Why the GOP Are Some Bitches (Part Eleven)

Even though Senators Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell might have saved the planet at the 11th, the country marched two weeks in to a Tea Party-orchestrated shut down of the United States government… primarily over the Affordable Care Act; which is the law of the land that was upheld by the Supreme Court and then underscored by Obama’s dick slapping of Willard Mitt Romney in the 2012 Presidential Election.

And while Congressman John Boehner holds the title “speaker of the house” it is quite clear that he had no control over his party that holds the majority, and that the 40 members of the House are the true leaders of the party, and when they were given their chance to show that they have some visions for the direction of the country, they shit the bed.

1obamaBoehner100913I get that the GOP and the Teabag Party Caucus don’t want Obamacare; it’s a big government outlay that will alter a huge chunk of the economy going forward, it raises taxes and it prevents the health insurance industry from gouging the public (so health insurance company investments aren’t going to deliver big gains and put money in the pockets of those who can afford to invest these days). It’s a bete noir to their core values… but you lost in every avenue to defeat it that a democracy allows.

So the real stink is coming from the Debt Ceiling, which at midnight tonight reaches its limit. The Treasury will have exhausted its borrowing ability, and it is this money that’s being spent by the federal government that’s stepping on the dicks of the Tea Party. But let’s look at something… under Obama’s watch a lot of federal spending has been slashed, from the 2011 Debt Ceiling Squabble to the Across-The-Board Sequester, which is what the GOP claims it wants (but I think they just want to ran a dick up the Black President’s ass to teach “the uppity nigger” a lesson).

A great deal of the (highly arguable) over-spending claims and Obama-instigated ballooning federal deficit that gave rise to the Tea Party jerkweeds in the first place, are disingenuous. Toying with the country’s economy, and therefore the world, should be considered treasonous… but I don’t think anyone in the mainstream media sees it that way, and therefore hasn’t presented this theory/fact. Obama could get impeached by the new speaker of the house (’cause I doubt Boehner retains the position), if he sidesteps Congress and invokes the 14th Amendment to force the Treasury to pay the country’s bills.

The most head-scratching thing is that the Tea Party can’t even come to an agreement amongst themselves over what they want; no sense of vision or leadership, and that’s why they’re dangerous. All they can do is say, “no” to Obama’s policies. The opposition that doesn’t present an alternative and just pooh-poohs is a bunch of bitch-ass MuthaFs.


Yet and still the GOP and its Tea Party crackpots receive a lot of support (from the grossly uninformed electorate and obscenely wealth individuals; stranger bedfellows I can hardly imagine). Their obstructionist tactics to defund Obamacare is so antithetical to good faith democracy — the so-called ethos of this country — that it undermines the moniker “The World’s Greatest Democracy” at an unprecedented level.

But let’s face it, that is exactly what the GOP has been after for the last generation with the gerrymandering/redistricting chess moves (if this is NOT anti-democratic, then I don’t know what is… considering that convicts, housed in rural areas, are barred from voting yet count toward the representative population in those Congressional districts) such that the overwhelming majority of House of Representative seats are “safe”; free of any kind of true challenge from the opposing party (which is some cases favors the Democrats).

Aggressive gerrymandering on its ugly surface alone takes a toxic explosive diarrhea shit on the graves of the Founding Fathers (who I can’t give any respect to any more as means to justify any post-Reconstruction reasoning for any new law) and the Constitution that they laid down (now exposed for being a potentially laughable governing document, and shown for what it really is — a instrument for giving Big Business and capitalists free reign like no other country in the history of the world).

Chew on this juicy fact: in the 2012 House races, 1 million more votes were cast for Democrats, yet the Republicans still maintain control. Democracy is bleeding out in 21st Century America.

Democracy is supposed to be about majority rule from the ballot box and (at least) bi-partisan agreements and compromises for effective governance. If you don’t like what’s happening, the ballot box is the way to switch up the politicians and policies that make more sense to the majority of the people.

However, how can you support the concept of democracy, if your vigorous (and respected) opposition is no longer that, when that opposition turns into outright obstructionism with strong-arm tactics that remind me of the SA (Brown Shirts) in Weimar Germany. It’s like the kid who takes his football away because he didn’t win the coin toss and then was scored on in the first play of the game.

It’s being a pussy-ass sore loser.


