How to fix the economy: throw your wife back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant is optional (Part 1 of 2)

This is a two part blog entry regarding how to fix our rigged economy despite 200 or so detractors at every avenue of every corner at both the micro and macro economic chess game. Enjoy.

Recently, I was at an ACL lab here in town waiting to have a routine blood panel. It’s been about four years since I have been to my family Doctor. I’ve been relatively healthy outside of a cold virus here and there so I have had no reason to go. This changed about two weeks ago when I got a letter from my doctor reflecting my noted absence.  Being a proactive individual (yet a habitual procrastinator) I figured it would be a good time to go and get a check-up.

So, a week later, there I am surrounded by CNN and an orgy of magazines. As I work my way through the titles I stumbled onto this Time Magazine cover-story, entitled:

The Richer $ex: Women are overtaking men as America’s breadwinners. Why that’s good for everyone.

This article was penned by Liza Mundy, whom also wrote the book: The Richer Sex: How the New Majority of Female Breadwinners Is Transforming Sex, Love and Family.

 
Now, it wasn’t until the last page of this piece before I realized it was from March 26, 2012 (mornings after a 12-hour fast is cruel and unusual punishment to this 6-1 235lb frame). With that being said, the article brought up a great point: women are becoming more assertive in the work force and in board rooms all across the country. And me being of the freedom of choice mindset; god bless.

Although the article did a decent job of pointing out the gains of women and the subsequent natural losses of men; I felt a bit empty inside however after finishing it up. This could have been due partly to my empty/gurgling stomach but nonetheless, it made me think and ask myself; while this is obviously great for one sex, is this really great for America as a whole? Are we all really 'better' for it? The short answer, I would say is this: it’s complicated. The long answer... its even more complicated.

On the surface, superficially, it’s obviously great. Nobody should be not hired based on anything but the ability to live up to, if not exceed, expectations of said job. Now, from a true Libertarian mindset this could get complicated because business owners should be able to decide what’s best for their business regardless of what is considered 'fair' but that’s another topic for another day.

What you and I consider to be the ingredients for functional/prosperous economy is always going to be different. From my viewpoint it’s simple. Sound money, home ownership, strong middle class & strong families are a cornerstone to a strong, free economy for all. We can scratch sound money off the table (thank you Federal Reserve, complicit banksters, elected and unelected political whores). What about Home ownership? We have seen that to a mixed bag at best, especially of late.

How about strong families?

According to this article, in 1960, five-percent of children were born to unmarried mothers; in 2010 there was 41%. Now social factors have to be taken into account. For example; people do not always marry before or after having children today, when in 1960 it was culturally looked down upon to not be married before hand. With that being said, the numbers are staggering. In the black community alone those numbers of children born to unmarried mothers are almost in the seventy percentile (67%).

Once these baby’s are born, more times than not, they are sent off to some form of childcare and with more and more women having children unmarried; it’s often out of the home in the hands of strangers.

May Saubier who authored: ‘Doing Time: What It Really Means To Grow Up In Daycare’ says in her book:

“A baby who spends five years at one center will lose one-third to almost half of her caregivers every twelve months or so.”

Not only do you lose the one on one relationship that comes with one parent at home to classes with sometimes a 10-1 child to caregiver ratio you also have to factor in the fact that 40+ hours a week that baby is out of the home not bonding with loved ones. If it wasn’t for weekends, you would have strangers raising a child as much as the parent(s).

This is not to say having your child in childcare outside of the home makes you a bad parent. Without work and income there is no stability. However, to say its “good for everyone” as the author of this Time article suggests in the subtitle, is incredibly shortsighted.

There was also an English study, released in 2009, that centered around 12,000 British schoolchildren. The study determined: mothers who worked full-time had the unhealthiest followed by those who worked part-time. The study published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health went on to state that:

“Currently, approximately 60% of women with a child aged five or younger in the UK or USA are employed. For many families the only parent or both parents are working.” 

Now you might look at this study and say what does 12k students in England have to do with the 315 million people here in the states. Statistically the sample size is small but I would also think, just based on common sense, that a parent in the home as opposed to a parent not in the home just works better. It would more often than not, lead to better choices all across the board.

There was also a revelation regarding Head Start, which is primarily a low income based program for pre-school aged children.  A Congressional mandated study of the Department of Health and Human Services (that fund Head Start) found that there was no benefit to the program for kids. In fact, in some cases it was actually a negative influence. But don’t allow those facts get in the way of this 8 Billion dollar job’s program. Don’t take my word for it either; this column by Mary Katharine Ham (Hotair.com) neuters this failure quite efficiently enough.

 Do we see a connection yet?

We have more and more mothers not marrying at alarming rates. However, we still have a healthy birth rate. We also have more women entering the workforce, more so than ever before and the kids home alone or in daycare are at a sided disadvantage versus kids with one parent who is always at home. Yet, it’s said to be “good for everyone”? I must confess, from the kid’s standpoint – I would emphatically disagree.


Part 2 tomorrow centering on the economic impact.

