Obit for the newspaper

Today's Class - Media 101

Call me old fashioned, but I always liked reading the newspaper, especially the sports page and the metro section to see what’s happening locally. You may have noticed that I didn’t mention the front page. No, reading the first section of the newspaper would often times raise my blood pressure to dangerous levels. The bias on display in the paper, both subtle and overt, was almost daily and it finally drove me to get my information elsewhere.

Examples are endless but the part that bothered me the most was how they slanted their message in ways that the average person would miss it entirely. Small things like if there was a political scandal involving a Democrat their party affiliation was never stated. If it was a democratic member of the House of Representatives, you’d see things like “Joe Blow Rep. Louisiana” giving the reader the impression he was actually a Republican. Conversely if it was a Republican, there wasn’t a paragraph that didn’t remind you of the fact and quite often it would be “conservative republican John Smith…” Another way they played with words was by the use of “pro” and “anti.” If the point was on the left of the issue it was always “pro choice” or “pro gun control.” On the right it was “anti abortion” never “pro life” which was what they wanted to be called.

You would even see bias in the pictures used accompanying the article. Every time there was a story on gay marriage, the picture was always of a lesbian couple, often times coming out the church in their wedding attire holding hands. There was never a photo of two men in their “kiss the bride” moment.

A while back I sent the following letter to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. To my surprise they actually ran it:

I recently read an article on the financial difficulties faced by many of the country’s newspapers. The list included the Star-Telegram which came as no surprise to me. Having been in the business world for over 30 years you learn a few things. I’d have to say tops on the list would be to sell a product or service that the people in your market desire having.

I could ask why would a newspaper in the midst of one of the country’s most conservative areas insist on skewing everything to the left, but I think we already know the answer. It’s simply liberal elitism; you’re secure in the knowledge that you know what’s best. That it’s your responsibility to educate the ignorant rednecks of Tarrant County and show them the error of their beliefs. It’s the same nanny state mentality that is so invasive amongst progressives.

If you decided to open a restaurant in downtown Cowtown would you only serve tofu and bean sprouts? No? Why not? It would be a healthy meal for your patrons. You wouldn’t because you’d know they’d just go next door and order a big steak or some enchiladas.

So back to my earlier question, why do you insist on serving a big helping of leafy green vegetables to your readers instead of the barbecued ribs they want? Well don’t fret too much about it. You’ll be able to hold your head high when they shut down the presses and turn off the lights. You stuck with your principles to the end.

Well either they or their readers didn’t get the sarcasm because there were angry responses from readers of my calling the residents of Tarrant Co. rednecks.

I know I’m not alone in my frustration with the media. I recently read that so many people are reading articles from European online newspapers that they are trying to remake their online advertising appeal to their American readers. It’s sad that you have to go to England to get an unbiased news report, or even more importantly, news that American newspapers don’t even bother running.

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Today's Class - Music 101

OK class, I hope you've all warmed up those vocal chords. Let's all sing along:

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Terrorists are not our foes, let’s shut down Guantánamo

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Economy comes to a halt, don’t you know it’s Bush’s fault

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Taxes are just legal theft, take and take ‘til nothings left

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Safe School Czar likes little boys, thinks they should be sexual toys

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Qaddafi, Chavez, Zelaya, they all love the messiah

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Tax those rich folks ‘til they cry, Obamacare let’s seniors die

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He’s a great apologist, sucking up to communists

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

ACORN scandals everywhere. Investigate? Hey, that’s not fair!

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

His policies are now attacked, you can’t do that because he’s black

mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama


Now, go ahead and teach this to you kids.

Well that's it for today.

Courtesy of The Allamon Cartoon Blog

This is all so very taxing.

Today’s class: Economics 101

Whether you want to believe it or not, every time you raise taxes there is a trickledown effect that negatively impacts everyone. It you tax people, they have less to spend on goods and services, less to invest, less to give to charities, etc. All of which causes job loss. When you tax corporations they have to reduce costs (lay off people) or increase prices. Increased prices paid by you have the same effect as if your taxes were increased. It’s a viscous cycle and like it or not, it’s the “rich” in this country that create jobs. Next time you see a homeless person holding a sign on a street corner ask him if he’s hiring.

Almost everyone would agree that some level of taxation is good for society as a whole but unfortunately, politicians love spending other people’s money and they do so with reckless abandon. Why should people in Louisiana be taxed to pay for a new bike path in Seattle? If the fine people in Seattle feel they need a new bike path, let them pay for it.

That being said, you can’t turn on a TV or read a newspaper without seeing where someone wants to, or is going to, raise the taxes on someone or something.

Here recently there’s been talk about taxing cosmetic surgery to pay for healthcare. I do find it a bit ironic that the boobs in Washington want to tax boob-jobs. But what about the person whose self esteem is affected by an exceedingly large nose? A lot of dental surgery is also cosmetic.

Now there’s the proposal in the L.A. Times entitled “Tough love for fat people: Tax their food to pay for healthcare” What they’re really saying is that we did it with cigarettes, let’s do it to soda and potato chips. Sorry folks, but it wouldn’t be just “fat” people paying this tax, it would be everyone who purchases any item deemed “unhealthy” by your nanny state politicians.

Here's an idea. In a previous post I discussed Cap and Trade. I believe we can take that a step further.

We should make everyone wear monitors that measure the amount of carbon dioxide being exhaled and levy a tax based on the amount that exceeds a set limit. This would be like the Cap and Trade bill but would work on an individual, and not industrial, level. As we ALL know, carbon dioxide is the leading cause of global warming so this would help the environment. Let’s say if you’re a jogger, or a blowhard politician, you could buy carbon credits from couch potatoes. The couch potatoes could then use the money to help pay for their fat tax.

Thanks for attending

This is not another "Where's the Birth Certificate?" blog (per se)

I’ve avoided this topic up until now for a couple reasons. One it sounded like to much like a conspiracy theory and I prefer to deal with facts, not fantasy. The other reason is that I kept thinking there’s no way someone ineligible to run for President of the United States would actually try to do so.

Then along came the strange case of U.S. Army Reserve Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, who was attempting to make the case that if he was deployed to Afghanistan he could be tried for war crimes. He was not some nut job trying to avoid going to war. His argument was that without a legitimate president as commander-in-chief, members of the U.S. military could be viewed as "war criminals and subject to prosecution" in the eyes of the world court. The reason he was concerned is because there is no evidence proving that Obama was actually born in the United States with is a requirement of Article 2, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution. No birth certificate has been provided and Obama has spent over a million dollars in lawyer fees to prevent its release along with other supporting evidence such as college records and passport information. According to Obama's grandmother he was born in Africa. During an interview she states ‘Barack, Jr. was born in Mombosa, Kenya and I was present during his birth.’

I’m not going to go into all the details regarding the birth certificate vs. the certificate of live birth, the forgery, etc. A web search will take you to several sites that will break it down for you.

Now here comes the strange part. The day after a judge in California agreed to review Cook's case the Army rescinded (for you PSGs that means withdrew) his deployment orders. It was like the government couldn’t prove Obama was eligible so they took away Cook’s reason for the lawsuit.

This got me thinking. Cook's same tactic could be used against any law that has been signed by Obama. If he’s not legitimate, any law he signs can’t be legal. Here are a few things the come to mind. I'm sure you can come up with others.

1. For you smokers out there, you need to keep your receipts so you can get a refund from the IRS for the 62 cent a pack tax increase that Obama signed.

2. All those auto dealers that were forced to close need to go to court because the GM and Chrysler bailouts were illegal.

3. If someone is brought up on charges for breaking a law signed by Obama, they already have a built in defense. Show me the birth certificate…

Those Rascally Racist Republicans (Part II)

Today’s class: History 101

In my first blog on this subject I made the statement that Democrats feel that blacks are better off enslaved. I made that statement based on not what they say but what they actually do.

When well intentioned white liberals went into poor black neighborhoods carrying promises of government assistance under LBJ’s Great Society. They also brought the news that “sorry, but you can’t get it if you’re married.” The "Great Society" plan poured billions of taxpayer dollars into a program that paid unmarried women based on the number of children she had. The part liberals didn’t understand was that this would result in millions of men leaving their families so they could get the “free money.” This was the beginning of what we have today, high unemployment, high out of wedlock births, high crime rates, and generation after generation of government dependence.

This program did nothing to lift blacks out of poverty and into self dependence. It only resulted in keeping them on the government plantation and a slave to the masters in Washington. You see, economic freedom is true freedom. You aren’t indebted to anyone but yourself. Today’s slaves, while not in the field picking cotton, are still beholden to their masters for all their needs; food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, etc., just as their enslave ancestors.

Star Parker puts it this way: “Lincoln took two great lies head on when he emancipated the slaves. The lie that one man should or could control another's life. And the lie that the African slaves could not be free.”

“It is the greatest of ironies that both these great lies animate the opposition of the Democratic Party -- and the NAACP -- to emancipating reforms like school choice and private retirement accounts. They believe that government and politicians should control the education choice of private citizens and should control savings and retirement funds of poor people. And they don't believe that African-Americans can be free and take care of themselves.”

“A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from ‘How do I take care of myself?’ to ‘What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?’ The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families."

There is obviously a belief among the left that blacks can’t improve their station in life on their own, either their not smart enough (Affirmative Action at colleges) or aren’t capable enough to get a job (hiring quotas) without the help of the Washington masters.

As Thomas Sowell sees it: “while most blacks lifted themselves out of poverty, the public image is that government programs were responsible. This has left many whites wondering why blacks can't advance themselves by their own efforts, like other minorities -- and left many blacks likewise convinced that without government programs they would be lost."

“Such myths help race hustlers but hurt the race that they claim to be leading.”

What’s not being said is that wanting to give someone the tools to lift themselves up, wanting government to get out of the way and let people succeed, both of which are at the foundation of conservatism, is not racist. The color of someone’s skin should never matter. Equality knows no color.

And finally here’s a fun little fact that I should have included in my first post:

How many realize that blacks founded the Texas Republican Party? It was formed on July 4, 1867, in Houston, Texas, by 150 blacks and 20 whites. Blacks across other Southern states founded Republican parties as well.

After 40 years of failed Democratic promises and programs, maybe it’s time for blacks to come home; back to the Republican Party. Believe me when I say you’d be welcomed with open arms.

Star Parker is the founder and president of CURE, the Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education, a 501c3 non-profit think tank that provides a national voice of reason on issues of race and poverty - in the media, inner city neighborhoods, and public policy.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute in Stanford, Calif. author, economist, and professor.

Welcome to the USSA

Today's class: Future History 101

Pryvet Comrades,

Welcome to a new and glorious Amerika. Yes comrades, the change we hoped for is upon us.

In our splendid new nation we can finally be done with the outdated vision of the founding fathers, that the government's job is only to protect individual liberty and guard against intrusions on our life and property. With the super majority now in place in the Senate and our superior forces in the House, the magnificent Chosen One can now lead the charge to greatness.

We can proudly become workers for the government, one that is now free to take the property of the productive and use it to bring about "economic justice." The fruits of our labor now belong to government ... and our grand and glorious government can do with them what it pleases.

For the first time in our history, we can use the police power of the state to collect taxes, not for the legitimate functions of government but, to promote "fairness" in our economy. The bourgeoisie will now be brought to their knees. They have had more wealth than they deserved and we now have the right to take it away and give it to those who really deserve it.

Amerika will now be a land where every worker will belong to a union, where our schools can now radicalize and politicize our students just as the messiah and Ayers worked so hard to do in Chicago, where we can proudly serve in Obama’s civilian corps, where we can bring down the evil capitalists and nationalize industry, and care for our comrades with socialized medicine. The arrogant America that was will no longer exist. Its riches will be wiped away and its money made worthless. The new and glorious Amerika is at last a place where someone who chooses to have friends and advisors who are communists, terrorists, racists, and thieves is no longer held back and despised, but is propelled to greatness.

Now stand with me and raise your voices and proudly repeat our new pledge of allegiance!

I pledge allegiance to the workers party and to the United Socialist States of Amerika, and to the government for whom we rely on to fulfill all our needs, one nation, under the chosen one, indivisible, with economic fairness for all!

Those Rascally Racist Republicans

Today’s class: History 101

We keep hearing that Republicans, and other forms of conservatives, are just a bunch of white bigots and racists. That is why 95% of Blacks voted Democrat in the last election. I thought it would be fun to take an in-depth look at those mean ol’ conservatives (aka Racist Repulicans) and contrast them with the more understanding, tolerant Democrat Party of the left.

And what better place to begin than at the beginning…

The Racist Republican Party was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists that included many who left the Democratic Party due to the party’s position on the Fugitive Slave Law (forcing the return of runaway slaves) and the Kansas-Nebraska Act (which allowed for the expansion of slave states). Those Racist Republicans didn’t understand that Blacks were better off being slaves like the Democrats did. The Democrats understood that Blacks needed their white masters. When the slave states seceded from the United States and formed the Confederate States of America, the north, led by the Racist Republican party, declared war. 360,000 northerners died to free the slaves, 260,000 southerners, led by the Democratic Party, died to keep them enslaved.

After the war, the understanding, tolerant Democratic Party kept a strong hold over the southern states and did whatever they could to keep Blacks in their place (again, for their own good). They were also behind the formation of such organizations as the Ku Klux Klan.

When Thaddeus Stevens, a Racist Republican, introduced legislation to give Blacks the so-called 40 acres and a mule the understanding, tolerant Democrats overwhelmingly voted against it.

Racist Republicans such as General Oliver Howard and Henry Morehouse started Black colleges, while understanding, tolerant Democrats fought to keep them closed. Many Black schools are named after white Racist Republicans.

It was understanding, tolerant Democrats that opposed the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments which were introduced by Racist Republicans to abolish slavery, give citizenship to all Blacks born in the United States and, give Blacks the right to vote.

In 1883 a new field of studies began call Eugenics which believed you could advance the human race by discouraging “less desirables” (Jews, Blacks, etc.) from breeding and encouraging the more desirable (aka whites of European decent) to reproduce. One of the strong believers in Eugenics was tolerant, understanding Democrat Woodrow Wilson, our 28th president.

Many Blacks begin moving from the Racist Republican Party to the tolerant, understanding Democratic Party during the FDR (one of Barrack Obama’s heroes) administration. FDR admired Wilson and expanded on many of his programs. We can see what FDR thought about Blacks from what he said to Winston Churchill about British controlled Caribbean islands:

I told Winston, listen Winston, those places are nothing but a headache to you – you know that. They cost the British Treasury five million pounds – nearly 25 million dollars - every year. They are nothing but a headache. If you think I want your headaches, you are mistaken. I don’t. Furthermore those places are inhabited by some 8 million dark-skinned gentlemen and I don’t want them coming to the United States and adding to the problem we already have with our 13 million black men. I tell you, Winston, it’s just a headache and you can keep it.

Understanding, tolerant Democrats opposed passage of many laws that were introduced by Racist Republicans:

Civil Rights Act 1866 - Reconstruction Act of 1867 - Freedman Bureau Extension Act of 1866 - Enforcement Act of 1870 - Force Act of 1871 - Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 - Civil Rights Act of 1875 - Civil Rights Act of 1957 - Civil Rights Act of 1960 - And during the 60's many understanding, tolerant Democrats fought to defeat the 1964 Civil Rights Act - 1965 Voting Rights Acts - 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act.

After signing the 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act and issuing Executive Order 11478, Richard Nixon, a Racist Republican started what we know as Affirmative Action.

Racist Republican President Ronald Reagan signed into law the bill to make Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday a national holiday.

Understanding, tolerant Democratic President Clinton (the 1st Black President according to him) sent 20, 000 troops to protect the white citizens of Bosnia, but sent no troops to Africa's Rwanda to protect the Black citizens there. Consequently over 800,000 Africans were massacred.

Blacks have voted overwhelmingly Democratic for the past 25 years yet they would be pressed to name one piece of civil rights legislation sponsored solely by the understanding, tolerant Democratic Party.

Today the tolerant, understanding Democratic party believes the same things the Democratic Party believed prior to, during, and after the Civil War: that Blacks are better off on the plantation and still need their white masters.

In a future class, I’ll be happy to explain that last statement.

Thanks for attending.