Author Archives: Danny Quinney

Justice Dept: Mirandize ’em all and let God sort it out

Posted on April 30, 2013 | 3 comments

Several brilliantly written articles ago I had a friend who shared a link to my site on her Facebook page. Because I was tagged I was able to view the conversations back and forth between her and one of her friends. In the conversation my friend’s friend referred to me, your humble narrator, as a woman not once, but twice. Me? As a woman? When my friend corrected her as to my gender she said something to the effect of, “Well, his writing and his site are very feminine.” Gasp. GASP!!! Feminine? Moi? I was so offended I was tempted to climb on my Vespa, drive to her residence and smack her with my whimsical floral print tote. But I decided to take the high road and forgive her (despite my best “sherlocking” I was unable to find out where she lived).

So, in an attempt to MAN this article up a little bit, I will try farting several times while typing it. Please don’t be offended.

Several days ago I was driving to work and did something I haven’t done in months. I listened to Glenn Beck. It was obvious, as I listened, that Glenn was upset because 19-year-old suspected Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev hadn’t been read his Miranda warning yet.

Since the time of my listening, the Obama administration has made the decision NOT to try this guy as a military combatant. Tsarnaey has been read his rights and has stopped talking. The administration sent Press Secretary and apologist Jay Carney out with this statement:

“He will not be treated as an enemy combatant. We will prosecute this terrorist through our civilian system of justice… So this is absolutely the right way to go and the appropriate way to go. And when it comes to United States citizens, it is against the law to try them in military commissions.”

So it appears both Glenn Beck and the Obama administration are in agreement.

I’m not sure I agree.

I can see Beck’s point of view. I agree with putting restraints on the Government. That is the point of the Bill of Rights. And I’m not calling Carney a liar (this time), but he is completely wrong.

Let me explain. Six months after the bombing of Pearl Harbor (1942) the Supreme Court upheld the use of military tribunals for eight German spies captured on US soil, two of whom were United States citizens. In this case Ex parte Quirin the court found that where suspected enemies have entered (or after entry) engaged in acts of belligerency against the United States, military tribunals were appropriate. The Supreme Court unanimously decided Quirin in less than twenty-four hours. Three days after the Court’s decision a military tribunal found the saboteurs guilty. Five days after that, six of the eight were executed including Herbert Hans Haupt, a US citizen. Only the two who ratted out the plot to the FBI were given prison sentences.

Because I’m the stupidest person I know, I hate to be the one who has to point out the blatantly obvious (especially when just the obvious will do). We are at war. We have been at war since thousands of Americans were attacked and killed, without warning, on September 11, 2001. In case some of you were unaware of this fact President George Bush told us (in one of his best speeches ever) we were at war in a joint session of Congress shortly after 9/11. “On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country.”

In other words, you cute little buggers, the President does have the authority to have those suspected of belligerence against the United States tried in military tribunals, even if they are citizens of the United States. Because we live in a land of checks and balances, if Congress has an issue with this, the Constitution gives it two choices. It can cut off funding, or impeach the President. It is not against the law as Carney and Beck suggest.

Quick side note: Is it just me or has everyone noticed there has been a huge absence of polls regarding the use of military tribunals? What’s up with that? As Americans, we are inundated with polls on every imaginable topic, but on this, silence. As a rule of thumb whenever polls are NOT being taken on a particular subject your walls of defense should go up. Somewhere there is a big, fat, commie rat.

Do I think this 19 year old is the mastermind behind the Boston Bombings? NO. Do I think we could have gotten more information from the guy had the Justice Department not stopped the investigation? Yes. Will we be able to get intelligence of other radicalized Muslims from this guy, now? I doubt it. Do I think he should be put to death for his role in the bombings? Absolutely. In the current judicial system it could take YEARS before this guy is brought to justice. I guarantee in the coming months we are going to have to hear about this young man’s feelings being hurt because a teacher or fellow student couldn’t pronounce his name, or some bull crap like that. Reporter Bob Woodward has already said the Boston bombings were “not that big of an event,” as if we need to have 5000 die to set the new watermark. We are already having to endure crap like this headline: “Budget Cuts Could Delay ‘Boston Bomber’ Trial” Makes me crazy!!! It is stupid, stupid, stupid.

I’m not sure if the President is afraid of trying this guy with the military, or is this just one more example of the pussification of America. Our enemies already view us as a paper tiger. Putting this scared little, baby faced, 19-year-old (guilty as sin) boy to death swiftly will show the world we take care of our own, and more than likely deter future acts of terrorism. Let’s pull up our big boy pants and make some hard decisions.

LIFEZILLA: A doughnut a day keeps the ads away.

3 Comments

Posted in America, Education, Uncategorized

Tagged Boston Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Ex parte Quirin, Facebook, Glenn Beck, Jay Carney, Obama Administration, World War II

Gay Marriage

Posted on April 3, 2013 | 26 comments

First and foremost I’m well aware that my personal thoughts and feelings on this matter, although correct, don’t matter. Not all the numbers are in yet, but early polling shows that no one cares what I think.

As I already BRILLIANTLY stated in past articles, it would be impossible for me to care less who sleeps with whom (Or is it whom sleeps with who? Whom/Whoever it is, I think we can all agree “sleeping” isn’t what the debate is about.)

Over the past several days I have seen a plethora of my friends change their profile pictures on Facebook to “equal” signs in support of legalizing gay marriage. In my little brain, those equal signs are a clear indication that gay marriage opponents have lost the battle, and consequently the entire war in the process. And, judging on how they have framed the debate, deservingly so.

All over the internet I have seen the same theme from the opponents of gay marriage. It’s either “God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” or “the book of Leviticus says…” or “gay sex is just icky.”

That’s how those people feel. I don’t want to dismiss their feelings outright. Feelings are real, I get that.

Let’s look at these arguments one at a time:

“Adam and Steve” – the ONLY reason this works at all is that it rhymes. “If the glove don’t fit you must acquit.”

“Leviticus says…” – The Old Testament also says you can’t eat hot dogs, or shellfish and you should stone people to death for shopping on Sunday. If you believe that Jesus is the Christ then you also believe he fulfilled the law of Moses.

“Gay sex is just icky” – Off the top of my head I can list a whole slew of heteros who I shudder to think about, or ever envision them doing the horizontal bone dance (ew gross, I just thought of some – auuuuck pass the ‘brain bleach’).

In my little, newly bleached brain I think the best argument in favor of gay marriage is that “Gay Divorce Court” on TV would be HILARIOUS. But instead, the group in favor of gay marriage framed the argument around it being a civil liberty.

I have a problem with this for two reasons: The first is, this is a tactic the left always uses. It honestly drives me crazy about liberals. If they want something, and they don’t want to have to explain why, they hide it behind a civil liberty. As much as they may want it to be, marriage is NOT a civil liberty. Gay people can vote, go to the same store as everyone, go the same school and can drive on the same highway. What they can’t do is marry someone of the same sex. But neither can I, nor a black, nor a Hispanic. The second reason it bothers me is it forever slams the debate shut. From now until the end of time being opposed to any form of gay marriage, for any reason, is an announcement that you believe in, and fight for inequality. It is synonymous to advocating getting those who are different from you riding in the back of the bus or drinking from a different water fountain. Anyone who even suggests a little bit of caution in redefining an institution that, more than likely, predates civilization itself is easily dismissed with no intellectual effort. Why would you listen to such people? They are clearly bigots, haters, homophobes and knuckle draggers. They have no place in the discussions that will shape the brave new world in which we now live.

You know what? I just realized the antonym for synonym is antonym. Well played antonym. Well played.

Personally I’m for civil unions. My sister and her life partner have two children. They are wonderful parents. They have spent tens of thousands of dollars making it so if one of them dies the other gets legal custody. Then there is the stupid business about gay couples not being allowed to visit their partners in the hospital, or not being able to get survivor benefits. With a civil union all that stuff is done away with, and that to me is a good thing. One piece of paper and you’re done. I see no reason why gay couples shouldn’t be allowed to do these things.

The big problem is that words mean things. If you allow society to redefine marriage then eventually marriage will mean everything which will mean it means nothing, and I don’t think that is a good place to go. “Feelings” and “Love” aren’t a good precedent for a legal discussion. We are going to have to go through this debate over and over as polygamy and any other variances of marriage rear its head. Let’s say I’m a 50 year old man who is a widower. My 25 year old daughter and I want to get married. We are both of legal age, and I had never been inappropriate with her growing up. If “feelings” are what it’s all about, why would you want to stop us? “We love each other.”

I know gays and pedophiles are not the same, but there is a very real push to make pedophilia legal. If it becomes legal what is to stop a 50 year old man from marrying a 12 year old boy? “We love each other.”

What if a man is legally married to a woman, and comes out gay. He loves his wife and his gay lover. Why can’t they all get married? “We love each other.”

If they legalize gay marriage there is going to be a TON of unintended consequences. Again, once “feelings” become precedence it’s going to open up a whole crap load of other issues. I think an institution that has been around for 6,000 years shouldn’t be pitched on a whim. That’s why, in my little brain, this is an issue for the states to decide. The people of the state, NOT THE JUDGES. It needs to be put on the ballot. We would be able to see what the obstacles are and if we decide in the future to make a change we will be doing so informed.

I dunno. Maybe I’m a knuckle dragger.

LIFEZILLA: I’m not close-minded. I’m just right.

26 Comments

Posted in America, Social Issues

Tagged Civil Rights, Civil Unions, Family, Gay Divorce, Gay Marriage, Gay Sex, marriage

North Korea

Posted on March 29, 2013 | 1 comment

I just stepped outside the office and aimed the rubber band on my finger due west.

Your move, North Korea.

1 Comment

Posted in Uncategorized

CPAC

Posted on March 20, 2013 | 5 comments

CPAC

As you may or may not know last week the best and brightest conservative minds met in Washington D.C. for the 43^rd annual CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference).

I did not attend. I know, I know. You would think by now they would be asking me to attend, but they didn’t (…sigh…)

I did watch several speakers. What I saw was AWESOME.

The highlights (of the three I watched) were Ted Cruz’s keynote speech, Marco Rubio, and Allen West.

Awesome, awesome, awesome.

I especially loved it when the conservative minds took the gloves off and REALLY started capping on President Obama’s policies and how they are detrimental to the country.

In my little brain- and I admit it’s little – here are my favorite quotes about what should be screamingly obvious (unless you’re a liberal) about the current tax system:

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

Then there was a BRILLIANT slam to President Obama and the Democrats regarding unemployment:

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

“The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive.”

To stimulate the economy this is what they suggested:

“[We will present a bill that will] include an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in both corporate and personal income taxes. It will include long-needed tax reform that logic and equity demand … The billions of dollars this bill will place in the hands of the consumer and our businessmen will have both immediate and permanent benefits to our economy. Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary. And these new jobs and new salaries can create other jobs and other salaries and more customers and more growth for an expanding American economy.”

And I swear to you, I almost stood up and cheered when I heard:

“You cannot negotiate with people who say what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is negotiable.”

And then, of course, I was so proud when a speech was concluded with “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.” It was such an awesome CPAC. And…er….wait a minute.

Oh. My. Gosh. I am so embarrassed. I had my notes all mixed up. Those quotes weren’t from CPAC. They were from John F. Kennedy. Well, you’ll forgive me, after all Kennedy was a great conservative Republ….what? He was a Democrat?

WOW. Look how much the Democrats have changed. I doubt Kennedy would even recognize his own party. Those quotes from Kennedy are WAAAAAAY different from such revealing quotes as:

“The conventional viewpoint says we need a jobs program and we need to cut welfare. Just the opposite! We need more welfare and fewer jobs.” – Jerry Brown

On the subject of rape on college campuses, (or would it be “campi”?) Rep. Joe Salazar said women don’t need guns, “It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, its why we have the whistles.” It makes you wonder why women would spend any time in a “rape zone.” Wait a minute, why the hell do we have “rape zones” in the first place?!?!?

“The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re passing legislation that will cover 300 million American people in different ways, it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.” – Congressman John Dingell

About the 2nd Amendment Al Sharpton said, “People do not have the right to unregulated rights in this country.”

And my personal favorite, Congressman Hank Johnson on Guam: “My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize.”

But, of course, it’s the Republicans who have changed. It makes me laugh. Of course I have no right to talk. After all, I use words like ‘perpendicular’ when I language at people so they think I’m good with vocabularying.

LIFEZILLA: I’d exercise, but I’m still trying to perfect my “before” picture.

5 Comments

Posted in America

Tagged Allen West, Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC, Marco Rubio, President Obama, Ted Cruz

Immi(de)gration

Posted on March 6, 2013 | 18 comments

Immi(de)gration

Okay, from the start I want you to know this one may be a little harder to follow. I’m not known for being extra bright, and I’m kind of a scatter brain. You know what, just, just stick with me until the end.

To understand my thought process on this I need to give you a history lesson. For the seven people who read my articles this may be a review.

War hero Andrew Jackson formed the Democratic Party with three main planks. The first plank was to continue taking the land from the American Indians. These people had three options: Go west, become farmers, or be killed. The second plank was the continuation and expansion of slavery. The third plank would now be called an “expansionary monetary policy.” This policy allowed white settlers to borrow money to buy “newly acquired” Indian land and with the work of slaves raise profitable crops for market: tobacco, cotton, etc. The policies of cheap land and cheap labor made Jackson very popular in the South. As President he destroyed the National Bank and started a “spoils system.”

In many history books Jackson’s victory is presented as a triumph for democracy over elitism. And to be honest, if you overlook the very real issues of slavery and genocide, there is some truth to this view.

The Whig party was started in direct opposition to everything Jackson and the Democrats stood for. The Republican Party emerged from the Whigs when the Whigs went “Pro-choice” on slavery.

For more information on this part of history go see the movie Lincoln (which totally should have won the Academy Award for best picture. I thought Argo was a good movie. Lincoln was way better).

Republicans then started fighting for civil rights, despite intense Democratic opposition. (See Civil Rights acts of 1866, 1871, 1875, 1957, 1960) The Democrats started the KKK, they opposed military desegregation, and were generally all-around jackasses. (Fun fact: Andrew Jackson’s opponents started calling him “Andrew Jackass.” He embraced this in his campaigning, making the jackass his symbol. Later the donkey came to represent the Democratic Party.) Most people will tell you the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the only Civil Rights Act EVER. It’s true if you consider it is the only one the Democrats supported.

Normally, right about now, I would have a cute little phrase or humorous one-liner that I would add. For the past twenty minutes I’ve been trying to think of a clever way to weave “a reptile dysfunction” into the article, but can’t…sooooooo just laugh, okay?

Presidential candidate John F. Kennedy changed the face of the Democratic Party when he made a two minute phone call to the wife of imprisoned Dr. Martin Luther King.

I think Kennedy was sincere in his desire for Civil Rights. Judging by his record as a Senator, his running mate Lyndon B. Johnson, was not. (Ronald Kessler, “Inside The White House” quotes a USAF crewman on Air Force One, Robert N. MacMillan, who heard LBJ justifying his wanting the 1964 civil rights bill by saying, “I’ll have them ni@@ers voting Democratic for two hundred years.”)

I don’t mean to totally get off the subject here. I think Dr. King was a great man. His “I have a dream” speech and his letter from Birmingham jail are extraordinary. That being said, I believe Thurgood Marshall did waaaaaaaaay more for Civil Rights than Dr. King. He won case after case in front of the Supreme Court.

In 1965 Teddy Kennedy took a much needed break from drowning women in his car to change America’s immigration policy from one that was similar to every other country in the world “What benefit can you provide for our country?” to “Do you have a pulse, and what can we do for you?”

Now for those of you who think I’m drawing a link between racism and immigration, I wanna put your mind at ease. That is exactly what I’m doing.

Racism is ugly in any form. The “in your face” kind makes the news, but I think the subtle kind is the worst. Making laws and policies that stifle creativity and human ingenuity is wrong. Saying things like, “there-there (person of color), you don’t have to learn English. It’s really hard. You just sit right here and let the state take care of you” just isn’t right. It’s soft bigotry of low expectations.

Isn’t it better to hope for every individual to reach their full potential? Can you do that while knowingly transferring the burden of your support onto society? I’ll give you a hint, ya can’t. I don’t know how they did it, but somehow the Democratic Party put the “rad” in degrading.

Before you get your panties in a wad, I’m not saying all Democrats are racist. There are some, just like there are in any large group. I’m also not saying many Democrats aren’t sincerely caring. They are. I’m just saying many of the policies implemented by the Democratic Party, though well intentioned, are misguided. Taking care of someone by giving them “free stuff” is economic slavery. Freedom is economic opportunity.

I disagree with Marco Rubio’s amnesty idea. All that will do is flood the market with a bunch of low-skilled workers. This will enable employers to pay minimum wage for years. It will stifle people’s growth more.

Does something need to be done about immigration? Absolutely. I especially think the “Dreamers” group is something we should discuss. But nothing should be done until we put a fence up. Stop the flow. Then discuss.

The Republican Party began as the anti-slavery party. They believed that “All men are created equal” (and it took the deaths of nearly 600,000 primarily white men to prove it). Today’s Republican Party stands for: Limited Government, Life, Personal Responsibility and a Strong National Defense. We believe people aren’t property; they are not wards of the state. In my little brain, I believe today’s Democratic Party stands for: Getting as many people dependent on the Government so we can keep winning elections, and the right for women to have unprotected sex with men they don’t necessarily care for, without consequences.

But still, “today’s Republicans” are painted as racist and uncaring. Even with stalwart men and women like Tim Scott, Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Marco Rubio, Mia Love, Allen West, Dr. Alveda King and Bobby Jindal on the fronts lines.

Un-be-freakin-lievable.

LIFEZILLA: I hate being Bi-polar. It’s awesome.

18 Comments

Posted in America, Immigration

Tagged American Indians, Andrew Jackson, Civil Rights, Democratic Party, Immigration, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Republican Party, Slavery, Whig Party

Just Some House Cleaning…

Posted on February 28, 2013 | Comments Off

Just Some House Cleaning…

I just want to put somethings into perspective.

Comments Off on Just Some House Cleaning…

Posted in Uncategorized

Minimum Rage…er…Wage

Posted on February 24, 2013 | 7 comments

Minimum Rage…er…Wage

In my last BRILLIANTLY written article I implied that someone may not be worth more than $7.25 an hour. It may have come across as more ‘Jerky’ than I intended. Clearly this would NOT be the case. Let me illustrate. When I, your humble narrator, was a young lad my older sister would often offer me ten cents a minute to tickle her back ($6/hr). When I was fourteen years old my first real job was washing pots at a restaurant. It was thankless, hot and heavy, with greasy steam doing wonders for my zit- and pimple-filled face. Making the minimum wage of $3.35 was hard to accept when I could make six dollars an hour for tickling.

I worked with a guy who was in his early twenties. He was loud, obnoxious, crass, often talked-back to the manager and made googlie eyes at the waitresses. He was an all-a-round jerk. I idolized him. I remember one day he and the manager were arguing. He yelled, “I don’t have to put up with this crap! (He didn’t say “crap.”) I can go anywhere and make $3.50 an hour,” to which my manager said, “Then do it.” The guy walked out the door, fired. The manager looked at me and said, “That guy will never be worth more than that.”

There is a lesson there.

I’m not really sure what the lesson is, but I’m sure there is one.

I have a friend who asked me if I had a problem with this “specific increase in minimum wage” or if I had a problem when President Bush raised the minimum wage. To me a stupid idea is a stupid idea. It doesn’t matter who came up with it, or who signed off on it.

Unlike (I suspect) many in Washington, I’ve read the Constitution. Am I an expert? HEAVENS NO. But I’m willing to learn, so if someone could enlighten me I sincerely will appreciate it. I just don’t remember any article, line or provision which gives authority to a group in Washington to dictate the wage someone in Florida should pay their employee. But again, I realize I’m not the sharpest bulb in the box so if someone could show me, I’m willing to learn.

Now that I think about it, I know what my biggest issue is. Why does everything have to be “universal” with liberals?

For guns, a three round clip may be great in New York, but if I’m in the mountains of Montana hunting wolves that keep killing my cattle, three rounds may not work for me.

In the state of Washington the current minimum wage is $9.19/hr. That’s great for them. But that may be too much to pay in Nevada, where the employee can choose a lower wage and receive benefits or a higher wage with no benefits.

Fifty-five miles per hour may be a perfect speed in North Carolina. But if you’ve ever driven between Las Vegas and California you know 55 mph is WAAAAAAY too slow.

Insurance was a mess because of regulation. So what was the liberal answer to fix the “broken” system? MORE REGULATION. And now (…yeah…) it’s universal. I don’t have enough middle fingers to fully express my feelings on that topic.

Little by little we are transforming from the fifty nifty individual yet United States of America to just “Generica.” Everything is the same bluh, bluh, bluh.

Generally speaking, I think liberals are like Maslow’s hammer. “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” Don’t think meat is good for you? Pass a resolution for Meatless Monday. Worried that the homeless are getting too much saturated fat in their diet? Require a permit for anyone feeding the homeless. Think people are too fat? Pass a law that 32 ounces is too much soda! (This last link is to a BRILLIANTLY written article – Check it out.) Just because you see things one way doesn’t mean everyone does. But instead of embracing the differences, liberals pass laws.

It kinda reminds me of a story. If I remember right, it is something about there being a big group, a plan was presented, and it was decided that people would be “agents unto themselves.” They could choose for themselves, good or evil. One man stood up and said something like, “I don’t like the plan. I don’t like how we will lose some people. Give me the power and I’ll force them to be good. And not one soul will be lost.” If I remember correctly, a big fight broke out.

It’s almost as if that same battle is still being waged. Thomas Jefferson said it best when he said, “The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.”

I’m sure the story went something like that.

Hmmmm…? Well, I’m sure I’ll remember it later.

LIFEZILLA: A day without Diet Coke is like…actually I have no idea what it’s like.

7 Comments

Posted in America

Tagged Constitution, Health Care, Minimum wage, Regulation, State Laws, Universal

You Didn’t Earn That: Minimum Wage

Posted on February 20, 2013 | 8 comments

You Didn’t Earn That: Minimum Wage

The Misses and I have used “Dish Network” for several years. We have always been happy with their service. A week or so ago we were watching a recorded show when the screen froze. LOOOONG story short we needed a new receiver. Because I called after hours on a Friday night, the replacement wouldn’t ship until Monday and we wouldn’t receive it until Wednesday. That’s right, almost a whole week without TV. BLUH!! It was HORRIBLE. We actually had to resort to talking to each other like cavemen…er…cavepeople (sorry). I don’t recommend it to AN-KNEE-ONE.

Because we didn’t have the means, I was unable to watch the President’s State of the Union Address. This simultaneously both irritated and thrilled me. I had all kinds of intentions of watching the speech the next day, but didn’t, and I haven’t yet. All I know is he talked about minimum wage, education and immigration (shocker). These three things are the trifecta of Democrat dumbassery. Hold on. That’s not entirely fair. They are the trifecta of Republican dumbassery as well, but for completely different reasons.

Democrats only have a few really good cards in their deck. “Caring” and “For the Children” are their favorites. The other most used is “Warmongering, racist jerk.”

Republicans, on the other hand, have the challenge to explain complex issues into a sound bite, which they know will never be played on Network Television. And you can’t explain a complex issue on a bumper-sticker. So Republicans are pretty much outta luck.

So even though it will bore me to tears, I’m going to TRY to get my thoughts down about these three issues. I’ll start with Minimum wage.

If you don’t know, the President wants to raise the national minimum wage to $9.00 an hour.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

I can see the President wanting to do it is for only two reasons. The first is that it appeals to his base. He gets to look like a knight in shining armor, swooping in to help the poor (for those who think it all the way through he looks more like an idiot in tinfoil). The second reason is, it demonizes the Republicans. They would look like a bunch of heartless meanies for not wanting to help. If they don’t cave, like they normally do on this issue, the President can sob, saying the Republicans just oppose raising the wage because HE suggested it (see racism).

It’s a win/win for him.

The fact of the matter is most Americans make well above $9.00 an hour. So the issue is about other people. It is super easy to get behind it. “It doesn’t affect ME at all.” So, as a country, we tune it out, go back to watching “Dancing with the Stars” and don’t think about the logic behind the regulation. It is easier to bow to the social pressure. After all, we don’t want to come across as uncaring. Right?

So if it is a small, small percentage of Americans who make minimum wage, and everyone knows if you work hard you can demand more than minimum wage, is the extra $1.75/hr going to help the country as a whole?

I guess that’s my question. Why just nine bucks? It seems almost silly. Sure it’s a 24% increase, but in the real world it’s a buck 75.

Quick hypnotical: what would happen if Republicans demanded a substantial minimum wage? Why $9.00/hr – which will help a very few – when you could raise it to $50.00/hr which will help a whole ton of people? Sure, in a few weeks a loaf of bread would go from $3.50 (for a decent loaf) to $25.00, but at least we’ll be spreading the wealth around. Right?

My guess is the Democrats would backpedal. They know it would kill the economy quickly. They prefer to kill it slowly, so they won’t get the blame.

Most employers (all of them) go into business to make money. The more profit they make, the more goods or services they provide, the more people they hire, etc, etc. When faced with a payroll hike they have one of four options: 1) Raise the rates to the new minimum, 2) Let employees go, 3) Downsize their jobs (employing them for fewer hours), or 4) Raise the prices on their goods or services and hope people will still use them. If you think about it, the forth option is really a hidden tax.

Most employers will do one of the four and then invest in goods to make labor more productive, so they can hire fewer people down the road, or shift their production overseas. The effect on employment is still there, it just isn’t “in your face.”

It will never happen, but imagine if Republicans grew a pair and ‘upped the ante’- if they demanded a substantial raise. At least it would force the country to have a grown-up conversation about it.

At the risk of sounding heartless, the sad truth is if an employee is worth more than $7.25 an hour and they are not being paid more, it is up to them to find work somewhere else. If they can’t find it, they are probably only worth $7.25. Having the government dictate that the employer pay $9.00 for $7.25 worth of work not only creates high unemployment for teens and unskilled workers, it is also intellectually dishonest. If someone is having a hard time understanding this, have them explain why we shouldn’t raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour.

LIFEZILLA: Not entirely sure what a “Propriate” is, but apparently I’m sometimes in it.

8 Comments

Posted in America, Government Over-reach

Tagged Democrats, Dish Network, Education, immigration reform, Minimum wage, Republican, State of the Union

My Thoughts on Valentine’s Day – Redone

Posted on February 14, 2013 | 1 comment

So I’m totally going to plagiarize myself. I posted this last year. I think my site was two days old, I would be surprised if five people read it. Reading over it now I still think it is kind of funny, but there is a bunch I would change, and I was half tempted too today. I would have worked in something like how kissing is shopping upstairs for downstairs merchandise, or how loud obnoxious snoring is my body’s natural way of fighting off affection, or how the difference between love and sex is sex relieves tension and love causes it, or how panties are over priced wrapping paper, or how I think about sex every3.14 seconds (OHMIGOSH…I’m Pi-Sexual!!!) or…bluh, bluh, bluh.

But in the end I decided to keep it as it was.

I hope you like it.

My Thoughts on Valentine’s Day – Redone

First of all, I love my wife. Second of all, I hate Valentine’s Day. HATE IT. To me Valentine’s Day isn’t a foo-foo lacy day, filled with pink hearts that ends up with the two of you doing “married things.” To me it is a day filled with a constant reminder of how I’m a screw up when it comes to love. Where, if I’m LUCKY, we end up doing “married things.”

Jim Gaffigan said it best when, talking about a pitch for Valentines day, he said, “How about a holiday all about awkwardness and failed expectations?”

No gift is appropriate. No gift is the right one. As a man I naturally want my wife in lingerie 24/7. To me it is in similitude to wrapping presents during Christmas. My theory being that it is fun to unwrap them (wicked grin). PFFFFFFFFFF. . . yeah right. It took my new bride (lo those many years ago) about two seconds to explain to me that I’m only giving a gift to myself.

But Valentine’s Day is fun when you are teenager. I remember one time a girl I was kinda dating made me one of the big poster-board signs with candy bars all over it with the names of the bars tying a sentence together. Like this:

Hey “Sweet Tart” it would be worth a “100 Grand” if we blah blah blah. You get the point.

Now, I have only been in one serious relationship, and I married her. So I never went through the “break up” drama. But I always thought it would be fun to break-up using this same concept. Of course if you’re breaking up why confine yourself to only the candy aisle? I say use the whole store.

“Lettuce” call it like it is. I know you think you’re a “Rock Star” but really you’re more of a “Monster.” So let’s take that “Red Bull” face of yours and put it back in the “Vault.” I look at your body and “I can’t believe it’s not butter.” I mean just look at your nasty “Mounds”. Your “eggs” are past the expiration date, and your “Milk” has gone sour. It is seriously a “Country Crock” and gives me the “Snickers” that you believe it would ONLY take a “100 Grand” to get your “Tub O’ Lard” to “Slim Fast.” I don’t want to ever see you again, not “Now or Later.”

Seriously, don’t you think that would be a fun way to break up?

LIFEZILLA: Valentine’s Day, when you care to give her the very best…once a year… grudgingly…because, really, after the hints and nagging, you had no choice.

My wife is actually really good about Valentine’s day. I LOVE HER SOOOO MUCH.

HAPPY VALENTINE’S DAY EVERYONE

1 Comment

Posted in Uncategorized

My Team of Writers

Posted on February 12, 2013 | 5 comments

My Team of Writers

From this point forward I will refer to the voices in my head as “my team of writers”. I have two issues my team of writers have been kicking around, but I’m not really sure how to make them mesh into one article. They have been driving me crazy. Maybe I’ll make it two articles. I dunno, we’ll see.

Both issues have to do with education.

We are (what?) seven weeks into the New Year. And I can list three similar stories that bother me. The first was when a six year old kid was suspended from school for making a gun with his hand and saying “Pow”. The second, was when a five year old girl was suspended for 10 days for making a “terroristic threat” for talking to a friend about shooting her with a “Hello Kitty Bubble Gun”. Yes, you read that correctly. A gun, in the shape of Hello Kitty, that shoots BUBBLES (Lawrence Welk would have been thrown in prison for life.) And most recently, last week a seven year old was suspended from school for throwing an imaginary grenade into an imaginary box filled with “something evil” to save the world.

An imaginary grenade into an imaginary box…So he threw nothing into nothing…? (hmm)

I can completely understand these young heroes desire to fight. My favorite part about imaginary fighting is the fact you get to thwart evil. You never get to thwart anything in real life. I like to thwart. My advice to these young patriots is to always have a backup finger gun strapped to your ankle in case your two primaries get confiscated again.

Is it just me, or does it sound like the administrators need to grow up?

Last week Dr. Benjamin Carson was at a prayer breakfast with President Obama and said he thought PC (Political Correctness) was dangerous (click here for the awesome speech). I agree.

The second issue that has been bothering me is about an article I read. Apparently, in Texas there is a web-based system used in 70 percent of the schools state wide to assist teachers with lesson plans. The system is “built by teachers, designed by teachers.” Many are concerned that it is difficult for non-teachers to get a look at the program.

One of the lessons for sixth graders “showed different countries’ flags and instructed students to “notice that socialist and communist countries use symbolism on their flags.” It went on to ask students what symbols they would use if they were to create a flag for a new socialist country.”

Many of the other lessons “promoted pro-Islam ideals, or described participants of the Boston Tea Party as terrorists.”

Pardon me Miss? I believe I ordered my brain-washing on the side.

The whole “designing a flag” thing BUUUUUUUUUUGED me. But because I had recently had a conversation with a young man about the “Boston Tea Party as terrorist” the article kind of set me off.

For the record. The Boston Tea party story has always rubbed me the wrong way. It is part of history. It happened. I get that. But terrorist? Come on.

Quick review: The Boston Tea party was in response to the Tea Act of 1773. The Colonists objected to the Tea Act because it violated their rights as Englishmen. They, rightly, believed they should be taxed only by their own elected representatives and not by a British parliament in which they were not represented. “No taxation without representation.”

I remember being taught the Tea Party was the catalyst that started the Revolutionary War. Hmmm…not really. In fact it probably set the whole thing back. It really dispirited both American and British supporters, like Edmund Burke.

George Washington disapproved of the destruction of the tea, and Benjamin Franklin demanded the India Tea Company be reimbursed (they were). Samuel Adams defended the raid by saying that all other methods of recourse, you know like…voting — were unavailable.

Many of the founding fathers considered the raid an embarrassment. The Boston Tea Party was not celebrated for another 50 years.

Not one person was killed. Paul Revere made sure to replace a lock that was broken during the raid and severely punished a man who stole some of the tea for his personal use (HEY…just like the terrorist of today who paid for the rebuilding of the…er…oh…forget it).

But kids today are taught that this great country was made from the act of terror. Come on. It took three years before our founding fathers engaged in their truly revolutionary act: The signing of the Declaration of Independence (for perspective the iPad was originally introduced three years ago in April).

In that document, they set forth, in clear terms, their complaints with British rule, their earlier attempts at resolution, and an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world for independence from the crown. I remember a few years ago reading the Declaration of Independence to a group of Boy Scouts. It was almost a spiritual experience.

Are these things being taught in your school? I dunno if they are in mine. But at least we can sleep well knowing we are safe from six year olds with imaginary guns.

LIFEZILLA: This Valentine’s day tell your lover the three little words she (or he) has been dying to hear: “I love Lifezilla”.

5 Comments

Posted in America, Education, Gun Control

Tagged Education, Founding Fathers, Liberalism, school violence, Schools, The Boston Tea Party

Author Archives: Danny Quinney

Search

Archives