The sky IS FALLING (in graphs)

The NCAA tournament isn’t over yet but we know its coming to an end in exactly 16 days. If I was to tell you it’s not over yet, I would be correct. But does change the fact that is will end? Of course it doesn’t. For many people, because we haven’t seen bread lines or riots in the streets the “sky isn’t falling” yet. Does that change the reality that our economy is on the downside of the bell curve?

When the FED dropped interest rates back in ’07 the idea was that it would incur borrowing from the public & private business; therefore creating new/bigger business and in the process creating jobs or at least not hemorrhaging more than the economy was already in the process of doing. Then the rates kept dropping and dropping and wont go up until the very least 2014 and then what? Go up? The debt will explode in a hyperbolic fashion.

This graph shows we paid MORE in interest on our debt in 2008 (10,024,724,896,912.49) then we did in 2012 (16,066,241,407,385.89). How do you pay LESS interest on six trillion more in principal? There is only one solution; you pay substantial less interest. 

As we know, unemployment has dropped from its high of 10.0% back in ’09 to 7.7% as of last month but at what cost?

GDP has only seen moderate gains during the last five years and in fact, as you can see below, the last quarter actually seen our GDP in decline; despite the fact that private GDP rose in the same period. 

Some people will point to the cuts in defense spending as the main culprit and they would be correct (as defense have seen a 22% drop in spending) but if running nothing short of an empire and that is how we are keeping afloat in the first place, well… 

Mortgage rates are now at their lowest rate in recorded history and this has been a yearly trend these last few years. Only now in March of 2013, are we beginning to see signs of the real estate market coming back to life; despite a plummet in interest rates the last six years that were supposed to (as said in my opening) entice borrowers. Was it worth it?

Was it worth it and at what cost are the two questions I pose to you today. At what cost and is it worth it to live for today at the expense of tomorrow?

The CBO estimates of this nation’s debt keep getting worse, study after study. This is a quite simple process: the interest rates remain low, the debt piles up and the economy barley moves. These projections below are based on current conditions. Remember, zero is the end game; there isn’t much that can be done after that. We are basically at zero interest rates now.  

These examples I gave are just the tip of the iceberg and they are all interconnected. And that iceberg is the general public of this nation being so inundated in debt, so much so that we are getting to the point where offers of basically free money can’t move the needle any longer. These last four years of record low interest rates with barley a crawl until four, five sometimes six years later illustrates this quite luminously.

With wages not keeping up with real inflation (not the phony government statistics) and the globalization of the market, incomes for the average American (an overwhelming majority of) are stagnated; if not in decline. Is there any way that changes? Of course not, this is the new reality.

So to keep up, for most Americans, debt is the only logical solution. Afterall, we know saving via the conventional bank route is futile with rates being under 1%. And as we know debt = money, so when the economy can’t jump start and the FED’s QE programs don’t jump start growth; what else can the FED do? It’s been said by Bernanke that the quick death of deflation will not occur, so that only leaves one alternative; go to zero and close its eyes. Then hold on for limb and life as the decent to a slow death via hyperinflation begins.

The political process here has become a joke. A crooked game ran by self-serving lawyers and career politicians hell bent on seeing who can kick the can down the road the furthest. What was once a calling of statesmen has been replace by a bloodthirsty pack of statists. Republicans blame Democrats for not cutting spending despite having no solution themselves and god-damn you if you want to cut a bloated defense budget! Democrats want to actually ADD to the problem with a monstrosity addition to healthcare. While both “sides” will tell you it’s the other guys fault. Then all the puppets and zombies watching/reading the propaganda will parrot it. You think this is going to change?

At this moment, under these terms we are watching the beginning of the end finally become visible before our very eyes. Americans and their distractions have reached the crescendo. They can no longer afford them. The sky isn’t falling, but our economy is. It’s circling the drain, not as fast as Greece or Spain but its circling nonetheless. So move over American Idol, the freak show isn’t just in your living room its right outside your window. Get ya’ popcorn ready.

The chequeing scheme, where micro meets macro

This is about as a rounded and admittedly loose connection as one can make but a connection nonetheless. Let me get straight to the back story.

My lady friend of 18 years & counting refuses to use a debit card. She despises credit. She also prefers to not use cash either. She's still the mindset of 20 years ago when everything revolves around cheques. Now, in her defense there is a practical reason behind it. She feels if you really want to buy something that added step of writing it out reduces impulse buying and judging by her sterling accounting of our finances; I offer no debate.

A few weeks ago she unexpectedly ran out of cheques. Unfortunately this coincided with the long Martin Luther King Day weekend thus the banks were closed. So with no ability to access her money, she had two choices: use credit or dont buy what she needed until the next day. As we were just one day from our annual winter getaway to Florida... I enter with option three: me picking up the tab. And being the loving spouse I am, I chose to use my cheques. One part out of respect for her and partly because I just haven't written one in so long. At the same time, I felt it would make it an interesting exercise to practice my cursive. 

So a few transactions and a few chicken scratches later, we were on our way. When we got back home is when it got interesting. It seems due to inactivity and I moving my direct deposit out of that bank, my account was closed. Unbeknownst to me, I had written three cheques without having an account at all. I quickly made contact with the vendors and paid in cash the amount + fees. This suddenly made me remember why I stopped using cheques over a decade ago: overdrafts.

