So much corruption, so little time

© 2019 Jim Spence -  Taxpayers continue to wonder after several generations of throwing more and more money at public schools, why academic results keep getting worse. One of the greatest tragedies in America is how firmly entrenched Democrat bureaucrats have destroyed inner-city schools. They do so through schemes of corruption and resulting neglect. Corruption and neglect are the defining characteristics of inner-city public schools all over the nation. This explains why in Washington D.C., Democrats who defend corrupt public schools (in exchange for a steady flow of campaign contributions), send their own children to PRIVATE SCHOOLS.
It is an intellectual cesspool out there. Virtually every Democrat running for president is part of the protection racket that allows public schools to continue to fail, while voting to take even more resources from taxpayers to piss away on a failed system.
Part of the Democrat's strategy to protect failing public schools, is to constantly bash the one segment of public schools that is not failing. That would be charter schools. Charter schools compete. They offer parents and students choices. However, it is important to realize that Democrats are only “pro-choice” on one thing, and that is abortion. On every other question, Democrats are in favor of the government making the choices instead of the people funding the scheme. Naturally, the choice Democrats don’t want students and their parents to have, is a choice to attend schools that are more shielded from corruption and graft.
Elizabeth Warren and many other Democrats have actually had the audacity lately to say that charter schools draw resources away from public schools. Never has a more dishonest statement been made about public education. The truth is, in many places, charter schools actually save inner-city children from the union-dominated public schools, simply by creating an environment conducive to learning.
Many taxpayers, both Democrats and Republicans, still think throwing MORE money at public education is the solution, despite three generations of poor results doing just that.
Why doesn’t throwing more money a public education work? It is because the machinery that runs public education simply uses the fresh funds for self-enrichment. The toxic stories of nepotism and corruption coming out of public school systems all over the nation are rampant. Some schemes are sophisticated forms of graft and theft, and some are not.
An example of theft that is not exactly sophisticated comes to us from the Baltimore school system. Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh, who is not one of the sharpest tools in the shed, is now facing federal charges related to a corruption scheme involving the public schools there. The scheme put hundreds of thousands of dollars intended for public schools into her pocket.
How did Pugh do it? It seems that Pugh self-published a children’s book series. Self-publish means she either couldn’t or wouldn’t go through a legitimate book publisher, one that actually felt her books could be marketable.
But low and behold, it turns out that Mayor Pugh's books were extremely marketable to her buddies in the purchasing department at the Baltimore schools. According to a grand jury indictment made public this morning, Pugh has been charged for her role in the scheme. There is no telling how many kick- backs were paid to others to get her hands on those funds.
The Pugh indictment is the tip of an iceberg. These theft schemes are everywhere. But unless the perpetrators are as blatant with their corruption as Pugh, they will continue to not be investigated, let alone punished.
Know this, with Democrats in power, taxpayers will continue to funnel more and more dollars to public education. And as day follows night, entrenched powers, who contribute mightily to Democrat campaign coffers, will continue to steal those dollars, instead of creating and maintaining good learning environments for children. And of course Democratic presidential candidates and others will continue to castigate anyone and anything that sheds light on this despicable situation.
Share/Bookmark

