Illegal Immigrant Youths, Children of God; Preborn Babies, Not So Much

This past weekend, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi opined about the growing crisis of unaccompanied, illegal immigrant children overwhelming our border.

In a purely cynical appeal to religious sensibilities, Pelosi said the inundation of illegal immigrants into our country isn’t a crisis but an opportunity to help because these are all God’s children.  She went on to say “If you believe as we do that every child, every person has a spark of divinity in them, and is therefore worthy of respect — what we saw in those [holding] rooms was a dazzling, sparkling array of God’s children, worthy of respect.”

Considering the source, this is one of the biggest loads of you-know-what Pelosi has offered to date.

First, she’s lying; period.

Second, who’s the “we” that believes everyone has the divine spark, worthy of respect? Catholics or Democrats? If Pelosi is including herself in with- and implying- Catholics, it’s an offense to all sincere Catholics who still revere the church, who read and believe the wisdom contained in the Bible. Pelosi rabidly advocates for abortion; she says her views on abortion are in line with the Catholic Church; she advocates for homosexual marriage; she wrote a letter to San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone suggesting that he rescind his support and participation for a recent March for Marriage in Washington D.C. Pelosi holds so many views contradictory to what the Catholic Church teaches that Cardinal Raymond Burke, the chief justice at the Vatican, recommended that she be denied communion- and rightly so.

Pelosi is as Catholic as I am a Nigerian goat herder. Hint: I’m neither Nigerian nor do I herd goats.

Now, if her “we” is implying Democrats, we know- again- Pelosi is full of it and she insults the intelligence of her audience. This is bad comedy, actually, because Democrats revere abortion (even late term abortion) and continually seek to silence religious objections to abortion. But more to the point, why are illegal immigrant children, “God’s children,” who deserve respect, but preborn children are not afforded the same classification and recognition as God’s children nor the honor of deserving the respect that comes with… life?

Anti-abortion religious believers continually make the same exact argument in defense of preborn life that Pelosi cynically makes here yet they are ridiculed and slandered as religious fanatics and fundamentalists who are wrongly or fascistically trying to force their religion onto other people. Why the double standard?

This woman has outright chutzpah using religion in an attempt to manipulate the religious sensibilities of the public as a political tool for her- and the Democrat- agenda?  Pure evil, this woman Pelosi.

The devil is not welcome, here.

Sanctimonious Whiteskins vs The Washington Redskins

This past week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (specifically, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board) rescinded the trademark registration and protection of the Washington Redskins because it decided the name ‘Redskins’ was, or is, “disparaging to Native Americans.”  Clearly, this was another example of a federal organization going above and beyond its legal limitations to spread its politically corrected, socio-political gospel.

 

One should ask why is the politically-corrected Indian lobby (i.e, politically liberal whites who use Native Americans as political pawns)- with the help of the United States Patent and Trademark Office- going after the Washington Redskins with such indignation, and not going after, with similar moral vigor and indignation- the Cleveland Indians, the Atlanta Braves, the Florida State Seminoles, the North Dakota Fighting Sioux, the Kansas City Chiefs, the Utah Utes?  Why aren’t they persecuting Chrysler to force them stop making Jeep Cherokees, Grand Cherokees and Comanches? Are these groups next or is this misguided and self-righteous crusade simply about the Redskins? And if so, why?

 

That this cadre of meddlesome fools aren’t going after similarly named mascots proves entirely how truly superficial, trivial, political, subjective and politically correct this entire non-issue is. Because a small minority of sanctimonious people (Harry Reid/Senate Democrats [who haven’t passed a budget in six years, but this is a priority], Bob Costas, Pres. Obama, the Indian Lobby) claims ‘offense,’ the name of a private business must be changed.  Never mind that most Native Americans don’t care about the name. It’s the “sensibilities” of white, meddlesome liberals that should now trump private intellectual property rights and justify subjective, irrational decisions.  Again, why is this push for a name change just against the Redskins?  Why aren’t these thin-skinned, annoying white liberals as agitated not only by the names/mascots of other teams who use AmerIndians as mentioned above, but with the many schools- on Indian reservations or predominately attended by Indians- which have Indians as mascots? The mascot for Lodge Grass High School, in Montana are the ‘Indians’; Heart Butte High are the Warriors, and the Red Mesa High School, on the Navajo Reservation in Red Mesa, Arizona, are also the Redskins. Are self-identifying Native Americans being ‘insensitive’ and ‘discriminatory,’ or engaging in self-hate and ‘disparagement?’

 

Further, why isn’t the Indian Lobby as apoplectic regarding the names of the Comanche helicopter? The Apache helicopter? The Armed OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter?  The Black Hawk helicopter?  The Chinook helicopter?  The Iroquois helicopter? The Tomahawk missile?  Will the US military be the next target of this ‘moral’ crusade, or are the names of these military weapons off limits?  If so, why?  Are some Indian names and references more offensive than others?  If so, based on what criteria- and is that criteria subjective, as is with the case of the Washington Redskins or is the criteria objective? Again, why or why not?  Those who support the attempted, forced coercion of the Redskins name change should be able- and forced to- explain specifically why Dan Snyder, the owner of the Redskins, must change the name of his organization, but schools on Indian reservations, multiple colleges and universities, Chrysler and the military are exempt.

 

And if the Redskins deserve to lose their trademark protections because of the name being offensive, why aren’t these trademarks also rescinded?  Aren’t they equally offensive and ‘disparaging?’

 

The Indian Lobby misunderstands- or more accurately, doesn’t care- that the nature of having mascots is based on the affirming notion of a group/organization intentionally identifying with someone, or something, that the group recognizes as noble and admires for having characteristics in which the group believes are self-reflective, which is why Democrats are asses (see what I did there?). In other words, it’s intentionally self-identifying with that which is revered. The mascot inspires confidence within the group and, at least at one point in time, intimidation of those outside the group. Choosing to be identified as a Redskin, a Warrior, a Seminole, or a Fighting Sioux isn’t meant to disparage; people don’t choose to identify with mascots that are disparaging or that signify weakness.

 

Also, the term ‘Redskins’ isn’t ‘explicitly’ racial as it’s constantly claimed to be; it’s explicitly descriptive. Referring to the color of one’s skin isn’t explicitly or implicitly racial (the negative connotations of the term) by any stretch of the imagination. People refer to the color of other peoples’ skin all the time (unless it’s the media reporting on black criminality in which it goes out of its way to avoid mentioning the explicit racial description). When people reference race as an explicit description, are they being inherently racist for doing so?  Of course not.  And more to the point, who uses the term Redskin(s) as a pejorative racial epithet anyway?  Of course, white liberals claim it’s a racial epithet, but white liberals have a history and an embarrassingly long list of bad examples of saying many things that, while aren’t true in the least, serves the purposes of their agenda and its implementation.

 

Frankly, this trivial and insignificant non-issue of forcing the Redskins out of existence is about demonstrating the power and influence of a a very bored, vocal minority in the Indian lobby and the federal government. Never mind the history of the term, its creation and use by… Native Americans. The politically-correct Indian lobby would rather create and fight unserious problems like this while ignoring very real problems that negatively affect the quality of life among Native Americans.  For example, almost 30% of Native Americans live in poverty; the illegitimacy rate is 64%; the infant mortality rate is higher than the national average; the destructive affects of alcoholism and binge drinking affect Native Americans disproportionately; the high school graduation rates of Native Americans are lower than the national average; the use and abuse of smoking and other tobacco products are higher than their peers, etc.  These are real problems facing Native Americans and are summarily ignored in favor of the trivial, simply so the morally-confused can revel in their own sanctimony. Changing and NFL team’s mascot from the Redskins isn’t going to have any meaningful impact or change the standard of living of Native Americans, no matter how good it makes the Whiteskins feel.

 

This episode is perfectly reflective of blacks in the media, academia (for sure); politics, the irrelevant so-called civil rights groups, the Black and Racial Grievance Industry (again, many of whom are white liberals and part of the Indian Lobby) who waste enormous and disproportionate amounts of time worrying about insignificant figures like Cliven Bundy or Donald Sterling; or creating and reacting to ‘microaggressions,’ while intentionally ignoring the self-inflicted moral and cultural degradation of the people these so-called representatives claim to represent. Horrible schools, dissolved families, disproportionate representation in violent crime and the penitentiary system, high unemployment, high rates of poverty, etc. are all secondary (and ultimately, insignificant) to the primacy of some intentionally-created racial boogeyman that’s somehow indicative or characteristic of the culture as a whole.  Who cares about actual problems; maintaining the racial narrative is paramount.

 

So, I ask again, where does this crusade end?  And how is it justified?

 

It should be clear that this meaningless crusade is nothing more than out-of-control political correctness, which at its core, is fascism. Aside from the ginned-up non controversy, the fact that the government and its bureaucracy continually seeks to arbitrarily infringe on- and limit- the rights of its citizens w/o proper legal cause should be especially concerning to all.

Anemic Economic Recovery, Year Six

The bad news from the Veterans Affairs scandal, the tepid commencement speech at West Point- which was coldly received, and the extremely questionable decision to trade five high-level terrorists from Gitmo for “missing” soldier Bowe Bergdahl, in addition to several other presidential missteps has been a distraction from the ongoing bad news regarding the economy. But it won’t change the reality that a country dependent on liberal policies for wealth creation and economic growth, won’t create wealth and won’t grow.

 

Like ours.

 

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, we are now into the sixth year of a supposed economic recovery. But the economy resembles anything but recovered.

 

The jobless rate remained at 6.3% in May. ADP says that 179k private sector jobs were added in May, compared to 217,000 jobs the BLS says were created, which was down from April. May was yet another month in which job creation didn’t keep up with population growth.

 

“Economic recovery.”

 

The labor force participation rate also remained unchanged at 62.8%, the third time the participation rate has been this low during the Obama presidency. If the current labor force participation rate was the same as it was at the start of this recovery in June 2009, (65.7%), the unemployment rate would be above 10%.

 

The number of “unemployed” people tallies 9.5 million people. The average length of unemployment is 34.5 weeks (almost six months). Thirty-five percent of unemployed people have been jobless for 27+ weeks. A third of the jobs created are in the low wage sector. The 2.1% wage increase doesn’t offset inflation. We just recovered all of the jobs lost prior to the recession (’07), but we’ve added an additional 10-plus million people to the labor force.  And over 92 million people aren’t in the labor force, 11.5 million more than when Obama took office.

 

“Economic Recovery.”

 

As it pertains to Hispanics and blacks, their jobless numbers were 7.7% and 11.5%, respectively. Black unemployment has a history of being roughly twice the national rate. Unfortunately, the black employment rate hasn’t “rallied” nearly as quickly as it has for the country overall. The reason- blacks have continued to diligently look for work longer than the national prospecting average, which means they’re counted as being part of the labor force for a longer period of time. The extended duration of prospecting is partially responsible for the perpetually a high unemployment rate including, the disparity between the black/white unemployment rates.

 

“Economic Recovery.”

 

This stellar job picture is in addition to news that the GDP’s first quarter growth was downgraded from .1% to -1%. This means the economy contracted last quarter. This is the second such economic contraction in three years, the other being the first quarter of 2011 was when the economy “grew” at -1.3%. Earlier this month when addressing the current economic contraction before the Joint Economic Committee, Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen told lawmakers that she viewed the contraction as a “pause” in growth.” Pause in growth. A ‘pause’ would be zero growth; -1% isn’t a pause. Only a progressive can walk backwards while claiming s/he is moving forward.

 

In addition to the economic contraction, the Wall Street Journal reported that worker productivity also plunged 3.2% in the first quarter.  Economists continue to blame the ‘harsh winter’ for the drop in worker productivity and the contraction of the GDP, but drops like these, are due to much more than the weather.

 

“Economic Recovery.”

 

The sixth year of President Obama’s prosaic economic recovery also sees stagnant wages (2.1% increase over the last twelve months) and increased school loan debt, which now totals over a trillion dollars. People having increased debt are partially responsible for the low volume of mortgage applications. Many of those who can’t afford to purchase homes are the often-cited Millenials. With increasing school debt, less-than-perfect credit, tougher qualifications for lending approval- combined with the inability to find work, Millenials are being prevented from participating and contributing to the economy. That’s why a third of Millenials are currently living with their parents.  The present situation affecting Millenials doesn’t inspire much optimism for the future of our economy.

 

But it’s not just Millenials who are having a rough go at finding work. According to the Labor Department’s own statistics, more than 10 million men aren’t in the labor force- which means they’re not working nor looking for work. This is a record high. Additionally, there are 3 million men who’re counted as in the labor force but who aren’t employed: these are men would work if they could find a job. That’s 13 million men negatively affected by the recovery who would otherwise be participating and contributing to the economy. “War on women?”

 

Nope. “Economic Recovery.”

 

To give more insight into how bad the national apathy is regarding our current economic picture, a recent poll showed that 47% of unemployed people have completely given up the hope of finding a job. In another poll, 60% said that their version of the American Dream was unachievable.

 

And if you think that Obama may do something advantageous for the country to spur the economic engine, if only for optics, forget it. Obama’s new, congressionally circumventing EPA regulations that claim to reduce carbon emissions over the next fifteen years, will actually reduce the presence of the coal industry. It will also wipe out over 200,000 jobs, cost the economy upwards of $50 billion dollars a year and, increase electricity rates- that fulfills Obama’s promise that “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

 

This isn’t an “economic recovery” by any stretch of the progressive’s imagination.

 

The past six years have demonstrated a clear, unadulterated truth. From the moment Obama sat down in the Oval Office-, the economy wasn’t a priority of his domestic agenda. Instead, Obama eagerly sought to implement as much of his expensive ideology as he could. From the “stimulus bill,” to “investing in ‘green energy,’” to increasing taxes and nurturing class warfare; to increasing entitlements and government dependency, to his financial reform bill, to adding endless pages of EPA regulations, etc., the president never intended to resurrect the economy.

 

Don’t expect him to start now.