The Illogic of Democrat Ebola Logic

Healthcare professionals who are compassionate enough to travel halfway around the world, live in 3rd world conditions and risk their own lives to work with Ebola patients will be discouraged from doing that in the future by a 21-day quarantine requirement? Do Democrats really think that makes sense?

You have to be in direct contact with someone infected with Ebola to contract the disease, right? So healthcare workers who will be up to their elbows, so-to-speak, in the blood, vomit, and feces of infected patients, don't need to be quarantined but our military personnel who won't be in direct contact with infected patients do? What???

Requiring a 21-day quarantine for healthcare worker returning after treating Ebola patients in west Africa, would be disrespectful to them but it isn't disrespectful to our returning troops. Really?

Calling for travel restrictions to affected countries and quarantines for those coming from those countries is anti-science, right? It is also implied that it is racist. So I guess all these countries and organizations are backward, racist, anti-science types.  
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Chad
Côte d'Ivoire 
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon 
Gambia 
Kenya 
Mauritania
Mauritius 
Namibia
Nigeria
Rwanda 
Senegal 
Seychelles
Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states – Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe South Africa on 21 August restricted entry for all non-citizens travelling from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. The government subsequently clarified that this was not a blanket ban and could be waived for 'absolutely essential travel'.
South Sudan 
Antigua and Barbuda
Belize
Colombia
The Dominican Republic  
Guyana
Haiti
Jamaica
Panama
St Kitts and Nevis
St Lucia
St Maarten
St Vincent and the Grenadines
Suriname
Trinidad and Tobago
North Korea
Australia 
Air France
The Togo-based carrier Asky Airlines
Arik Air (Nigeria)
Gambia Bird
Kenya Airways  
British Airways  
Emirates Airlines  
Korean Air
Senegal Airlines
Royal Air Maroc 
Brussels Airlines.
Racist, anti-science bastards ALL!

Appointing lawyer, non-doctor and political fixer, Ron Klain, as Ebola Czar makes perfect sense, right? By the way, has anyone seen him lately? He hasn't been to any of the meetings.

Democrat Open Border Policy Pushes Black to Back of the Bus

I have never been able to understand why the overwhelming majority of African Americans support the Democrat Party. After all, this is the party of slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow laws, a welfare system that has systematically destroyed the black family and abortion on demand that has resulted in the alarming statistic that today 50% of black pregnancies end in abortion. These last two issues have been the most insidious.

In 1965 when President Johnson outlined his "Great Society", only about 24% of African American children were born out of wedlock. Today, that number is more than 70%. According to the US Census Bureau, the African American population was 10.5% of the US total in 1960. Today it is only 13%. During the same period, the birth rate for African Americans plummeted from 4.2 births per women to only 2 births per women. The high rate of abortion among black women is obviously a major contributing factor. In fact, the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, often said in her writings that two of the main goals of birth control are weeding undesirables from the population and eradicating the Negro race. It is obvious that Democrat welfare and abortion policies have had a particularly deleterious effect on America's black citizens. Although not eradicated, the African American population in America has suffered under Democrat policies.

The Democrats' most recent scheme to keep African Americans at the bottom of the principle minority groups in the U.S. is their open borders policies and the attempt to legalize millions of illegal aliens. Since they take their African American constituents for granted, they are going to buy the Latino vote and American Blacks will be the ones who pay the bill. Blacks will still be 13% of our population and Hispanics will suddenly be more than 20%.

When I was in high school, I worked as a laborer in construction during the summer. There were a few other white high school kids and the rest African Americans.  Today, if you walk past a construction site, you won't see any white or black laborers. They have all been replaced by Hispanics. That would be fine if white youth and African American workers were finding other employment and the Latinos were working here legally. However, that simply isn't the case.

After the mid-term election, President Obama has vowed to grant amnesty to millions of illegals - the majority of them from Mexico and Central America. What the president will in essence be saying is, "Rosa get on to the back of the bus. Jose gets your seat!"

