Martyr Made To Order

As I drove to work this morning, a news reader delivered words written by Kayla Mueller to her family. Her words made me sad, as they seemed to convey surrender to God's will, having flowed from a graceful state of belonging to God. It read, in part, "I have surrendered myself to our creator. I have learned that even in prison, one can be free."

The world is seemingly pouring out with grief in the wake of her death. President Obama issued a statement that read, in part, "Michelle and I convey our deepest condolences to Kayla’s family... the country shares in their grief. Kayla represents what is best about America."

Sometime during the day, the name Rachel Corrie popped into my head, and I thought of similarities between her and Kayla. Rachel Corrie was also in her mid-twenties when she died, in a land far away from home. I thought that was the only similarity. I was wrong.

Both Rachel and Kayla were both, at one time, members of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). ISM is portrayed as a peace movement on behalf of the Palestinian people, and believers in non-violence. Their website lists goals including the principle of being "non-violent in our actions that affect others." But ISM founder Adam Shapiro has been quoted saying of suicide bombers, "This is no less noble than carrying out a suicide operation. And we are certain that if these men were killed during such an action, they would be considered shaheed Allah(martyrs)." He has also written that "we accept that Palestinians have a right to resist with arms."

Thus I have to laugh when I see Rachel Corrie being referred to as a "peace activist." She threw herself in front of an Israeli bulldozer to martyr herself, after getting tired of burning American flags in Gaza. For this her parents were presented a framed picture of her, by Yassar Arafat, engineer of the second intifada.

Kayla Mueller has been described in similar glowing terms. She has been called an "aid worker." For her efforts, she has been honored by ISM, describing her volunteer time with Palestinians as an effort "against the confiscation of their lands due to Israel’s illegal annexation wall and settlements."

Many people abandon mis-guided ideals of their youth when adulthood comes. And Kayla was highly idealistic, volunteering with, among others, Big Brothers and Sisters, at an AIDS clinic, on behalf of African refugees to Israel, and finally, the organization Support To Life.

So it's hard to hate Kayla, and I don't. Perhaps had she advanced in years she would have come to see both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I do feel that she was used by people for their own aims at certain times in her life. People who would think nothing of asking her to step in front of a bulldozer. And her story is now being appropriated by those with their own agenda. Those who would murder her and stage her death as a result of a "Jordanian airstrike."

The American people are in the process of beatifying her. Maybe some in the media industrial complex will take some interest in the blogs she wrote while in "occupied" East Jerusalem. President Obama today is asking Congress for an Authorization of Military Force against ISIS. If we are building edifices that are to represent us, the least we can do is make sure they can stand up to scrutiny.

Obamanomics

There is plenty of evidence indicative of President Obama's socialist disposition. All one has to do at look at his policy preferences. One such policy is his plan to "encourage" American companies to repatriate their foreign profits.

Memo to Bloomberg editors: "encouragement" is certainly a creative way to phrase it. The repatriation the President wants is not voluntary. It's mandatory.

It's also confiscatory, in the true, Marxist sense of the word. The repatriation plan betrays the core belief of committed socialists. It isn't really your money. It's the government's money, that in their munificence, have deigned to let you keep.

These profits represent returns on investment in foreign countries. As capital, it should be reinvested where it most maximizes future profits. Maybe the corporation will decide that it is best to leave it in the jurisdiction in which it originated, and invest it there. Obama's plan removes that freedom of choice from the company, imposing a one-time 14 percent tax on current profits outside the U.S.

To help sell this confiscation, the President claims the revenues will be used for infrastructure projects.

Bloomberg's article estimates that General Electric is the American corporation with the largest pile of foreign profits. My bullshit detector leads me to believe that a crony capitalist like G.E. would only support this plan if they are first in line for no-bid "shovel-ready" projects.

Foreign profits of American companies should be taxed at no more than five percent, and it should be conditional on repatriation. There are those who believe that even Obama's plan is too generous. They claim it "benefits the worst tax dodgers."

Their arguments against such a "lenient" repatriation is that this money will be used for stock buy-backs, and end up "hiking the bonuses of the executive suite." That might certainly be true, and executives might get bonuses. That doesn't make me envious, though. My mind doesn't really work that way.

Stock buy-backs are a perfectly justifiable use of repatriated profits. A buy-back would probably increase the price per share. Any foreign profits "lost" by the government will be claimed eventually, in the form of taxes on capital gains and dividends.

And the money is put to more productive uses than the government would. When the equity of a company increases, it increases the amount of debt that company can assume to fund expansion. This risk-taking has positive economic multipliers. Repairing a bridge is important, but it doesn't create an economic multiplier.

Patriarchy In The Automobile Aftermarket

Editor's Note: From time to time, this blog will feature the well-known feminist scholar, Katrina De Las Hondas, as guest contributor. De Las Hondas is a transitioning (we're not sure in which direction) mixed-race individual living in the greater Los Angeles area. She deleted her Twitter account after being forced to flee her home. Her contributions will be called Snatches of Feminist Discourse.

Katrina De Las Hondas is a pseudonym -ed.

Today's Snatches of Feminist Discourse subject is the distressing Patriarchy at work in the automobile aftermarket. This Patriarchy often takes the form of unconscious bias.

I am always hyper-vigilant for signs of the Patriarchy. Today I saw an advertisement for Safelite Auto Glass Repair Service on television. The advertisement uses the narrative device of the damsel in distress to sell their service. A hypothetical woman is on her way to work, but first she has to drop her child off at day-care. She notices a crack in her windshield. This is the crisis that propels the narrative forward.

The woman telephones the Safelite Corporation, and the technician appears, seeminingly out of nowhere, to rescue our helpless damsel. And this technician is a male. Straight out of Patriarchy central casting, too, I might add. He drives up in a car, which represents his gallant steed. He doesn't have a suit of shining armor, but he does have facial hair, all the way down to his neck. I'm just surprised that this neckbeard wasn't wearing a fedora.

I would have liked this commercial to have a different narrative, one in which the woman fixes the broken windshield herself. Short of that, why not have, for example, a transitioning woman of color be the service technician. Isn't Safelite merely reinforcing the harmful stereotype that women aren't good at fixing cars?

This bias begins in high school, where the focus seems to be more on indulging those with mechanical ability rather than nurturing potential talent. The image of the stereotypical automobile technician hasn't changed in the last one hundred years. It's always a male, and usually a white male. There is a glass ceiling to break when it comes to being considered exceptional, especially for minorities. These are people who do not have access to a car.

This bias is acted out thousands of times every day in automobile repair shops. Technicians routinely tack on unnecessary services to the bill of those who are not genius-level automobile experts. These people are usually women.

I reached out to the Safelite Corporation by clicking on their website, and looking at employment opportunities. The cultural bias is right out in the open. They require the "ability to operate various hand and power tools and equipment." Patriarchy. Women are systematically excluded from shop class. They also require the "ability to lift and carry large, heavy (up to 75 lbs.) objects." This requirement blatantly favors men over women.

Diversity benefits everyone. Safelite, think how that woman feels when the technician rolls up to her home, possibly wearing a fedora? As he assaults her with his eyes, how can the woman feel safe in her own driveway, knowing that the guy is raping her in his imagination? If Safelite wants to be an inclusive corporation that respects female empowerment, they must begin a diversity program at once.

Abolish The I.R.S.

According to a Gallup poll taken in 2014, forty-one percent of people feel that the Internal Revenue Service is doing an "excellent" or "good" job. Another 29% believe the agency is doing a "fair" job. Only 27% believe they are doing a "poor" job. Maybe they are mostly saying nice things because they are afraid of the agency's SWAT team.

I will grant that the I.R.S. does a good job, in the sense that they do the best with what they've got. Anyone with real talent works for the private sector.

Or increasingly, in the underground economy. It is estimated that there is as much as two trillion dollars in off-the-books economic activity every year. That is because taxes are too high, and too complicated to figure out. The estimated loss of tax by the shadow economy is in the neighborhood of $500 billion a year.

I do my own taxes, because I take the standard deduction. I usually use TurboTax, and I am always done with state and federal in about an hour. I just hope that somebody hasn't already fraudulently claimed my state tax refund. The longer you wait to file, the greater the chance.

Perhaps the fraud rate would be reduced if filers of fraudulent returns weren't able to have their "refunds" sent to untraceable pre-paid debit cards.

Fraudulent state returns are actually the least of the documented problems plaguing the agency, and its mission to fairly enforce the tax code. One of the biggest scams now going is the abuse of the Earned Income Tax Credit. The Treasury Department estimates 22 to 26 percent of EITC payments were issued improperly in Fiscal Year 2013. The dollar value of these improper payments was estimated to be between $13.3 billion and $15.6 billion. I have never read a news story of anyone facing prosecution for this crime.

E.I.T.C. fraud will only get bigger, because, thanks to President Obama, you don't even have to be a United States citizen. Obama's deferred action on illegal immigrants means that they get social security cards and can use them to file for E.I.T.C. refunds. They can even file amended returns for three previous years. This is the President's amnesty bonus.

Perhaps the fraud would decrease if we simplified the tax code. Most taxpayers receive their health insurance through their employer. This is a relic of World War Two wage and price controls. Employers couldn't lure new employees with a higher wage, so they were forced to offer health packages. This vestigal benefit is what allowed a law like Obamacare to be wrought upon us. This tax exclusion costs over $200 billion a year.

Another $100 billion a year goes for the mortgage interest deduction. Abolish it. Grandfather in existing mortgages and abolish it going forward. I don't believe any tax deductions are sacred cows, even the deduction for charitable giving. Too often, the tax code is used to sanction politically favored groups.

The I.R.S. overwhelmingly favors Democratic causes and candidates. Nearly two-thirds of campaign contributions from I.R.S. employees go to Democrats. And I.R.S. employees are represented by The National Treasury Employees Union. The N.T.E.U. operates a political action committee that allocates ninety-six percent of its donations to help elect Democrats.

The collusion between public sector employee unions and the lawmakers they elect is nothing short of a criminal enterprise. Even Franklin Delano Roosevelt opposed public employee unions, saying, "The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."

The Obama Doctrine

President Obama has released his 2015 National Security Strategy. Helpfully, National Security Adviser Susan Rice informed Administration critics that the United States does not face any existential threats. She "argued that al Qaeda's core has been decimated." That means that their core has been reduced by ten percent. Susan Rice is proof that in this Administration, people fail up.

Some highlights of the report:

"We are currently testing whether it is possible to achieve a comprehensive resolution to assure the international community that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful." We are using advanced marketing theory, and focus groups, to determine which lie will be most convincing.

"...pursuing a diplomatic effort that has already stopped the progress of Iran’s nuclear program and rolled it back in key respects." Which respects, exactly? Iran has produced an ICBM. The only reason Iran wants an ICBM is to put a nuclear payload on top of it.

"We have made clear Iran must meet its international obligations and demonstrate its nuclear program is entirely peaceful." Iran is sitting on top of one of the world's largest proven oil reserves. They don't need to build nuclear reactors to boil water. And there is no reason other than weapons production for the enrichment of uranium past three percent. Iran has stockpiles of 20 percent enriched uranium.

"Our preference is to achieve a comprehensive and verifiable deal that assures Iran’s nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes." How are we going to achieve this "verification?" U.S. inspectors? Or will Rouhani and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei pinky-swear with Susan Rice?

Other than wishful thinking about Iran, the report is fanciful, self-congratulatory, and absurd.

"We will be a champion for communities that are too frequently vulnerable to violence, abuse, and neglect—such as ethnic and religious minorities; people with disabilities; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender." Bruce, excuse me, Belinda Jenner will be our worldwide ambassador to facilitate transitioning teens.

"As part of our effort to promote a fully democratic hemisphere, we will advance our new opening to Cuba in a way that most effectively promotes the ability of the Cuban people to determine their future freely." By turning Guantanamo prison over to the Cuban government, so they can confine journalists, political dissidents, and other troublemakers there.

"Equally, we stand by the citizens of countries where the full exercise of democracy is at risk, such as
Venezuela." Venezuela is not "at risk," it is a completely failed state. Their foreign currency reserves are nearing zero because of low oil prices. For two years citizens have been lucky to wipe their asses with real toilet paper, because of price controls and subsequent shortages. Now, even basic medical supplies are running low, and people are dying.

"We... have prohibited so-called enhanced interrogation techniques that were contrary to American values." Your values. Not mine, and I'm not alone. More than half of Americans believe enhanced interrogation was justified.

The only time Islam is mentioned is in the phrase, "We reject the lie that America and its allies are at war with Islam." Strawman. We are not sending soldiers off to fight a religion. We are at war with radical Islam, or Islamism, or Islamic supremacy, or equivalent terminology. We are sending soldiers to fight those who wage war in the name of Islam.

"Climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national security." There is a superstorm lurking off the coast, gathering strength, and unless we tax carbon and use the EPA to regulate coal fired power plants out of existence, it will kill us all.

"As the world’s two largest emitters, the United States and China reached a landmark agreement to take
significant action to reduce carbon pollution." The United States will voluntarily lower emissions to twenty five percent below 2005 levels. China will do nothing until 2030. This is their landmark agreement.

Is Motherhood A Disability?

An article by Rebecca Traister in the New Republic caught my eye. As an aside from the forthcoming analysis, I do enjoy her writing style and I am charmed by the fact that she is a young mother. I revere motherhood and believe everybody should be really nice and indulgent of pregnant women and young mothers.

Traister cites a study by "University of Massachusetts sociologist Michelle Budig [who] has found that, on average, an American woman’s earnings decrease by 4 percent for every child that she bears." Easy solution: require that all American women become sociologists.

Her problem with the Family and Medical Leave Act is that it "merely protects her job for twelve weeks of unpaid leave, and then, only if she has worked at her company for at least a year." One year is the "baseline period." A one-year baseline period is also required to qualify for unemployment benefits. And that only covers employees who are unemployed through "no fault of their own." Becoming pregnant is often volitional.

She says she finds herself "cringing at the use of 'disability insurance' by some companies in some states as a means to patch together paid time off." This represents a type of feminism, "protectionist feminism," that she claims to usually views with aversion. Her very next example is of UPS worker Peggy Young, who became pregnant, was advised by her doctor to only accept light duties, and was placed on unpaid leave.

I don't feel that Peggy Young was treated with perfect fairness. But to afford her protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act is not right, either. Traister seems to think ADA protection is warranted, though, writing that "Young’s co-workers who had been injured on the job were protected from this kind of treatment by the Americans with Disabilities Act. She was not."

Traister laments the difficulty of waiting tables "when suddenly you’re hit by a wave of fatigue so intense that it feels as if your bones may have melted." Remind me to ask the captain of my next flight whether she is pregnant.

Traister comments that we live "in a country that venerates motherhood but in practice accords it zero economic value." Wrong. The Earned Income Tax Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit cost taxpayers almost $90 billion in 2013. That doesn't count untaxed benefits like TANF, WIC, and Medicaid.

She's suspicious about companies like Google, Apple, Reddit, and Facebook, who have instituted "paid leave for mothers and fathers, but also baby bonuses, child care credits, subsidized fertility treatments, and egg-freezing." What, no sperm freezing? She claims many Americans are anxious about this because "incentives [may be] part of a plan to lure workers into becoming capitalist tech drones?" How many times can Rebecca Traister change her mind - sexist trigger warning missing - in a single article?

"The United States and its corporate structures were built with one kind of worker—frankly, with one kind of citizen—in mind. That citizen wage-earner was a white man." Inevitably invoking white male supremacy in a feminist argument must be some kind of Progressive "Godwin's Law."

"This weakness, she writes, is being addressed by employers faster than it is being addressed by Congress, [and] contributes to the widening of the class chasm." Opinion disguised as fact, and appeal to authority. The very last thing we need is more regulation of the workplace. Our workers must compete with workers all over our interconnected world. Why hamstring employers by making it yet more expensive to add a female labor input?

Speaking of competition, Traister includes a graph that helps visualize disparities in the way different countries compensate pregnant women. Entitled, How Does The U.S. Compare To Other Countries In Guaranteed Paid Maternity Leave? I was very surprised that the usual 'social democratic' nations of Western Europe were not included. When a Progressive argues that the U.S. is behind another country, in infant mortality or universal health care, they always compare us to Denmark or Finland or Sweden.

But this list is topped by Russia, followed by Lithuania, and not far behind them, Japan. There is a very good reason these countries are subsidizing pregnancy. They are all in demographic death spirals. They all face the inverted pyramid, in which the benefits of the elderly are being shouldered by fewer and fewer young workers. Their birthrate has fallen so far below replacement level, that they would put female libido compounds in the water supply if they thought it would work.

Right below Lithuania are Greece and Turkey. I wouldn't want to be a citizen of either country right now. Greece is in an economic death spiral, and will be defaulting within two years. Turkey is turning away from secularism, and turning toward sharia law. I don't think Rebecca would want her daughter to grow up in Turkey.

Brian Williams Remembers

I had a lot of laughs yesterday following the #BrianWilliamsMisremembers Twitter hashtag. One of my favorite comments was from el Sooper (@SooperMexican) who tweeted, "And as I died I said to Matt Damon, 'EARN THIS!!'"

It is entertaining to make fun of Williams, who, in my opinion, is a mendacious Democrat meme-bot masquerading as a trusted news anchor. The bias is never explicit, and thus never has to be defended as opinion. It does take an ear attuned to subtle bigotry, such as when he said, in 2012, "Who woke up in the Republican Party one day recently and said, ‘I know what, let’s go after, let’s go after reproductive rights in the United States’? What was that about?"

When Williams talks like this, I see it as in-group signaling. The group he wants to belong to are all elite, East-coast, progressive, believers in the role of the state as protectors against ourselves. Plus he works at NBC, well known for doctinaire social justice. The network that employs known tax cheat Al Sharpton.

NBC's Today Show once ran an edited version of George Zimmerman's 911 call, so that viewers would believe he told dispatchers, "This guy looks like he's up to no good... he looks black." Zimmerman actually told the dispatcher, "This guy looks like he's up to no good. Or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about." The next comment in the sequence is by the dispatcher, who asks, "OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?"

Somebody tell NBC that the narrative should match the record. If it doesn't, it's a lie.

Now Williams has been caught in a lie, the lie of stolen valor. In 2013, he went on the Late Show with David Letterman, and repeated the lie. It was a big thing in 2003 for a reporter to "embed" with infantry soldiers. The embedded journalist got the vicarious thrill of being in combat, without being in any danger. They probably had a squad assigned to Williams to ensure he wouldn't experience the slightest discomfort. But that's not the way Brian Williams remembers.

He told Letterman, "I like to go out on patrol." For what, a juice bar that serves arugula and wheat grass?

"We were north of the invasion. We were the northern-most Americans in Iraq. Two of our four helicopters were hit by ground fire, including the one I was in. We were stuck, four birds in the middle of the desert." The situation was grim, we were surrounded, and we were out of ammunition. At dawn, the commander instructed us to fix bayonets and prepare to charge the enemy fortifications.

"Our late friend Richard Bloom was travelling in a tank across the countryside." Williams was envious of Bloom, who suffered an aneurysm, because he got to embed with a tank crew.

Williams' apology is really a non-apology. An I'm-sorry-you-were-offended non-apology. "I made a mistake in recalling the events of twelve years ago." It was a really, really, really long time ago.

"I want to apologize. I said I was travelling in an aircraft that was hit by RPG fire, I was instead in a following aircraft." The following aircraft was one hour and a hundred klicks behind the stricken warbird.

"It was a bungled attempt by me to thank one special veteran." My intentions were pure, therefore, I am blameless.

The unearned virtue of good intentions. Brian Williams Remembers.

Net Neutrality

It's easy for me to decide how I regard the FCC's proposed net neutrality regulations. All I need to do is see who is in favor of them. Beyond the fact that the term "net neutrality" is an appropriation of language for political reasons, much like "marriage equality."

Senator Elizabeth Warren tweeted that she was "optimistic about strong new rules to protect a free & open Internet, but nothing is official until the FCC votes." The FCC is made up of three Democrats and two Republicans. We know how they are going to vote.

Mozilla Corp tweeted, "Big news on #NetNeutrality today. 21 days left to speak out and guarantee victory." Mozilla is a social justice organization masquerading as a tech company.

So is Wired Magazine. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler made his announcement in an op-ed in today's Wired. It reads like a petulant missive from a jilted former lover. "I personally learned the importance of open networks the hard way," he writes. "NABU was delivering service at the then-blazing speed of 1.5 megabits per second...but NABU went broke while AOL became very successful."

Ars Technica is another publication that cloaks its social justice activism with a nerdy gloss. They tweeted today that "Verizon is mad that its huge net neutrality gamble backfired." In other words, a taunting, "You mad, bro?"

I'm no fan of my cable company, or my cell phone carrier. But I'm not under the mistaken impression that there is no competition. I can take my television to AT&T and there are several wireless carriers to choose from. Why shouldn't a carrier be able to charge Netflix more for traffic prioritization? They have to build out capacity.

The Daily Beast published an article last year about Net Neutrality. Entitled, "Killing Net Neutrality Kills The Dreams of Young Entrepreneurs." Not much nuance there. Columnist Joshua Dubois tells the imaginary story of "a young, Black, (yes black was capitalized) male 6th grader... from the far west side of Detroit." His dream of starting a "radical new video service," would be stillborn because "he'll have to pay Comcast or Verizon an exorbitant fee."

The key word there is "service." What the young techie is engineering is a web service. No different from Wikipedia. If Wikipedia added a widget that offered a "radical new video service," it would still not be considered a utility.

The reason NABU failed was that they didn't have a way to get their users that last mile. Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, any common carrier would have been compelled to allow NABU access to their network. All they would have needed was a NABU-compliant modem. NABU's failure tells us nothing about traffic prioritization.

All Title II common carrier regulation will ensure is lower investment in carrier infrastructure, and the heavy hand of government involved in regulating the internet. Seems to be a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Yes, Senator Cruz, Net Neutrality is the "Obamacare For The Internet."

Frozen Eggs and Feet of Clay

New York Magazine published an article by Jillian Dunham entitled, The Real Reason Women Freeze Their Eggs. Dunham is a childless, thirty-seven-year old, successful New York professional woman. This is a woman who should have children preparing to leave the nest. Instead she is meeting with doctors, trying to harvest whatever wisps of fertility she may have left.

In short, this woman is a failure at being a woman.

In the most telling exchange in the article, her doctor tells her, "It isn’t you. All day long, I see patients like you. You’re smart, beautiful, accomplished, nice. It makes no sense. I go home to my wife and I say, "There’s something wrong with the men in this generation. They won’t grow up.'"

She has already come to this conclusion. Her doctor is just confirming her bias. Earlier, she writes of a beautiful, sardonic friend who got dumped, and realizes that "none of us were responsible for the fact that so many men see relationships as a giant albatross."

Interesting that she uses the analogy of the albatross. In Coleridge's Rime of the Ancient Mariner, the albatross follows the ship and is considered a good omen. When the captain kills the albatross with a bow, the bird becomes an omen of misfortune and is hung around his neck.

Dunham had her man in the bag, and she blew it. "Matt asked me to marry him..." but "the ring stayed in my jewelry box." That is the anecdote that symbolizes her albatross.

Men can sense desperation, and in her case it clings like fog clings to the moors. It emanates a fragrance of shame and fear, and gives men a reason to be "cagey," a word she uses twice. I'm going to infer that Dunham is the one who is a "commitment-phobe." She mentions the death of her mother, but doesn't mention her father once in the article. This is a very important developmental relationship, and it isn't mentioned. The omission is glaring.

Perhaps her mother divorced when she was very young. The freedoms secured by her feminist forebears, like abortion and no-fault divorce, were once seen as good omens. These desiccated birds are now hung about her neck and everyone can see her humiliation.

Perhaps her mother divorced, and was given full custody of her. Her father could only visit on weekends, but he was compelled by the court to pay child support every two weeks to the mother. Her mother, knowing this, traded this convenience for the relative inconvenience of having a man around to tend to. This feminist freedom was once seen to be a good omen. Now her daughter is the one carrying around this mangy menage of beak and feathers.

Well done, sister suffragette!

It strikes me that when a woman is in her twenties, she has a financial incentive to sell her eggs. It's a seller's market. A woman in her late thirties is buying time for her own eggs. For what? In ten years, when she finally settles for someone, and they go to the doctor to hopefully inject an embryo, what kind of embryo will it be? Eggs with freezer burn married to semen from an old guy with the world's biggest U-Porn collection?

I hope she likes cats.

Without Consent of the Governed

A recent poll shows that a near-majority of Californians approve of the job of their legislature. According to Public Policy Institute of California, forty-nine percent of those polled approve of the job the state legislature is doing. I won't dig into poll methodology to justify a suspicion of bias at PPIC. Instead, I will make the following inference. A plurality of Californians have their heads up their ass.

The legislature has a veto-proof Democratic supermajority, and a seeming plurality of members under indictment or heading to prison. Leland Yee is facing racketeering charges and is awaiting trial. Ron Calderon is facing trial on corruption charges. Last year, Rod Wright was convicted of perjury and voter fraud. And lest we forget that last year party boy Ben Hueso was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving.

I would imagine voters would be more aware of these lawmakers if they were Republicans.

Jerry Brown polled at sixty-one percent approval. Apparently three-week-old Ellorah Warner was not asked for her opinion. Warner was the nineteen day old baby murdered by her father, Matthew Warner, who was released early from prison under AB 109, California's prisoner "realignment" program. Governor Brown signed Ellorah's death warrant with this bill.

The grievances range from the petty to the profound. The evidence leads one to discern that the legislative impetus is flowing in only one direction: limiting the personal liberties of the citizens.

Last year, Brown signed SB 270 into law, banning supermarkets from using plastic bags. Nobody in Sacramento bothered asking the voters. Thanks to the state initiative process, soon they will hear from us. A referendum to overturn SB 270 gathered enough signatures to be placed on the November 2016 ballot.

State Senator Ed Hernandez has introduced Senate Bill 151, which would make California the first state in the country to raise the minimum smoking age to 21. There is also a growing tsunami of support for restrictions on vaping and e-cigarettes.

The age of majority is eighteen. This is how old a person must be to accept responsibility for their actions. They should be considering lowering the drinking age to eighteen, not raising the minimum smoking age. Just one more example of our government betters legislating morality.

And please don't tell me it's a public health issue. Long-term smokers get lung cancer and die very quickly. They generally don't linger and consume lots of long-term care.

The red star is for Socialist Utopia!

Obama Wants Regime Change - In Israel

I'm a Zionist. But I'm not one of those touchy Hebrews who finds anti-Semitism behind every cob of the web. I see it in every web comment section and message board, but it's easy to dismiss because Israel is strong, and Jews are strong. I'm proud that Israel has atomic weapons because no Arab state would dare attack. Non-state actors are another story.

I don't throw around the label "anti-Semite" every time someone makes a comment about Jewish bankers controlling the world economy. And I don't throw around the term "blood libel" loosely. The term refers to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a tome that has some people convinced that Jews make their Passover matzo from the blood of Palestinian children.

That's a blood libel. The truth is that Israel wants to live in peace with Palestinian Arabs, which is why an Israeli hospital treated Ismael Haniyeh's daughter. Haniyeh is the leader of Hamas, the organization that is sworn to destroy Israel.

Israeli hospitals treated more than 220,000 Palestinian Arabs in 2012. That is something that nobody in the BDS movement could ever admit. They keep trying to convince the world that Israel is an apartheid state. They ignore the fact that twenty percent of the population of Israel are Arab, and have full citizenship. But any hypothetical future Palestinian state being Judenrein is just fine with them.

One argument that I consider blood libel is that U.S. lawmakers are beholden to the Jewish state, or that Israeli functionaries are trying to corrupt the U.S. political process. Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo crossed this line last year, when he wrote, "Nothing gets the Obama administration's ire up like the perception (very often grounded in reality) that Netanyahu and his government ministers are trying to scuttle his initiatives by inveigling themselves into domestic partisan conflict in the U.S."

Israel might deserve some slack in the interest of existential furtherance.

Things have gotten much worse recently, because of the way the Obama Administration is openly fellating the Iranian theocratic regime, offering concessions in place of sanctions. The Obama inner circle is reportedly furious at Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, accusing him of "repeatedly placing Mr. Netanyahu’s political fortunes above the relationship between Israel and the United States." For an administration like Obama's, salted with political operatives, to make this accusation, is infuriating.

There is evidence the Obama administration itself is "inveigling" itself into the "domestic partisan conflict" within the State of Israel. Senator Ted Cruz expressed concern about a recent Haaretz report, that the U.S. taxpayer-funded non-profit organization called OneVoice is actively working with a campaign operation called Victory 2015 (V15)–working hand-in-hand with Obama field director Jeremy Bird–in an effort to influence the upcoming elections in Israel on March 17."

I wonder if any of the wealthy Jewish donors, who contributed so much to Obama's Presidential campaigns, are experiencing buyer's remorse?