I Must Rant For A Moment. Triggered, Indeed.

I admit it, I was "triggered" by a Facebook post of a high school friend, a clickbait headline about Science Disproving Transphobia or some similar drivel.

Are people phobic about trans people? I don't think so. I mean, that's a catch-all kind of statement in the first place. Yes, there are people who are scared of trans people, the idea of trans people, etc, just as there are people in the country (and the world) that are racist, but I believe we are no longer what any sane person can call a "racist nation."

The entire bathroom flap about trans people was started by the prog/lib/dems deciding that there was a problem for this unbelievably small number of people and THERE NEEDS TO BE A LAW to decide that THEY CAN USE WHATEVER BATHROOM I IDENTIFY WITH BECAUSE they said so.

Now, is it reasonable that people should be able to go to the bathroom? Yup.

Is it reasonable that people should not be bullied or assaulted because of this? Yup. How often was that happening? I dunno. Too often, no matter them actual number

However, when you say PAY ATTENTION TO THIS TINY ISSUE, WE ARE MAKING A LAW ABOUT IT, people pay attention.

This resulted in conservative/repub lawmakers saying YOU CAN'T MAKE US ACCEPT THIS LAW because Religion and stuff! Dems lit a fire, Repubs threw gasoline on it, like always.

So, the last POTUS signed an order about schools and bathrooms, then the new POTUS signed an order rescinding it, saying clearly "this isn't a federal issue, schools can make whatever policy suits them about bathrooms without a federal mandate." **It's worthy to note that Trump has been by far the most LGBT-friendly presidential candidate in our history, if you are paying attention.

This, I assume caused the post (and article) that "triggered" me.

So, where's the rant?

People aren't afraid of trans, they are afraid of perverts and pedophiles. That's the objection. We have been carefully taught (catch the South Pacific reference?) that ALL MEN ARE PREDATORS by the extremist lefty prog anti-rape-culture feminist pogrom for my entire time on earth and maybe longer than that. All. Men. Are. Predators.

Every class, training, sensitivity session that has taught our young men and women about harassment, rape, etc, has emphasized how bad men are, and this is the fruit of this education, folks.

We all now know beyond that shadow of doubt that men cannot be trusted with children, or women. I cannot even so much as coach my children's teams without approval from the school, archdiocese, FBI and state police. I cannot be alone with the team even after that (2 adults always!) because I still may be a predator or perv (or may still be accused of predatoring or perving if alone without a corroborating witness, who is there to protect me and my reputation just as I am there for them). When I first went through the vetting process as a M Ed student, we were carefully instructed to never being alone with students, or if conferencing, keeping the door open and alerting a colleague to the sensitive situation if no one could chaperone so that we couldn't even be accused of the unavoidable, expected sexual assaults we couldn't help but perpetrate on our students....

So, excuse us if we think giving adult-males-that-may-be-predators the legal ability to share our daughters' (and sons') bathrooms and locker rooms is a problem. We aren't afraid a trans kid is going to hurt them, we are afraid a predator is going to waltz in right in front of us instead of having to sneak in while we are trying to protect our kids.

Just Wanted To Be On The Record

I have to tell you, every time a lib/prog on FB posts about the evil Trump, I want to scream "you are so stupid you don't even know he's a lifelong Democrat, do you?" I mean really, his donations, his policies, his statements, his votes are D, not R. You have got to be kidding me.

I just want it on the record, when he doesn't get the nomination because he's a Democrat and they finally realize it a the party level.

..."it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Add this to the list of reasons I will never be a democrat, or a liberal:

"Senate hold global warming all-nighter"

"The last time that Congress seriously attempted to address climate change was in 2009, before the GOP took control in the House. Democrats in that chamber narrowly passed a bill to cap carbon emissions. It never made it through the Senate, and in the end, the effort was thought to have contributed to Democrats’ losses in 2010.

Which explains why some concerned Democrats feel an urgent need to launch a talkathon – which is really a media campaign (follow it on #Up4climate). It also explains why some Democrats will be safely tucked in their beds while one of their colleagues makes an impassioned plea to the C-SPAN camera."

Seriously, folks, they have the Senate, so if they wanted to actually do something they could, right? It's not they actually wrote a bill that needed fillibuster or something. Just another Dem dog and pony show, and you know that the believers were eating it up. 

Nothing To See Here, People, Keep Moving....

The National Park Service has closed privately run marinas, restaurants and inns throughout the country and in some cases even posted guards to keep people from using them during the government shutdown, arguing that it doesn’t have the money, manpower or authority to let them operate.

Views to Mt. Rushmore blocked......

Or, you could get kicked out of your home.

Not surprisingly, Wisconsin and it's eeeeevil republican governor said "nope, not gonna do it" to some NPS demands.


Oh, it's the House's fault. Not the kind, gentle, wise, educated, master of locution.

These folks beg to differ.....

Apple Ad Lessons

#1 knocked this out of the park today, and it dovetailed so well with a rant I verbalized in my car yesterday about the lack of an investigative, critical mindset in so many Americans. Let's take that first!

My rant was brought on by Reason Mag saying this:

Meet the Democrats Who Voted for the Defense of Marriage Act

Zenon Evans|Jun. 27, 2013 2:25 pm

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. With the ruling, same-sex couples that are legally married by a state will now be able to receive federal marriage benefits.

Some prominent Democrats have lauded this movement towards more equal treatment. In response to the ruling, Bill Clinton tweeted that he is “grateful to all who fought tirelessly for this day.” He also released an official statement condemning the discriminatory nature of DOMA. What Clinton failed to mention was that he signed the act into law.

He wasn't alone in his silence. Other leading Democrats who supported it include Vice President Joe Biden, who voted for DOMA as a senator. Sen. Harry Reid (Nev.), who said, “The idea that allowing two loving, committed people to marry would have a negative impact on anyone else, or on our nation as a whole, has always struck me as absurd,” also forgot to note that he voted for DOMA. Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) released a statement praising the forward thinking of the Supreme Court. “The march towards equality... moved forward again today... The Supreme Court did the right thing here and helps us understand that the march to equality in America is unstoppable.” He made no mention of the fact that he, too, voted for the act and against "the march to equality." Sen. Bob Menendez (N.J.) patted himself on the back: “As a member of Congress who signed the amicus brief urging this decision [to repeal DOMA], I am thrilled that the Supreme Court took a strong stand for marriage equality." Menendez saw no need to clarify that this was only after he voted for DOMA in the first place. Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa) voiced his support yesterday saying, "I am glad that the court recognized that all American families deserve the same legal protections," but made no mention of why his point of view flipped.

Here are the Democratic senators and House members still in office who voted for DOMA:

Senate

Baucus, Max (Mont.)

Biden, Joe (Del.) (Now Vice President)

Harkin, Tom (Iowa)

Leahy, Patrick (Vt.)

Levin, Carl (Mich.)

Mikulski, Barbara (Md.)

Murray, Patty (Wash.)

Reid, Harry (Nev.)

Rockefeller, Jay (W. Va.)

House of Representatives

Hilliard, Earl (Ala.)

Pastor, Ed (Ariz.)

DeLauro, Rosa (Conn.)

Brown, Corrine (Fla.)

Bishop, Sanford (Fla.)

Rush, Bobby (Ill.)

Durbin, Richard (Ill.) (now senator)

Visclosky, Peter (Ill.)

Neal, Richard (Mass.)

Cardin, Benjamin (Md.) (now senator)

Hoyer, Steny (Md.)

Cummings, Elijah (Md.)

Levin, Sander (Mich.)

Dingell, John (Mich.)

Peterson, Collin (Minn.)

Andrews, Rob (N.J.)

Menéndez, Bob (N.J.) (now senator)

Schumer, Charles (N.Y.) (now senator)

Lowey, Nita (N.Y.)

Kaptur, Marcy (Ohio)

Blumenauer, Earl (Ore.)

Doyle, Mike (Penn.)

Reed, John (R.I.) (now senator)

Clyburn, Jim (S.C.)

Johnson, Tim (S.D.) (now senator)

Hall, Ralph (Texas)

Doggett, Lloyd (Texas)

Green, Gene (Texas)

Johnson, Eddie (Texas)

Rahall, Nick (W. Va.

Now, I instantly pondered how I could gently, instructively communicate my thoughts about this to my liberal, Democrat, and/or progressive friends and acquaintances. I can't.

Here's what I want to say: be like me. Be slightly cynical toward your government (at all levels). Be skeptical. Be critical, as I have been trained to be as an English major, like we criticize literature and media. I think the Founders would support me in this. I am not (like those at Reason) Libertarian, I'm a founding principles kind of guy. Representative Republic, you know, not Democracy.

I expect this type of behavior, do you? I don't trust my elected officials or yours. Republicans, Democrats, especially Independents or Socialist Bernie Sanders. None of them. I know a few, and like a few, but I don't trust them. My local radio guy pointed out that as contentious as it seems in DC, that he was told, from a Congressman's very mouth, they all are all buddy-buddy behind closed doors, like a country club. You know the line about making laws and making sausage? You don't want to see either getting made.

So, when a list like the Reason list shows up, or gay friends tout Clinton's words, I want to shout "doofus, you can't take the politics out of politics!" All of them consider the political ramifications of what they are saying and voting on first and foremost. Everything else is a distant second or third. Everything.

The Dems that voted for DOMA did so because it was politically expedient at the time. They gauged the fallout on both sides and voted for it because it was the most beneficial to them at that time. Pres. Clinton could have refused to sign it if he was so against it and dared them to override the veto, as they had a veto-proof majority on the vote (thanks to all the Dems that voted for it with the Republicans), but he chose to do the politically expedient thing and sign it. Why? Probably because he didn't want the issue used against him or his fellow Dems in elections or fund raising, etc.

Here's the thing: I know this about our Congress and therefore I don't trust them to be honest with me about anything. I treat everything they all say as "pending verification."

Shouldn't you?

There are fact check organizations out there, but guess what? None of them are "independent" or "non-partisan" as far as I can tell. So, I don't trust them either. I believe Newsbusters more than FactCheck because I generally agree with their stance, but I still take it with a grain of salt because I am aware of both my bias and theirs.

Now, to Rush's elucidation today.

He reported a buzz in the ad and tech world about how poor the reactions have been to Apple's ad about the feel of the products "designed by Apple in California."  (unlike that link, which loves it), and after a conversation with a friend that bought into that narrative, Rush explained that he was missing one crucial point: all the polling data and verbiage about the negative reaction being quoted in the ad and tech mags came from Samsung's Agency.

Therefore, it was nothing but marketing spin aimed at damaging Apple and not actual data. Good luck to Samsung in this spin, I have no allegiance to Apple, but the thing that sticks is that media outlets are reporting the marketing spin as independent data and people are believing it.

This is instructive, especially in light of the DOMA story above. The Dem reactions to the Supreme Court DOMA decision are a bunch of crap, and any decent media outlet would know this, they would, if they weren't in total agreement with the Dems and therefore always find them credible (like I do with News Busters) and don't find it necessary to "verify" anything they say. You remember my comments about Weiner, and Piers Morgan's admission. Citizens should have the same reaction, but so few remember anything political that they don't know that if not for the Dems voting for it, DOMA would not have passed with a Veto-proof majority.

Now, this has larger implications. If the same groups sending out polling data about any Republican are allied ideologically, philosophically, or even financially, to liberal, Democrat, progressive, or socialist organizations, why is there such wide acceptance of what they say? Why is there no skepticism? Why do people believe that one political party is Racist? There is precious little evidence of that. The NAACP is uniformly Democrat, yet the Republicans are racist? The reaction to the Supremes decision about the voting rights acts is laughable, it's as though our nation will accept denying people the right to vote because of the color of their skin or their ideology. Oh wait, didn't the IRS just help that happen? Didn't Eric Holder refuse to consider charging Black Panthers that were armed outside a polling location?

I just want people to be like me. Be skeptical, critical, intelligent about all the media you encounter. Don't worship an ideology, political party, or any human, engage your brain! (On a lighter note, have you seen the Despicable Me characters' "no cell phone" PSA in the movie theaters? Be Like Dave!)

On a related note, in my inbasket was an email from a local channel with these two links consecutively in a list:
Target, Home Depot drop Paula Deen
Another day, another rant from Alec Baldwin

strange, that Deen said one word years ago, has apologized profusely, and is being treated like a pariah yet Baldwin is treated just a little differently even after multiple outbursts of true toxic bile. Hmm.

Brief Weiner Thoughts

What I find most disturbing is that the parents of the High School girls that are a part of all of this willingly parroted the Weiner Talking Points, same as given to the former porn star.

Politics over morals and family, I guess. Disgusting. Yet, it happens every time. Chandra Levy's family loved Gary Condit who, while not a murderer, was involved inappropriately with their daughter. Monica Lewinski's parents just looooved Bill Clinton (well, at first). Yuck.

Wonder what those parents are saying today?



here's the longer version submitted to the Graph:

One observation about the Rep. Weiner scandal that I have yet to hear anyone else make, and one that disturbs me the most is the behavior of the parents of the High School-age girls involved in the initial release of information.
As was covered in great detail, to his credit, by Tommy Christopher at Mediaite, Andrew Breitbart didn't start this, but Christopher got everything else wrong because he believes in Weiner, just like the parents of these girls, the girls, and the rest of the media. Piers Morgan, interviewing Ann Coulter on his show on June 7th, showed the bias and proved her points when he said without irony that the reason the MSM was doing stories about hacking Twitter rather than investigating Weiner's claims was because Weiner was "believable" in his statements. This symptom of 'politics first' is frightening to me as an American, as a parent, and as a thinking human! (good luck finding the video, CNN didn't post that part of the show).
Read these statements from Christopher's article from the girls and the parents, and compare them to what emails with former porn star Ginger Lee say about Wiener's attempts to quell the story.
"When Rep Weiner followed my daughter the one and only message he sent her was welcoming her to his twitter followers and suggested he go to his website for more information. My husband and I were delighted with this message as it furthered our daughter’s interest in learning about government. We were very grateful to Rep Weiner for this and saw nothing wrong or inappropriate with this message.
This was the one and only message that Rep Weiner sent our daughter. Our daughter sent a message thanking Rep Weiner for following her and thanking him for the welcome message. This was the one and only message our daughter sent to Rep Weiner.
We would also like to express our disgust at the harassment of Rep Weiner and hope that everyone remembers this man did nothing wrong.
And concerning a certain adult actress, we would like to add that this girl did nothing wrong. If you actually read her blog it is about politics and chronic illness. My husband and I read it together with our daughter."
"I followed Rep. Weiner with the permission of my parents. I sent a request to Rep Weiner using his WEINER YES hashtag and he followed me back. He sent me one welcome direct message that said to visit his webpage. I sent him a message thanking him.
Rep Weiner never tried to contact me beyond his welcome message.
Rep Weiner is a good person and it’s so mean what everyone is attacking him without any proof."
Emails from Weiner suggest Ginger Lee say this:

"The key is to have a short, thought out statement that tackles the top line questions and then refer people back to it. Have a couple of iterations of: 'This is silly. Like so many others, I follow Rep. Weiner on Twitter. I don't know him and have never met him. He briefly followed me and sent me a dm saying thank you for the follow. That's it.'" and:
"I have nothing to do with the situation involving Rep Weiner. I follow his twitter feed. And for a brief time he followed me. Much has been made of the fact that I have posted about my admiration for Rep Weiner and his politics. All I can say about that is that I'm a fan of his. Rep. Weiner sent me one short direct message thanking me for following him. I have never met Rep. Weiner and he has never sent me anything innappopriate (sic) ..."
So, it seems clear to me, at least, that words were given to all the players here by Weiner or his people. What this tells me is that we have yet another set of Democrat parents willing to sacrifice the truth, theirs and their daughters' credibility for a skeezy congressman that they "admire" and think "has done nothing wrong." Does anyone else remember all the support the parents of Chandra Levy gave Gary Condit, even though, while not a murderer, he had been engaged in an inappropriate relationship with her? Monica Lewinsky's parents?
While it is much more rampant among liberals, this cult of personality isn't just for Democrats, either, as Lisa Baron says about sleeping with Republicans in her new book "The Life of the Party,"
"'To be able to say, 'I'm with the such-and-such campaign,' or 'I work for Senator So-and-So' is to us political junkies what "I’m with the band" is to Pamela Des Barres."
I can't speak for you, but this all disgusts me.

Looming US Government Shutdown

I just want so badly for each story I hear, each radio or tv blurb to mention that this is THIS YEAR"S BUDGET that LAST YEAR'S CONGRESS didn't get passed, but kicked the can down the road, so we are looking at the 2011 budget in April.

Blame that on the Koch brothers, salad tossers and coffee stains!

Now I have looked and listened for mentions of this fact and have yet to be satisfied. Sure, the commentators are all over it, but as an example, I just want the demon FoxNews to include it in a radio update, since they are so "faux news and uber conservative" and all. I won't hold my breath.