About Me

Name: Catmman
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Everything coming up...Whitey?

Posted by Catmman on Monday, August 30, 2010 12:06:49 PM
Hey!  Whitey!  Why you so hateful?

This is the meme from the MSM.

When upwards of half a million people gather to have a rally, it must be racist.  Why?  Because those half a million people disagree with the way the country is headed.  That is their crime - they simply believe contrary to the Leftist elite in this country. For that contrary belief they must be racists.  Why else must it be racist?  Because the crowd was "predominantly white."

Read this short sampling of snippets of coverage of the Restoring Honor rally.  Nine different news outlets:  Newsweek, Associated Press, Politico, CBS, Washington Post, Salon, LA Times and more.  ALL OF THEM coming to the conclusion that since the crowd was "predominantly white" there must be a racial overtone to the message and those in attendance at the rally must be racists.  Racism isn't specifically mentioned but what other conclusion are we to take from these articles?  These outlets don't have the guts to say what they really mean, so they play word games to place the perception of racism in the minds of their readers.

The whole premise is silly even upon the most cursory of analysis.  Let's break this down.

The racial breakdown of the United States (as of 2008) was this:

White:  75%
Hispanic:  15.4%
Black:  12.4%
Some other race:  4.9%
Asian:  4.4%

Generally speaking, wouldn't any large crowd gathered anywhere be "predominantly white"?

Of course this is an elementary analysis.  Demographics are affected by many things like location.  I live in San Antonio.  San Antonio has a huge hispanic population (61.2%).  However, according to a demographic breakdown, whites are still in the racial majority.  Does that make San Antonio somehow guilty of implied or inherent racism?  Does it make any city of "predominatly white" residents somehow inherently racist?  How about communities in which blacks or hispanics are in the majority?  Are they somehow inherently racist, simply because of a racial demographic breakdown?

Al Sharpton had a 'counter rally' in Washington on the same day.  In coverage of his rally, is there mention that his crowd was predominantly black?  If there is, is it to place the perception of black racism in the minds of readers?

I conducted an extremely un-scientific experiment this morning.  Using the premise that simply based on a crowds demographics there must be some type of inherent racism, I headed out to conduct some business.

I had to head out to the hospital to drop off some insurance paperwork.  100% of the 'crowd' in my car on the way to the hospital was white (I am 'white' and was alone in the car).  

Conclusion:  My car is racist.

When I arrived at the insurance office this morning, I took note of the occupants, both customers and employees.  Of the six people (including myself) I saw in the insurance office this morning, I was the only white guy.  There was a black guy and four hispanics.

Conclusion:  My insurance office hates white and black people.  The one black employee I saw is obviously a token for the hispanic hate-mongers.

On the way home I determined that my car was still racist.

I stopped at the corner store to get my wife a drink to drop off to her at work.  There were two employees, both female, one white and one hispanic.  

Conclusion:  Once I entered the store, it immediately turned racist since at that point the occupants of the store were "predominantly white."  The store also demonstrated it was sexist since there were more females than males in the store.

My admitted un-scientific experiment was turning out to be extremely enlightening.

When I dropped off the drink to my wife at her place of work, I took notice of her environment.  I noticed that she employs "predominantly white" employees and all of her employees are female (she is director of a day care center.)  I advised my wife of her obvious inherent racism and sexism in her hiring practices.

She thanked me for the drink, told me to shut up, quit being stupid and go home.

When I got home, my house also became racist.

Will the H8 ever end?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

America Is Culpable

Posted by Catmman on Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:10:32 PM
Is America responsible for the acts of terror propagated against it?

America is culpable in one manner: By our habit of apologism for third-world evil and tolerating the intolerable, making excuses for murder, we are in effect preventing the necessary argument that must be had within Islam. Terror and tribalistic hatred must be reformed out of it, and, just as with the housing market, we are propping up a bad system, delaying a necessary reckoning, by continuing to indulge in this happy-happy joy-joy apologism for Islamist evil.

Rauf continues his "outreach" to terrorists (by which we mean: tacit support for and moral encouragement of) because we haven't yet insisted that he choose, once and finally, between peace and war, forgiveness and hatred, decency and murder.

We allow him to play this vile game, and by doing so, we are showing tolerance -- tolerance for murderers. And it should be little surprise then that the murders we are tolerating are continuing apace.

We have taken the ultimate step in defining deviancy down: We now pretend that mass murder is an understandable expression of Islamist rage, something we are just as responsible for as they (or more so), and little wonder then that the Islamist murderers take us at our word.

If you give someone moral license to kill you, you shouldn't be surprised if he gets the crazy idea you've given him actual license to kill you.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

On cancer treatment, "politics matter"

Posted by Catmman on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 5:26:16 PM
While cancer drugs are being outlawed by this administrations FDA, if you are a super-wealthy Democrat donor, the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is only too happy to pull some strings to work on your behalf:

WASHINGTON – Dallas' top Democratic donors will cut big checks to share dinner later this month with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Most will be motivated by a desire to protect the party's congressional majority.

Lisa Blue will have an extra reason: to say thanks for Pelosi's efforts when her husband, Fred Baron, was dying of bone marrow cancer. His only option was an experimental drug whose manufacturer refused to give permission to use it for Baron's condition.

Blue has no illusion that a typical family could pull such strings.

"There are so many cases like Fred's," she said. "One thing he taught me was politics matters. What a personal experience for me to understand how politics matters."

"Politics matter."  If you aren't a plugged in donor/supporter/advocate of the proper political philosophy, there is a chance you would not receive the care or medicine you need to save your life.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sick and tired

Posted by Catmman on Tuesday, August 17, 2010 11:39:13 AM
The Ground Zero Mosque is NOT about religious liberty!

I am sick and tired of liberal, self-righteous morons lecturing me about tolerance, freedom, liberty, the 1st Amendment, etc.

These are the same morons who scream bloody murder every Christmas when someone wants to put a Nativity scene anywhere near a government building.  Hell, these are the same morons who scream bloody murder when anyone wants to put a Nativity scene anywhere in public.

These morons have the audacity to lecture on the 1st Amendment, how it ensures the freedom to exercise religion, any religion, yet have forgotten about how the 1st Amendment also guarantees everyone the freedom of speech - even when that speech 'offends' their delicate sensibilities.

These are the same morons who want to gnash and wail about the supposed 'intolerance' being shown Muslims on the GZM issue, yet excuse actual and demonstrated Muslim intolerance against Jews and Christians.  Muslim nations, particularly Saudi Arabia, have separate roads for Muslims and 'non-believers'.  If you are not a Muslim, you cannot even enter the city of Mecca.  If you display any non-Muslim accouterments (crosses, bibles, etc) while in a Muslim nation, you will be arrested.  Saudi Arabia has a religious 'police' force for goodness sake - the Mutaween.  If you want real religious intolerance, travel to a Muslim nation.

Not one mainstream, conservative pundit has said this mosque should not be built because it is a mosque or because the 'community center' will cater to Muslims.  Has there been one?  If so, who?  Name them.  Show me their words.  Let me hear the audio.  Let me see the video.  

You know how I know there isn't any audio or video or evidence of any kind?  Because it isn't all over the television, newspapers, lefty or even righty blogs.  All we get is people like this guy naming the ever elusive, yet always accessible "wingnuts" as evidence of their claims.  Are there people who don't want it built specifically because they don't like Muslims?  I'm sure there are.  There is no shortage of idiots anywhere - on the Right or the Left.  However that is not evidence of systemic bigotry or intolerance.  All it is evidence of is there is no real evidence.  As with many on the left, all that matters is the tactic - the accusation.  Repeat a lie enough times and sooner or later it becomes 'fact'.  As with the accusations of racism and the uttering of racial epithets during a rally against Obamacare several months ago, there is no and continues to be no evidence.  No video, no audio, no photos, nothing. All we have is the accusation designed to shut people up.

