About Me

Name:Playful Walrus
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Dating a Bad Boy Can Be Fatal

Ladies, do not date or have sex with violent jerks.  If the investigators - and one of this guy's other baby mammas - are right about this man, he has a history of "domestic" violence and has now murdered someone.

Please don't think I'm taking any blame away from him.  If he is guilty, he deserves the full punishment allowable by law.

However, women have a responsibility to themselves and their children to NOT date, have sex with, or conceive babies with a man who is violent towards them.  At the first sign of violence STOP SEEING HIM.  Do not date a man who will hurt you, especially if he is married!

This also goes for men.  If a woman you are dating is unstable or violent, STOP SEEING HER.  Do not make excuses for her.  If it really is "your fault", then not seeing her any more should prevent her from being violent, right?  If she "needs help", YOU aren't the one to give it to her.

Really, though, women have so much of the power.  If they all would not date, have sex with, or cook for men who commit unjust violence, such violence would virtually disappear.  But as it is now, some men can lie, cheat, steal, beat, and murder and still get women to flock to them.  Even death row inmates have women throwing themselves at them.

ENOUGH!

Protect yourself!  Not everything you have a right or a freedom to do is without negative, even deadly consequences.  The right to do something (like have sex with whom you want) does not mean the authorities will be able to protect you from the possible negative consequences.

This guy could be convicted and receive the strongest sentence, but that woman and her baby will still be dead, and her other child will be without his parents.  Consider the consequences.  No amount of earthly justice can fix everything once it has been done.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Politically Incorrect Birth

 [Oops... I meant to write "had", not "has" towards the end of this post - this was NOT a crisis pregnancy.  We planned this.]

Our first child was born this week in Orange County, California to American citizens.

She will be raised bilingual – learning English and another language that is not Spanish.

She and her mother have health insurance.

We thank God that:

-Both mother and daughter are healthy, beautiful, and doing well.

-We, her parents, are married – to each other.  (There was no chance of a baby being conceived before the wedding, if you know what I mean.)

-We both have college degrees and we both were gainfully employed in professional careers.  However, my wife happily stopped working outside the home to have and raise our child(ren).

-We have no debt, other than a reasonable mortgage.  We are saving and investing for the future.

-I have saved up my own time off.

-Our child(ren) will be raised in a Christian, patriotic home – by her own parents – and will be taught the importance of family, personal responsibility, the difference between good and evil, and most of all, the importance of devotion to God.

-We are not substance abusers, nor abusers of people.

-That all of the above means we have no need to be dependent on the promises of Leftist politicians.

From early on, we saw our little girl in ultrasound sessions, and from early on, she “looked like a person”.  Even if this had* been a crisis pregnancy and not planned, abortion would have been out of the question.

Please forgive my slowdown/lack of blogging as I tend to the two most important women in my life – both are blessings from God.  I have no idea what the next few weeks will be like, and how often I’ll be able to chime in here.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

You Deserve to Live Beyond Your Means

Once again, certain Anaheim residents are whining and asking for handouts.

Maria Mejia's family has had trouble paying the rent, forcing her to share garages with siblings and cousins and double up with in-laws and other relatives in mobile homes.

There are options here if you don’t like that arrangement.  For example, you can find ways to bring in more income, cut other expenses, or move to where housing is more affordable.

Less than two miles away from her latest leaky home, thousands of condos and lofts are under construction to help relieve a housing shortage. But none are slated for low-income families, such as the Mejias.

Right.  People can upgrade to those more expensive units, thereby vacating older, more affordable units that may then be available.

Tonight, hundreds of churchgoers, including Mejia, are planning to push city officials to require affordable housing in a planned development on city-owned land next to Angel Stadium.

Hmmmm… churchgoers?  Isn’t it a function of churches to redistribute wealth?  No government involvement needed.

Once again, truly “affordable” housing is affordable due to market demands, location, size, features, construction costs, etc.  Having the City Council wave a magic wand doesn’t make anything more affordable.  It means that either the other unit buyers will be subsidizing the “affordable” units, or taxpayers will.

"I don't really think that's right," said Mejia, 33. "We are working families, too, and I really think we should have some (housing), a decent place to live in Anaheim."

You are entitled to whatever you can negotiate on a voluntary exchange - nothing more.  If you don’t like it, buy the land yourself and do with it what you want.

Four Catholic churches are hosting tonight's forum, arranged by the Orange County Congregation Community Organization, a coalition of faith-based groups.

Hey, the RCC has a lot of money.  Why don't they buy the units and give them away?

Church members are trying to do something about an issue vexing many of its 12,000 or so families: Many members pay as much as 70 percent of their monthly income on rent. Some parishioners moved to the Inland Empire.

See, you can move.  You know what would lower housing costs?  Reducing demand.  Discouraging millions of more illegal aliens from flooding the area would help reduce demand.  I’m sure the RCC will get right on that.

Since 2004, the city has been approving new homes on private land in the Platinum Triangle, which is transforming into a downtown-like setting around Angel Stadium.

I’m sure the other people using that land would just love to have the "entitlement-minded" poor move in next to them, especially on their dime.

Where do people get this idea that "other people" are supposed to be forced to provide them with food, housing, health care, education, and entertainment?  Each one of us has something to offer other people.  Voluntary exchanges of goods and services (or money, which represents goods and services) can get you what you need.  Stop calling on the government to force other people to take care of you.  Why doesn't your church step up?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

In Praise of the Automobile

Nature-worshipping freaks, environmental alarmists, and commie mass transit advocates knock the personal  automobile.  I love automobiles.  There are many reasons to love automobiles.

1. It’s there on demand.  No looking up schedules, no walking several blocks to a station or a stop, no scrambling to conform to a schedule, no dealing with late buses or trains.

2. It gets you exactly where you want to go, in using the route that is of your choosing, as direct or as scenic as you choose.  You don’t have to go way out of your way and wait for a transfer.  If you want to slow down and pull off of the road - maybe to dump some toxic chemicals into an endangered species habitat, or eat an artery-clogging burger made from a dead cow, or hunt a defenseless little furry animal - you can.  Just try dragging a game carcass onto a public bus.  Ain’t gonna happen.

3. You can have some level of privacy.  This allows you to call in to Dr. Laura without anyone around you hearing.  It also allows for you to have you kids sit in the back and earn their keep doing child labor while you go over their homeschooling lessons.

4. You can listen to what you want without disturbing others or having to wear earphones.  The Bible on tape,  Atlas Shrugged on tape, Rush Limbaugh - you can listen to it all and still hear that siren.

5. Any passengers are of your choosing.  Do I need to draw you a picture?  No holding on to your wallet or enduring paranoid mumblings.  You can hide “passengers” in the trunk, too.

6. The aroma is of your choosing.  See #5.

7. The climate is of your choosing.  I like running the air conditioner full-blast and having all of the windows down.

8. Automobiles allow a wide-range of self-expression, from that little fish symbol, to an NRA bumper sticker, to that red-white-and-blue paint job, to that horn that plays “Battle Hymn of the Republic”.

9. Automobiles allow for self-determination.  On a commuter train, you are often delayed when someone jumps in front of it to kill themselves, but in an automobile, you can run right over them, back up over them, and run over them again, then take off, go home, and have an adult beverage as you wait for the police to arrive to hear your explanation involving assisted suicide.

10. People used to use horses for transportation, but now horses can be sold to Europe to be turned into meat.

Of course, this all depends on the men and women who design, engineer, build, and maintain our roads, highways, bridges, and traffic systems.  Without those, automobiles would just be another place to make love to your spouse.

Automobiles may change over the years, getting safer, more efficient, and more “environmentally-friendly”, but is hard to beat the basic premise of a passenger-controlled vehicle that can be navigated to exactly where the passenger wants to go, exactly when the passenger wants to get there.  Long live the personal automobile!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thanks, Dad

Thanks, Dad... I couldn't have gotten this far without you.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Townhall Blogs Should Not Be Cobwebs

Many of the Townhall Blogs on my blogroll haven't been updated in months.  I see that there are supposedly well over 700 Townhall blogs based in California, yet how many of those are active and not trolls?

I know that the folks behind Townhall probably like having as many blogs as possible listed here, but c'mon, people - Townhall Blogs should not be cobwebs.  Either they should be updated regularly (as in at least once a month), or should have a post that explains the lack of updates, or it should be removed.  That way, finding other Townhall bloggers who are serious will be easier.

This place is a great tool to spread the word, enable activism, and change minds and hearts.  But allowing too much of it to turn into cobwebs is counterproductive.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Great SCOTUS Decision

 "Unions have no constitutional entitlement to the fees of nonmember employees," Justice Antonin Scalia said.

Thank you, SCOTUS!  Scalia gets it!!!

For far too many years, unions have taken money from workers and spent that money on political campaigns without the permission of the the employee.  How can someone be forced to support a candidate, political party, or legislation with which they vehemently disagree?

On the one hand, unions can require employees to pay fees or dues to cover the cost of collective bargaining, at least in states that authorize "union shop" rules.

However, dissident employees cannot be forced to pay for political contributions. In 1977, the court said dissidents had a free-speech right not to pay for political causes they opposed.

Reconciling these two principles continues to pose problems. Union leaders prefer a rule that allows them to use dues money except when dissidents object and seek a refund in writing. Anti-union activists have fought this approach, saying it gives unions too much leeway to spend the money of dissidents.

Scalia's opinion for the court takes the side of dissident teachers.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Illegal Alien Situation and Debate: What I’ve Learned

Here are a few things I’ve learned thanks to the illegal alien situation and the discussion of “immigration reform.”

No matter how low you think President Bush’s approval rating is, he will do something to make it lower.

Citizens who tire of waiting for the government to fulfill basic Constitutional functions are “vigilantes” and bad.

Welcoming people from all over the world who legally immigrate - but not wanting to grant legal status to illegal aliens - makes you a “racist”.

It is morally okay to sneak into a foreign country and march in the streets waving your home country’s flag.

Breaking and entering is okay, and the property owner should take care of you once you are there.  Burglars are home invasion robbers are “undocumented householders”.

If an entity that ruled over your ancestors or to which your ancestors belonged used to control property and later relinquished that property in an agreement, it is perfectly legitimate for you to sneak onto that property, squat on it, and claim it belongs to you.

Everyone in the world who wants to come here and live off our system has an inherent right to, regardless of the needs of Americans.

Americans are lazy because they want to get paid decent wages for hard labor.

More socialism is the answer to problems with existing socialism.

Increasing regulation will solve problems of not enforcing existing regulations.

People should be forgiven of their crimes so that they can be “brought out of the shadows” and because it is so darn hard to enforce the law.

Drug dealers are “unlicensed pharmacists”.

A fourteen-year-old who takes a car on a joyride is only an “undocumented driver”.

The best way to solve a crime problem is to legalize the crime.

Pleasing Mexico is more important for too many American politicians than pleasing Americans.

A government that can’t locate or  round up people or persuade them to go home will still, somehow, be able to collect thousands of dollars from them and verify that they've jumped through various hoops.

If a criminal is “entrenched” or has family, it is cruel and wrong to prosecute him and separate him from his family or remove him from things to which he has grown accustomed.

We should value and protect every culture except American culture.

Legal, illegal - there's no difference!

America should adapt to people who come here illegally, but then newcomers should not be asked to adapt to America.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Questions For Presidential Candidates Re: Health Care

If you get the chance to pose a question to a Presidential candidate, don’t miss a good opportunity!

Here are a couple of questions to ask them about health care.


1. Are you satisfied that all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care?

[The candidate will say “no”.   If you can follow up, ask the second part of the question below.  Otherwise, bridge to the second part of the question by saying, “And if the answer is ‘no’…”]

Then shouldn’t we take care of Americans - native-born and naturalized - before subsidizing health care for Mexico’s citizens, especially ones who have come here illegally, by shutting down the border and encouraging those already here to return to Mexico?


2. Since we have so many problems, challenges, and low achievement with “universal education”, why should we believe universal health care will improve health care for most Americans?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Social and Fiscal Conservatives Belong Together in the GOP

Democrats, especially the Leftists, love to claim that the GOP is a loose, fragile, and nonsensical coalition of the Religious Right, other social conservatives, big business types, military hawks, and libertarians.

But it makes sense for social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and libertarians to stick together as Republicans.

Yes, I know that there isn’t consensus among Republicans on immigration and right-to-life issues, but most of the priority goals of the different factions are compatible.

Why?  Conservative social values are good for business and reduce the demand for social spending of tax money and the demand for stronger regulations.  Conservative social values make the nation strong, stable, and a good place to do business.

Conservative social values make good employees.  First of all, we’ve been aborting so much of our labor in this country that is has taken both legal immigrants and illegal aliens to supply the labor needs of the businesses that don’t move their operations outside of the country.  The low unemployment figures indicate this.  It is no coincidence that Roe v. Wade was in 1973 and we’ve had a massive influx of illegal alien labor since the 1986 amnesty.

But there is more to being a good employee than just being alive.  Being sober, avoiding vice, treating yourself and others with respect when it comes to sexual relations, respecting authority, adhering to integrity over easy crime, and self/family reliance over dependency are good qualities in am employee, are they not?  Who thinks that a person would make an ideal employee if he or she gets drunk or stoned, smokes, sleeps around without much discretion or with few boundaries, is openly crude in mixed company, would pilfer or embezzle as long as they were unlikely to get caught, disrespects any boss, and looks to “someone else” to do everything for them?

Since employees will be working with both men and women and may have either as a boss, being raised by both a man and a woman better prepares an employee for that arrangement.

An employee who avoids substance abuse and saves their body and heart for marriage is  more likely to be physically and emotionally healthy, and thus to show up to work and to be a smaller burden when it comes to health benefits.

Conservative social values make good citizens.
  A stable, married household is more likely to teach self-restraint, self-respect, self-reliance, respect for authority, and healthy interaction with both sexes.  A religious household is more likely to teach the importance of charity.  This means less crime and less dependence on the government, which should mean lower taxes.  It means more voluntary cooperation and less dysfunction in groups.

You have a better chance of creating a lasting and healthy, stable, married household if you do not have vice addictions and you save sex for marriage.

We can’t have a more libertarian society function well without self-control.  We can’t have strong businesses without reliable employees.

That is why social and fiscal conservatism go hand in hand.  If, for the sake of libertarian ideals, we don’t maintain laws and courts that actively promote social conservatism, we should at least prevent Leftists from enacting laws and appointing judges who will undermine the social conservatism of the people.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Appeasing Mexicans, Angering Americans

So El Presidente Jorge Bush is going to continue to insult his die-hard supporters by pushing shamnesty instead of enforcing existing law.

The GOP needs to take a stand. 
Rudy has said some very reasonable things about border control and immigration enforcement.  Of course, Duncan Hunter and some of the other candidates who are not getting as much media attention have also expressed what Americans want.  Senators need to take a stand and call for the enforcement of existing laws before any more laws are passed.

Why is Bush so concerned about pleasing Mexico?

I’m thankful for Bush’s tax cuts and his fight against the terrorists.  But this “immigration reform” bill will end the U.S. as we know it.  What is the point of cutting taxes if you are going to swell our population “in need” of public assistance?  What is the point of fighting terrorists with weapons when you won’t even secure the border?

Then there’s the Roman Catholic Church in southern California, supporting shamnesty and sanctuary policies.  That would all be fine, as long the Church would be willing to support these illegal aliens without letting them be a strain on the rest of us.  Hey, wait a minute - isn’t the RCC prominent in Mexico?  Why can’t the RCC minister to the needs of Mexicans IN MEXICO.  They don’t need to come to the U.S. illegally.  They already have the RCC in Mexico.  BE THE CHURCH IN MEXICO, and Mexicans will not feel that they need to come to the U.S. illegally.

The Mexican government is a failure. Is the RCC in Mexico a failure, too?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What Good Has the Dem Congress Been?

Please tell me what positive, constructive things has the Democrat-controlled Congress done with its time?  I mean, really.

1. It repeatedly tried to usurp the Executive branch’s authority in attempts to meddle in the fight against terrorists in Iraq.  Democrat Senate Majority Leader Dingy Harry has declared defeat even though Saddam was removed, prosecuted, and executed, many terrorist have been caught, the oppressive genocidal government was replaced with a democratically elected government, and we halted their WMD development.  That’s losing?  And let's not forget Nancy's trip to the Middle East.

2. It has raised the minimum wage, thereby discouraging employers from offering low-skilled jobs and making everything more expensive, a move that will hurt the poorest.  Why should anyone get paid more than they can negotiate for themselves?

3. It has tried to pass a disastrous “immigration reform” bill with the urging of President Bush.

4. It has given way too much attention to “global warming”, accomplishing nothing.  Someday, more people look back at this hysteria like we were all a bunch of ignorant fools.

5. They have promoted symbolism over substance with things like their focus on the Attorney General’s firing of prosecutors, even though the AG is authorized to fire them for any reason.  It doesn't matter that they don't like his reasons, or the way he did it.  IT IS HIS TO DO.  End of story.  A "no confidence" vote against him is just more stupid, wasteful symbolism over substance,

Are they ever going to do anything productive to protect our liberty and increase government efficiency?  I won’t hold my breath.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Some Victims Are More Equal Than Others

I’m definitely for the rights of crime victims, but it looks like some of the activism of the 9/11 widows is combining with a victicrat culture to establish problematic precedents.

Relatives of the Virginia Tech shooting victims demanded representation on a gubernatorial panel studying the killings, saying in a letter Monday that they feel "ostracized."

Uh, isn’t it normal to have professionals investigate crimes?  What’s next - parents demanding to assist in major surgery on their own children?  It is horrible when something like this evil act is visited upon your family.  You should demand justice and whatever restitution is possible, from the appropriate parties.  But this should not entitle you to participate in an official capacity in a public investigation.  Hire a private investigator if you want, or do your own investigative work.

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine appointed the eight-member panel, which includes former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, psychiatrists, educational specialists and former law enforcement officials, to review the tragedy, the circumstances that led to it and the response.

Some guy from Korea who was clearly diverse - uh, I mean disturbed - murdered a lot of people.  I just offered that insight for free.  No panel needed.

"Family is important to us. It's also important, I think, to the governor that he have a panel that was viewed as being totally objective and not driven by emotions," said Massengill, a former Virginia State Police superintendent who oversaw the agency's response to the Sept. 11 attack on the Pentagon and the 2002 Washington-area sniper attacks.

The panel's third public meeting was held Monday, when members hoped to get some insight into how the student gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, was able to skirt Virginia's mental health system. Cho was ordered to receive outpatient mental health treatment in 2005 but never did.

Maybe he got special treatment for being a famous rich white girl.

On the morning of April 16, Cho killed two students in a Virginia Tech dormitory, then went across campus to Norris Hall, chained the doors shut and opened fire inside several classrooms. He later committed suicide there. In all, Cho killed 27 students and five faculty members.

The only thing he did right was shoot himself and save everyone a lot of time, money, and trouble.  Too bad he didn’t start the rampage by shooting himself.  Things would have gone much better then.

The families also said it was important that panel members gain access to Cho's immigration and mental health records. Massengill has said that the panel would go to court if necessary to get Cho's medical and mental health records, which Virginia Tech officials have said federal privacy laws bar them from sharing.

Remember, medical privacy is an absolute right.  So much so, that it allows women to have their babies killed.  You have to love what “abortion rights” has wrought.

I wish those directly harmed by this evil man's actions well, but I do not like the precedent I'm seeing established.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Clooney, Damon's Ramp Up To War

It is clear that George Clooney and Matt Damon are gearing us up for war in Darfur.  After all, that's what the Leftists says that W is doing he when makes comments like this:

"We can hold rallies and fundraisers and everyone think it's fixed," Clooney said. "It's not fixed."

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

LA Mayor: Cut Back So Illegals Can Live Next to You

Los Angeles Mayor Tony Villar (Antionio Villaraigosa) is calling on the city's people to conserve water.  Hey Tony, how about you stop encouraging illegal aliens to settle in the city, and maybe the DWP will have more water!  Why should Americans cut back so that Mexico's cast-offs can continue to come here illegally.

No!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive