Archive for June, 2014


Would Donald Trump take financial advice from a crackhead? Would Ivana let one pick out her wardrobe? Of course not, but that’s what happened in Seattle. A city besieged with unemployment and homelessness has taken the advice of a Marxist from Mumbai and comitted economic hari kari by raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. The author of this suicide pact is Kshama Sawant, an immigrant from a city in India where 70% of the population lives in extreme poverty and maintains an oppressive social structure. There’s a “war on poverty” in HER hometown. You don’t see that in Seattle. Now, after leaving her own country because it was such an anal repository, she has landed on OUR shores and taken it upon herself to inform us how screwed up our system is and how she can fix it- a system that’s worked pretty damn well for the last 240 years without her brand of benevolence. In 1900, while her great grandfathers were still eating dirt and dying of cholera, ours were building skyscrapers and the strongest nation in the world. One look at her bio and it becomes clear Ms. Sawant certainly didn’t work her way up from the poverty in Mumbai. The former software engineer is the daughter of a teacher and civil engineer. This left wing elitist could afford to wax poetic over the theoretical superiority of communism, and has supported various causes, from income inequality to gay marriage. Sawant thinks Marx and Engel “got it right”, and was quoted by PBS as saying that “capitalism generates more poor people every year and more billionaires every year”, lured in by the lo’ each-according- to- his -needs -redistribution of wealth platform. Did she actually READ the Marx she seems to love to quote? Marx was NOT a fan of minorities like her. Or should this be a shocker since Marx supported slavery and that is essentially what this 15$ an hour plan ensures? In response to the idea that the $15 an hour wage might hurt the economy she replied “If making sure that workers get out of poverty would severely impact the economy, then maybe we don’t need this economy”.( Sawant donated over $60000 of her salary as councilwoman to this same cause. My, how magnanimous! That entitles her to dictate to us how to fix all our problems? Her statement on the economy however, speaks VOLUMES as to what her true mission is, and the mission of Seattle liberals who think this raise was a good idea. How many employers are really going to pay $30000 a year to their lowest-end workers and NOT pass this offset on? This will only add to an already skyrocketing unemployment rate for minorities and will drive the price of goods and services up exponentially. This is just another Liberal move to overwhelm an over-burdened system Cloward and Piven- style.

The minimum wage fast food workers and other service industry positions this will “benefit” are erroneously assuming this will promote a living wage. The minimum wage was never designed to do that. It was intended to serve as a more transitional wage, for teenagers and college student primarily, before entering an established work force. But, under this Administration that has done so much to actually kill jobs, a job at Target is to be sought, as if its a Forbes 500 employer. Under this administration a minimum wage job is to be cherished, and not just by teenagers and college students anymore. Blacks are desperately trying to support families on them, and, in the end, because of this wage increase, will eventually be forced to turn to the System for help, just as planned. This isn’t a victory for the low-income wage earners, this is a coup against blacks and other minorities; a direct assault on the very hope of upward mobility. It is a move designed and implemented by an ideology that has no room for minorities within it, and carried out by individuals sporting their own versions of the Communist Manifesto in their backgrounds. This isn’t “income equality”, it’s state-sponsored slavery. Mixing Marxism and money is never a good idea, especially when you toss minorities and exploit them as the silent beneficiaries of some kind of economic upset in a strategy whose real design is to shackle them even closer to the oppressive arm of the State.

If Sawant thinks this is such a great idea, here’s a suggestion: she needs to go back to Mumbai, where the wage gap is on a level far beyond anything on the West Coast and implement her plan to “get workers out of poverty” there. And if she spent so much time observing conditions in her country and found them so horrendous why didn’t she donate her $60000 to her hometown that doesn’t even have clean water for all its residents? ( ) It’s far easier to throw money at a Leftist cause here and become a champion by screwing the people under the guise of “victory” than to clean up her own backyard. This has nothing to do with the people and everything to do the People’s Republic. There’s more to this Seattle story than just what’s percolating on the surface.



In response to thousands of illegals streaming across our Southern borders, including hundreds upon hundreds of undocumented children, the venerable Nancy Pelosi responded that “we’re all Americans” and that she wished “she could just take them all home”.  After giving it some thought, I think that’s a damn good idea.  In fact, since Nancy is so concerned with this “humanitarian crisis”, I think she should take some of the $803 million+ she made last year and set up a charity for all the little rugrats she wants to take home.  She could build a housing project right in her own backyard- it doesn’t have to be very big- most of these kids aren’t that tall.  She could provide them with free cell phones to call the main house when they want her to tuck them in and give them free wifi so they can stream Netflix on all the brand new laptops she’s bought them (because internet access is a MUST for everyone, and, therefore, a RIGHT).  She can sign them ALL up for unemployment even thought they’ve never worked here a day in their lives (that doesn’t matter to the Libs) and then get them on foodstamps to go along with their free healthcare because that’ll REALLy give them “more bang for their buck”. And with the free healthcare, they’ll be able to pursue their dreams as artists, or Cartel heads.  AND, when they’re old enough they can all go to college FOR FREE and get business administration degrees so they’ll know how to make the best investments from their drug running operations.

Am I being racist?


Do I want our border closed to everyone, including the little moppets currently flooding our system?


Do I think that ANYONE crossing into this country illegally should be immediately deported (or shot on sight)?


In fact, we could start the whole deportation process with Nancy herself.  IF any other self-respecting country would take her……


This is the second half of a two-parter that began with “$30000 and Johnny Still Can’t Read….”

Every year the United States spends over $100 billion dollars on education and yet, we rank 36th as a nation in the world for educational quality and academically superior students. So what does $100 billion get us and where is the money going? For over 200 years, education was a matter left solely to parents and the local community, but in 1979 the former office of Health, Education and Welfare was split into two agency by President Carter forming the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services. Ranked among the smallest of the cabinet positions, the department still has 5000 employees. Its stated mission is to “establish policy for, administer and coordinate most federal assistance to education, collect data on US schools, and to enforce federal educational laws regarding privacy and civil rights.” This mission included the institution of Common Core and its reteaching of our history to fit a Leftist agenda, and the department’s more insidious “P-20” plan that literally follows a student from cradle to grave, sharing information with other governmental agencies, violating, at the very least, a students’ rights to privacy. For $100 billion a year we get an academic version of the NSA, tracking, monitoring and recording all of our children’s movements within the educational framework, all inside an agency that has an insatiable desire to stick its nose into every facet of our childrens’ lives. Ten years ago there were 760 education-related programs spread across 39 agencies, costing taxpayers $120 billion a year. The situation has not improved much with educational spending at $107.6 billion in 2012. Every year the Department issues its Strategic Action Plan outlining its goals for the following school year and beyond. In comparing 2013 and 2014 two facts stand out. The first is that the goals for both years are entirely identical and, second, 2013 was an epic fail for turning around poor performing districts, at least in the DC district we previously investigated, that ranked lowest in the nation and spent the most per student at over $38000. Getting the picture?

Within the Department are a myriad of grant opportunities available for individuals, non profit organizations, schools (surprise!) and “other” organizations and/or agencies. After reviewing the three hundred pages listing the grants, their descriptions and how much money is allocated to each one, it becomes apparent that anyone and his brother has an equal opportunity to apply for some type of funding. These grants run in the millions, can be used for virtually any purpose and aren’t necessarily educational in nature. For example, one grant allows equal opportunity for blind individuals to operate vending machine services in schools. Another allocated over $18 million in 2012 for the advocacy of disability rights. It also becomes obvious upon review that the number one use for allocation of these monies is to hire more teachers. Giving the teachers union more power and making sure there is an equal number of Coke machine contracts given to blind vendors is not going to raise our position as 36th on the world’s academic stage. The Department also operates with a variety of extraneous offices and subdivisions of its authority that appear to be completely unnecessary. For example, why does there have to be an Office of Risk Management? This office’s own mission statement is highly suspect: “As part of implementing Enterprise Risk Management throughout the Department, RMS is responsible for identifying risks and taking effective action to manage and mitigate risks that may adversely affect the advancement of the Department’s mission.” In other words, schools that refuse to implement a policy such as P-20 would be subject to action by the RMS. There is another office higher up the administrative food chain, the Office of Innovation and Improvement,that, among other things, handles better access to mental health treatment for veterans and their families, specifically mentioned in Obama’s executive order 13625, for suicide prevention and substance abuse. They, in turn, oversee another office that is instrumental in “innovation in television learning”. While this office is making sure Kermit remains relevant, it’s also staying on top of drug addicted veterans. Why is this a matter for the Department of Ed? With 5000 employees, you have to ask yourself if this department is even necessary.

