he’s tone deaf

A picture of tolerance

Yes, I know there haven’t been many posts lately.  I’ve been busy.  And until someone wants to pay me for this blog, then my job security will need to be priority number 1.  No mom, no one has complained.

With all of that being said, can anyone explain to me why we need a mosque near Ground Zero?  I know I’ve asked before, but with the recent acceleration of the issue, I’m asking again.  And no, I’m not questioning whether one can be built there, obviously it can be.  But why should it be built there?  What’s the point?  Is this really the best place to prove that we, as Americans, are tolerant of everyone? 

 And what are the motives of the muslims building the mosque?  Peace and understanding?  B.S.  You could have the same peace and understanding if you built it somewhere else.  And no, your right to practice your religion is not being inhibited in any way by making you build the mosque elsewhere.  Moreover, if your real motivation was truly a thing of butterflies and kittens and pretty rainbows and dew-drops, why give it a name that basically means muslim conquest?  I’m not sure that forcing a mosque down the throat of a majority of New Yorkers, and Americans, that don’t want it speaks of tolerance.

And what does this have to do with our esteemed president, you ask?  Well, on Friday, he said this:

In his speech on Friday, Mr Obama said: ‘Let me be clear: As a citizen and as President I believe that Muslims have the same right to practise their religion as everyone else in this country.

‘That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.’

As one could expect, that went over like a ton of bricks.  If the Republicans win back the House (and possibly Senate) this fall, a thank-you letter should be sent to the president.

House minority leader John Boehner’s response,

‘The fact that someone has the right to do something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do. That is the essence of tolerance, peace and understanding….’

Say what you want about Boehner (I tend to like him), but he’s absolutely right (except that I don’t think they have the “right” to do it).  If the muslims attempting to get this thing built want to show how much they love everybody, then they should share their love elsewhere.  The people don’t want it, period; and with good reason.  Lest we forget that it was muslims who brought the twin-towers down, in the name of their religion.  I don’t care if they were “radicalized.”  They weren’t Christians, or Catholics, or Quakers.

Simply put, there’s no justifiable reason for the mosque to go there.  In fact, the mere fact that the builders want to put it there reveals their own insensitivity.  Of course, I’m not dumb enough to think those building the mosque are doing so with good intentions. 

Question: what would happen if, after a small group of Christian Americans set off a bomb in the middle of Mecca because they wanted to start another Crusade, another group of moderate Christians wanted to build a church near the site of the bombing to send a message of peace and love?  Well, it’s actually a trick question because non-muslims aren’t allowed in Mecca.  That fact notwithstanding, even if the moderate Christians were granted the opportunity to build the church, I would give it about a week before some “radicalized” muslims bombed it into oblivion.  And how would the American left respond?  Likely how many responded to 9/11: it’s our fault and we should work to understand their grievances.  We’re destroying ourselves, and our esteemed president is leading the way. 

Feds Bail Out States; Avoid Hypocrite Label

House Approves $26 Billion in Aid for States

Well, that’s a relief.  For a minute I thought the federal government was going to tell the states they actually had to balance their budgets, which would certainly have been awkward.  But the good guys pulled it out in the clutch by providing $26 billion to the states,

Democrats countered that the money would provide vital aid to states struggling with rising Medicaid costs, and would help local governments to avert public-sector layoffs in the autumn.

Gee, makes you wonder how much easier it would be for state governments to balance their budgets without a huge federal entitlement program shoved down their throats.

Democrats said the legislation would enable state and local governments to avert layoffs or to create 290,000 public sector jobs this fall.

“Avert layoffs or to create 290,000 public sector jobs this fall.”  Well which is it?  Wait, don’t tell me, because you don’t really know.  290,000 additional public sector jobs?  For what?  When exactly does the government admit that it only creates government jobs by spending our taxes?

The economy is slowly grinding to a halt.  What does the dawdler in chief do?  Sends his wife and daughter on a spit-in-America’s face trip to Spain, on our dime.  What does Congress do?  Throws more money at stuff that can’t improve the economy: entitlements and government jobs.  At this point, I’d be more accepting of the government doing something bold and stupid then simply more of the same; at least we wouldn’t simply be watching the economy crash in slow motion.

I guess I’ll just look at the bright side.  At least I’ll get to hear progressive talk radio tell me why paying off state debts was the “right thing to do.”

Paul Ryan is Why I’m a Republican, and Why You Should Be Too.

I’ve been hearing a lot of self-described conservatives say things like “I’m not a Republican…don’t put a label on me…I think for myself” lately.  My response to those statements falls somewhere between “congratulations…here’s your medal for being an individual…now it’s nap time” and “you’re right, they’re not perfect,” depending on how well I know the person who’s saying it.  Look, people can identify themselves however they want in life, but when it comes time to vote in November, there are only two choices: the party of Paul Ryan or the party of Paul Krugman; and there’s a HUGE difference between the two.

Mr. Ryan hails from Wisconsin, is a member of the House of Representatives, and is a Republican.  And contrary to  the mindless rhetoric from the Democrats, he has a plan.  More specifically, he has a plan to get us out of debt and improve the economy.  And he does it by lowering taxes.  His “Roadmap,” as he call it, has been met with great disdain from the left because of its radical ideas; namely, cutting government spending.  Now, I understand that nowadays, actually cutting back on federal spending is the equivalent of riding a unicorn with the president, but there was once a day when the federal government didn’t employ the entire state of California.  The Roadmap cuts spending, decreases taxes for both individuals and businesses (which will create jobs), and simplifies the tax code to some extent.  Is Mr. Ryan your typical modern-day Republican?  Maybe not.  But you will never find a Paul Ryan in the Democrat party.

Paul Krugman.  I’ve written about him before.  While he identifies himself as an economist, he’s actually just a liberal shill in a tweed sport coat.  He believes spending cuts are stupid, or evil, or something.  He believes, like all liberals, that “tax cuts must be paid for.”  Of course, such a position constitutes lunacy when one considers the fact that those “tax cuts” are not expenditures, but simply less theft.  Like many liberals, Krugman believes increased government spending will create jobs by “stimulating” the economy.  Of course, he never identifies how much spending is necessary, since it’s never actually worked.  His convenient answer to continued failure is “we should have spent more.”

In response Krugman’s recent rambling and nonsensical criticism to his “Roadmap,” Ryan stated,

‘At the core of this is a big ideological fight between those who believe in the Founding principles and the sense of limited government—the American idea—and those who believe in the progressivist welfare state.’

‘The Roadmap is designed to maintain a limited government in the 21st century, and it is the antithesis of the progressivist vision which [Krugman] subscribes to. That’s fine. I understand it violates his vision for a progressivist society.’

In these statements, Ryan has admirably described the foundational difference between conservatives and liberals.  Liberals seek control by way of taxation, government spending, and entitlements.  Conservatives believe in self-reliance, small government, and opportunity.

The point of all of this is that it matters what Ryan believes vs. what Krugman believes.  It matters because, regardless of your feelings on “Republicans” vs. “Democrats,” the simple fact remains: Ryan, and those like him, will never be Democrats, and Krugman and his followers will never be Republicans.  For those that want a better shot at more opportunity, fewer taxes, sustained job growth, and smaller government, then vote Republican in November.  The only alternative is a vote for liberals like Krugman.

Portland shuts down lemonade stand due to no permit. Next up: Boy’s not allowed to discriminate against girls with cooties.

My secret ingredient is ebola

Sigh.  Portland is quickly becoming my most hated city.  What now, you ask?  The city health inspector shut down a seven-year-old’s lemonade stand because she didn’t have a permit.

‘I understand the reason behind what they’re doing and it’s a neighborhood event, and they’re trying to generate revenue,’ said Jon Kawaguchi, environmental health supervisor for the Multnomah County Health Department. ‘But we still need to put the public’s health first.’

Are you serious?  It’s lemonade.  It’s even made on site…the girl had all the ingredients right there for everyone to see: bottled water and Kool-Aid.  She even used hand sanitizer!  Jeez, when my kids make lemonade, they use the lemonade as hand sanitizer.  Maybe the little girl should have had a fifth next to her to hit the inspector  over the head.  Disclaimer: This blog does not stand for violence against government employees with too much time on their hands.  At least not with a fifth…that would be alcohol abuse.

I especially enjoyed the “I understand they’re just trying generate revenue but…” statement.  How ’bout a little pot, meet kettle.  Cost of a proper lemonade stand permit: $120.00.  If little girl hadn’t folded up her dirty little enterprise: $500.00 fine.  I’m confused: Who’s “simply trying to create revenue” again?

I’ll say it again: it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to run the government; just a little bit of common sense.  It’s a lemonade stand, not an oyster bar.  And it’s Kool-Aid…you know the shelf-life on that stuff?  If the health inspectors of Portland have so little to do that they’re going to force a seven-year-old girl to close up her lemonade stand, then Portland should seriously think about shedding some payroll.

UPDATE: Realizing that angry people don’t like to re-elect you, the top elected official in the county advised his health inspectors to use their “professional discretion” in doing their jobs.

‘A lemonade stand is a classic, iconic American kid thing to do,’ [Chairman Jeff Cogan] said. ‘I don’t want to be in the business of shutting that down.’

See, he loves his job America.  I’m sure the “lemonade revolt” being planned by a local anarchist had nothing to do with it.

Rangel and Waters: Exhibits A and B for Term Limits

Charlie Rangel: 20 terms.

Maxine Waters: 10 terms.

No, these are not prison sentences.  And contrary to what James Clyburn may think, they’re not coded racist messages.  They’re how long Rangel and Waters have served in the United States House of Representatives.  Now, this post isn’t about how corrupt they both certainly are.  Instead, it’s about term limits.  Like many in Congress, Rangel and Waters have made being “public servants” a full time, and quite lucrative, job.  The fact that either of these parasites are even around long enough to gain wealth from their public offices is a disgrace.

Simply put, politicians don’t care about doing their jobs.  They are more interested in securing “contributions” for themselves and getting re-elected, all while receiving a pay check consisting entirely of taxpayer money.  And that goes for both sides of the aisle.  The Schumers, and McCains, and Grahams, and Kennedys need to be forced by law to sit down.  Arguing that we can simply defeat these sacred cows at the ballot box isn’t really a legitimate option due to their war chests.  Instead of running quality candidates against them, we’re forced to simply run wealthy candidates.

It will take a Constitutional amendment to institute term limits, and those are never easy.  But without such action, we’ll have more of Congress voting itself another raise while spending hundreds of thousands of our money on bottled water?