It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.

 

I stole the title for this post from Judge Andrew Napolitano. He has a book out with that title, and I highly recommend it. It is about how, little by little, we have allowed the government to unconstitutionally intrude into every aspect of our lives.

 

I came across an article in the newspaper last Sunday that is directly related to one of the subjects Judge Napolitano covers. Is it wrong to discriminate? Our courts say it is, yet we have the Constitutional right to associate with the people of our own choosing. Conversely, that means we also have the right to not associate with anyone for any reason. This right applies not only to individuals, but to privately owned businesses as well. Mind you, this is what the Constitution actually says -- it's not the interpretation courts in recent years have subscribed to.

 

The article in question concerns Arlene's Flowers, a florist shop in Richland, Washington. Barronelle Stutzman, a Christian, owns Arlene's. Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed, homosexuals, are long-time customers at Arlene's. They decided they wanted to get married, and they went to Arlene's shop. Barronelle told them she couldn't, in good conscience, provide the flowers for their "wedding" because of her religious beliefs. So Barronelle is now being sued by the ACLU and the state's attorney general.

 

I did a quick Google search and found at least four or five other florists in Richland. I'm sure at least one of them would be glad to sell flowers to the queer guys. Barronelle has the Constitutional right to practice her religious beliefs and to associate or not associate with whomever she pleases.

 

And on another note, how would the queer guys like it if we told them they had to eat at Chick-Fil-A?

 

"Suits target florist." The Dallas Morning News; April 21, 2013; p. 5A.

I'm an old fuddy-duddy with no sense of humor.

 

Am I just an old fuddy-duddy with no sense of humor, or is anyone else bothered by educators subjecting themselves to pies in their faces, working from rooftops, shaving their heads, and other assorted silly stunts as rewards to their students for high test scores or selling the most wrapping paper or candy?

 

I noticed in the paper the other day a teacher getting a pie in the face from a student who had done well on her STAAR test last year. I can't imagine myself ever wanting to throw a pie at one of my teachers -- even the ones I didn't like (and there were a few). My teachers were to be respected and looked up to. How can you respect someone who allows you to smash her face with a shaving cream pie? How can you respect a teacher or a principal who sits on top of a building as if he were a fool?

 

Could this be part of the reason educators have such a hard time keeping control in their classrooms these days? Maybe they're trying to be too hard to be the life of the party.

 

I can understand rewarding students for a job well done. How about a cupcake party or a pizza party? Oh, I forgot, Michelle doesn't want junk food in the schools unless it's a pie in the face.

 



Is God speaking?

 

There has been an outbreak of deadly meningitis in New York City among gay men. At least 13 have contracted  the disease this year. Seven of them have died. There is also one brain dead patient in West Hollywood, California.

 

Maybe God is trying to get their attention.

 

The response from health officials has been to urge homosexuals to get a meningitis vaccine. Perhaps the response should be, "Stop the perversion, and you'll most likely be OK."

 

And the California gays want the taxpayers to foot the bill to protect them from their own perversion -- they say that the county should make the vaccine available to gay and bisexual men who want it.

 

"Case of disease worries residents." The Dallas Morning News; April 14, 2013; p. 8A.

You're a mean one, Mr. Pierson!

 

Lennard Pierson thinks allowing children to believe in Santa Claus warps their personalities and makes them into liars.

 

He asks how you would like being lied to for years. You know, as I look back on my early years and the time when I discovered that Santa was real only in the sense that he represented the innocence and magic of  childhood, it never once crossed my mind that my mom had "lied for years."

 

"Can any child trust an adult . . . from that point on?" Lennard asks. Well, if he can't, I'd say the child has some deep psychological problems that have nothing to do with a harmless fantasy that's brought joy to millions. I challenge Lennard to interview 100 people picked at random and ask them how believing in Santa ruined their lives. I daresay all he'll see are looks of incredulity that such a stupid question would even occur to anyone.

 

He says Santa is built of lies and false cheer. I say Santa is built of generosity and good will and good memories and the spirit of the season. Essie has seen more Christmases than she cares to admit to, and even though she knows Santa's not coming down the chimney on Christmas Eve, she still loves him. In fact, she actually feels like she's forgetting something when she doesn't leave the milk and cookies out for him.

 

Lennard says that when we get rid of Santa Claus, we'll begin to tell the truth about ourselves and our world. I think Lennard has revealed the truth about himself quite clearly already.

And are you ready for the kicker? Lennard is a fiction writer (a review of  his novel on Amazon.com is considerably less than stellar). How ironic is that?

 

"Stop telling the lie of Santa." The Dallas Morning News; December 27, 2012; p. 14a.

 



A Matter of Perspective

 

I came across something David Letterman said last year when he was campaigning on his show for Obama: "What more do we want this man to do for us, honest to God?"

 

Isn't the more relevant question: "What more do we want this man to do to us, honest to God"?

 

"Talking Points." The Dallas Morning News; May 20, 2012; p. 1A.

Robert Butsch: A Ray of Sunshine

 

Robert Butsch of Duncanville is just a regular ray of sunshine! He says there's no need to try to stay healthy. According to Bob, "excessive healthy behavior" will cost you more in the end, because if you live longer, you'll get Alzheimers and the cost of that will be more than if you just go ahead and clog your arteries and omit the colonoscopy and die young. Gosh! You can save on your grocery and utility bills that way, too! What a brilliant plan!

 

By the way, I've known personally at least four women who lived past 100 years of age. One of them never had any form of dementia and the others didn't exhibit signs until well into their 90's. So much for Bob's thriftiness!

 

"Health leads to Alzheimer's?" The Dallas Morning News; April 11, 2013; p. 16A.

 



Why don't all victims of violent crime get medals?

 

I guess I'm just a little unclear on the concept here. Don't get me wrong -- what happened to Sarah Collins Randolph and her sister and friends in 1963 is despicable, and the perpetrators deserve their place in hell.

 

Sarah is the lone survivor of the 1963 Sixteenth Street Baptist Church bombing in Alabama. The KKK planted a bomb in the wall of the church, and Sarah and her sister and friends were in a bathroom close to the bomb when it went off. Her sister and three other little girls were killed. Sarah lost an eye.

 

Congress is considering awarding the Congressional Gold Medal to Sarah and awarding it posthumously to the other little girls. The medal is the highest civilian award that Congress can bestow. I just don't quite grasp why these people should be awarded a medal. According to the congressional website, the medal is to be awarded in recognition of "national appreciation for distinguished achievements and contributions." What achievement or contribution did these little girls make? I guess the argument could be made that the cause of civil rights advanced because of this crime, but those children had nothing to do with that -- they were the victims.

 

At any rate, Sarah is not appreciative of the gesture. She wants millions of dollars in compensation instead of the medal she says they want to "throw" at her. I agree wholeheartedly that she should be compensated, but she should be compensated by those who committed the atrocity -- not those who had absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

"Survivor says no to medal." The Dallas Morning News; April 11, 2013; p. 6A.



Just where has Michelle been since the inauguration?

 

I started to write this blog on one subject, then I got to thinking about another, so we'll just cover them both.

 

First, have you seen Michelle Obama's latest Vogue cover? Here it is:

 

 

Let's compare it to her 2009 Vogue cover:

 

Do you see any difference in the face? Does her nose look thinner in the new photo? Is the skin a little tighter around the lips? Does it look like her cheeks are thinner? Does she look a little like Jerry Jones in that new one?

Now think about it -- how many pictures of Michelle have you seen since last January's inauguration?

A little plastic surgery, you think?

What I really started to write this post about was how Michelle and Barack have common experiences with every newsmaker around. The latest is Michelle's assertion that "Hadiya Pendleton was me, and I was her." Hadiya was the teenager who was killed in Chicago (the city with some of the strictest gun control in the nation) after her high school band performed at the inauguration.

Then there was Michelle on the news the other day proclaiming she was a single mom.

And Barack saying if he had a son, he would look just like Trayvon Martin.

I guess these people have to create an image for themselves, because they have no sense of who they really are -- they are whatever they need to be in order to get what they want  -- power.

"For first lady, gun debate is personal." The Dallas Morning News; April 11, 2013; p. 2A.



If only it were that simple!

 

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings is pushing for the end of domestic violence -- a worthy cause. However, I think the man is just a bit naïve.

 

He's had a rally, given speeches, and run full-page ads in the newspaper. His theme is something along the line of "Real men don't hit," or "Be a man." One of the speakers at his rally, Dallas Cowboy Dez Bryant, made a profound statement. "I just want everybody to know, it's not good to hit women."

 

My goodness! Don't you know that every wife beater in Dallas has just sat up and said, "I didn't know that! I'm not gonna' hit the old woman anymore!" And if that didn't do it, I'm sure those full-page ads questioning their manhood did.

 

If only it were that simple, we could have a rally against murder and rape and wipe out those scourges as well. And some glitzy newspaper ads against robbery and drug pushers and terrorism. If only . . .

 



The New Convenience News

 

The Dallas Morning News recently spent about a month hyping its new design featuring "more news from the suburbs." It's turned out to be something like the new convenience packages at the grocery store. You know -- three pints of ice cream for the price of four, 14 ounces of vegetables for the price of 16, a 4-pack of Jello pudding cups for the price of a 6-pack . . .

 

As I was reading the Sunday edition from the first week of the new for-your-convenience journalism, I saw a couple of headlines and thought to myself, "Oh, an update on a story I read this past week." But after perusing a couple of the items, I didn't learn anything I hadn't already read. Then I noticed that the headlines were preceded by "Recap." Oh, so now I get it. If you don't want to write up any new articles, you just rerun articles from the previous week. I counted at least six such articles in that edition.

 

News repackaged for your convenience.

 



Minimum Wage

 

Those arguing for a sharp rise in the minimum wage claim you can't live on $7.25 an hour. They're right. You're not intended to live on $7.25 an hour. That's what you pay teenagers who are still living at home. That's what you pay the part-time clerk who just wants to make a little extra money.

 

Any employee worth his salt won't stay at the minimum wage long. He'll be promoted, or he'll build on his experience and find higher paying jobs, or he'll use his ingenuity and come up with a money-making plan. Failing that, he'll moonlight in order to make ends meet.

 

Did you know that the average McDonald's employee generates $2500 a year in profit for the franchise? Do the math. If that worker puts in 20 hours a week, and the wage is raised to Obama's goal of $9, the franchise will have to pay that employee $1820 more a year, not to mention the increase in Social Security taxes. That means he makes only $680 in profit from the labors of that worker. If the worker happens to be full-time, the franchise is out $3640 -- a net loss on that employee of $1140. At what point does the franchise owner say, "It's not worth it. I'll just eliminate that employee."

 

As I've pointed out before, how much are you willing to pay for a Big Mac?

 

"Is it time for a raise? Minimum wage hike a thorny issue." The Dallas Morning News; March 7, 2013; p. 1A.

Irony?

 

The Obama administration is spending millions of dollars this year to lure foreign visitors through a "Discover America" ad campaign in nine nations.

 

I do hope they are adding the disclaimer that the visitors won't be able to tour the White House.

 

Perhaps Obama could divert some of that money to keeping the White House open to our own citizens.

 

"A weaker tourist magnet." The Dallas Morning News; March 17, 2013; p. 6a. 

Oh, well, that makes it OK.

 

Senator Rob Portman changed his view on gay marriage when his son told him he was gay. I wonder if Mrs. Bundy changed her view on rape and murder when she learned what Ted had done? I wonder if John Wilkes Booth's father changed his view on political assassinations when he learned what his son had done? I wonder if D. B. Cooper's father changed his view on hijacking planes and extorting money when he found out what his son had done?

 

I guess anything is OK if it's your son doing it.

 

I also found the headline for this article subtly biased. Portman was "inspired" by his son to "change course." If it had been a Democrat who decided to speak out against gay marriage after his Christian son presented the biblical perspective to him, do you suppose the headline might have read, "Senator waffles on equality after indoctrination by fanatic son"?

 

"Inspired by son, GOP senator changes course." The Dallas Morning News; March 16, 2013; p. 1a.

Isn't that what the First Amendment is for?

 

The Oklahoma House of Representatives has approved the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act. The act protects the voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint by a student.

 

Gosh, I thought that was settled in 1789 in the Bill of Rights. Our Founding Fathers must be shaking their heads in disbelief.

 

"Religious expression measure advances." The Dallas Morning News; March 15, 2013; p. 4A.

Circular Reasoning

or

Chasing Your Own Tail

 

I've written before about how excited scientists are that they think they've discovered the Higgs boson or, as they refer to it, the God particle. I find their discovery quite amusing.

 

It goes something like this.

 

The Higgs boson must exist because if it doesn't, our model of the universe is wrong.

Our model of the universe is correct because the Higgs boson exists.

 

I guess it's never occurred to them that they could be wrong about both the origin of the universe and the Higgs boson.

 

Ahhhh - those kooky scientists! What will they come up with next?

Where is the outrage?

 

I'm sure you all have heard the news about the nutcase who stabbed 14 people with a box cutter at the community college in Houston. However, you had to go to page two to read it. Do you think it would have made page one if he had used a gun?

 

I have a few other observations:

 

Where are all the liberals calling for background checks and controls on box cutters to stop box cutter violence?

Where are the calls for bans on double edge razor blades?

 

If students and faculty had been allowed to carry guns on campus, do you think someone might have been able to stop this maniac before he injured all those people?

Did I miss the commiseration speech from Obama with grieving family members serving as his backdrop?

 

"At least 14 hurt in stabbing attack." The Dallas Morning News; April 10, 2013; p. 3a.

What country did you say this is?

 

 I heard on the news yesterday morning that an Oregon legislator has introduced a bill requiring public schools to fly an American flag and recite the pledge of allegiance. One of the spurs to his action was a charter school that wanted to fly a world flag instead of the Stars and Stripes. "We have schools in southern Oregon that will not fly an American flag. They'll fly a united world flag. Since they are a public school, I think that's a little out of line," said Representative Sal Esquivel. The school to which he is referring was refused permission to fly the world flag, so it has refused to fly the American flag. When I saw Rep. Esquivel on the news, he said it was astonishing to him that he would have to introduce legislation addressing such a basic principle. In fact, Rep. Esquivel's bill is redundant. This issue is already covered in the United States Flag Code in Section 6(g):

"The flag should be displayed during school days in or near every schoolhouse."

This rule goes all the way back to the 19th Century when President Benjamin Harrison ordered every school in America to display the flag.

Then, there is Texan Brenda Brinsdon. Brenda declined to participate when her high school teacher and principal instructed her to stand to recite the Mexican pledge of allegiance and sing the Mexican national anthem. Her family is suing the McAllen school district for punishing her for her refusal to pledge allegiance to a foreign country. Ironically, this article appeared in the newspaper on Texas Independence Day.

 

All of this has left me wondering -- are we still in the United States of America?

 

"Suit: Girl prodded to say Mexican pledge." The Dallas Morning News; March 2, 2013; p. 3A.

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/04/daily_pledge_of_allegiance_sho.html

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30243.pdf

I wonder . . .

 

Sam Madden of Garland doesn't like it that the jury exemption for parents applies only to those parents with children under the age of 10. He says he is the custodial parent for a child who was 10 years old when he was summoned for jury duty. He says if he had been picked for that jury, he wouldn't have been able to afford day care.

 

I wonder what Sam does with his daughter when he's working? I also wonder about his contention that he cannot afford child care. In another letter to the editor, Sam says, "I have been manager of financial planning and analysis for a public company and a CFO for a private company."  Sounds to me like he's doing OK. Surely, if he can manage the finances for a company, he can manage his personal finances enough to be able to provide care for his child. 

 

I wonder if Sam just didn't want to serve on a jury and was looking for a reason not to.

 

"Single Parents need exceptions." The Dallas Morning News; August 21, 2009; p. 28A.

 

http://letterstotheeditorblog.dallasnews.com/2012/11/youre-spending-our-money.html/

Remember, Trace, you asked!

 

Trace Ordiway of North Dallas says we can solve this gun violence thing by making bullets a controlled product.

 

For example, he says that ammo for a Bushmaster should be sold only at target ranges. You take your Bushmaster, buy however many rounds you want to fire, fire them at the range, show proof of how many you fired, and turn back in any leftovers. "Where is the flaw in this logic," he asks.

 

Flaw #1: Suppose I want to shoot my Bushmaster somewhere besides the target range.
Flaw #2: Suppose I shoot 20 rounds at the range, but tell them I shot 30 rounds and pocket the extra 10. Will they have someone counting?
Flaw #3: How many extra employees will the range have to hire to police the shooters and fill out and turn in the government reports on how many bullets they have?

 

But that's not Trace's only example. If you go deer hunting, you show your license at the sporting goods store, and they sell you only the bullets they think you need for the season. "Where is the flaw in this logic," he asks.

 

Flaw #1: What if you're a lousy shot and you use up all your ammo on misses?
Flaw #2: What if you have licenses in multiple states? Does that mean you have to buy your ammo where you hunt?
Flaw #3: What if you want to do some sight-alignment or target practice before you go?
Flaw #4: What if you just get the license, but you don't hunt at all? Is it illegal to save your ammunition?

 

But Trace has another logical example. If you want a pistol for home protection, you show the sporting goods store your license to carry and they sell you the bullets they think you need for a month or a year. "Where is the flaw in this logic," Trace asks.

 

Flaw #1: You don't have to have a carry license to have a gun for home protection. A carry license is just what it says -- a license to carry the gun. So how do people who don't have a carry license get ammunition to protect their families?
Flaw #2: Who's to say how many bullets are enough? Do you think such a policy might be discriminatory? Don't you suppose that people who live in the 'hood need more bullets for home protection than people who live in upscale neighborhoods?

But here's the flaw that makes all the others superfluous: . . . The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If all you can carry is an unloaded gun, your right to bear arms has been infringed.

 

So, Trace, I have to conclude that you're of the same caliber as that ditzy congresswoman who thinks a magazine and a bullet are synonymous. Neither one of you has the slightest idea what you're talking about.

 

"Bullet regulation." The Dallas Morning News; April 8, 2013; p. 16A.

Essie's back!

 

Essie has been on a little hiatus for a variety of reasons I won't go into. But I'm back! And I want to start my blogs with an upbeat update.

 

Remember the story of Dallas Wiens and Jamie Nash? Dallas was severely injured when he came into contact with a high voltage wire while repairing a church window. He literally lost his face, but through the miracle of modern medicine and the generosity of a family in grief, he received a face transplant. Jamie was critically burned when she wrecked her car while texting (be wise --- don't text or read email or text messages while driving!).

 

Through personnel at Parkland Hospital where both were treated, they met. Dallas and Jamie were married Easter weekend at the Ridglea Baptist Church in Dallas. That happens to be the church where Dallas suffered his accident, but he says that the happy memories there outweigh the memories of his horrendous ordeal. "He grew up there; he felt really connected there," explained one of his childhood friends.

 

Dallas and Jamie entered their reception to the song "Just the Way You Are." Dallas was able to give a dazzling smile, because he has new teeth implants. Dallas, may you wear those implants out with smiles in the coming years!

 

"At site of tragedy, a new journey starts." The Dallas Morning News; March 31, 2013; p. 1B.