Sandra Fluke And Her Imaginary Pay Gap

It is discrimination to demand equality where none in fact exists. It is stupidity to see what is unequal and but to say it is equal. Then stupidity is one Sandra Fluke’s calling card, from Puffington Post:

A significant gender pay gap still persists, which is why we cannot be passive as we acknowledge Equal Pay Day. This year, Equal Pay Day is April 8th, which represents how far into 2014 women must work to earn what men did in 2013. While it often feels like our battle for gender equality has come so far, it’s startling to see that women still earn just 77 cents to the dollar that men earn. Women of color are hit especially hard: African-American and Hispanic women earn 70 percent and 61 percent, respectively, of what white men earn. Without any male income in their household, single women and lesbians may feel the pay gap effect all the more. This wage gap costs working women and their families more than $10,000 annually, and over a lifetime that cumulative effect of lower wages jeopardizes women’s retirement security.

From, Daily Beast:

What is wrong and embarrassing is the President of the United States reciting a massively discredited factoid. The 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for differences in occupations, positions, education, job tenure, or hours worked per week. When all these relevant factors are taken into consideration, the wage gap narrows to about five cents.

Ms Fluke thinks see is smart enough to serve in the California legislature, but see is too stupid to see beyond a White House talking point.

Letter from First Lieutenant Patrick Cook:

My letter to Congress, read today at Texas Senate committee on Constitutional Carry. It is now public record.

To my friends, fellow Texans, brothers in arms, members of the committee, and everyone within the sound of my voice, greetings.

My name is First Lieutenant Patrick Cook of the 49th Transportation Battalion, Fort Hood, Texas, and this past Wednesday I found myself trapped in an enclosed room with fourteen of my fellow Soldiers, one of whom was barricading the door against a madman with a .45 pistol when he was fatally shot. Through what I can only describe as a miracle, he somehow found enough strength to continue pushing against that door until the shooter gave up and went elsewhere, at which time he collapsed. Nearly a week later, I can still taste his blood in my mouth from when I and my comrades breathed into his lungs for 20 long minutes while we waited for a response from the authorities. This Soldier’s name was Sergeant First Class Daniel Ferguson, and his sacrifice loaned me the rest of my life to tell this story.

But I write to you today not to memorialize this brave Soldier, nor to tell a war story about how we made the best of a losing situation, but to express the part of that story that some in high positions of power clearly do not want told: I knew this was going to happen. I had been saying for five years that Fort Hood was a tinderbox of another massacre waiting to happen. It had to happen, because our betters failed to learn the obvious lesson of five years ago. Worse yet, I know it will happen again. More will die, more will be wounded, more families will be torn apart, needlessly. It happened again, and will happen again, because Fort Hood is a gun free zone.

When the first shots rang out, my hand reached to my belt for something that wasn’t there. Something that could have put a stop to the bloodshed, could have made it merely an “ugly incident” instead of the horrific massacre that I will surely remember as the darkest twenty minutes of my life. Stripped of my God-given Right to arm myself, the only defensive posture I had left was to lie prostrate on the ground, and wait to die. As the shooter kicked at the door, I remember telling myself, “oh well, this is it.” It is beneath human dignity to experience the utter helplessness I felt that day. I cannot abide the thought that anyone should ever feel that again.

At the point blank range at which this shooting occurred, anyone with an M9 and some basic instruction could have ended the mayhem as quickly as it began. An MP by trade and a CHL holder, I am convinced that concealed weapons would have stopped it, but openly carried side-arms, like the ones carried in a law enforcement capacity, could have prevented it entirely. Instead, many more died because of the fatally misguided restrictions on the carrying of arms, which obviously the madman did not respect.

I shall conclude by restating my warning. This will happen again, and again until we learn the lesson that suppressing the bearing of arms doesn’t prevent horrific crimes, it invites them. To those of you who hold elected office, if you hear nothing else I have told you, hear this: you have the power to stop the next massacre from happening. You have an opportunity to restore the sacred Right to bear arms, which has been either stripped entirely or unjustly relegated to the poor substitute of a probationary, government-issued privilege. For God’s sake, do the right thing.

Thank you for your attention, and good day.

Hat tip, Dan Cannon, Guns Save Lives

An American Fighting Man should not have to cower in fear like a trapped rat.

There is an unconfirmed rumor that four out of five detainees at Guantanamo would rather be water boarded than be forced to eat a Michelle Obama school lunch.

Hat tip photo and more, Blaze:

Students Fed Up With Michelle Obama’s School Lunch Overhaul — Menu-Item Snapshots Spell Out Why

In my nine years of eating school lunches, I was never served such a pathetic meal.

Back to Guantanamo, I suspect that serving such a meal to a POW would violate one of the Geneva Conventions.

Kudos to Mark Black and boo to Sandra Lyon.   Most, if not all, primary schools declare them to to both gun free and drug free.   So you would thing that a person, especially a teacher, who attempt to stop the open sale of  illegal drugs in school class room would be deemed a hero.   You would be wrong.  It appears the only reason that stopping  the open sale of illegal drugs is not a hanging offense is the lack of rope, video:

Hat tip and more, William A. Jacobson, Legal Insurrection.

So h0w long will it take Eric Holder’s Department of [In]Justice to instigate a civil rights complaint against Black?

From NJ.COM:

TRENTON — Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell is dismissing Gov. Chris Christie as a non-factor in the presidential race because of the controversial closing of lanes to the George Washington Bridge. He named Jeb Bush as his favorite GOP contender.

“Not only can Chris Christie not win, I think he may have trouble finishing out his term,” Rendell said Tuesday at the Rebovich Institute at Rider University. He added later: “There’s absolutely no chance that he didn’t know this was going on if he didn’t order it or OK it. So I think he’s not a factor.”

Well, he most certainly isn’t, so long as he runs under the GOP banner. But about a year ago, I came out in these spaces and predicted that we’d see Christie change parties and run for the White House as a Democrat. That’s aprediction I stand by insofar as it’s the only way he will surface as a candidate for the office. Rendell is correct that “Bridgegate”, however manufactured, is going to be too big an issue.

But watch… Let’s play a game of “What if”….

What happens when Christie Changes parties? Given his history of knowing how low to bow to the Democrats and when, the change of politics really isn’t all that much. But it does two other things. First, the mayor of Ft. Lee NJ, himself an aspiring Governor, suddenly gets forgetful, to the point of asking “What traffic jam?”

Such a move also pits him squarely against a very deeply flawed Hillary Clinton, and the specter of a third term for a deeply unpopular (even in his own party) Obama… and even absent the constitutional issues, it’s our assessment his political career is over when he leaves the office.  This is a situation which makes the White House attainable for Christie in ways it never would be if he stayed with the GOP, a party he has invariably come down to the left of, despite the party’s own left leaning.

I’m slightly more skeptical of my prediction, at the moment, but then again, the time between now and the next presidential cycle is two long (and for the Democrats, painful) years away. And as I say, it’s the only out for Christie, an obviously politically ambitious man.

Addendum:  DavidL:

If conservatives want to win national elections, we have to stop letting liberals pick our candidates, see John McCain.   Christie’s love affairs with Barack Obama and gun control leave him with some explaining to do.   Yet, Rendell’s anointed GOP favorite Jeb Bush is endorsed amnesty by declaring love trumps the rule of law is making himself radio active.  News flash, Clyde Barrow said it love a money, and not utter disregard for laws which caused him to rob banks.   Finally,  Rand Paul has a father problem.   Paul the Younger needed to put some distance between him and the Paul the Senior.   Junior is failing,

finally had the time to sit and spend some time with the blind web site and its crossties to Facebok, Twitter, etc. I did manage to get them all working.  Added a terabyte of drive space to my desktop. (Thank you, Donna) That part is surprisingly un-full, even after swallowing most of my home network.

Anyone who has spent any degree of time reading these spaces recognizes the fact that we don’t consider the politico to be a bastion of right wing thought by any stretch of imagination.  That said, an interesting little report showed up today in which we read …

Problems getting judges confirmed by the Senate have been a constant complaint for this White House — but this week, President Barack Obama’s aides are celebrating a confirmation count that outpaces President George W. Bush’s.

Oh we must tolerate, no embrace, Muslims, but we dare not let our culture offend them, from Detroit Free Press:

Some Muslim parents are concerned about public schools in Dearborn handing out flyers to all students advertising an Easter egg hunt, saying it violates the principle of church and state separation.

A flyer headlined “Eggstravaganza!” was given to students this week at three elementary schools in the Dearborn Public Schools district, which has a substantial number of Muslim students. The flyer described an April 12 event at Cherry Hill Presbyterian Church in Dearborn featuring an egg hunt, relay race, and egg toss. It asked students to RSVP “to secure your free spot” and included images of eggs and a bunny.

I offer two challenges. One attempt to find the concept of Separation of Church and State any where in the Constitution and two, find a connection to Christianity in an Easter egg hunts:

The practice of decorating eggshell is ancient, pre-dating Christian traditions.[6] Ostrich eggs with engraved decoration that are 60,000 years old have been found in Africa.[7] Decorated ostrich eggs, and representations of ostrich eggs in gold and silver, were commonly placed in graves of the ancient Sumerians and Egyptians as early as 5,000 years ago

Good luck Mr. Phelps.

Reax, Rick Moran:

I am calling BS on that parent. If his kid said that, my name is Mohammed. Besides, the flyer isn’t telling anyone to “go to church.” It’s inviting kids over to have some fun. And how can these secular symbols of Easter be defined as “religious”? Maybe the Muslims think that Christians worship bunny rabbits.

I note, that tolerance is a one way street.

What is the difference between a “gun-free safety zone”  and a free fire zone?   The sign.   It seems, at least at Fort Hood, that a shooter kills until confronted by anybody with a gun.   Hence the more people given access to guns the sooner the shooter will meet armed resistance and the fewer people will die, from Richard Fernandez, Belmont Club:

The phrase “shelter in place” has been used at least twice in the last few hours. The first was in reference to a shooting at Fort Hood. “The incident began shortly after 5 p.m., when Ft. Hood tweeted and broadcast an alarm that all personnel should take shelter in place” The second was to do with Kent State. “Kent State campus puts shelter in place after gunfire.”

Shelter in place, or hide under a desk and politely wait your tern to die.

Fernandez:

Gradually the word has morphed to mean to hide somewhere in case a roving shooter guns you down. Wikipedia notes: “The phrase has also erroneously been used, instead of the more accurate lockdown, to describe precautions to be taken by the public when violence has occurred or might occur (particularly in shootings) in the area and the perpetrator is believed to still be in the area but not apprehended. The public in the area is advised to carry out all the same tasks as a typical shelter-in-place but without the key step of sealing the shelter up to prevent outside air from circulating indoors, in this scenario people are simply urged to lockdown – stay indoors and “close, lock and stay away from external doors and windows.”

Soldiers have traditionally advanced towards the sound of gun fire. Shelter in place is an order act like a coward rather than a soldier.   Luckily good soldiers sometimes disobey bad orders, from Fox News:

Gripping accounts of heroism are emerging in the aftermath of Wednesday’s Fort Hood shooting massacre, including the story of one soldier who died trying to hold a door shut, preventing the gunman from killing dozens of military personnel packed inside the room.

Army Sgt. Danny Ferguson, who had just returned from deployment in Afghanistan, was killed while trying to keep the shooter from entering the room, Ferguson’s fiancee, Kristen Haley, told WTSP-TV.

Haley, also a soldier, told the station that Ferguson held the door shut “because it wouldn’t lock.”

Time to let our soldiers be soldiers again and let them defend themselved, every officer, commission or non-commission, should be armed. It will put a stop to having lone lunatics freely roam a free fire zone.

Is a Bush v. Clinton grudge match looming?  From Politico:

Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush may not agree on much, but they surely recognize they need each other in 2016. Only the nomination of both for president by their respective parties makes the dynasty issue go away.

While Clinton has long led her party’s 2016 presidential wish list, the ascension of Jeb Bush up the GOP board is more recent. But make no mistake: Many top Republicans would love him to run, as reported by the Washington Post and discussed on the Sunday shows over the weekend. I have heard the same thing for months from the highest levels of the GOP, which is part of the reason why Bush now occupies the top spot on our University of Virginia Center for Politics Crystal Ball rankings of the 2016 Republican contenders (Clinton obviously tops our Democratic rankings).

The very idea that just two alternating families would occupy the White House for 28 of the 36 years between 1989 and 2025 would have been abhorrent to America’s founding fathers. They weren’t enthusiastic supporters of participatory democracy, but they knew a monarchial line when they saw one, and started a revolution to end it on these shores. The presidency was never supposed to be a household inheritance.

A presidential match up between Mr. William Clinton and Jeb Bush would not be a contest between political  dynasties. Jeb Bush would be the third member of family seeking the fourth Bush term. In contrast, Mrs. Clinton would merely be a bread seeking a third term for her husband, B.J. Clinton. The contest would a choice between the third Bush and the first, and only, Clinton.

Both Mrs. Clinton and Jeb Bush would have some explaining to do.  Bush has to explain his support for Amnesty and Common Core.   But unlike Mrs. Clinton, Bush does not to explain dead bodies like Ron Brown and Vince Foster.   We don’t need any more stains on the carpet in the Oval Office.  Say no to B.J. bid for a third.

Other than that fact the Head Start does not work, it is a shame the Strutting Delaware Blue Hen,  a/k/a Obama’s Life Insurance Policy. b/k/a Vice President Joe Biden is too old, and senile, have reaped any of the programs alleged benefit, from Washington Times:

Vice President Joseph R. Biden asked Americans Saturday to confront lawmakers who oppose raising the federal minimum wage.

“Ask your representatives who oppose raising the federal minimum wage—why do they oppose it?” Mr. Biden said in the White House weekly address. “There’s no reason in the world why an American working 40 hours a week has to live in poverty.”

No Mr. Vice President. Rather than living in poverty, a minimum wage earner is more likely a child living at home, covered under their parents medical insurance, from Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less. Among employed teenagers paid by the hour, about 21 percent earned the minimum wage or less, compared with about 3 percent of workers age 25 and over.

For purposes of Obama Care, the regime has defined people under the age of twenty-six as children. So why does anybody living rent free and with no need to pay Obama Care premiums need more money for video games?

Washington Times again:

“There’s clear data that shows fair wages generate loyalty of workers to their employers, which has the benefit of increasing productivity and leading to less turn over,” Mr. Biden said. “It’s really good for the economy as a whole because raising the minimum wage would generate an additional $19 billion in additional income for people who need it the most.”

If the benefits of a wage increase were as alleged by Mr. Biden, there would be no need for federal legislation. Employers would do it of their own accord.

Aside from golf and separate vacations, there is not much the Obama regime actually likes, and a free press is not like a separate vacation, from Daily Caller:

A reporter has been detained by Capitol Hill police for trying to ask a question of Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy.

[…]

[Ari] Natter was detained while covering the American Council On Renewable Energy conference, where McCarthy spoke. Also speaking at the conference was Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a staunch supporter of green energy who regularly takes the Senate floor to sound the alarm on global warming.

Hat tip and reax, Karen, Lonely Conservative:

He was then held by Capitol police until they verified that he had press credentials. Who knows what they would have done if he didn’t pass the background check.

Evidently the self-proclaimed professor of constitutional law has trouble understanding the actual Constitution, First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

It is the People, and not merely agents selected by the state, who have the right of free speech.  The right of free speech is presumed to be granted by God and as such it is beyond the power of the state to license.

Jeff Jacoby professes to be shocked to learn that a  UK, home one Johnathan Swift,  hospital was using dead babies to heat hospitals, from, Boston Globe:

Jonathan Swift was being satirical when he penned his “modest proposal” that destitute Irish parents alleviate their financial woes by selling their children as delicacies for rich landowners. He assured his readers that 1-year-olds are delicious, “whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled.”

That was satire circa 1729. Imagine what Swift at his most scathing would write today — say, a 21st-century “modest proposal” to use unborn fetuses for renewable energy.

But this — from a prominent story last week in The Telegraph, a British newspaper — wasn’t satire:

“The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found. Ten [National Health Service] trusts have admitted burning fetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat . . . At least 15,500 fetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts over the last two years alone, Channel 4’s ‘Dispatches’ discovered.”

At Addenbrooke’s, a hospital in Cambridge, England, the fetuses from 797 miscarriages and abortions were burned in a facility designed to generate electricity and heat. Releases given to the women by the hospital had specified only that the remains would be “cremated.” Elsewhere, according to the Channel 4 broadcast that broke the story, hospital staff were more candid. After suffering a miscarriage, 35-year-old Cathryn Hurley recalled in an interview, she asked the nurse what would happen to the baby she had just lost. She was told it would be incinerated with the rest of the day’s clinical waste.

“That was really difficult to hear,” said Hurley, her voice trembling. “Because to me, it wasn’t the day’s waste. It was my baby. It would have been nice to have some kind of choice about it — to, kind of, mark that baby’s life — and there was nothing within the hospital that gave us that opportunity.”

The exposé set off a furor, and British officials quickly condemned the practice. Clearly, the thought of burning unborn babies to heat hospitals horrifies many people. But just as clearly it doesn’t horrify everyone, or there would have been no scandal to expose.

An Addenbrooke’s spokesman told the Daily Mail that the hospital used to dispose of fetal remains in dignity at the Cambridge City Crematorium. It decided to switch to its own main incinerator — the same one it uses to burn trash and recover energy — when the crematorium raised its prices. Hospital managers were facing budgetary pressures, and needed to be “careful with the use of limited resources.”

From a strictly utilitarian point of view, why not? Not only did the hospital save £18.50 per cremation, it helped cut energy costs as well. It doesn’t make any difference to the fetus how it’s disposed of. Why should it make a difference to us?

The answer used to be self-evident: Human beings are more than mere flesh, more than just one organism among all other organisms. Death doesn’t transform us into “clinical waste,” suitable for recycling or fueling an industrial heating system. Human beings have moral agency; that is what elevates us above every other creature. It is why human rights are intrinsic and universal, it is why human life must be treated with dignity — and why human remains must be handled with dignity when we die. And yes, it’s why even the remains of an unborn baby should be treated respectfully.

Just how shocked should Mr. Jacoby be? If undesired babies are deemed to analogous to a cancer tumor their dead bodies are just another form of medical waste.  Using dead babies as furnace fuel it part and parcel of the culture of death.  I have to think some one if the Obama regime is mad because he did not think of this first.

The retards known as the Obama regime continue to give us imaginary solutions to imaginary problems:

(CNSNews.com) – Following several years of “constructive dialog” with the LGBT community, the U.S. Justice Department is now training law enforcement officers on how to better understand and help the “transgender community.”

There are but two sexes, male and female. I might imagine myself a leprechaun, having consumed two many pints of Guinness. However imagining  myself to be a leprechaun can not no make me a leprechaun than Chasity Bono can imagine herself into becoming a male.   Instead of being sensitive, how about investing in some biology textbooks?

Follow the money. Eric opined:

The conservative agenda needs to be properly explained and sold tominorities and single women

All well and good. However in addition to explaining the conservative agenda, the liberal agenda must be understood. Don’t think of the Democrat party as a political party but rather as a criminal enterprise. For example, the phoney science of so-called anthropogenic global warming is not intended to control what can not be control, to wit Mother Nature, but rather to enrich selected political donors who will profit off so-called green energy.

When legal guns sales are made illegal, the illegal gun dealers will have a monopoly, from Liberty Unyielding:

Liberal California state Sen. Leland Yee has been a fervent advocate of gun control, but with recent allegations that he was involved in illegal gun trafficking, his previous statements are quickly making him the poster boy for left-wing hypocrisy. Check out the video above, posted May 24, 2012, where he says it’s “so crystal clear” that there’s no reason for California residents to own assault weapons. “No debate, no discussion.”

Video:

April 19, 1775 was a revolt against one tyrant, King George III, who wanted to disarm his people. Leland Yee is no less a tyrant than King George, and is entitled to the same type of response.