A taboo subject

© 2019 Jim Spence -  The best estimate for a human fetus being "viable" is about 24 weeks, or just under six months. This makes discussing the topic of "when" abortion should be legal, a very tricky endeavor, even for pro-choice people.
The term, "abortion" actually means many things. It can mean the act of terminating a pregnancy in the first month or so. Or, it can mean that a doctor performs a late-term abortion by killing a baby that could easily survive outside the womb.
Everyone is familiar with the Supreme Court ruling known as Roe vs. Wade, wherein the court found the right to an abortion in the U.S. Constitution. What people are not familiar with is the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Here is the essence of the law:
The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (Pub.L. 108–105, 117 Stat. 1201, enacted November 5, 2003, 18 U.S.C. § 1531,[1] PBA Ban) is a United States law prohibiting a form of late termination of pregnancy called "partial-birth abortion," referred to in medical literature as intact dilation and extraction. Under this law, any physician "who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both."  Partial birth abortion is an act in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus. (18 U.S. Code 1531). 
Wow is it chilling that someone would actually do that, or what?
The statute also includes two findings of Congress: (1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion ... is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.
(2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. 
Shouldn't be much argument about this should there be? Think again.
Amazingly, abortionists have found ways to “get around” this law. How do they do it? Many abortionists will induce what is known as “fetal demise,” before beginning late-term abortions. This means they will take a draconian step to make sure the baby is already DEAD…..before it exits the mother’s body. This is accomplished with the use of a solution of potassium chloride or digoxin, which is injected directly into the baby’s heart. Barbarically, abortionists will often use ultrasound technology to guide their needles......so they don’t miss the baby’s heart. There is one very vicious goal. If they can simply kill the baby, before it exits the mother’s body, they are not in violation of the above law. And amazingly this "get around" is still not in great dispute in many “political circles.”
However, what has been proposed by many Democrats is to provide blanket legal cover when abortionists fail to inject a sufficient amount of potassium chloride into the baby’s heart to kill it. Radical feminist Democrats, who find the phrase, “Stay out of my uterus,” popular, are now arguing that any mother should still be able to demand that the doctor kill their baby after it is born alive. In several states, Democrats have passed laws that say doctors are allowed to kill them legally.
Where did all of this come from? It is clearly a reaction to the conviction of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, whose actions were well-documented at his murder trial, and in the book and film: Gosnell: The Untold Story of America's Most Prolific Serial Killer.
It seems that Kermit Gosnell was not particularly adept at crushing the babies skulls in the uterus. He was also rather inaccurate with the needles he used to try to kill fully developed babies inside the mother's body. Accordingly, Gosnell simply snipped the spinal cords of new born babies as they lay living and breathing on the operating table. He did this once he realized his needles missed the mark and they were born alive.
A serious question remains as Democrats take actions in additional states to pass more laws making the actions of butchers like Gosnell legal. Is support for these laws simply a political view, sort of like wanting more government or wanting less government? Or is the support to allow these things to be legal, simply naked advocacy for giving women and abortionists the right to murder unwanted newborn babies?
Would love the feedback on this taboo subject. I do find it interesting that the discussing of this subject is seen as taboo, and looking the other way on the killing of newborn babies is expedient.
Share/Bookmark

The working people and the underdogs

© 2019 Jim Spence -  Recently the Wall Street Journal ran a piece suggesting Democrat voters didn’t care about the ideology of their presidential candidate, they just wanted a nominee who could win.
That could be a problem for America, given the “collective” ideologies of the field.
Sometimes it is important to take some time to wade through all the bovine excrement pumped out by the “news media” regarding the motives of the candidates. Let’s understand who provides Democrats with incentives to shape policies.
For my entire adult life, Democrats have positioned themselves as the party of the working people and the underdogs. It is clear this how they want to be perceived. However, perception is one thing, and reality is often another. What about the reality of Democratic fundraising?
The 2016 campaign of Hillary Clinton was a case in point for why people should never believe that the Democrats associate with and favor the underdogs and working-class people. Just look at how Hillary Clinton amassed so much money with her fundraising. You need look no farther than the most powerful segments of American society to understand who buttered her bread.
The numbers tell a story that suggests the news media is chock full of bald-faced liars and partisan advocates. They spent an inordinate amount of time and resources disguising who gave her money while painting Trump as beholden to the rich and famous.
According to Kevin Williamson at National Review, Banker’s campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton simply dwarfed those given to Trump in 2016. The margin was a factor of 7 to 1 favoring Clinton. Consider the elite stock brokerage firms, companies representing the uber-wealthy such as Goldman Sachs. Clinton’s campaign receipts from Goldman Sachs outnumbered Trump’s campaign coffer receipts by a factor of 70 to 1.
How about Ivy league school affiliated donors? The Ivy League is clearly the home of the firmly entrenched ruling elite in America. For Harvard affiliates, Hillary Clinton’s advantage in fundraising over Donald Trump was a whopping 200 to 1.
Let’s turn to Silicon Valley in California where high-tech billionaires live and where they run enormously powerful and profitable companies. Money coming from Facebook executives and employees favored Clinton by a ratio of 100 to 1. At Apple, the campaign contribution money totals favored Clinton by a factor of 135 to 1.
Are we beginning to see a pattern here? There is much more. Google contributions favored Clinton by a ratio of 76 to 1.
That is fine say the Democrats. It is big oil we have to watch out for, because you know, the oil companies are destroying the planet. Exxon-Mobil donations favored Clinton by a ratio of 4 to 1.
It goes on an on. How about big retail? Walmart executives and employees favored Clinton by a factor of 3 to 1. Mrs. Clinton led Trump by a ratio of 20 to 1 among lawyers and law firms She beat him in the all-powerful film and television business by a ratio of 4-1. How about health care? She won by a ratio of 3 to 1 among those in working in the health care business.
Can we summarize using the All the Presidents Men model of simply following the money? Clinton was, by an overwhelming margin the darling candidate of large money center stock brokerage houses, Silicon Valley corporate giants, gigantic Hollywood film makers, Ivy League schools, lawyers, and even real-estate developers. Add in overwhelming support from over-compensated do-nothing bureaucrats holding government jobs of dubious purposes and you get the picture.
So enough about who represents the working-class folks and the underdogs. Not one group mentioned above falls into that category. The big lie in America is that Democrats don’t represent the entrenched political power structure of the United States. The truth is Donald Trump is the only “outsider” in my lifetime to ever win the presidency. In doing so, he has attracted the wrath of those who are mad is hell he is drowning out their voices with his big mouth.
Share/Bookmark

Efforts at election nullification lead to civil wars

© 2019 Jim Spence -  History buffs notice patterns in national behaviors. On these commentary pages I have suggested the United States has been inching closer to a second Civil War. On other sites there have been red flags raised.
At the heart of the rebellion is the idea of nullification. The slave holding south, saw the presidential election of 1860 as a life and death situation where they lost. It now seems that these same American Democrats, 159 years later, have decided that their loss to Trump in 2016, like their loss to Abe Lincoln, should simply be nullified.
Make no mistake, Democrats have been talking nullification (impeachment) since before Trump’s inauguration. And they have trotted out one absurd accusation after another in their relentless effort to nullify the results of the 2016 election. It has been an impeachment effort in search of a crime ever since.
Questions arise. What is it that Democrats actually want? Why do they hate Trump in particular? And why do they hate Trump voters in general? They do these things for many reasons. Below is a short list.
Democrats have an open border obsession. They support unlimited illegal immigration. And despite the fact that all countries have borders, Democrats demonize men and women who want immigration laws enforced. Anyone who doesn’t want to end national borders is a racist. Anyone opposed to offering U.S. citizen benefits to all illegal aliens, benefits that are paid for by taxpayers, is branded as a racist by Democrats.
Democrats have an anti-free market-capitalism obsession too. They bash employers every day and they can’t keep from insinuating that anyone in business is an oppressor who exploits all others for personal gain.
Democrats want all Americans to forget that the three worst butchers in human history were all socialists (Hitler’s National Socialism, Stalin’s Soviet Socialist Republic, and Mao’s socialist China). Democrats want to make the U.S. into a socialist country instead of being a free nation.
Democrats want to be allowed to never place blame for poor human decision-making where it belongs. They blame crime on everything except criminals. They blame guns instead of bad people for firearm violence. Democrats also have an obsession with disarming law-abiding civilians. They seem unconcerned that denying the 2nd Amendment will make it easier for a dictatorship to take hold. They ignore the fact that it was the well-armed militia in the original 13 American colonies that won the American Revolution.
Amazingly, Democrats are developing an anti-Semitic obsession. They have sent and defended radical Jew-hating women to Congress. These women make brazenly anti-Jewish statements on the House floor and are defended by the Democrat leadership. Democrats still seem oblivious to Islam's deep ties to Nazis Germany during World War II. Those anti-Jewish ties remain strong to this day.
It is also simply bizarre that Democrats want Americans to abandon the fundamental principles of civil liberty. They openly support radical anti-free speech stances on college campuses all over the nation.
Democrats use fossil fuels while demonizing the energy industry. They are mindful of TV preachers who have sex with fast women in limousines after delivering sermons on chastity.
Democrats constantly promote ignorance of economics. They have corrupted public education to indoctrinate students to embrace Marxism.
Democrats have also perverted our health care system. Despite horror stories within the V.A. system, Democrats want to engineer a government takeover of all healthcare services. The long lines and long waits to see physicians seem sure to grow even longer and longer if America votes for the Democratic presidential candidate.
The 2020 election of course, will follow the sham process of trying to pin the rumor on the White House. These days Democrats are changing the vocabulary of our nation. A partisan, political hack, and scam artist is now known as a, “whistle blower.”
The approaching civil war summary is simple. Those who like people who sign paychecks, understand the socialist legacy of Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, believe in the U.S. Constitution, want basic freedoms preserved, want borders protected, respect the outcomes of elections, and aren't hypocrites about energy consumption, will be fighting on the other side of Democrats who are opposed to all these things.
Share/Bookmark

Bad predictions don't seem to matter

© 2019 Jim Spence - Lately the Weather Channel has been trying to sway the 2020 presidential election. Most people turn the Weather Channel on to, you know, check the weather forecasts. However, it is clear that the producers at the Weather Channel, which is not surprisingly owned by NBC, seem compelled to blow smoke for Democrats. This explains why one Democrat presidential hopeful after another, is being filmed wringing their hands, as they pretend to discuss the horrific consequences of climate change.
Just this weekend, Bernie Sanders was seen talking about how awful it is going to be….when the coastal regions of the U.S. are all under water. Of course, the trouble with this feigned Sanders' fear, is the coasts were supposed to ALREADY BE UNDER WATER. This is based on countless predictions made by radical environmentalists decades ago, as they tried to kill the energy industry. Yes, predictions of rising sea levels have been around for more than three decades with catastrophes predicted by the year 2005.
Now.....in case you haven’t noticed, all of the doomsday predictions on rising sea levels, the total disappearance of snow, etc. haven’t quite come to pass. However, with the help of their buddies in the media, Democrats keep moving the goal posts on climate change catastrophe predictions, allowing as to how predictors just need a few more decades to be right. In the meantime, we taxpayers can go along with the spending trillions of dollars to prevent what has yet to happen, despite the fact we didn’t spend what they wanted us to spend decades ago, before they turned out to be wrong…..dead wrong.
Today on the CNN weather page you can read this: “Don your jackets and mittens, East Coasters. You're going to need them. The next five to seven days won't just be cold -- they'll be record-breaking. That's according to data from the National Weather Service, which predicts more than 300 record cold temperatures could be tied or set from Monday to Wednesday.”
Here's a news flash. Record cold temps don't cause rising sea levels, they make more ice. And you don’t get record-breaking cold temperatures year after year, if the globe is truly warming.
Let’s get something straight here. The term “climate change” is meaningless. Nobody can define what climate change is. The closest definition of climate change is that it is vague enough to become a political excuse to encourage voters to put more power in the hands of an already bloated and over-reaching federal government. Climate change con artists have yet to get one single catastrophe prediction right. And yet these bogus predictions drive people to take dubious actions.
Speaking of lousy predictions, has anyone noticed that this impeachment thing is simply the latest in a long line of Get Trump scams Democrats have been running on us since the morning after Hillary’s political self-destruction reached the ultimate pinnacle? Democrat henchman Adam Schiff has been getting caught in more lies than Bill Clinton did after toiling with Monica Lewinsky. Nothing Schiff "predicts" ever comes to pass. This entire impeachment scam, which is being foisted on the American public with the help of an obsessed anti-Trump news media, is paid for with taxpayer money. Schiff should quit his job in Congress and become a producer at the Weather Channel.
There is actually one story out there that truly takes the cake. It is the story of how ABC News buried the horrific pedophile scandal surrounding Jeffrey Epstein. Before Epstein "committed suicide" like so many Clinton cronies tend to do, he was caught engaging in criminal behavior that was likely to snare Bill Clinton among others. Watch this video of ABC anchor Amy Robach. In this piece, Robach is caught on tape talking to her producer about how she had the Epstein story complete with corroboration. She says she had it three years ago. What happened? The big shots at ABC News, who have cocktails with prominent Democrats frequently, simply refused to run her story. It sounds like Robach should commiserate over a glass of cabernet savignon with former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson, who was treated the same way while at CBS.
Still, and amazingly, the news media continues to be shocked at how much it is distrusted by Americans. Tough to figure that one out isn’t it? Make a few hundred thousand asinine predictions and you get branded as scam artists.
Share/Bookmark

Its hard to win if you behave like a loser


© 2019 Jim Spence - There’s an old saying in politics. If your election pitch is based on confiscating money or property that belongs to Peter, so you can give it to Paul in exchange for his vote…..you can pretty much count on Paul’s support.
Unfortunately, this becomes a serious problem once it pays nearly as well to sit back with your hand out like Paul, versus getting out and hustling like Peter. Logic tells us most people will simply behave much more like Paul and wait for politicians to take more of Peter’s earnings away from him. In sports, we call this, a Loser’s Mentality. Winners make things happen. Losers let things happen and blame their lack of success on everyone and everything except THEMSELVES.
We can see the LOSERS mentality increasing its grip on America these days. We see it with participation trophies instead of first, second, and third place trophies in athletic competitions. More alarmingly, we see tens of millions of bogus diplomas awarded to high school students all over the nation. Many schools pretend students who are essentially illiterate in the areas of reading, math, and science, have accomplished something when they haven't. We see this first hand on college transcripts, with horrific grade inflation. Academic achievement is often simply an illusion at universities, making it more difficult to determine which graduates actually have skills and work ethic.
Consider America’s dilemma in 2020. The GOP choice will be Donald Trump, who most rational people must concede, is off a bit. However, this being said, Trump has actually kept more promises than any other purportedly pro-competition and pro-higher living standards president....since Reagan.
The alternative to Trump, will most certainly be a Democrat who will continue to sneer at successful people and promise to confiscate the fruits of their production. The Democrat sales pitch is simple. They are coming after what Peter earns, so they can hand it to Paul. Success is to be scorned at.
A more intelligent approach would be to encourage people to make an effort to know more about billionaires than they do right now. I am reminded of the great book, Titan by Ron Chernow. Chernow documented John D. Rockefeller’s accomplishments, including the fact that he donated about 98% of all his wealth to charities. Rockefeller didn’t just give his money away, he became very scientific about his philanthropy, and gave only to “productive charities.” Rockefeller's gifting methods are well-documented in another book, The Circuit Riders, by Gerald Jonas.
Taking from Peter to give to Paul is not a new strategy. Politicians called for the confiscation of Rockefeller’s wealth by the state back in his day, even though Rockefeller had a better plan to make sure his hard-earned money did not make its way into the hands of politicians and crony government employees. It should come as no surprise that Warren Buffett also plans to funnel his vast estate to charities, instead of seeing the state's army of self-serving bureaucrats take it and squander it. Smart people hate waste. Billionaires hate waste. We should all hate waste. It is much easier to look the other way on waste....when someone else's money is being wasted.
An important question needs to be asked of all American adults. Why would anyone want to vote for any politician who encourages them to act like losers?
A quick survey of the competitive landscape in athletics suggests winners are required to exhibit a strong commitment, maximum effort, and a high level of personal discipline. Conversely, losers maintain much lower levels of expectations of themselves and others, especially in the areas of commitment, effort, and personal discipline.
Make no mistake, lowering the performance bar is precisely the approach that the candidates in the Democratic field are trying to sell. They don't suggest ways for us to get better. Instead, they sell mediocrity as if it is something to aspire to. They blame what amounts to personal failures on the fairest system on the planet. They encourage their fellow citizens to be particularly jealous of people who keep their commitments, make maximum effort, and exhibit strong personal discipline.
So here we are as 2019 winds down. Due to the loser’s mentality firmly embedded in public education, the bashing of Peter is considered a "safe" routine during Democrat "debates." 
Sadly, Democrats suggest that everyone should simply act like Paul. This may be a winning political strategy in America these days, but just as it is in athletics, acting like a handout-seeking Paul is a metaphor for the Loser’s approach to life.
Again, we should be asking everyone: Why is America thinking about embracing the attitudes losers embrace, when they could simply aspire to be the best they can be, instead? It makes no sense, unless selling dead-end shortcuts is your scam.

Share/Bookmark