Are they all they're cracked up to be?

There's an article in yesterday's Dallas Morning News about electric cars -- everybody must go green, you know. I just can't see that there will be that many takers for these things no matter how high gas goes. Here's why:

1) They'll cost you almost as much, and in some cases more, than a regular vehicle. Prices range from $7,000 to $35,000.

2) The maximum speed of the two lower priced models is 30 mph. The maximum of the one that's over $30,000 is 75 mph.

3) The range per charge is 30 miles, 50 miles, and 200 miles, respectively on the lowest, middle and highest priced cars.

I question how green these vehicles really are. How long does it take to charge them to the max, and how much electricity do they draw? We already have experienced rolling blackouts on very hot days. If everyone has an electric car, what will that do to consumption when all those cars are charging? How long will the battery last? As long as a regular car battery?

There is such a thing as paying for convenience. All you green folks can have the glorified golf carts. Give me my 4-door, 18-gallon tank, gasoline powered sedan, and I'll wave to you on my way to Dallas!

"Dallas man plugging cars that won't cause gas pain." The Dallas Morning News; July 30, 2008; p. 1A.

"I have no mercy for you." Susan Atkins, 1969

If you were alive in August 1969, you remember the horror we all felt when seven people in California were brutally murdered in what appeared to be some sort of ritual killing. Movie actress Sharon Tate, four visitors to her home, and Leno and Rosemary LaBianca were stabbed repeatedly and their blood used to leave scrawled messages.

If you weren't alive then, perhaps you've read Vince Bugliosi's account of the murders and ensuing trial -- Helter Skelter. It is a book not easy to put down, and I promise it will give you nightmares. The perpetrators of these crimes were heartless, cold, automatons controlled by perhaps the most evil, maniacal person this world has ever seen -- Charles Manson. These weren't murders committed because of rage, a desire for money, or jealousy. They were murders with no motive other than Charles Manson's drug-fueled fantasies.

Susan Atkins was one of Manson's "family." She has now been in prison for almost 40 years. She is dying of brain cancer. She petitioned the Board of Parole for a compassionate release. In 1993 when Miss Atkins came up for parole, she spoke of Sharon Tate. "She asked me to let her baby live. I told her I didn't have mercy for her." Her brother said, "Please let us be with Susan in private in her last days, to pray with her and give our last goodbyes."

I'm sure Leno and Rosemary LaBiana's children would have appreciated being able to pray with their parents before they died. I'm sure Sharon Tate's husband and sisters would have liked to be with her in private in her last days. I'm sure Abigail Folger's family would have liked to say goodbye to her.

I feel compassion toward anyone facing their last days. But that doesn't erase what Susan Atkins did. She should have been put to death 40 years ago for the atrocities she committed. I hope she has used that 40 years to make her peace with God. As far as the California Parole Board -- they have no mercy for her. Her request has been denied.

"Manson follower is denied release." The Dallas Morning News; July 16, 2008; p. 9A.

Nobody tells us what to do!

In case you haven't noticed, our country is going down the tubes. Yesterday's news reported on just another instance of how we've placed the emphasis on politically correct to the point of absurdity. And what's really disappointing is the stance the Bush Administration takes on this issue.

In 1993, Jennifer Ertman, 14, and Elizabeth Pena, 16, were raped, sodomized, and strangled with a belt and shoelaces after they stumbled upon a gang initiation in a Houston, Texas, park. The girls were taking a shortcut home when they encountered Jose Medellin and seven other gang members. Jose Medellin, an illegal alien, confessed to the rapes and murders. He was sentenced to death.

Even though it has been 14 years since sentence was passed on this animal, federal officials say Texas will be "rushing to judgment and endangering Americans abroad" if they carry out the sentence on the August 5 execution date. Why are they taking such a stand? Because the International Court of Justice, an organization which has absolutely no authority over a sovereign nation, has said so. President Bush ordered states three years ago to review the cases of 51 Mexican nationals on death row, including Medellin, as directed by the International Court. The Supreme Court, however, said individual states are not bound by the treaty. Now some know-it-all, bleeding heart, liberal congressmen from California are trying to tell us how to conduct our business. They've introduced a bill to require states to come into compliance with the International Court order.

Hooray for Rick Perry -- his office says, "the governor isn't feeling any pressure on this simply because he is here to uphold the laws of the state of Texas and not some foreign court in Europe. Two young girls were brutally gang raped and murdered, and the governor is not willing to say that any foreign national is going to get any additional protection under the law than a Texas citizen would."

Hey -- we're Texans! If you don't want to die here, don't kill anybody here! Fill up that syringe!

"Federal officials try to block Texas execution." The Dallas Morning News; July 28, 2008; p. 1A.

Check the edge, Bob.

In a letter to the editor in yesterday's Dallas Morning News (p. 3D), Bob Linker of Holly Lake Ranch, Texas, comments on a previous article about the new dollar coins. Bob says the article left out the fact that "In God we trust" does not appear on the coins. He says a citizen boycott of the new dollar has been organized.

If citizens want to boycott the new dollar, more power to them, but they better find another reason. If Bob will look on the edge of his George Washington dollar, he'll find "e pluribus unum" and "In God we trust." If it's not there, it's one of the few mint errors that slipped through, and I suspect Bob will reconsider the boycott as he can probably get quite a bit more than the one dollar face value for the coin.

Rude Runner or Aware Athlete?

There was a letter to the editor in The Dallas Morning News, July 24, on page 6B. The title over it was "Rude runner." So that you'll understand my response, I'm going to transcribe the entire letter:

"I run every weekday morning through my neighborhood. Most runners I come across are considerate and always willing to help out a fellow runner.

That is, until this morning, when I asked another runner if he had a cellphone. He mumbled a barely audible 'no' and kept running. He didn't bother to ask if I needed any assistance; he just kept going.

The problem was that there was a fire alarm going off in the church across the street from where I was at the time. I had already tried to ring a few doorbells, but no one wants to answer the door at 5 a.m., and, given the state of fear that everyone lives in, I must try to understand this.

But I cannot understand the runner who doesn't come to aid (sic) of another runner. At the very least, he could have asked if everything was all right, or if I needed help. Needless to say, I am highly disappointed and discouraged by his lack of courtesy. I could only hope that, by the time I made it home to make the call to 911 myself, the church was not engulfed in flames.

Candace George, Dallas"

Well -- Essie May fully understands why the "rude runner" didn't stop. I wouldn't either if a total stranger came up to me at 5 a.m. and asked if I had a cellphone. On the other hand, if the stranger ran up and yelled, "That church is on fire" I would whip out my cellphone and dial 911. Anyway, the runner said he didn't have one, so the point is moot. What did she want him to do that she wasn't doing herself? And why didn't she holler after him, "I need help!"

Candace was obviously not in distress as she was on her own two feet, not bleeding, not clutching her chest and reeling, not being pursued by a chainsaw-wielding psycho, and not disoriented. And I'm just a little confused -- why is it OK, ("given the state of fear that everyone lives in") for someone not to answer the door, but it's not OK for a pedestrian to avoid being accosted by a stranger on the street?

I think Candace may be faulting the unknown runner for the wrong reason -- he's probably not rude. He just hasn't yet mastered the art of reading minds.

Oh, by the way, Candace, you might consider carrying your own cellphone when you run in the wee hours of the morning. Then you won't have to contend with rude runners.

Would you be taken back if you met a renown person?

The managing editor of our local newspaper, who holds a journalism degree, should know better than to repeatedly commit the two errors below. And she can't claim typo, because I have read both these in her articles and columns several times.

1) In yesterday's paper, she said, "Shoppers in the Park Place Shopping Center on Clarksville Street may have been taken back shortly before 1:30 p.m. Thursday when a crowd gathered outside the TCIM call center facility."

Taken back where? Taken back when? She means taken aback -- aback means startled or dumfounded.

2) When speaking of a well-known person, she will often say, "The renown Joe Schmoe." Renown is a noun, not an adjective.

I was certainly taken aback to know that a renowned person such as Mary did not know these simple words.

The chicken or the egg?

In an article about the increase in the minimum wage, the newspaper yesterday bemoaned the fact that the increase has been eaten up in higher prices. I'll grant you that the major cause of higher prices today is the increase in gasoline and corn. But there is another factor in the increasing cost of consumer goods. This is the second round in the 3-part minimum wage increase mandated by congress. The first increase took effect last year, and most employers don't eat those costs -- they are passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices on goods and services. If that doesn't happen, some minimum wage employees will be laid off. So part of the reason minimum wage workers aren't seeing any increase in their buying power with their pay raise is because the minimum wage was raised. It's a chicken and egg situation.

Consider the small business owner. The total increase in minimum wage will be $2.60 (I think my figure is correct -- at any rate, it's close). The employer not only pays that extra $2.60 an hour -- an extra $104 a week for a full-time employee -- he also has to pay, at the least, social security, state unemployment tax, and federal unemployment tax on the increase. If he offers contributions to a pension plan, he also pays that. Those costs will make his increase in costs more like $2.91 an hour depending on his unemployment tax rate and pension contribution. That cost is either eliminated through job cuts or passed on to the consumer in higher prices.

Consider the minimum wage worker. Minimum wage is a starting wage. It is for people learning the job, high school students, part-time, and temporary jobs. Very few people who start at the minimum wage are still making the minimum after six months in the same job. The concept encouraged by the media is that the same people have been working for the same amount of money for all these years without a raise. It just isn't true. Minimum wage is a "pass-through" wage. The trainee will hopefully learn the job well and earn a higher wage. The high school student will hopefully be more qualified when he graduates and will get something a little better. The part-time worker may do such a good job that he will be asked to take a full-time job at a higher wage. Ditto with the temporary worker. In my first job, I made minimum wage about three months before I was given a raise because of my job performance. It is just not true that people get "stuck" in minimum wage jobs.

Consider the whiner. The wire report of this story included the example of Walter Jasper. Walter earns minimum wage at a carwash in Nashville. "It will help out a little," said Walter, who with his fiance supports a family of seven. "I'd like to be on a job where I can at least get a car," he said. Why does someone incapable of earning more than the minimum wage have five or seven children (depending on your interpretation of the sentence)? My guess is that Walter and his "fiance" aren't married because his "fiance" is drawing some form of government money on all those kids. Without more information, Walter doesn't get my sympathy. Bruce Cooper works full time for minimum wage in Kansas City, Missouri. He buses tables. He said he makes far less than his chef's training and skill level merit. Kansas City is a fairly large city. Is he saying he can't find a higher paying job that would utilize his skills? Is he saying he should be paid a chef's wages for cleaning tables? He says he's going to have to decide whether or not to drop a job he loves or stick with it. Does that mean he intends to go on the welfare rolls, or that he intends to find something better? Without more information, Bruce doesn't get my sympathy, either.

So the bottom line is, when you pay more for that quarter-pounder with cheese, it's partly because that gum-smacking, oblivious teenager serving it to you has received a huge government mandated raise he didn't deserve and is now making a whole lot more than he's worth.

"Workers getting a 70-cent raise today." The Dallas Morning News; July 24, 2008; p. 1A.

I can't have sex -- you can't fire me!

How much more absurd can our government be? A federal appeals court has ruled that the inability to have sex is a disability protected under federal anti-discrimination laws.

Now I ask you, what job could you possibly have (aside from prostitution) that having sex or not would be in any way relevant? I don't recall ever filling out a job application with the question, "Are you able to have sex?"

This all came about because Kathy Adams, who had breast cancer, wants the State Department to hire her as a foreign service worker. The State Department says they won't hire her because the department cannot guarantee access to the required medical follow-up at all overseas assignments. In an attempt to compel them to hire her, Adams says that she cannot have sex as a result of her surgeries, and that the inability to have sex is a disability, and that she should, therefore, be covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act. And the dumb-butt court agrees with her.

The State Department, by the way, was not even aware she couldn't have sex. Actually, the woman can have sex -- she just doesn't want to anymore. I'm figuring there must be millions of disabled women in that case. But back to the point -- here's the court's brilliant reasoning -- "it makes no difference whether an employer has precise knowledge of an employee's substantial limitation." So how can you discriminate against somebody when you don't even know they have whatever you're supposed to be discriminating against? And if the State Department does hire her, and she gets sent somewhere where there are not adequate medical facilities, and her physical condition worsens, do you think she'll sue? I'd bet my last dollar on it!

You better hire me -- I don't want to have sex, and I'll sue!

"Sexual inabilities ruled a disability." The Dallas Morning News; July 23, 2008; p. 5A.

I see England, I see France, I see someone's . . .

Hooray for Lynwood, Illinois! They've passed an ordinance outlawing saggy pants. Showing more than three inches of underwear in public will net a sagger a $25 fine. The ACLU complains that the ordinance targets "young men of color." A law is a law, regardless of who's more prone to breaking it. White folks will pay the same $25 fine for going around with their unmentionables showing.



Joe Klomes, a resident of Lynwood and obvious fashion plate, says the new law infringes on his personal style. He says leaders should instead spend money on making the area look nice. Well, duh, Mr. Klomes! Isn't that what this ordinance is all about?

Will values class work?

I don't know too much about Sunnyvale, Texas, but I do know they need a new principal at the middle school and a new school superintendent. Here's the story:

In September, a bunch of 8th-grade boys simulated a lewd act in the locker room. Some of the 7th-grade boys didn't understand what was going on, so the 8th-grade boys began to make fun of them. This progressed to the younger boys being grabbed and held down. Then it progressed to organized attacks with lookouts. As the victims would try to fend off their attackers, the attackers would try to strip off their shorts. One of the 8th-graders would slide his fist into a hard plastic cone and attempt to sodomize the victims. These attacks continued through April.

In late March, some of the boys told their parents about what had been happening. The parents went to Principal Diana Freeman. Her "investigation" concluded that nothing beyond bullying was taking place. Sunnyvale ISD Superintendent Doug Williams verified the accounts of the attacks, but he said "We tried to be as proactive as possible to stop these things when we heard about them." Yet at least one other attack occurred after the "proactive" measures were instituted. How "proactive" do you have to be to provide supervision and punish the perpetrators of these crimes? Does "proactive" include failure to call authorities until May? Because that's when the Dallas County Sheriff's Department first heard of these atrocities. And then they didn't get it from the school authorities -- it came from the parents.

The sheriff's department is recommending prosecution. The school district is implementing "values-based" class to help students make "good choices." Give me a break! These sexual predators didn't just steal a Twinkie from some nerd's lunchbox! They, at the very least, committed attempted rape!

Mr. Williams says, "It is flat upsetting both as a parent and as a school official that things like this could happen." Just upsetting? What an understatement! How about horrific, unconscionable, unlawful, devastating, and absolutely inexcusable?!!!!!

"Witness recounts attacks on his peers by older students." The Dallas Morning News; July 19, 2008; P. 1A.

I just want what you have . . . but I don't want to work for it!

The Dallas Housing Authority has almost completed a $4.5 million project reserved for low-income blacks, the Villas at Hillcrest, in an affluent far North Dallas neighborhood. The course of this project has not run smooth. As you may imagine, the people in the area were very much opposed to a housing project near their homes.
(And certainly reserving these townhomes for blacks is discriminatory, but that's another post).

The liberal perspective is that poor people are poor in large part because they are forced to live in blighted areas. My perspective is that areas are blighted because most of the people who live there have no pride, no work ethic, and no ambition -- hence, they are poor! Put another way, the blighted area doesn't make the poor person; the poor person makes the blighted area. So when you plop down a housing project in a nice area, it will, in all probability become blighted itself. But I digress.

James Ragland's column in the July 16 edition of The Dallas Morning News (page 1B) decried efforts by the neighbors of this project to insure that the landscaping fit in with the area. The DHA is proposing xeriscaping (Ragland repeatedly and erroneously refers to it as "zeroscaping" in his column). The rest of the neighborhood has lawns and shrubbery. I believe the neighbors are rightly concerned -- if the DHA doesn't care about the landscaping, what else will they let slide?

But the thing that really caught my eye in this column was one statement. Ragland says, "The bottom line is that these poor black tenants want the same things as their affluent white neighbors: a decent and safe place to live, challenging schools and good neighbors." I guess that's true, but there's one glaring omission in Ragland's statement -- the affluent white neighbors worked and paid for theirs!

Am I psychic or what?

Before you read this update on my post of May 21, "You owe me a place to live," you might want to go back and read it. The subject was the new homeless shelter in Dallas, The Bridge. I questioned how long such a facility could operate with virtually no rules. They required no real check-in procedure, no rehab, no payment, and one of the quotes was that it would be almost impossible to be kicked out.

Here's the update from today's Dallas Morning News. The subhead reads "Open-door policy has led to crowding, crime; center addresses issues." The reporter states that the open-door approach has led to "drug-dealing, fights, thefts and lax security." According to Joel John Roberts, chief executive of PATH Partners of Los Angeles, which formerly provided social workers for the facility, several staff members were assaulted by guests (that's what the homeless are called at The Bridge -- self-esteem thing, you know). He also alleges that security guards accepted gifts of pizza and soft drinks from known drug dealers. And, he says, there seems to be no formal system for identifying who is on the campus.

Mike Faenza of the Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance says these problems have been resolved. They instituted (gasp!) a rule! No one may enter after the 10 p.m. curfew. In response to one of Mr. Roberts's allegations, that many at the shelter were not homeless but were there to prey on those who were, Faenza says that's not an issue -- they discovered only 80 such people and made them leave. He also disputes the claims of assault, saying they've had only one worker assaulted, then adding that "some staffers were uncomfortable working with people with serious mental illnesses." If that's the case, what in the heck were they doing working in a homeless shelter? Duh! What kind of people did they think they would encounter there?

Despite Faenza's claims that the shelter does not allow violence, drugs or alcohol, police say they respond to calls at The Bridge almost daily, most involving theft and fights. The police spokesman does believe, however, that The Bridge is making an effort to keep the place safe. I say the whole philosophy is flawed -- you can't have a bunch of people who either don't want to or are incapable of fitting into society gathered in one place with no rules and expect it to be safe. As one of the "guests" says, "This is a hellhole."

"Bridge a 'victim of its own success.'" The Dallas Morning News; July 18, 2008; P. 1A.

A mother's plea to break your heart . . . NOT!

The trial for Wesley Lynn Ruiz was held last week in Dallas County. Ruiz was accused of the murder of Police Officer Mark Nix in March of 2007. The jury convicted Ruiz, and his mother testified at the sentencing phase of his trial.

"I never in my worst nightmares thought I'd have to stand up for his character," she said. What character? Wesley Ruiz has convictions for burglary, escape, theft, possession of a controlled substance, evading arrest, and unlawful possession of a weapon. He is a known gang member. This woman is either disingenuous or stupid.

"That fatal day, he honestly believed his life was in danger," she weepingly continued. His life wouldn't have been "in danger" if he hadn't fled from the police with meth and an assault weapon in his car, lost control of the car, then refused to get out of the vehicle when they told him to.

"I'm terribly sorry that Officer Mark Nix is not here, but Wes is part of me just like Mark Nix was part of you." No, I don't think it is the same at all. By dear Mom's own admission, she has a history of drug and alcohol abuse and was not there for a long stretch of her son's life. Wonder why she cares so much now?

At any rate, her tears didn't work. The jury saw through them and sentenced him to death. Score another one for good old Texas common sense.

http://www.nbc5i.com/news/11350906/detail.html

http://www.txcn.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/tv/stories/DN-officershot_25met.ART.North.Edition1.445c608.html

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/071208dnmetruiz.4576768b.html

"Killer's family pleads with jury to show mercy." The Dallas Morning News; July 10, 2008; p. 9B.

World's dumbest criminals . . . but we'll probably keep 'em.

Did you read about the armed robbery gone awry in Denton? A bewigged armed robber sporting sunglasses demanded money at Pizza Patron. As worker Stephanie Martinez was removing money from the cash drawer, another employee attacked the thief. As he did so, the thief's wig fell off, and Mrs. Martinez received quite a surprise. The thief was her father, Benjamin Ramirez.

Ramirez fled to a waiting pickup occupied by Sonia Palacios, Miss Martinez's mother, and Jose Miguel Martinez, Mrs. Martinez's husband. Police believe Mrs. Martinez to be completely innocent of the crime. And guess what. . . Ramirez and Palacios have immigration violations filed against them. Will they be deported? Past experience indicates they probably will not (the guy who was randomly shooting at vehicles in the Garland/Mesquite area a couple of weeks ago had earlier been found guilty of armed robbery).

"Robber's identity shocks worker." The Dallas Morning News; July 15, 2008; p. 1B.

Wait just a sec, Mr. Burglar, I'll be right with you . . .

Since the Supreme Court has said Washington, D.C. can't ban handguns outright, D.C. legislators have come up with a plan with these restrictions:

1) handguns may be used for self-defense only in the home
2) they must carry fewer than 12 rounds of ammunition
3) they must be kept unloaded
4) they must be disassembled or be equipped with trigger locks.

I can see it now -- I wake up in the middle of the night and hear footsteps coming up the stairs. I wake up Mr. Essie May. He hears it, too. Suddenly, the bedroom door bursts open, and a man with a gun rushes in. Mr. Essie May yells, "Freeze! And stay that way until I get the cylinder put on this gun and the bullets loaded!"

Would you like to know how it would really happen at our house in Texas? As soon as I woke Mr. Essie May, he would have the loaded .38 out of the nightstand, and that armed burglar would be dead before he was two feet inside the door! Praise God for Texas and Smith & Wesson -- Oh, and Mr. Essie May, too!

"Council to vote on gun law." The Dallas Morning News; July 15, 2008; p. 6A.

And we wonder why America has problems!

Virgin Mobile, a cellphone company, and National Network for Youth (NN4Y), a Washington lobbying group for homeless youth, have come up with a truly innovative idea for clothing homeless teens. They decided last week to begin testing this campaign. I'm sure every American parent will applaud their efforts and encourage their children to participate.

The way the campaign works is this: teenagers will film themselves doing a strip-tease and post the videos on the web. For every hit the video gets, clothing companies will donate new clothes for homeless teens. The "Strip2Clothe" campaign's slogan is "You take off yours, we donate ours."

I'm sure there are many of you who think I'm making this up. I wish I were! Virgin Mobile says not to worry. They have "established good taste criteria." "[We] believe that [the] promotion will result in thousands of new clothes being provided for those in need." And, they say, their criteria includes no nudity. I'm not sure there is a "good taste" way to suggestively take off your clothes to music in a video. And if we're talking hormonal teenagers here, who knows what can happen! Is this not promoting child pornography? What about parental consent for this thing? Can you imagine a parent seeing his/her child in something like that, and the kid says, "Oh, it's OK. It's for charity." I would OWN Virgin Mobile if that happened to me!

There is a ray of hope, though. At least some of the 150 charities who are members of NN4Y say they are appalled and have had their names removed from the site.

"Strip videos don't take off with some." The Dallas Morning News; July 14, 2008; p. 9A.

More Black is Beautiful

Steve Blow, a Dallas Morning News columnist had some further comment on the John Wiley Price incident I talked about a few days ago. (I have been requested to provide links to the stories I reference, and I'll try to remember to do that -- I'll put them at the ends of my posts). His general feeling was that this was an absurd incident, but he also said, "As a white person, I probably can’t fathom what it’s like for the color of your own skin to be synonymous with — to quote from the The Synonym Finder — evil, dirty, criminal, satanic, corrupt, sinister, disgraceful, foul, ghastly.... "

In the first place, that's ridiculous. Black is a color. Why would we call a black hole any other color? IT'S BLACK! One of the rooms in my house is painted a ghastly pink color. I want to repaint it to beige. Right now, though, I can call that room beige, blue, brown, or purple, but you know what? IT'S STILL PINK!

In the second place, blacks themselves chose the way they wish to be referred to. When I was a child (and this will date me), I was taught the polite way to refer to them was "colored" or "Negro." At some point this became offensive to them, and we all readjusted our thinking to "African American" or "Afro-American." And at some point, we were told "black is beautiful," so we readjusted our thinking again. So don't come yelling about black holes and black being sinister and people using black as a derogatory term. It was your people, John Wiley Price, who chose the designation. Either live with it, or tell us what your next pc term is.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/localnews/columnists/sblow/stories/071108dnmetblow.41f4132e.html

But the rules don't apply to me!

Robert E. Sweely of Irving is not happy with the Irving Police Department. It seems they gave his son a ticket for riding his bicycle through a stop sign in a residential area. The ticket cost him $172. This is unfair, because the son slowed down and looked both ways. And the policeman obviously missed the fine print on the sign: "STOP - except for Mr. Sweely's son who has only to slow down and look both ways."

Thank heaven this did not happen, but I wonder who Mr. Sweely would be blaming if his son had been hit by an oncoming car?

Press 1 to speak to a representative, Press 2 if you're stupid.

I got one of those privacy-invading recorded telemarketer calls this morning. Is it just me, or is this, as Mr. Spock would say, illogical?

Here's what the recorded voice said:

"Do not be alarmed, but this is your final notice to receive a reduced rate on your current credit card account. You will not be notified again. Press 1 to speak with a representative now. Press 2 if you do not wish to receive further phone calls."

Is the recorded voice a liar or just stupid? Or do those people behind the recorded voice think I'm stupid?

Just when you think you've heard it all . . .

Puttering around the house yesterday afternoon, I had on Channel 4 News. They were reporting on a controversy arising from a comment made by Dallas County Commissioner Ken Mayfield in some kind of county meeting. The topic of discussion was a county office responsible for collecting traffic fines or some other sort of county revenue, and it seems the office is way behind in their paperwork. Mr. Mayfield likened the office to a black hole.

Now most reasonable people know what is meant by a black hole -- the term comes from an astronomical phenomenon where a collapsing star creates a vacuum and pulls everything into it. There is no light, ergo, a black hole.

Commissioner John Wiley Price and a black Justice of the Peace are demanding an apology. They don't feel Mr. Mayfield is racially sensitive. They want to know why it's not termed a white hole. I have never heard of anything so stupid and ignorant in all my life. White holes and black holes are not the only holes in this story! So with all that in mind, my creative juices started flowing, and I wrote this little story.

Black is Beautiful

by

Essie May

Dedicated to the brilliant John Wiley Price

John Blackaby, the Blacksmith, wrote the instructions for voting on the blackboard. Each member had the power to blackball any applicant to the club. "Before voting begins," Mr. Blackaby said, "our treasurer, Mr. Blackstone, will give the financial report." Mr. Blackstone stood. "I am pleased to report that we are in the black."

The marbles in the bags counted, the club welcomed onto their rolls Mr. Blacketer who worked for the FAA. His job was to find and analyze the black box when an airplane crashed. Mr. Blackbear, a Blackfoot Sioux Indian, also made the cut. He was an ornithologist who specialized in blackbirds.

After the voting, the new members were to be entertained at a black tie dinner. The menu included blackberry compote, blackened swordfish, blackeyed peas with black pepper, biscuits with blackstrap molasses, black walnuts, and a choice of blackbottom pie or black forest cake for dessert. All of this was to be washed down with pots of black coffee. Entertainment was to be provided by country singer Clint Black.

Everyone had gathered in the dining room for dinner when someone missed the master of ceremonies, Dr. Blackthorn. Suddenly, he burst into the room causing quite a stir. He had misunderstood the nature of the affair. Thinking it was a costume ball, he had come dressed as Blackbeard the pirate. "My apologies for the lateness of my arrival," he said. "I was watching my favorite PBS series, Blackadder, and I lost track of time."

Just as the festivities began, the power went out. Calls to the utility company confirmed that the cause was a rolling blackout. One of the ladies, Mrs. Blackstock, became so distressed that she fainted. Some of the other ladies feared she had been bitten by a black widow spider. But when Dr. Blackthorn saw she had merely blacked out, he called for his black bag. "I have just the thing," he exclaimed, as he drew out a bottle of Black Draught Elixir.

As Mrs. Blackstock began to come to her senses, another hubbub arose. The doors burst open and a man covered in something black and sticky stumbled in. "We're rich! We're rich!" he yelled. "Oil! Black gold in our backyard!"

Just then it began to snow. Huge crystal flakes falling fast and furious soon covered the land and the blacktopped roads. And this very black day ended in a veritable fairyland of snowy white.

The End

How far the mighty have fallen . . .

There was a day not so many years ago when use of profanity was socially unacceptable. Rough sailors who didn't blink an eye at the most vulgar words would clean up their acts in the presence of ladies (even ladies of ill-repute).

Then came a day when those words could be heard in sleazy barrooms and other places where "polite society" was not to be found. Then came a day when it was OK for anyone to use those vulgarities in situations causing dire distress. Then came a day when we heard those words quite commonly on the movie screen. Then came a day when we couldn't walk down the street without being assaulted with the f-word.

How much further can we fall? In order to raise the scores of low-achieving students this year, the British examiners of their equivalent of the TAKS test awarded credit for the use of profanity. In grading papers peppered with the f-word, one examiner stated, "It would be wicked to give it zero, because it does show some very basic skills we are looking for -- like conveying some meaning and some spelling."

I think the Brits need to convey some examiners to some rubbish bins!

Welcome, felons! Skilled artisans, keep out!

The Garland, Richardson, and Plano areas were endangered a week or so ago by a nutcase shooting randomly at vehicles on the roads and, in one instance, at a restaurant. Guess what? He is not a citizen -- though he is here legally. My question is why he is STILL here legally.

This was not the first time this guy had transgressed the laws of this country which graciously allowed him and his family to come here from Vietnam to live. Thai-An Huu Nguyen was charged in 2002 with carrying a weapon in a prohibited place. He was convicted for misdemeanor assault in 2006 in a case in which a woman was robbed at gunpoint (And why, is robbing someone at gunpoint a misdemeanor?). He faced a felony charge of failure to render aid in 2006 -- the rest of that story is that it appears he intentionally ran down the victim before he didn't "stop to render aid."

This man should have been deported in 2002. Since he wasn't deported in 2002, he should have been deported in 2006. What makes this even worse is that decent, law-abiding, skilled people are trying to enter this country to work and, in contributing to our society, enhance their own lives. But the red tape and bureaucracy is so daunting, and hiring a lawyer is so expensive, it's almost impossible for them to do so. I know of a gentleman who would love to live here. He is very skilled in his field of work, but it is doubtful he will be able to obtain a green card. My suggestion is to get rid of Mr. Nguyen and the thousands of others like him and give their green cards to people who deserve them.

No more! No more! You're driving me crazy!

Aren't you tired of advertising? You go see the ball game in a stadium named for some big corporation. You go to a concert hall named for some big corporation. You get little pop-ups on your TV screen while you're watching your favorite program. There is product placement in every movie. There are flashing signs and billboards on every street and highway. You get annoying pop-ups as you surf the web. "Enough!" we scream.

Ah -- but it's not enough. A special-effects man has come up with a new technology that will fill the sky with foamy clouds shaped like corporate logos. He calls them flogos. "There was no way to ignore the test clouds as they floated lazily overhead," said Augie Hendershot, police chief of the city where flogos are being tested.

I don't know about you, but I don't want my beautiful Texas sky messed up with a bunch of man-made clouds trying to sell me stuff!

I'm so proud of our members of congress!

I never cease to be amazed at how politicians think. If the average American ran his household like our politicians run the nation's budget, America would have disappeared long ago.

The latest thing I've run across deals with a lawsuit settled in 1999. Black farmers sued the Agriculture Department claiming that they were discriminated against in USDA offices by being denied loans, disaster assistance, and other aid frequently given to whites. There is no mention of why these farmers were turned down, but I have a feeling it had a little more to it than just being the color of their skins. At any rate, at that time, 22,500 farmers filed claims. About 2/3 of those were awarded a total of $981 million. Another 73,000 were denied because they missed the filing deadline. So the deadline was extended for nearly a year. Most of those claims filed after the deadline were denied because they didn't qualify for the settlement.

Now, after 9 years, our illustrious lawmakers have decided to reopen the settlement to more than 70,000 potential claimants. The liability could exceed $3 billion. But in the legislation reopening the settlement, the budgeted amount for payouts was $100 million. Quite a difference in $3 billion and $100 million. Senator Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican says there's no doubt that there will have to be more moeny in the future. Want to know why it was done that way? Representative Artur Davis, a Democrat from Alabama, said with a higher estimate, lawmakers probably would have stripped reopening the settlement from the bill. Ya' think?!!!

Think I'll go pick me out a $75,000 automobile and tell Mr. Essie May it will cost $10,000. He'll say, "Sure, go ahead." Then when he finds out he's in debt for $75,000, I'll just explain to him that if I'd told him what it really cost, he wouldn't have let me have it!

I'm proud to be a Texan!

When Mr. Essie May heard that a Harris County grand jury had refused to indict Joe Horn, he said, "I'm proud to be a Texan!" Mr. Horn is the gentleman who saw two burglars leaving his neighbor's house through a window. Mr. Horn yelled for them to stop, and when one of them started to charge him, he shot them, killing them both.

Unfortunately for Mr. Horn, this doesn't end the case. The fiance of one of the men, Stephanie Storey, says she's "pondering" her legal options. Of course she'll sue! "I'm very surprised that these two lives had no value, that someone can take the law into their own hands and shoot them down like animals," she says.

What Ms. Storey is evidently not taking into consideration is that these two "valuable" lives were in someone else's home in the dead of night taking out property that did not belong to them. When they decided to "take the law into their own hands" and rob an honest citizen, they assumed the risk of getting what was coming to them. And they weren't shot down like animals -- they were shot down like the thieving burglars they were!

Ms. Storey is not the only one incensed over this case. Quannel X (don't you just hate the posturing of these black guys who think they're going to get famous because they change their name to Somethingstupid X?) says he's calling on District Attorney Kenneth Magidson to release details about the racial makeup of the grand jury and present the case to a new grand jury. A spokesman for Mr. Magidson's office says the requests will not be honored. I'm so proud to be a Texan!

UPDATE: My dog is my baby!

Remember my June 2 post, "My dog is my baby"? I questioned how much these people really loved their dog.

Well, now we know. The July 3 edition of The Dallas Morning News reported that the Sniders abandoned four cats and a dog when they left a rent house more than two weeks ago. Concerned neighbors tried to care for the animals and find homes for them. They finally contacted the Denton newspaper which in turn contacted Denton animal control. The Sniders have relinquished ownership of the animals, and they are now available for adoption.

Oh, Say Can You Sell CD's!

Rene Marie must think she's quite the clever entrepreneur. But we'll get to that later.

I had never heard of Rene Marie until yesterday. She is a jazz singer from the Denver, Colorado, area. So the Mayor of Denver asked her to sing the national anthem at last Tuesday's State of the City address. When she was introduced and began to sing, the audience certainly recognized the music, but Rene Marie wasn't singing the familiar words to our National Anthem.

It turns out she was singing the words to the "black national anthem," "Lift Every Voice and Sing." My first thought was, "Why do blacks need a national anthem? Is there a United States of Negroes I somehow missed hearing about? And if there is, why is their anthem being sung for an American city ceremony?"

Rene Marie says she meant no disrepect, she only wanted to "express how I feel about living in the United States as a black woman." She says when she visited Russia once, she was asked how it felt to be an American, and she said she didn't feel like she was an American. If that's the case, and she has a problem singing the song that expresses the patriotism every American should feel, then she should have politely declined the invitation to sing.

I'm with Denver City Councilman Charlie Brown who said, "I was mad. I almost walked off the stage. There is no substitute for the National Anthem." Mayor John Hickenlooper, who at first expressed understanding for the incident, now says the city was deceived. Even the NAACP is backing off on this one. Denver branch President Menola Upshaw said, "If she promised to sing it, she should have."

Now we get to the clever part. She is directing the public to her website for her official statement concerning the incident. And included in the statement are instructions on how to order her CD's. She's unpatriotic and deceitful, but she's a darn good marketing expert!

We want our rights!

There was a letter to the editor in the paper the other day. Since it was short, I'll just copy the whole thing here:

"America is the land of the free. Smokers have the right to make choices where and when they smoke. Why are we being pushed around in public? We are almost pushed into smoking in our cars and homes. We want our rights to smoke where and when we desire to light up." Waneta Tardy, Dallas

You got it Waneta! I say you have the right to light up anywhere you want -- as long as you stick the lighted end in your mouth!

And if you really don't know why non-smokers don't like smokers, let me give you a partial list of reasons:

1) They stink.
2) Their smoke makes our clothes and hair stink.
3) They stink.
4) Their smoke makes our noses burn.
5) They stink.
6) They litter our streets and parking lots with their butts.
7) They stink.
8) They leave disgusting little ash trails everywhere they go.
9) They stink.
10) Most of them are inconsiderate.
11) They stink.
12) They start grass fires when they throw their butts out the car windows.
And finally,
13) They stink.

Just remember, Waneta, America is the land of the free, but your rights end where my nose begins!

If A=B and B=C, does A=C?

I've always loved logic problems. They are fun to do, and they really do enhance one's critical thinking ability. I don't know who Eugene Robinson is, but he needs to do some logic problems.

He had a column in a recent edition of The Dallas Morning News. The subject of his column was the recent Supreme Court decision which upheld the 2nd amendment right to bear arms. Generally, he was in agreement with the decision, but there was a paragraph in his column that made me question his intelligence.

"I realize that the now-defunct D.C. law was unusually comprehensive and restrictive," he says, "and thus, in the legal sense, offered a bull's-eye for the pro-gun lobby. I also know that the law was easy to attack on grounds of efficacy: Given all the handgun killings in the city, was the ban really having any beneficial impact at all? (And it's not as if striking down the law, and perhaps adding hundreds or thousands of weapons to the city, will make things any better.)"

Here's where logic comes in. If having a weapon in Washington was illegal, then no law abiding citizen had one. On the other side, only criminals did have guns. Now that weapons have been legalized, doesn't it make sense that if "hundreds or thousands" of weapons are added to the city, it will be those who didn't have guns before (law-abiding citizens) who will be getting them? If a criminal wanted a gun, he already had one -- he's a criminal, and he doesn't care what the law says.

Washington has one of the highest, if not the highest, murder rates in America. It's pretty much a given that those "added" guns won't be used to rob banks, hijack cars, or shoot innocent people. Now that law-abiding citizens can effectively protect themselves, I predict it WILL make things better.

Affirmative Action or Declining Standards?

Officer Lavar Horne is a Dallas police officer. As Steve Blow says in his column in last Sunday's newspaper, "Officer Horne, 29, is a product of that era when the Police Department lowered its standards in a push to expand and diversify the force."

Would you like to know how Officer Horne "diversified" the force? To begin with, he failed his entrance exam and interview. He reapplied 18 months later. He was hired on the condition that he pay off $1207 he owed in traffic fines. Already sounds like a fine candidate for a police officer to me. A year later, Officer Horne was fired because a routine check showed that his drivers license was suspended (I suppose as a result of the traffic fines). At any rate, he says he didn't know it was suspended. The department must have believed him, because after a review, they put him back on the force.

Then last year, he got into a little trouble. He had used up his sick days, and didn't provide the required doctor's note for the additional days he took off. No problem, just a clerical error -- officer Horne later brought in the required notes. But this year, when the notes were reviewed, it turned out they were forged. Oops! Given his record, I would have fired him, but he remains on duty.

Then a couple of months ago, undercover officers about to conduct a raid on a club in Dallas saw Officer Horne there. One of the officers gave him a heads-up and told him he should get himself out of there. As Officer Horne left, the undercover man saw him speak to the doorman who began text messaging, other text messages were being sent and received all over the club, all the illegal activity was swept out of sight, and the manager who was the target of the raid disappeared.

Yes, I can see where we need more and more of this diversification business! It's doing SO much to improve our society!