Now at this point It was behind us. One week later came the letters from collection agencies demanding the funds to cover said cheques. So, I called to explain to them the situation. A manager on duty of the collection service then hit me with this...

"Sir, if you dont have proof you made good on these cheques we require a payment to take care of that. We except two forms of payment. Western Union and Cheque by phone."

Cheque by phone, I asked? I told her I wrote a bad cheque, why would they accept another cheque? She then begins to tell me it happens all the time. That people knowingly write bad cheques and then make payments to the collection agencies with more bad cheques. If this process seems completely irrational and made up; its only the same exact thing that our government does (and gets away with) regarding the dollar.

Now I did say it was a loose connection and you made it this far so bare with me.

We effectively print dollars with no tangible backing whatsoever, just "confidence" that the dollar will not crash and that in turn will not lead to a run on the bank. Remember, due to the modern practice of fractional reserve banking, bank's tend to only keep a small fraction in liquid reserves. Thus any major fluctuation of withdrawals in a one day period can make things very interesting for a bank.

Now with that said, after the banks make these monopoly based dollars, they just sit back and operate the biggest shakedown modern civilization has ever seen.

By way of OPEC taking only US dollars for its oil (thank you President Nixon and King Faisal), it forces oil buying nations (read the entire world) to naturally obtain US dollars so they can obtain the OPEC oil (which holds about 2/3 of the worlds oil supply). OPEC then takes those US dollars and reinvests them into US banks further strengthening our place as the preferred empire of the world over.

So, like a guy armed with a closed chequing account and a fistful of cheques, you too can play the game of tangible assets/commodities for nothing too. Buy the goods and services with cheques that, like our dollar, are essentially worthless paper backed by nothing; THEN use the same cheques to pay off the creditors! You come out with goods and everyone else is stuck holding worthless paper. Then rinse & repeat.

The difference between the guy running that scheme with a closed chequing account is eventually the jig will be up. Unless you’re real slippery and willing to constantly move and change your name quite often; it will all come to an end. But what about the US petrol-dollar scheme? How long before that hustle is over? When you think about it, from the US point of view, it’s paramount that the US remains the reserve currency for oil. For if not, we can expect a lot of dollars coming back home and when I say a lot, I am talking the SHIT-TON of quantities.

If that happens our standard of living (even at a declining rate) will all but disappear. This will create instant hyperinflation and eventually a sell-off so large that the immigration issues on the borders wont be commonly known from Mexican people trying to get as they are today but instead it will be American citizens trying to get out.

Its pretty obvious the lengths our leaders will go to keep this asset bubble propped up. So, what happens if you don't agree with this petrodollar recycling scheme? What if you are in favor of, say a more "open competition" regarding how to pay for oil? As I stated last year in this piece; it usually doesn’t end well for you.

Now with Iraq and Afghanistan wrapping up, all the sabers are waving towards Iran and they are running out of time. Friday, President Obama put them on notice Friday saying:

"Right now, we think it would take over a year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon"

Then eloquently added:  "but obviously we don’t want to cut it too close.”

The President then went on to call a nuclear Iran "a red line". You have less than a year Iran. Less then a year before you continue or end your nuclear program. But remember, the nuclear program is a guise. The real threat remains the precedent you are making with disrespect for the dollar. So, close your oil bourse and fall back in line or else.

Now picture that guy again with the cheques and the false chequing account. Hes cashing cheques and receiving goods and when you want to collect or end the scheme he shows up at your place of business with an army and guns and tells you if you dont change your ad's or paint your store Tropicana yellow hes gonna shoot the place up and remove you. You like your job dont you? Your kids eat waffles dont they? You need money to buy waffles. The American hegemony alive and well; Tony Soprano don’t have nothin’ on us. 

The Droning of America

  

“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”

This was a quote from a Department of Justice (DOJ) memo landed by NBC’s Michael Isikoff last month. In this white paper memo it’s clear the backdrop has been set; completely trampling over the 4^th, 5^th & 14^th amendments in one fell swoop. The Executive branch will wage its war on your freedoms under the guise of “terror” not just in your backyard in the Middle East but your front yard and everywhere in between.

Per the FAA’s website, they have granted over 1,400 licenses or better known as Certificates of Authorization (COA) to some corporations but mostly government agencies to allow unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) to occupy US airspace. Congress, despite its miserable record of futility and utter failure managed to pass a bill that set a September 2015 deadline for “full integration” of UAS into the national airspace.

When the powers that be want to torture and cannot do so because it’s the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, they get “creative”. They just rename it. So "torture" becomes "enhanced interrogation techniques". That’s what these politicians think of your intellect. They just rename an act like your mom used to do when you were four; calling cabbage apple pie.  

When they want to take away your 1st amendment right of free speech and assembly they deem you a terrorist or an enemy combatant. 

The 2011 drone strike in Yemen that killed two alleged al-Qaida operatives Samir Khan and Anwar al-Awlaki were both U.S. citizens. Lest not forget al-Awlaki’s 16 year old son also an American who was also killed in the attack. Neither men (and of course neither was a minor) were indicted nor charged by the US Government for any crimes. Instead they were put onto a list without due process and executed by a remote control airplane in a desert thousands of miles away; the same remote control airplanes we will have patrolling our skies here in the states.  

Some of you might say, but both men were al-Qaida, but how do we know? How do we know what they did if there was no charges or trial? If they are American citizens they are guaranteed their rights by our constitution. The same constitution that each elected representative is sworn to uphold and protect. So how can these elected representatives by the people for the people have the audacity to kill American citizens without a trial or even charge? 

The answer is simple. Americans are too quick to trade freedom for security.

Isikoff also notes a speech from Attorney General Eric Holder in March of 2012 where he endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans. Just like seen in the recently discovered DOJ white paper, the narrative is consistent, as Holder states they (those on the kill list) could be legal and justified kills if government officials determine the target poses “an imminent threat of violent attack.”

There is that pesky phrase again: “an imminent threat of violent attack”. How do you go about deciding how imminent a threat is? This falls into the hands of a judge or a jury of ones peers, right? Normally, yes, but in today’s brave new world, it’s just not the case.

No, the President and his appointed Attorney General play both jury and judge. While they give the thumbs up or down on who is to be killed; the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and an army of drones play executioner. This wording is very vague and ambiguous (i sense a trend here) thus the interpretation of these words and how they apply to citizens must be dealt with accordingly. Allowing this power to rest in one mans hands and his attorney general is the way of a monarch or dictatorship not a republic.

If this sounds like something out of communist Russia or Nazi German; it's only because it is.

This JSOC falls under the command of the President making in nothing more than a Gestapo. A force that's militarily superiority is only matched by its geo-political carte blanche. Bound not by borders, sovereignty, neither international nor domestic laws but simply the decision then subsequent command of one man. This is not democracy. This is why we have a constitution. Is it any wonder those in power go at lengths to undermine it?

So, when Rand Paul in epic fashion brings about a filibuster last week to protest the nomination of war monger & drone whore John Brennan, to head the CIA, you can bet he was met with considerable disdain. And this was not just from the usual suspects (namely the President and his minions) but from the likes of none other than neo-con hawks John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Two career politicians dressed up as republican senators who sold their soul long ago to K-Street and two mouth breathers who will do anything to defend their corporate masters in the military industrial complex.

Your rights via the constitution get in the way of those in power. War’s and chasing bogeymen in the sands of Arabia funnel obscene profits to those in power both at the elected and private level. Anyone and I mean ANYONE who defends drones strikes on American soil while promoting endless wars against an “enemy” that’s about as dangerous as street gang in Omaha… is the enemy. They are an enemy to our republic and they are an THE “imminent threat” to our natural born rights as American citizens. Know thy enemy.

Another positive gun story. Shhhhhhhhh

Yesterday, much to the delight of certain types of businesses that profit off of school shooting tragedies (read media), there was another school shooting, this one occurring in Atlanta. As of today the two victims were said to be a student who was shot in the back of the neck and teacher who had minor injuries from being trampled during the melee. The student, a 14 year-old, was not seriously injured and was remarkably released from the hospital the same day.

Now, there appears to be a motive regarding the shooter and the victim as there was said to be a dispute. So the likelihood of this becoming a massacre was unlikely. With that said, there were steps taken into consideration by the school beforehand to keep these things from escalating. First, they had metal detectors, obviously they weren't affective here but a barrier nonetheless. Secondly and most important, there was an off-duty Atlanta police officer stationed at the school as a resource officer; something I have advocated before. 


According to ABC, Atlanta PD Chief George Turner stated that an armed off-duty Atlanta officer was able to disarm the suspect MOMENTS after the shooting. Without even using his gun to do so. Kind of makes the point of a trained officer vs a kid with a gun, statistically speaking, its overwhelmingly in the officers favor. What if there is no officer there? We can assume because this was targeted it wouldn't have gotten worse but if he wasn't there... does this 14 year old kid walk up and "finish" off a obviously defenseless classmate?

Now, where is the coverage of this? Where is the ABC special edition where they cancel programming to fit it on-air in a timely fashion? Now obviously these are rhetorical questions, because there will be no extended coverage. There will be no interviews with family and neighbors nor will there be any candlelight vigils. All because tragedy was avoided. 

Seems backwards but the reality is we often celebrate tragedy and push to the back burner or simply just ignore situations when tragedy is averted. This isn't some "agenda" by the media, it's simply an indictment of what put's eye balls on the tube. Its a clear indicator of the average Americans tabloid love affair with sentimentalization, drama and tragedy. And to top it off, the likelihood of your child becoming a victim (0.00003% probability) of such an attack is about as likely as Jim Cook puts it:

As earth being hit by asteroid 2012 VE77 between the years 2033-2035.

 

As you can see, the homicide rate is actually falling considerably while school shooting's stay relatively the same and have never reached over 40 per year (with no disrespect to those effected of course). Yet here we sit, a large portion of the public using this terrible, yet extremely remote possibility as a pretext to start restricting gun ownership while ignoring the benefits of a gun in a school that just yesterday possibly prevented a massacre. I understand the American public for the most part is dumbed down and distracted but we are reaching all time lows for common sense collectively and the media is right there out in front like the Pied Piper.

Amerikan Stasi has a vital mission but whos the threat?

Has any weapon garnered as much attention in memory as the AR-15 has the last month? I can’t think of any weapon more demonized and we are talking about a weapon that only fires .22 caliber bullets. Well, the Ar-15 is in the news again this week and no, I’m not talking about the daily jib-jab about banning it. What I am talking about is the Department of Homeland Security’s recent request for 7,000 of these “assault rifles” that are supposed to be so dangerous.

Now let’s get one thing straight before we continue. Any gun in the wrong hands is dangerous but the gun isn’t what makes it dangerous per se, it’s the person holding it. An AR-15 is no more dangerous then a bottle of whiskey unattended; the whiskey isn’t going to consume itself and the gun isn’t going to shoot itself. So the common denominator… ah yes, humans are. Imperfect, emotional, crazy and often foolish humans are the problem not the inanimate object.  

So, the Department of Homeland Security puts in a large order for guns that are not fit for public use (personal defense weapons suitable for personal defense use in close quarters) or at least that is what those advocating #guncontrol would lead you to believe. My question or comment on this piece of news isn’t the hypocrisy because it’s rather obvious. No, my question is what exactly is the Department of Homeland Security up to? Let’s take a look at their mission statement taken right off their website:

The Department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation from the many threats we face. This requires the dedication of more than 240,000 employees in jobs that range from aviation and border security to emergency response, from cybersecurity analyst to chemical facility inspector. Our duties are wide-ranging, but our goal is clear - keeping America safe.

Seems rather ambiguous to me does it not to you? So they want to keep us safe from the many threats we face, presumably here in the homeland. Sounds about as clear a statement as the Navy’s slogan they been pumping out for the last few years:

“A global force for good”

Words like “good, safe many threats” all these are pretty loose terms and for good reason, what these agencies are doing is being as broad as possible. Why you say? To keep their options open. Who is an enemy and keep “us” safe from whom is about ambiguous as it is chilling. Now strap on your tin foil hats for a second, I don’t do this often but lets just look at a few more things regarding the DHS and play connect the dots.

Last year the DHS ordered 450 Million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition. Just a few months later there was an order placed for 750 million additional rounds but then after questioning it was deemed to be classified information. We also have Tim Brown from Freedomoutpost.com who reported last year about the DHS buying 700 pounds of High Density Ammonium Nitrate and 700 pounds of A-5 Flake RDX used to create “dirty” bombs. If that wasn’t enough even the Social Security Office is stalking up, buying 174,000 hollow point rounds. Hollow point rounds are made for maximum damage, expanding in the body thus no exit wound. Not exactly what you expect granny to see when going to get her check now is it?

Mass purchases of AR-15’s, billions of rounds, explosives… one has to ask himself what is Homeland Security getting ready for because it appears they are stock piling to wage war not just protect the border. Remember DHS’s slogan opening line: “to secure the nation from the many threats we face” With illegal immigration actually trending down whom is left to pose a threat? Now that you got your tin foil hat on nice and tight the answer is clear is it not? It’s you.

Rights are being infringed upon in the name of security. Entire sectors in business are being shipped overseas. College students are now going to school taking on debt and having no place to work to obtain money to pay back said debt. Income inequality like we have today hasn’t been seen since the 1920’s. 

Corporations are getting richer while wages continue to fall. The poorest live like the middle class without lifting a finger (to keep them occupied with their Obama phones and free housing and not in the streets rioting). The richest live like kings siphoning off obscene profits that would make Rockefeller blush. And who makes it happen for both?

The middle class. They just keep running on the hamster wheel afraid to become poor wanting to become rich while the poor are content and not too rowdy to cause a disturbance in the matrix. To top it off, while all this is going on... Inflation is building in reserves waiting to unleash like a tsunami as purchasing power is erodes with every dollar we flush into the system to prop up this pig economy that is nothing short of a mirage.
 

Call it what you will, class warfare. Crony capitalism. Tell me its not real and you looked outside and the sky isn't falling. Say what you will, but remember one thing. Civil unrest is the biggest threat to any power structure and this isnt going unnoticed by our government.

We are seeing the inevitable happen. It’s a game of musical chairs and the music is coming to an end. How soon it ends depends on how fast we lose confidence in that filthy dollar. I would love to quote Marilyn Manson here and end it with the line: “get your gun’ but it appears someone has beat me to the punch. But don't worry... their goal is clear "to keep America safe".

Democrat Sheriff goes HAM on Liberal gun grabbers.

"I'm Sheriff David Clarke and I want to talk to you about something personal: your safety. It's no longer a spectator sport; I need you in the game. But are you ready? With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option. You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back. But are you prepared? Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there. You have a duty to protect yourself and your family."

I got a little tingle up my leg it appears?? Sign me up!!

This was a public service announcement on radio last week in Milwaukee courtesy of County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. Here is a man with a badge telling you that your best option for safety in Milwaukee is no longer calling your police it’s protecting you and your family with a fistful of steel (thank you RATM). 

 

Now of course this didn’t go over well with everyone in Milwaukee. The Mayor had this to say about Sheriff Clarke’s call for public action in arming themselves:

"Apparently, Sheriff David Clarke is auditioning for the next Dirty Harry movie,"

With layoffs and furloughs this could be a political sparring match with the Mayor and the Sheriff but the good Sheriff has held this strong belief even in the wake of Newtown. He went to as far call for an armed officer in every school in the country (which I strongly agree with).

Not to be undone, Sheriff Clarke had this to say about the Mayor:

"Several years ago, a tire-iron-wielding suspect beat Mayor Tom Barrett to within inches of his life. I would think that he would be a lot more sensitive to people being able to defend themselves in such instances. A firearm and a plan of defense would have come in handy for him that day."

Here we have an interesting situation. We have a man of the law who is actually a Democrat not only advocating for an increasingly armed public but also going out of his way to call those (read Liberals) that support gun restrictions what they truly are:

"Shame on liberals for exploiting tragedy once again in our country and try to use tragedy as a reason to take our rights away.  Liberals are shameful."

And you are never going to guess how the Sheriff suggests we pay for a cop in every school…

“With all the money we spend on going green projects and other waste of money social service spending we do."

Bu... bu... but we cant do that, what about global warming? It appears Sheriff doesnt care for talking points, now does it? Here is a Democrat, who won his last election with 70% of the vote, thinking outside the box and favoring people’s rights and security over those of the state’s; which naturally are seized when you deny the rights of the public. Does it get better than this?? 

Now ask yourself, where do you come in on this debate? Are you a “wolf at the door” as Sheriff Clarke called the criminal? Are you a sheep who is in favor of gun control? Or are you a man/women of free will who wants to maintain their God given rights to protect his/her life?

Now only if we could have this non partisan common sense in Washington.

Dereliction of duty: How Black America has been hijacked by "race hustling pimps".

Here is a disclaimer. I am not black, I am a white male. Some of you may find this contrived or think I have no place speaking about issues pertaining to a race that I don’t belong to. I can accept that. Some may even go as far as a call me a racist (it’s been done before) and that is your right to feel that way as well. However, facts are not racist. They are facts. I also think it’s very important that black folks receive a different message that they are accustomed to hearing from “the left’. That’s why I spend many posts on this subject and with that said, let’s begin.


This is a tale of two stories, literally. I read in the last two days, two separate articles written by black men regarding race and politics. Now, these stories are not on the same subject matter but I think you will see that they are connected nonetheless and its not a connection based solely on race but instead freedom and prosperity and how you go about achieving both.

This started by me reading a great piece at Investor.com last night regarding how being a black conservative author in today’s world gets you ignored. Or at least that is the claim made towards Ebony Magazine in this article. Now, I purposely led with that first statement because there are simply not enough conservative black voices in media & the political arena as well and it’s about time this becomes a discussion.

That is to not say there is a shortage of black conservatives, on the contrary, they do not exist. In fact conservative values were at the core of the civil rights movement; regardless how progressives try to spin otherwise.

Sure it was progressive in moving blacks forward to having equal rights, but that shouldn’t have been a fight in the first place. Equal rights for all are a tantamount to freedom and liberty. A true conservative/libertarian mindset does not allow for racism and collectivism. This lack of rights for all was a failure as a country from the very beginning. Now as these voices remain isolated, I find myself asking, why is this so?

From a writing point of view it’s probably a lack of readership. I don’t think its bad judgment on black media’s part as much is it is just bad business. Most blacks identify with progressive values or vote overwhelmingly democratically, thus reading about a conservative mindset would simply go unread. Politically, it’s no different but with a slight twist.

At the center of this twist is the Congressional Black Caucus. Nobody politically defines a race in US politics more so than the CBC. With now 42 members of congress, the CBC is not only the largest caucus racially it’s also incredibly strong because they are practically untouchable. Nobody in media wants to even poke, let alone tear a hole inside that bee hive’s nest for fear of being stung by the politically correct swarm that seem to have infiltrated every level of our lives.

But hey, I’m a blogger with such a low (but dedicated) readership; I am perfectly happy to do so. After all, it’s not like this is my first rodeo concerning the CBC anyway.

Now, getting back to the article written by Mr. Larry Elder, a quote by Congressman Cleaver, D-Mo., caught my eye.

"As the chair of the Black Caucus, I've got to tell you, we are always hesitant to criticize the President. With 14% (black) unemployment, if we had a white president, we'd be marching around the White House. ... The President knows we are going to act in deference to him in a way we wouldn't to someone white."

This also isn’t the first time I have written about Mr Cleaver and his obvious double sided coin regarding race. This is just one in a long line of quotes that are obviously inflammatory yet it goes completely unnoticed or at least unchallenged by the masses. Double standard you say? You bet. But this notion that it’s acceptable for a black president to show high unemployment in the black community further drives home my point I have been making about the CBC. They are not concerned with the problems just the appearance that they are concerned.

As we usher in the 113th Congress and with it the CBC gaining more and with it more power and yet here Black America sits with unemployment almost double the national average. Prisons are filling up at all time highs. And what are the solutions that the Congressional Black Caucus has for these dire times in the black community? The same tired excuses & handouts they have been fighting for, for over 30 years and what has changed since in terms of results? Nothing. We have a black President but has Black America taken that next step with his re-election? No.

