Monday, October 31, 2011

Progressing to Pedophilia?

Yesterday I picked up a copy of the Wisconsin Gazette. They bill themselves as "the voice of progress for Wisconsin's LGBT community."

I find an article entitled "Gay military strategist key to Washington's victory over British" written by Victoria A. Brownsworth as a special to the Wisconsin Gazette for National Gay History Month. Read it here.

I will summarize. The article touts Benjamin Franklin as a gay-friendly founding father because he recruited gay military strategist and "extraordinary advisor" Baron Friedrich von Steuben to help with our war versus the British. According to the article, Franklin gradually overcame his reluctance to recommend Von Steuben for the job. He came with a bit of baggage. For example, a letter written to Von Steuben's former boss reads "It has come to me from different sources that M. de Steuben is accused of having taken liberties with young boys which the laws forbid and punish severely...." Nonetheless, Franklin wrote the recommendation and "Von Steuben arrived in February 1778 with his 17-year-old French lover, Pierre Etienne Duponceau. The rest - thanks to Franklin - is history."

So the only mention in the article of Von Steuben's homosexual activity involved sex with boys. The article quite evidently does not distinguish between homosexuality and gay pedophilia. Throughout the article, Von Steuben is simply described as "gay." And the article generally portrays both Franklin and Von Steuben favorably.

Frankly, I find this disgusting. A 17-year-old French "lover" of a 47 year old man would be considered by decent people as a victim, not a lover.

So I am left wondering why the voice of progress in the Wisconsin LGBT community would print articles about pedophiles and pedophilia in such a positive light. Is that what they intend to progress towards?

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Undocumented Americans

We have all heard of the plight of the hard working undocumented Mexicans in our midst. But little to no attention is given to the problem faced by undocumented Americans. This is their story.

Most Americans just assume freedom is a birthright. That is what Jim (last name withheld) thought. And then his freedoms were systematically denied by, get this, his own government.

Jim was literally put in a cage for years. But Jim was not to be denied his freedom. He is free now, albeit without the proper government documents. And his plight continues.

Jim is literally being hunted by armed government officials. Sometimes Jim wishes he had it as easy as the Mexicans. He would gladly pay full tuition to a university if the government would just call off the dogs - yes, they actually do chase him with dogs.

Jim just wants the freedoms that the rest of us take for granted. If ours was a just society, we would call him a freedom fighter. But no, Jim is ridiculed. They call him insensitive and stigmatizing slurs like "fugitive" or "jailbreaker."

Shame on America!

Saturday, October 29, 2011

An Untimely Excuse

That Racine's 14th annual Racine Unified analysis has revealed 14 consecutive years of educational failure should surprise exactly nobody.

Nor I suppose should we be surprised by the reasons offered by the experts. Especially comical is the explanation offered by Racine Educational Association president Pete Knotek, who cited "the elimination of collective bargaining" as "an external factor that hinders our program."

How exactly has a 2011 law that affected not a single union contract at Unified somehow managed to cause 14 years of educational futility? I wonder which 2025 legislative actions are the cause of this years dismal performance?

I guess it would be too much to consider the possibility that the single most potent force in public education, that being the union, could impact education quality.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Secret Communication!!

Crisis time ALEC members! Sean Cranley knows too much.

Now is the time to implement phase two before Sean can derail our plans. All members of the super secret Disposal of Troublesome Opposition Command meet at the black helicopter landing pad for further instructions. And is Koch ready with the genetically modified submission agent for the water supply?

It's go time guys. Corputopia is just around the corner. But first we must stop Sean Cranley!

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Journal Times Exceeds Expectations

Unified taking less from taxpayers than expected is the headline in the Racine Journal Times that might as well have been written by the RUSD public relations department. Then again, perhaps it was.

I am noticing a trend. When Unified wants, say $10 million extra dollars, to "educate" the same number of students, but receives only $5 million, it is a budget cut. When they "expect" to raise taxes by, say $10%, but only raise by 6%, they would like us to believe there has been a tax cut. And the Journal Times is usually right there helping promote the dishonesty.

Next, when they expect student achievement to decline by 10%, but only does by 5%, we can rejoice in the gains made by our students.

The Journal Times should be embarrassed to print such a headline as it demonstrates once again their willingness to carry water for Racine Unified.

I have come to expect bias from the Journal Times. And sometimes, they even exceed my expectations.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Protest U?

The JT has an article today about the Original Root Zen Center's Peace School for four to eight year olds. While sitting in a circle, the "children clap and drum while repeating peace phrases, or mantras, such as 'Sharing toys, Sharing books, Sharing hearts.'"

Everything you need for a life of protest you can learn in kindergarten.

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Think Danny Think

The following letter appears in the Journal Times:

Who am I? I am a patriotic Christian. To some that would make me a Republican.
I feel our country can’t solve the words problems through war. That would make me a Democrat. I feel our elderly should not be taxed out of their homes, and have to decide wether to eat, or buy prescription drugs. That would make me a Democrat.
I feel our tax system is too complex and our government to big. That would make me Republican. I do not feel our teachers, police and firefighters are overpaid. That would make me a Democrat.
I don’t see a candidate for president who feels as I do. Who am I ? By Danny Fugate.

Hmmmm. Well, for starters Danny, you are confused, but I think, no wait, I feel you know that already. That would make you a Democrat, or worse, an OWSer. You use "feel" four times and "think" not at all. That would make you a Democrat. You are right that you can't solve word problems through war. Try a dictionary or a thesaurus. I feel this also makes you a Democrat.

But all is not lost Danny. You "feel our tax system is too complex and our government to (sic) big." Nothing wrong with feelings, but they can impair your thinking. Feelings without thought can lead you to conclude that people shouldn't have to make difficult choices. But difficult choices are exactly what await this country. And neither your feelings nor mine will change that fact. Think about it Danny.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Stoking Hatred

Dennis Prager asks an excellent question. Why is class hatred morally superior to race hatred?

Our schools go to great lengths to address, and probably exaggerate, the problem of hatred inspired by differences in skin color. Why not address hatred based on differences in income or accumulated wealth?

Rather than address this problem, the left, led by our president, instead stokes this hatred. This will not end well.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Searching for Mrs. Right

Like all conservatives, I am drawn to Herman Cain because he proves I'm not a racist, and he will get my full support unless we find a black, disabled, Muslim, lesbian, public-school-teaching conservative willing to run for president.

Saturday, October 15, 2011

My Brilliance Shared

I have a brilliant new business idea I would like share. As Free Racine readers may know, I own a retail business. On any given day, I probably have ten or so folks enter my store for the very first time. From now on I am going to charge them $500 each just to step into my store. That's $5,000 every day from now on. I can retire in a few years.

I can almost hear you skeptics out there. Nobody is going to pay the money, you say. I won't get any new customers and I will lose business, you say.

No worries. Let's suppose you are right. I have a Plan B. I will raise prices on existing customers by 50%. Problem solved!

OK, I have a confession to make. I have stolen this brilliant idea from the Racine Water Department.

A few years back, I rehabbed a commercial building and built two apartments above my retail store. In order to become a customer of the Racine Water Department I had to pay about $2,500 per unit for the water hook-up. Full disclosure: I had the total fee reduced to $2,500 because of previous water use in my building - should have been reduced to $0 but wasn't. Anyway, Racine didn't actually hook up anything - my plumber did at my expense. The $2,500 was a penalty for being an entrepreneur in Racine. But I had it easy. I later learned that new businesses that used significant quantities of water were subject to a prohibitive introductory water use penalty. Perhaps you heard of the laundromat that didn't open because of the fees or the car wash that didn't open because of the fees. How many businesses didn't open because of the Water Department business model? How many jobs have been lost? Who knows? Who cares?

Have you looked at your water bill lately. It is going up. Why? Well, recently I heard Mayor Dickert on the radio mention that we have not been using enough water to keep the water rate steady. So they need to raise the rate.

Only in government can you get away with such a ridiculous business model.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Occupy Racine

Why no Occupy Racine? Where are the Unitarians, the illegal alien lobby, the clueless Horlick students, the Peace and Justice hippies, you know, the usual suspects? Let's get this party started! How about Monument Square, directly across from an evil bank? Sean, you in? I'll bring the hummus.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Remedial Lesbian Indoctrination 101

The JT has a story, here, concerning a teacher who claims that she has been discriminated against because she is a lesbian. I am going to take the unusual position of siding with Unified on this one based on the contents of the article.

The claims themselves seem rather minor and are in any case disputed by Unified. A student who allegedly threatened the teacher was allowed to stay in her classroom but when a heterosexual teacher complained something was done. The lesbian was punished for being late for work while the heterosexual teachers saw no consequences. Yet, concerning these complaints, there appears to be no evidence that the different responses where because of her sexual orientation. Maybe it is because she is blonde.

An attempt was made to resolve the differences with the help of a state mediator. One of the terms not agreed to by the teacher was a requirement to "refrain from making any references to your personal sexual orientation to students." According to the teacher, the request itself is discriminatory because they would never ask that of a straight person.

Perhaps not, however... the teacher went on to stress the importance of discussing her sexual orientation when students inquire. "I had kids that came out and were kicked out of their houses and they need to know that, one, somebody related; and, two, that somebody wasn't going to be judgmental and they were just going to help them find a safe place." and I also had quite a few kids that struggled with suicide issues and depression and family acceptance."

Perhaps now is the time to mention that the teacher in question is a middle school remedial reading teacher.

I have no way of knowing whether said teacher is offering sound advice to confused middle schoolers or is grooming them and/or pursuing a political agenda. Regarding the grooming comment, I suppose that could upset some readers, so I will put it to you this way: would you want your presumably heterosexual fifth grade daughter talking about her sexual thoughts with the 45 year old male math teacher or would you alert the authorities? Anyway, it is not her job to deal with this stuff so she should be stopped. Maybe if she did her job instead of talking about lesbian stuff the kids could read at grade level.

Saturday, October 08, 2011

Department of Mysterious Verification

Feel free to call me a crank if warranted. Yesterday I went to the DMV to get my son his temporary drivers license. One acceptable form of ID was a valid passport. I presented them with an expired passport which they would not accept. I was not happy. I understand that an expired passport would make my son ineligible to enter another country or return to this one, but why it was not an acceptable form of identification at the DMV remains a mystery. Is expired synonymous with invalid?

Thursday, October 06, 2011

On Double Dipping

The JT has an interesting article, here concerning a proposal to eliminate, or at least minimize, the practice of "double dipping" by government employees. "Double dipping" basically is the practice of "retiring" (in quotes for a reason), receiving a pension, then returning to work for the same or another government entity, and receiving a salary and a pension at the same time.

Retired people, by definition, are no longer working. As such, retirement benefits should be reserved for retired people, not working people. Working people receiving retirement benefits from government is hardly different from employed people receiving unemployment benefits, healthy people receiving disability benefits etc.... The only reason this is not considered outright fraud is because the beneficiaries in many cases are writing the laws that allow the double dipping for themselves. Yes, the fox has written the laws on hen protection.

I will now consider some of the rather weak justifications for continuing this practice.

Former and current police chief (does that make sense?, I say choose one or the other) Kurt Wahlen said "It is not like I just retired and get to draw on money from the state....It was money set aside." Yah, set aside for when you retire. You are working, therefore you are not retired. Therefore no retirement benefits. Pretty simple really.

And then there is current and former (or is it former and current?) government employee Tom Christensen who feels the proposal "treats public workers unfairly" because " a private sector worker could receive their retirements while working a new job." First of all, government has no business regulating the pay and benefits of private sector businesses. They should only concern themselves with government employees. A comparison then between private and public makes no sense. But if you want to compare the two, I am willing to bet that there aren't any private sector employers willing to pay wages and retirement benefits to the same person simultaneously.

State Senator Van Wangaard is receiving a pension as a retired police officer and a wage as a senator. He does not consider his a "double dipping" situation. He has the strongest argument in my view as at least he is elected to his job. We could toss him out of office if we don't like it. At the very least he should recuse himself from a vote on this matter as he (if I understand the issue correctly) would directly benefit from the proposals demise.

And State Rep Robin Vos seems rather lukewarm to the idea when he says "But if someone is retired for a year and they are asked to work in a different position in a different agency, I don't know why I should care." I will tell you why you should care. You should care because taxpayers are tired of getting ripped off. We don't want to pay unemployment for the employed, disability for the abled, welfare for the wealthy, or retirement for the not retired. You should care!

Wednesday, October 05, 2011

Media Bias?

A thought experiment for Sean Cranley. Suppose former Attorney John Ashcroft testified before Congress on an important matter, say, an operation that allowed firearms to "walk" to Mexican druglords. Well call it Operation Daft and Curious. Now suppose Attorney Ashcroft claimed, in say May of 2003 that he first heard of Daft and Curious a few weeks prior to his testimony. Now suppose Ashcroft was sent memos concerning Daft and Curious beginning in August of 2002.

Do you think this might have, just maybe perhaps aroused the interest of the mainstream media at the time?