The Next Facebook Name Game

We've all seen them - the "What is your _______ name?" game on Facebook. You know, "What is your old lady name?", "What is your gangster name?", "What is your superhero name?" or whatever. You take the name from one list based on the month you were born and the second name from a second list based on the day you were born.  If our leaders in the West don't dislodge their collective heads from the tight, dark, fetid, place where they have them wedged, we better all be thinking about "What is your Islamic name?" which we will have to take when we are forced to convert. These ISIS devils are serious evil incarnate and they mean business. We are all at risk. Christians will be forced to convert or die. Moderate Western Muslims need not worry. No, not because you are already Muslims. No, you don't need to worry because you won't be around. What? Yes that's right. You will be some of the first to be killed because the Islamists will label you not Muslim enough, or decide you are from the wrong branch of Islam, or a Zionist collaborator, or some other trumped up excuse. Why? Because that's what tyrants do! And if you are Jewish? Well you know you needn't bother either. It's always the same story for you, right? Dangerous days are ahead for the civilized world - Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Atheist, Druid, Pagan, Cult of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or whatever, unless we wake ourselves from our politically correct slumber/stupor!

Thought on the Border Crisis

So according to the Left, the current border crisis is the result of the poverty, drugs, and gang violence in Honduras and Guatemala. Things are so bad that parents are willing to spend thousands of dollars to have coyotes (human traffickers) take their children unaccompanied, hundreds of miles, across dangerous terrain, on the top of the "Death Train" where they are dumped off by themselves on our southern border. So why aren't the parents from south Chicago loading up their kids and sending them to safety? Do Honduran parents love their children more than the parents in south Chicago? Are Guatemalan parents smarter than Chicagoan parents? Maybe the parents of kids from south Chicago should load up a bus with their children and send them to let's say Bethesda, MD and then have them just dumped off. They could create a crisis there and demand the good, caring residents of Bethesda house, clothe, and feed their kids. Or maybe they could send them to Honduras or Guatemala. I'd be willing to bet there was less murder and mayhem there last weekend than on the South Side!

Your thoughts are invited.

A Few Thoughts on Sgt Bergdahl Situation

1. As a policy, the US military doesn't try to apprehend AWOL service members or those who desert yet we tried to find Bergdahl who seemingly was either a deserter or AWOL - there is a disconnect here. 2. With all the evidence that he willingly left his post, the news media compulsively questions the honor of the soldiers who did their duty but who are critical of Bergdahl. They also speculate about the leadership of Bergdahl's commanders without any hint of there being a problem. 3. Susan Rice says Bergdahl served with honor and distinction. Really? He left his guard duty post endangering his fellow soldiers. He willingly sought out the enemy. The enemy's effectiveness suddenly increased after Bergdahl disappeared. Coincidence? Maybe. Who did he served with honor and distinction? Certainly not the US! 4. Two of the Taliban prisoner released were accused of crimes against humanity by the UN for killing thousands of people. Do you think the media would let a Republican president get away with that? 5. If Osama bin Laden had been taken to GITMO rather that turned into fish food, would the Obama administration have traded him as one of those returned for Bergdahl? Think about it. Honestly think about it you liberals out there!!! 6. This administration couldn't even track the guns they illegally sold to Mexican drug cartels in the Fast and Furious fiasco. Do you really think they can track those 5 released terrorists? 7. The Taliban immediately released a statement saying they would make abducting Americans to use as bargaining chips for other prisoners a priority. Surprise!!!! 8. The story about why the trade was made, in typical Obama administration fashion, seemed to change every other minute. All parents recognize this as an indication of lying. These are just a few thoughts. I could go one but why bother. This scandal has already been replaced by another.

Underserved High Self-esteem + Reality = Elliot Roger

Once again we have had a young man who has gone on a murder spree. Unlike our dishonest media, I say murder spree instead of shooting spree because Elliot Roger killed some of his victims with handguns but he killed an equal number with a machete and attempted to kill still others with his expensive European sports sedan. The media won't tell you this because they have an agenda but that is another discussion. For now, I'd like to propose what is wrong with our society that causes young men in their teens and early twenties to go on these murderous rampages. This was nearly unheard of 40 years ago when I was a young man and guns were just as plentiful then if not more so. What has changed? I blame the shift in American parenting techniques. Over the last 40 years, prompted by PhDs in psychology, sociology, education, etc. Americans have stopped allowing their children to fail, prevented them from competing, kept them from doing anything that might end up causing them to scrapping their precious little knees, placed developing their children's self-esteem above achievement, prevented any and all playground scuffles, and stopped spanking their kids when they do something wrong. It is easy to tell your child, regardless of what they do, how wonderful and special they are but that is the lazy, easy way of being a parent. Never having to deal with a child who is disappointed because their team lost; telling your child that it is unacceptable to get poor grades instead of worrying about boosting their self-esteem; avoiding ever having to put Merthiolate and a band aid on a cut or scrape or ice on a bruise, and avoiding the guilty feeling after giving them a well-deserved swat on the butt when they misbehaved is laziness on the part of American parents. Moreover, it is neglect and it is costing us dearly. Our children are unable to deal with reality. They never learn to deal with disappointment in a responsible way. They never learn to empathize with others especially when it comes to someone else's pain because they have never experienced even the most minor of injuries or corporal punishment. Bullying is now an epidemic because those being bullied are never allowed to give their tormentors the bloody nose they deserve and as a result, bullies continue abusing others. Life doesn't give us timeouts. Conflict resolutions techniques might be fine for John Kerry but they don't work with children because they aren't intellectually or emotionally equipped to approach problems that way. Children need to learn how to vent their frustrations in a controlled manner. They need to learn the world isn't going to end because they struck out and that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow even though they got a couple less Valentine's Day cards than some of the other kids. Elliot Roger needed to be told by the other kids in grade school that he was kind of a creep and maybe by the time he got into high school, he would have started acting appropriately. Today parents treat their children like little adults - they are not! Childhood is an incremental process to prepare kids to be adults. It is when disappointments can occur; mistakes can be made, and failures can happen but without severe consequences. It is a time to learn how to deal with setbacks and persevere and build self-esteem through success as a result of hard work not from being told, regardless of our lack of achievement, how wonderful we are. With all the newfangled child-rearing techniques, our kids are reaching adulthood ill-prepared for the harsh realities of being a grown-up. When they face their first real-life, major set-back like being fired, being rejected by a member of the opposite sex, not getting all A's, their Starbucks order isn't right or whatever, they snap. Today we teach our kids that anything that goes wrong is someone else's fault and none of their own. Unearned, undeserved high self-esteem plus reality equals Elliot Roger and Adam Lanza and James Holmes and Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold...It's easy for American parents to blame guns for all the violence - especially when it is the parents' fault.

Do Nothing House or Do Nothing Senate? You Decide!

Amid the growing Veterans Administration scandal where allegedly veterans were placed on secret waiting lists and at least 40 reportedly died before receiving treatment, the highly partisan, do nothing, obstructionist, Republican-lead House of Representatives (paraphrasing President Obama here) passed a bill 390-33 to give the Secretary of Veterans Affairs the power to fire anyone found responsible for gross violations. Perhaps something like, oh I don't know, creating secret waiting lists to get the number of those awaiting treatment down in order to meet department goals and receive bonuses? The bill was passed yesterday with both Democrat and Republican support. It was only 3 pages long but when it went to the US Senate, it was immediately tabled. The Senate didn't have the time. Understandably, Senators are very busy and have many issues competing for their time so they have to use their judgement to prioritize what they act on. So what was a higher priority for the US Senate than fixing the Veterans health care crisis? Well for 50 of the 100 Senators (all Democrats), it was writing a letter to the NFL urging them to force Washington Redskins owner, Dan Snyder, to change the name of his football team. Keep in mind, Congress has no say or responsibility for dealings with a private business like the Redskins. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee and a self-proclaimed socialist who caucuses with the Democrats, explained that they didn't have time to hold hearings or read the bill - the 3 page bill! That didn't stop them from passing the Affordable Care Act without reading it. So have the Democrats learned their lesson or are their priorities just out of whack or both? I'll leave it to the reader to decide for themselves. I think you can guess my position. In the meantime, perhaps some money should be invested in Evelyn Wood Speed Reading courses for all the Senate Democrats so they can get through those pesky 3-page Republican bills coming from the House. But that's just me!

Armed Conflict Narrowly Avoided in Nevada Grazing Rights Stand-off

In case you missed it, last week a potentially deadly stand off between Nevada rancher, Cliven Bundy, and the US federal government was resolved peacefully when the armed Bureau of Land Management officers withdrew from the vicinity of Mr Bundy's ranch. I'm not sure of all the details surrounding this case but the gist of the dispute is over grazing rights on federal land and fees the government says Mr Bundy owes. Regardless of who is ultimately found to be in the right, what I find troubling is that the Bureau of Land Management can muster a paramilitary response to a dispute over cattle grazing. Admittedly, the government claims Mr Bundy owes a million dollars in unpaid fees which to an ordinary citizen might seem like a large sum of money but in the grand scheme of things is a insignificant and it certainly should not have nearly come to bloodshed.

So my question is: Are you comfortable with the Bureau of Land Management (a part of the Department of the Interior) having a SWAT/Special Operations-type law enforcement capability including snipers that they are willing to use against ordinary citizens over cows eating grass?
I know I'm not!

Why Should Anyone Pay One Penny More?

On 20 March, a report was released by the Inspector General that disclosed that its investigation found that the Department of State under Barack Obama could not account for $6 billion in funds in the 6 year period it looked at mainly during the tenure of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Regardless of whether or not they can afford it, why should any American be asked to pay one cent more in taxes when things like this are happening? If she runs for president in 2016, do you think this will be an issue for Hillary Clinton?

Democrat High Fives All Around for Meaningless ACA Enrollment Number

There is an old military saying, "When you are up to your ass in alligators, it's easy to forget that the original mission was to drain the swamp." For the Affordable Healthcare Act this seems very apropos. The liberals won't remind you but the original goal of healthcare reform was to insure the alleged 40 million Americans who didn't have health insurance. Now for a little math: 7.1 million divided by 40 million is 17.8%. Would most reasonable people consider this success? This is just one of the many ACA "alligators". Even if one believes the number provided by the Obama Administration, there is no way to draw any real conclusions from the enrollment number reported Monday following the end of the first open enrollment period for the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) but that didn't stop the President and his fellow Democrats from crowing and doing a victory dance at a press conference. Funny how Mr. Obama didn't take any questions from the media - as if they would have asked any tough ones. In order for the number to have any meaning, we need to know the details. How many of the 7.1 million didn't previously have health insurance and how many of that number had to replace the insurance that they had and were happy with but lost because the new law 'declared' it inferior? Well the Administration won't tell us. There are many reports that millions of Americas were in this situation. Rand, the highly respected think tank, has determined that 6.3 million Americans lost their insurance due to the ACA. That would mean that only about 900,000 of the 7.1 million are actually newly insured. And how many of those who had to replace their insurance now have higher premiums and higher deductibles? Uh, well we don't know. How many of the supposed newly insured have actually paid their first premium? Again, we don't know but can one really be consider enrolled if you haven't paid? What about the percentage of the 7.1 million enrollees are having their new insurance subsidized by the government or how many people have been added to the Medicaid rolls? Again, no answers are forthcoming. Why not? When you have a program that encompasses one sixth of the U.S. economy, it is essential to set up a mechanism to accurately assess its effectiveness. You need metrics and getting those metrics would have been easy to get, if they had only asked these questions on the website but they didn't? Why? The answer is because they didn't want to know. This is precisely why conservatives hate big government programs like this. One would have to be ignorant, profoundly stupid or an ideological zealot to believe that the enrollment figure is any indication of success at all. If you are among the believers, you now have the facts, so you are down to two choices. So which one are you?

Russia A Regional Power: Yes But What Region Mr. Obama?

At a press conference yesterday at The Hague, Netherlands, ABC White House correspondant, Jonathan Karl, asked "Mr. President, . ... In China, in Syria, in Egypt, and now in Russia we've seen you make strong statements, issue warnings that have been ignored. Are you concerned that America's influence in the world -- that your influence in the world -- is on the decline? And in light of recent developments, do you think Mitt Romney had a point when he said that Russia is America's greatest geopolitical foe, if not Russia, who?" President Obama responded, Russia is a regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors — not out of strength, but out of weakness. ... Karl's question was a truly good one but he missed a golden opportunity for a follow-up. If Russia is only a 'regional power' then what region would that be? Russia covers 11 time zones and 1/9th of the earth’s land area. It reaches from the North Pole to the Black Sea and from the well into the European continent in the west to the Pacific Ocean in the east. With 6,592,800 square miles of territory, it is 1.7 times larger than the second largest country, Canada, and its 3,855,100 sq miles of land. Russia has close ties in the western hemisphere with Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Columbia. According to RIA Novosti, a leading Russian news outlet, “Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Russia is looking to build military bases in Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, the Seychelles, Singapore and several other countries.” So my follow-up question to Mr. Obama would have been, “And what region is that, exactly Mr. President?” The answer to that question would certainly be interesting wouldn’t you agree?

The Story of Noah; No Mention of God - Leave It To Hollywood

Let me start out by saying that I haven't seen this movie yet. It doesn't open until the 28th of March. However, I have heard and read the reviews, I am aware of the controversy and I've heard the radio advertisements that say the filmmakers took artistic license but they believe they stayed true to the Biblical story. Really? Perhaps I'm not as familiar with the story as I think I am but I find it hard to believe that it is true to the Biblical story when, during the 139 minutes of runtime, God is not mentioned once. I reread the story in Exodus and in truth, no one utters the name God. However, God spoke to Noah and I find it difficult to imagine how to tell the story without so much as a narrator explaining that Noah is hearing the voice of God or depicting Noah trying to persuade others to repent without explaining to them what God revealed to him.

I doubt the sincerity of the filmmakers claims when I read things like the following in the Washington Post: "The producer of the movie 'Noah,' a self-professed atheist, says he is proud of the fact that he’s taken a story inspired by God’s word and turned it into something so secular." Why turn a Biblical story into something secular? Further, the Washington Times reported that in the UK Telegraph the director "...claimed his leading character, Noah, was the 'first environmentalist,' something that suggests the movie storyline doesn’t exactly follow the Bible’s."

It seems to me that the producer and director were more interested in pushing a liberal secular, overpopulation alarmist and environmental extremist point of view. The story in the Bible, the Torah and the Koran for that matter doesn't have anything to do with environmentalism or overpopulation and is anything but secular. How can a story about the relationship between God and man lack any  religious aspect? Leave it to Hollywood. Expect the Left Coast and Manhattan elitist crowds to love it.

Unilateral Disarmament: Rosetta Stone for Small Nations

There's just no better way for a small nation to learn a second language. Give up the means to defend yourself. It's like geo-political Rosetta Stone. Just ask Ukraine and the 40% non-ethnic Russian Crimeans in a few years.

US-Russian Relations

Crimea: Another Secretary of State Clinton Success?

America elected our current president based mainly on the superficial desire on the part of liberals and well-meaning but otherwise confused moderates to elect our first African-American president. Will we make the same grave error in 2016 by electing the first woman president, Hillary Clinton? For the sake of the country and the free-world for that matter, let's hope not. The Office of the President of the United States of America is far too important to allow it to continue to be used as an affirmative action program. A major factor in judging Mrs. Clinton's qualification to be president has to be her performance as Secretary of State. For our nation's top diplomat, performance comes down to the answer to two questions. One: Are America's interest throughout the world better now than when they took over their post. And Two: Are ties with our friends and allies stronger now than they were before. To both questions, the objective answer has to be a resounding no. Starting with her first diplomatic trip to Russia and the ill-fated "reset button" incident, our relationship with Russia has continued to deteriorate. Russia has resisted our attempts to prevent Iran from continuing to develop nuclear weapons, interfered with efforts to stop the violence in Syria, and now invaded Ukraine. (As of this writing, a referendum in Crimea seems to indicate that it will break away from Ukraine and rejoin Russia leaving the US with few good options.)Furthermore, during her tenure as Secretary of State, North Korea has joined the group of countries with nuclear weapons capability, Libya went from a country that was cooperating with the US and strengthening its ties with America to one where Al Qaeda affiliates have taken control of a large part of the country and it is no longer a safe place for American diplomats to serve. This became abundantly clear when our Ambassador and three other personnel in Secretary Clinton's charge were murdered in Benghazi. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the costly gains paid for with American blood and treasure have been lost as Al Qaeda and the Taliban return to Iraq and Afghanistan respectively due to a failure to reach diplomatic agreement on how the US should support the new governments after our military role has ended. As a result, America is withdrawing our forces from the region without any mechanism in place to maintain those gains. The answer to question two is also clearly, no. Relations with Russia have not been this bad since prior to the collapse of the old Soviet Union. President Putin's actions make it obvious he has no respect for President Obama or his current Secretary of State, Mr. Kerry. Relations with key friends and allies such as the UK, Israel and Germany are strained as a result of snubs, inattention, and the embarrassing revelations of NSA eavesdropping on personal communications of their leaders. In Egypt and Libya, we encouraged the ousting of two leaders, Muammar Khadafi and Hosni Mubarak - no gems of humanity to be sure - but they were favorable to our national interests. Following Mubarak’s overthrow, unbelievably, our government supported Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood – the original Islamist movement organization. For their first official act once in control, Morsi and his government announced that, after 30 years of peace with Israel under Mubarak, they would no longer honor the Camp David Accords thus undoing one of the few accomplishments of Jimmy Carter’s presidency. Today, chaos reigns in both nations as Islamist groups vie for control. As we get closer to the 2016 presidential campaign season, look for Clinton supporters to try to rewrite the record of her accomplishments, especially as Secretary of State. We should also expect the bootlicks at CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, Washington Post and the other leading mainstream media outlets to continue to ignore the diplomatic wreckage left in the wake of her Sec State aircraft's contrail. This won’t be an easy task but they are a clever lot and I’m confident they will do their best. Perhaps they will continue to ignore stories like Benghazi in favor of the items the public is clamoring for and really needs to know about such as Gov. Christie’s Bridgegate scandal. Any sarcasm detected was intentional.

Murder on the Rise in Montgomery County Maryland - Surprised?

I usually like to stay focused on national and world issues but this one is just too good and it does have national implications. Yesterday, Montgomery County Maryland reported its ninth murder of the year - only 2 months into 2014. Last year there were only eight murders total in the county which is the epicenter of liberal lunacy in the "Free State". At this rate, Montgomery County is on track for a 2014 year total of 54 murders or a 675% increase. Does this surprise anyone? It shouldn't! As I predicted in my Sunday, March 17, 2013 piece "Under Martin O'Malley, Maryland Open for Business to Violent Criminals" this would be the effect of Gov. O'Malley's successful push to repeal Maryland's death penalty law and implement new gun control laws that restrictive law abiding citizen's 2nd Amendment right to self-protection. Who would have guessed it? Answer: Any thinking person, that's who.