Quote of the Day – Bitter(10/7/2012)

Why is PBS lobbying so hard for taxpayer funds? I know they raise money effectively. I gave during a fundraiser to get @alfieboe tickets.

BitterTweet
October 5, 2012


[The answer to this is actually really simple.  PBS while they could fund themselves through private means still wants “free” money from the government.  It makes things that much more cushy.

Government throwing funds at the economy to “stimulate” it, actually has the opposite effect and I will explain what I watched first hand.

Back when they did they started talking about the massive bailout almost immediately utilities put a halt to current projects.  Utilities plan projects years in advance and have the funds to do them.  They froze the projects because they could smell money on the table and ultimately they could use it to improve their bottom line.  When the stimulus was finally passed they then needed to file for the grants.  The way this worked most simply was a dollar for dollar matching scheme to help with equipment retrofits.

So all of that moved at a snails pace through the cogs of government bureaucratic paper. Meanwhile here in reality, planned projects have now been on hold for over 6 months, all because they could smell money on the table.  When funding finally did start rolling in, almost a year after it started to slow down, projects rates looked just like it did prior to the funding push.  What happened was a projects that it merely subsiding what was already planned.  This didn’t have the effect of creating jobs since it’s still the same crews doing the work.  The most entertaining thing though is overall the decrease in output will never be really made up.  Everything the utilities are doing was already planned, this didn’t magically create extra work.  All it did in the end was delay the inevitable.

How’s that for the government “stimulating” the economy?  Still think only the government is capable of solving problems?

This is why PBS is going off the deep end.  They see free money and they want some of it.  -B]

Quote of the Day–Adam Kline (10/3/2012)

The NRA thrives on weak challenges; it sees them as fundraising opportunities. Its supporters are ready to believe that any gun bill — no matter how rational its purpose or how minor its scope — is a threat to God-given and constitutionally protected rights, and will contribute generously, giving the organization not only the psychological momentum of a win, but likely a surplus as well. It is up to us to choose our battles wisely.

(Emphasis mine)

Adam KlineSen. Kline: Democrats haven’t wimped out on guns

October 2, 2012


[h/t to Joe for the article. First, side rant. Adam Kline also said the following:

The way it works in this democracy is that we legislators represent our constituents. We can get a majority of our colleagues on an issue when enough of us sense that the people are there, or almost there, or at least going there, and that we may have to push them there, but at the end of the day our risk will not have been wasted. The work of moving public opinion on an issue cannot be done by legislators alone, whose work makes us generalists, but must be done by the activists who care particularly about that issue.

We don’t live in a democracy Mr. Kline.  We live in a constitutional republic.  I realize though that a majority of those who now work in the legislative bodies are ignorant of how the system was actually designed to work and prefer to twist and manipulate it to destroy the rights of the minority.  For you see a democracy is nothing more than mob-rule.  If the mob wants to take your property, they can.  If the mob wants to kill you, they can.  If the mob decides they would rather bleed you dry like a slave, they can.  The point of a constitutional republic is that both the majority and minority are protected equally.

Now back to the quote at hand, more specifically the part emphasized.  There is a reason we view it as a threat to a natural and enumerated right.  Because it IS! I grew up in the age of the 1994 assault weapons ban.  I remember it quite well and it’s goal was down right obvious.  Don’t believe me?  The most popular rifle in America would still be banned if it wasn’t for the expiration of the AWB.

That was claimed by supporters as being rational and the only way to curb gun violence.  The thing is, statistically gun control has been proven to be ineffective over and over again.  Further when you compare nations with strong gun controls it becomes obvious it creates a world that is less safe for the law abiding. 

That is the crux Mr. Kline.  The American public no longer likes being criminalized by the government for merely having and effective tool of self defense.  The American public sees what you’re doing and claiming for exactly what it is.  You’re issue is that you can no longer control the narrative.  Not only can you not control the narrative but you’re upset because the people on your side of the debate are crazy and violent.  Because of this your side of the debate is left standing still every time you attempt to infringe on that natural and enumerated right.

It is however unsurprising that you find your home the Peoples Republic of Puget Sound and you feel your “majority” other wise known merely as Seattle is a right for you to dictate life throughout the rest of the state.  I doubt this will make any difference given the 37th Legislative district is the equivalent of Communist China, but if you live there, please send that tyrant home.

So in closing Mr. Kline, in the words of Melvin Udall, “Where did they teach you to talk like this, some Panama City sailor wanna hump hump bar, or is this get-a-way day and your last shot at his whiskey, sell crazy some place else, we’re all stocked up here.”  -B]

What is wrong with this picture…

First up is the following headline:

US Embassy issues terror warning for Americans in Egypt

It appears that there is credible information suggesting another terrorist attack is going to occur in the middle east. You know much like the first one that killed a US Ambassador and 3 other US citizens.  Our fearless leaders response can be summed up with the following statement:

The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday that it would provide Egypt’s new government an emergency cash infusion of $450 million, but the aid immediately encountered resistance from a prominent lawmaker wary of foreign aid and Egypt’s new course under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Umm, why are we still sending money to that crap hole?  Seriously, why is anyone in our government still contemplating sending our money to those who will just use it to kill our own civilians.

Yeah, Reason magazines response I think fits this incident quite well.

Lets not ignore the fact that this administration still tries to blame a video for something that is actually a terrorist action.  I watched the video and it doesn’t even qualify as something that would even fit into Grindhouse cinema.  Some of us have woke the fuck up, there’s plenty more than continue to want to rack up debt and fund our enemies, who’s really asleep at the wheel here?

Today’s Lesson

My dad drilled something into my head growing up and the following reminded me of it:

One of the more depressing things in the life of being an activist for rights is that more often than not, rights are lost because people didn’t want to defend the bad guy. It’s easy to look the other way when Scummy McScumbag has his rights violated because… well because scumbag!

To which another person stated the following which further rung the bell:

But his legal rights were violated in the name of Justice. And as Robb points out, the violation of this man’s legal rights is a loss of rights for everyone. It gets easier to break the rules once you’ve done it once, and in this case, when you’ve been officially blessed by the Powers That Be.

Here is today’s lesson folks, it is simple and only a single sentence:

There is no correlation between the law and justice.

Did everyone get that?  Please read it out loud and repeat it to yourself a few times because it is very critical you remember and understand it.

It is important to understand because that line succinctly describes both the positive and negative in the justice system.  On the one hand you have the issue as Robb pointed out with Mr. Scumbag.

Mr. Scumbag gets a pass because his rights were violated, this boils back to the principal of protecting the innocent.  This principal is important and is one that as a free people we should never lose sight of.

The second side of this is that the law can just as easily screw someone who doesn’t actually need screwing.  It’s pretty darn unjust to annihilate someone’s rights and make them a felon over what really amounts to something that isn’t an actual danger to society.

We must remain vigilant for that exact reason.  As our “elected betters” create laws, there is nothing actually guaranteeing that those laws are just.  This especially holds true  when the phrase above is tied in conjunction with the following:

The purpose of the law is to keep those who have money and power with the money and the power.

Lets also not forget about prosecutors and how they also fit into this entire mess.  They provide yet another prong in the long illustration how there isn’t a correlation between the law and justice.

Yeah, at times it sucks when you think about the fact you have to defend some dude who truly should go to jail.  The thing is, he would have if law enforcement played by the rules and the prosecutor did his job correctly, making sure to charge him with the applicable crime.

h/t Uncle

Quote of the Day – Frank Fleming

I hear the DNC had a video tribute to Ted Kennedy, the only politician with a confirmed kill in the War on Women.

Frank Fleming (@IMAO_) – Tweet (via Alan Gura)


[All I can think to add to this is, “That’s about par for the course.”  I did make a tweet about the hypocrisy of the DNC requiring ID to get in, but you don’t need ID to vote.  Someone replied saying the following:

It’s called security you know secret service.

I didn’t realize they needed photo ID before they searched you or your belongings for “security”.  Sounds like a great excuse to keep out “undesirables.”

Joe and I were driving across Nevada as the thing went down though we were getting updates via Bitter and others.  The feeling I got by the end was the hypocrisy coming from them was so thick it could have been granite by the time it was all over.  -B]

Good for this small business owner!

A Virginia business owner refused a Vice President Joe Biden campaign visit at his three month old bakery on Wednesday because of President Barack Obama’s recent “you didn’t build that” comments.

If I lived within a day’s driving distance round trip I would be patronizing your establishment as soon as possible.  Instead I hope that some of my friends who live in Virginia can pay you a visit in my stead. I applaud you for standing up for yourself and not taking the cowards way out for cheap press and letting your convictions slide.

Though I will say you’re probably getting considerably more press and coverage by telling them no, than you would have by accepting their patronage.

Now some have claimed that Obama was merely talking about infrastructure, except lets look at exactly what he said (emphasis mine):

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help,” Obama said last month. “There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.  Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive.  Somebody invested in roads and bridges.  If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made that happen.”

If I have a business, I didn’t build that.  Someone else made that happen.  In the words of Samuel L. Jackson:

He said, plain as day, “if I have a business I didn’t build that, someone else did”.  But lets humor them for a second and say it just applied to “infrastructure”.

It wasn’t the government that built the roads, no, it was small independent contractors, aka small businesses that built that.  They were paid from money collected by the federal government.  That money was collected from businesses and their employees.  They made that money by selling goods and services to other people.  So really small businesses through inter-cooperation built roads and infrastructure with the government getting involved to take a cut of the costs.

So maybe what Obama was actually talking about was money.  You see government prints the money and since it’s no longer standardized on anything they can print as much as they want.  So it was the government that built a fiat currency to use to buy all this stuff and in the end screw businesses by devaluing the currency used for transactions.  That is the only way that “If you have a business, you didn’t build that” can possibly make any sense.  That statement can only hold true if you say that government is the creator and founder of using money in exchange for goods and services.  Except you need not only use cash, you can barter or use precious metals in transactions as well.

The bottom line is the President let us look under the veil on that one.  Under that veil we saw what many of us already knew, a hard-core socialist that wants to drive private independent businesses into the ground and have a central government-run it all.  Because in that case no one would build that, it would all be “owned” by the government.  No thanks Mr. President, keep the change.

SSCC #378–The FBI

So, this is actually a kind of old incident but given new information I feel like classifying it as a state sponsored criminal.  Who is this criminal,  Major Nidal Hasan, the man animal responsible for the Fort Hood shooting.

Since I’m sure most of you are familiar with the shooting I won’t reiterate details.  What is interesting is the following:

A top FBI official testified today that Ft. Hood shooter Army Major Nidal Hasan should have been interviewed by FBI and Defense Department investigators before the deadly shooting based on reports from a field office about the major’s activities

Gee, you think it would have been a good idea to interview him there sparky.  Tell me why didn’t you interview him given you state the following:

“I am concerned that there were warning signs, and that with more aggressive investigation, there is a chance that this incident could have been prevented.  I am further concerned that the reason for less-aggressive investigation may have been political sensitivities in the Washington Field Office, and maybe even the FBI’s own investigating guidelines,” Wolf said in his opening statement at the hearing.

So let me get this straight, you ignored him and let him walk on by because of Political Correctness.  Did I understand that right there sparky?  Here’s the thing, you guys are more than happy to brew up your own terrorist cells, arm them, and then use the material to scare the public.  If you don’t understand what I’m talking about, watch this, I don’t feel like digging up every associate link.

As horrible as this sounds, and it is purely conjecture, what’s to say you all didn’t just look the other way to increase panic and fear, thus causing the American people to want to surrender more freedom and liberty thus giving you more power.  Seriously, someone explain to me how this could be allowed to pass purely under the guise of “Political Correctness?”

At best this was negligence, except this had to be willful.  People knowingly did nothing and the worst part of it all is the man still hasn’t be tried and many are still claiming this was not an act of terrorism.  Evidently the DHS has now released a new requirement that to qualify as a terrorist you must be a white Caucasian male, since you know they run in screaming “Allah Akbar” while shooting at every Christian in the joint.

Seriously, how is it the American public can allow the government and American media to look the other way and play down exactly what happened that day?  How is the American people can believe this was anything but an act of terrorism.  I know many don’t, but they sit idly by and do nothing while this administration plays the PC game to get this terrorist off the hook.  All the while the DHS redefines terrorist’s so broadly myself along with many others fit the description with not a stretch of their definition which doesn’t even relate to the actual definition of terrorist and terrorism.  Yet a man who obviously committed an act of terrorism and had ties to known terrorists under the traditional definition was just suffering PTSD.  Doesn’t that just seem a little wrong?

The reason this happened is obvious, the state willfully allowed it to happen for political capital.  He was a state sponsored terrorist that they allowed to complete his plan to reign terror on American soil.  Every person associated with allowing him to walk free should be hung for treason along with him.  Someone should have blown the whistle, even if it meant the end of your career.  Just because it hurts, doesn’t mean it isn’t the right thing to do.

I hate sounding like a conspiracy theorist, but seriously this is just too damn stupid.  The long complicated plot is trying to believe that political correctness allowed this to happen as opposed to people willfully looking the other way in an effort to gain more power.

State Sponsored Criminal and Terrorist 277: Major Nidal Hasan

Because real terrorism isn’t terrorism, it’s the result of PTSD, and all those libertarians that just want the nanny state to leave them the hell alone, they’re the real terrorists.

SSCC #364–TSA

Seriously, I’m having problems not wishing violence upon people.  Why?  Because I have no clue why anyone would feel the following is acceptable behavior.

While I was going through the TSA, some of them started laughing in my direction. I thought it might’ve been someone behind me, but I found out otherwise.

They went through my bag (for no reason), and found a couple bags of candy I brought. I was told I wasn’t allowed to fly with that (wtf? I’ve flown with food before — these were even sealed still because I brought them right in the airport). I was then asked if I would like to donate the candy “To the USO”. Since I know the airport there has an Air National Guard base, and I figured it would go to the soldiers, I (annoyed) said sure, why not?

The guards, as I was getting scanned, started eating the candy they just told me was for the soldiers. In front of me, still laughing at me (very clearly now). One of them asked why they were laughing, and one of them came up to me, pointed at my shirt, laughed at me and said, “Fucking deafie”. The Louisville TSA called me a “fucking deafie” and laughed at me because I was deaf, and they expected wouldn’t say anything back (or wouldn’t hear them). Make no bones about it — she was facing me and I read her lips. There was no mistake. I would later find out that they had called at least 4 other individuals the same thing.

Seriously, it makes me so angry I can barely see straight.  What angers me more than just the actions of these despicable individuals is that no one yelled at the agents.  No one confronted them.  Everyone stuck their tail between their legs. 

I know exactly why no one was willing to stand up though.  No one wants to be stranded from home on the whim of some high school drop out who was too stupid to get his GED.

I am at a loss of words why anyone would tolerate that behavior in general.  While yes you do have a small risk, the quickest way to minimize the risk is to bring the majority of those who were silently protesting inside to the fight.  You do so by leading from the front.

I am disappointed in my fellow Americans.  Not only for the fact that they would allow the TSA to grow to such a behemoth mass, but they would stand by and do nothing in that situation.  I’m tired of waiting for legislators to do something.

If you’re flying, buy a bottle of Mountain Dew, drink it or dump it down the drain.  Refill it while you’re in the bathroom and feel free to let them taste test it.  Harass them verbally when seen in public.  Call them names while they do their job, make their jobs miserable.  Make it so no one would willingly take that job.  There are other options, many of which are of questionable legality, but then again, revolution is legal in the first person while illegal in the third person.  What they are doing is illegal, yet no one has acted to stop it within legal means.  Well at what point to do give up on Plan A and move to Plan B?

I refuse to fly specifically because of these state sponsored thieves and molesters.  I am reaching the point where I am going to be hard pressed to control my rage towards any of the blue gloved Gestapo.

State Sponsored Criminals: The whole damn lot of the TSA

Because when someone is deaf, or has any other disability, it is perfectly OK to harass them, steal their stuff, and be rude, insolent, and total pricks because your employer is Uncle Sam.

*And if you didn’t get the clue, I am pissed and if anyone has any video of a TSA agent being verbally ridiculed to the point of emotional breakdown, that would seriously help cheer me up.  Hell seeing a bunch of people riot in an air terminal would be a big step up.  There’s a reason our legislators aren’t doing a damn thing about it, we aren’t seeking to do damage yet.  This shit keeps up, I’m sure someone’s tripwire is going to snap

If riots occurred in air terminals, if people started being injured because of the TSA’s attitude towards the general populace, attitudes would quickly shift… I’m not saying anyone should, or condoning any such action, I am merely stating an observation that our legislators fail to act because they see no need or concern to act.

I’m all for making some molester who thinks it’s OK because Uncle Sam told him to stick his hands down little Timmy’s pants or up little Tiffinay’s skirt realize he’s a piece of crap who should be expunged from society as the heartless predator he is.  I would say to start laying on every last legislator too, but they’re a bunch of corrupt cowards anyway, and that type of stuff happens on a daily basis so what would be new?

**End Rant!

H/T to my buddy Jonah from high school.