The Jackie Robinson little league team had their championship stripped because they were caught padding their team with players from outside their approved zone. They also had all their regional titles taken away. Now all the public figures in Chicago are crying that the children did nothing wrong and they should keep their championships. Their argument is that the adults cheated, not the kids, so the kids should not be punished. Ok, I get it. The kids didn’t do anything wrong. Neither did the kids from the New Albany Little League team in Southern Indiana. All they did was get beat by a team filled with ringers for the Great Lakes Championship game. That was the end of their run. They didn’t get to go to Williamsport, Pennsylvania to play for the National title. The Jackie Robinson team got to do that. Everyone in Chicago is crying out for justice for the children who did nothing wrong. The only problem is, they are demanding justice for the wrong team.
Two police officers were attacked and beaten by seven people on the Brooklyn Bridge. Two other officers were assassinated in their cars in New York. I guess it is now open season on the police. Did anyone NOT see this coming? When the liberal press and politicians continue talking about police like they are the enemy, what did they think was going to happen? When people are shouted down for being racist when they display signs that say ALL lives matter, or BLUE lives matter, what did people think would be the result? This is all meant to be divisive. If this was a movement meant to bring people together, the slogan would have started out as ALL lives matter. It didn’t. The slogan was BLACK lives matter. How inclusive does this sound? We are now seeing the results of their actions. Anyone who condones this slogan or these marches aren’t trying to bring people together. They are trying to sow discord. If they deny it, they are either lying to you or to themselves.
Ok – I know I can be sarcastic, but seriously, I don’t understand anything about Ferguson. I realize people rioted because an unarmed black man was shot by a white police officer. But is this the example they want to stand behind? He wrested the officer for his gun and punched him in the face twice. Then he charged him. Does anyone think that the police officer wasn’t justified in shooting his attacker? If you don’t think he was justified, exactly what do you think police should do in this situation? Run? Hide? Turn the other cheek? I mean, really, what was he supposed to do? Police are there to enforce the law – not to be attacked. Are criminals supposed to be allowed to do anything they want without fear of reprisal? Even from the police? I wouldn’t suggest this strategy if you are interested in living in a world with relative safety.
I also don’t understand the looting and burning. What is this supposed to accomplish? Do the rioters think this will gain them sympathy? What did the store owners do that their place of business deserved to be burned or looted? Were they involved in the shooting? Did they cheer the police officer when the man was shot? I just don’t get it. Are these people trying to draw attention to a cause or to themselves? None of this makes sense to me.
Ok – I have officially had it with the idiots running this country. We need to put a stop to the idiocy right NOW! My wife and I have spent our entire lives working and doing without a lot of things so we could live in a modest home in the suburbs. We paid our bills on time and lived within our means. On the radio today, I heard about something I was totally unaware of. They are called Super Vouchers and they are passed out by the Chicago Housing Authority.
These Super Vouchers will allow 4 lucky low income residents to live at 500 N. Lake Shore drive. These units are the second most expensive in the city, with one-bedroom apartment rents approaching $3,000 dollars a month! These aren’t the only people benefiting from super vouchers either. The CHA has approved 706 super vouchers since this program began.
I am so sick of hearing Democrats cry about how they need to raise taxes because poor people will starve, or be homeless, or go without education if we don’t increase taxes to help them. They NEVER think about cutting taxes. Now they have the gall to provide luxury apartments to poor people? We have to pay more taxes so poor people can live better than the average tax paying person?
I am absolutely fed up with this lunacy. If the government can’t think of anything better to do with tax money, then we need to rethink the entire tax system. One of the basic concepts behind the founding of this country was no taxation without representation. Did anyone ask you if you minded that they take your money so poor people could live better than you do? When did you agree to this? When did I agree to this? We need to get mad! We need to take a stand and tell politicians to knock it off! We need another revolution!
Did you ever wonder why veterans hand out poppies to raise funds during the Memorial Day holiday? I guess I never thought about it, but now I know. During WWI, the Germans shelled the trenches in Flanders, Belgium with chlorine gas. A Canadian army doctor named John McCrae survived the shelling. He treated he wounded and buried the dead. He later noticed poppies growing among the graves, which inspired him to write “In Flanders Fields”, which is reproduced below.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below
We are the Dead.
Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
Out of horror, beauty blooms.
First off, I would like to extend my heartfelt sympathy to those students and teachers terrorized by another senseless crime. 22 injured by some idiot who thought he had a good enough reason. There is never a good enough reason.
As I was reading the news coverage, I was struck by the somber attitude in many of the articles. Many people are wondering what could possibly drive someone to do this. What were his motives. That attitude is drastically different than other recent articles covering similar tragedies. The difference? Guns weren’t involved in this crime. Knives were. Missing are all the outraged authors and politicians demanding tighter gun controls. Gone are all the people who insist that guns are to blame for all these outrageous crimes. Now, all of a sudden, it’s the perpetrators fault. What was he thinking? Why did he do it? Why, when it’s a stabbing, is it the person’s fault, but when it’s a shooting, it’s the guns fault?
Here is a quote from our beloved Governor Quinn just the other day: “The truth is, those who are telling you that Illinois can tax less and spend less and still expect to fund education are simply not telling you the truth”. He said this with a sense of outrage that his poor constituents were being lied to for political gain. The audacity of those darn Republicans! I seem to remember a couple of other statements by the Gov. One of them was that he would veto any income tax hike over 2%. Then, when the Democrats proposed a 67% increase that he APPROVED, he said it would only be temporary. So I guess that just shows that Quinn doesn’t really have a problem with his constituents being lied to, he just wants to make sure he is the only one to do it.
Apparently, not the FCC.
The FCC says it wants to examine “the process by which stories are selected,” as well as “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.” The commission “plans to ask station managers, news directors, journalists, television anchors and on-air reporters to tell the government about their ‘news philosophy’ and how the station ensures that the community gets critical information.”
I guess the question now is, do you trust the FCC? Do you trust any government agency under the Obama White House? How about the IRS? They wouldn’t single out Republican organizations to audit, would they? Oops, they already did that. Now the FCC wants to examine news rooms? Really? Isn’t the administration getting enough favorable coverage? I guess if the government can control the media, they won’t have to put up with ANY unfavorable coverage. I suppose next they will want to put filters on Google searches. Does any of this sound familiar? It does to me; just not in America.
A little over a week ago, our president picked Maria Contreras-Sweet to lead the small business administration. Here is a quote from the speech he gave that day: “Maria knows how hard it is to get started on a business, the grueling hours, the stress, the occasional self-doubt…” Now that’s all well and good, but does anyone remember the speech he gave in July of 2012? Here is a small quote from that speech: “If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
How do you reconcile these two speeches? How does the media reconcile them? The media question is actually easier to answer. They don’t reconcile them. They are hoping you forgot his first speech, because they sure aren’t going to remind you about it. That might make their savior look bad, and we just can’t have that, now can we? The answer to the first question is – you can’t reconcile them, because they are incompatible. I sure hope we see a change in the near future, because I am sick of the hope and change we have now.
Mayor Rahm’s proposal to impose tougher penalties for illegal gun possession failed on a surprise procedural move the other day. The reason? Rep. Ken Dunkin requested information on how much the proposal would cost taxpayers. REALLY? When did anyone ever ask that question in Chicago?
Later, lawmakers expressed concerns that increased jail time instead of rehabilitation would not be the best answer for the community. Hmmm. The police chief said recently that guns are driving the crime in Chicago. Let’s think about that. Guns are driving the crime. That is exactly like saying that cars are driving the drunk driving accidents. Why don’t they complain about cars? Why don’t they demand laws to limit car possession? Because they don’t want us to peek behind the cloud of nonsense they are spouting to look at the real cause. CRIMINALS. Now, they don’t think increased punishment is the answer. Maybe if Rahm had offered to keep the guns locked up longer, it would have passed.