“Distinguished Warfare” Drone and Cyber Medal Shot Down

Picked up from Ars Technica

the Defense Department has pulled the plug on a proposed medal of valor for drone operators and cyber warriors. The Distinguished Warfare Medal, which was announced two months ago by outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, was shelved by new Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on April 15...

The medal was intended to be awarded to members of the military engaged in cyber operations or in drone operations that saved the lives of those on the battlefield, going above and beyond the call of duty.

'Cause we all know it takes real balls to sit in a booth thousands of miles away from "the enemy" and let go a missile at them while they sleep, get married, take a walk, attend a funeral or are eating a meal.

Real guts that.

Cowardice

From Barry Lando. I couldn't say it better myself:

After all, what could be more cowardly than for some unknown, unseen, unannounced killer to blow apart and maim innocent men women and children, without any risk to himself.

You get why I have "issues" with drones now? You cannot seriously back drone bombings on "anyone 16 and older" who may be in the vicinity of [presidentially determined] terrorists and then run your mouth about how cowardly the Boston Marathon attacks were. Seriously. You cannot.

Immigration Reform: What's Not Being Discussed

In the past I've discussed the very real impact of illegal immigration (AP be damned) on wages for "born" Americans and particularly African-Americans. Over at VDARE.com there is a very detailed report on what has going on with employment:

There were 9,956,000 unemployed native-born Americans in March. If March’s job growth rate persists—and if the native-born were miraculously to get all the new positions—it will take 59 months, nearly five years, for the native-born unemployment rate to reach the 4% level considered “full employment” by most economists.

Remember that this report is not discussing the unemployment rate of African-Americans which is far higher than the nation's average (or overall) unemployment rate.

And that would indeed be a miracle. Because about 90,000 legal immigrants arrive every month. That means that essentially all the jobs created last month would be needed just to absorb new legal entrants...

March 2013 was a disaster for native-born Americans and immigrants alike. The Household Employment Survey, which records the ethnicity and nativity of respondents, found across-the-board job declines.

In March:

Total employment fell by 206,000, or by -0.14%
Native-born employment fell by 130,000, or by -0.11%
Foreign-born employment fell by 76,000, or by -0.33%

There's more in the report so you should read it in it's entirety. The point here being that if there is no discussion on how the US fulfills it's obligations to it's citizens first then there is a problem with the discussion period.

The Future of Hate Crime Laws

I've long been against so called "hate crime" laws mostly because it criminalizes motives (and thereby thoughts) rather than actions. Criminal law is supposed to punish the actions of an individual regardless of the why. A motive may be used to establish murder over negligent homicide, but the particular motive ought never be criminalized itself. Hate crimes becomes a slippery slope because if you really think about it, other than some cases of serial killers, just about every hate crime that involves physical violence involves "hate" of some kind.

Hate crimes are usually based on "protected classes". Sexual minorities, race (usually excluding persons classified as white), ethnicity and religion. Now England has gone and added "alternate sub-culture":

Police in Manchester have arrested two people for an attack on a 16-year-old emo in the first recorded hate crime against followers of alternative subcultures.

The force announced last week that it was classing assaults on subcultures such as goths and punks in the same way as offences against race, religion and sexual orientation...

The changes came after senior officers at Manchester worked closely with the mother of Sophie Lancaster, a 20-year-old student who was beaten to death by a gang who took exception to her dreadlocks and piercings.

George Zimmerman's mother lashes out at justice system and media

I bit late in posting this but the LA Times reports on Zimmerman's mother making an ass out of herself and joining George's brother in biasing the potential jury pool against Zimmerman. Well, no one said they were bright.

On Thursday, Zimmerman’s mother celebrated the anniversary by angrily denouncing the justice system and the media for the pushing for the arrest of her son “solely to placate the masses.”

For anyone who pays attention to the title's of court cases like the one Zimmerman is facing the title is usually The People vs. so and so. So yes, the justice [sic] system is supposed to represent and provide justice for "the masses." How exactly do you get mad at that?

“April 11 2012 will be forever remembered by the Zimmerman family as the day the justice system failed us as Americans, and as a consequence an innocent man was arrested for a crime he did not commit, solely to placate the masses,”

I suppose that no one has informed Ms. Zimmerman that all persons under the US justice [sic] system is presumed innocent (unless you are a man accused of rape in which case there is a growing movement to remove that presumption of innocence but that's another post for another time). Zimmerman was arrested because there was probable cause (a dead body killed with his weapon) to arrest him. Exactly how the US Constitution requires. So exactly what is the "failure"?

“From the beginning, this case has been heavily publicized and a false narrative was developed surrounding a very real tragedy when there was little evidence available to the public,” the letter stated. “It is astounding that despite the vast amount of information and evidence now available that supports George’s self-defense claim, the majority of the media avoids its publication. It is indeed alarming that even more media outlets do not regret misinforming the public and have not taken steps to retract the fabrications they are responsible for perpetuating.”

As I've said elsewhere in regards to this matter, I do not know all the data available to the prosecution. I still think it was and is mistake to charge Zimmerman with murder because they will have to prove malice or some sort of depravity and I think that's going to be a hard sell with the information I do know about. That said Zimmerman's mother (and brother) apparently don't understand that Zimmerman is on trial because he followed a person who wasn't doing anything wrong (and no, looking at your surroundings is not evidence of intent to commit a crime). Having your hands in your pocket is not evidence of intent to commit a crime. Running from someone who's been following you in their car is not evidence of intent to commit a crime. Confronting a person who was following you in their car and has decided to follow you on foot is also not a crime (particularly under Florida's stand your ground law).

All these things mean that the police had probable cause to arrest Zimmerman and to try him for whatever they deemed appropriate. I know that it bother's some white people a great deal but black men (and minors) have the same rights as anyone else to walk down the street in peace without being followed by armed people. They have the right to confront a person who is menacing them and the right to defend themselves against someone who poses a risk to them.

Zimmerman could have avoided the entire situation by doing one thing. The thing he was told by the police dispatcher:

Stay in his car.

Alternet does Ageism and Racism in One Go.

Not that I'm in the habit of defending "old white men", you'd think that a "left" organization would avoid entitling an article with:

Old White Guys Focus on Militarizing Border, While Real Americans Descend on DC Looking for Reform

I mean number one what is the purpose of pointing out "old"? Are "old" people not really Americans? Does "Americanness" expire after a certain age? If so then what is the cut off? Thousands of Floridians would like to know.

Seriously though, after dumping on Hillary Clinton for her "real Americans' commentary during her presidential bid, you'd THINK that a left leaning publication would take pause to put "real American" in any story that isn't a direct quote.

The second fault here is the accompanying picture:

Well if he isn't "allowed to stay" then that makes him a "non-American".

Question: Is Alternet implying that non-citizens are "real Americans" and that old citizens are not "real Americans"?

Sounds pretty racist* and ageist if you ask me.

*And this does conform to my definition of racism since it is an ideology based on race.

Don’t Forget, The Young Grow Old

Don't forget what happens when you "grow old".

Rodolfo Acuna warns the Democrats:

Pundit after pundit predicts that the entrance of large numbers gay and Latino voters will end the culture wars that divide the country. There is only one problem — progressives forget that the “Young Grow Old.”

It is easy to get caught up in the euphoria of the moment. I remember demonstrations in the 1960s, and thinking that we had entered a new era. I did not fully appreciate the seductive power of capital in negating any communitarian or humane transformation.

The piece is pretty bad in that it, like many other pieces from people on extremes, uses extreme positions. You're either young and progressive or rich, greedy and selfish. Just like how when people speak of women's bodies you're either fat or anorexic.

I remember my college days. Many of the most "progressive" people were going through college on someone elses dime, dollar and loan signatures. It was completely lost on them that they were "welfare activists" living off mom and dad's hard earned money and soon to run out grants and loans. Many of the most "progressive" people were super duper duper seniors who in addition to continue to spend other people's money on their "education" were some of the least responsible people on campus.

The campus activists who had much to say about tuition increases but never had the sense to get out of school before the next one. That doesn't mean that rising tuition isn't an issue. It is. But anyone against it ought to have as their number one priority to get themselves (and anyone they can convince) to get out as soon as possible. After all the best way to curtail your out of pocket (as well as loan) expenses for education is to graduate as quickly as possible.

Anyway, this particular part of Acuna's essay got my attention:

Nor did I take into account the self-interest of many of the demonstrators who opposed the war; they remained interested for only as long as they were personally threatened. Poverty and injustice was only visible for as long as the young remained young. They became invisible once more as the baby boomers grew old, and took on mortgages. They then distanced themselves from poverty, which again became a non-priority.

Acuna is actually well onto something in regards to those who protest against war. Many of the same people who were very much against the Bush wars and other "wars of empire" went completely silent once Obama took office, if not during his campaign. People who constantly had Bush in the mouth were suddenly "well if the Libyans want..." and "but the Egyptians want..." and "What about that viagra fueled rape story...?" and my favorite "well he's being SMART about it."

It turned out that they were actually opposed to white men (and to a lesser extent women) leading imperial wars. They couldn't fathom how The Ghost was against imperial interference in the matters of other states period. Punto. Full stop.

Supposedly I lack nuance.

As to the second part in regards to mortgages and things; it's called maturity. The young generally waste money and often times it's someone else' money. See when one gets thrown off the parental money titty one starts to look at the world a lot differently. Can't pay that rent? No time for that protest. Oh that art degree you spent 50K on? Well I hope you can eat it 'cause those student loans will soon come due? Oh that's not fair? Why is it not fair that the institution that loaned you money to go to a school you could not afford to go to in the first place, for a degree in a subject you may not get well paid to actually use, expects to be paid back plus extra for their bother?

Oh you want a car? You want to start a family? Get married? Well all of that costs money too and nobody else is going to pay for your life. Once it sinks in that nobody owes you anything for your life and how you live it, a lot of that talk starts to look really immature. It sinks in that those changes you wished for so bad weren't exactly going to happen during your 20's if in your lifetime and...ummm...the bills are due.

Does that mean that we're good with predatory lending? Sky high interest rates on credit cards? 66 month car payment terms and the like? Nope. Those of us who matured in our thinking got smart and minimized our exposure to these things while we spoke out against it. But it becomes pretty hard to sympathize with folks who choose to live way beyond their means and make purposeful fucked up decisions. Let's be clear; there are people out there...a lot of them who simply do not care that other people have to shoulder the burden for their fucked up decisions. They feel entitled to your "help" and "advocacy" because they never grew up.

Check Acuna's next statement:

I bought my first home at 21 – no down payment, total cost $8500. I could qualify for it on my janitor’s salary. Today that same house costs $500,000; $100,000 down. And I am sure I could not qualify for it on a teacher’s salary.

Let's ask Acuna a simple question: Would he accept $8500 for his home now? After all if that is the value of his home and he has principled objections to those who invest making many multiples of money off their investments, then he ought to sell his home to someone for the same amount he paid for it.

Acuna's (who made his living in large part off the government read: other people's money, as a professor at a public institution) partial thesis (the rest being about Mexicans) reminds me of a poet at a slam event who took shots at people with "nine to fives". The room had a good number of people who had "nine to fives" who after the slam were expected to part with their cash to buy this poet's book and CD. How do you insult the same people you're going to ask for money from?

Yeah the young grow old and hopefully mature.

"Remote Threat"

After months gun control coverage and the latest tour of the Newtown families, the NY Times writes this:

The effectiveness of using police officers in schools to deter crime or the remote threat of armed intruders is unclear.

Now if I say it. I'm an NRA shill. When I point out the totally disproportionate fear relative to the actual cases of gun violence in schools, I'm not being sensitive. So what to say about the NY Times?

Al-Qaeda in Syria

File this one in the "Just Can't Make This Up" Folder:

The leader of the al-Nusra Front, a jihadist group fighting in Syria, has pledged allegiance to the leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri...

Spokesmen for the Free Syrian Army, considered the main armed opposition group in Syria, reacted to Wednesday's statement by distancing themselves from al-Nusra.

"We don't support the ideology of al-Nusra," FSA spokesman Louay Meqdad told the AFP news agency.

"There has never been and there will never be a decision at the command level to coordinate with al-Nusra," Mr Meqdad went on, while admitting that there had been co-operation between FSA brigades and al-Nusra on "certain operations".

So a group of rebels against the government of Libya Syria has ties to Al-Qaeda. The so called non-Al-Qaeda affiliated "Free Libyan Syria Army" denies cooperation at the "command level" but on the ground, it's whatever's clever.

Who woulda thunk it.

9000 Missile Launches

Again, you don't have to agree with the current DPRK administration but one cannot deny the logic:

Since World War II there have been 9000 missile launches. 4 were by the DPRK. There have been 2000 atomic bomb tests. 3 were by DPRK. No country was sanctioned by the UN Security Council for this. No country except the DPRK. Why wouldn’t the North Koreans be incensed by this double standard, especially when the US has nuclear weapons in South Korea?

This rank hypocrisy whether it be about Iran, Libya, Israel or Venezuela is clear for the world to see. The question I have is why the other members of the so called "international community" haven't taken a stand on it.

There Are Slave States and Noble States

There are slave states and noble states. Noble states develop their own technological infrastructure, GPS, weather reporting, etc., so need satellites. These days satellites are used for many things. If your country doesn’t have your own technology, you end up a slave state, dependent on other countries. Noble countries are in control of their own development and have a future.

You don't have to agree with the leadership of the DPRK, but the above statement is absolutely true.

Is Chuck's Gun Shop To Blame?

Last week Counterpunch ran a piece entitled Chuck’s Gun Shop Throws a Tantrum in which the author pins the blame of crime in Chicago on Chuck's Gun Shop.

2,370 crime guns were traced to just one gun shop located in suburban Chicago between 1996 and 2000. Over 1,300 have been traced to the shop since 2008–as well as 20 percent of all Chicago crime guns used within a year of their purchase. Yet Chuck’s Gun Shop, in Riverdale, far from being shut down as a virtual ATM for crime guns, has actually brought suit against Cook County calling a $25 gun tax that went into effect April 1 unfair.

That's an interesting comment.

One could ask the following question:

Did the owner of Chuck's know that the guns he was selling were being sold to either persons who he knew intended to commit a crime or to persons who he knew were purchasing the guns with the intent of selling them to other people.

If either of the answers to these questions are "yes" then Chuck could and should be prosecuted for gun running and knowingly facilitating straw purchases.

Given that neither the state or the federal governments have gone after Chuck's on such charges, we need to ask another set of questions:

If we know that the guns that were used in the commission of a crime were purchased at Chuck's then why do we not know who those guns were sold to?

Under Illinois law one must have a Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) card, in order to purchase a weapon. There is also a 24-72 hour waiting period between purchase. From Wikipedia:

When a firearm is sold or transferred, the buyer is required to present their FOID card. This applies to private sales between individuals as well as to sales by Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders. For private sales, the seller is required to keep a record of the transfer for at least 10 years.[6] For FFL sales, the seller must retain the federal Form 4473 for at least 20 years. For firearm sales by an FFL holder, or at a gun show, the seller must perform an automated dial-up check with the State Police, to verify that the FOID card is valid, and to redo the background check of the buyer;[3] this additional checking is known as the Firearm Transfer Inquiry Program (FTIP).[7] The buyer is also required to present their FOID card when purchasing ammunition.

So Chuck's cannot legally sell to anyone who does not have an FOID. Chuck's must also keep a record of all purchases for 10 years. How is it that all these apparent straw purchases have been going on at Chuck's? Either there have been 1,300 different buyers since 2008 OR someone or a few somebodies is buying a lot of guns and it isn't tripping any warnings.

You would think that if Chuck's has to keep records for 10 years that upon discovery of a gun that is traced to Chuck's, the buyer would be quickly identified and arrested for illegally transferring a gun to someone who should not have had one. After a bit of time, Chuck's would no longer be a good place for such purchases no?

So I take exception to the idea that Chuck's is an "ATM" for gun crimes. Clearly someone else is the ATM, because unless or until proven otherwise, Chuck's is doing business in full compliance of applicable law. Furthermore the entire article focusing on Chuck's rather than the [most likely] gang members who are actually breaking the law.

Let me be clear. Chuck's is no more responsible for gun crime in Chicago than Sears is responsible for the misuse of the knives it sells in it's stores or Ford for the criminal use of it's cars.

There are large swaths of the US where there are lots of guns and little gun crime. Gun crime is largely an urban problem. To be blunt, in NY, gun crime is largely a black male problem. Black males are the ones shot and the ones doing most of the shooting. In Chicago, gun crime is large a black male problem with black males being shot and the shooters. Let's stop with trying to find blame with other people and businesses. Let's address this issue of a minority of black men who do not value their lives and the lives of those who are around them. The mentality of the kids at the mall in Chicago recently trashing stores and damaging automobiles. It is the mentality of the kids that were running up the Magnificent Mile, bumping into people and starting fights.

That is the source of much of Chicago's gun crimes. Guns are inanimate objects. They can do nothing without someone using it. It's time to talk about the someone.

Job Growth Falls Sharply

Surprise!

The Ghost has been telling people, using research done by Paul Craig Roberts, that the job reports they have been reading in the news has been a total farce. The LA Times is now reporting on what we've been saying for years

The nation's unemployment rate last month dipped a notch to a new four-year low of 7.6%, but for the wrong reason. It dropped because the labor force, those working and looking for jobs, fell by nearly a half-million people. In fact, the share of working-age Americans participating in the labor force declined to a new three-decade low of 63.3%.

A three decade what?

But all these reports of people becoming employed does not square with a three decade low labor force participation rate.

This is usually where someone says something along the lines of "I told you so".

The Problem with "Firsts" Narrative

author update: I was going to shelve this entry. Why? Eh, I'm not sure. Anyway now that the Jackie Robinson movie is upon us I gave this entry another thought and decided to post it anyway. I actually think it's more relevant now than before not only given the movie but some of the conversations I've had since I first typed this up

So I was getting my fix of Stuff Black People Don't Like when I read their latest post on Walmart's "History Teaching History". Apparently Kersey is annoyed that Walmart is making a big deal about Jackie Robinson and other negro "firsts":

The video for this campaign features Jackie Robinson, Martin Luther King, and Thurgood Marshall… hardly black people who accomplished anything other than being the first black individual to accomplish something white people had been doing for many years (in fact, basically invented – save for the ability to induce white guilt, which is MLK’s specialty).

Now let me say outright that I enjoy Kersey's blog. Really. Unlike a lot of blogs that I read that are simply opinion pieces, this fellow, regardless of your position on his ideology, provides evidence for his position. Believe me when I say it, that such an act puts him far above many popular blogs out there. But this isn't a "love fest" post.

The thing that was so revealing about the post was the basic assumption leveled at the African-Americans mentioned in Walmart's campaign: They were doing something that white people had been doing for years.

First let me go back and discuss my attitude towards the election of Barack Obama to the US Presidency. I am a Garveyite. One of the things Marcus Garvey repeatedly told people was that anything that any other man (he said "man". I'm not going to change it for PC points) had done "the negro can do as well" (see, I didn't change "negro" either). Sad that such a thing even needed (needs) to be said, but it is a powerful statement in a situation where large swaths of the black population apparently believe(d) that they need other people to do things that they should be doing themselves.

Garvey also famously asked of the African: Where are your nations? Where are your men of big affairs? etc. Garvey's position being that the African would not be respected until he can face the rest of the world as an equal in accomplishment rather than as a beggar in constant want of "help". So what does this have to do with Obama?

My position was that I wasn't all that impressed or excited about Obama's election because I was already of the view that a black person was quite capabale of being president (as in was just as capable of doing (or not doing, like Bush) the job as any other "reasonable" candidate or previous office holder. That is, I was not in need of proving to white folks that "we can do that too". The only thing that Obama's election signified was the acceptance of a non-white person into the most powerful office in the land. However, since my family is from Jamaica, I'm already familiar with black head's of state. Therefore I was less concerned with what Obama looked like than I was with what his policies would be. As anyone in formerly formally colonized Africa could tell you, switching out white faces for black ones means extremely little if the actual policies pursued are bad for the population.

The point being was that simply because black activity in certain fields is largely invisible to white people, it does not mean these things are not being done or have been done by black persons. Which brings us back to Kersey's comment.

See in his knee jerk reaction to black folks doing things, he allowed himself to believe that black folks had simply showed up out of thin air to the Supreme Court and National League Baseball. Kersey conveniently ignores the fact of the Negro Leagues that had been operating in parallel to the NLB specifically because African-Americans were barred from the NLB. So his statement that Jackie Robinson's accomplishment was to do something that white people had been doing for years exposes his ignorance of the actual symbolism of Robinson. Robinson isn't noted for being a baseball player. It was for him dealing with white people some of whom wished to kill him for the simple act of playing on a "white field". So let's be clear: Jackie Robinson, in terms of actual baseball, had been doing what black folks had been doing since the game had been invented: Playing at a high level.

But there is another story under Jackie Robinson. Desegregation of baseball also meant the end of the Negro Leagues which ended the ability of African-Americans to make money off the sport by owning and controlling all aspects of the sport: stadiums, teams, etc. None of the official negro leagues were absorbed into the National League. Such a move would have placed African-Americans among the majority owners of long storied and rich teams. This is something I'm quite sure will be totally missed in the Jackie Robinson movie

Then we have Thurgood Marshal. Like Jackie Robinson Thurgood Marshall was doing exactly what black lawyers had been doing: Litigating. Thurgood Marshal's achievement isn't that he somehow figured out how to be a Supreme Court justice. It was that White folks finally felt comfortable to allow a non-white person hold the job.

This is the problem with the "Firsts" narrative: It makes the first seem to be some anomaly in the community. As if "finally" we got one bright enough to be a Supreme Court justice. We FINALY got one good enough to be in the NLB. Foolishness! As Garvey said: Anything anyone else has done you can do as well. It is not a matter of ability. It is a matter of opportunity.

I think it is past time we get off the "first black" narrative and move to accomplishment regardless of when. I think it does a disservice to those who are doing great things but who are not recognized by white folks for whatever reason. It also puts waaay to much power in the hands of white folks to determine who the "first black" is. Why would we do that?

More BS in Chicago

First we had that mall incident. Now this. Look parents..your kids are fucking up badly.

Is That Like "Legitimate Rape"?

So reading JudgyBitch's blog entry in response to Jezebel I ran across this quote (which I missed when reading the original Jezebel piece):

Feminists do not want women to escape prosecution on legitimate domestic violence charges,...

"Legitimate domestic violence"?

Would these be the same women that had a fit when "that man" said "legitimate rape"?

Oh sure is:

http://jezebel.com/search/?display=all&sorting=date&q=Todd%20Akin&page=4

I could fill the page with the results of "Tods Akin" and "legitimate rape".

You would think an organization that pillored a guy for putting the word "legitimate" before a felony would make sure to not put the word "legitimate" before any other crime.

You'd think.

But you know, when women up and beat on a man It just might not be a case of "legitimate" domestic violence. I mean he must have had it coming or deserved it.

Who You May Give Your Money To

Yesterday I posted on the dumb Change.org petition to get Mattel to produce a black Barbie. Had to break down basic ethno-economics on the matter. Today via a comment on the site Stuff Black People Don't Like We have the following which should give black folks pause when they are deciding on medical care and other activities:

Now, let me tell you something really funny. I am an eye doctor. I am not allowed to put a sign up that says WHITES ONLY, thus every single African that comes to me has NO F'n CLUE that I am a Racist Pig Whiteass Cracker.

When they come to me I raise my prices. My staff knows I do this, but since my entire staff is WHITE, they get a kick out of it. I charge Africans and Aztecs more to get back what they have stolen from me. I get a big kick out of it. I smile (they like a smiling White man) and I act like I care, even though if it was up to me every single one would be deported back to their sewer countries.

Why do the Negroes and Mayans come to me? I once asked a Wetback who worked with me when I worked at someone else's office, why. He said: They want a White Doctor. They don't want an Hispanic doc. They think Whites are better.

And, Boy, we are. (I am assuming you are a boy, boy)

As the boys on record say: For real for real. Now about those reports on racial disparities in healthcare......

Police restrain crowd from taking food after supermarket eviction

In what was the richest country in the world (I believe China has taken over this spot, but unoffialy). A town justifies throwing out food from a closed supermarket.

The Marshal of Richmond County, Steve Smith, says the food wasn't theirs to give away, so they had to trash it. "We don't have authority to take possession of the property; we just have to make sure that it's handled, disposed of by law," Smith, said. SunTrust Bank in Atlanta owns the property and they're sending the merchandise to the landfill after evicting the Chois, the owners of the grocery store.

I've said that banks are greedy but this right here is an example of just how lowdown and dispicable these banks are. So a charity did not pick up the goods. So what?

The better option is to toss it in a landfill?

This is how little those who have care about those who do not. I could understand if there were insurance and liability concerns. Let the bank sign a notarized waiver of all rights and responsibility for the food. Therefore just as when you put your trash to the curb, it is no longer your legal property. If someone takes what you put on the curb, you can't claim that it was stolen nor can the person who took it sue you for damages they may get by taking, using or injesting what they took.

The city could have easily done crowd control, let people take what they wanted and then remove the rest. Perhaps removed goods that could spoil for reasons of public health.

But to toss the food simply on a technicality was callous and cold.

Black Folks Just Don't Get It

African-Americans have the highest levels of unemployment in America. Causally African-Americans have the lowest level of business ownership. Relatedly, Most African-American businesses hire no more than one person. Also relatedly, African-American businesses, in most markets generate 1% or less of the business profits in the markets they are in. Why is this?

