The Political Correctness Police are at it again. This time right smack dead center in the Bible Belt.

Twice this week the Idiots From the Moronosphere struck not once but twice in eastern Kansas. The first was forcing an “In God We Trust Banner” to be removed from the Post Office building in Pittsburg, Kansas. Citing the usual incorrect and dumbed down “Separation of Church and State” – a phrase that contrary to popular belief - does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution OR it’s Bill of Rights.* 

Thaaaaat’s right. The only thing about religion, freedom of or freedom from mentioned in any of those documents is the First Amendment to the Constitution which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."**

It is true that some – not all – of the Framers wanted it more explicitly stated but the majority of them thought it either sacrilegious or too extreme to ban religion from government completely. But what the majority DID agree on was, as Thomas Jefferson later wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association (1802) that “that the United States Bill of Rights prevents the establishment of a national church, and in so doing they did not have to fear government interference in their right to expressions of religious conscience.””** [Emphasis added].

In other words, the Framers and their brilliantly written 

founding documents say only that individual

citizen can do spiritually whatever they please without interference from government and that compulsory membership in religion will not be government policy - period. It does NOT say that the government absolutely cannot condone religious displays such as a manger scenes in the town square or an “In God We Trust” banner on a post office wall. I mean, it says “In God We Trust” on our government minted currency so what’s wrong with it saying the same thing on a post office wall?

And since “The USPS has not directly received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s…”*** [emphasis added] then there shouldn’t be any problem with a banner saying the same thing as our money does being up on a wall. I’d be willing to bet that if the ACLU tacked up something to the contrary on that very same wall the same complainers would remain silent and the Pittsburg post office would not be so anxious to cave.

Along similar lines, in Lawrence, Kansas, 140 miles to the north the liberal hypocrites struck again.

On Kansas Day, 2016, the story broke that “A Kansas high school student who had been displaying a Confederate flag on the vehicle he drove to school has been told he can no longer show the flag on school property, according to school officials.” [Emphasis added]****

Free State High School decided that such a display was “disruptive to the learning environment.” And “Lawrence Superintendent Rick Doll said the school’s administration considered the student’s free speech rights before making the decision.”

Really? Seriously? Who the hell do they think they’re kidding with that pap?

Oh, but the double standard gets even more inane and hypocritical. “While the district doesn’t have a policy regarding the Confederate flag, the high school’s student handbook has a policy that states its commitment to providing a discrimination-free learning experience.”****

For one thing, the Confederate Battle Flag which has been totally hijacked by the race baiters of the 21st Century to mean only that one supports slavery and not to just stand for rebellious attitudes in youth (see “The Dukes of Hazzard” for an example), States Rights against an oppressive federal government (see the Confederate States of America secession decrees) and so on. So the fact that some teenager has a Confederate Battle Flag sticker or antennae flag on his vehicle should not automatically send the hypersensitive perpetually offended rabble rousers into their usual hysteria and overreaction.

But, alas, this is the 21st century politically correct culture we live in. Common sense and rational reactions to things are sadly so last century.

I guess the Lawrence School District only believes in teaching revisionist or politically-correct history and Constitution and government studies about the Constitution and Bill of Rights. And their views on “discrimination-free” are pretty skewed too. I say this because it’s pretty obvious from their actions and hypocrisy that they apparently only believe Kansans live in a truly free state and that someone truly has the right of free speech only if they do or say something the PC police agree with. However, if not….

I’d be willing to bet school district officials didn’t go around and yank any of those Human Rights Campaign equal sign decals off any of the cars in the parking lot or telling their drivers to not bring those vehicles back to school because voicing support for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender might be considered offensive to their Christian students’ religious beliefs and therefore disruptive to their learning environment.

Sadly, in this dumbed-down, politically-correct, morally bankrupt and hypocritical culture we live in can’t see the crippling mental deficiencies that give rise to such double standards. I’m sure the Framers and the other Founding Fathers are just spinning in their graves to see how far their brilliant creation of government has so decayed these past couple of centuries.

