Politics

Racism is (unfortunately) alive and well

/ hsoi

Roberta X goes off about the recent New Haven, CT firefighter racial discrimination lawsuit ruling.

The dissenting — liberal — Justices aver, “in effect, that having so few black firefighters in command positions provides a reason for the city to at least consider throwing out the test and then designing a new one that will accommodate the education level, lower income, and particular work experience of African-Americans. And candidates for a promotion don’t need to be the best; they need simply have qualifications that are only ‘necessary to successful performance of the job in question.’”

This is the cold, dead hand of Woodrow Wilson’s Democratic Party, reaching out with the soft bigotry of low expectations. telling us, “that’s all they’re capable of, poor creatures.” Bullshit! Pure, unadulterated, triple-strength bilge and hokum! It’s 2009 and just about the only groups that have to be reminded of the countervailing examples all around ’em are unregenerate racists and liberals — but I repeat myself.

Like I said, most liberals aren’t.

Roberta X continues:

…But what still has my blood boiling is this burning desire to define tests down to achieve “balance.” It shows up in public safety jobs and the military these days but public safety is the most damaged by it — there are often different physical requirements for the boys and the girls, yet once they qualify, they do the same job. This is the worst sort of foolishness; if a fireman’s got to be able to carry X weight for Y distance under Z conditions, then a firewoman had better be able to do so, too, or she’s gonna have to leave someone to die that her brothers would’ve been able to save. Unfair? –It may have the effect of setting the bar higher for women than for men but it does not make it impossible, and it could be your loved ones or even you, left to burn by someone who only got in because the bar was lowered.

Some jobs take strength or stamina; some take great powers of concetration and fine motor control. Some — Supreme Court Justice, perhaps? — merely take good sitting-down muscles at both ends. And many jobs require some basic abilities that if you, personally, lack ’em, you had not ought to be doing that job. Not even if Justice Ginsburg thinks it would be “fair.”

How they stand, what it tells you.

/ hsoi / 1 Comment

Former Texas State Representative Suzanna Gratia-Hupp:

How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.

Rather an interesting litmus test, and it holds up.

A liberal examination

/ hsoi / 3 Comments

Linoge has an enlightening little piece examining the word “liberal”.

I’ve known many so-called Liberals in my life, especially when I was in undergrad, and certainly I know many today. The sad thing is, if you go by the true definition of “liberal”:

  • open to new behavior or opinions (“open minded”)
  • willing to discard traditional values
  • favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms
  • favoring maximum individual liberty in political and social reform
  • non-interventionist
  • tolerant

most Liberals aren’t; in fact, I’d say they’re just the opposite.

Remember that change…

/ hsoi

…. can also be a bad thing.

Wow. Times like we have now, and they’re just going to keep screwing middle American harder and harder.

If you voted for Obama, Pelosi, or any of those listed in the “yes” column, can you please explain to me why you did so? Can you please explain to me how their track record over the past 6-9 months is going to have a long-term positive impact upon this country? How is this behavior making anything better?

So much for promises

/ hsoi

Remember how before he became President, Mr. Obama promised transparency in government? I guess it was a 7-Up promise: never had it, never will.

I’m not saying things were peachy before him, but he promised change and we’re not getting it.

My rainbow-farting unicorn still hasn’t arrived.

See? Socialized medicine works… we’ve got proof!

/ hsoi / 4 Comments

From John Farnam:

15 June 09 On socialized medicine, from a friend and physician: “I recently returned from Canada, where I practiced medicine for many years until I finally, in disgust, immigrated to the United States. The state of socialized medicine there is now even worse (if such a thing can be imagined) than it was when I left. The national government created seventeen ‘Regional Health Authorities,’ that pay no attention to provincial boundaries. Each is responsible for ‘ managing’ health-care decisions in their geographic area. When it became clear that didn’t work, the government responded by creating a health-care ‘ Superboard’ that dictates to regional boards. Government’s solution to messes it creates is, without fail, ‘more government!’ The net result has been fewer doctors, fewer nurses, but an ever-expanding army of ignorant bureaucrats, none of whom deliver any health care to anyone. Hospitals continue to be chronically understaffed, and waiting times for even simple medical procedures has now increased to the point where they are, for all practical purposes, unavailable. Who can afford it, come to the USA to get done what needs doing. The balance of Canadians tolerate this disaster, even as they watch their own family members languish in pain and die needlessly. They have been indoctrinated by the liberal media who tells them that they, as individuals, are insignificant. Only the government, and those in it, are important. Americans who look to Canada as a ‘shining example’ of socialized medicine are like investors who buy junk bonds, because their broker tells them, with a straight face, that junk bonds are actually better than blue-chip stocks. Those brokers, like socialists in Washington and the media, are no more than cheap hucksters, talking endlessly about the precious-few good points, while deliberating hiding the multitude of horrifying issues with national health systems like Canada’s. What ever happened to ‘full-disclosure?’ It’s time to shout down these lying con-men. The alternative will be a medical meltdown that defies the imagination. Believe me, I’ve seen it!” Comment: Is this what we thought we wanted? /John

See? Socialized medicine works. Medical care adminstered by the government works! We have proof! Witness Canada.

(I’ll stop being sarcastic now).

Fools learn from their own mistakes. Wise men learn from the mistakes of others.

I fear the number of fools in my nation is growing. I’d love to be proven wrong.

“I didn’t fight to protect this shit”

/ hsoi / 6 Comments

Read the heart-warming story of Danny Hurley, and how he got held at gunpoint and handcuffed, for taking a picture of a B-24 Liberator.

My article title comes from this part of the article:

But according to one of the crew, they had ID’d me as one of theirs, and the tower knew and tried to call it off. But once the wheels were set in motion, it could not be stopped. The pilots were pretty much cool and laughed at me and were even willing to escort me to take more shots. One old-timer gruffed under his breath, “It’s the U.S.A., not U.S.S.R. — I didn’t fight to protect this shit.” One even offered me his seat on a ride.

Don’t we all feel safer now?

An observation

/ hsoi / 2 Comments

Funny how the “armed self-defense” approach is A-okay at the macro scale in HI, but Heavens forfend they should entertain the notion of plain citizens being armed to protect themselves from footpads and highwaymen, ooooo nooooo.

– Roberta X

Micro-stamping, well-intended but useless

/ hsoi / 6 Comments

Via Sebastian I’m referred to a great article by The Arizona Rifleman on why microstamping is useless. Intentions may be good, but we know what paves the road to Hell, right?

The biggest issue is that if it’s aimed to stop crime or help police solve a crime, it just won’t do that. Either the criminal will avoid the microstamped guns, will modify their microstamped guns, or use microstamping to their advantage to cast someone else into the mix — likely an innocent person — and either frame them or just cause mounds of legal trouble for the innocent person. There’s just too much risk of problem and increased cost in this, and no benefit towards the desired goal.

If you can demonstrate a way to hurt the criminals and not hurt the law-abiding citizens, I’m all for it. But when the efforts do exactly the opposite, how can one lobby for their support? unless I guess you like helping criminals and hurting law-abiding folk.