The answer is simple. Look at every ethnic conclave in a given city. Go to the Chinatowns of Manhattan and Queens. Go to the Hispanic sections of Paterson and Passaic. Go to the Italian and Russian neighborhoods of Howard and Brighton Beach. Go to the Jewish neighborhoods in Crown Heights and Williamsburg. What do you find there? You find the businesses owned and operated by the ethnic members of the communities. The businesses that cater specifically to the cultural needs of those communities. The foods. The clothes, The entertainment. The religious artifacts, etc.

Who are they employing? People from the neighborhood and/or people who have recently immigrated into the neighborhood from "a foreign" (Jamaican slang for "overseas").

Generally speaking when you go into a heavily black neighborhood you do not find this. What you find are stores owned by various ethnic and racial groups. Retail outlets. Laundromats. "corner stores in the middle of the block" (Yes I know the author. Yes, buy his book.) "Supermarkets" with spoiled and near spoiled products. What businesses do the black people in these places usually own? The barbershop and the hair saloon. And the latter usually depends on "hair care" products purchased from some other ethnic group that I decline to name but everybody in the "hood" knows.

Oh yes, then there's local drug trade. Possibly the greatest employer of black men without a college or HS education in America...up there with....prison.

ahhh but this is not the WHYYY...

Yes, to quote the Merovingian of Matrix fame. This is not the why. It would be easy to blame the interloping immigrants and other various non-whites for "invading" the hood and "making" black folks buy stuff from them. That would be easy. That's like Black Revolutionary Rhetoric 101. I'm way past that class. If you wanna roll with The Ghost(tm) You have to graduate to the post Bach program of Garveyism.

Way back in the last century Garvey told black folks the world over that if they wanted respect and employment and nationhood that was not dependent upon the whims of other groups of people, you must do business with and for yourself. To that end Garvey launched the Black Star Line and the Black Star Factories. The Black Star Line and Factories were to employ "negroes" in various "negro" communities with the goal of making said communities self-sufficient. The BSL would have acted as a means of distributing black goods (crops, finished goods) around the globe, thereby connecting the Africans of various nations in commerce for their collective benefit.

Every other group of ethnics that come to America understand this basic concept. Black folks STILL don't get it. Today's example from Change.org:

Petitioning Mattel
Mattel: Offer party supplies featuring Barbies of Color

My African American daughter asked me for a Barbie party theme featuring a black Barbie for her birthday this year. I thought surely, with all of the dolls of color Barbie sells, that it would be no problem to find the party supplies with Barbies of color. Little did I know that not only would I find nothing featuring Barbies of color, but that the only line of party supplies Mattel offers features various huge, blown up images of a blonde haired blue-eyed Barbie on literally everything except for some very small images of a brown-skinned Barbie and a brunette (possibly meant to be Hispanic) Barbie on a tablecloth, and a set of a handful of hanging decorations. Even though it seems like a small thing, featuring the white Barbie so prominently on the banners, cups, napkins, plates, party favors, and invitations, while relegating the "ethnic" Barbies to near-invisible cameos sends a clear--and troubling--message to young girls. As parents of children of color, we're basically faced with the choice of either foregoing a Barbie theme altogether, or compensating for Mattel's lack of sensitivity through labor-intensive DIY solutions. Check out this blog of a mother who went so far as to print out labels of Black Barbies at home and stick them to party supplies: http://ebonylove10.blogspot.com/2011/12/how-to-have-black-barbie-party.html

The above is testament to the utter SAD state of economics among African-Americans.

Mattel's apparent "oversight" is actually a business opportunity for African-Americans. Why the hell would black folks cede a market for African-American dolls to Mattel instead of creating and buying one of their own, created by their own, and employing black men and women to design, build, manage and distribute them?

This is why I didn't spend time in this piece making disparaging remarks about so called "blood sucking Jews" and dumb stuff like that. If black folks are dumb enough to volunteer to hand other people their money and intellectual property, then why should I be mad at them for accepting it?

I don't WANT Mattel to make a black Barbie. I want a collection of black folks to make an "Akua" doll. I want that doll to come in every shade of brown that African-Americans come in. I want the set to have the most "nappiest" headed doll to the Jamaican red, purple, green and whatever color extension that African-American women put in their heads ('cause I'm not here to judge what black women do with their hair. I just prefer how it comes out their head.). I want her wearing all kinds of outfits whether it be Zulu mudcloth, a wrapper, Hijab, Pum-pum shorts or whatever else we see black women wearing.

I could go on and on because I see the huge, global picture. I don't have time or the inclination to do simpleton, dependency bullshit like ask Mattel to do things that black folks should be doing themselves.

If you don't understand what I'm saying or disagree with it because it offends your "liberal sensibilities", I'm sure there is a white college or other institution dependent upon white philanthropy that will be quite willing to employ you to spread the status quo while thinking you're actually doing something "different".

Red Clay Scholar's Lesson To Rick Ross

He can miss me with all that too.

How Often Are Men Victims of Domestic Violence?

Over at my other blog I have a post called the Gender Bullshit Report. One of the things I point out there is the acceptance of female on male violence in the media, which is reflective of the mood in American society at large.

I've often had people disagree with me on this (particularly when I was on FB and Twitter) but often those persons, sorry every time those persons failed to present actual evidence. The above video should serve as proof what what I said then (always with documentation) as truth. I would also implore those men who I know who are unwilling to believe what I've said in the past because it would put them on the "outs" to seriously watch this information (the data of which I have confirmed) and stop making false statements online and elsewhere about how "infrequent" certain things are.

Robert Zimmerman: Idiot (At The Very Least)

Ahhh gotta love it when White Supremacists like Zimmerman here tries to make a point about what they think are "facts".

First thing is that the kid that shot the woman and her baby was and is a crook (to be nice) who was in fact out to cause harm and was in fact armed.

Trayvon on the other hand was walking from the store with items he purchased and minding his own business.

Zimmerman was following Trayvon first in his vehicle and then on foot.

Zimmerman was armed (and dangerous).

There is no comparison.

Trust me when I say this: If you follow me in your car and I spot you and then you pop out your car and come at me: I will put you down. Period.

Whether I tell you "tonight you're gonna die motherfucker" or anything else, won't even matter, Why? because by stalking me and menacing me is enough for me to defend myself.

So all Robert Zimmerman did was expose his true identity. We see you. PS: Don't even get me started on the number of white people on Twitter and elsewhere throwing birds to a camera.

Garvey's Ghost on The "Gay Marriage" Question.

I was going to post on the topic...again. but decided that it would be better for the reader to go over what I've been saying since 2008: 1) On The California "Gay Marriage" Ruling

I think the constitutional issues coming out of this will be huge. Utah was admitted into the union on the basis of it banning polygamy. Seeing that the argument about 'state interest' has been shot down in two states, for maintaining marriage as between one man and one woman, I think the LDS church will soon be in a position to sue not only the state of Utah but the Federal Government over this issue. Since "family" is being defined in terms of who loves who and who can raise children (as opposed to producing them), there is no legal standing to ban polygamy.

2) Prop 8 arguments

Oh and the comparisons to Dred Scott are entirely out of order. Dred Scott (and by extension Loving) was about the legal designation of blacks as less than human and therefore not even covered by the laws of the land. There is no argument being put forth that homosexual men and women are not human. Anti-Miscegenation laws were again based on white supremacist science that claimed that not only were blacks sub-human but because of that the offspring of such breeding would be sub-human as well.

3) Follow up on Prop 8 Arguments (response to e-mail)

In my opinion the only equitable means of dealing with this issue that does not run afoul of religious liberties, is to have all levels of government get out of the marriage business. No city hall ceremonies. Marriage remains the social institution it is and would be performed by any religious or social group that the people involved wish to deal with. The states can do what they do when people form legal businesses. The submit an application to form a "domestic partnership" with as many or few people as they want. The state simply certifies the declaration of this domestic entity. That is all. Everybody has a domestic partnership regardless of what genders are involved or how many people are involved. This would legally help hospitals with privacy laws that prevent non-relatives from access to or making decisions for patients. Show your certificate and that's taken care of. I think the above is the best way to address the legal "equal protection" issue, without running into the sociology and cultural issue of what is and who should be recognized as "married".

4) The Problem With The Latest Prop 8 Decision

The California constitution as enacted in 1849 is very clear as to what it considers "marriage". The word "marriage" appears exactly twice in the original California constitution:

Sec. 12. No contract of marriage, if otherwise duly made, shall be invalidated for want of conformity to the requirements of any religious sect.

Sec. 14. All property, both real and personal, of the wife, owned or claimed by marriage, and that acquired afterwards by gift, devise, or descent, shall be her separate property; and laws shall be passed more clearly defining the rights of the wife, in relation as well to her separate property as to that held in common with her husband. Laws shall also be passed providing for the registration of the wife's separate property....

Therefore for a justice to claim that prior to November of 2008 that any other marriage arrangement was legal or recognized under the California constitution is factually wrong.

Gang Member Shoots Mexican because he was Mexican

This black gang member shoots a Mexican man in front of his son in retaliation for " for the death of one of their own by a Latino member of the 38th Street Gang."

By the way.What is the name of this gang that this fellow is from?

Pueblo Bishop Bloods

His dumb ass is in a gang with a "latin" name and killing random Latinos.

o_0

On another note, what the hall are 31 and 40 year old black men doing gangbanging?

Gabrourel was convicted after the state unsuccessfully tried him in 2011. Two other men, Gary “Big J-Killa” White, 47, and Jermaine “Lil’ J-Killa” Hardiman, 31, were also convicted in the slaying.

I mean Gary White is damn near 50. 50! Why is ANYONE gang bangin' at damn near 50?

Your life has to be all kinds of fail to wake up at damn near 50 years old on some "I'mma kill me a Mexican" tip.

It's dumb enough to be a gangster as a teen. I can kind of sort of understand that. Young men not thinking about their future. Typical young man "I'mma become a big shot caller...yadda yadda yadda.. But damn! Near 50 and gang bangin?

Look, if you're in the gang life..by the time you're damn near 50 you need to be in upper management handling the retirement fund, the "legit" front businesses and stuff like that. If you ain't doin' that. If your clique ain't got a retirement plan or legit front businesses for "old gangsters" to launder money and stuff like that, you should REALLY REALLY reconsider your affiliation.

Being White In Philly

The original piece here: http://www.phillymag.com/articles/white-philly/

I'll just say this: If you think that what was written there was 'hateful" let me assure you that whatever negative commentary or quotes contained in the piece is a far cry from what is being said by those with no filter.

Farrrrrrrr cry.

Blindsided: The Exoneration of Brian Banks

I remember when this story broke. Two things to say about this:

1) I recall during my time on Twitter the number of educated African-American women who were of the opinion that any time a woman says she has been raped that she is to be believed. If any of them are viewing this then they should now understand why I called them on it. How any African-American woman, fully cognizant of the history of lynching in America could open her mouth and say that a rape claim should be believed simply because it has been made is a betrayal of their own ancestors.

Now should police take a rape claim seriously? Absolutely. But seriously and true are NOT the same thing.

2) What was with the African-American woman lawyer who after receiving the total net worth of Brian Banks' mother, abdicate her responsibility to vigorously defend her client? I know people who work in the justice [sic] system who say that such plea deals are common. Yes Brian faced an uphill battle for a fair trial. As an African-American woman not only should she know this but given her supposedly uniqueinsight she should have been in a position to know how to get around such biases. I wonder if this woman even bothered to reach out to Brian. I wonder if she refunded some of her "earnings" (I use the term loosely given she convinced her innocent client to plead guilty to a crime he did not commit) to Mr. Banks.

Exporting Censorship

For those who don't know, France has a peculiar law. It is illegal to say "bad" things about Jewish people. It's framed as "anti-semitic speech" but since Arabs are apparently not covered it is clearly about "Jews". Apparently it is the case, like a lot of places in Europe, that the government(s) are of the opinion that the citizenry is so immature and childlike as to not be able to see "bad" speech for what it is and decide for themselves how to deal with it. And so it is illegal to sell Nazi material (because that magically prevents folks from becoming violent White Supremacists (as opposed to the more genteel and acceptable, sofa, governmental and university White Supremacists.

To this end the French government has been coming after Twitter:

In January, a French court ruled that Twitter must hand over the details of people who had tweeted racist and anti-semitic remarks, and set up a system that would alert the police to any further such posts as they happen. Twitter has ignored that ruling, and now the Union of French Jewish Students (UEJF) is suing it for €38.5m (£32.8m) for its failure.

The French government is of the opinion that a US based company must spend it's time providing the actual identities of persons who make "anti-semetic" remarks on Twitter to the police. This amounts to exporting French law to other countries.

Twitter refused, arguing it was based in the United States and thus protected by the 1st Amendment's freedom of speech guarantees. A Parisian circuit court ruled against the social network, giving it two weeks to comply or face a fine of up to €1,000 (£849) for every day it doesn't. The UEJF want considerably more than that, says its president, Jonathan Hayoun, because "is making itself an accomplice and offering a highway for racists and anti-Semites".

Even if US law didn't protect such speech it would not be relevant. Twitter is not a French entity. As far as I know Twitter's servers are accessed by french citizens. The actual burden here is on the French authorities to police it's citizenry not overseas entities.

As to the charge of "accomplice", what happens if a media outlet reports on "anti-semetic" speech and provides quotes of said speech? Are they too "accomplices" because they have provided an outlet for such speech?

"Twitter is playing the indifference card in not respecting the decision of 24 January," he added, when speaking to AFP. If the UEFJ wins its case, it plans to donate the money to the Shoah Memorial Fund. Twitter has said it will appeal the decision. It deleted many of the offensive tweets in January after the earlier court ruling, but has so far held back on using its country withheld content feature to pre-filter potentially offensive content, as it does with neo-Nazi posts in Germany.

I think Twitter has made a huge mistake in deleting the offending tweets as well as providing filters in Germany for neo-nazi tweets. Twitter ought to simply block access to it's site from the IP ranges originating from those countries. Trust me, the world is FAR LARGER than France or Germany. Let the citizenship realize that the censorship laws they have are undemocratic and are costing them access to a world of information.

Such a move would also be quite profitable for the web proxy business.

This is the problem with accepting the small censorship. Now you cannot talk "ill" of the Jew. Soon you cannot talk ill of any religion. The men at Pycon and Play Haven have found out just how far the speech suppressors are willing to go.

Today in "Spot The Negro"

Reflecting on my post last week where I highlighted the quote:

If you have no women working for you, you might find it hard to get women to work for you: Does a female engineer really want to go work for a company where she's the only woman in the office?

I pointed out what a double standard that was as it regards race; That is, such an argument wouldn't be presented much less accepted in MSM.

I also have pointed out how many tech companies that are going on about what they need to do to attract women may as well have "No Negro" signs on their management office (or even in general).

Yesterday browsing Flipboard I came across a post in Gamespot about game developer Firaxis. What they do is not important. However the picture of what I assume to be the staff at Firaxis is telling:

Now please follow me with today's "Spot the Negro". I spot 1 definite (extreme left) and one possible (extreme right).

Now count the women:5. None Black.

I suppose Firaxis has a problem hiring blacks because well, they don't have blacks working for them.

o_O

Listen to Sarah Gudger: Slave Narrative

Hat tip to Cappuccino Soul

Becky Stone brings the voice of former slave Sarah Gudger to life from the Federal Writers Project Slave Narratives of 1937. Listen as she describes her personal experiences with her family, owners, slave speculators, the Civil War, thoughts on emancipation, and what life was like as a slave in Buncombe County.

R.I.P Chinua Achebe

Dongle-Gate: The sterilization of men in tech culture

I was SOOOOO enraged when I read this that I had to leave my place of employment lest I do something to threaten said employment. I was going to write about it but A Voice For Men has done it already and I'm going to let their piece speak for me (at least for now).

This is completely out of hand now. Completely.

What the now former engineer for Play Haven and his friend didn’t know; Was that the conference they were attending had copy and pasted their code of conduct from the Ada Initiative’s example code of conduct. This code of conduct forbids any sexual discussion. You heard that right, a public convention, with thousands of people, talking, socializing, etc. explicitly forbids any discussion about sex or sexual remarks amongst conference goers.

Some back story here:

The Ada Initiative is a feminist organization aimed at removing male sexuality from tech spaces while allowing feminism approved flavors of female sexuality to remain. I really wish I was being hyperbolic here, but this an exact quote on that topic:

Personally I think men should boycott next year's PyCon. Seriously.

How Greedy Are These Banks?

Take a look at Cyprus:

With anger growing, Cyprus’s president, Nicos Anastasiades, was set to propose a revised plan later Thursday to scrap a controversial tax on bank deposits. But if the government does not raise enough money through other means to satisfy creditors, that plan would need to be revised. And in a rare public mea culpa, the head of the euro zone finance ministers sought to defuse tensions by taking the blame for the proposal to levy a one-time tax on small accountholders as a condition of the bailout. The proposal was roundly rejected by the Cypriot Parliament on Tuesday.

Imagine.

You open an account with your bank. Your [relatively] meager savings stashed away earning a wee bit of interest. The bank had been using your deposits as leverage to make loans to people who should never have seen a cent. It speculated on whatever. It gets into trouble. What does the Big Fed people do? They decide that you should be charged a tax on your little savings. Why? Did YOU fuck up? Nope. You get taxed so the bank that used and leveraged YOUR money in bad (and possibly fraudulent) activities can stay in business.

This is how greedy these people are.

I Have Not Had It All

I have not had it all.

I have had a lot. I feel lucky to have had a successful career as a journalist and author while being the primary caregiver of our four children for a decade.

But I definitely did not have it all.

Well said.

Let's Not Exaggerate

NY Times reporting on the lack of "minorities" enrolling and graduating from teaching colleges has this little gem:

“In their first year as an engineer, they’ll earn more than a teacher will ever earn over a 30-year career,” said Rick Ginsberg, the dean of the School of Education at the University of Kansas.

This from a "dean".

Unless first year engineers are pulling in million dollar salaries AND teachers never make anything above the minimum wage, it is mathematically impossible for the quoted statement to be true.

Mind you, I get the actual point, but I really hate exaggerations. It's just not necessary.

The Onliest Negro

Continuing my watching of the increasing gender discourse in the technology field; here's Jezebel's latest on Etsy

If you have no women working for you, you might find it hard to get women to work for you: Does a female engineer really want to go work for a company where she's the only woman in the office?

Once again highlighting the not so funny double standard in this coverage. Replace "female" and "women" and you get

If you have no Blacks working for you, you might find it hard to get Blacks to work for you: Does a Black engineer really want to go work for a company where she's the only Black in the office?

Lest you think this is hyperbole, please do note that such "spot in the milk" situations are quite common both in education and the workplace. Certainly This Week with George is one such place (That round table has a thin stable of "the usual" black folks" and they are often not there. Women on the other hand appear just about every week.

Of course I could answer the question with the same tripe I get about race: It shouldn't matter, we shouldn't be looking at gender[race] but the quality of the candidate and the work. Right?

Right?

Seriously though. It is not so funny to see the arguments that are being passed around in this gender argument that aren't even allowed to see light of day when the subject is race.

The Internet is a surveillance state

The Internet is a surveillance state. Whether we admit it to ourselves or not, and whether we like it or not, we're being tracked all the time. Google tracks us, both on its pages and on other pages it has access to. Facebook does the same; it even tracks non-Facebook users. Apple tracks us on our iPhones and iPads. One reporter used a tool called Collusion to track who was tracking him; 105 companies tracked his Internet use during one 36-hour period.

Yup.

“She Is So Raped Right Now.”

Mr. Westlake had been granted immunity for his testimony, and he had been attacked for his role in the events of that night and for filming a now-infamous YouTube video in which he is heard laughing as another boy describes the girl as “deader than O.J.'s wife” and says, “she is so raped right now.”

Mr. Mays admitted to the girl that he took the picture that had already circulated among other students of her lying naked in the basement with what he told her was his own semen on her body, from what he stated was a consensual sex act.

Right verdict.

Young men need to understand: If she's passed out. She's off limits.

The Progressive Movement is a PR Front for Rich Democrats

The self-labeled Progressive Movement that has arisen over the past decade is primarily one big propaganda campaign serving the political interests of the the Democratic Party’s richest one-percent who created it.

Someone else has finally figured this out eh? From Counterpunch

Boston Schools Drop Last Remnant of Forced Busing

The Boston School Committee, once synonymous with fierce resistance to racial integration, took a historic step Wednesday night and threw off the last remnants of a busing system first imposed in 1974 under a federal court desegregation order.

Instead of busing children across town to achieve integration, the plan adopted by the committee is intended to allow more students to attend schools closer to home.

This is a good thing.

But numerous parents and activists complained during a hearing before the committee’s deliberations that the new system would leave some children — mostly black and Hispanic — in the lowest-performing schools.

This is a bad thing but it's not solved by trying to stop the first thing.

It is clear that the funding to schools via property taxes makes for underfunded schools. Obviously places with high property values will be able to spend more on their school systems (and likely have lower density of residents and therefore lower numbers of total students to service). Places with lower incomes and likely higher student density will have less money to spend on schools.

The answer to this problem is clear as day. End the allotment of money via property taxes and replace it with a statewide education fund that distributes money based on student density first, need for improvement (physical and or staffing) second.

That would immediately add needed funds for schools that need it and raise the floor for minimum accepted standards. Schools districts would and should be free to take donations or raise taxes (via referendum) to add more funds to their schools as they see fit. Yes it would still result in "unequal" schools. but "equality" is not going to happen ever. Wherever there is a difference in wealth there will be a difference in "amenities". Deal with it.

The concern here is that bad schools are raised to higher standards and that is entirely possible to do.

Double Standard

So companies are falling over themselves to talk about how and what they are going to do to recruit and retain women workers. They are looking at places where they are lacking and requiring their managers to make plans.

Sandberg even got time on 60 minutes to talk about this. I find it all VERY amusing. Why? Because no one has asked the question that has been on my mind: How many black employees do you have? Is it proportional to the national population? Is it proportional to the population in the locale in which your company operates?

How many black folks are on the board of FB? What about the management? And I'm not even getting into splitting black men and women.

What about Cisco? Here's a company publicly talking about what it hasn't been doing for women. Check out the executive team

Where are the black folks. From what I see, Cisco doesn't have a women problem as much as it has black problem. There are 8 women on Cisco's team and not a SINGLE ONE is Black. Not a single one.

Christopher Young may be African-America but I hold a pretty high bar for calling someone black and from his picture I'm not convinced. But let's assume he is. One person out of 63 executives (1.58%) are "black" in a country where 13% of the population is "black". So if the argument is entirely about "proportional representation" (which from what I've seen has been the entire argument for all these 'we gotta do something about the women" books and whatnot) then CISCO has a lot of problems and should be taken to task for it.

When I go through my tech feeds on my iPad and I see plenty of articles about companies started or run by a group of white men (and I'm not in any way opposed to that). I see numerous articles about women run companies and I see accompanying photos with rows of white women (not opposed to that either). Some with rows of equal numbers of white women and white men. I have seen articles with accompanying photos of Asian men (and women) from various Asian cultures.

I rarely and I mean rare like meat running red with blood, see black folks.

Why is it suddenly so fashionable and permissible to go around talking about what companies aren't doing for women when many, if not most of these same companies may as well have a "Negroes not welcome here" sign on their front door?

It's high time these so called journalists start asking the hard questions rather than pandering. Shoulda asked Sandberg how many black people, male or female, are on the exec track at Facebook. How many are management. Don't know the answer to these questions, then go here for 2007's lineup as well as Facebook's own page here Which only lists the top persons. Here's the SEC filing listing the Board. I'm guessing there are no negroes on the board

NY Soda Ban

We live in an age of government overreach. We have made certain topics of speech criminal. We have decided that crimes with certain motivations (rather than simply a motive), thoughts to you and I, are worthy of extra prosecution because that thought makes some group happy.

We have a president that has decided that the government can kill anybody over the age of 16 if they are deemed a terrorist by "someone with authority". An obvious expansion from a previous president who was of the opinion that Americans have not rights that the executive need respect (10 points for those who recognize the reference).

Whistleblowers are in jail because the state has been embarrassed. The same state that want's to declare National Security in regards to widely known information and decided what defense a defendant may or may not claim in a criminal proceeding.

All kinds of blatantly unconstitutional laws are proposed by folks who apparently don't even understand the job duties.

Children are killed in a school by a kid who was clearly mentally disturbed and apparently it's "common sense" to restrict the rights of those persons who do not commit crimes. Because as we all know criminals are known for observing laws passed to make them more civilized.

With all of this going on it was not surprising that NY Mayor Bloomberg proposed that sugary drinks over a certain size would be illegal to sell in some establishments in NYC.

To me it was a clear cut case of governmental overreach. Who could seriously think that the government could actually legislate how much of a legally produced and sold product one could sell with the argument that people need to drink said product less? It was ridiculous on it's face.

The entire argument by Bloomberg was thus: Sugary drinks directly contribute to obesity. Obesity is epidemic in the population causing x amount of deaths every year and costing the city and state y amount of dollars every year. Therefore the city has an obligation to protect the city from the epidemic of obesity by tackling the "epidemic" of 20 oz sodas.

Of late the entire "safety" and "save lives" rationale has been trotted out for all manner of unconstitutional laws, the Patriot Act being a prime example. There is an obvious question to ask of Bloomberg's argument: Why not Alcohol?

If the consumption of any product poses an immediate threat to the population it would be alcohol. Drunk drivers caused the deaths of 409 people in NY State for2008.

In addition a number of crimes including rape, domestic violence, murder, assaults have alcohol as contributing factors.

Lastly Liver Cirrhosis is often a result of alcohol use.

Having established that alcohol poses a danger to the public why didn't the state decide to limit the amount of alcohol allowed to be served by establishments? Why not ban the sale of 6-packs of beer to one pack per customer and outlaw the sale of kegs altogether? I mean WHO needs to drink THAT much alcohol?

As of now you should be saying to yourself that my suggestion is silly. That's exactly the point. You don't go limiting what responsible people may decide to purchase because 16 million people in the US are incapable of controlling their intake and subsequent behavior. And this is what this rule comes down to: Control.

Does the government have the power to control how much food and drink you may consume? Yes, the rule was on "sales" but the intent of the law was at consumption, not sales. No it does not have that power.

The problem with obesity is one of culture. Most obese people that I have met are obese because they want to be. Yes, Want to be. They do not care about what they are eating or what amount they are eating. They do not want to know how many calories are in a food or drink. They do not care how many cubes of sugar are in a soda. They want to eat and drink what they please, when they please. Whether I agree with it or not, they have a total and complete right to do so.

Anyone who decides that they care what they eat will look at labels. They will drop soda from their diets. They will drop a lot of foods from their diets. They will work out. Most importantly they can and will do so even while they pass aisles in the supermarket with rows and rows of 2 litre sodas, cookies, cakes, bread, bread, bread.

People who care about their bodies do not need the government to tell them what they can and cannot eat and drink.

It's good that the decision laid out the legal basis for the smack down, but I think it is high time for blatantly unconstitutional laws be simply thrown out as "blatantly unconstitutional". It shouldn't require 37 pages to explain why the state cannot tell an establishment or a citizen how much of whatever food they can eat. That clearly is an issue of privacy just like a woman's right to what she will allow to grow in her body.

Quick Note on the New Pope

News reports said this is the first "non-European" Pope. But Pope Francis is the son of Italian immigrants to Argentina. How is that a "non-European" Pope? By nationality? Sure. By race? Yet another European Pope. See this is why I don't follow silly Negroes who think that somehow "white" people don't exist in South America.

New York State Supreme Court Decision on Bloomberg’s Limits on Sugary Drinks

So far as I read it, it's been argued by the court the same way I argued back when it was first proposed: Huge overstep. Hopefully I'll be able to add additional commentary not found in the ruling but equally important.

That's A Whole Lot Of Nerve

The Obama administration demanded Monday that China take steps to stop the widespread hacking of American government and corporate computer networks and that it engage in a dialogue to set standards for security in cyberspace.

The demands, laid out in a speech by President Obama’s national security adviser, Thomas E. Donilon, represent the first direct response by the White House to a raft of attacks on American computer networks, many of which appear to have originated with the People’s Liberation Army.

Let's assume for a moment that the Chinese military is in fact hacking various US based companies and government websites.

Let's make that an operating assumption.

Having exposed the US's use of hacking to attack the sovereign state of Iran's nuclear facilities. Iran who is a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty and has broken none of it's requirements the US shouldn't have SHIT to say to anyone about the use of cyber warfare against a perceived threat.

But although Mr. Donilon emphasized the importance of developing a code of conduct on cybersecurity, he made no mention of Washington’s attacks on the computer networks in Iran, which have impeded Tehran’s development of nuclear centrifuge machines.

No mention? That is soooooooo surprising.

I suppose it is proper that I am not a 'diplomat" because my immediate response would be for Obama et. al. to shut the fuck up.

It is the height of hypocrisy for a country that regularly kills males over the age of 16 because they "might" be terrorists in contradiction to any number of international laws including those that cover warfare.

And if you, dear reader are so naive as to think that organizations closely or loosely related to the US Govt. is not in fact doing the same thing to perceived enemies, you are stupid.

Very stupid.

I'm just wondering how long it is going to take before other heads of state grow a set of balls, ovaries or whatever gives them intestinal fortitude and tell the US and some others to Shut The Fuck Up in public and on record. The hypocrisy is nauseating.

Too bad we have lost a strong man like Hugo Chavez who had the guts to call Bush by his proper name.

Camden, NJ

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Survey of O.C. blacks finds harassment, discrimination

The survey was conducted after an incident in upscale Yorba Linda, in which an African American family said they had been forced to flee the county after enduring months of racial attacks and acts of vandalism that seemed racially charged.

In response, the Orange County Human Relations commission held a series of public "listening sessions" at churches across Orange County, urging African American families to share their stories of life in a county that — at one time — had a reputation as a place of intolerance.

The stories — collected in a document released Friday and that will be discussed at a public forum next week — include those of a woman who said a company CEO seemed "shocked" when she complained about the Confederate flag outside his offices and the high school student whose classmates said they planned to dress up in KKK garb for Halloween and "lynch" black people.

And although African Americans make up only about 2% of Orange County's population, officials with the human relations group — which has been tracking hate crime and discrimination in the county for more than 20 years — say black residents have been the most targeted in hate crimes.

While I'm sympathetic to the families and certainly think that those who think that dressing up like Klan members is "fun", I have to seriously ask why families who apparently have the means to live in an upscale neighborhood don't simply band together and create an upscale black neighborhood?

What is with this need to be a tiny minority of black folks in a neighborhood where your neighbors don't want you?

I really do not understand the whole "they gonna like me. They gonna accept me" mentality.

Six Sexy Hairstyles Men Are Attracted To

Guess what kind of hair didn't make it? Shouldn't take long. Probably the biggest slap in the face to Black women is "bed head". I mean seriously, uncombed white hair as it is first thing in the morning rates better than natural black hair of any state? Damn.

They Did What?

They regarded the elected president of their country as uncouth and uncivilised, a zambo of mixed African and indigenous blood who could not be trusted. His supporters were portrayed on private TV networks as monkeys. Colin Powell had to publicly reprimand the US embassy in Caracas for hosting a party where Chávez was portrayed as a gorilla.

So allow me to ask. Why is it there was a shit storm about the prostitutes and this right here didn't see light of day? How many people got fired for this?

So: Prostitutes: bad. Racist characatures of a head of state: OK.

Yes Powell did his bit. My commentary is about the larger outrage that should have followed.

Huffington Post's Sporadic Use of "Alleged"

Reporting on the current UNC "Honor Court" case the Huffington Post show's it apparent confusion over the use of the term "alleged":

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is under intense community backlash after news broke that Landen Gambill, a sexual assault survivor, faces possible expulsion for "intimidating" her alleged abuser.

No court that I know has actually found that Gambill was actually sexually assaulted. Gambill has not even bothered to file charges with the local police.

Let me re-iterate this:

There has been no police report of this alleged felony. Yet the Huffington post has decided to declare that Gambill is an actual factual "sexual assault surviver". How does the Huffington Post know this? Were they there? Are they in possession of forensic evidence that we don't know about? If not then the onlu responsible way for the Huffington Post to describe Gambill is as an "alleged" or "possible" sexual assault victim. Why? Because Gambill has made a claim that has not been substantiated by any party. One cannot declare that someone is in fact guilty of a felony without providing proof. And no, simply saying so is not proof.

More:

she received the charge, she was told by a student with the Honor Court system that she could potentially be violating the Honor Code by speaking publicly about her rape.

Again, how does the Huffington Post know that Gambill was in fact "raped"? The sentence should have read [purported] or [alleged] rape.

I'm particularly disturbed, as I was when I was on Twitter at the total willingness of people to assume that a claim is true simply because it has been made. I would not sign a petition or anything else until Gambill at the very least reported the incident to the police. If she feels so strongly about the situation why hasn't she reported this person to the police?

Let's be clear: You don't get to call a man or woman a rapist (yes, women can rape. Shocking, I know), not report them to the police for the alleged offense and then stalk them. If Gambill wants "justice" she should start with a trip to the local police station. This whole situation stinks and it's high time for proper reporting on this issue. I've seen it and it hasn't come from Huffington or any of these other "mainstream" sources.

Wildin' Out in Chicago

View more videos at: http://nbcchicago.com.

Seriously?

Seriously?

And the idiot with the "Self Made Gangster" shirt?

Seriously?

What Do the Billionaires Know?

Buffett has been drastically reducing his exposure to stocks that depend on consumer purchasing habits. Berkshire sold roughly 19 million shares of Johnson & Johnson, and reduced his overall stake in “consumer product stocks” by 21%....

During the second quarter of the year, Paulson’s hedge fund, Paulson & Co., dumped 14 million shares of JPMorgan Chase. The fund also dumped its entire position in discount retailer Family Dollar and consumer-goods maker Sara Lee.

George Soros recently sold nearly all of his bank stocks, including shares of JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs. Between the three banks, Soros sold more than a million shares... Before you dismiss the possibility of a 90% drop in the stock market as unrealistic, consider Wiedemer’s credentials. In 2006, Wiedemer and a team of economists accurately predicted the collapse of the U.S. housing market, equity markets, and consumer spending that almost sank the United States. They published their research in the book America’s Bubble Economy.

Jast passing along info.

R.I.P Hugo Chavez

354 US Representatives Do Not Understand Their Job

By a 354-to-72 vote, the House approved a measure sponsored by Representatives Christopher Smith, a New Jersey Republican, and Grace Meng, a New York Democrat, that would authorize the Federal Emergency Management Agency to make direct grants to churches, mosques, synagogues and other houses of worship “without regard to the religious character of the facility or the primary religious use of the facility.”

Never mind that:

Supreme Court rulings interpreting the First Amendment’s prohibition against establishment of religion have long barred the direct use of tax money to build, repair or maintain buildings devoted to religious services or other religious activities.

I have long said that the voters, in cases of gross ignorance of the constitution, should remove from office any representative (or senator) who willfully and knowingly proposes or votes for legislation that is clearly unconstitutional. In my opinion, those who have done so have clearly shown their inability to perform their required duties and should be replaced with one who does. NY Times

The One Picture...

That should disqualify the US as a "fair" party to disputes in the Middle East

Seriously. NY Times

In Voting Rights Arguments, Chief Justice Misconstrued Census Data

NPR attempted to dismiss Justice Roberts point in regards to Black voter turnout in Miss. being higher than that of Mass.

The number of black citizens eligible to vote in Massachusetts is 236,000, while it is 721,000 in Mississippi, more than three times that number. Therefore, according to Census officials, when looking at the estimated turnout rate in Massachusetts, the voting percentage for African-Americans at first blush is estimated at 39.3 percent. But the margin of error is 11.5 percentage points, meaning that the black voter turnout actually could be as high as 50.8 percent (or, conversely, as low as 27.8 percent).

Now, look at Mississippi, where black turnout is listed at 48.7 percent. But because of the large size of the African-American population that was sampled, the margin of error is only 5.4 percentage points...

That means that factoring in the margin of error, the black turnout rate in Mississippi could be as high as 54.1 percent, or as low as 43.3 percent.

So, if you factor in the margins of error at their extremes — with Mississippi at the low end and Massachusetts at the high end — Mississippi could have had a black voter turnout rate that was 7.5 percentage points lower than Massachusetts.

Could. You'd think that a company with the resources and reputation would not leave an article with "could". Surely they would actually see if more firm numbers could be had. Well lets look at some numbers. First we have a link to the black population of all Miss. counties. Then we have a link of the 2012 voter results for every county in Miss. So for example, in Jefferson County, with an 85% black population, we can observe a 89.1% Obama vote (3,951 votes). Since we know that 85% of the population is black and that there is no way at all that the 15% of the population that is not black is representative of the vast majority of the votes. It is clear that the eligible and registered black voters had no problems going to the polls.

In Tishomingo county where Black people make up 3.7% of the population, Obama received 20.7% of the votes (1,643 ballots). We can note that: 1) There was no effective means of preventing people from voting for Obama since it is clear that a decent sized minority of non-blacks, 6 or 7 times the size of the total black population, voted for Obama.

In fact if one compares the two charts you will note that the votes for Obama correspond quite closely with the percentage of the black population. And this would also match up with the data that shows that African-Americans country wide voted for Obama at over 90%. Clearly then one cannot argue voter suppression with such evidence.

If we look at Massachusetts population we find that only one county has a black population above 20% (Suffolk County). That county voted for Obama by 77.4% (223,896 ballots). No more than 24.6% of those votes could possibly be African American (44,780 ballots).

Which brings us to the position of The Ghost on the issue of the Voting Rights Act.

I have said on many an occasion that actual citizens do not need "voting rights acts" because actual citizens are covered under the 14th Amendment which reads, in part:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws...

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Clearly the latter portion is why the Voting Rights Act is constitutional insofar as it supports the aforementioned claims of the amendment. If the federal government cannot show that the states under the "prior clearance" rule have abridged the 14th Amendment, then from what I can see, the requirement would be unconstitutional.

It is clear from the data that Justice Robert's point, however badly stated, is accurate. Not only are black people generally not being disenfranchised in MS. but it is quite correct that more black people voted in MS. than in MA AND did so in higher percentages. Therefore the situation in MS. is not what it was when the Voting Rights Act was implemented and those who wish to see those states still operate under the pre-clearance rule will have to make a better argument.

Gasoline Prices

From the LA Times

The high prices were causing big changes in the driving habits of American motorists, with gasoline consumption dropping sharply. And one result of the big decline in U.S. consumption was a record amount of gasoline exports by U.S. refineries, to Central and South America and even Singapore and Australia.

So gas prices are at record highs for this time of year. The "news" presenters have been trotting out the old "change of blend" excuse that they trot out every year, but here we have it.

There is no "shortage". There is no "change in blend". There is so much gasoline available, in the US that US refineries are sending it elsewhere.

What was that rule I was taught in school? If the supply is high and the demand is low the prices should go down. Do I remember that right?

"Let the market decide". I believe I heard that too.

None Dare Say It's Name

White Supremacy. A phenomenon which apparently is a forbidden word unless one is speaking of the Ku Klux Klan or other assorted small time white lead groups doing small time things. Counterpunch provides us with another example:

Why are many in America, with its professions of Christian and democratic values, oblivious to our government’s glaring criminal foreign policy? Philosopher Noam Chomsky provides an answer. “We own the world,” he said. As an example, he gave the repeated threats of the U.S. and Israel to bomb Iran, saying, “There happens to be something called the UN Charter which says that—in Article 2—the threat or use of force in international affairs is a crime. . . . Does anyone care?” He continued, “No, because we’re an outlaw state by definition, or to be more precise our threats and use of force are not foreign, they’re indigenous because we own the world.” (“We Own The World,” Adapted from a Z Media Institute talk June 2007, Z Magazine, Jan. 2008)

Another example of American hegemony cited by Professor Chomsky was former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice saying that “the solution to the problem in Iraq . . . is quite obvious, ‘Withdraw all foreign forces and withdraw all foreign arms’ . . . she was not referring to U.S. forces, she was referring to Iranian forces and Iranian arms. And that makes sense, too,” Chomsky explained, “on the assumption that we own the world because, since we own the world U.S. forces cannot be foreign forces anywhere.” He concluded, “It’s all too easy to continue with this indefinitely. Just pick your topic. It’s a good exercise to try. This simple principle, ‘we own the world,’ is sufficient to explain a lot of the discussion about foreign affairs.” (Ibid)

Oh don't let the references to minor non-white players in the White Supremacy game. The phrase is "White Supremacy" not "White Only". How is what is quoted above different than the "White Man's burden" of yesteryear?

It isn't.

That a person of color is at the head of one unit of the Global White Supremacy entity does not change what it is. Africom is still happening. That POC was the first president to order a killing of a Somali "pirate" who was barefoot and wearing rags.

But don't worry. Responsible Negroes (tm) will not utter the phrase. It's far easier and "polite" to say "American Hegemony" as if NATO does not exist. That France is not right now in Mali for "humanitarian reasons". That Ghadaffi wasn't offed by a coalition of European countries. That just last Sunday a representative of the US said on This Week that non-whites are "irrational" as he went on to list "rational" "players" in the current Syria and Iranian conflicts that consisted entirely of European nations.

Yup. None dare say it's name.

The Word is "Alleged"

Think Progress apparently doesn't understand how the legal system works AND is asking for a lawsuit.

A college sophomore at the University of North Carolina is being sent to the school’s “Honor Court” and may be expelled for speaking publicly about her rape.

University officials are alleging that Landen Gambill is being “disruptive” or “intimidating” her rapist by going public with her story of sexual assault, despite the fact that Gambill has not even publicly identified her rapist....

The Honor Code may also specify that rape falls under “the University’s Policy on Prohibited Harassment,” but Gambill’s rapist remains on campus. In fact, Gambill lives across the street from her assailant.

Allow me to help Think Progress out:

A college sophomore at the University of North Carolina is being sent to the school’s “Honor Court” and may be expelled for speaking publicly about her alleged rape.

University officials are alleging that Landen Gambill is being “disruptive” or “intimidating” her alleged rapist by going public with her story of sexual assault, despite the fact that Gambill has not even publicly identified her allegedrapist...

The Honor Code may also specify that rape falls under “the University’s Policy on Prohibited Harassment,” but Gambill’s allegedrapist remains on campus. In fact, Gambill lives across the street from her assailant.

Seriously Think Progress, No one has been charged or convicted in this case. Therefore it is a total fabrication of fact to state that someone was raped when such a determination has not been made. There is only a rape claim. Of course Think Progress would need to have an editorial staff with the moral fortitude to make sure these kinds of edits are made and enforced.

Gaza Rocket Strikes Israel, Breaking Truce

Given what I see in this picture I will assist the NY Times in a more appropriate title: Gaza Bucket strikes Israel. IDF Panics.