So what are the solutions? I don’t have the answers nor do I pretend to but I know two things regarding this subject for certain:

1. Freedom and liberty is a cure all because it encourages individual responsibility
2. Self proclaimed black leadership is not leading.

In separate piece written by Dr Wilmer Leon for Politic365.com, there is a slightly different take on this viewpoint. Dr Leon argues that with a new rising class of young educated workers who are settling for lower wages and multiple lower paying jobs, called the “Precariat Class”, this class will be so large that the future for Black America and its relation to employment will be “catastrophic”. This isn’t hyperbole; Dr Leon brings up accurate information that troubles the black community.

What I disagree with the Dr. is the assertion that the government should do more. Because when the government does more as we all know, it means taking from someone else. This happens through a seizure of either a right, freedom and/or their wealth. Dr Leons argument is that austerity measures should not be taken in this economy with many people struggling:

 “In challenging times such as these the government should be investing in the economy not cutting back.”

The problem is we have invested into this economy. We have overspent long before President Obama got into office and we have done so with no results, not only in the black community but the country as a whole. The standard of living for most Americans has remained stagnant for years and yet we continue to pump more liquidity in the market creating inflation that ultimately acts as a tax on those that rely most on cash. Nobody relies more on cash than the poor and destitute, black or white, red, blue or yellow; the poor all spend the green the same.

The question begs; why not try a different path to prosperity if the path that has been tried simply does not work? Why not reach out to the black population and drive home the point that over 70% of black children growing up in a single parent family home is the single biggest reason the black community faces so many challenges? This could also explain why "the wealth accumulation of the average European American family is 20 times that of the average African American family".

Why not try what China has done and encourage its population to buy gold & silver?

Why not encourage the 2nd amendment as a viable option to black on black crime statistics and show that legal gun ownership would be the biggest deterrent to black on black crime?

Why not come out and support an end to the racist drug war that puts so many black men in prison?

Are these guaranteed solutions? Of course not and I don’t know if they will solve all the problems but lets put an end to the patronization of the black community by the black leadership. Engage them like adults. Don’t just hand out a fish, show them how to fish. There is only one way to achieve prosperity and freedom and that cannot be given to you by a government; it comes from within.

‘Now is the Time’

This is the the President's "plan to protect our children and our communities by reducing gun violence”. This "plan" is what spawned the 23 executive orders on Jan 16, 2013. This has also been called the most comprehensive gun control legislation passed since 1968, eclipsing the "assault weapon ban" so often referred to now that was signed into law in the 1994 under Bill Clinton.

If we remember anything politically speaking about 1968 it would have to be the assassinations of Dr Martin Luther King & Robert Kennedy. The tightest gun control ever to that point was introduced before the deaths of both men but was quickly fast-tracked and passed after their murders. Reading a piece written about 1968 this week in regards to gun control reminded me of something I read in 2008 from then chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel who was “advising” the newly elected President on crisis management:

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. Things that we had postponed for too long, that were long-term, are now immediate and must be dealt with. This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."

As the President walked up on the stage this week and signed his executive orders into place all I could think about was at what ends will this lead to? Actually, it wasn’t soon after that initial thought before I came to the conclusion of not “what” ends, but “when” those ends will come. When will we see the end of the legal ownership of any firearm?

The right to own guns keeps man free. Free from the state or free from foreign invaders. It says so right in the 2^nd Amendment. I would find this humorous if it wasn’t so damn offensive.

The state piles up guns and then turns them on you and forces you to do as they say or they punish you with the threat of taking away your freedom which infringes on your liberty and pursuit of happiness. Seems like a conflict of interest regarding rights, no? Then, the state, despite all the guns and all the money, also does a piss poor job of keeping foreign invaders out of the country. From “terrorists” to illegal aliens the borders remain wide open.

If that wasn’t enough of a kick in the groin, the state also looks down upon militias, essentially blowing the 2^nd amendment out of the water on those grounds alone. The part about “a well regulated militia” isn’t time sensitive, regardless what anyone wants to say otherwise. There is no expiration on the meaning of the amendment, constitutional scholars be damned. These examples and the latest push executive order(s) are all attacks on not only our right to own firearms but it’s also an affront on our collective common sense.

 

When it comes to bureaucrats and the 2^nd amendment there seems to be a major disconnect. The 2^nd amendment is pretty direct, it’s pretty plain English. Thus, there is no reason to “read into” anything. Yet the federal government shows no respect for something so straightforward. Is this a coincidence? Not a chance.  
 

Semantics, are some of the firsts arrow pulled out of the quiver of control. Using wordplay and rearranging definitions to justify the means to an end – that is the ultimate goal of those in power. They also use situations and crisis to manipulate the public trading in freedom for security. Hitler did it, Stalin did it, Bush did it, Clinton before him etc etc… this isn’t something new but I find it pretty interesting for a president who promised "transparency". Who ran on "change". It is what it is. Call it Machiavellian or call it just being a politician. Whatever the definition you  come up, see it for what it is.

The executive orders signed into place this week are centered on ‘assault rifles’. Now, ask anyone for a definition of what an assault rifle is and you are sure to get something different from everyone. So, what happens when banning ‘assault rifles’ or reducing magazines doesn’t stop school violence or mall shootings or movie theater shootings? Well, naturally the handguns will be next, just like they came for them in NY and Chicago. Then maybe we will see the call to ban “assault weapons”. And the assault weapons definition is about as ambiguous as you can imagine.

Here is a list of “mass stabbings, hammer attacks, and cleaver attacks” in China from 2010-2012. China already has strict gun ownership laws, thus the truly dedicated to killing innocent will use any means necessary, as you can see. England (who else) has actually seen a push to eliminate “long pointed kitchen knives" to "reduce deaths from stabbing”. So again I ask: when does it end?

It ends when the anointed and "elected" say it ends. It ends when the calamities of life cease to exist. They won’t and that is the whole point. Let me leave you with this; and this will be the most important thing I will ever say on this topic.

The rush to get your gun, chipping away at your rights with one piece of legislation at a time is no accident. The state fears you. When it’s no longer able to control you with its debt mechanism and money manipulations… when it all comes tumbling down through hyperinflation or a spiral of irreversible deflation; the state will have to protect itself be any means necessary. The more the state can force dependency (SSI, welfare, food stamps, unemployment, low income housing, universal health care etc etc) the less important freedoms become or at least the dependency to live trumps freedom. The more divided we become, the easier it is to quell resistance. A people not divided and instead unified not to mention well armed is the ultimate threat to that power. 

The state fears you and me... and for good reason.

California 'Current' Love: Qatar

“Of course Al didn’t show up,” said one high placed Current staffer. “He has no credibility.

“He’s supposed to be the face of clean energy and just sold [the channel] to very big oil, the emir of Qatar! Current never even took big oil advertising—and Al Gore, that bullshitter sells to the emir?”

Let me start out by saying I have never been a fan of the anonymous quote. Its shoddy and in my opinion; just simply not credible. Now with that said, I would think the quote above courtesy of the NY-Post is more of a punch line, more so than it is something to derive information from. Because I think its obvious the sentiment for Gore from employees at Current, just ask Eliot Spitzer if he digs the new format.

If I was to quote anyone, I would quote rapper Ice Cube, as I think it sums up the whole process here:

“Bend over, grab your ass, spread your cheeks and give me two big coughs”

No, I’m not just quoting Ice Cube’s ‘first day of school', I’m quoting Al Gore and the green police’s latest move, who tapped that green ass like a piggy bank; all the way from Cali’ to Qatar.

 

Yes indeed, the green movement got a little darker this last week (how about onyx black) with the sale of Current TV to Qatar funded Al-Jazeera. Yes, THAT Al-Jazeera. It was reported that Glenn Beck was interested into buying Current TV but was rebuked because he was too “right”. Alana Goodman (commentarymagazine.com) said it best about dismissing Beck for Qatar:

“But an authoritarian-Islamist government that has criminalized homosexuality, discriminates against non-Muslims, prosecutes journalists, and has a “Not Free” rating from Freedom House?”

 

There are no shortages of punchlines you could come up with here regarding Gore and this sale. It’s literally endless. The real story is the people who actually believed in the man or at least the movement enough to stomach the man who give them a voice.

The green movement has been effective because it bully’s people and companies out of fear or isolation. These unsavory tactics such a hyperbole, misinformation and just flat out lies make this happen. And nobody exemplifies this more so than then Mr Gore. This is the same guy who warned of 10-20 foot rising coastal areas in his book/movie 'An Inconvenient Truth', before he bought that Nine million dollar pad in Monticeto, California so he could rub elbows with Oprah. After this lie was brought to light he admitted to it, because he knows if he makes it scary enough (even if its false) people will act, talk about sheer ignorance or arrogance:

"I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is..." - Al Gore

The green movement has come a long way since those crazy 60’s. They have long since traded in their tree hugging for cappuccinos and Ipads. Instead of protesting deforestation with protests chaining themselves to trees in rain forests, this crowd are chained to a chair in at Starbucks (without any sense of irony) blabbering about how evil capitalism is for its carbon footprints. As a side note, I'm not impressed with any protesters involving trees until you take it to this level. Wake me up when you display that type of commitment to your premise.

Going “green” is an ideal that while may sound like a great idea; it’s still an ideal. Thus, it is highly desired but hardly practical.

Big Al knows this. He is a capitalist himself. He capitalized on his surname via his daddy’s political career and made himself hundreds of millions of dollars in personal wealth by parlaying his career in politics into becoming the face of an entire ideology. He has no real work history to speak of, out of politics with no experience… yet he here he is, the fattest cat in the room (pun intended).  

He’s L Ron Hubbard incarnate (minus the kinky sexcapades). He’s made a fortune off ideologues, fear, politics and being a natural and gifted self promoter with nothing to sell. That’s a talent. So congrats to Al Gore going green via his sale and subsequent windfall made possible by big oil, anti-gay, anti-free speech or basically everything he allegedly fought against as a Democratic Congressman, Senator and VP; you know, the party beholden to the (sic) common man... minus the Vaseline.