People don't want a mosque built near Ground Zero because it is near hallowed ground.  Almost three thousand innocent Americans were murdered on September 11, 2001.  They were murdered by Muslims who were acting in the name of Islam. Regardless of whether they were 'radicals' matters not.  When an abortion clinic is bombed or when abortion doctors have been murdered, there has been no widespread nuance in referring to the killers religion.  They are referred to, simply, as Christians.

Muslims committed the murders.  Muslims took credit for the crime and the plot.  Muslims celebrated the act.  Muslim leaders continue to use the act as a rallying cry to kill non-Muslims.  None of those things can be disputed.  Simple facts.  Mentioning those facts does not make me a bigot.  Not wanting a mosque near GZ does not make me intolerant.

What it makes me is angry that because I feel this is an affront to the memories of the victims, because I feel it is improper and disrespectful and simply in poor taste, because my gut is telling me there is a decent chance those proposing the mosque are doing it for reasons other than those they state, I am castigated as a hate-monger and bigot, simply because I feel the way I feel. 

Tolerance is not a one way street.  Rights are indeed universal in the United States, but contrary to popular belief, so is responsibility.  Just because a person can do a thing doesn't mean they should do a thing.  Get it?

We would not tolerate a Shinto shrine one hundred yards from the Arizona Memorial (thought there is one near Pearl Harbor, Pearl Harbor being a big place...).  We would not tolerate a KKK rally anywhere near the grave of Martin Luther King, Jr.  There is no Mexican Consulate near the Alamo (it is several miles away.)  

Why?  Because there is a thing called decency.  Simply ask yourself:  Is putting a mosque near GZ decent?  If you think it is, then I submit you are the one with a problem.  

If you think disagreeing with a mosque at GZ is being intolerant and contrary to the 1st Amendment; if you think those who give voice to their differing opinion on the issue should just shut up about it, I submit you are the one being intolerant.

If you think that a mosque a stones throw from GZ is ok, but a child taking a bible to school is not, then you are the bigot.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Building Bridges by Jew Baiting

Posted by Catmman on Monday, August 16, 2010 6:00:54 PM
Boy.  Those Ground Zero Mosque folks have an odd way of wanting to "build bridges":

if Haaretz likes publishing fables, perhaps they could go back to the Yiddish ones with parables

The road to moderation and tolerance runs directly through Jew-baiting.

Actually, its not odd at all when the stated intention was never the true intention.  All of this in response to this article which claimed there was a possibility the Ground Zero Mosque might be moved.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Tolerance of Muslims, illustrated

Posted by Catmman on Monday, August 16, 2010 4:54:31 PM

As Doug Ross says, the road to tolerance seems to be only one way.  At least for some...


images here.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Medicare to cut cancer drug due to cost?

Posted by Catmman on Monday, August 16, 2010 1:14:23 PM
An abject lesson the uninformed and liberal supporters in this country would not see when they were calling for the passage of Obamacare:

Coverage doesn't necessarily mean care.

People should know this.  When you buy any type of insurance - for your car, your home, anything - you really need to know what is in your policy making sure you are covered.  For example, most homeowner insurance policies don't cover floods. Flood coverage is extra or must come from another policy.  Car insurance doesn't necessarily include 'full coverage' - things like being covered in case of getting hit by an uninsured driver can be extra.  Just because you are 'covered' doesn't mean you are covered for what you might think.

So it begins with Obamacare.  Many people assumed once it was passed, they would be covered and have their health care needs taken care of.  Not true.  As many opponents of O-Care tried to make the case, once you let the government take control, they become the arbiters of what care they will pay for, not simply what care you may need to survive.  This was the point being made which Sarah Palin and others who were excoriated by coining the term "Death Panels."

Many people just couldn't (or wouldn't) believe the government would deny them care.  What these people couldn't (or wouldn't) understand is that 'Government' isn't interested in you.  They don't really care about you the individual or your family or friends.  When it comes to spending money on anything beyond keeping them ensconced in power, they only care about the bottom line.

"Tunnels to Nowhere"?  No problem.  Turtle tunnels?  How many do you want?  Bike paths, shrimp research, ant studies, etc., the government can't spend enough money fast enough.  

When it comes to paying for cancer treatment drugs for the average American citizen however, well the cost may just be too high.  With the passage of Obamacare, they will use all of their justification for demonizing insurance companies to deny you coverage.  "We need to get and keep costs under control" you will be told.  Or the more sinister, behind closed doors justification will be that they could use that money for other medical treatments for other people.  After all, if you're on Medicare (unless you qualify for financial reasons) your on the downslope of life anyway, right?  Honestly, how much more could you add to society?  You had a good life.  Don't be so selfish.  Sit back, relax and die.  The government will use that money for helping younger people.

The thousand pound elephant in the room though is that the government won't use that money for younger people.  Younger people will also have treatments denied for whatever reason the government deems.

Sure, insurance premiums are high.  People have problems with some companies.  Yes, sometimes insurance companies do the same thing, attempting to deny coverage to strengthen their bottom lines.  With your insurance company however you have recourse.  You can sue.  You can go somewhere else.  You can pay the higher premium and forget about it.  Whatever.

When it comes to the government being in control, you have no such recourse.  You cannot sue, or if your allowed, the process will be so drawn out, become so costly or will be saddled with so many specific steps that it makes the process futile. When the government is in control of your healthcare, when the government is healthcare, you can't go anywhere else.  One thing that will remain though is that your taxes will go up and up and up - you will pay a higher price for the same or, more likely, diminished quality, not to mention quantity, of care.

My wife is currently going through chemotherapy for non-Hodgkins Lymphoma.  If Obamacare remains the law of the land, if at some point in the future she has a recurrence (she has had several since 1996) is some bureaucrat, some member of a 'Death Panel' simply looking at the bottom line, is such a decision going to be made about the medication my wife needs to live?  What about anyone in your family who may experience the same thing?

This is the boat the uninformed, the hyper-partisan and the deceitful have put us in.  We were told this would not happen.  It is happening.

What are we going to do about it?

Addendum:  I didn't even think of this point. Thanks to Ace:

To avoid a difficult political debate -- and the honest confession that "bending the curve" of Medicare costs to free up money for ObamaCare is going to require a lesser standard of treatment -- the FDA is killing a safe and effective drug and thereby outlawing for anyone, including those who can be helped by this drug and no other, and who are paying for the drug with their own private insurance or own out-of-pocket money.

In other words: He is doing exactly what he vowed he would not. He is "equalizing" health access not by bringing up care for those who have little, but by reducing care by full might of federal legal power for those who have "too much."

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why is it called the "Ground Zero Mosque"?

Posted by Catmman on Sunday, August 15, 2010 9:19:27 AM
This is why.  

Share with your friends.

H/T: AoS
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sheryl Crow: Still an Eco-Wacko

Posted by Catmman on Saturday, August 14, 2010 4:21:32 PM
Entry Question:  How many resources, including cash, are being used to accommodate Ms. Crow's eco-habit?   Just think of all the fuel and other resources being consumed to accommodate just one - ONE -  concert for Ms. Crow and her entourage.

How many tanks of gas are they wasting trying to find dark chocolate organic candy bars?

The document, excerpted here, actually has a 2-1/2 page “environmental portion” to be “strictly followed and policed.” Seeking to “minimize the overall environmental impact of our tour,” Crow demands that only biodegradable cups and dinnerware be used by the caterer. Produce should be “organic and purchased from local suppliers as much as possible.” And for the five backstage “watering stations,” water “must be sourced from a local spring water vendor.”

According to Crow’s rider, her tour party travels between gigs in two 45-foot buses, while her equipment is packed into two tractor-trailers.

The document also details how Crow’s backstage hospitality room is to be stocked. The singer needs an assortment of “biodegradable non-petroleum cups” and 24 “disposable napkins made of 100% recycled fiber.” Crow’s rider also lists a wide variety of drinks and snacks that she needs, including organic coconut water and two bottles of Cabernet Sauvignon (“Sheryl’s Favorite” is Stag’s Leap Artemis). Two “good quality, dark, organic chocolate bars” are described as “***VERY IMPORTANT***”

As in a prior Crow rider, the current version includes her specific liquor schedule. On Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday, she needs a small bottle of Ketel One vodka that will be mixed with a half-gallon of organic cranberry juice. On Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday, Crow requires a bottle of Patron tequila that will be mixed with a half-gallon of organic grapefruit juice. (6 pages)

Just a shot in the dark, but isn't all coconut water organic?  I'm not much on either tequila or vodka (I'm a whisky man myself.) But I could not fathom ruining a premium distilled spirit with cranberry or grapefruit juice.  Additionally, a good Cabernet Sauvignon is not a 'sipping' or 'drinking' wine, not really.  I have found that to be truly enjoyed, it must accompany a hearty meal whose main course consists of red meat (beef or lamb) cooked no more than to medium (rarer is better if your digestive system can hack it.)  

My tastes and palate obviously aren't as refined as Ms. Crows...

One can't help but wonder if Ms. Crow were as serious about minimizing her "environmental impact" as much as she wishes of others, she wouldn't be engaging in such fruitless wastes of ALL kinds of resources by going on worldwide music tours. 

The self-indulgence of the supposedly environmentally enlightened never ceases to amaze. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The real problem with the Ground Zero Mosque

Posted by Catmman on Friday, August 13, 2010 9:26:05 PM
Pithy:

My enemy is someone who thinks it's a good idea to advertise the virtues of Islam next door to Islam's Greatest Hit.

In case you were wondering what President Obama's thinking was on the subject - he's all for it.

As if we didn't already know...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Egg Harbor, WI - 600 F on July 4, 2010

Posted by Catmman on Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:43:55 PM
Measured by 'official' NOAA stations.  By 'official' and 'measured' I mean totally made up BS:

But our intrepid anonymous whistleblower wasn’t done yet. He pointed out that Egg Harbor, Wisconsin, really got cooking this July 4th around 9:59AM, according to NOAA and Coast Watch. It was there, at the bottom left row of the temperature data points, that the records reveal on that day a phenomenally furnace-like 600 degrees Fahrenheit. (Click here if CoastWatch link does not work or disappears)

Egg Harbor by Royalbroil
Egg Harbor by Royalbroil

Further analysis of the web pages shows that the incredibly wide temperature swings were occurring in remarkably short 10-hour periods-and sometimes in less than 5 hours. Strangely, none of the 250 citizens of the 78 families living in the village appeared to notice this apocalyptic heatwave during their holiday festivities.


As you do, just keep telling yourself the "science is settled".   Stephen Hawking's warnings have come to late.

H/T: AoS
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Shirley Sherrod - Massa?

Posted by Catmman on Friday, August 06, 2010 12:38:56 AM
Was Shirley Sherrod, the person who lost her job for comments at a NAACP meeting, guilty of keeping African-American farmers as chattel in the early 1970's?

Shocking new allegations against Shirley Sherrod (the USDA employee recently embroiled in a controversy over a speech she gave to the NAACP) and the communal farm she ran with her husband Charles Sherrod have been confirmed by an article published 36 years ago in a farm workers’ newspaper.

Combined, the new 2010 allegations and the original 1974 allegations accuse Shirley and Charles Sherrod of:

• Paying farm workers as little as 67¢ per hour, far below minimum wage for the era.
• Employing underage children to perform hard labor.
• Compelling their employees to work in unsafe conditions, including getting sprayed with pesticides.
• Firing any workers who acted as whistleblowers.
• Forcing employees to work overtime in the fields at night with practically no advance notice.
• Having a capricious payscale under which employees doing the exact same jobs were paid different amounts according to the whims of the managers.
• Being unwilling to address the abuse even after it was raised by union representatives.
• Seriously mismanaging the farm to such an extent that it went bankrupt.

More here.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Isn't the 'Peak" of anything when it's busiest?

Posted by Catmman on Friday, August 06, 2010 12:30:54 AM
Since the poster of the below story doesn't allow comments, just thought I'd ask.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »