The benefits of the New Green Deal

03-17-19

 I think it's time for AOC to change her name to Chicken Little.

 Like many people in the left these days, climate change means the sky is falling.

 For those of us who happened to listen to this kind of rhetoric since the early 1970s, we know it is simply not true -- at best it is being exaggerated beyond all proportion to reality.

Climate change has become a political talking point to the Democrats something they can scare people into supporting.

Like nearly everything coming out of a Democrats mouth these days it is an attempt at social control at trying to scare people into doing what the Democrats want them to do.

 The new green deal clearly wants to force humanity back to the good old days before Prometheus stole fire and to list Prometheus as an environmental terrorist for setting humanity on the path that has added to carbon emissions.

 This return to the Stone Age however has its disadvantages especially when it comes to social issues such as women's rights. AOC can't possibly want to go back to the mating rituals that were so prominent when humanity still occupied caves. Does she want to be dragged back by the hair by some smelly hairy male for a mating ritual?

 The great gift Prometheus brought us was fire to cook by and to stay warm by are two very problematic issues when it comes to the new green deal since both add to the carbon footprint.

So, we clearly go beyond just limiting our restrictions on cooking animals from those with cloven hoofs.

With fanatics in animal rights, we should not raise them or cook them let alone eat them and so therefore we must go back to the concept of collecting nuts and berries.

 Environmentalist tell us that cattle  -- whether beef for eating or for milk -- tend to fart a lot and add carbon to the atmosphere.  This is complicated by the fact that in order to make room for grazing  we often clear the land of trees that pump oxygen into the air.

 Even in more primitive times we often burned wood to make the fires by which we cook the animals so therefore fire itself is a bad thing and adds to the carbon footprint.

 Since it is clear we cannot use coal or gas or atomic plants to make the energy we need to power our smartphones and laptops, we may well have to rely on lightning strikes on those days when our solar panels aren't working because of clouds or night, or our wind farms are turning up enough to handle the millions of devices that are plugged into the network.

 We might take advantage of all the hot are liberals spew if we could all turn them in the same direction at the same time in order to turn the turbines. But unfortunately liberals tend to disagree so much they would not be able to agree on what direction they needed to turn -- with some turning this way and others turning that way, while still others suspecting some sort of conservative plot behind the whole deal won’t turn at all.

Of course, these environmentalists seem to have no problem in the manufacture and use of handheld devices that use non-renewable rare minerals as their base of operation, really believing that these are preferable to trees and paper which are renewable.

OAC clearly believes in a shared economy, too and so, those who do not have, should simply take from those who have and feel that they are justified.  This means that people who do not pick their fair share of nuts and berries have every right to take as much as they want from those people who work hard and perhaps pick more than their fair share.

Since we are desperate to reduce our carbon footprint we have to resort to other means of keeping warm. This, of course, in winter becomes an issue me may have to reinvent communal sex and multiple partners so as to rub ourselves into survival.

Travel under this new regime is even more challenging since we clearly have to get away from the concept of horsepower which means no animal should become a beast of burden just so that we can visit our grandparents in California.

We might consider a DaVinci Style flying device made of wood except with all the need we deplete the forest and so defeat the purpose of doing away with air travel in the first place.

Solar power for electric vehicles is so undependable that the only people who could actually travel anywhere would be those who live in Arizona and frankly they don't want to go any place and nobody wants to go there to see them.

We might actually outfit are automobiles with little sails only it would likely take the wind gust from Katrina to get us anywhere we would want to go.

Since buses and trains also contribute to the carbon footprint, we need an alternative mass transit system.  Bicycles are considered the most efficient machine so perhaps we can have a bicycle with a hundred or more pedals and so all the passengers will contribute to the energy needed to travel from place to place.

Since hot air balloons will need heat to rise we cannot use them effectively because of the carbon footprint. Helium is already depleted worldwide and so we might have to go back to hydrogen and chance another Hindenburg.

Since we are banning fire, we will have no need of fire trucks and if everybody is involved with communal lovemaking we will have need no police.  Since we have a shared economy in which anybody can take anything anybody else owns we will not need a court system.

Clearly this new green deal shows great promise for the future.

email to Al Sullivan

Why Democrats should hate Mueller

03-24-19

There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth among the Democrats this morning, a sad day for the disillusioned who actually believed their own Fairytale.

You cannot believe your own lie and then expect not to fall into depression when the lie is exposed as untrue.

Democrats play the Russian conspiracy as one big fabrication. The problem is it was meant to delude its own followers because the Trump people never believed it.

And because the deluded masses of Democrats, many for their own naïve followers are now whaling the way they did after they lost the 2016 election and struggling with the idea that maybe Trump did not cheat after all.

The Brain Trust behind the Democrats who thought up the scam knew better all along.

 But they hoped that they could propel this whole thing into another Watergate.

 While Watergate was also a fraud, a staged political coup by the Democrats, it worked because there was just enough to justify impeachment.

Liberals have a significant problem: they always underestimate their opponents.

Liberals actually believe they are smarter than Republicans when clearly, they are not.  Liberals tend to stereotype Republicans and then believe the stereotype, calling them all kinds of mean names like hillbilly and white trash.

This is largely a misinformation campaign many of them learned in college from really embittered professors who have no real sense of reality and so impose their own views on the world that are not quite real.

These miseducated children come into the world believing all the crap they learned in college which is why the Democratic party can also manipulate them since that is what they have really been trained for all along to be manipulated.

This is what education has large to become a training field for future puppets.

There is also this pathetic culture that refuses to acknowledge the concept that in every contest there are winners and losers.  Instead Liberals do not want to hurt people's feelings by telling them they lost, and this is largely why there was such a knee-jerk insane reaction to win Trump beat Hillary in 2016.

Everybody said Hillary was going to win and so when she didn't everybody freaked out.

Well everybody is going to freak out again over the Mueller report.  These same masters of democratic manipulation sold their flock into the belief that Trump would be indicted and now without the Mueller report it will become very difficult for them to accomplish that.

Still worse is the fact that the Democrats big lie was exposed and now nationally people are no longer going to believe the lies that are being told as easily.

While liberal true believers will believe anything they are told, it is that middle ground that everybody relies on to win elections that maybe more skeptical now.

You can expect a much more ruthless liberal attack on Trump focusing on immigrants and racism because those are the other lies Dem0ocrats have relied on and have yet to be exposed as BS.

The other big loser in all of this is Media which has been the bullhorn for this lie all along. Perhaps the best thing they comes out of the failed Mueller investigation will be to expose media as the fraud it is and make people more skeptical on what they read in the Washington Post and the New York Times or here on CNN or MSNBC.

email to Al Sullivan

The benefits of global warming

03-21-19

It's official; it's spring.

It wasn’t as rough as in the past. But I refuse to blame global warming since I have heard that hysteria since I was in my teens.

Like all modern myths it is based on possibly faulty assumptions with a twist of politics added for taste. 

Scientists who question the validity of Gore's inconvenient truth are excommunicated or treated as nuts, risking precious research grants. So, doubters for the most part keep silent or go along with the popular agenda, adding credibly to this madness.

Environmental science has replaced Christianity as the new state religion. Media has become the new inquisition.

We attribute all the melting to our expending of fossil fuels and ignore the fact that all this has happened before.

We didn’t have cars to explain why the little ice age froze over the Thames.

I’ve been listening to this chicken little stuff for so long I nearly have it memorized the way my grandparents memorized biblical verse.

I remember a time when we predicted the world population would fill up every corner of the globe, bodies piling up so high as to leave no room for anybody even in the depths of the Grand Canyon.

But that was before Planned Parenthood started selling baby's body parts and saved humanity.

I can’t remember a time when someone somewhere refrained from preaching doom and gloom.

My best friend told me in 1970 that New York City would have Florida weather by 2000. Here it is 2019 and I'm still waiting.

I'm not unhappy with lack of snow. I hate shoveling.

What I hate is silliness of environmentalists who want to replace cars with electric bikes and oppose building power plants to charge them with, relying on questionably reliable sources like solar and wind to accommodate these – when nobody actually wants any of these wind farms or banks of solar panels spoiling their views of nature. They complain about coal, atomic and even gas power plants, but do not hesitate to plug all their environmentally unfriendly devices.

We are so worried about our carbon footprint we forget we need it to keep warm.

In this regard maybe global warming is a good thing.

There is a reason California has a homeless problem. Better to starve in LA than to freeze in New York.

Meanwhile liberals are building walls around cities where they now live in luxury apartments concerned about the rise in ocean levels to flood them out, ignoring the past when city planners only located factories and warehouses there, knowing flooding will come.

This is a lot like the fools in the late 1800s who got suckered into buying farm land in the Midwest during the historically unnatural plush times. When the land reverted to a dust bowl, they all headed west to California which may well explain the inherited lighted headedness of the current population there.

I appreciate the arrival of spring. I already put away my pet-friendly and environmentally safe snow melt until the freeze comes again and if I’m lucky and global warming comes earlier than expected I won’t need to use it again.

email to Al Sullivan

Black Panther wins for best propaganda

By far the best bit of comic book propaganda released in film in recent memory is Black Panther.

Unfortunately, Black Panther comes on the heals of a far inferior propaganda film, Wonder Woman, which got a lot more hype in national media.

Black Panther does more than just play lip service to the African American community the way Wonder Woman does in regard to women’s issues.

With Wonder Woman what you see is what you get, while Black Panther’s manipulation of fact is much more devious to the point of being brilliant.

Both films establish an idea world from which their heroes emerge. One is a remote island of women where warriors prepare for the inevitable confrontation with the Roman God of War, Mars. Like most comic reproductions of myth, Wonder Woman distorts Greek mythology (upon which Roman myth is founded) to suit the comic writer’s uses much in the way previous feminist writers have distorted the King Arthur myths. Unfortunately for Wonder Woman, once she leaves this perfect man-less island, she can never return.

In Black Panther, we also have a hidden perfect world (located in the heart of Africa) which is kept secret from the outside world, and like in Wonder Woman, this Garden of Eden is spoiled by evils outside their boundaries.

In both films, these worlds are violated. In Wonder Woman the hero chooses to leave her world in order to confront evil before it gets its chance to destroy Eden.

In Black Panther, the hero must go out and set things right in order to keep his world’s secretes from being exploited by unscrupulous people, some white, others much to the chagrin of the hero, black, and worse, related to royalty back home.

But real message of Black Panther is to say while white men may be truly evil, the black villain is not, and has legitimate reasons for doing what he does, based somewhere in the distant past when African Americans lived through 400 years of slavery. There are no real evil black people in Black Panther, only some who are misguided, and some who must die in a Christ-like fashion to be forgiven. The film and comic book upon which it was based largely ignores the complicity of other Africans in capturing and selling people into slavery, but worse, ignores the vicious behavior of African culture itself in which Sangomas and Inyangas, and the influence of witch doctors resulted in animal sacrifices, human mutilations, and the murder of black and white people – cultural tribalism that continues today. All the Sangomas in Black Panther are good and noble, seeking only to preserve their culture and their technological superiority. Even the other tribal leaders turn out to good guys with good intentions, even when in the beginning they do not start out looking that way.

This reshaping of the reality of African culture is the core of the misinformation the film portrays, and by glossing over of actual tribal influences, the film paints a perfect world that does not and cannot exist, although makes for great fiction.

Black Panther is a film designed to bolster all of the current myths being sold to the public and does so brilliantly. It is a mythological film about and for blacks, and nobody else.

This is where is diverges sharply from Wonder Woman. For all the hype, Wonder Woman is a hero of the whole world, not just a racism or gender segment. While she plays lip service to the feminist community, Wonder Woman’s role is to go out into the world and fight for humanity, beyond the borders of her own world, and beyond the limited scope of her own gender.

While Black Panther eventually comes to the conclusion that it cannot remain uninvolved with the world beyond its borders, it reaches out in the end not to save the world from Fascism or even to help build a farer world for black and white, it uses its resources to help other black people. It never resolves the race issue – in fact, it never makes the attempt.

Black Panther confronts a token white villain, even though ultimately the greater threat to his perfect world comes from another black man, the result of a self-inflicted evil that takes the film to a whole different level of complexity and manipulation.

Because this is a film made by black people for black people, it raises appropriate questions about the responsibilities black people have in regards to other portions of the black community, a sense of obligation to make the world right for all people of color, and not just to those who happen to be born into a perfect economic and powerful piece of the world.

While Black Panther plays up all the usual platitudes of current liberalism – such as the idea that people of today are somehow responsible or even impacted by the ill deeds of the distant past – it does raise questions about the conditions of poor blacks and the responsibilities of those who have made it to the mountain have in helping other reach the same peak.

To straighten out the kinks in the plot, the film story starts with Black Panther’s father, who as king of the hidden land, is also Black Panther and in charge of protecting his Eden and its secrets.

He discovered that his brother has stolen – lets call it a magic elixir although it is more than that) and intend to sue it as part of a radical movement to overthrow countries that oppress black people.

But before the elder Black Panther can bring his brother back to face justice at home, he is forced to kill him.

Shamed by his own actions and not to expose the kingdom to the world, the king leaves his brother’s son – a boy born in America to a woman who is not from the magic kingdom.

From this seed comes the central conflict of the film, a villain not born from the oppressors race, but from their own race, who cooperates with the white villain to steal the secrets of the magic world, resulting in the death (murder) of the old king, and the rise to power of the old king’s son, the film’s Black Panther.

Black Panther is unaware of his uncle, the boy’s father, or even the existence of the boy, who helped the white villain kill the old king while stealing the magic elixir.

The boy ultimately kills the white villain as a way of gaining access to the magic land – where he as a descendant of royal blood – challenges Black Panther for leadership.

Like his father, the boy – now a man – wants to use the power of the secret land to attack white oppressors everywhere, a symbol of the radical movements that no longer want the kind of equality Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. espoused, but for dominance, to reverse roles and to get even for all the real or imagined sins of the past.

For Black Panther, this is a story of a need to change, not only for him personally (mired in old traditions), but also for the concept of society that kept itself isolated from the world in order to save itself. Black Panther must give into some of the valid concerns of his nephew in that a successful black society must somehow intervene to help those who are mired in poverty and violence elsewhere.

The conflict in this move is over the means, not the ends. Does Black Panther become a tyrant the boy would have him become, or to give those close to him who have urged for his society to reach out to help, allowing for his country to share its knowledge with other black people, and perhaps somehow achieve real equality.

While Black Panther is loaded with propaganda, it also asks the right question as the right time when the black community is at a crossroads, where its radical element seeks to push the agenda down a road that will inevitably lead to greater violence, actions that will inspire reaction and will create a never-ending cycle of violence.

Or does the black community find a more positive path, seeking to education and enlighten, to use power not for conquest but to build a society that does not have to remain hidden to survive, and does not need violence to achieve equality.

New Morality and St. Patrick’s Day

03-08-19

Daylight savings returns this Sunday. This coincides with the St Patrick's day parade in my town.

This celebration of the coming of spring the new world order mocks as over indulgent, equating the Irish with the same racist rhetoric we all suffered back when we all first arrived in time to give our lives in the war to free the slaves .

We have become a nation of prudes, a new godless moral majority aimed at stamping out all those things that make us human, the good and the bad.

We got a glimpse of this during the Kavanaugh hearings when these dictators of good taste suddenly decided it was sinful to drink beer. These arbitrators of the new morality seemed to fall back onto the Calvinistic dictates that wine leads to the unleashing of immoral passions and we should refrain from such or engage in any provocative behavior that might lead us into sin.

So, we castrate our males to make them acceptably safe for women to manipulate, the next strange phase of the eternal conflict for sexual control.

In this Dionysus becomes Satan in a new not so idyllic garden of Eden in which woman is created in god’s image and man from some lesser part of her anatomy, and he tempted by the serpent, who then presents her with the apple, using spirits to seduce her into behavior she wishes to avoid or at least control.

In this new morality woman is always victim and man always the aggressor, defying all logic and the basic tenants of human nature.

Media of course turned Kavanaugh into a drunkard to help bolster the lie Ford told as part of a larger campaign to keep the high court from abolishing abortion.

But if women were as moral as they pretend to want men to be they would not need abortion. This is as bad as that woman who testified during the Obamacare hearings who said access to the pill was a medical necessity and should be paid for by the government – requiring taxpayers to support her sex life.

This notion that we can control human nature is absurd.

It is also self-serving since the new morality sets rules for some people (mostly men) and ignores others (mostly women) in a hypocritical attempt to reverse roles not build equality.

So, we ban parades and condemn people for drinking, and we do all those other things that we believe as moral and right,  yet ignore those which are inconvenient to our philosophy.

 I'm not going to lose sleep over it since I will not be alive for the consequence of this insanity.

But I will lose sleep over daylight savings and so will likely arrive just a bit late for the parade in which people will still get drunk and still laugh and still feel free of constraints, the Dionysus of the modern world  sticking its tongue out at the new morality defying it and saying we can still be human despite all of these new fascist rules.

email to Al Sullivan

Man in the High Castle as propaganda

I had to stop watching Man in a High Castle because its third season was so deplorable.

Not only had the writing completely falling apart to become something of a liberal soap opera, it is also become unbearably politically correct.

I can only imagine Phillip K Dick turning over in his grave wishing he could return as a Frankenstein monster to seek revenge on those who completely gutted his work.

No literary sn is worse than when you take one of the most provocative writers and twist his work into propaganda.

This is even worse than calling Dr. Seuss a racist.

But it is indicative of a society that has the Mad tea party syndrome in which the lunatics have taken over the asylum and pathetic writers try to emulate masters by paying tribute with mockery and distortion.

Everything now has become a kind of propaganda machine we can't escape and seeking refuge in the classics is no help because many view the world of the past as an enclave of racism and bigotry.

Although there must be real Scholars of American History, most of the Liberals that control Hollywood these days seem to have gotten their education on the past from the distorted works of the Burn Brothers, The West and the American Civil War.

The biggest target of liberals these days appears to be the actor John Wayne upon whose shoulders liberals dump all the white guilt of the past. He is model of macho male modern feminists come to despise and is often attributed as the symbolic culprit of the genocide of Native Americans.

Feminist may be right about the first because men these days appear to have castrated themselves in order to bow before the altar of new morality and a power shift from male to female dominance. We live in a time of male hatred and this is not going to pass easily until something major changes in the human psyche to bring things back into balance.

But for those liberals who condemned John Wayne as anti-Native American, it is clear they have never seen a John Wayne movie and the host of characters he played more than a little sympathetic to the plight of Native Americans – as were many of the characters in westerns, only liberals either weren’t watching or got their opinions handed to them by professors determined to reinvent media as well as history.

One such lecture in the mist of Man in the High Castle made me finally turn off the program and refused to turn it on again as it became one lesson after another in somebody's MFA thesis.

I don't know what happened to the writers of the first two seasons when they did not have to hit you over the head with the concept of fascism and they played closer to the original ideas that Phillip K dick espoused.  But it is clear that the writers in the third season were far less talented and incredibly more politically correct then those in the first two seasons.

The ultimate result of course is to make victims out of the Japanese by the Germans, better fitting with the misconception that somehow Europe was worse than Asia when it came to Fascism.  In other words, white Europeans continue to attack people of color even if those people of color happened to be fascist Japanese murderers.

This aspect isn't exclusive to the third season but clearly emphasized more than it was during the earlier portions of this TV.  Somehow, we were expected to see the Japanese fascist as more sympathetic than their European counterparts.  This was never the intent of the original novel.  but it was bearable as long as it was subtle and once the program became clearly over the top liberal propaganda it was no longer tolerable even as entertainment.

I mean political correctness is nothing new for contemporary television Stargate SG1 had one or two episodes that you need to fast forward on in order to get through the muck.  But with Man in the High Castle there is no getting around since the plots are so entwined. Even if the editors managed to rid the program of all those questionable lectures on John Wayne and other people, the horrible writing of the third season would make the program intolerable as well.

You can’t blame the actors for giving such wooden, puppet like performance, since they are the same quality actors of the first two seasons. You have to blame the writers and directors who put these pathetic speeches in their mouths and expected them to somehow make propaganda sound plausibly entertaining.

Unfortunately, because of the structure of the series the damage is done and there is no going back. They have stepped outside the box and now are condemned to follow threads that are clearly unbearable to watch as fiction and only the truly die-hard liberal radical would appreciate the content.

The few of those who have even remote literary tastes would not be able to stomach the bad writing and the plastic acting.

For those who have not yet seen the series yet, you’re better off with the first two seasons if you can't possibly avoid it and let the rest go to posterity.

For those of us who actually delved into the third season, we are stained for life and cannot scrub the memory of such bad fiction from our minds.  Perhaps in time this will fade perhaps if we go back to the original book, we can repair the damage. But this is unlikely since once infected you will likely bring this distortion even to the Masterpiece Philip K dick inked.

Perhaps the best thing to do is go watch some John Wayne movies and see some legitimate acting and legitimate dialogue and legitimate point of view and wash the memory of the crappy 3rd season out of your body like a toxic disease.

New green deal disaster

03-05-19

Just when you assume the worst is over, winter returns, this haunting beast we must endure for a quarter of our lives, waiting for the inevitability of spring.

Unlike fall which explodes upon us usually in one last gush before all goes bare, spring creeps up on us, a bit of it popping up here or there, yet rarely all at once in the same place.

Day light savings time comes this weekend in a year when Easter comes remarkably late, both serving in the past as sign s of changing season, the first symbolic of humanity's arrogant belief it can control nature, the second that tribute to nature's ability to resurrect despite all we do to harm her.

Our arrogance shows worst when we claim we have power to undo through intention what we caused by accident, a retelling of that old tale about spoiled coffee. fixing things are bound to make the situation worse. Yet you cannot tell those who see themselves as saviors that it is best to let mother nature heal herself when we clearly cannot start over with a fresh cup of coffee.

Fixers are compelled to fix even when at time what they fix is not broken.

Sometimes we are in such a rush to hurry spring we delay it, all of our schemes frustrated by our inability to see the signs of change, popping up here and there if not all at once.

We keep ranting on about how we need to reduce our carbon footprint, touting energy sources that as yet are proven unreliable why condemning those that are, carrying around in our pockets tiny devices more toxic than the coal we burn to keep them charged. We complain about the mounds of plastic poor people use and dispose of and end in the sea while ignoring the poles of used technology seeping poisons into the soil, like a toxic elephants’ graveyard that was supposed to keep us from cutting down trees, each device filled with unrenewable resources to replace trees which are.

In telling us we should abandon air travel, the fixers revert to tat old adage that if god had intended us to fly, he or she would have given us wings. but since fixers do not believe in god, they must play god, setting down in stone rules by which the rest of us must live.

But there are rules we live by dictated by powers beyond our control, if not god them a force of nature we seem determined to defy or reverse, fixers determined to bring us back to the caves to uninvent fire or at least keep Prometheus from acquiring it for us, back to a time when anticipating spring is more than a luxury ,but a desperate struggle for survival.

email to Al Sullivan

Victimization of snow

March 4, 2019

We waited for hours in the snow. When it came it so full as tiny flakes we mistook as rain.

It was supposed to start out as rain and so we assumed the storm would turn out worse than predicted. In a climate of hysteria over global warming, people panic over the slightest things, building mountains out of mounds of snow.

How much worse will our reaction be when an inevitable disaster comes? This not due so much over climate change but over the fear we create over small things so make us unprepared to confront any serious calamity.

Freud was right when he claimed humanity has changed little from our days in the caves. We are a panic-stricken race, resorting to a mob mentality when faced with things we fear, do not understand, or with we disagree.

We are a society of victims playing victims, getting our identity from being victims.

We close schools for a snow we would have been punished over as playing hooky over if we failed to attend when we were young.

Whole cities get gridlocked for no real reason.

This is the kind of madness that led to the wall street panic in 1929 and worse to come.

All this strikes me as silly as I watch one of our outside cats -- the one we call friendly kittie sister -- frolicking in the snow in our back yard, oblivious to the fact that cats are not supposed to like snow, basking in an innocence we as a race have generally lost.

We look for reasons to hate or reasons to panic, and unfortunately, find them.

I'm now old enough to realize I may not manage to outlive the current madness the way I managed to do in the past, and so I might perish with this lingering doubt about humanity's sanity.

I want us all to go back to being the cat in the yard, too carefree to worry over whether the trains will run on time, too independent to care if the streets are clogged, caring only that I’m having fun embracing the snow, blind maybe to it being a sign of world's end.

Black privilege?

When one newly elected Democrat congress woman attacked her conservative opponent, claiming he had white privilege on his side, I began to suspect that this new batch of Representatives might not know what they are talking about.

White privilege is a myth manufactured in the minds of liberals to explain anything bad that happens, a kind of magic potion that serves as an excuse for why African Americans after nearly 60 years of concentrated effort by the U.S. Government hasn’t yet managed to achieve what many liberals envisioned or predicted.

And nothing so far, including AOC’s recent New Green Deal proposal has done anything to convince me otherwise.

If a bird shits on someone’s head, some liberal in some elite college is going to write a thesis explaining how it was caused by white privilege.

The same would be true if someone slips on a banana peel – since clearly white men’s policies over the last century resulted in exploitation of the native Americans and other indigenous people who harvested it caused that peal to be in that particular spot at that particular moment so that that particular African American can fall.

The theory of white privilege rivals the flat earth theory in practical application. But generally, it follows the logic that white people who live in a racist society automatically inherit advantages that black people do not.

So, kids who grow up in the suburbs, where there is little crime, schools teachers aren’t scared to death to work in, and eat dinner home with a family generally consisting of a mother, father, and siblings will do better in life than blacks who grow up in the hood, where brothers shoot other brothers (and shoot sisters if they’re bad shots), whose parents (if they have any) are drug attics or drug dealers put away in jail, and go to schools that are in such deplorable conditions that they might be considered an environmental disaster area, and are so full of violence the only teachers who want to be there are those who couldn’t cut the mustard in a white suburban school or are secretly molesters, or perhaps merely machoistic.

It is clear that whites have all the advantages – if you completely ignore the billions and billions that have been shoveled into urban districts to try and to make those areas safe and to bring up their schools to the same standards as in the suburbs, or you ignore the fact that not all white kids actually have it any better, living not in suburbs, but in rural places where their father’s are hacking from black lung after years working in coal mines, and mothers prematurely age after having gotten pregnant for the first time at 12 or 13 and have kept popping kids out until the rip old age of 20.

Or whites in farmlands whose bread and butter has been scooped up by immigrant labor coming across the Mexican and other borders to work at starvation wages even below the starvation wages white farm labor worked for prior to their arrival – leaving white kids in equally dire straights and struggling to get a grip of their white privilege long enough to get a good meal.

While privilege assumes that poverty is a black condition and that poor whites somehow have an advantage over poor blacks, when the vast majority of aid to deal with poverty goes into urban (mostly black) places to make certain kids there have the fundamental necessities such as skateboards, cell phones, and weekly visits to the nail salon.

White privilege is strongly associated with the concept of reparations for slavery because of the belief that black people have been held back by the experience and that European whites were responsible. This ignores the fact that blacks in African sold blacks to traders – many of whom were European, but some were also various breeds of native Americans, and the fact that a number of native Americans also owned slaves, and that in some cases, former black slaves even owned slaves, or how many whites opposed slavery in the north and the south and worked actively to end it.

Racism – unlike God or Big Foot – does still exist in America and was not just generated in the deep south where they drive race cars and drink moonshine. Many whites in the north -- largely European immigrants (who liberals love today and have strong feelings for especially when it comes to the prospect they might be kept out of the United States by Trump’s wall) opposed the freeing of slaves, condemning Lincoln for the emancipation proclamation, because they accurately anticipated a mass move of slaves North that would steal their jobs. Not that the jobs were much better than slavery, since corporate towns often owned the houses they lived in and sold them (at exaggerated high prices) the food they ate and blackballed them from getting jobs in other similar towns if they objected and beat the crap out of them if they dared to join a union.

The mass movement did not happen immediately after the Civil War but almost a century later in what is called The Great Migration when blacks arrived in ill-equipped urban centers in the North, overwhelming many of the already strained resources. Crumbling infrastructure send jobs to other locations. Better equipped whites fled the cities with their rising crime rates, increasing poverty and inadequate services in what became known as White Flight

Blacks for the most part got stuck with what remained such as schools named after ancient political entities at a time when those political figures were still flesh and bloods. While many Americans soon discovered the fact that the streets of America were paved more with lead than with gold, blacks also found lead as one of the minerals they could count on in their drinking water.

Education is the big key to this concept of white privilege, since black kids – as pointed out in a recent editorial dealing with Rutgers University – are underrepresented, and that most black kids are at a disadvantage when they are forced to compete head to head with the better equipped and socially stable whites.

This ignores the fact that black colleges in the United States have existed since before the American Civil War, many of them located in what was considered the slave states, and massive programs have been in place since the 1960s to provide equal opportunity for blacks to become successful.

In places like New Jersey and to some degree the rest of the country State and federal money poured into the urban centers in an effort to rebuild the structure there as to provide African Americans with equal opportunities the whites in the suburbs enjoyed.

This, of course, meant more than cities getting regular visits from Mr. Softy trucks to equal Good Humor trucks prowling suburban parks, money thrown around like that often doesn’t get spent appropriately. Incompetence and corruption followed. Even black leaders, who claimed to have the heart of their people in mind, lived the highlife, driving expensive cars, wearing expensive clothing, living in expensive homes – while the people around them starved or worse became victims of another aspect of poverty: black on black crime.

Although clearly enlightened by well-meaning and isolated professors in college, white liberals got a taste of ghetto conditions starting in the 1990s when odious laws had cleared the streets enough for them to feel safe to return, replacing Mr. Softy trucks with gello store, and corner coffee shops with Starbucks. They also discovered what they could not see at a distance: crumbling schools, terrible roads and bridges, and social conditions they did not encounter when watching Friends or Sex in the City on TV in the suburbs.

These, of course, really were the privileged whites that the congresswoman claimed make up the essence of white privilege, and whites that became cheerleaders in college, condemning themselves for their privilege without actually giving up any of those privileges – talk about having your cake and eating it, too.

Unfortunately for this congresswoman who accused her black opponent of benefiting from white privilege, she hasn’t a clue what she is talking about, and like many radicals and liberals throws around the word “racism” like a curse word, condemning anyone successful as being in league with white supremacists or worse.

Once you wave the flag of racism, there’s no arguing with it, even when in most cases it isn’t true.

In some ways, white privilege is more like the old myth of the greener grass next door.

Liberals look at successful white people and automatically assume the successful white person had some advantage a black person didn’t have.

Liberals wave around statistics to show the great disparity, pointing to how many fewer black doctors or lawyers (god help us) there are, or how fewer black students are in this college or that, but do not understand what it means to get there.

Many who invoke white privilege confuse “providing opportunities” with “outcome” and so assume that if black students aren’t in college, whites somehow had an advantage – even when society has spent billions upon billions to equal the playfield, often giving blacks “a more equal” opportunity through programs such as affirmative action.

What might have been White Privilege in 1860 or even 1960 is an illusion today when so many opportunities are available and are part of a massive financial effort to make right what slavery and other factors created in the past.

We do live in a competitive society in which if you don't get your kid into the right preschool, he or she most likely will never get into one of the better colleges either.

This is something liberals know very well, but we do not see many liberals taking their kids out of elite pre-k to make room for a poor black kid either.

Black kids do have a disadvantage, but it has nothing to do with white privilege – except that many of the kids that come out of white homes come from stable supportive families, and many of the kids coming out of the ghetto do not. But to claim whites have a privilege is to ignore the vast number of poor white kids from rural and other parts of the country that do not get into those schools either.

The fact that Asian and other minority kids attending the same urban schools as black kids manage to succeed invalidates the whole white privilege argument.

Call it class privilege maybe, where rich kids do better than poor, but to claim this as a race issue is bogus.

While disparities do exist, the reasons are more complicated than having a black woman attack her black opponent.

This concept of white privilege is largely a myth created to explain something that other people do not want explained, why after all the resources we have put into this over the last half-century the disparity still exists.

The idea of a fair society is to erase colored boundaries entirely and to create opportunities that will elevate black to the same positions that white currently have, not to burn down a neighbor’s house because you don’t have what they have or to hold them for ransom to settle some imaginary grievance from generations past.

Society has tried for the last half-century to do even the score, sending billions upon billions upon billions of dollars into the community to help African-Americans and other minorities through programs like affirmative action and Head Start not to mention the massive welfare state which helped try to maintain a basic level of finance and medical care.

Where did all that money go and why was it ineffective? People like this congresswoman likes to think that there is racism, but it really is something else entirely.

While racism does exist in America it is hardly the mass movement liberals want to make it out to be or what media portray it as. In fact, calling people racist eventually turns them into racist just out of spite.

We have spent more money set up more institutions created more programs and done much more than was ever envisioned in the Civil Rights Act over the last 60 years to make conditions equal and yet for some reason everything has failed.

For this congresswoman and for the radical left want is the same outcome.

They want every kid to get everything they see in the candy store, whether they have earned it or not, whether they have the same skills, the same motivation or more importantly the same family support people elsewhere have.

In other words, the congresswoman doesn’t merely want black kids to get the same opportunity, she wants them to be guaranteed the same results.

White privilege is a crock

White privilege is a crock

Few scams have been so successfully foisted on the American public as the concept of white privilege.

This is largely a manufactured term to explain why liberal policies for helping poor -- especially people of color -- have failed so miserably.

To avoid explaining why African Americans in general are no better off today than they were at the time of the Civil Rights legislation which was supposed to have given black people advantages in the community, liberals have come up with the concept of white privilege.

This theory claims that whites because of the color of their skin automatically have certain advantages that people of color do not -- especially when it comes to things like education and jobs.

The argument four reparations from slavery is based on this misconception and that some how 400 years of slavery affected the ability of African Americans to achieve today.  Proponents of the White Privilege theory stop just short of claiming this is a white conspiracy, partly because the loudest voices promoting it happen to be the voices of white liberals.

This theory of white privilege is somewhat discredited when you look at jobs like those in coal mines or white workers displaced in farms out west by immigrants. There is more than enough diversity in supermarkets and mall stores such as Kohl's to show that white privilege is not white privilege at all.

What activists -- who promote this white privilege myth -- mean is that people of color do not have access to high paying jobs – such as those on Wall Street or those who are heads of corporations.  This is also somewhat dishonest but has more legitimate argument when you look at a different concept called class.

The theory of white privilege is so engrained in our culture it is taught in every college in America as fact, even though empirical evidence discredits it, and that some people of color actually achieve those jobs in higher waged employment than others.

Asians in particular Chinese, Japanese and Indian not only are often at the top of the pay scale and then he cases but attend some of the best universities on the planet achieving higher grades on average than whites or blacks.

While these groups were not slaves in the same sense at blacks, each suffered similar discrimination, and yet somehow managed to over come it, even with the alleged existence of White Privilege.

While liberals might argue that blacks often attend schools with far fewer resources, statistics show that many Asian students attend the same schools in the same urban environment, and yet still managed to graduate at the top of their classes and attend colleges that were in the past perceived as exclusively white.

White Privilege is a myth created by white liberals, men and women, who want to avoid the label of racist and seek to appear supportive of their black brothers and sisters – even though many of the liberals who mouth these things hold many of the positions blacks would love to achieve – leading these white liberals to another, much more legitimate issue: white guilt. This guilt forces liberals to come up with some explanation as to how liberals succeeded where African-Americans for the most part still struggle to climb up even to the level of middle-class.

It allows liberals to blame White Privilege rather than failed policies for the fact that the billions and billions and billions of dollars that have gone to help elevate African Americans have done very little and has been ineffective through more than 60 years.

In this, white liberals get to hang the white privilege label on themselves while calling other whites who refuse to accept blame racist.

White liberals get the blame white privilege for the fact that African-Americans for the most part have become addicted to many of the anti-programs born out of the New Deal and later the Civil Rights Act rather than these programs offering an incentive to advancement.

Democrat Bill Clinton adopted GOP strategies for reforming welfare system in the 1990s dumping millions of African-Americans and other poor into low-wage jobs while at the same time shrinking funding for educational programs that might have allowed them to advance.

This allowed Clinton to reduce the deficit and to lay claim to have created more jobs than any president since FDR.

The problem was many of the established liberal establishments which services poor mostly black communities were as addicted to poverty as the poor people they served, scrambling to survive since their livelihood had also depended on federal funding.

This changed the focus of the Democratic Party and its associated welfare state, seeking to replace African-Americans and other people of color with immigrants.

If anything, we currently have an immigrant privilege as a result.

The white privilege myth and the concept that African Americans need reparations for slavery is only a return to the welfare state, and the mistaken notion that money is going to make a difference and somehow bring African-Americans out of the poverty that they have been enslaved by four generations.

White Privilege is an excuse not a reason why African Americans still are not where they want to be in society.

The fact that the problem is not race at all it is class. Rich people are rich and poor people are poor and for the most part the rich want to keep it that way.

When Democrats claim they want to tax the rich, what they really mean is they want to tax white rich who are not involved with programs supported by the welfare state.

White people, of course, dominate the class structure partly because they have had many more generations to build the necessary networks to be on top. They have had time to build networks and institutions that allowed them to climb the ladder of success.

Radicals are always looking for a quick fix to a problem that needs time to remedy.

While there are a number of groups seeking to build a similar community that will support African Americans, teaching the steps they need to take to get out of poverty, most educators – especially on the college level -- are teaching people how to hate whites and riling them up to believe that somehow someway local people who work hard for a living are responsible for  black people's misery.

This is not only dishonest it is dangerous because by enraging blacks into a kind of frenzy, liberal educators are creating the very conditions that they claim already exist, building a racist backlash because when you have blacks hating whites the whites will eventually learn to hate back.

The most pathetic of these are the liberal whites who have learned to hate whites as well, and white professors require their white students to write essays about how ashamed they ought to be because they are white.

The myth of White Privilege is a way for liberals to cover their tracks and to disguise their failure to actually help African Americans achieve the American dream.

Instead of colleges teaching blacks and whites how to hate whites, these instructions should be striving towards a colorless society, where there is no advantage to anyone and that all people have equal access to everything.

White privilege and racial reparations are less about justice than they are about overturning the power structure so that there is a new master in the house, one with a black face rather than a white, instead of black and white living in the same house as equals.

Black privilege?