The Price Is Far Too High

Anyone who thinks government-run healthcare is a good thing, that it's just what we need, should take a very close look at the scandal rocking the Veteran's Administration right now, as well as other socialized medicine programs around the world. Believe it or not, liberals, those of us who speak out against government-run healthcare have our reasons.

Just today, the Inspector General's report on the VA scandal was released, which confirmed that veterans were made to wait ridiculously long times for appointments at the Phoenix VA hospital for an average of 115 days. The “official” VA data, by the way, showed that those vets waited an average of just twenty-four days. I don't know how you look at it, but my non-Common Core math says 115 days is over four times more than 24 days. Some veterans waited for an appointment as long as 155 days!!! The IG's report also said that the problems are “systemic” throughout the entirety of the VA.

The veterans of the United States military have been treated abysmally. The men and women who have written a blank check to the nation they love should be the first to receive healthcare: Before welfare recipients, before government bureaucrats, before anyone in either house of Congress, before anyone in the White House or the Supreme Court. I cannot emphasize that enough. Yet, as the IG report states, at the Phoenix VA alone there are as many as 1700 veterans in danger of being lost to the system due to not being on the Electronic Waiting List, or EWL, as well as up to 1400 veterans who are on the EWL but not yet received an appointment for their primary care physician.

Our veterans have left parts of themselves all over this planet. My own grandfather lost a leg fighting Nazi Germany. My father left a part of his soul in Vietnam fighting the spread of communism, not to mention the health issues he's had from being exposed to Agent Orange. Veterans having to wait for the care they were promised is disgraceful and reprehensible in the extreme. And for veterans to be basically denied care, most likely because the “official” EWL is the standard for VA worker's bonuses, it's unconscionable.

I understand that the problems at the VA didn't start with this administration, but King DingleBarry made multiple campaign promises to fix the issue during the 2008 campaign. He didn't “find out through media reports” as they've recently claimed, yet the majority of the mainstream media remains silent on this aspect of the story. It's true that the VA's budget has been essentially doubled over the last few years, but the VA also rolls over any unused funds from one year to the next. Approximately $450 million was rolled over from last year to this. Why was this money not used to get the waiting vets the healthcare they needed and deserved?

This scandal is stunning in its depth and breadth. The VA system is socialized medicine, and the problems inherent in the VA system will be multiplied, and amplified, across this country once Obamacare is fully and completely implemented. All one needs to do is look at nations with government-run healthcare to see that.

We're heading down a path that has already been trod upon, and right now, our veterans are paying a price they should never had been made to pay, and soon, we will all be paying that price. ~ Hunter

Video Games And Movies Aren't The Issue

How about we blame the actions of a CLEARLY disturbed individual ON THE INDIVIDUAL, instead of the old, and very tiresome, excuses of violent video games and movies.

Those things aren't the issue. The issue, to my mind, is PARENTING. Video games, for example, don't lead to shootings if - and here's the important part - parents teach their children to divorce FANTASY from REALITY.

My own son was playing Goldeneye on Nintendo 64 at a VERY young age, but I taught him that it WAS NOT REAL, nor was it something that should even be contemplated in real life.

The UCSB shooter was clearly unbalanced. All one need do is watch his YouTube video for evidence of that. He believed that women OWED him love and/or sex simply because he was, well, him. He had the CLASSIC entitlement mentality. He was the result of what's STILL going on in our screwels today - the "nobody wins, get a trophy just for participating" self-esteem social experimentation engineered by the Leftists that have hijacked our education system.

What happened in Isla Vista has everything to do with the shooter and his upbringing, and nothing whatsoever to do with video games or movies.

Let's stop giving the bad guys all the outs and start calling things like they are - EVIL.

A Reminder Of What Memorial Day Is, Or It Isn't About The Barbecue And Fireworks

In the midst of the holiday celebrations you'll have or attend this weekend, please make sure to remember why we have this holiday, and those who made, and still make, it possible for you to celebrate. Remember our honored dead.

All gave some: Some gave all.

The beginnings of Memorial Day are shrouded in the mists of time. There are many different versions of the “official” start of the holiday, but the two most prominent versions are wildly different.

The most commonly accepted version of the story begins in Waterloo, New York. In early May, 1866, Waterloo druggist Henry Welles finally got his oft-repeated wish to set aside a day to honor the nation's fallen soldiers.

According to the legend, General John B. Murray, a celebrated hero of the Civil War, supported Welles' cause and cajoled the town to hold a formal ceremony with music, a parade, and the draping of wreaths and black mourning clothes upon soldier's graves.

On 30 MAY 1867, the event was held again. In 1868, Waterloo invited neighboring towns to participate. As more and more towns began honoring their own fallen soldiers, thus the Memorial Day holiday was born.

Another origin story, slightly less well-known, is that Memorial Day started as “Decoration Day” in Charleston, South Carolina. Initiated by black Americans as a way to honor those Union soldiers who fought and died for the freedom of the former slaves.

On 01 MAY 1865, approximately ten thousand people took part in disinterring 257 Union soldiers from a mass grave. After giving them all proper burials in a cemetery setting, then cleaning and decorating the graves, Decoration Day was then filled with speeches by representatives and supporters of the Union, music, and marches. The new cemetery, named “Martyrs of the Race Course,” was prepared by the men of the town, mostly former slaves, ten days prior, complete with a large fence, as well as an entrance archway welcoming those who wished to honor the fallen soldiers.

Whether one origin story is more “true” than the other will probably never be known, at least not to anyone's satisfaction. What we do know to be true is the sentiment behind the holiday – to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice to protect the God-given freedoms guaranteed under our Constitution.

It's true that the barbecues, parties, family reunions, and fireworks displays that typically accompany Memorial Day are fun times, but if you don't teach your kids why this holiday even exists, the price paid in blood, you're shortchanging your children and your nation. Remember not just that this nation is still free, but also who has kept it free since its inception.

"It is the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag."

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is nothing less than the absolute truth. ~ Hunter

Every Tom, Dick, Rose, Or Susie

Ladies and gentlemen, today I bring to you a rare treat – a guest post from none other than Cupcakes, a personal friend of mine. Formerly of Things Liberals Hate, she now posts on Liberals are Hypocrites, plus she has her own page – The Shenanigans of Cupcakes and Friends. If you haven't checked it out yet, you're missing a lot. She uses some colorful, but clean, language, and her style is a refreshing difference from my own. Please show her some For Love Of Country love. ~ Hunter

The mass shooting in California will be yet another reason libturds will be screaming for gun control. This is a sad story and I blame the modern day libturd for it. Our society has become a selfish one, people only caring about themselves ...and what they can get for free.

We have also become an immoral society...thinking sex with any Tom, Dick, Harry, Sally, Rose, or Susie is normal and expected. Well, take a hard look into Elliot Rodger's privileged eyes and know he was one sick puppy that was only a product of his environment. He felt as though he was being cheated because he couldn't find a girl that would screw him. Yuuuuup, that is what the murder of seven people boils down to...a 22 year old that couldn't get laid. Our society is sick, really sick. We stepped onto a slippery slope and our decline just gets faster and faster.

Want to know what the true fruits of abortion are? The devaluing of human life is the fruit of abortion. Life just isn't important in our society.

And here is another point to ponder: Why was this man's goal to get laid rather than be successful at some career. Could it be that daddy gave him everything and he felt as though that was the way it should be...getting something for nothing? I mean look at the guy's car and lifestyle he lived.

The bottom line is our society is producing mentally ill whackadoodles who all feel that the world should revolve around them and if it doesn't, they are going to at least get their five minutes of fame by doing something crazy and making at least a few people suffer.

We have gone full-blown topsy turvy!!! ~Cupcakes

'I will slaughter every single blonde s*** I see': Lonely killer posted chilling video warning of 'retribution' because he was still a virgin at age 22.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2638049/7-dead-drive-shooting-near-UC-Santa-Barbara.html#ixzz32iswfQej



When Narcissism Meets An Inferiority Complex

***WARNING:  This video is creepy and disturbing on more levels than I care to count.  Viewer discretion is STRONGLY advised.***
This is the full video of the suspected UCSB shooter.
I didn't realize that it was possible to have an inferiority complex coupled to a god complex, but this scumbag manages to pull it off.
The narcissism is strong with this one. ~ Hunter
Elliot Rodger CHILLING videos just days before Go…: http://youtu.be/t-jCSZh2tMk

If Obama Had A Son Who Ran For Class President

Everyone remembers President Obama's ridiculous comment during the Trayvon Martin incident - "If I had a son, he'd look a lot like Trayvon Martin." - or something to that effect. Naturally, and totally keeping in character for him, he made this statement without really knowing the particulars of the case. Whether he was right or wrong about it is immaterial.  Here's a story about someone who seems much closer to what I imagine the son of the Great and Wondrous King DingleBarry would be like.

If President Obama had a son, and he was running for class president, he might just be like one young man who recently ran for class president at St. Peter’s Prep, in Jersey City, NJ.

In May, it was reported that a black student at the school received four racist text messages warning him to drop out of the race.

“We have NEVER and will NEVER have an (n-word) to lead our school,” was one of the messages supposedly sent to the 16-year-old student, who at the time, was a resident in Jersey City. The message went on to call President Obama by his middle name Hussein and used a racial slur in referring to Obama, a police report said. “We will never make that mistake again. Drop out right now . . .” it continued, a police report said.

A second message read “Whites! Your a waste on this earth, a waste at this school, and most importantly a Waste for this campaign.” That message called the student government candidate a “slave” and used a racial slur, a report said.

The third message texted to — and as it turns out from — the student, contained a warning to drop out of the race and the fourth read, in part, “COMEONE your black!!! lol your a joke for even trying to run,” according to a police report.

Michah Onditi, 16, who eventually lost the election, and became class Vice-President, no longer attends St. Peter’s, but the entire incident has been thrown into a new light with the revelation that the student who sent the vile text messages was……..Michah Onditi.

“The entire Saint Peter’s Prep community is relieved that this extremely distressing incident has found closure, and we commend the various law enforcement officials for their diligent work on this case over the past months,” said school spokesman James Horan, who confirmed the results of the probe after its disclosure by a police source.

At the time Onditi received the texts, he notified his parents and school officials, who in turn reported the incident to the police. The police, however, were unable to immediately to identify the sender due to the texts being sent through a smartphone app called TEXTME.

In an interview with The Jersey Journal at the time the texts were sent, the boy’s father said his son was “extremely nervous and feels threatened” and did not want to be interviewed.

“He is the type of boy who does not want any kind of trouble,” the father said. “It’s so sad. He doesn’t want the image of the school to be tainted.”

“It is a predominantly white school and there may be a few sections of the school who are fearful of a new face trying to get in office,” the father also said at the time.

There has been no comment from the family since the hoax was revealed, and Jersey City police spokesman, Bob McHugh, has also refused to comment due to Onditi being a minor.

Sex Ed For Kindergartners, Or What's Left For The Left To Destroy?

Chicago has a lot of problems, as if having Rahm Emanuel as mayor wasn’t enough.

Out of over 500 murders in 2012, 443 were committed by firearms despite the city having a near total ban on guns, giving the city a higher murder rate than New York City, which has nearly TRIPLE the population of Chicago. The third largest public school system in the nation, with approximately 431,000 students, had a $1 BILLION (yes, you read that correctly) budget shortfall, which forced the layoffs of 2,968 total school employees - 1,456 of those were teachers - as well as the closings of fifty schools. Seriously, the list could go on and on.

The latest curriculum addition from the wondrous and wonderful public school district, instituted at the beginning of this school year (and remember, they were expecting to be $1 billion in the red this year): Sexual education for all children in the school district. Every child, every grade – even kindergartners. I very much wish that was a joke, but sadly, it isn’t.

None of the educators or politicians seemed to have a big problem with this, either. After all, they tried, and failed, to pass a bill for the entire state when President Obama was just lowly state senator Obama. SB99, which is, as far as I can tell, as similar to these new regulations as to be virtually identical, pushed for eliminating all references to marriage in the Illinois sex education code, and required that all material used in classrooms be age – and developmentally appropriate and medically accurate. It would also have expanded sexual education to students in kindergarten through fifth grade and mandated that students be taught the age of consent, positive communication skills, and that they [the student] have the power to control behavior.

I’m quite sure that the school district, as a whole, has the best of intentions. The problem is whether or not sexual education is a role the State should have in the lives of our children. Will parents be allowed to decide whether or not their kids are exposed to this until the parents believe the time is right? Remember, we’re talking about children as young as five.

I’m not against sexual education. I just happen to believe that parents, and parents alone, should make the determination when that education should begin. It should certainly not be mandatory for a child in kindergarten. I went to Catholic schools for most of my formative years, and even there we had some form of sexual education. It wasn’t much, given the teaching source, and it certainly focused more on abstinence than anything else, but it got the job done. My parents filled in the gaps, and therein lies the point of this blog post.

We can debate the usefulness of sex-ed courses, and the role it does or doesn’t have on teen pregnancy, teen sexual activity, the transmission or prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, etc., and that is a worthy debate, but when 79% of students in your school district can’t read at their own grade level, is teaching sex-ed to 5-year-olds really the best and most cost-efficient use of money for an already cash-strapped school district?

One thing I’d really like to know – are they going to teach the kids that abstinence is the only tried-and-true, 100% guaranteed method to prevent pregnancy and STD’s? I’m not going to hold my breath…

This is just one, glaringly obvious example of why conservatives say there's more indoctrination than education in the public school system. ~ Hunter

Jerry Brown, MENSA Member

Folks, this is one for the record books. Seriously, we've known for years that former, and present, Governor of California, Jerry Brown is a few fries short of a Happy Meal, but his latest attempt, and I cannot emphasize attempt enough, at intelligent discourse is laughable by orders of magnitude.

Gov. Brown, MENSA member extraordinaire, has decreed that the wildfires plaguing California at the moment are the result of...........wait for it...........global warming.

Yes, you did, indeed, read that correctly.

The Republican Party is "in denial" about climate change, California Gov. Jerry Brown said on Sunday, suggesting the wildfires in his state were related to global warming.

“As we send billions and billions of tons of heat-trapping gases, we get heat and we get fires and we get what we’re seeing," the Democratic governor said on ABC's "This Week." Major wildfires in the San Diego area, due in part to extreme drought, forced thousands of residents in the area to evacuate.

“Humanity is on a collision course with nature, and we’re just going to have to adapt to it the best we can," he added.

The governor also took a swipe at Republicans for denying climate change, which he said was likely to blame for the increase in wildfires. “It is true that there’s virtually no Republican who accepts the science that virtually is unanimous," Brown said. "There is no scientific question. There’s just political denial for various reasons best known to those people in denial. But whatever the thoughts of the Republicans, we in California are on the front lines.”

I, and others far better, have written extensively about the absolute myth of human-caused global warming. I'm not a scientist, but I do understand that science is never settled, and as virtually all of the computer models that global warming believers use have been wildly wrong, the facts are generally on our side, at least for the time being. Our understanding of things we've taken for granted for decades is changing every day based on new studies, etc. Anyone who says the science is irrefutable is pushing a political and/or economic agenda. They've also neglected to tell these scientists, all of whom have impeccable credentials, not to mention a number of them were virulent believers of the global warming movement.

It never ceases to amaze me just how stupid liberals can be. It's almost as if they beg people to ridicule them. They certainly don't make it difficult to do so, and Jerry Brown is one of the easiest. Then again, that puts him on the same level with the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, and Barbara Lee.

I feel for ya, California. I really do. ~ Hunter

Eric Holder, Hypocrisy Personified

In a commencement speech given at Morgan State University on Saturday, United States Attorney General Eric Holder told the graduating class of the historically black college that several high profile displays of racial bigotry were "not the true markers of the struggle still that must be waged, or the work that still needs to be done - because the greatest threats do not announce themselves in screaming headlines."


While not calling out Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling or Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy by name, instead referring to them obliquely as "jarring reminders of the discrimination - and the isolated, repugnant, racist views - that in some places have yet to be overcome," Mr. Holder seems to forget his own "subtle" racism.  One glaringly obvious example that comes to mind is the Black Panther voter intimidation in Philadelphia, PA, in which Holder refused to prosecute the thugs who were caught on video threatening white voters.


Holder testified before Congress after the 2008 presidential election, taking offense at comments from well-known civil rights activist Bartle Bull, who called the actions of the Black Panthers "the most serious example of voter intimidation" he had ever seen at the polls, by saying, "When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60's to try to get the right to vote for African-Americans, to compare what people subjected to that with what happened in Philadelphia ... to describe it in those terms does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line for my people."


Think about those last two words for a minute - "my people."  He wasn't talking about Americans, my friends; he was talking about black Americans.  The highest law enforcement job in the land, a job in which every law is supposed to be applied equally to all people, regardless of color, is held by someone who, by his own words and actions, seems to be just as much of a racist as those democrats who persecuted blacks during the Civil Rights Era.  Why people don't seem to have a bigger problem with this is utterly beyond me.


The United States of America still has much work to do.  There is still racism here, and it certainly is much more subtle than it was in days gone by.  I submit to you, once again, that it's the democrats who are the true racists.  Their history shows it, beyond a doubt.  Their actions today should show it, but people refuse to see.  Affirmative Action anyone?  To believe one group of people needs special help over and above what help is offered to other groups is RACISM.  In essence, you're telling that group that they can't make it on their own, that they can't succeed on their own merits, that they need help.


Nah.... No racism there...


It really shouldn't surprise anyone that Eric Holder chose racism as the topic of his commencement speech, given that this administration has made racism, or the perception of racism, as one of its main ideological underpinnings.  Let's not mention this administration's supporters, whose claims of racism for the simple act of disagreeing with the policies of this administration are simultaneously maddening and laughable. ~ Hunter

My "Coming Out" Announcement

I'm here today because I'm straight. And because maybe I can make a difference. To help others have an easier and more hopeful time. Regardless, for me, I feel a personal obligation and a social responsibility.

It's weird because here I am, a blogger, representing – at least in some sense – a culture that has had ever-increasing, strident, and often unreasoning demands placed upon us. Demands for tolerance, special status, and of censorship.

It was difficult for me to reach the decision to make this announcement, but it was time. I would appreciate your support as my family and I move forward in the face of increasing hostility towards heterosexuals. Thank you.

If you've followed current events recently with the athletes and at least one Hollyweird celebrity “coming out,” you'll know exactly why I wrote the above. Yes, I paraphrased, and parodied, Ellen Page's coming out announcement, but I did so to illustrate the absurdity of it – not that she is gay, but that she felt the need to announce it to the world. Does she truly and honestly believe that she's the first lesbian actress? Or even the first openly lesbian actress?

NBA playerJason Collins comes out of the closet, and he's hailed as a hero. Tim Tebow is open about his Christianity, and he's vilified.

Michael Sam announces he's gay, and nobody bats an eye. Why? Because no one cares that he's gay. What people care about is whether he'll be a good professional football player, especially fans of the St. Louis Rams. Given his performance at the NFL Combine there's some reasonable doubt.

My point is that most people don't want to hear about someone's private life – hence the reason it's called private. Personally, I don't need to know who's sleeping with whom. It's none of my business, just as who I'm sleeping with is none of yours. ~ Hunter

The Politics Of Race In Politics

Ladies and gentlemen, I have a perplexing and important question to ask, and I'm extremely interested in hearing your answers. Please don't hesitate to leave your answer in the comment section below. Ready or not, here comes the question...


Have we reached the absolute rock bottom with “identity politics”? If we haven't, I personally believe we're so close to the bottom as to find it virtually indistinguishable from the actual bottom.

Late last week, democrat (lowercase for disrespect) Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, who is also the Assistant democratic “leader” in the House of Representatives took a verbal shot at the South Carolina Republican senator, Tim Scott, saying, “If you call progress electing a person with the pigmentation that he has, who votes against the interest and aspirations of 95 percent of the black people in South Carolina, then I guess that’s progress.” Really?!

Isn't the job of every senator, from every state, to represent every citizen of their respective states? Isn't the entire point of having a state-wide campaign to attempt to appeal to more of the voters in the entire state than your opponent? I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure there's no senator for the east/west or north/south sections of any state. I'm also positive there's no senator exclusively for blacks or whites or hispanics or asians, etc.

Clyburn's remark comes just over a week after another black democrat representative made disparaging comments about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. A remark which Clyburn refused to denounce, by the way. Mississippi democrat Bennie Thompson described the accomplished Justice Thomas as an “Uncle Tom” and said Thomas “doesn't like being black” during an interview on a Mississippi radio station.

Everyone remembers Harry Reid-iculous lambasting Nevada rancher, Cliven Bundy, for his use of the word “negro” - something that is utterly absurd, given that it was just a few short years ago that Mr. Reid-iculous used that very word when describing then-candidate Obama. The response from the democrat “leadership” to these latest racial slurs – crickets chirping.

While I find Clyburn's and Thompson's remarks remarkably disgusting, close-minded, and certainly divisive, I do not find them necessarily “racist.” They are, however, stunning examples of racialism.

Racialism is defined in Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary as “a theory that race determines human traits and capacities.” The World English Dictionary definition is “1. the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics determined by heredity factors and that this endows some races with an intrinsic superiority over others. 2. abusive or aggressive behavior towards members of another race on the basis of such a belief.”

It's the last definition that's most applicable to Clyburn and Thompson, but not in that blacks have an “intrinsic superiority.” Liberals like Clyburn and Thompson, by virtue of their ties with the democrat party, believe that black people have an intrinsic inferiority. Just look at the democrat party's record of institutionalized racism. Could there be a more dichotomous position for someone to take?

By attacking Senator Scott and Justice Thomas, Clyburn and Thompson have essentially said without saying that they believe blacks to be incapable of critical thinking and should fall in line with what their “leaders” say they should do. They've sold out Martin Luther King's dream by insisting that the color of one's skin does matter, apparently more than the content of their character. Clyburn's slam against Senator Scott, in which he effectively says Scott votes against the color of his own skin, is a particularly blatant example of this tribal thinking.

The democrat party is the party that divides people into groups based on economics, race, religion, and a whole host of other categories, none of which have anything whatsoever to do with a person's character. They are the originators of identity politics. Look no further than the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow, the fight against every single piece of civil rights legislation proposed after the end of the Civil War, often filibustering them. This is a matter of historical record. Also a matter of history is that the first twenty-three black members of Congress were Republican. Coincidence? I think not. The first black democrat wasn't elected until 1935. Again, I don't think this was a coincidence.

People blame the mythical, and I emphasize mythical, “party switch” or “ideology switch” for the nearly wholesale departure of blacks from the Republican party – that they became suddenly, inexplicably, and virulently racist, and the democrats became the party of inclusion. I hate to disabuse them of this notion, but it was George Wallace standing against desegregation, not Republicans.

I reiterate – the primary function of a senator from any state is to represent the interests of every citizen of their state. Ethnicity has no place in politics. No person should be elected because they are, or are not, any particular race, and they certainly should not be expected to vote according to skin color. Clyburn, Thompson, and the countless others who interject race into politics are repugnant, and are the very antithesis of MLK's dream. It's time to vote them out of office and replace them with people who value all people. ~ Hunter

Photo ID Hypocrisy From The Left, Or It's Not Rocket Science

In early February of this year, the NAACP held a rally/protest in Raleigh, NC. The subject of the rally was to protest a Republican-led effort to pass a Voter I.D law. A law which passed, by the way. The requirement for a photo ID to vote in North Carolina begins in 2016. As far as I'm concerned, it's long overdue.

The basic premise of their protest, which was completely predictable, was that requiring a photo ID to vote will disenfranchise minority voters disproportionately, making it an undue and unreasonable burden to exercise their right to vote. Do they have even the foggiest idea of just how stupid they sound when making this claim?

Here's a short list of things that people can do that require a photo ID:

1. Buying alcohol
2. Buying cigarettes
3. Open a bank account
4. Apply for welfare
5. Apply for food stamps
6. Rent/buy a house
7. Rent/lease/buy/drive a car
8. Apply for Medicaid/Social Security
9. Apply for Unemployment
10. Apply for a job
11. Get on a plane
12. Get married
13. Buy a firearm
14. Adopt a pet
15. Rent a hotel room
16. Apply for a hunting/fishing license
17. Buy a cell phone
18. Visit a casino
19. Pick up a prescription
20. Buy certain cold/allergy medications
21. Donate blood
22. Buy a “Mature” rated video game
23. Buy nail polish at CVS

I'm certain that this is but a partial list, but to get back to the NAACP – imagine, if you will, the hypocrisy of holding a protest against requiring a photo ID to VOTE, while requiring a photo ID to attend the protest.

Yes, you read that correctly. Amazing, isn't it?

Wait – didn't they disenfranchise a lot of people who would have otherwise attended the protest? Maybe the protestors should have protested the protest.

I have an idea. Instead of protesting/complaining/whining about requiring a photo ID to vote, which is arguably our highest civic duty, perhaps the liberals/democrats/race baiters could use the time they would put into organizing the protests/complaints/whine sessions to do something constructive – like helping those who don't have a photo ID get a photo ID.

This isn't rocket science, people. It's just common sense. ~ Hunter

More Fast Food Foolishness

McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, KFC, Papa John's, Taco Bell, Arby's, Hardees, and presumably several other fast food companies will have people demonstrating against the wages they pay their employees next week, in a planned protest taking place in 150 U.S. Cities, as well as 30 other countries.

Funny part is, people are calling on these companies to raise wages to a point where people can support a family with them. Here we go again...
Notice anything “special” about these companies? I do – there is not a one of them that requires an ounce of actual skill to work for them.

These are entry-level jobs, primarily intended for young people. You're not supposed to raise a family with what you get paid working these jobs. The purpose of these types of jobs are exactly what the term “entry-level” implies - entry into the workforce They're to be used as a stepping-stone to a better job with better pay after you put in some time. You acquire the better job and pay with experience and/or education. You don't walk into a high paying job working at places like these when just about anyone can walk in off the street and do that job.

The protesters are calling for a “living wage” of $15 an hour. Yep, you read that correctly - $15 per hour. Oh, by the way – these protests aren't being organized by the workers of the companies. They're being put together by outside forces, primarily the SEIU, in an attempt to unionize the workers. What that means is that it's less about the wages than it is about a union trying to force it's way into the industry.


Let's assume for a minute that the protests and unions are successful in their attempts. The workers get what they want – more money – and the unions get what they want – more people paying them union dues. What are the unintended, yet totally foreseeable, consequences of these “successes?”


Well, one consequence would be that a good chunk of the additional pay a worker would receive is likely to disappear because of the union dues. How long before the workers start complaining about the exorbitant dues, then clamoring for even more money to make up the difference yet again?


The second consequence would be the higher prices that would necessarily follow any wage increase of the size they're asking. This, in turn, would have a myriad of effects. As prices rise, fewer people would pay them. Fast food isn't a necessity in life, like gas for your car. It can be cut out of one's life fairly easily. Higher wages would also mean fewer jobs. Companies have to operate under a certain profit margin or it's not worth being in business, and the fast food industry historically has a small profit margin. How long before it becomes ridiculous to stay open as profit margins shrink further? Franchises having to pay more for jobs that aren't worth the amount of pay being demanded for them would lower the already small profit margin to the point of unsustainability, forcing first layoffs, then closures.


I would be remiss in my duty if I didn't mention that the individual restaurants that will be targeted by these protests are franchises, owned and operated by regular people, just like you and me, and not the parent company. McDonald's, for example, only owns about 11% of its restaurants. The franchisees are the ones responsible for setting the wages they pay their workers. The executives, salaries are under such scrutiny by those outside influences organizing the protests, have little to do with the individual franchises except to set the overarching company policies, the menu, etc. The only thing forcing the individual restaurants to pay ridiculously high wages would lead to is the closure of the franchises. It certainly won't hurt the parent company.


Earlier I said that no skill is required to work for most of these companies. I would know. About 20 years ago, I worked for Pizza Hut. I started as a delivery driver/dish washer. In about three months, I made assistant manager, despite having nothing more than a high school diploma. I didn't go “on strike” or protest for higher pay: I worked my butt off to be the best damn delivery driver/dishwasher the company had ever seen. Was I? I have no idea. But I showed my willingness to work hard, no matter what I was doing. That's why I made assistant manager as quickly as I did.


I know I'm probably going to catch hell for this post, but I don't care. Any basic business economics class will tell you that wages are based on what the market is willing to pay based upon averages of what a job is worth. Yes, there's high and low extremes, but economics is economics. You wouldn't go spend $800 for a flatscreen TV that you can get elsewhere for $350, would you? Why, then, should employers be expected to pay more than a job is worth paying?


Yes, it really IS that simple. ~ Hunter



Liberals Are Hypocrites (You're SHOCKED, I Know)

“We are anguished as mothers, grandmothers and lovers of children that this is what the children, the girls in Nigeria are worth,” Sheila Jackson Lee said while holding up $12, the amount of money the girls are said to have been sold for by their kidnappers. “And so our first command and demand is to use all resources to bring the terrorist thugs to justice.”

“We want our girls back and we want them back now. We want this terrorist group brought to justice, and we want the slaughter and the intimidation, the trafficking, the murders, we want this stopped today,” Barbara Lee added.

“The seizure of these young women by this radical extremist group, Boko Haram, is abominable. It's criminal, it's an act of terrorism, and it really merits the fullest response possible.”

These first two paragraphs were uttered by democrat members of Congress in response to the kidnapping of nearly three hundred young Nigerian girls by the terrorist organization, Boko Haram. The third paragraph is a direct quote from Hillary Clinton, answering a question from ABC's Robin Roberts at the Philanthropy New York's 35^th Annual Meeting at the Ford Foundation on Wednesday.

While I take issue with Ms. Jackson Lee attempting to command anyone to do anything as a member of Congress, what I'd really like to do in this post is point out the blatantly obvious hypocrisy in their strong words.

Now I'd like to share the strong words from Sheila Jackson Lee about the terrorist attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, Libya on 11 SEP 12. You remember, the attack in which Ambassador Chris Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service Information Officer Sean Smith, and C.I.A. Contractors and former Navy SEAL team members Ty Woods and Glen Doherty were killed? *******crickets chirping*******

That's right, ladies and gentlemen – no calls, demands, or commands to “use all resources to bring the terrorist thugs to justice.” Hmmm... I wonder why that is...

I'm sure Congresswoman Barbara Lee must have said something about bringing the full resources of the United States to bear in finding out what, exactly, happened in Benghazi that night, or at least bringing the terrorists to justice. *******wind blowing*******

Nope. Nothing. Not a word. What the....?

I know former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just has to be calling for a complete and thorough investigation into the events of 11 SEP 12, as well as throwing her full support behind the new Congressional Select Committee, headed by South Carolina Representative Trey Gowdy, which will be doing the investigating. Well..... Not exactly.

When Robin Roberts asked Clinton if she was "satisfied with the answers" and "content with what you know what happened," Clinton replied: "Absolutely."

"I mean, of course there are a lot of reasons why, despite all of the hearings, all of the information that's provided, some choose not to be satisfied and choose to continue to move forward," Clinton said.

"That's their choice, and I do not believe there's any reason for it to continue in this way, but they get to call the shots in the Congress.” Yes, she actually said that.

Of course, can we really expect anything more from the woman who told the families of the dead when their flag-draped coffins were sitting right in front of them that “we'll get” the guy “who made the video” and essentially shouted from a rooftop while testifying in front of Congress “What difference, at this point, does it make?!” when referring to what reason the four men died?

Nobody in this administration has told the truth about the events in Benghazi from day one. Most of them can't even bring themselves to call it an act of terrorism without being pressed hard on it, and democrats in the House and Senate blindly and actively support this administration's blatantly ridiculous talking points, stories, and outright lies about Benghazi.

The saddest thing of all is they don't seem to even want to so much as think about perhaps pondering the possibility of thinking about feeling badly about the four Americans who were brutally murdered that day. In fact, I submit they've done as much as they possibly could to block any investigation into the matter. They're still trying to marginalize Benghazi. Just today, Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called the Select Committee investigation a “diversion.”

For the record, I find the kidnapping of the Nigerian girls from their boarding school, and the subsequent threats tho sell them into slavery and marriages absolutely deplorable, and I hope beyond hope that karma catches up to those Boko Haram bastards sooner rather than later. I believe that the United States has a moral imperative to do everything within its power to do what it can to bring the Nigerian girls home to their families, as safely and quickly as possible.

The hypocrisy of the democrats concerning the two incidents is certainly predictable. It is, however, still disconcerting to me that they give the appearance of caring more for the kidnapped girls than they did for four American citizens. Calling for the United States to use “all resources” to bring back the Nigerian girls, while remaining virtually silent on Benghazi, except to denigrate those of us who have done our level best to keep alive, just speaks volumes, doesn't it?

It's no coincidence that the name of one of the Facebook pages I'm involved with is “Liberal are Hypocrites.” ~ Hunter

The Truth About Islam - Part Two

22,892: In the 35 days since I wrote the original “The Truth About Islam” post, there have been 160 new attacks with fatalities committed by the followers of mohammed. That's an average of just less than five attacks per day.

22,892: That number includes 37 people, including 11 children, killed in 6 known attacks committed over five days since Friday, 02 MAY 2014. That's an average of just over 7 people per day mercilessly slaughtered by islamists.

Makes you wonder why Christianity is blamed for all the world's ills, doesn't it? Last I checked, the number of people killed this year by Christians acting in the name of Christianity was exactly..........wait for it.........NONE. I know, you're as shocked as I am.

Between 26 APR 14 and 02 MAY 14, there were:

48 jihad attacks

16 “allahu akbar” suicide attacks
363 dead bodies (averaging a little under 52 per day)
725 critically injured in these attacks

The above numbers represent a fairly slow week, compared to other weeks I've seen.

Let's look at the totals for just April 2014:

203 jihad attacks

23 countries

1571 dead bodies (averaging just over 52 people murdered in the name of allah [lowercase to denote disrespect] per day)

2452 critically injured

The numbers for the entirety of 2013 are bringing the reality of the “religion” of “peace” will bring some additional clarity to this post:

2801 jihad attacks

51 countries
16,170 dead bodies (average of just over 44 people killed per day)
29,432 critically injured

To put this in a little perspective, the estimate - which is based on new, very thorough research - of people killed during the entire *500* years of the Medieval and the Spanish Inquisitions is about 6,000 deaths. While those deaths are reprehensible, and all Catholics lament them, it's not quite the same, is it? The acknowledged average estimate is around 30,000.

Now, to shine the clear light of truth upon this entire post. From 07 APR 14 to 05 MAY 14, a total of 1,382 people (just over 46 people per day) were murdered, in cold blood, by the followers of mohammed, in the name of a socio-political ideology which is bent on global domination, masquerading as a religion (sounds an awful lot like Naziism, doesn't it? The same cult-like aspects are there). The 1,382 does not include the estimated 300 killed in Nigeria by Boko Haram just yesterday.

I have no patience for the people who say that the Inquisition was just as bad as islamic terrorism, especially given that anyone with half a brain, and five minutes can easily find this information online. The next time someone brings up the Inquisition, you now have the facts to refute their arguments.

I know some will say I'm “islamophobic.” That's fine; it's not true, mind you - but I can handle that. To those people, however, I submit this: A phobia is an “unreasoning fear” of something. With numbers like I've detailed above, you have to ask yourselves one question: Is it really “unreasoning fear” when their mantra is “Convert or Die”? ~ Hunter

With Great Rights Come Great Responsibilities

I think it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of people know the Spiderman mantra, even if they don't really know where it came from - “With great power comes great responsibility.” Yes, that simple bit of wisdom actually came from a comic book. Go figure...

In a nutshell, that phrase means that if you have a certain power or advantage over others, it's up to you to use that gift responsibly. It doesn't make you better than others who don't possess the same gift; it just makes you different.

That being said, I'd like to make a similar statement to apply to our system of government - “With the great rights guaranteed by our Constitution, it's your great responsibility to maintain those rights - not just for you, but for all.”

How is it that our citizenry, with one of the most powerful tools ever created at their disposal – the internet - a tool that people as recently as our own parents didn't have, can't be bothered to research what this nation is about; how and why it was founded, the wars we've fought, the people we've freed, the people we had a part in enslaving, the good we've done across the globe? Everything, all of it – the good, the bad, the ugly, the beautiful. The angel's wings and halos our brave fighting men and women have earned fighting for other people's freedom. America's history is at everyone's fingertips; all you need to do is look for it.

Here's the deal – our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the most brilliant documents ever written, set forth by the most brilliant men ever assembled in one place, at one time, are not safe. There's no fail-safe, however, written into those documents to protect them from us. We are the guarantors of the freedoms enumerated for us, not the government. If anything, the government has proved itself incapable of safeguarding our freedoms, especially since the Woodrow Wilson era. It's up to us to teach those around us what America is, her role in the world. Teach your children what it means to be an American, and how to take the responsibility of that seriously.

We are the stewards of our own rights, not the government. It's our responsibility to ensure future generations have the same rights we've enjoyed. We're failing miserably in that responsibility, and our children and grandchildren will be the ones to pay the price. ~ Hunter

Cinco De Mayo Flag T-Shirt Ban, Or When Did Patriotism Become a BAD Thing?

Everyone knows that the 5^th of May is celebrated by those of Mexican descent, and nobody should have a problem with that. To celebrate one's heritage is to honor where you came from and the sacrifices your ancestors made to get you to where you are. I am a very proud Irishman myself, even with all the negative stereotypes involved with that. To understand where this post is going, you need a little background into the history of the Cinco de Mayo holiday, especially in America.

Spanish for “fifth of May,” Cinco de Mayo is a celebration held in the United States and Mexico, most notably in the Mexican state of Puebla, obviously on the 5^th of May. Originating in the American West in communities of Mexican descent to commemorate the cause of freedom and democracy, today the date is a celebration of Mexican heritage and pride. In Puebla, the day commemorates the Mexican Army's unlikely victory over vastly superior French forces on 5 MAY 1862.

Cinco de Mayo has its roots in the French occupation of Mexico, which took place in the aftermath of the Mexican-American War of 1846-48, the Mexican Civil War of 1858, and the 1860 Reform Wars. These wars left the Mexican Treasury nearly bankrupt. In July of 1862, Mexican President Benito Juarez declared a two-year moratorium on all foreign debt payments, prompting Great Britain, France, and Spain to send fleets to Veracruz. The Spanish and English negotiated with the Mexican government and sent their fleets home.

The French, ruled by Napolean III at the time, were unmollified. Late in 1861, seeking to establish a Latin empire favorable to French interests, an 8,000 strong French force stormed ashore at Veracruz, encountering little meaningful resistance and sending the Mexican government into retreat. Moving towards Mexico City from Veracruz, the French suffered a decisive, though relatively short-lived, defeat at the hands of an ill-equipped and much smaller Mexican Army of 4,500 men at the forts of Loreto and Guadalupe, near Puebla.

The American Cinco de Mayo celebration originated in communities of Mexican descent in the American West, Southwest, and Northwest in the 1860s. Mexicans and Latinos living in California during the American Civil War are credited with being the first to celebrate Cinco de Mayo in the United States. It grew in popularity and evolved into a celebration of Mexican culture and heritage, first in areas with large Mexican-American populations, like Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston. Eventually it expanded across the United States. On June 7, 2005, the U.S. Congress issued a Concurrent Resolution calling on the President of the United States to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe Cinco de Mayo with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

In the United States Cinco de Mayo has taken on a significance beyond that in Mexico. To celebrate, many display Cinco de Mayo banners while school districts hold special events to educate pupils about its historical significance. Special events and celebrations highlight Mexican culture, especially in its music and regional dancing. Examples include baile folklórico and mariachi demonstrations held annually at the Plaza del Pueblo de Los Angeles, near Olvera Street. Commercial interests in the United States have capitalized on the celebration, advertising Mexican products and services, with an emphasis on beverages, foods, and music.

"Public memory of the Cinco de Mayo was socially, and deliberately, constructed during the American Civil War by Latinos responding to events and changes around them," says historian David E. Hayes-Bautista. "The Cinco de Mayo is not, in its origins, a Mexican holiday at all but rather an American one, created by Latinos in California in the middle of the 19th century. (David E. Hayes-Bautista, "El Cinco de Mayo: An American Tradition (2011) p 5)

I think it's time for me to reiterate that there is nothing wrong with celebrating your heritage. I've detailed in other posts how I believe it is wrong to place your heritage before your American citizenry, and how multiculturalism is destroying this nation, formerly known as “the great melting-pot” of the world. The American culture, into which all immigrants are supposed to assimilate, is being subsumed by those who refuse to do just that – assimilate.

That being said, can someone explain how and why it became a bad thing to celebrate being an American here in AMERICA?! Late in February of this year, a federal court ruled that a high school in California is not violating the civil rights of patriotic students by banning them from wearing American Flag t-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. The school's reasoning for the ban – fears of “racial violence,” saying they might enflame Latino students celebrating today.

I understand that the school has a history of gang fights and racial tension, but are the administrators there really stupid enough to believe that it's all one way? Let's not mention that there isn't even an American “race.” Why, then, is it considered okay for Latinos to celebrate their heritage, and what is essentially an American “holiday,” but not for others to celebrate their own heritage? Did no one consider that celebrating Cinco de Mayo might just “enflame” racial tensions the other way?

My family has a saying: “If you do for one, you do for all.” It's something I've tried to follow, with varying success, for my entire life. If you apply that logic to the American Flag t-shirt ban, what the school should have done is ban all ethnic celebrations today, or any day for that matter. It's not something in which I'm truly in favor, but there's no excuse for banning one display of patriotism, while permitting another display.

It's beyond disgusting that a school, and a federal court, IN AMERICA, think that it's somehow appropriate to essentially stifle American citizens' Right to Free Speech for fear of offending others. It's beyond offensive that a display of patriotism for the nation in which we live is somehow considered inflammatory in the country in which we live.

Patriotism is not, nor should it ever be considered, a BAD THING, nor should it be discouraged. Indeed, it should be readily and heartily encouraged. Patriotism got us through the Revolution, World War 2, and September 11th, just to name a few. Patriotism is still a primary motivator for those who join our all-volunteer armed forces. I don't think anyone can truly say that those are bad things for America. ~ Hunter