Now here’s the rub on this whole situation, and it’s really fucked up – a radical Right-Wing group, no matter how distasteful and racist (‘cause we KNOW that racism has seen a resurgence since Obama was first elected), has successfully flaunted the country’s mythological ideals and spirit to the utmost, even when it behaves most terribly and in ways that would have the likes of Thomas Jefferson eat King George’s shit he’d be so disgusted.

This same radical Right-Wing group can act a fool, because they know that no radical Left-Wing group will rise up and mirror the same bad behavior  (political extortion, economic blackmail and legislative obstructionist tactics) in Washington even if a Right-Wing majority ruled Congress and a Right-Wing jackass sat in the Oval Office. Why? Because a radical Left-Wing group does more than hint at socialism and communism, and in America – at any and all its points in history – it is far better to be a branded loud-mouthed racist or an anti-Semite than to branded a socialist or a communist.

Take the case of movie producer John Palermo, who recently openly called Kanye West a classless nigger in print. He’ll get a pass (after some public shaming and a difficult few years as a producer), but if he was making claims to radically redistribute wealth, he’d be shunned and prevented from working.

Look at how the Right has used the ugly of stick of socialism to paint Obama since Day One; it’s one of the midwives for the birth of the Tea Party.


The problem with running away from socialism while throwing stones at it is that one needs to take a careful look at just how socialist the United States actually is; all the government handouts in the form of the social safety net, farm subsidies (that disproportionately help citizens and voters in the Red States) and other forms of corporate welfare, government-back loans for housing and farms and business (the SBA)… are are wealth redistribution efforts. Yet there’s a lot of avoiding this picture… unless you put people of color in the frame, then he have voters up in arms about handing money to lazy, shiftless blacks and illegal latinos.

Something that I think people forget is that during the Great Depression lots of white Americans joined the American Communist Party, because in the aftermath of that wanton destruction of the majority’s wealth that tore the poor a new asshole, redistribution seemed like a possible good idea… at the time. But those desperate choices and political leanings came back to take their pound of flesh.

How do you think Senator Joseph McCarthy and his Inquisitors were able to launch the Red Scare in the early 1950s unless a sizable portion of the population had either embraced or been curious about communism during the hopelessness of the Great Depression. The stain of being a communist is so virulent that McCarthy was able to dredged up records from 20 years prior to destroy people’s lives.

1380375_10153313286635109_908177091_nLater, Ronald Reagan used our collective fear of communism to not only win several elections but to rip up a good deal of the social safety net in California and then for the nation as a whole.

Reagan, what a bitch.


Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

USA, the great democracy? I’m laughing so hard, I’m pissing my pants

And so the bitch-ass GOP members in the House of Representatives have forced part of the federal government to shut down, because they don’t like the taste of the Obama’s dick in their mouth in the form of the Affordable Care Act.

A robust opposition is CRITICAL to any functioning and effective democracy, yet what the Tea Party gutter snipes are doing opposing the ACA (aka Obamacare) is outright criminal, and it’s refusing to swallow the sour grapes of losing out in opposing this legislation THREE TIMES.

First, the Republicans lost the battle when they failed to elect John McCain or gain a majority in the House or Senate in 2008; the sad thing is the notion of a great many concepts in ACA came out of the Republican think tank The Hertigate Foundation.

Second, the Republicans claimed that the ACA was unconstitutional, so they took it up with the Republican dominated court and LOST.

Third, good old chump of chumps Mitt Romeny claimed he’d win the presidency and then repeal Obamacare his first week in office.

None of those things came to pass, and so the law stands, thus prompting the GOP to hold hostage government action (which they don’t like anyway) and the full faith and credit of the United States — best believe we haven’t seen ugly until the debt ceiling debate rolls around (It should not be referred to as the debt ceiling anyway… change the terms, and you change the narrative).

Tagged , , , , , ,

Renewing Their Bitch-Ass MFs Card

John Boehner, Eric Kantor and the tea party are back to extortion tactics to burn down ObamaCare. With the federal government about to run out of money and the debt ceiling reaching its limit – at the same time, which had made the Republicans’ dicks hard – is the coup the GOP has been rubbing their hands together since über-chump Mitt Romney got his ass handed to him last November.

Obama will veto any spending bill that snatches the money away from the Affordable Care Act, not that one will get out of the Democratic controlled Senate.

