This blog consists mostly of common sense responses to happenings (news articles, political events, etc) that just cry out for someone to say "WHOA! Hang on a second, here!" Too many people get away with just inventing their own facts as they bull-rush their way through an argument.

Unless you're dodging a taxicab or sidestepping a falling gargoyle, it's usually wise to take what time is available to evaluate and apply actual common sense. Good, old wisdom. It is, of course, my opinion, but I'll try to show why I think it's factual.
Thomas Paine said, "To argue with someone who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." ... but I argue with drunks, egomaniacs, anti-gun Statists, Socialist/Keynesians and climate-fraud peddlers, too.

**PLEASE share this around. I didn't research, consider, write and post this junk just to have it hidden.
And feel free to comment.**

CONTACT SophosArchaeus: eMail at sophosarchaeus@hushmail.com
NOTE: this page does not endorse violence, racism or threats, nor permit such abuse in any direction.
Though Americans are fully able to end a fight, that is a last-resort, defense-only option.
If you're here for such crap, get the hell off my page!]

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Truth really does set you free.

On page A13 (2nd section) of May 14th’s Daily Bulletin, is a short (5 column inches) article. It represents the major reasons for problems and divisions that we see now. There are reasons for our crashed economy, a bankrupt California, the rise of Socialists in America, welfare-dependant millions who don’t believe they can compete, riots in bankrupt, Socialist Greece, American school kids at odds over U.S. and foreign flags, degradation of family values and people completely ignoring the written word of law. Some normally sensible people actually believe that “racism” and “oppression” are somehow invisibly included in a simple, fair bill, because some leaders say it is.

How can a short article include all of that? For one thing, “Assembly OKs felons’ food aid”, reports that, in the same week that Schwarzenegger announced “terrible cuts” in the state budget, Assembly Democrats passed a bill to allow convicted drug dealers to receive food stamps, without even seeking treatment for addiction. The federal system bans all drug felons from receiving the aid after release. California opted out of that ban in 2004, allowing assistance for drug offenders, with proof of treatment. On May 13th, Sandre Swanson (D-Oakland) won 42 Democratic votes to eliminate the drug treatment requirement. So, despite rampant debt, bankruptcy and huge citizen opposition to non-essential spending, Progressives add another taxpayer supported perk for drug dealers. “To prevent recidivism”. Right: free food prevents drug sales!

But that doesn’t cover all those other problems, does it? The article’s other aspect is that it is buried on A13 (2nd section). Few people read in depth beyond the first few pages (& the comics)and the “mainstream media” knows it. The White House makes unpopular announcements late on Sundays for the TV version of the same strategy. Progressives don’t want this new, preposterous giveaway known to taxpayers (who have to pay for it) only a few months before November’s already tough elections.

This mislead/ignore/minimize/hide tactic still works for those who cannot access cable or internet sources for news. Obama himself said that “technology is a distraction from democracy and emancipation”, though our Republic was emancipated by a million dead Union troops. He has no interest in "game boys, playstations or ipods", just Web access and Cable news. Other Socialist comments, hidden theft of billions, real politics of terrorists, actual content of laws (like Arizona’s, or “health care”) and other facts are widely known, for anyone who wants to know, on the web and cable news. At least you can decide for yourself, if you have the actual facts. Obama has to stifle this because FOX and others are out-drawing all other sources, and he is losing his dwindling support as the People learn.

Front pages and broadcast news are reserved for things like the President and Attorney General making false claims about a new law; they only admit that they never read it when they are under oath - - and on cable or page 13.

Harder to Stand Up for America and justice.

In his article of May 13th, “Easier for parents”, Ruben Navarette Jr. joins the throng of baseless, main-stream-media attacks on American sovereignty and patriotism, in favor of foreign supremacy. He says, “I have no idea what five students at Live Oak H.S… have in mind…” and then, like Obama, goes ahead and speculates anyway. He feels they are “good actors”.

Navarette makes 'mischief' the prime motivator of the Patriots; “they just spontaneously got the urge to wear… T-shirts adorned with American flags”. Oh, the horror! Shades of Maxine Waters and, “acting outlandishly… having a great time, laughing, waving American flags”! Its not like these and many other kids haven’t worn patriotic items before, or need anyone’s permission now. “The mood just happened to strike them on the fifth of May [translated]”. And…?? What significance does that date have in the U.S.? It has almost none in Mexico; not an official holiday, any more than the anniversary of the Battle of Charleston does here. They had no evident problem (nor did Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez) with dozens of foreign flags and shirts being worn by other students, but wanted to show the pride of some Americans in America. No one reports any racist or anti-immigrant taunts from the boys, sitting quietly at the lunch table when they were rounded up and sent home.

There is no District or school policy against wearing flag apparel. Navarette reports that administrators had asked students not to wear any sort of flag clothing. I am glad to hear this; since it has not been reported elsewhere and I have been unable to find this claim in Rodriguez’s statements. Unfortunately, Navarette gives no source. In any case, Rodriguez admits that there was no actual “trouble”, and he probably acted unnecessarily. Oh, and only the five “American” kids were ordered into the office, only they were ordered to turn their “flags” inside out and only they were told to go home “unexcused” when they declined. While all the others were left alone. When this happened, the boys “started acting like victims, insisting that the school was picking on them. How unreasonable of them!

Since that day, pro-Mexican flag students have walked out, tussled with administrators and bystanders, thrown down and trampled American flags, and complained about how badly they are being “disrespected”. A few outlets made heroes out of the America advocates. The rest of “mainstream media”, like Navarette, make them out to be trouble-making, racist, anarchists. Having been singled out for behaving like citizens in their own country, celebrated AND reviled, they are a bit confused and trying to figure out how to act. The 15 and 16 year olds know that what they did was perfectly within the rules and the law, but they are either trumpeted or attacked no matter what they say or do, yet Navarette wants them to find some other way to act.

Navarette claims that he was all set to defend the boys. Their rights were trampled on, the American flag shouldn’t threaten anyone (outside of terrorists) and there is something wrong about assuming any American (regardless of race) would react to the Stars and Stripes “like a bull reacts to a red cape”.

Evidently, Navarette’s divination that Rodriguez told everyone to leave all flags at home but disciplined only five American-promoters, changed his mind. Now, he muses about parents. “Parents”, he tells us, “find it easier to defend kids unconditionally than to raise them properly for the benefit of society. The result is a crop of defiant and narcissistic kids who demand attention and think the rules don’t apply to them.” This is most certainly true. Some kids will defy rules. They will also disrespect their own country (without discipline), leave school and cause disturbances, shout support for “the race”, and then demand respect for an amorphous allegiance to a foreign power whose corruption, failed economy and treatment of aliens drove their own parents to come to the U.S. for opportunity. Of course, the vast majority of all students stayed in school, though threats kept the five at home.

Navarette concludes, saying that conservatives want to make this about loss of American sovereignty, while it is really about having already lost of control of their kids. As noted above, some kids (few, fortunately) really do have anti-societal values and anti-American perspectives. Next he will tell us that somehow the U.S. southwest is “stolen land”. That Texans’ war of independence (1836) and the Mexican war (1846) were not won by the north, that Mexico did not sign a treaty (1848) and the U.S. did not pay the 2010 equivalent of over half a billion dollars to the bankrupt Mexican government for basically empty land that Mexico (with Spain and France) had stolen from the Indians a generation before. The problem is, all of that is true, but it makes his position harder to sell.

Monday, May 10, 2010

RE: Preschool “Return on investment”

In his 5-10 Point of View, D.A. Ramos makes taxpayer-funded preschool out to be a panacea for all of society’s ills. Let me say at the outset that Preschool is a good idea. Parents should invest in positive activities for their kids. Also, kids should get good, healthy meals.

Ramos points out that (according to un-footnoted sources) preschool provides benefits worth $7 to $16 in improvements to society for every dollar spent. $7 to $16 is what is known as a “shotgun” spread , the high end is more than double the low end, meaning that the underlying research is so general as to be unreliable; such as the preposterous ‘climate fraud’ or ‘stimulus jobs’ numbers. I did find his numbers, produced by liberal think tanks or agencies that depend on the tax dollars for their payroll. It is numerical wishful thinking.

The problem with this program is making taxpayers pay for it, in this miserable economy; California unemployment stayed above 11% and INCREASED again last month. Ramos does not mention that taxpayer-funded preschool programs not only include, but actively RECRUIT clients advertizing that "Immigration status does not matter”. That is the phrase on flyers that Head Start and others distribute. He doesn’t point out that 90-passenger school busses (7 MPG) transport 10 or 20 students, who are dropped off and picked up at bus stops by parents driving cars; some with $1,200 dollars worth of 22” wheels. These kids then get free (on the taxpayer) breakfast, lunch and medical checkups. All great for the kids and easy on the parents, but why is it at taxpayer expense, since none of this is educational? I paid for my kids’ preschool, fed them before driving them there and took them to my pediatrician afterward.

To be clear, kids deserve the best they can get. Their parents should provide it. If they can’t, many churches, charities and organizations help out, though increasing taxes and unemployment hurt their donations. Still, I can beat Ramos’ “44% more likely to graduate” and “decreases in crime, welfare and remedial education”.

There are many worthy youth groups, operating at little or no taxpayer expense and run on volunteerism and donations. As a rule, they get no more government help than any citizen/visitor off the street could get by asking for a tour. Here is Boy Scouting’s impact: only 1% ever have any crime involvement, while 4% become Eagle Scouts. Scouts (any rank) account for 85% of Student Body presidents, 71% of football captains, 72% of Rhodes Scholars, 68% of West Point graduates and 26 of the first 29 astronauts . They also have a huge impact on health and fitness.

Parents and private donations pay for this, not taxes, and they are also hurting: the last time BSA could afford this research (mostly school statistics) was over 10 years ago, and the ACLU is constantly suing the “evil” BSA for it’s efforts. Also, California Senate Democrats just denied BSA a commendation for 100 years of service to 110 million boys, and a liberal court recently held that Cities may no longer RENT park space to BSA, though KKK, “the Race” and Socialists may use it.

Ramos celebrates the fact that “California is leading the nation in it’s commitment to after school programs”. We are also leading the charge on state Bankruptcy, and have appealed for federal bailouts. We have seen how well things have gone for the formerly “Golden State”, as Progressive Democrats have built majorities in both houses. In the 1940’s people moved here for opportunity. Now, anyone who can afford to leave gets out while they still have something left. Ramos, up for re-election himself, goes on to praise Schwarzenegger for inflating the preschool budget, and profiles a Progressive platform for candidates in upcoming elections: 'kids should be raised by big government, rather than parents'.

Clearly, this course has not turned out so well. Perhaps we should get back on a "profitable" investment track, instead of throwing good money after bad.