Should we do away with the Department altogether as some conservatives have suggested? The

Department has been a total disaster and a thorn in the side of Republicans since its inception. Federal funding only accounts for about 10% of a state’s education budget, the remainder coming from state and local taxes. If this Department was eliminated, the supporting architecture of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that President Bush resigned would remain intact, including the ability to fund all the sacred cows of Title I spending (at $14 billion a year) and the language that guarantees equal educational opportunities and the monies saved in administrative costs and payroll could be rolled over into the states’ budgets While the Department of Ed oversees Pell grants and the like, these monies could be returned to the states who know better how to distribute funding ,as well. In all truthfulness, this department and the accompanying cabinet position has done nothing to justify its existence. The administrative affairs and political policies it implements does absolutely zero to add to the quality of a student’s educational success. Title I funding target underprivileged and under served districts, but this funding does more for the numbers of union voters than it actually does for the students.

Reagan tried to do away with the department, but learned that federal agencies don’t just die. There’s too much red tape, too much bureaucracy, too many lobbyists involved, tightly rolled up in neat little ball with Benjamin Franklin’s picture everywhere. There is no definitive solution. Should the department be left out in the cold to die? Probably. But, there exists every chance that even then it will be resurrected like Truman’s War Department, split again into two or more federal agencies and create just another black hole for taxpayer money to disappear in. The secret lies in returning the issue of education completely to parents and states with more educational options than our standard K through 12 fair. Doing this would not only assure more control of curriculum content and funding distribution, but perhaps starve the beast into extinction. However, until the decision is made to be fully responsible for our children’s education, when and what they are learning, the Frankenstein that is the Department of Ed will continue to grow.


There is a video up on YouTube posted by Pete Santilli’s group at Guerilla News Media that is an absolute must see.  This video pretty much sums up how I think the vast majority of Americans are feeling.  The sergeant that read the riot act to Iraqi cops in this vid deserves a damn medal, and if I wasn’t married he’d have to file a restraining order against me for stalking!  THIS is what our military should be doing.  Instead, we’re forced to fast for freakin’ Ramadan!  S’cuse me?  Our commanders have the unmitigated gall to make our service men and women- men and women who, I might add, have already seen MASSIVE budget cuts that have resulted in less than optimal conditions on the battlefield- FAST for Ramadan.  In fact, all of their usual routine will be disrupted for the Islamic holy month.

The juxtaposition of the sergeant in the video against this superficial observance of an alien religion is the perfect example of political correctness gone way to far.  Just my opinion, but we’re there to PROTECT them, to TRAIN them, to serve in an AUTHORITATIVE capacity so they won’t get bombed into oblivion by their own freakin’ people.  They should be kissing American  ass seven ways from Sunday and erecting altars in the name of John Wayne!!  I don’t see anyone ELSE over there to protect them.  From the very beginning of the reports of the ISIS insurgency it was clear that the Iraqis left there have absolutely NO backbone- jeezus! You’d think they were a bunch of gun-fearing Libs!!  Too pussy to even defend their OWN homeland!!  And then you have the sergeant from the video who refuses to take any bullshit from ANY of them.  Pin a medal on that boy’s chest and make him a General!

We have been in that god-forsaken country for 13 years, and we’re there AGAIN, trying to defeat an ideological enemy AGAIN, that will only resurface AGAIN under another name once we’re gone.  Obama replaced any military advisors that had any sense and now he has idiots that not only want to curb a war that’s been fought off and on for a thousand years, but want OUR soldiers to get with the program so they don’t “offend” anyone. Are you kidding me right now?  I would expect nothing less from an Administration that has PROVEN itself to be worthless and weak, and apologetic for us being the greatest nation in the world.  But, I would hope beyond hope that ALL our servicemen and women are of the same cloth as the unnamed sergeant in the video.

Thanks to Pete Santilli and the Guerilla Media Network for this video.  Might trade Naveen Andrews for that sergeant on my island……

This is the first part of a two-part report on the Department of Education and the state of the American educational system in general.  Even if you don’t have school aged children, this affects all of us, with BILLIONS spent each year and absolutely nothing to show for it…………….

How many people actually attend their local school board meetings? Few even show an interest unless there is a bond issue put forth that requires a vote to prevent a rise in taxes. But, the local school board is responsible for balancing the annual budget, issuing interim financial reports and reporting to you, the tax payer, exactly where you money goes. We spend as a nation BILLIONS of dollars every year on education. So, where is all this money going? District administrators provide few answers as they are only interested in if the current funding stream lines up with what they have budgeted for individual programs; is there enough to cover the fine arts program this year? Or will they have to cut back somewhere else? The National Center for Educational Statistics is no help either, as they publish data that is as much as 3-4 years old. Government websites (.gov) skew the literacy rate (claiming 99%) while actual studies show that 1 in four children grow up and can’t read. The truth is virtually impossible to find just by skimming the surface. With this lack of interest and YOLO-style accounting it’s no surprise that school districts are able to get away with horrendous acts of overspending and waste.

In the 2010-2011 school year, according to the National Center for Educational Statistics Washington DC spent a shocking $29349 per student. However, in 2013 83% of eight graders in these schools were not “proficient” in reading. These are the schools in our nations capitol, where for decades both parties have been pushing for more federal involvement in education and more federal spending. Unless you search the districts’ actual budgets, trying to find information on the true amount being spent and what its spent on is a lot like herding cockroaches. The Cato Institute reports spending in the 5 largest metro areas, including these same DC schools, average 44% higher than is publicly reported, and public schools spend 93% more than private schools. The numbers vary in any given district, from report to report, by anywhere from $4000 to $10000. For example, DC stated publicly in 2009 that $17542 was spent per child for a less-than quality education. That may sound like a lot but the actual amount according to this same Cato Institute study was $28170 per student, where the NCES ( a government website no less) claimed it was $15842. There’s a big difference between $15000 and $28000. Combine all the districts statewide and the actual numbers can vary as much as 20 million dollars from district to regional level. And what do we get for this?

Under the auspices of the NCES, the federal government periodically tests elementary and high school students in various subjects, including reading and math. These tests are scored through another government agency (National Assessment for Educational Progress) on a scale of 500, and student achievement levels are rated as “basic” “proficient” and “advanced” In 2013, these tests were taken nationwide and, in spite of the ridiculous amount of money the DC district spent on education, they came in dead last. Only 17% of eight graders in DC rated proficient or better in reading. The US ranks 36th in education worldwide. Thirty sixth. Estonia ranks ahead of us and twenty five years ago they weren’t even a country! We’re talking about very basic levels of learning here. Advanced classes rank us even lower.

Let’s look at one elementary school in the DC district, Aiton Elementary. Upon examining the details of their budget that amount the Cato Institute mentions of $28170 per student pays the salaries of teachers making nearly $97000 a year to pass little Johnnie on even though he can’t read in third grade, can’t read in fourth grade, can’t read in fifth grade, and for the love of God don’t give him a math problem! Worldwide, even Russia ranks ahead of us in math. One thing becomes very clear: the teachers in DC are making too damn much money for churning out kids that can’t compete with Communist countries!! When digging into and comparing the budgets of the 2011 and 2014 school year, some interesting facts jump out. In 2011, the principal was allocated $138710 in salary, a figure that for an elementary school with less than three hundred kids enrolled is difficult to justify under any conditions. But, in 2014, that figure jumped to $153425. Upon closer inspection, it seems that something is happening at Aiton Elementary. In 2011, there were 13 full time general education teachers for kindergarten through 5th grade. In 2014, that figure dropped to 9. In 2011, there were 3 pre-K teachers. In 2014, there were only two. This trend continues through the positions of everything from administrative aides to business managers, shaving off one here, two there, turning a full time position to part time. Perhaps this is how the $15215 raise the principal received was funded. The only additions of positions for that same time frame was in special education. The number of teachers went from two to three, suggesting that the number of children with special needs had increased. The standardized test scores coming out of the district certainly suggest that. Could it also be possible that at least some of these “special ed” children had simply never been taught to read?

This problem is not just confined to the DC district discussed here. The need for education reform has been a hot button issue for decades, and yet, in spite of all the rhetoric surrounding it, the teachers’ unions, as well as the Feds, have effectively blocked any attempts at solutions to the problem. Charter schools and voucher programs have met with staunch resistence, and merit based pay is anathema to the unions. Home schoolers, regardless of how much they save the district by educating their own children, have even been targeted by the Left as somehow subversive. Web-based distance learning would also be a viable alternative in some districts in order to save money. Eliminating the slush fund that the Department of Education is would be a solid start, but that discussion raises more than a few eyebrows among the bureaucrats within the department. What about setting up schools in vacant buildings the government already owns instead of spending millions on new facitlities? And what would happen if districts had to provide families with vouchers equal to the amount they spend per child for that family to use on private schools, charter schools, or within the district itself? All of these options have a negative affect on the teachers’ union, however, and are largely ignored by them and the legislators the unions donate to. Yet, until that broader discussion is had and families are given a choice when it comes to education within or outisde of the system, the situation will not improve.

There are a few occupations that most folks will agree do not get paid enough for what they do; firemen, policemen, bomb disposal technicians. And there are a few really well qualified teachers out there working for next to nothing because they truly believe in the nobility inherent in their profession. But, not in DC, ironically, where that discussion needs to start. The DC district, and the small picture painted here of Aiton Elementary, is but a single example of the waste and abuse that has overrun the education system. There is a broader more systemic problem at issue here with the education system and the Department of Education, however, it’s clear in the DC school district, you do NOT get what you pay for.


Redheads and Reparations

Posted: June 22, 2014 in Uncategorized


Here we go.  Another example of the Liberal Gimme Culture.  Food stamps, housing subsidies and cell phones for crackheads is never enough.  Always gotta push it that extra step.

After reading Te-Nehisi Coates left-wing drivel in the Atlantic raising the subject of reparations once again( “The Radical Practicality of Reparations”  I thought maybe it was time to set the record straight.large

Trading blacks in America is a relatively new convention, but for centuries, dating back to Roman times, the Scots-Irish have been an enslaved race. Long before the black man ever set foot in this country, my ancestors were being sold on the auction block.  The first black slave was sold by the Dutch East India company in 1719.  But, as far back as 1652, as documented in the Egerton Manuscript in the British Museum “any person…found begging or vagrant in any town, parish or place [shall be] conveyed into the port of London or unto any other port from where such person or persons may be shipped into a foreign colony or plantation”.  An estimated 100000 Scots made their way to the New World in this fashion prior to 1730.  My ancestors were quite irksome to their overseers, so they were rounded up, or , in some instances, kidnapped, and sold for horrendous profit.  Children were no exception.  Polticial prisoners were routinely sold into slavery and anyone caught wearing tartan was subject to deportation.  Conditions aboard ship were deplorable and Scottish slaves were treated just as badly as their black brethren, sometimes worse, specifically because they were white.

Slavery in any form is just plain wrong; no one should live like that, and I find it abhorrent.  But, instead of bitching about reparations, we brought you whisky,  and gave you Gerard Butler.

You’re welcome…..




The recent article published in the Atlantic on “The Confidence Gap”  is just another example of the Left’s silent war on women under the guise of Feminism, and exactly the kinda thing that, frankly, makes me want to kick their ass.


The authors, Claire Shipman (left), a reporter for ABC News, and Katty Kay (right), the anchor of BBC World News America. In two decades of covering American politics, they have interviewed some of the most influential women in the nation. They were surprised to discover the extent to which these women suffered from self-doubt. (Henry Leutwyler)


According to this article, the number one reason women continue to fail in breaking through the glass ceiling is their own lack of self-confidence. The authors’ own personal descriptions do nothing to exude confidence; Katty is described as entertaining the notion that her “public profile in America was thanks to her English accent,” which surely, she suspected gave her a few extra IQ points every time she opened her mouth.”  Can you you say superficial?

But, it gets worse.  The entire article goes on to say how women in general predict they will do worse on tests, get passed over for hard-fought promotions, and do not see validity to their own worthiness.  They even go so far as to say that maternal instincts are a problem and that, ultimately, we don’t have confidence because we are women. It becomes a matter of biology and brain waves at that point; we’re just not built the same.  It’s clear these two have their own confidence issues and it’s just easier to blame it on biology.  Women are just not risk takers, they say, and are constantly second-guessing their own personal validity.

Of course they do!  They’ve  got women like Shipman and Kay subtly inferring they’re not good enough!  Turn on Oprah’s network  and at any given time some self-improvement guru is on, telling women the latest way to lead happy fulfilled lives as if the lives they are living are somehow deficient and there’s something wrong with their methods up to this point.  The  Liberal media inundates us with the idea that we as women are somehow “broken” and  need to be “fixed”.  Hollyweird produces movies with strong female leads that include some emotional flaw requiring a man to sort it out. Women are either corporate ball busters or home with the kids.  NOWHERE do you ever see a strong, confident women also portrayed  as wise and compassionate, as if those qualities are completely exclusive of one another. Women with careers and families run antithesis to the Feminist Manifesto, a movement that has done more to destroy women than empower them because its very premise asserts that we’re not good enough to begin with!    As for the men?  This article cite studies that “prove” men think they’re “all that” by nature, and these two seem quite bitter about it: “Infuriatingly, a lack of competence doesn’t necessarily have negative consequences”.   Let’s just level the playing field some more.  It’s not fair. Waaa.

Bitch, please.

Women are born risk takers.  Ever given birth?  That’s a fairly risky proposition you don’t know you’re capable of until you’re in it.   But, Shipman and Kay don’t bother to mention that,  doing a lot of whining about why women are underconfident and offer no substance for empowerment.  Typical Liberal tripe: let’s blame it on men, or biology or the difference in our synaptic brain impulses.They don’t bother to mention that confidence, and from it the desire to take bigger risks, first  comes with taking responsibility for yourself…..