What pisses me off is that October 1st is when the discount insurance programs start their intake period. As someone who really needs to see a few doctors, but can’t afford the full freight price. I checked my monthly fee on Covered California website; it’s going to be $65/month with all sorts of no-deductible services in can get.

But these GOP cads want me to pay at least twice that, have high-ass deductibles and that would be if I could get insurance anyway (’cause I have a pre-existing condition).

My life style will change when ObamaCare comes into effect. And I don’t care of businesses have to subsidize it!

Also the House GOP have voted to slash $40b from the food stamp fund over the next 5 to 10 years. See? Fucking bitch-ass chumps.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Defending Same Sex Marriage

The Supreme Court has finally heard the arguments on whether to uphold or strike down California’s Proposition 8, which bans gay & lesbian marriage in Californa. The repercussions will be felt across the nation come summer when the SCOTUS issues its ruling.

The opponents to same sex marriage are primarily the religious right; those self-styled chumps who use the Bible to dictate their thoughts on how not just they should live, but how you and I should live as well. The Bible has many a verse that decries and damns homosexual activity… And with good reason, because Religious fanatics believe that sex should only be about procreation, and sex for other means is deemed wicked in the eyes of not just God, but most specifically and acutely “His” church.

These people should all forced their women to undergo female circumcision. And Michelle Bachman needs to be first in line.

Anything that has a religious root to its argument pretty much has no business in shaping laws or social morays in the modern era. You base a legal argument on a verse of Scripture and you’re trying to skirt around the separation of church and state component to the Constitution. Think about it, the church is the one that has told you homosexuality is wrong and you’re being its undeclared proxy when arguing in accordance with a religious doctrine.

The Purpose of Marriage

One of the things that comes up all the time when same sex marriage is debated is the purpose of marriage, and it gets defined as a sacred union between a man and a woman. But that’s not the case. It can be for certain marriages, but its hardly true in a country with a higher than 50% divorce rate.

In days gone by, marriage was a covenant between a man and his father-in-law to determine the disposition of property when the father-in-law died. It was also a means to control women from having children with multiple partners, so the children could be provided for and raised by an identifiable father (and force upon him a sense of responsibility for his off-spring, which he could disregard or deny if he wasn’t married).

However, we all know that throughout history all the way up to the present day, far too many men treat their children like shit and don’t raise them right. There are a lot of deadbeat fathers, so marriage (and then divorce) doesn’t guarantee that the man will be a proper father. The courts have laid down rules and penalties about this – and this could be applied to divorced same sex parents as well, should they have children together and then split up.

The argument that marriage is deigned in part to ensure that children are raised by both the mother and father is foolish, because look at the number of divorced households that then result in single-parents raising the kid(s) with no help or help that is begrudgingly given through court order.

Another “purpose” of marriage is to be a legal contract to enable the woman to have rights to the man’s property and money. Ask any man who has been through a divorce how fair the courts are in terms of dividing up the so-called joint property. Unless you live in a no fault state and have a mutual agreement between the spouses, the man gets sodomized by the woman and her lawyer the vast majority of the time.

Marriage is a legal contract that also affords you certain rights under the Federal government, and these are nearly all financial in nature (e.g. filing joint tax returns or receiving. Social security benefits) and these can and should be extended to same sex couples as well.

The Civil Rights Aspect

The 1950s and 60s ushered in changes to Society that should have been in put in place by the Constitution, but the overhyped Founding Fathers refused to deal with core issues and kicked the can down the road (thus laying the groundwork for the Civil War when the Declaration of Independence was signed and the Constitution was ratified – thanks a heap, guys!).

The problem with race relations is core to the country, and Black people who helped build this country as slaves, were instrumental in redeeming it through the Civil Rights movement. The Women’s Movement and the advancement of all other protected class came about because Blacks took beatings, dog bitings and water cannons for US ALL.

It’s disingenuous to preclude homosexuals from getting their just due, as they get discriminated against the same way as women and disabled people do (nothing compares to the adverse treatment Blacks get though).

It’s going to be a few months until we know how all this shakes out, but if Prop 8 is upheld and same sex marriage is banned, then there’s another reason why the GOP have fucked this country no only over the past 40 years but over the coming 40 as well.

Trampling State’s Rights

There are something like 1100 rules and statutes that will be affected if same sex marriage is deemed legal in California, because of how it bleeds into federal law and benefits. Marriage, as a legal binding contract and status, is defined by the states, so if the SCOTUS strikes down Proposition 8, thus leading the pathway to same-sex marriage… it’s basically the Feds trampling on States’ Rights, and that’s something that the GOP, in particular, won’t like. What many people probably fear is that if the SCOTUS  overrules States’ Rights in this issue, it will set the precedence for more hobbling of States’ Rights. So this factor alone might be reason enough for the SCOTUS to punt on this case thus going back to the latest ruling, which was the California Court of Appeals ruling which I believe struck down Prop 8 (there is controversy, because the judge in that case revealed that he was gay and then didn’t recuse himself).

What happens next does have everyone sitting on pins and needles…

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

And We’re Hating Because…

Now the Hollywood award season is over, the two odd “news” stories that cropped up in the waning days is The Onion’s vulgar commentary on Quvenzhane Wallis (star of BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD) and the insipid “hatred” of actress Anne Hathaway.


I get the smack down of Q Wallis, the media doesn’t care for Black women too much, particularly snarky young ones (as she was little too much on the Red Carpet prior to the Oscar ceremony, challenging her mother and sister the way she did). Although The Onion had some big brass ones to call her a “cunt” in a Twitter post.

The Anne Hathaway knee-capping seems to be based on the fact that she’s “insincere”… and that she’s came across too well rehearsed at

Hathaway has sky-high sex appeal… for an actress who isn’t a blonde bombshell or even one who makes it a point to market herself as a sex symbol (although EVERY actress wants to be considered sexy… and have men and boys jerk off while looking at their photos, they just don’t want to know it; as long as they sense that kind of unbridled carnal lust, they’re good).

So I’m not understanding the hate…

it seems that people are casting disparaging judgment on the woman based upon her off-camera behavor, how jacked up is that? And let’s be honest, it’s almost inappropriate to used a jaundiced lens on the artist when the step away from the camera, step off stage, step away from the keyboard, the canvas, the sculpting platform… because if that was an appropriate criteria for whether or not we “like” an artist, we’d probably end up hating more artists and refusing to appreciate or even experience their artwork — which is what we crave in a society that in drowned in negativity…

Tagged , , , , ,

Ras the Exhorter:

The agenda of the church was probably the reason for the departure of the red tile roofs that dominate Italian homes

Originally posted on A Certain Slant of Light Photography:


Five humongous domes of St Mark’s Basilica make a very interesting contrast with its neighbors. I wonder if the departure from the red roof standard is deliberate.

View original

Controversy? What Controversy?


Advance Movie Poster

After a half dozen seasons of Fox’s “24″, I’m a little immune to so-called advanced interrogation techniques that get approved by Hollywood censors. So when I saw Kathryn Bigelow‘s latest film ZERO DARK THIRTY, I wasn’t too terribly shocked by the various torture scenes scattered throughout the film.

I’ve seen and/or read worse accounts when the Abu Gharib scandal broke about five years ago, and in other first-hand accounts of how convicts are treated in American prisons, let alone other prisoners of war. After all, ZERO DARK THIRTY is a Hollywood film with “awards consideration” written all over it (because once a director hits that highwater mark, as Bigelow did with her previous film THE HURT LOCKER, it’s a given that the next two or three films will get lumped into the awards consideration bracket on GP). This is not some little indie labor of love where the filmmakers had to fight tooth and nail to a) get it made, b) shock the audience with the graphic and gross physicality inflicted on one human being by another (e.g. IRREVERSIBLE) and c) avoid getting bitch-slapped with an out of date and bete noir NC-17 rating.

However, there’s been a good amount of chatter about how the film’s wanton use of torture clearly shows that torture was justified because it provided the answers which the CIA needed to gather the actionable intelligence that was needed to send in SEAL Team 6 and execute Osbama bin Laden like the dog that he is/was.

I sort of disagree with that narrow take-away from the film, because IN THE FILM (who knows if this is true in real life) the torturing of al-Qaeda operatives and associates didn’t exactly lead the CIA very far. In fact, there’s a specific scene in which Jessica Chastain’s character pleads for direction on how to prove her theory about who lives in the Abbotabad compound WITHOUT access to the torture teams and that it would be futile in any event, because the detainees — particularly the ones in Gitmo — would lawyer up and get a message UBL that the CIA was on to the compound.