*Live Science Staff (19 Oct., 2010) Where Did 'Separation of Church and State' Come From?, LiveScience. Retrieved 30 January, 2016 from http://www.livescience.com/10156-separation-church-state.html
**Wikipedia (26 January, 2016) Separation of Church and State. Retrieved 30 January, 2016 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
***”…with the exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters.” Wikipedia (24 January, 2016) United States Postal Service. Retrieved 30 January, 2016 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service
****Associated Press (29 January, 2016) Lawrence student told not to display Confederate flag on vehicle on school property. Cjonline.com. Retrieved 30 January, 2016 from http://cjonline.com/news/2016-01-29/lawrence-student-told-not-display-confederate-flag-vehicle-school-property
*****By The Human Rights Campaign (designer)AMK1211 at en.wikipedia (this version) - Human Rights Campaign, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15038149****** By William Porcher Miles (1822-1899) - SVG adapted from this image, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=628953
*******By The original uploader was Themanwithoutapast at English Wikipedia - Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons by PhiLiP using CommonsHelper., Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6617347

 

 

 

Where DO they get their economics education?

The headline read: SEATTLE RESTAURANTS CLOSING THEIR DOORS AHEAD OF MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE.”*

Yeah…well…all I can say to this is…DUH!

I don’t know where these liberals got their education on economics. But, anyone who’s spent the first two weeks in a REAL economics course class (not this Marxist pap they seem to be teaching nowadays) knows that as price of a given product increases, demand for it goes down. That has been true since time immortal for anything - bread, beer, smart phones or…wait for it…yes, even labor!

So, guess what; the libs that buy into this “feels good but never works in the real world” “spread the wealth” Marxist horse hockey that Obama and his kind like to spew convinced Seattle to pass an ordinance which took effect April 1, 2015 required city businesses to increase the minimum wage they pay workers to $15/hour.

Let’s put this under the microscope for a second. According to “the Washington Restaurant Association, before the wage increase, a typical cost breakdown for Seattle restaurants was: 36 percent of funds devoted to labor, 30 percent to food costs, 30 percent to other operating costs, and the remaining 4 percent was profit margin. However, under the minimum wage increase, if a restaurant owner made no changes, labor costs would rise to 42 percent in quick service restaurants and 47 percent in full service restaurants. [Emphasis added].

“Arguing that the wage increase is harming the workers it was intended to help, the free-market think tank the Washington Policy Center said, ‘The [restaurant] shut-downs have idled dozens of low-wage workers, the very people advocates say the wage law is supposed to help. Instead of delivering the promised “living wage” of $15 an hour, economic realities created by the new law have dropped the hourly wage for these workers to zero.’” * Get that? Zero!

Business people have to be smart. Or they don’t stay in business for long. Those that do, look at their costs, their processes, their costs and try to price their products accordingly. According to how much investment they have in that product and how much price the market will bear. Ask yourself:

• Would you spend more to make less than you spent to earn it – in other words, lose money? No, of course you wouldn’t.

• Would you spend a given amount to make only that amount back  - in other words, break even? Probably not.

• Would you spend a given amount to make that and a given % more back? Probably so.

But it seems trendy today for all the libs to be saying that most businesses make too much more than they spent back – in other words, excess profits (a favorite Marxist mantra, by the way). So, maybe you’re saying “Yes. I’d spend a given amount to make a small % return on my money.”

Fair enough. But let’s examine the % extra a little. Should a person make enough to put some aside “for a rainy day?” Most people say yes. Should a business be allowed to make enough to save for downturns in the business climate/market? Most people say yes, but some say no more than that should be allowed.

OK. Keeping that last thought, let’s take a fictitious Seattle restaurant as example of the impact of this minimum wage increase. Let’s say that our fictitious Puget Sound Seafood Joint makes an average of 9% profit annually over expenses. Not bad, but not awesome either. As a matter of fact, “high-end restaurants earn, on average, a profit margin of just 8%.”**

So, with annual gross revenue of $397,000, our fictitious fish joint only banks a little more than $31,000 gross profit (just to keep the numbers round). Before we jump to a conclusion that such should be enough, remember that’s the rainy day market fund. What if there’s another recession like hit in ’08 and ’09? How long would that $31,000 last?

Those only come once in a blue moon you say. More minor ones come every four to five years, so you think our place should survive fine through both with such annual revenues? OK… But what about rising costs? Realize that a restaurant’s food costs are as much as 45 to 50% of its total operating costs.*** And what about the not so obvious rising costs – insurance, taxes, rent and…labor?

All of those cost increases have to come out of that profit margin making it a smaller %…or the restaurant has to raise their prices to keep the % the same. Before we jump to a conclusion that to reduce the profit margin is the more “fair” answer, let’s think about what a business might do with the profit dollars it banks up over time, “retained earnings” accountants call them.

What if a restaurant’s management would like to add wait staff or kitchen help to provide better service to its customers? What if its management would like to give out Christmas bonuses to kitchen and wait staff this year or otherwise increase their base wage? Or, what if adding another store is being thought about? Each and every one of those decisions is impacted negatively by increasing any of the costs in the restaurant’s operation.

That includes spiking labor costs 42 - 47% like the Seattle city council did last year.

So, how did all this really affect Seattle restaurant employees since the new minimum wage ordinance came into effect? Firstly, Anthony Anton of the Washington Restaurant Association says that “in a $700,000 restaurant, he estimates that the average restaurateur in Seattle has been making $28,000 a year.” [Emphasis added].****

That’s only a 4% profit margin on average.

From January to September, 2015 Seattle lost 700 restaurant jobs. One might think that’s not so bad considering what a major metropolitan area Seattle is. But consider this: Washington state restaurant jobs outside Seattle increased by almost 6,000. *****

And the “domino effect” of such restaurant closures goes beyond restaurants. For example, “The Seattle Times reported that a Clarion Hotel recently made the decision to close its full service restaurant (laying off 15 people) and let go of a night desk clerk and a maintenance worker. It also plans to raise its rates by 10 percent to offset increased labor costs.” ******

Another headline read: “Seattle’s $15 Min. Wage Is Making Something Happen That City Leaders Never Expected.”****** YA THINK? They’re actually shocked by that! Yeah…well…all I can say to this is…DUH!

Honestly, where do these “feels good” liberal clowns get their economics education?

 

 

* "Seattle Restaurants Closing Their Doors Ahead Of Minimum Wage Increase | NFIB." National Federation of Independent Business. 20 Mar. 2015. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

** Rotelli, Wendy. "How Much Profit Should a Restaurant Make?" Restaurants.com. 9 Apr. 2013. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

*** "Don't Fall Victim to Restaurant Profitability Myths." National Restaurant Association. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

**** "More Seattle Restaurants Close Doors as $15 Minimum Wage Approaches." Shift Washington. 12 Mar. 2015. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

*****Perry, Mark. "Minimum Wage Effect? From Jan. to Sept. Seattle MSA Restaurant Jobs Fell -700 vs. 5,800 Food Jobs in Rest of State - AEI." AEI. 21 Oct. 2015. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

****** DeSoto, Randy. "Seattle's $15 Min. Wage Is Making Something Happen That City Leaders Never Expected." Western Journalism. 16 Mar. 2015. Web. 22 Jan. 2016.

 

72 Killed resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston

Please read this to the end.  I think it is such a wonderful reminder of what our current state of affairs can become.................

The headline read: “72 Killed resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston"  Boston – National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons  were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement  sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were  compelled to withdraw. Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest  movement. Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue  offices. The governor, who described the group’s organizers as “criminals,” issued an executive  order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government’s  efforts to secure law and order. The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry  to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons. Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This  decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders  at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms. One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people  would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily.” Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government’s plans. During a tense standoff in the Lexington town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists. Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange. Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith, finding his forces over matched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat. Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops. Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as “ringleaders” of the extremist faction, remain at large. And this fellow Americans, is how the American Revolution began, April 20, 1775. On July 4th, 1776 these same extremists signed the Declaration of Independence, pledging to each other and their countrymen their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. Many of them lost everything, including their families and their lives over the course of the next few years. Lest we forget…. It'll be worse next time.  No one uses muzzle loaders now.  File:Boston Massacre high-res.jpg This media file is in the public domain in the United States. This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1923. See this page for further explanation. Retrieved 18 January, 2016 from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boston_Massacre_high-res.jpg

Those who call good evil and evil good....

Tricia Bishop, deputy editorial page editor for the Baltimore Sun, stated in her column last Thursday that “I'm less afraid of the criminals wielding guns in Baltimore, I declared as we discussed the issue, than I am by those permitted gun owners.” *

Really? Seriously?

Has the liberal propaganda machine so accomplished its objective of vilifying the law-abiding and productive of our society and praising, protecting and prospering the criminal and unproductive and destructive of our society that a member of the fourth estate really and truly feels more comfortable 

in the presence of armed criminals than of law-abiding gun owners? Apparently, she does.

Why? Because she “knows how to stay out of the line of Baltimore's illegal gunfire….” Apparently Ms. Bishop is so clairvoyant she also knows how to stay out of traffic accidents, tripping over curbs and catching the common cold as well. Because…she has “the luxury of being white and middle class in a largely segregated city that reserves most of its shootings for poor, black neighborhoods overtaken by ‘the game…’” [whatever the hell that is] and admits that “only exposure to guns has been to legal ones.”

She goes on to praise the soft tyrant Barry Hussein Obama and his crackdown on the Second Amendment and says that “Guns in the home are far more likely to be used accidentally, in suicides or family disputes than in self defense, according to studies based on anecdotal evidence.”  Lest you be too persuaded by her “evidence” let me point out that dictionary.com defines “anecdotal evidence” as “non-scientific observations or studies, which do not provide proof but may assist research efforts.”

I’ll bet. When it’s not based on anything scientific or quantitative, one could make it assist the hell out of their “research” efforts by claiming it to say anything they want it to – just like Ms. Bishop does in her column.

Ms. Bishop and her kind are all very reminiscent of the prophesy in Isaiah 5:20: re "... those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

And of Thomas Jefferson who said “"When government fears the people, there is liberty.”** And “"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."***

But, instead, Ms. Bishop and her kind fear a law-abiding gun owner than a tyrannical government or even a criminal intent on doing harm to others – illegally. I wonder if she would be as equally incensed if the government she so admires and trusts were to suddenly demand a want of registry list of all columnists who legally write such columns as hers???

Sources: 

*Bishop, T. (7 Jan. 2016) Do you know the gun owners in your circle?, The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved 10 Jan. 2016 from http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-bishop-0108-20160107-story.html.

** One source attributes this quotation to Jefferson in The Federalist.4 The Federalist, however, was the work of Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison, not Thomas Jefferson; nor does The Federalist contain the text of this quotation. This quotation is vaguely similar to Jefferson's comment in an 1825 letter to William Short: "Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent."5 To date, however, the most likely source of this quotation appears to be a series of debates on socialism published in 1914, in which John Basil Barnhill said, "Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty." Retrieved 10 January, 2016 from https://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/when-government-fears-people-there-libertyquotation

*** Charley Reese, "Founding Fathers Gave Individuals the Right to Bear Arms," Orlando Sentinel, June 22, 1989.  This quotation appeared in a number of publications in quick succession in the mid-1990s, including in The Militia Movement in the United States: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Government Information of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session ... June 15, 1995 (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1997), 120. As quoted on The Jefferson Monticello website. Retrieved 10 January, 2016 from https://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/strongest-reason-people-retain-right-keep-and-bear-arms-spurious-quotation

Obama: "Gun actions consistent with 2nd Amendment." Say, what!?!?!?

I’ve got news for ya, Obama; a presidential end run around the Congress AND the Constitution’s Executive Powers Clause AND said Constitution’s Bill of Rights with an Executive Order restricting the 2nd Amendment like you've done here is in NO way legal. It's in NO way “consistent with the 2^nd Amendment!” Who the hell do you think you’re kidding with that crap?

What you have done today re the 2^nd Amendment is exactly the kind of imperial abuse of power the Founding Fathers feared from a federal govt.

Ladies and gentlemen of America, this president is out-of-control!

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/0b440ac2030b4de2b8b8390fcf162911/obama-starts-2016-fight-over-gun-control