With the exception of Sean, I suspect that not too many Free Racine readers voted for Barrack Obama in 2008. So the following will probably be a fruitless exercise.
To those of you who did vote for Barrack Obama, I am sure you had your reasons. Please reflect on those reasons. Perhaps you thought he would unify the country or improve our economy or improve our standing in the world with allies and adversaries. But only you know the reason you voted for Obama. I have a simple request; evaluate whether President Obama has delivered. And by all means share your thoughts here.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Saturday, October 27, 2012
The Deflowerers Perspective
Dear Penthouse:
I never thought this could happen to me. I am a married man in my late 40's with two youngish daughters. Anyway, I came to know that a young adult gal was ready to give it up to me! She wanted to give it up to a great guy. Yah I'm a great guy all right. Or so I have been told my whole life. Who could blame the young broad. I'm frickin eye candy dammit. She wanted birth control so I said fine, I'll get other people to pay for that. She wanted other stuff like middle east peace, health care blah blah blah.... She pretty much told me what she wanted to hear so I lied to her. Whatever it takes, you know what I mean. The deed itself didn't take too long as you can imagine. One quick thrust and it was over, another manipulated woman and another vote for me. Next!
I never thought this could happen to me. I am a married man in my late 40's with two youngish daughters. Anyway, I came to know that a young adult gal was ready to give it up to me! She wanted to give it up to a great guy. Yah I'm a great guy all right. Or so I have been told my whole life. Who could blame the young broad. I'm frickin eye candy dammit. She wanted birth control so I said fine, I'll get other people to pay for that. She wanted other stuff like middle east peace, health care blah blah blah.... She pretty much told me what she wanted to hear so I lied to her. Whatever it takes, you know what I mean. The deed itself didn't take too long as you can imagine. One quick thrust and it was over, another manipulated woman and another vote for me. Next!
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Big F...ing Deal
The Obama campaign has a new ad out that equates a vote for Obama with losing ones virginity. You can find it here</>.
This ad is so disturbing and disgusting that I have to admit that I think I might be falling for some sort of hoax here. Could anyone seriously making the case to be President of the US for a second term really put out an ad like this?
Unlike the woman in the ad, I didn't vote for Obama. Why do I feel like I have been f...ed?
This ad is so disturbing and disgusting that I have to admit that I think I might be falling for some sort of hoax here. Could anyone seriously making the case to be President of the US for a second term really put out an ad like this?
Unlike the woman in the ad, I didn't vote for Obama. Why do I feel like I have been f...ed?
Sunday, October 21, 2012
A Job For Our Mayor
It is pretty much an open secret in downtown Racine that a city inspector is making life hell for restaurant entrepreneurs, three of whom have had their "opening soon" signs displayed for an absurdly long time. And rumor has it that the Journal Times would like to write a story but can't get anyone to speak on the record. As an aside, the French press had a similar problem trying to break a story about impolite guillotine operators.
So what to do? To me this seems like a problem in need of a long overdue intervention from our mayor. Full disclosure: I have known John Dickert since childhood and I like him personally though our politics I am sure diverge. Of course both sides of a political divide can agree that filling vacancies with new restaurants in the downtown is a good thing, one would hope.
One thing about John Dickert that many people now realize is that he is a man of big ideas. As such, he seems to spend a fair amount of his time in pursuit of something big. Big companies moving to Racine, big deals, big out of state conferences with big shots, big developments etc... I will leave it to others to catalogue the results of his efforts.
A good mayor may well pursue big plans but must also ensure that day to day operations are running smoothly. Presently we have an inspector who is wreaking havoc downtown and no doubt other places as well. This is crushing development and perhaps more importantly, sending very discouraging signals to other would-be entrepreneurs in Racine. The problem is simple enough though no doubt unpleasant. Mayor Dickert - fire away!
So what to do? To me this seems like a problem in need of a long overdue intervention from our mayor. Full disclosure: I have known John Dickert since childhood and I like him personally though our politics I am sure diverge. Of course both sides of a political divide can agree that filling vacancies with new restaurants in the downtown is a good thing, one would hope.
One thing about John Dickert that many people now realize is that he is a man of big ideas. As such, he seems to spend a fair amount of his time in pursuit of something big. Big companies moving to Racine, big deals, big out of state conferences with big shots, big developments etc... I will leave it to others to catalogue the results of his efforts.
A good mayor may well pursue big plans but must also ensure that day to day operations are running smoothly. Presently we have an inspector who is wreaking havoc downtown and no doubt other places as well. This is crushing development and perhaps more importantly, sending very discouraging signals to other would-be entrepreneurs in Racine. The problem is simple enough though no doubt unpleasant. Mayor Dickert - fire away!
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
President Offends
President Obama at the debate on the Bengazi tragedy:
And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our U.N. Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. That's not what we do. That's not what I do as president, that's not what I do as Commander in Chief.
The president also indicated that on the day after the attack on our consulate he indicated that it was a terrorist attack. As such, it was clearly not a obscure movie review gone bad. If he knew that on day two, why did he, his press secretary, his UN ambassador, etc... repeatedly claim that the movie was to blame for the attack?
No doubt President Obama is offended by the suggestion that a false and misleading narrative is viewed by many as a misleading political play. I suspect that anything that might impair his path to reelection is offensive to the president.
The most plausible explanation for the false narrative is political. With an impending election, clearly a terrorist attack calls into question the success of our foreign policy. Better perhaps to play politics and suggest that an obscure film was to blame.
I know, my suggestion is offensive to the president. I too am offended. I am offended when our president and members of his administration pedal a false narrative on the Bengazi attack. I am also offended that he has not issued any explanation for the false narrative despite ample opportunity to do so. That is not what a president, a commander in chief, should do.
And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our U.N. Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. That's not what we do. That's not what I do as president, that's not what I do as Commander in Chief.
The president also indicated that on the day after the attack on our consulate he indicated that it was a terrorist attack. As such, it was clearly not a obscure movie review gone bad. If he knew that on day two, why did he, his press secretary, his UN ambassador, etc... repeatedly claim that the movie was to blame for the attack?
No doubt President Obama is offended by the suggestion that a false and misleading narrative is viewed by many as a misleading political play. I suspect that anything that might impair his path to reelection is offensive to the president.
The most plausible explanation for the false narrative is political. With an impending election, clearly a terrorist attack calls into question the success of our foreign policy. Better perhaps to play politics and suggest that an obscure film was to blame.
I know, my suggestion is offensive to the president. I too am offended. I am offended when our president and members of his administration pedal a false narrative on the Bengazi attack. I am also offended that he has not issued any explanation for the false narrative despite ample opportunity to do so. That is not what a president, a commander in chief, should do.
Racism Discussion
Yesterday I attended a Coming Together Racine meeting/movie/discussion on racism at the Racine Public Library.
Attendees were five activist white liberals and myself. We watched a movie on the Freedom Riders who courageously confronted the segregation in the deep south. While the film was a bit manipulative at times -example, splicing in scenes of white bus passengers merrily singing, juxtaposed with vicious racism - there is no mistaking the horrific violence and racism perpetrated by southern segregationists.
I wondered to myself what relevance that blatant, state sponsored racism of fifty years ago has to claims of racism today. Indeed one participant noted that we don't have such problems today. The problem of course is now subtle and rooted in each of us, according to one participant. That might be the case for liberals I suppose but I am not accepting the guilt. It just leads to more problems, like electing an unqualified man as President of the United States, among others.
Over the course of the discussion I made a few points. I wish now I had tied my comments into the consequences of white guilt but I did not. However, I noted that the tendency to expect lower outcomes or worse behavior from blacks is not in the end very helpful to them. Also I noted that the City of Racine, one of Coming Together Racine's sponsors, has thrown up roadblocks (conditional use permit) for businesses which has had the greatest negative impact on minority business owners and or those wishing to serve alcohol to black customers. This revelation seemed to make an impact on the group.
I enjoyed the discussion very much and I will try to attend future meetings. If nothing else, there is no point in ceding the high ground on race to liberals.
Attendees were five activist white liberals and myself. We watched a movie on the Freedom Riders who courageously confronted the segregation in the deep south. While the film was a bit manipulative at times -example, splicing in scenes of white bus passengers merrily singing, juxtaposed with vicious racism - there is no mistaking the horrific violence and racism perpetrated by southern segregationists.
I wondered to myself what relevance that blatant, state sponsored racism of fifty years ago has to claims of racism today. Indeed one participant noted that we don't have such problems today. The problem of course is now subtle and rooted in each of us, according to one participant. That might be the case for liberals I suppose but I am not accepting the guilt. It just leads to more problems, like electing an unqualified man as President of the United States, among others.
Over the course of the discussion I made a few points. I wish now I had tied my comments into the consequences of white guilt but I did not. However, I noted that the tendency to expect lower outcomes or worse behavior from blacks is not in the end very helpful to them. Also I noted that the City of Racine, one of Coming Together Racine's sponsors, has thrown up roadblocks (conditional use permit) for businesses which has had the greatest negative impact on minority business owners and or those wishing to serve alcohol to black customers. This revelation seemed to make an impact on the group.
I enjoyed the discussion very much and I will try to attend future meetings. If nothing else, there is no point in ceding the high ground on race to liberals.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Totalitarian Diversity
The top diversity officer at Gallaudet University has been suspended because she signed a petition indicating a preference for a referendum on a gay marriage proposal.
Why is the left largely unable to see the hilarious hypocrisy on this issue?
The suspension makes a mockery of liberals supposed support of the idea of diversity. Wouldn't the folks that embrace diversity celebrate the expression of a diverse range of ideas on social issues?
But of course diversity as the left sees it has nothing whatsoever to do with ideas. When it comes to ideas, a strictly enforced uniformity prevails.
A more honest university would replace their diversity officials with conformity/thought police.
Why is the left largely unable to see the hilarious hypocrisy on this issue?
The suspension makes a mockery of liberals supposed support of the idea of diversity. Wouldn't the folks that embrace diversity celebrate the expression of a diverse range of ideas on social issues?
But of course diversity as the left sees it has nothing whatsoever to do with ideas. When it comes to ideas, a strictly enforced uniformity prevails.
A more honest university would replace their diversity officials with conformity/thought police.
Sunday, October 07, 2012
Bully Crap
I have had a few days to reflect on the recent presidential debate and the reaction from leftist pundits and bloggers. Leaving aside the outlier points like Al Gore's altitude excuse, it seems that many have settled on Romney as liar and bully. Many have debunked the former point but nobody that I know of has considered the latter. So I will.
I watched the debate. I have seen many replays of particularly relevant segments. If someone were to tell me with a straight face that Gov Romney was a bully during the debate, I might have to quote said Gov and say "I don't know what you are talking about." I didn't see anything that even remotely resembled bullying. Whatever you might think of Romney's arguments, he simply advocated them assertively, unapologetically, respectfully, and with occasional humor.
But the left are masters at word play. And the left is also leading the crusade (or is it a jihad?) against bullying. Is it fair to connect the alleged bullying by Romney with the broader effort to confront bullying behavior? Perhaps not but I will anyway because both efforts emanate from the left primarily.
Bullying should be confronted. On that point I agree with the anti-bullying crowd. But it all depends on what is meant by bullying. If asserting a point of view that is disagreeable to leftists is the new bullying, perhaps we need to be suspicious of the movement to confront bullying. If bullying must be stopped and asserting positions that offend liberals is bullying, then the anti-bully movement is little more than a disguised assault on the freedom of speech. Calling one who challenges liberal orthodoxy a bully becomes the secular equivalent to blasphemy. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the left is more open to criminalizing insults to Islam. Who is the real bully?
I watched the debate. I have seen many replays of particularly relevant segments. If someone were to tell me with a straight face that Gov Romney was a bully during the debate, I might have to quote said Gov and say "I don't know what you are talking about." I didn't see anything that even remotely resembled bullying. Whatever you might think of Romney's arguments, he simply advocated them assertively, unapologetically, respectfully, and with occasional humor.
But the left are masters at word play. And the left is also leading the crusade (or is it a jihad?) against bullying. Is it fair to connect the alleged bullying by Romney with the broader effort to confront bullying behavior? Perhaps not but I will anyway because both efforts emanate from the left primarily.
Bullying should be confronted. On that point I agree with the anti-bullying crowd. But it all depends on what is meant by bullying. If asserting a point of view that is disagreeable to leftists is the new bullying, perhaps we need to be suspicious of the movement to confront bullying. If bullying must be stopped and asserting positions that offend liberals is bullying, then the anti-bully movement is little more than a disguised assault on the freedom of speech. Calling one who challenges liberal orthodoxy a bully becomes the secular equivalent to blasphemy. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the left is more open to criminalizing insults to Islam. Who is the real bully?
Thursday, October 04, 2012
A Modest Proposal
I have to admit I am a tad giddy after last nights' debate. I even have an inexplicable yet pleasant tingling sensation in my leg.
Anyway, I have a plan for the country that could work for everyone. Let's build a second White House, identical to the real one. After a round of golf and a View taping, bring President Obama over to the fake White House. We declare him President for life and he can live out his days much as before, believing to be the leader of the free world. Nothing would have to change. He could still skip national security meetings, Beyonce could still come over for play dates, he could still go on Letterman. Meanwhile Romney could do the actual presidential stuff.
We can pull this off I am sure. The media is already well versed at pretending he is an acting (as in actually doing presidential things) president. All we need is buy in from MSNBC et al who might after all enjoy the fantasy more than say, reporting on a Romney victory and presidency.
Anyway, I have a plan for the country that could work for everyone. Let's build a second White House, identical to the real one. After a round of golf and a View taping, bring President Obama over to the fake White House. We declare him President for life and he can live out his days much as before, believing to be the leader of the free world. Nothing would have to change. He could still skip national security meetings, Beyonce could still come over for play dates, he could still go on Letterman. Meanwhile Romney could do the actual presidential stuff.
We can pull this off I am sure. The media is already well versed at pretending he is an acting (as in actually doing presidential things) president. All we need is buy in from MSNBC et al who might after all enjoy the fantasy more than say, reporting on a Romney victory and presidency.
Undebatable
Wow. Even lefties are unable to lie about the thrashing President Obama received last night.
Tuesday, October 02, 2012
Hey Nonprofit, Can You Spare a Dime?
Racine Mayor John Dickert has sent out a letter to Racine tax exempt nonprofit organizations asking them to "consider paying a portion of the property tax the city would normally charge them if their properties were taxed" according to this Journal Times article. A few random thoughts on the subject to follow.
I have no problem with the city asking for money but I suspect that in time "asking" will be replaced by "insisting."
Certainly there are plenty of people who would welcome an elimination of the tax exempt status of some institutions, particularly religious ones. But in many cases these institutions are providing services for people which would otherwise cost the government. Still, I think the hostility towards religion is so strong for some that they would welcome any effort to damage religion in favor of their preferred religion of militant secularism.
Speaking of militant secularists, the article mentions the Olympia Brown Unitarian Church and two spokespeople, both of whom would personally favor contributing, though the decision is in the hands of their board. As the Unitarians tend to favor big government liberalism at every turn and pass those costs to the rest of us, I am at least grateful that they might now consider picking up part of the tab. Is there really any difference between a donation to the Unitarian Church or one to the City of Racine?
A better idea in my view would be to sell all government owned buildings not serving a legitimate government purpose. Sell all residential and commercial buildings and let go of employees working in residential and commercial property development. Not only would the city get money from the sale of said properties, but they would also be returning properties to the tax rolls from which they never should have been removed. And while they are at it they could demonstrate a commitment to property rights by revoking the conditional use permit that effectively politicizes all entrepreneurism while allowing the city to discriminate against those wishing to serve black people.
The program is called Racine's Fair Share, a name that implies that non-profits are not paying their fair share. I doubt that is the case with most non-profits who I suspect are saving us all money via their service.
I have no problem with the city asking for money but I suspect that in time "asking" will be replaced by "insisting."
Certainly there are plenty of people who would welcome an elimination of the tax exempt status of some institutions, particularly religious ones. But in many cases these institutions are providing services for people which would otherwise cost the government. Still, I think the hostility towards religion is so strong for some that they would welcome any effort to damage religion in favor of their preferred religion of militant secularism.
Speaking of militant secularists, the article mentions the Olympia Brown Unitarian Church and two spokespeople, both of whom would personally favor contributing, though the decision is in the hands of their board. As the Unitarians tend to favor big government liberalism at every turn and pass those costs to the rest of us, I am at least grateful that they might now consider picking up part of the tab. Is there really any difference between a donation to the Unitarian Church or one to the City of Racine?
A better idea in my view would be to sell all government owned buildings not serving a legitimate government purpose. Sell all residential and commercial buildings and let go of employees working in residential and commercial property development. Not only would the city get money from the sale of said properties, but they would also be returning properties to the tax rolls from which they never should have been removed. And while they are at it they could demonstrate a commitment to property rights by revoking the conditional use permit that effectively politicizes all entrepreneurism while allowing the city to discriminate against those wishing to serve black people.
The program is called Racine's Fair Share, a name that implies that non-profits are not paying their fair share. I doubt that is the case with most non-profits who I suspect are saving us all money via their service.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