Granted Maya and the CIA did learned the name of bin Laden’s courier through torture, but they were using the wrong photograph to ID the man, and it was only by sheer dumb luck that after half a dozen years some fresh-to-Pakistan CIA analyst discovers an overlooked file that the Jordanians sent over in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

In real life, you can’t tell me with a straight face that some actionable information wasn’t obtained through waterboarding and the like, you can’t. The CIA did learn a lot of shit and probably stopped the wholesale slaughter on many US soldiers and probably civilians throughout the western world.

But then the more pertinent question remains, is it morally right to employ these advanced interrogation techniques on enemy combatants to gain information?


Sick ‘em, Sick ‘em

The humanists will say, that it’s absolutely and categorically wrong to abuse another human in such a manner.

The pragmatist will say it depends on the context.

The realist will say say use it to see what it yields.

Director Bigelow is a politicized filmmaker, but tends to not answer questions that her films ask, and this by no means says that she advocates physical violence and advanced interrogation techniques… at least not publicly (and who would outside of the nutjobs on Fox News?)…

Would any director take the public stance that torture is good? Of course not, because any artist worth their salt doesn’t give answers to the meaning of their work, but coyly says, “you saw the [film, painting, documentary, etc.], you tell me?”

We can’t hold artists accountable for the content of their work or the words and deeds expressed/carried out by characters within their work (if that happens to be the case) — artists, when they’re on their game, hold up a mirror to society and say, “don’t flinch when you look.”


Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Case for Assad

In the wake of the Arab Uprisings, known as the Arab Spring, many of the long-standing despots/strongmen came crashing down; Mubarak in Egypt, Brother Leader Qaddafi in Libya, and in Tunsia. The Arabs in Syria wanted to throw of the yoke of Bashar al-Assad, the son of the dictator who ran Syria for three decades or so.


Bashar al-Assad

However, Assad has proven to be very resilient in turning back the rebels. The Syrian Civil War has been raging since March 2011, and there is no end in sight. Mainly because the Western countries, who would normally intervene in some way, haven’t stepped up — not even with the NATO airstrikes that helped vanquish Qaddaffi (remember, Qaddaffi made some dumb mistakes with the US in the past, and the US was more than willing to help crush that fanantical fool). However, Assad hadn’t really pissed off the US in recent history (maybe his father, Hafez, did), what’s the incentive to put troops on the ground.

The US public would NOT stand for another Middle East combat situation; after ten years in Afghanistan and about six in Iraq, there wasn’t going to be another American beat down of Arabs (and if there is going to be one, then it’s going to be against Iran, so there’s not going to be a pre-fight in Syria… that was Iraq).

Assad, through his armed forces, has been brutal toward the Syrian Rebels, who are primarily Sunni Muslims, and there has been scuttlebut that the Syrian army was planning on using chemical gas against the rebels — but President Barack Obama harshly warned him about such a mistaken action.

I thought for sure, last summer when Alleppo fell to the rebels, that Assad wasn’t going to see the holidays. But I was wrong, because of the ethnic make up of the elites in Syria.

The Assad Regime is NOT an Islamist regime; it is a Christian sect (Alawites), and if you look at the history of the Middle East in the 20th century, when there is violent change in a government, the revolutionary forces that assume power are NOT kind to anyone associated with the previous regime and they crack down on minority religious groups with a ferocity that it is unmatched, nasty and disquieting. Islam, when it’s used in politics, doesn’t tolerate non-believers — they’re called infidels, and nothing is too heinous to be inflicted upon infidels (thus justifying barbaric torture that makes the Spanish Inquisition look like a frightening trip to a Russian dominatrix).


Staunch (and even casual) Islamists have proven that they are dangerous when they seize political power — look at Iran, look at Iraq and then let’s see what happens in Egypt (which I don’t have high hopes for).

Islam, when it is used in the political sphere, has been nothing but an anathema across the entire Middle East — the volatile mix of Arab culture and Islam’s harsh diktats on how life must be lived has push the society in the bulk of the region back to the 19th century or further. Its zealots, who operate outside of any accountable framework, turn militant and export jihad across the globe. Not to mention the implementing ethnic cleansing as a domestic policy. So much of the violence and the continuing violence in Iraq is based upon the fact the Saddam Hussein was a Sunni Muslim, which is a minority in Iraq, and Hussein, through the Ba’ath party, kept a spiked iron boot on the neck of the Shi’ite Muslims in Iraq. So when Saddam fell, the Shi’ites felt it was their Allah-given right to fuck over ALL Sunnis who “had it so good under Saddam” (meanwhile, NO ONE had it good under Saddam), and fuck them all over they did — Sunni and Kurds alike.


We shouldn’t be surprised when we see the same type and level of brutal reprisals by the Islamists if and when they get into power in Syria; Christians and Sunnis and other non Shi’ite muslims are going to gang raped, believe you me.

Lebanon went through a Civil War in the ’70s and ’80s that pretty much destroyed a generation — in a state that wasn’t too harshly run — and the civil war in Syria is going to do the same thing to there. Are the Western powers and diplomats, who so want Assad to step down, going to step in with boots on the ground to prevent the humanitarian disaster? No, of course they’re not.

This is why, as heinous as Assad is, the West shouldn’t make efforts to overthrow him. I’ll just bring up Libya again, and the Benghazi Incident as my case in point.


2nd Amendment Revisions Requested/Required

English: AR-15 rifle with a Stag lower receive...

English: AR-15 rifle with a Stag lower receiver California legal (only with fixed 10-round magazine) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the last six months, America has witnessed the shameless killing spree in Colorado during the Dark Knight Rises screening, the shopping mall shooting in Oregon just the other day and now this senseless killing in Newtown, CT where innocent children weren’t just gunned down, but chopped to pieces by a Sig Sauer. In 1994, California Diane Feinstein introduced a comprehensive Assault Weapons Ban law that actually passed, but it had a 10-year renewal loophole thrown in, and when George Dubya Bush was the Commander-in-Chief, he refused to renew the law… hence, more assault weapons in the hands of everyone. Weapons that have no basis, except to inflict maximum damage on people or animals.


The NRA and the Gun Lobby have effectively twisted the debate about “gun control” to mean “gun ban” in the hearts & minds of far too many Americans. Like W.E.B. du Bois said, “Either ignorance will destroy America or America will destroy America”, and at the moment Ignorance is winning most of the battles. Think abou the loophole that the NRA has been able to keep in effect, if you want to buy a gun (like an AR-15) at gun shop or store like Wal-Mart, then  you must submit to a Federal Background Check. However, if go to a gun show then you don’t have to submit to the Background Check — which would mean, why would anyone with evil on the mind buy their death dealer from a gun shop? They wouldn’t. People who support gun laws hoot and holler, “guns don’t kill, people do!” Okay, so let’s go with that; there are thousands of automobile related deaths every year, and we can analogously say that “cars don’t kill, people behind the wheel do”, and yet with cars you have to pass a test to get a driver’s license and show that you have an insurance policy to even drive a car of the lot (in most states). Why can’t the same be done for guns? Where part of the gun-totting test is a psychological evaluation and the Federal Background Check; also you gotta have a $1m liability insurance policy — in you accidentally kill someone or kill someone in a manner that is deemed to be manslaughter (or worse) when you thought you were acting within your “rights” (like George Zimmerman thought when he snuffed out Travon Martin in Florida earlier this year).


The biggest definition-twisting that the Gun Lobby perpetrates is how they “interpret” the 2nd Amendment, which states at a militia has the right to bear arms. My question then is: who the fuq is in a militia? I know that militia groups in rural areas claim to be militias, and therefore, probably have the best claim on the right to bear arms. But the history and tradition of the country had afford any the opportunity to have a gun whenever they hell they want one; so taking the 300+ million firearms that are in circulation is practically impossible, but we’ve been so accustomed to ruthless and merciless gun violence People who the support gun rights claim that if guns are banned, er controlled, then criminals will have them anyway and be able to terrorize law-abiding citizens. Criminals have illegal guns NOW and they’re not terrorizing regular folk any more than usual, and they usually do it with pistols and shotguns. Outside of drug dealers, is the random home invader using a legally obtained assault rifle to tie up your family, rape your women and steal all your shit? Or are they pistol-whipping you with Glocks and Sig Sauers that they stole or bought off the street or traded for drugs with the Mexican cartels?


The recent chatter from Gun Freedom Advocates that classroom teachers should be strapped has been making the rounds over the last week. This not only smacks of ignorance, but fails to take into account several things; skip the fact that it’s a vain attempt to protect kids — can you imagine Mr. Welty the 5th Grade Teacher trading shots with a disgruntled, deranged and hell-bent on killing all rampager? What about stray bullets? Who is to blame when stray bullets from the strapped teacher kill students and/or other teachers? What’s the insurance premium and liability for that? How does a teacher live with him or her self if friendly fire kills a student? The old Star Trek: Wrath of Khan adage: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or one)?

A week after the Newtown Killings, the NRA spokesman gave a speech that NPR covered and the douche was talking about how we post armed guards at banks, airports, sports stadiums and office buildings, but somehow we’re supposed feel okay about increasing the level of on-display firearms in the public space?

The NRA EVP compared a strapped Secret Service agent protecting the President to putting AR-15s in the hands of School Hall Monitors. Some angry man at the NRA Press Conference shouted out, “NRA, stop killing our children, stop the killing… they are the perpetrators…” Some woman, obviously in pain and perhaps related to a victim, shouted: “Ban assault weapons now… stop the behavior of the NRA…”

Why is the NRA taking a more aggressive stance that only more guns in  the hands of “good guys” can stop the “bad guys”? How does LaPierre define “good”? It might not be my definition,


See, here’s the funny thing about Wayne LaPierre’s (and I guess the whole NRA) proclamation that we should post Wehrmacht-style guards at the entrance of every school. When Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold went buck wild at Columbine High School back in the late ’90s, THERE WAS AN ARMED GUARD on-duty that day. And guess what? He was basically fucking useless in stopping the rampage killing. That security guard didn’t even shoot Klebold or Harris, they killed themselves with self-inflicted suicide GSWs.

Also, these rampage killings aren’t spur of the moment fits of insanity… they are PLANNED, and with any assault plan there is a scout that goes on, in which the “enemy’s” defenses are judged… so a soon-to-be rampage killer would scope out a school, see where the guards were, see what their rotation patterns are and then strike at the weak point — perhaps that only means a surprise attack (with a flash suppressor/silencer fitted on the gun) and the Armed Guard is taken down. Also, if School Guard Bob doesn’t have his AR-15 locked & loaded and in combat-ready position, how quick do you think he’s going to be able to return fire before he’s mowed the fuq down?


I learned today that in Floria, which has that oh-so-fuqed-up Stand Your Ground Law, over 400,000 Concealed Carry Gun Permits have been issued SINCE 2009. And get this, its Department of Agriculture does the supervision and regulation, which conveniently doesn’t cross-reference ANY Federal database of potential or known fuq-ups.


On the weekend news talkshows, NRA Chief LaPierre was saying that we should call him crazy for suggesting that we put weapons of limited destruction in the arms of kids, teens, school hall monitors and the like.

FUQ CALLING HIM CRAZY, he’s irrelevant with his idiot comments. The so-called Left Leaning Media needs to shut him up, not give him any kind of forum to vomit out his wack-job views, because right now he’s just a MAJOR parat of the problem.

Will we see President Obama actually sign new legislation to address this mess? Probably not, those NRA types know how to scare Congressmen and women like no other lobby group.

I wonder if Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 has the lead being a high school hall monitor who’s packing a H&K MP-5 to defend his turf from an anti-social, psychologically deranged former student?


Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Battery De-Powered

It’s quite remarkable, when you think about it, how the Internet and the accompanying/burgeoning mobile age disrupts businesses and how industry leaders get complacent and don’t adjust their corporate strategy for continued success.

We all know about Kodak’s grievous missteps which have pretty much spelled curtains for the company. Another company that’s on super-shaky ground right now is Energizer. NPR ran a story this morning about how the fabled battery company has hit hard times in the current mobile age, because consumers are buying rechargeable batteries more and more (instead of the eco-unfriendly disposable ones that Energizers makes).

The Energizer Bunny… soon to be on the Bread Line

Ever since the Prius became a hit car, and more and more automakers began a push to make electric cars, it would make sense that a battery company like Energizer would be leading the way in the green energy revolution, and focus massive amounts of R&D dollars (and take on new debt, if need be) to develop the next generations of batteries for cars, homes, industrial needs and, of course, consumer electronics.

But Energizer didn’t see it that way… and now it’s shutting down factories and firing people. The Board and upper management should be fired, not the workers.

Tagged , , , ,

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: