Gay Men Pay Taxes To Fund the Opposition Wednesday, Jul 30 2014 

I find it astonishing that states think they can fight gay men in court incessantly – states have been doing it for decades – time after time – every single last effort to remove all laws against us – and to include us in laws that already exist – we go to court and our opponents – the state – are right there. And to do so – they must use “taxpayer” dollars. Oh, I’m sure just a few hundred thousand, but still, it’s taxpayer’s money. So, whose taxes? Well, gay men’s taxes. We gay guys are not faced with “no taxation without representation” – no – we are faced with “taxation to pay for the opposition.” Much as I find it astonishing that the “government shouldn’t use taxpayer’s money to promote homosexuality” while using gay men’s tax money to tell us how very bad we are.

And how much in taxes do gay men pay? Well, no one knows, of course. Hell, no one has looked. Supposedly it’s been figured out what our incomes are, and how much we have to dispose of – but that number can’t be right because no one knows how many gay men there are or what jobs we hold. Indeed, it would seem that the economics of gay men is simply an unstudied thing. Still, we pay taxes, so, how much?

To be sure, gay men must be paying taxes for we work … there is no social welfare program for gays. Even though many still declare us “sick” and “demented” and “ill” and bring up all manner of how we psychologically stunted and psychiatric basket-cases … we are not covered by the American With Disabilities Act – such a horrendous malady, and no special programs, cures, coverage, protections – as all other maladies have by now.

Say there’s the low end of the number of us – Gary Gates’s improbable 2,491,034 of us … the recent CDC phone-poll came up with the same figure using the same method of what Mr. Gates himself called “flawed, but the best we have” data … and he’s the vaunted gay demographer. Then there’s the 5,000,000 adult gay men I conjure up by using the dead reckoning of 106 boys born for ever 100 girls – the six are the gay guys … it’s obvious to us. So, somewhere between 2.5 million and 5 million of us pay taxes – all taxes – income, property, sales, phone – you know, taxes – all of ‘em. We’re not exempt from a single tax whatsoever.

Say that on the low end, inclusive of all taxes: federal, state, county, city – school, fire district, excise taxes on cigarettes and liquor, gasoline taxes, income taxes, property, all those tiny taxes on electric, phone and cable bills – you know – any tax – so, on the low end we pay $5,000 a year in taxes. At the upper reaches, without a shred of “research” except my own considerable knowledge of gay men – we pay $30,000 a year in taxes.

What do these numbers look like in the aggregate? A chart is required:

2.5 million x $5,000, $10,000, $20,000 and $30,000 – and:
5 million x these same numbers:

2.5 million x $5,000 = $12,500,000,000
x $10,000 = $25,000,000,000
x $20,000 = $50,000,000,000
x $30,000 = $75,000,000,000

if 5 million we get:
x $5,000 = $25,000,000,000
x $10,000 = $50,000,000,000
x $20,000 = $100,000,000,000
x $30,000 = $150,000,000,000

So, we pay between $12 billion and $150 billion – I lean to the higher numbers.

How much do gay men cost? – Well, of course, AIDS – and the sum total for all HIV/AIDS funding is $20 billion – $2 billion in Ryan White funds – HIV drugs costs … and the rest in research (which benefits everyone) and about $1 billion in Foreign Aid, mostly in HIV drugs.

So, we’re a net benefit to society given my contention that we’re 5,000,000 paying on average $30,000 a year in taxes of all kinds.

And, oh yes, the costs of the many lawsuits against our Pursuit of Happiness – because it offends people, aw … well, that’s $3,000,000 that Boehner spent – let’s say $1,000,000 per state – so, $50,000,000 bucks.

So, the states are taking Billions in gay man’s tax money – to fund the $50,000,000 used against us.

Well, Taxed Enough Already doesn’t even cut it. Oh, it’s one thing to take people’s money and give it to someone else in the guise of helping them – but our money is being taken to be used against us. That’s ballsy, you know?

Anyway, that’s just a quick look at the taxes that gay men pay – and well, if we’re not really a part of society – and some horror – give us all the damn money back. I want 100% reparations for 60 years of haranguing, harassing and hounding gay men – we’re sick of this. Grow up already – pay your own damn way. We do.

What’s even more aggravating – is that the president wants to spend $3 or $4 billion to help all these new refugees – all of whom are allowed to get married here – they’re not even citizens, don’t pay taxes – and they’re treated better than American Gay Men Taxpayers – how utterly infuriating.

But really – states should refund to gay men all the money they have used to fight us in court .. it’s blatant theft of our money.

Ben Carson, the idiot neurosurgeon Thursday, Jul 24 2014 

Supposedly Ben Carson, conservative darling, is a very smart man – why, he’s a Neurosurgeon! – Oh my, brains out the wazoo. Which is where he pulled some recent crap out of, for sure. Maybe he’s smart on many subjects – I beginning to have my doubts – for when it comes to gayness and gay men and “homosexuality” – the man is an utter raving lunatic. His stupidity truly boggles the mind. Yes, just stupid. And if you’re a moron on one subject – one that is endlessly discussed and about which millions of words have been published – most arrant nonsense and contradictory beyond belief – who knows what else one can be a moron on? He’s certainly a moron about Marxism. Yes, moron. There’s no other word for it – at least without using expletive deleted sort of words – you know – F… S… Head … yes, a F…S…Head – completely.

Here’s a video of him spewing utter nonsense – it’s embarrassing – a doctor? Really? He’s not a doctor when it comes to gayness – apparently the man hasn’t read a word written on the subject since 1958 –

Carson, neurosurgeon, is unaware of Bruce Bagemihl’s “Biological Exuberance, too? That’s a book that documents “homosexuality” in some 1500 species – I dare say, when the elephants and dolphins and big horn sheep are part of a Marxist plot to destroy America – we’d better watch out – elephants have good memories, dolphins are smart, and the Big Horn a symbol of the Rockies where they live gaily everyday. Surely animals are not part of Marxist plots – and if a neurosurgeon is unaware of any of the science (such that it pitifully is) on gayness since 1958 – well, he’s no neurosurgeon – he’s a moron. Can’t say it enough – moron. Sorry.

Now, according to this site below — in 1958 a “Canadian for the American Constitution” claims that “Communism” has a goal of being nice to gay men — to destroy the nation – not Canada – but America! – and Mr. Cleon Skousen … not even American – a foreigner!

And Skousen wasn’t even talking about gay marriage – he was talking about gay existence – yes – homosexuality itself – something about which there is oft quoted 2000 year old Scripture is a thing invented by Karl Marx in 1848. You know – I’ve read pretty much every word Karl Marx ever wrote, and most of Lenin and Stalin and sundry other Marxists – none of whom ever mention Homosexuality or Gay people in the slightest, in any form whatsoever. “Be nice to homosexuals” certainly isn’t on the list of “10 things you need to do socialize a country” that Marx listed in the Communist Manifesto. Hell, Karl Marx couldn’t because the word wasn’t even invented yet – boy, was he ahead of his times, eh? Making up “homosexuals” to destroy “capitalism” – yeesh.

And if Carson “believes” this – as it is right to believe any arrant crap – then he’s a moron. Completely. No holds barred. And it’s my duty to work to disabuse him of the notion – and to keep him from any position of governmental responsibility – anyone this stupid shouldn’t be in public office.

Oh, screw it – foul words are needed for such foul thought – Is this man this fucking stupid? I mean, does Ben Carson have a clue that the Communists, Marxists and Leninists said (hell, still say) that “homosexuality” is caused by the decadence of the late stages of capitalism and the opiate of the masses, aka, religion – and is being introduced the world to destroy Marxism! And he quotes a book from 1958? Really? E-fucking-gad – a miserable idiot indeed.

All during the Cold War Russia and America blamed the other for the existence of “homosexuality” — but both agreed we’re the problem – And today, Iran is sure that “homosexuality” is a plot by the USA to destroy the Ayatollah’s theocracy! Indeed, for centuries, each country blamed the next country for “homosexuality.” In the 1500s the English called it the “French Vice,” and French called it the “Italian Vice,” the Italians called it the “Spanish Vice,” the Spanish called it the “German Vice” and the Germans called it the “English Vice” – I dare say – every country in Europe during the 1400s, 1500s, 1600s, 1700s and well, even to the mid-1900s – called “homosexuality” a plot by some foreign country to destroy their won glorious nationhood – well before the word “homosexuality” was even created! My my, perhaps Karl Marx’s great-great-great-great-great, etc etc- grandfather in 1400 said “Oh, those “homosexuals” they’re out to destroy “capitalism” and when my great-great-great-great-great, etc etc- grandson is born, he’s not going to utter a word about it – but sneak it in when no one is looking. Ooh. Egad.

Really — it’s astounding – this “man” – this mental midget – disgusts me. Egad, where the fuck is a cotton field to put this moron to work, he’s a dumb as a darky field hand in 1850. I don’t give a crap – call me a “racist” – I don’t care the color of your skin when you’re this stupid. Yeesh — enraging moronic “thought” has never been my happy suit —

Did Skousen in 1958 have an earthly clue that according to the Soviet, and Czechoslovak, Socialist Encyclopedias of the same period blamed “homosexuality” on religion and capitalism – which purpose was to destroy Marxism? Apparently not. He’s moron too – thankfully dead – but Carson? Alive and kicking.

And what of the gays in China? They live in a Marxist country – which says “Homosexuality is a capitalist plot” – for sure – China is NOT gay friendly. Are gay men there part of a Marxist plot to bring um, Marxism to China? Really? You’re kidding, yes? No, you can’t be serious that Marxists are using gays to bring Marxism to China. But, Carson, Skousen and the rest surely must believe this – or, they are clueless that there’s gays in China – arguing for gay marriage – and if you don’t know what’s going on in China – you really shouldn’t be president at all.

Meanwhile – there’s this craven idiot – a malicious man spewing libel and slander:

He should be sued into oblivion for slander and libel – the gay groups are remiss and derelict in their duty on this concept, I assure you. And certainly his church should lose it’s tax-exempt status if he’s a political candidate, right? Sure, no one will do a thing … sad.

Then there’s Rick Perry, who is sure gayness itself is like alcoholism. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has other ideas about what the “evil” “mean” “Nazi” “homosexuals” are doing – why, we’re out to destroy the family and civilization itself – exactly as Marxists claimed we’re doing. Why, Perkins agrees with Marxists, but claims to be “conservative” – perhaps he’s a “conservative” Marxist – what can I say?

The National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) says the father made us gay – apparently dads are Marxists!
The Americans for the Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) says the mother made us gay – apparently moms are Marxists!

Now, maybe both those groups should get together and draw straws to see if the mom or dad is responsible for creating the little capitalist-marxist destroy um, capitalist-marxist.

Hell, Matt Barber of Liberty University avers we are Nazis – Scott Lively, GOP candidate for governor of Massachusetts disagrees with Carson of his own party – he says Gays are Nazis! He wrote a book about it! No, really – it’s a fantasy of unimaginable stupidity. And the gays of Malaysia? Japan? Kenya? Nigeria? Who are they seeking to destroy? Who’s side are they on! Oh, inquiring minds want to know – certainly I’d like to question them all together to get to the bottom of which heterosexuals are using gay men to destroy the world. Why, we’re the very cause of hurricanes and earthquakes if Pat Robertson is right.

If you get these people in one room – would they agree or disagree? Now that’s a question to behold. For their ideas are contradictory to each other. Hell, get a few diehard Marxists in there, they’ll inform Carson that “homosexuality” is a Capitalist Plot!

Well, that’s enough rage on this stupidity – like I said, it’s mind numbing. But, if you’re going to be an idiot in public, expect a member of the public to call you and idiot. Here I am, John Q. Public: Mr. Carson – you’re an idiot.

Judicial Reason V Activism, Common v Civil Law Wednesday, Jul 23 2014 

ObamaCare has been somewhat struck down, somewhat upheld, by various judges in the past few days – there’s much discussion everywhere about it. I think the law is an abomination, for many reasons, which are not the subject of this post. I hope it gets obliterated. I can’t get clearer.

Many on the Right – let’s use Todd Starnes, sage commentator of Fox News – opinionator of high order – lauded by many, quoted often, in the news – hell, he is the news-maker – let’s use him as our arbiter of two ideas: Judicial Reason and Judicial Activism. Which is related, believe it or not, to the differences between Common Law and Civil Law. Mr. Starnes is going to wax rhapsodic about how courts should strike down ObamaCare – indeed, he has. He wants judges to declare unconstitutional a duly enacted act of congress … and he’s just a stand in for most people on the Right, and quite a few on the Left it’s now surfacing as they realize this law screws them too.

If the Roberts court strikes down ObamaCare in whole or part, or any judge, this is “Judicial Reason” by the standards of the Right. Still, ObamaCare (ir)rationally affects 320,000,000 Americans – and is only somewhat emotional.

There’s another matter before the courts – one that rationally only affects only 5% of the people (despite frequent phone surveys that say 2%, but, still holds true if this small,) and yet emotionally affects 320,000,000 people – ooh, is it emotional – amazingly so. And if the courts strike down these laws, as they’ve been doing – then Mr. Starnes and cohorts and similarly situated – are up in arms over Judicial Activism. This would be marriage for gays, of course.

Well, you can’t be FOR “rational” judges overturning laws, and then be against judges overturning laws – either you think judges can overturn laws – any of them – or they can’t. It is inconsistent to say that for one set of cases declaring a law unconstitutional is good, wholesome, reasonable and the American way – and that when those same judges strike down another set of laws through such a declaration are now activist judges out of control – without being an utter mush ball. Mr. Starnes, he’s a mush ball on the subject. He does not think rationally about gay folks – he’s all emotion on the subject.

The reason, however, that judges can overturn and declare laws unconstitutional is our legal system – the Common Law – which comes from England, and is based on the 800 year old Magna Carta, and goes back even further than that, to Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence under Alfred the Great in the 890s AD – and perhaps before that too – it’s a long held tradition amongst the English for judges to be able to strike down laws as absurd and unconstitutional.

The other type of law in the world, which is the primary law of all Non-English speaking peoples, regardless of the name – the laws of Confucius and Hammurabi and Incan potentates are all “civil law” – Catholic Canon Law, Roman law, the Code of Justinian, the Napoleonic Code – all of it – the Civil Law – which is the unquestionable acts of the legislative body – and no judge can rule something unconstitutional. Judges apply the law, hand in hand with the prosecutor – which is why the rest of the world is screwed and wants to go to English speaking countries – where judges can tell legislative bodies “no, you can’t do that.”

Mr. Starnes, and ilk, which is not everyone on the “right” – and many in the American left to be sure – are for the Civil Law when it comes to gay folks, and the Common Law for everyone else. He’s for judges overturning laws when it suits him, and against it when his underpants are knotted. Liberals are like that too. They only like the judicial rulings they like, and otherwise the judges are horrendous critters wrecking the land.

For instance, in the recent Hobby Lobby case – Mr. Starnes was gleeful that the courts struck down provisions of ObamaCare – he was judicial activism! – while the Left was aghast at this “overreach of unelected judges” – why, they were all for Judicial Reason – and not Activism.

I suppose when a judge rules for you – he’s reasonable – when he rules against you – he’s activist. And so Starnes, emblematic of the Right, and many on the left, are both for and against judicial reasonableness and activism – they want their cake, and to eat it too – and to tell the baker what sort of cake to make for whom.

Well, it’s amusing to watch, that’s for sure. Let’s hope judges strike down even more laws – hell, the president and the legislative bodies, and bureaucracies, too, of this nation are hog-wild with decrees that make no sense – let us hope judges are active indeed.

Ho-hum, another survey to find gays Saturday, Jul 19 2014 

Well, another phone survey was conducted to find gays in the population. Every other phone survey admits to the same flaws as this one does – they simply call random houses and ask “Any gays there?” and then they miraculously conclude that there’s 2% of the population that is “gay and lesbian.” If every previous phone survey was flawed – why would this one be any better? Ah, but this one is new and improved – for the CDC supposedly did it – by contracting out to the same flawed phone polling services used previously.

So far, in recent history there were 8 phone surveys across the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s. Then, Gallup did their big survey of 240,000 people oh, 2 years ago … now comes this one. And amazingly, the exact same number surfaces once again. Bizarrely, despite the obvious, blatant differences in the social and legal environment for gays since 1980, the surveys come up with the same number. Why? Well, that’s the number of gays! Yeah, right.

Astoundingly, just as in 1980, there seems to be near the exact same number of gay men as to women lesbians. Hell, even the vaunted Gary Gates survey 2 years ago, he a vaunted “gay demographer” (geez) took the old phone surveys and averaged them – without a shred of new data – not one new call or attempt to count – merely a recount of the same mush – and he concluded there were 2,491,034 gay men – exactly! – to the last 34th of us – and 1,540,000 some Lesbians – and it was bandied about as Scripture – and well, it’s just not true. Anyone remotely aware of the gay “community” (which leaves out the heterosexuals around us) can tell you that there’s oh, 5 gay men for every 2 lesbians. So, if a survey splits and says ½ men ½ women or even close – it simply cannot reflect the known reality among gay people.

Just as in 1980, a random set of phone numbers spread across a geographic area is called and the question asked out of the blue by a total stranger … “Hi, any gay people there?” – and from this, we expect a true answer based on the supposed equally random number of gay people sprinkled around the country in the exact same concentrations within the general population as for say, “What toothpaste do you use?” or, “Will you vote for Clod A or Clod B for public office?” or even “What do you think about the Ukraine?” And yet, what do we know about gay people in reality? … not on the phone – but, by, oh, looking at where gay people are. Say, at gay pride parades? There’s more than 2% of the population out at gay pride parades on one weekend nationwide in June for Heaven’s sake. And if one went to the parades one could clearly see that it’s 5-to-2 men to women. So any phone survey which doesn’t reflect this – just can’t be real.

One survey in the 1990s concluded California had 2% gay folks, while, astonishingly, an internet survey in Indiana in the same time frame concluded 5.7 percent were gay. And if you think Indiana has more gay people than California – well, you’re just not thinking.

Let’s take a look at Phoenix AZ – where I live today. The gay people are, of course, “everywhere” – but, they are concentrated in the center of the city – a rough 3 mile square between 16th Street to the east and 16th Avenue to the west, Camelback Road to the north and McDowell Road to the South. How do we know this? Well, that’s where all the gay bars and businesses are. Indeed, the biggest problem with these surveys is that they simply ignore the gayborhood – or the concentration in every city in America of gay folks in certain zip codes to the exclusion of others. If you did a phone survey of the three area codes of the Phoenix Metro Area and just randomly called and asked “Any gay people there?” – you’d wind up calling places like Mesa and Sun City – each to the far east and west, respectively, of the metro area – where, oddly, there are no gay bars, no gay businesses, and very likely, very few gay people. The people who were brought up in the metro area moved to the center – and the people like me who moved into the city – all went to the center. Gay people are just not moving to Mesa or Sun City. OK, a handful. But due to the disparity of concentration – if you called the edges, you’ll miss the center.

It is said by the opponents of gay folks that all the gays move to big cities. That we all live in the gay ghetto – hell, I’d wager ½ the country thinks all the gays live in just a few cities. When they find them in small cities they are aghast! But phone surveys will simply not cut it. And if even Lake Charles Louisiana, with which I’m intimately familiar with, has a gayborhood, you can rest assured that every other city has one.

It’s like in the 504 area code – the New Orleans metro area – which includes Metairie – a family suburb. Well, if you call numbers randomly in the 504 area code you will get at least ½ in Metairie and ½ in New Orleans – and thus, presto – less gay folks can be counted – for you’d miss the concentration by diluting the sample. Even if you just counted New Orleans city limits, you’d still wind up missing so many gays because they are concentrated along the river districts south of downtown, and are not, say, in the housing projects and Lakefront area.

Ah, more problems with phone surveys: a good ½ of gay men would never tell a total stranger on the phone “Yeah, I’m gay” – hahaha – I just know people personally who would run for their bed and hide under their covers should they get the call. Perhaps that would be listed under “I don’t know.” I don’t know. Then too, there’s the elder set, over 50, over 60, even over 70 and 80 – shy people – having lived through a lifetime of trauma and travail at the hands of heterosexuals – they’re not going to say to someone on the phone “Oh yah, gay, yep.” I know these people, they are friends of mine – they wouldn’t admit it you paid them!

Then there’s the issue of gays, say, between 8 and 25 living at home – they’re not “Out of the closet yet” – often, their own parents don’t know. I can imagine, with clarity, some mom getting a phone call, “Any gay guys in your house?” and she, truthfully from her perspective, says “Nope.” And then she looks at her 21 year old son sitting at the kitchen table who hasn’t spilled the beans yet (though, the lack of a girlfriend ever might be a clue) and thus, he’s uncounted.

One could go on about the flaws in all these surveys – hell, in my book “The Pink Sheep of the Ninth Circle” I examine them for more than 30 pages – it’s amazing what one can find when one thinks differently on the subject.

Oh, to be sure – gay groups are derelict in not trying to count us – but instead relying on heteros and then they shake their heads and say “well, that doesn’t seem right.” Of course it doesn’t – we know it isn’t – Gaydar tells us so. We walk around and we see, oh, 4 or 5% of the men are gay – and 2% of the gals – and well, we always come up intuitively with a bigger number. Forget Kinsey, I don’t have time to deal with mush from the 1940s, geez. But even he said 4% are “exclusively gay” and another 6% are “Mostly gay” – giving us the vaunted 10% figure.

Then there’s the gay bar issue – what? How could gay bars help us count gay men and woman? Well, there’s always far more gay men bars than lesbian bars in any given city. By a near 5 to 2 ratio, gay men’s groups versus lesbian groups – on and on through gay publications, gay everything – 5-2 – but heterosexuals are seemingly fixated on the idea that there’s an equal number of us. Ah, but what if 2% of a population is gay?

Let’s look at Abilene Texas – a place with one gay bar – and a little gayborhood – I know – I’ve been there. Abilene is a few tens of thousands. Let’s say 50,000 – pick any small city, I don’t care, want to find gay bars in small cities? – every town over 50,000 has a gay bar – oddly, 1 bar for every increment of 50,000 – if a city has 100,000 then presto, 2 gay bars, 150,000, 3 gay bars – and so forth – Entrepreneur magazine and several state Small Business Development agencies say you need 5,000 people around a bar for it to survive – thus, if a city has 50,000 people and 1 gay bar there must, by common business reckoning, be 5,000 gay folks in that area.

Back to the funny numbers: If 1/3 of the people in a city are kids – roughly – then we get 30,000 adults, 20,000 kids – (oh, I’m going to ballpark this like everyone else.) So, ½ the 30,000 are men and the other ½ woman – so, we get 15,000 men, and 15,000 women. 10% of the men is 1,500. 5% is 750, 2% is what? 300! – And since only ½ the gay population goes to a bar that leaves us with a grand total of 150 gay men in Abilene Texas in a gay bar on Friday night – and this same 150 gay men must be going out 3 or 4 nights a week, week after week, month after month – and this you think is real? This is rational? It’s a joke, yes? No bar could survive with just 150 customers – no bar has the same 150 customers every night – and so – who else is in this place night after night, weekend after weekend? Obviously, there just must be more than 2% of the adults who are gay. If you use 5% of the men and 2% of the woman, and then add in a few bisexuals, transgendered … you get – Presto! 5,000 gay folks in a population of 50,000 – or 10% … yes? Yes.

Then too – if you don’t count the kids – and we all know we’re gay very very young – you’ve missed a slew of people.

Oh, I could go on – there’s a book in this already – “How no one knows how to count gay men.”

I find it odd too, that throughout all marriage studies – that is, the numbers of men and women who get married – 93% of men get married – 97% of women – somehow the 5-2 ratio holds there too.

But, to conclude, before I go about my day – it’s time for gay groups to count us – and stop relying on heterosexuals to count us. Relying on heterosexuals is just numbnuts – ludicrous even. Why, they have a vested interest in under-counting us! Anyway, I hope this little essay on the absurdity of this latest survey helps put it all in perspective.

Superficial misleading Facebook graphics Tuesday, Jul 15 2014 

I see lots of graphics on Facebook – some image with a few words – as if what is said is some profound and important thing … which can brook no opposition by whomever posted it. Who knows who makes them? I’ve been making a few of my own lately – anyone can have fun. These graphics often lead to heated arguments in the comment thread – and people call each other “idiots” and such and worse for not “understanding” or “believing” or “being against” something which the graphic purports to show. But behind every graphic there is a reality. And that reality cannot be expressed very succinctly on Facebook – but often takes lots and lots of words, till people’s eyes glaze over and they go for a video which is often just a moving graphic like just the two I’m going to look at today. Oh, I suppose I could analyze them endlessly, for they come in an endless supply. Most of it is utter mush, lunacy, ridiculousness, uninformed, and well, just not good. Let’s take a look


Who is the “we” who polled these people? Why do they not proudly put their name upon their basket? No, someone decided they would be cute, and trash people who they don’t like. So, they made a pithy graphic. Vituperatively so. For I’m sure that most “members” of this amorphous thing called the “Tea Party” could indeed identify what a “homo sapien” is – and I’m sure most would not throw the kid out for this reason. I’m also sure that if anyone polled a 1000 Liberals, of the Jay Leno “man in the streets” bit kind … you know those videos he does – utter morons – about everything and anything. I’m sure those people would be just as moronic about the meaning of the word “homo sapien” as the alleged “Tea Partiers” mentioned.

What is the point of the graphic? Well, to somehow say “Tea Partiers” are anti-gay – but, in my considerable experience on the matter – Liberals and Conservatives of all religions can be or aren’t anti-gay in one way or the other – it’s quite a mishmash. In fact, there’s a whole cadre of African-American Liberal Democratic Pastors who are viciously anti-gay. The good Liberal Democrat New York state senator Ruben Diaz is a perfect example. I dare say, “Liberals” – which would seem to include all the 95% of the black population that votes Democratic – are just as likely to throw out their homo-son as Conservative White Rednecks. The gay thing is just not a Left-Right issue – it’s a hetero-gay issue.

Now we come to this rather legitimate seeming graphic about economics. It’s “A lesson in economic history” – which reports certain “facts” – and then makes a causality that is just not real.


The “top tax rate” talked about in 1922 was only on incomes of over $1,000,000 a year – which very few people earned, like, a hundred or so. Meanwhile, the tax itself was only 6 years old at the time. So, technically, prior to 1916 there was no top tax rate whatsoever – and yet, prior to 1916 there were “panics” and “bank failures” and “runs on banks” and “recessions” and “depressions” and all manner of economic grief … as has been happening for well nigh 5,000 years now. Economics goes through cycles – they are called Kondratieff cycles … he being the man who noticed this. The theory’s been tweaked a bit – but still, economies go up, they do down – no one knows why. Not much. A little. However, if there were these economic disruptions prior to the income tax – it can’t very well be caused by reductions in the “top tax rate” – and Mr. Thom Hartmann, so gleefully putting his name to his mush (I applaud that!) is obviously then, unaware that economic history nor downturns or up-ticks is really related to the income tax which was 6 years old in 1922.

Meanwhile, real estate and the stock market are “gambling” in that all things which involve risk is gambling. Mr. Hartmann’s ride to work is a gamble. He’s gambling he won’t get in a wreck – he’s hedging his bet by buying insurance. Getting married is a gamble. Indeed, most of life is a gamble. So to use the word “gambling” is to somehow imply that economics is not a gamble unless evil mean Mr. Harding lowers the tax rate. Which shows that Mr. Hartmann is an economic illiterate. And, a pit of twit for using the word to imply some terrible negative.

Then too, the stock market crash of 1929 was amply laid at the feet of the Federal Reserve Board, itself just 8 years old at the time, by many economic historians, including Von Mises, Hayek, Friedman and others … and which Ben Bernacke, current poobah of the Federal Reserve Board admitted “yep, it’s true, the Federal Reserve wrecked the economy.” So, a tax cut to a few millionaires didn’t cause the crash – but, a contraction of credit by a government agency did.

Astonishingly, Mr. Hartmann, obviously a liberal into big taxes – complains that the rich in the stock market suffered and were made poor, as he wishes everyone to be, or at least “equal” I’m sure. At some level determined by the cads at the Federal Reserve Board or the IRS who perhaps shall be empowered to set the proper level of earnings for all Americans – the very people who caused the crash, as admitted by the man who runs the crashing agency, is now to be gloried with the power to rule the rest of it. Yeah. Brilliant. Yes? No.

Roosevelt raised the tax rates in 1932 – and the Depression got worse … and about the only economic boom times the country saw between 1929 and 1945 (the end of the imperium) was during World War II. So, from late 1929 until 1941, the economy essentially contracted, or muddled along – and regardless of the “top tax rate” not much changed. Then! – A war! When the booming economy that we created was to destroy Japan and Germany and their booming economies – amazingly, by them boom-booming all over the place. A veritable festival of booms and millions dead – and the War economy – you know, evil mean rich arms manufacturers – boomed – and we got corporate health care in the bargain (so we can now argue decades later about what we shall beg from our employers.)

Reagan got the “misery index” – that famous measure of the Carter Administration – which combines the Inflation rate with the Unemployment rate – down from 21 to 8 – but, because the inflation was running so high, and it had to be reeled in, the economy had to contract for a brief bit. All inflated economies have to go through that correction, as anyone who ever studied economics or its history can tell you. Mr. Hartmann here studied his politics, not his economics. So, for the first year or so of Reagan, which was the carryover from Carter who gave us the Misery Index (we were to blame, too, a “malaise” he said we had – cheeky fellow) – and then, once the inflation was rung out of the economy, the economy boomed for the rest of Reagan’s term – indeed, the longest continuous expansion of an economy the world had ever seen. Amazing.

The Savings and Loan “crisis” was more about fraud and government mandated loans to stop redlining – the old practice of not giving loans to blacks, a product of Democratic Party policies for deca…, well, forever … and this banking crisis was a result of HUD and “Fair Housing” and “A mortgage in every pot.” and well, the potheads, couldn’t pay the mortgages. And most of the problem was restricted to a few states, Arizona particularly … went through a few corrupt governors while they were at it. Republicans, true, but corruption is not party-specific.

The Clinton Era is well known for the Internet Bubble, conveniently not mentioned by the gambling bubble concerned Mr. Hartmann – which burst shortly after he left office, dumping his “boom” right into the lap of the hapless Bush, who got an even bigger boom right away, too. The “boom” of the Clinton Era was also related to the new found prosperity in China and Eastern Europe – which Reagan helped create by “Tear Down This Wall” … and so, as must be true for slow moving large objects – like the US economy – what happens in the term of one president perforce slips into the term of the next – to the detriment or boon to whomever is lucky or unlucky.

It’s also not mentioned by our Economic Historian Mr. Hartmann, that Bush senior famously said “read my lips, no new taxes” and proceeded to hide his lips and raise ‘em – and the economy fell! Suffered! Unemployment up! No boom – which led to his defeat to Clinton – who saw Bush’s raise and raised ‘em some more – like a gambler!

Anyway, the Internet Bubble burst, like bubbles do, and poor Bush junior got the gum all over his face.

As for the “Misinformed Viewers of FOX NEWS” I will not argue – all viewers of any TV news are misinformed – it’s the nature of the beast. I’d say it’s because if one is watching the news – which is about personality – one is not reading about economics or economic history – as Mr. Hartmann so valiantly illustrates. Thank you, sir, for illuminating this reality.

A Tale of Two Obama Graphics Monday, Jul 14 2014 



These are two Obama graphs that I got from Facebook. They are interesting because they obviously say completely different things. I don’t know which came first, though obviously they are parodies of each other. And so, which is true? Well, they both are, in a way … but it’s the reasons they are both different and true that is the fascinating part. Let’s take a look.

The Dow is indeed up above 16,000 – why? Well, one reason is inflation – for with a steady growth of the money supply by the Federal Reserve Banks shoveling between $40 and $80 billion a month to “stimulate” the economy – it has done that by simply inflating all the numbers. So, a good percentage of the 16,000 is merely extra numbers with no real value. That is, if the Dow as near 8,000 in 2009, with inflation, even if the Dow hadn’t gone up, it would be, oh, 11,000. Much as the price of a block of cheese or a pound of beef has gone from $2 and $7 respectively to $3 and $9 … the value of the items hasn’t increased, but the dollar amount has … it’s just zeros. But because the price is up, so are the corporate incomes, and thus things look rosier when you can say “a company earned $1 million in 2009 and now you can say it earned $1.4 million today … the $.4 is not “growth” but “inflation.” Indeed, the amount of things sold hasn’t gone up, and if anything declined … but the “income” appears higher in absolute numbers, in the ratio that is inflation the company has made the same amount of money.

Another reason the Dow is up is that the stimulus money to banks and the financial sector are just being plowed into the stock market for the lack of anything else to put it in. What is a bank or finance firm supposed to do with $1 billion? Eh, by stocks – pushing up the price. In sense, however, this is taking money from your average Joe and Jane and giving it to big banks … which is the very opposite of what the Democrats pretend to do. So, Obama is helping big banks at the expense of the people.

Still another reason the Dow is up is that foreign money is pouring into the place. For instance, because of the Russian-Ukraine near-war some $200 billion in capital has fled Russia – well, it has to go somewhere? So, it went into the stock market. Meanwhile, France raised its taxes on the wealthy sky high, so, capital is fleeing France – to the point of the French trying to pass yet another tax to prevent the capital outflows. Most of Europe is taxing more, thus, people there are moving their money here. They are, in a sense, outsourcing cash. Instead of putting it into European markets, they are putting that money here. I’m sure the fracases in Thailand, China, Venezuela, Nigeria, Iraq and sundry other places in the world is also pushing anyone with movable wealth to move it to New York. Well, that will drive the market up. Indeed, even though the US economy is moribund, it has more life than the mordant economies of the rest of the world. Thus, capital flows to the market, pushing the price up.

The “unemployment,” “full time workers” and “workforce participation” are all true … so, how does the first go down … and the other two also? Well the government doesn’t count people who have left the workforce as “unemployed.” That is, if you’re one of the 8 million people newly on disability you are no longer “unemployed.” How exactly 8 million people all of a sudden are disabled is not answered … nor do people seem to question it. But, apparently Americans are becoming disabled at an alarming rate – and yet, there is no press and news coverage of this epidemic of disability. The number of workers is down – the number of layoffs up. The numbers seeking new unemployment claims is up, the numbers of people on seemingly permanent “unemployment” is up … how? Well, it seems everybody is becoming “disabled” or simply gave up looking. How does one count that? They don’t really, they just surmise it while comparing the numbers of people “working” and the number of able bodied people that used to be available for work. So, with all these newly disabled people, and people who no longer wish to work – “unemployment” is down. But, all three of these figures must be counted at once, and compared, for a true picture to emerge. In a sense, the “unemployment” rate is a ruse and lie.

The GDP “growth” is a myth – partially fueled by inflation. The same way that a storm which sweeps through say, Miami, will be “more expensive” this year than last – because the “value” of the homes are higher, because of inflation. For most economic figures show a contracting economy in “real dollar terms” – that is, “adjusted for inflation” and well.

Oddly, the Right, you know, “Conservatives” – think that by touting that homeownership is down, and poverty is up, and the median income is down – they are showing Obama to be bad – and the Left, you know, “Liberals” – will use those figures to show that the rich get richer at the expense of the poor – after all, the Left argue that evil mean Wall Street which they prop up with stimulus money and the Ex-Im Bank are up, ergo, the average fellow is poorer. In a way, the right is helping the left push the “income inequality” nonsense. Not brilliant politics, but, that’s what they’re doing.

The numbers on food stamps has nearly doubled – but this is also a sign of “income inequality” – in a sense, the Right is giving ammo to the Left to call for more government leveling of the playing field, mostly by plowing the rich under. And of course, the Left uses this number to say “ooh, look, we care, and the heartless Right does not.” And then the Left blames the corporations for laying people off and not doing enough hiring and “outsourcing” – which is the supposed evil of sending jobs overseas.

One graphic compares the Debt to GDP and the other the Deficit – well, the Debt is that which is held already – and if you inflate an economy, as we have – then the Debt will “fall” because the Debt is a static number from the past, and is not inflated. Basically, if you owed a billion bucks and your economy is 10 billion you get a 1-10 ration, but if you still owed the same billion bucks but inflate your economy to 20 billion you get 1-20 – which makes it appear that the “debt to GDP” has indeed fallen – and in fact, this is exactly how governments throughout the ages have cheapened their debt. They inflated the economy. How much better to pay back a dollar with a “dollar” that is now worth 50 cents?

Meanwhile, the “deficit to GDP” if the amount of money not spent yet – but that will be spent, that we don’t have – because there’s less workers paying less taxes – and less real corporate income and a contracting economy. So, the Deficit to GDP is up because of a falling economy.

“Consumer Confidence” is measured in numerous ways – and if you ask the questions right, you wind up with a rosy picture. If you ask the right people, you get a rosy picture. In a sense it’s a mush number. The popularity of the president, congress, courts and media has tumbled to historic lows – which is not showing “confidence” at all. The numbers of people who say the country is going in the “wrong direction” is up … but, well, people feel like shopping, so, “confidence” is up. How so many people can proclaim so many problems – and there’s no shortage of them, either complainers or problems – and yet still have a heightened confidence is symbolic of the way the number can be created to be whatever one wishes. Whoever made this number – for which there is no source – wanted a happy picture.

Anyway – there’s still more that could be developed on this theme, but I really have no time – it is, however, as I said, fascinating how two graphics can show so much, especially when compared to each other – and so that each side can vindicate themselves and call for more measures which they think will right the problem – except avoid changing the measuring of it all – which doesn’t express the problems as they really are.

Republican “war on women” IS “Gays: change!” Sunday, Jul 13 2014 

Nothing is so aggravating as to be told by a political party who to smooch and why … and yet, there’s the Republican party demanding like petulant children whom gay men should smooch. Oh, they’ll offer “reparative” – what? It’s not even a damn word! – the word doesn’t exist – and they put it in their platforms – they shall require gay men to smooch – women! Which? Whose!? Whose daughters shall we marry? Well, that’s what’s got to happen yes? 5, 6, 10 million gay men have to wake up in the morning and “decide” or be “reparatated” to marry someone’s daughter! Whose? No one says. Certainly none are offering their own daughters – no, we shall go find some other women!

It’s bizarre – the Republican Party is simply insane on this issue – and well, I don’t care, really – but you can’t keep this up with a straight face can you? Well, they do! They shall tell gay men “Get a gal!” Or? “Or else!” – it’s mind numbing really.

The Republicans claim to be against “group think” – there they are – demanding an entire group of citizens change their ways! And of course – “the homosexual lobby” – why, they think we all think alike. It’s astonishing, really.

The Republicans claim to be for “individuality”! – so long, of course, as gay men aren’t too individual at all – why, we’re to just – marry a gal!

And yet, no one, absolutely no one seems to wonder which women!

All over the Internet I see Republicans bewail their dwindling numbers – and laments over their loses. Yet, there’s a seeming inability for Republicans to ask for votes for people with like values on everything but smooching. No, on this you will call us a danger to society – for having jobs and paying taxes. Mind boggling. Truly.

Poor Allen West – lost by 2000 votes – in a district that is amazingly filled with gay men – who he told to go vote for the Democrat. Well, it’s abject stupidity for a politician to expect to win when he tells everyone to vote for the other fellow, yes? And this Mr. West is supposedly oh so smart? Really? Eh, he lost on purpose. I have no sympathy.

Ben Carson? A Brain Surgeon! And so moronic after decades of “studies” on gay men – he’s declared we choose to be gay and are thus a threat to society! We are part of society – and families – and Mr. Brain Surgeon is so blind to this I wonder if it’s just plain stupidity or willful ignorance.

Meanwhile, the Democrats – long part of the NO GAYS! Movement – and still many within the party completely insane also on the issue. The Black, African-Americans – utterly outraged that gay men use the words “civil rights” – NONE FOR YOU! They declaim. Beats me – I didn’t realize “civil rights” is like “nigger” – Only black folks can use the word.

Well, it’s astonishing, like I said – a nation of supposed adults – so bizarrely stupid on a simple issue – there’s gay men. Have at it folks. Enjoy. Watch the country spin out of control and go economically kerflooey as you’re all obsessed over what gay men might say to each other late at night. Children, heterosexuals are just children on the issue, truly. Not a one of you folks is rational on the matter, even if you’re “gay friendly.”

Stalin Giggled — my new book. Friday, Jul 11 2014 

My new book “Stalin Giggled” is now available at Amazon …

Here’s the cover …

stalin giggle cover

Hobby Lobby, Religion, Gays and ObamaCare Wednesday, Jul 2 2014 

Well, everyone in our up-in-arms one day and forget about it the next culture is agog over a decision by the Supreme Court over whether Hobby Lobby should have to offer 17 types of Birth Control rather than the 16 they do – I had no idea that there were even that many. Does Hobby Lobby fund abstinence too? I don’t know. Boycotts have been called for by people who probably haven’t set foot in a Hobby Lobby ever – they’re hobby being trashing anyone who disagrees with them, rather than, say, doing a painting. And, well, it’s just strange – “companies” made up of individuals have no rights supposedly, though “communities” made up of individuals do – yet both “groups” are made up of individuals and it is Individuals who decide things – not “companies” or “communities.”

Just as when I hear “society wants” – well, no – society doesn’t want anything – it’s just someone in society who wants something, and alas, they usually think everyone else in society wants the same thing – or should want it, whether they want it or not, and they’re just fool idiots for not wanting what “society” as defined and expressed by busybodies ‘want’. Society is against marijuana, but, well, people smoke it. Society is against gay folks, except that portion of it that doesn’t care, or is gay. Soceity, soschmiety – it’s what some individual wants. So, the law was struck down because “society” as expressed in a confounded law required “individuals” to want and pay for stuff they didn’t want.

In any event, I go to a site every Monday, Wednesday and Friday to make comment

And this is what I wrote there – it’s good for here: 

“Well, it’s certainly “A Thousand Points of Blight” with this administration. 
Meanwhile, I just read that 43% of voters now think that Obama is the worst president ever, with GW Bush coming in a paltry second at 33% – even Nixon was rated the worst by only 13%. That’s quite a feat, or feet — but just whom is kicking whom?

Strangely, the meme is “women denied healthcare!” and yet, it was merely decided who would pay for it — not who could get it or use it. To be “denied” is now “you pay for it”? — weird. Though, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, any heterosexual can get all the birth control in the form of condoms, at least, FREE! at any gay establishment, paid for by gay men’s donations, and not the government. I’m sure a bucket of them can be placed in the break-rooms at Hobby Lobby. 

More strangely, somehow Salon, Slate, Huffpost and others have opined that somehow this ruling is good, or bad, depending on the author, for gay men — um, beats me — we seem to have cornered the market on 100% effective birth control … without taxpayer expense nor even insurance coverage required whatsoever — well, I can’t figure out why this bugs some gays, or straights oh so concerned about us, nope.

Then too, the Religious Rights law in question came as sort of a package with DOMA/DADT believe it or not — so that some religions could continue to be free to chastise those who don’t adhere to those religions, while still others were denied freedom from state sponsored religious belief or practice — which is, oddly, any and all laws against gayness in any way – it’s purely the establishment of religion, as Justice Scalia made clear in his dissent on why such state infringement on religious belief by gay men should be legal. He’s being quoted a lot in all the current cases. So, remember that as all the “No gay couples shall be recognized because our religious beliefs says so” laws fall across the nation. Taxpayers, being denied rights – I hate that, don’t you? Anyway, somehow, we’re tied up in this, as the fury over Arizona’s vetoed “religious freedom” law showed.

As for the “Republican War on Women” — I’m sorry, but they’re having a skirmish at least – demanding women take on the heterosexualizing of gay men is just down right unfair to those gals. No one ever seems to think of that angle, for if we all are “repaired” we shall require virgins by the millions – and well, there don’t seem to be any — at least not if all the Flukes of this nation are fluking to the point of requiring insurance coverage for abortifacients and 16 other types of birth control. (And you cannot believe how cranky some folks get after demanding I change that I have heard the word and will now demand to marry their own daughter. Someone else daughter seems to be whom they have in mind. Whose? Beats me. None have been offered.) 

In any event, it might become true that judges of the future quote Ginsburg’s dissent as much as Scalia’s in Lawrence is being quoted today.

Just goes to show what happens when religion and politics get together, which is why the 1st Amendment tried to stop it.

Of course, if the court had struck down ObamaCare in entirety when they had the chance, they wouldn’t be knocking down this or that part of it, as the president waives it for others, and still more opt out and/or demanding exemptions. What a monstrosity did that man cause.

Well, that’s my brief, strange view of this case … I’m off to Hobby Lobby for some paints — selling paintings is one of my jobs.”

And that’s a lot to say in a blog comment. But, well, sometimes dots must be connected.

Really, that law, ObamaCare has simply pit people against each other who otherwise would never had had cause to argue over anything – it’s amazing – and it’ll happen more with ObamaCare yet.

Here, some paintings:






The Immigration Dilemma Monday, Jun 30 2014 

The problem of illegal immigration, or undocumented workers, or unauthorized guest workers – or whatever you wish to call them so you’re not offended and you can befuddle the issue more than it is – is rather complex.

First, why are these people leaving? How terrible is it down the in Mexico and South America that people are leaving by the millions, at a steady clip, millions more seemingly waiting their chance? Somehow, it seems to be, this question must be asked. It seems not to be. There seems to be on the one hand this meme that everything is simply wonderful in their culturally strong Latino-ness. And of course, so many say that the poor folks who come are being oppressed and subject to racism and worse – still, they keep coming. Seems they don’t care. Or, are willing to suffer the indignity here as better than the obvious indignity of life there. Or perhaps there’s not really any oppression and racism at all.

Indeed, it seems to be true also that all the illegal aliens (yet another term) are taking all the jobs from good Americans – who are said to not want those jobs, because they’re busy becoming social workers so they can, um, help the poor downtrodden immigrants – Or, they are all on welfare sucking the nation dry. Perhaps some would say they are both all on welfare, and all working at the same time. How they manage to do this is anybody’s guess. One would think you would need to present a photo ID and some proof of citizenship to get food stamps and Section 8 housing and even an Obama phone. And to present a real Social Security number, too. But no, apparently, some say, the illegals are getting “welfare” – what kind? I’m not sure. The vague word signifying no particular program is used.

Or, as I said, they’re working because they want to destroy America by bringing the Southwest and who knows where else back into Mexico – which poses the bizarre idea that these people are coming here by walking across the desert and perhaps swimming a river or two, and certainly going over a wall, and then mowing lawns or breaking old sheet rock, or some other manual labor, and learning English as fast as they can – yet, crave to recreate the conditions South of the Border, north of it – I don’t think that can really be true – I don’t think the immigrants are coming here to recreate what they left – I think they’re coming here to get away from it.

Here in Phoenix, and elsewhere I’ve been – there’s an English language school on nearly every third block – someone must be paying to keep all these places open. They all look well staffed and plenty of people going to and fro. And I know in Mexico itself there’s an English language school on every other corner – and that vast multitudes are working hard to learn the language. Why, the Mexican government itself has a program to teach all school children from Kindergarten through High School to speak English. Certainly the youth are learning it fast. I dare say, within 50 or 80 years there might not be anyone left down there speaking Spanish.

Then too there’s what to do with the folks here. To round them up seems such an expense. The nation is broke, and we’re to spend billions checking people’s papers – by handing our current government vast new police powers – and that can’t be a good idea. If you’re against lots of police power and brutality and warrantless searches and marauding police free to inquire without cause – well, having the police or even the army go after the illegals doesn’t quite seem like a good idea. And too, if they’re working, they must be doing something good for the economy. Some have suggested that with fake Soc-Sec numbers they are pumping a billion or two a year into that tottering system without getting anything in return.

Then too there’s the money they send back to Mexico – billions more – and if that money is cut off then Mexico teeters just a bit more – and the poverty increases – which will, strangely, drive more people north. And what is Mexico going to do with7 or 8 or 10 million of its citizens returning? There’s no real jobs for them there, nor prospects – and if largest hordes of unemployed people wander about a nation often goes into violent revolution – and that can’t be good for us. To have an even more broken Mexico is not a good idea. And suppose there is vast civil unrest after the millions return, and vast new poverty? Will we then allow them to come north to escape the ravages? Or will we just watch as the country decays into warlords and a shooting war? Then perhaps will send in billions of humanitarian aid, so the kids can eat and the mothers perhaps wash their clothes without worry of being shot.

Then too, there’s the idea of why should the illegals be allowed to vote? They don’t really speak English, as is often said, even by the Liberals para los chicanos y la causa y raza – si? Yes, Liberals are sure that Spanish is the preferred language for Mexicans, hence everything is Oprima Numero Ocho if you want … and so, they really can’t understand what’s going on – for the Liberals use big words in English. And certainly, with them working in oppressive conditions for 10, 12 and 16 hours a day, they have no time to read up on the plights of the nation. They certainly didn’t grow up to think democratically, and are cannot be said to understand American ways. Indeed, many Liberals are sure that the poor Mexicans are so un-educatable that they must be kept handmaidens of the government forever – once they get legal, or something.

Some churches seem to be helping the poor cross the border – while others are sending in the militias to guard the border – and so we get church groups at odds over the issue. Others seem to think that by bringing in more illegals will do wonders — Liberals seem to — while at the same time they complain about the way they are treated – and the lack of jobs – -and the cost of health care – -while Conservatives don’t want the immigrants, but won’t propose anything other than “Liberals suck.”

Then too, are they a net drain or plus to the nation? Well, immigrants are always good, actually – and this crop is no different than previous ones. Oddly, during the heyday of “legal immigration” there was a system that organized the entry of anyone – and they got their papers when they got here. Now we require them to get their papers back at home, and wait – sort of like waiting in VA waiting room – you’ll see someone shortly, I’m sure.

In Hermosillo Mexico, a city of a million or so, just south of Tucson, there’s one little window, the size of your computer screen, for you to apply at. Daily there’s a thousand or more people milling about waiting to see someone at that window. We have made it so ridiculously difficult to get permission to cross – because we don’t want all the immigrants – that the immigrants are coming without permission, because it seems to be, like with most consumer-based issues – what the consumer wants – not what the government or sellers want. The government is offering a service: legal permission to cross – and not providing enough of it at convenient locations – and so the consumers are going elsewhere to obtain the product – mostly be just walking across.

Will building a wall work? What cost? Do we buy up all the land within a mile or two of the border and strip it bare and destroy the habitat and clear out the cactus and brush and anything else that lives there, and set up guard towers with folks set to shoot a warning shot if someone starts to cross? Or do we just but a 20 foot high wall and hope they don’t have 22 foot tall ladders? How close do we put people? It’s sort of whack-a-mole if we have them every mile – the illegals will cross at the half-mile points. If we go for the ½ mile, perhaps they’ll find the ¼ mile stretch just fine. How many soldiers, police, ICE agents, etc, do we need to patrol 2,000 miles? Will the cost of that all be just as much as the cost of the immigrants themselves? Who has done the cost-benefit analysis?

Do we pump billions in foreign aid to them while they are still down south? Do we go for regime change? How can Americans get rid of the medieval laws these countries operate under? Their law is from Alphonso XII in 1280 AD – King of Castille – he’s the guy who set this up – how do we get rid of that? 

And what about just opening the border – but, we require Mexico to let Americans buy land, hold jobs, do things – reciprocity. No, we don’t even bring this up. I have rarely seen anyone bring up the matter of unifying the laws of the two nations regarding an open border policy – and what will that do to Mexico? Oh, it won’t do much to the US – people will move to where the work is – but Americans want to retire south, perhaps – and we can’t buy the land – and there’s no civil rights as we know them – basically, how do we make Mexico more like the USA and Canada?

There is the fantasy option I joke about – all 105 million Mexican move north to the USA – making them ¼ of the new population of 440 million or so – and then we’ll have a big national park to the south – or, we could give it to the gay people of the world so we don’t have to bother anyone again.

Though, seriously, not one politician current offering any plan seems to be aware of half this problem and none are proposing any solution other than “reform” and vague words and promises.

It’s a mess – and there’s not much rational thinking by anyone, frankly.  

Next Page »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: