Chappelle is Black Enough

I'm a fan of Dave Chappelle but I take issue with something he said during his monologue on SNL a couple weeks ago.  He made a comparison between 'Black lives matter' and 'Blue lives matter'.  He minimized 'Blue' by stating Blue is a suit you wear that you can easily remove.  'If you don't like the job, get another one,' he said. I postulate that Blue and Black are EACH attitudes leading to behaviors associated with consequences.

Uncle Tom isn't Black enough. He doesn't wear his pants low enough.  He says 'ask' instead of 'aks'. He can't dance and finished school.  He doesn't fight or do drugs. He's not into Hip Hop.  These are not behaviors with which he was born.  It's the person he has become resulting from a series of choices he's made influenced by important figures in his life.

Barney P. Fife is too Blue.  He thinks his badge protects him from the results of his actions.  He can spot guilty people at a glance. He plays judge, jury and executioner while hiding behind a shiny piece of metal.

It seems to me neither Barney nor Tom represent the norm as Dave would see it.  I see more value in someone who puts his life on the line by wearing a Blue uniform than someone who pumps his fist in the air because he's Black enough to matter.


Michael Jackson - Beat It

The Beautiful People

You know who bigots REALLY hate?  Ugly people.

Does anyone care how many fat chix don't work at Hooters? Does anyone care how tall and beautiful CEO's tend to be?


I just hope someone's sail catches my drift.

The Beautiful People - Marilyn Manson

Juror # Minority

A Puerto Rican juror says, "Zim got away with murder." Puerto Rico is populated with Puerto Ricans, mostly. Mostly in the Puerto Rican culture they do not believe in self-defense as an excuse for killing a human.  “Thou Shalt Not Kill” rules the culture.  Our soldiers are murderers by that standard.  Thank our Constitution that she performed her American duty as a juror based on law and agrees this trial should never have been tried.

Meat is Murder 

Equal Justice

America hates Males.  There are by far more males than females in prison for killing people in the USA.  About 77% of the US prison population sentenced to prison for killing a human is male. It has nothing to do with facts or trials. It's hate. It MUST be.  How else can we justify such an imbalance?  We hate males so we put them in jail when they kill people, and we forgive females. We don't need trials if all they are is a method to express hate.

I thank Al Sharpton for this revelation. I was enlightened by the good Mr. Sharpton when he pointed out the imbalance as it is tracked per race.  Clearly the only reason more blacks than whites per capita are in jail for shooting people is pure and simple racism. It has nothing to do with facts or trials. It's hate. It MUST be. How else can we justify the imbalance?

So mister Sharpton … ?  Will you march with me?  We must end this sexism!

And Justice for All 

We’re Gonna Keep it Hyphenated

We have become a divided nation. 

Today is July 3^rd 2013. Maybe it’s the jinx of unlucky numbers bringing me down, but as I watch TV, read blogs or listen to people talk on the street, I struggle to be excited about this pending celebration of American Independence.

I see the George Zimmerman trial junkies arguing about words like “punks” vs. “creepy-ass crackers” as if we should be appalled by one and snicker at the other.  I see Don Lemon of CNN fame walking the streets with papers in his hands. On one is printed the word “Nigger” on another “Cracker”.  “Which is worse?  Which is more offensive,” he asks unsuspecting passers-by.

Does it matter which is worse?  What’s in a word like “Cracker” or “Creep”?  Is it the inherent value of what society deems most heinous or might intent be paramount? I suggest the latter.

We Americans are divided and it’s evident in our language as we prepare to celebrate our sovereignty.  We use words to describe “us” and “them”.  We use hyphens to separate ourselves into claims of higher ground, lower sympathy or just plain prejudice.

It’s not enough to be American.  Just plain ole American means white and over-privileged these days.  Americans have no plight, need no sympathy and empathy cannot be fathomed.  Nope.  It’s the hyphenated Americans who need all that.  The African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Immigrant-Americans, Disabled-Americans, Under-Privileged Americans, Homosexual-Americans, Creepy-Ass-Americans … This list cannot be complete no matter how hard I try so now I pause.

When will we Americans stop using hyphens as excuses for entitled respect?  Hyphens do not represent entitlement to respect, we have to earn that as individuals.  But on this, the eve of American Independence Day, can we agree that other Americans are not "they" or "them"?  They are "us". They are "we".

Let's drop the hyphens.  What d'ya say? 

Come Out and Play

NFL Refs

So the replacement refs have been replaced, yet Chris Collinsworth still found breath to waste on words like, "The Eagles want the replacements back" or "There will be a lot of discussion about that pass interference call," Sunday night.

Until we have a Ref on mic, the announcers need to stop armchair officiating. It's disrespectful. The announcers have multiple angles to review on every play in super slo-mo and even then I sometimes wonder if they're watching the same images I am.

The game is fast moving and tough to call. Do your job and stop criticizing the Refs for doing their jobs until they start criticizing your inept participation in an athlete's trade as a former athlete.

Blind Man in the Bleachers - Kenny Starr

Religious Right Might Need to Checkity Check Themselves

Recent conversations with, and emails circulating among, my friends from the Religious Right have me drawing conclusions ... maybe even judging ...

One friend subscribes religiously to any form of media willing to bash the leader of the free world. That same friend is beside himself that the biased mainstream media let's Obama get away with his lies and Godless tactics.  A recent right-based circulating email  ended with, "We need to get rid of this Socialist, Muslim in the White House" because he is supportive of funding the acceptance of Palestinian Refugees onto our land.

It seems to me the Christian Conservatives among us tend to either pity or hate anyone not religiously in line with their senses of morality.

Pity and hate are symptoms of arrogance.  Christ preached humility ...  It's time to put down the torches and pitchforks.  It's time for Christlike tolerance to replace religious hypocrisy.

Losing My Religion - R.E.M.

Rhode Island Missing Mark on Gender

Bear with me for a 'graph and a half ...

I can’t speak like a pirate.  Today is “National Talk Like a Pirate Day” and even though I’ve watched Pirates of the Caribbean and each sequel in excess of 20 times, my pirate dialect is nothing short of embarrassing.  It’s not an inadequacy.  It’s just who I am and I can live with that. But when I see all these show-offs saying “Arrrr matey” and “Man the mop swabbie”, I feel I am unfairly discriminated against. No, I don’t think people do it purposely. They do it out of ignorance so I know I am justified when I call for an end to the very offensive “Talk Like a Pirate Day”.

Likewise, my wife’s dad left her mom (or was it the other way around? Not sure but neither here nor there) when my wife was 14.  When the daddy-daughter dance came along, what was she to do? Well, unfortunately for her, the ACLU figured it out about 27 years too late.  Yep, 27 years ago they could have just done away with the entire practice altogether. Instead, my wife had to endure (end sarcasm) one of her favorite memories accompanying her best friend and best friend’s dad to the joyous event.  I guess you could say she “stagged it” but, yes, still it is a cherished memory for my wife.

Rhode Island has banned Father-Daughter dances and Mother-Son ball games. The ban was prompted when one single-mom cried foul since her daughter had no daddy to escort her.  I’d say what that poor girl lacks is a mom with creativity or without issues dealing with men.  Even in the most ardent, man-or-woman-hating, single-parent atmosphere, someone emerges as a father or mother figure in the lives of children being raised by just one parent.  The girl can go to the dance if she so desires, yet rather than having to face the facts of her daughter’s misfortune and her own poor planning in life, this mom would have NO ONE attend such an event.

It’s gender discrimination they say …

The ACLU says, “In 2012 not every girl necessarily wants to grow up and be Cinderella, some might actually like to go out on the baseball field and a public school of all places should not be suggesting otherwise…”

Why do women wear a dress and men a tux at a gender-mixed wedding?  Why do girls tend to play with dolls and boys tinker toys or footballs?  Is it stereotyping and mind shaping?  What does “2012” have to do with it anyway? Who would name their boy "Sue"?

It doesn't really matter ...

Red herrings exposed, what’s being missed in all this politicizing, is that these events are meant to encourage interactions between parents and their children.  It’s aimed at stretching the parents to act beyond an innate comfort zone.  It’s not about whether or not little Sally would rather attend a ball game than a dance.  It’s about Mom. You know?  Mom: that lady who spends some breath every week scolding dad for watching “football, AGAIN?” It’s about Dad. You know?  Dad: the guy who’d rather attend an Ogden Raptors game, than dip mom on the dance floor wearing his finest threads and smelling like a freshly pampered Julio Iglesias.

By and large (To misuse a nautical term. [Yes ... it's nautical] Seee? Landlubbers just shouldn't try that pirate thang)  Boys are different from girls. 

Generalizations recognized, let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water, people.  Let’s embrace our differences.  Let’s enjoy rather than demonize tradition. We’ve come to a fork in the road (I almost said Rhode).  One sign leads to a Rhode (snap, did it anyway) less taken and reads, “If we can’t please everyone, we should please no one.”  On the other road, or shall we just call it “the beaten path”, a more tattered sign reads, “I learned my lesson well”.

Garden Party - Ricky Nelson 

Romney Camp Out of Touch

Recent comments by Hillary Rosen are being billed as a campaign boon for the Romneys.  Read the story ...

I assert they need to drop it. Rosen made a comment about Ann Romney as an economic adviser to a would-be President of the USA. She wasn't saying parenting isn't hard or noble work. Rosen is right, Ann Romney has nary an empathetic offering on the subject of women in America and economic issues.

While yes it's nice Romney worked real hard as a stay-at-home mother and that it was a nice choice she made, it's a choice most of America can no longer consider. Mitt Romney boasts his business prowess and uses Dominos as an example of a company he 'fixed' and in so-doing created or saved some 200,000 American jobs. Can the average salary at Dominos raise a family of four while one partner stays home to raise the children?

Ann Romney makes a crucial mistake if she is to boast her family portrait and proud 'choice' to stay home with her 7 or 8 kids. I believe that choice is one most American parents would gladly make given the financial resources to do so. The sad truth is that most of middle America is populated with two-job working families out of necessity, not choice. What of the single parent? What of men or women without children and jobs?

Careful Ann! You might alienate more people than you draw in with your movement to support women (not men) staying home to raise their children.

Who wouldn't want to spend more time with their children?

Time is priceless and most of us can't afford it.

Fly Like an Eagle - Steve Miller

Social Compartmentalization Wrong in Any Form

Tonight in the debate the idea came up of new special advantages for Veterans in the form of money going to people who hire Veterans over Civilians.

Ron Paul had it right. While there needs to be a call for help in the form of medical care both physical and psychological for our Vets, we don't need to be segregating ourselves into special groups who deserve work over others based on arbitrary means.

Let employers simply hire the best man or woman for the job and stop incentivizing the development of social compartmentalization.
To say Veterans should hold priority over Civilians for jobs is to impose a draft by proxy.

Born in the USA - The Boss

Alec Baldwin Melt Down Telling

Rudy Giuliani was a guest on Piers Morgan's CNN show tonight. Alec Baldwin became a topic of conversation as the guy who was wrongfully removed from an American Airlines flight for reading his Kindle.

I assume Morgan struck this line of questioning with Giuliani for reasons of proximity to Baldwin's career and a posture of higher thinking on results attainable by hijackers of planes.

It breaks down like this: Baldwin, Giuliani and Morgan believe they are not harming anyone by using electronic devices on planes especially when they make specific selections on their electronic devices that disable Internet communication. I know none of them are airline pilots or affiliated in any way with the FAA, yet they have one large soapbox upon which to stand for poo-pooing FFA regs.

Never mind that we've all heard that 'motorboating' sound when a cell phone is too close to our speakers or microphones. These high falutin' celebrities are sure American Airlines is engaged in simple tyranny by not wanting ANYONE, not just Baldwin, activating electronic devices during certain segments of travel.

I think they know best, actually ... the FAA and American Airlines that is. I mean if Travolta was raising a stink about this I might be remotely interested in their argument that pilots of planes have no reason to fear technology in the fuselage. But I guarantee Giuliani was asked to turn off his Kindle, his Smart Phone and his pace maker for the interview inspiring my very words.

So my p0int is this: Do Americans really believe that airliners are simply interested in tyranny? Do we believe they just don't know which devices may or may not cause trouble so they say we can't have any of them on their flights? I suggest to you they know exactly what sort of trouble electronic devices can cause. They have their reasons for not wanting devices engaged during the flight. Maybe one of those reasons is that policing the 'disable' function on various technologies is far from reasonable for Airlines. They have far too many responsibilities for that (like serving Baldwin his favorite beverage all the while kissing his pompous ass), so a ban is the simplest solution. Yet Baldwin believes himself above all that. " Don't you know who I am? I'm Alec Fucking Baldwin!"


I ask of a laughing Giuliani who should be most aware: Do you now see a reason people shouldn't bring box cutters on board? I mean I have mine to clean my nails, but what about you Mr. Mayor? Why do you have yours and how do I know the safety catch isn't unhitched?

Furthermore Mr. Mayor, given you know planes can be hijacked with simple box cutters and no one had before considered them a threat, might you not suffer from a closed mind if you don't see that some folks on planes might say they've disengaged their laptops, but really haven't? Even I, a West Coaster who wasn't there that day can see that terrorists will use means we've not considered to achieve their ends. Does some dude with a laptop and seemingly kind intentions have to use his laptop to commandeer an airliner before you finally get it into your skull that the experts ought to be left alone to stay one step ahead of people who want to take control of flying buses full of Americans and crash land them into other Americans?

If there is one thing Giuliani should have learned from 9/11, it's the simplicity with which terrorist strikes can be initiated. Mr. Mayor, please, put some trust in the experts on this and stop calling for relaxed measures so your hero Baldwin can get his Twitter account back!

I am God - Alec Baldwin

Have You Earned Your Freedom?

During a paid 3 minute sermon on the radio a preacher posed the question, "What have you done to earn your freedom? Are you a taker? Think about it." He asked this after framing the signers of our Declaration of Independence as mostly people who sacrificed their lives or were ultimately arrested and tortured.

I say the Founding Fathers did not make such sacrifice so we would have to do it, too. They didn't give their lives so their children would do the same. They did it so we wouldn't have to.

On a similar note, while I respect our soldiers and appreciate the sacrifice some of them have made, some of them come home with chips on their shoulders. Some of them will ask similar questions of civilians, "What have you done to earn your freedom. I fought so you can have rights ..."

I endured such ridicule at the hands of a former friend who didn't agree with my line of reason on this topic. He had signed up for the military during a time of peace though he saw combat duty in Bosnia. He believes I as a civilian owe him something for that and that his status as a Combat Veteran trumps my right to free speech. Some how I should not even comment on Freedom since I did nothing directly to earn the right.

Well, he was paid for his service. He has his benefits. He was taught skills and all he had to do was sign up. He didn't have to interview or tryout for his position. He simply volunteered to be told exactly what to do and when to do it. He knew what he was signing up for. If he was signing up so to have a leg up on we lowly civilians, then he took that job for all the wrong reasons.

I will gladly thank soldiers for doing their jobs as I will do for construction workers and grocery clerks. I think it's time some on high horses found time to thank all productive Americans for sacrificing their time, for risking their lives during the commute if not directly on the job and for being part of the greatest economy the world has ever seen.

I will thank the Founding Fathers for my freedom and for the sacrifices they made so that I could be born with certain inalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and I will not feel guilty for not 'earning' these rights as defined by certain elitists.

I'm Free - The Who

My Jerry Mcguire Moment

In construction there are fire codes. One method to contain out-of-control fire is to build a barrier so that the heat of a fire would take 1 or 2 hours to burn through. Another is to fully fire-sprinkler a building. Fire sprinklers have an outstanding track record for containing fire. Yet in a fully-sprinklered building, we still find compartmentalization defined by rated-walls.

If properly designed, installed and functioning fire sprinklers are as effective as I suggest, then why fire rated walls? The answer is simple. We must consider the possibility of water supply breakage or fire sprinkler malfunction. I say that is a reasonable concern.

But sometimes these rated walls are made out of glass. Fire-rated glass is VERY expensive, so architects and builders need an alternative. They need a way to make fragile and not-so-fire-resistant glass to maintain a 1 or 2 hour rating in certain applications. So what did they do you ask, almost rhetorically? I will tell you! They decided to use special-application fire-sprinklers to solve the problem. The codes that apply to this situation, the sprinklers involved and the volume of water intended to keep every square inch of the glass wet in case of out-of-control fire is also expensive and often aesthetically displeasing.

In short, we need rated walls in case the fire sprinkler system fails, yet in some cases we need to count on the fire sprinkler system to tally a certain rating for our fire-rated walls. If the sprinklers work, we don't need the rated walls ...

Yes, I earn a living in the fire-sprinkler industry and benefit from this sort of bureaucratic nonsense. But like Jerry Mcguire, I have an internal ethic that just doesn't know when to keep its mouth shut!

Breaking News

Broadcasters have lost touch with the words "Breaking News". I watch a lot of CNN. Since 9/11 I believe the words "Breaking News" have burned themselves into my Television Monitor. They're using the term loosely to grab your attention but the 'cry-wolf' syndrome and law of diminishing returns have to eventually kick in.

Before the turn of the century it seems to me news was broken down into Sports, Weather, Latest News, Developing Stories and Breaking News. Breaking News was rare.


Breaking News is not a story that developed a couple hours ago. Breaking News is something developing as we watch. It doesn't come with pre-packaged pieces edited with well-written commentary. There isn't time for that. What we see the likes of Anderson Cooper and Nancy Grace dubbing "Breaking News" is generally what ought to be considered "The Latest".

Someone employed by Rupert Murdock needs to pull the reins on the term before it is squeezed dry of all meaning. Go back to terms like "The Latest" so that when we see "Breaking News" we actually watch with the anticipation of old.

Of course, I recognize they use "Breaking News" as a sales pitch. I don't buy it anymore. Do you?