Woman On Cell Phone Dies In Car Crash

H.L. Mencken

It stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting sacrificial offerings.  Where there's service, there's someone being served.  The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters.  And intends to be the master. 

Ayn Rand

"I don't need Bush's tax cut. I have never worked a [bleeping] day in my life."

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.)

Annapolis lawmaker puts toy guns in cross hairs

    An Annapolis lawmaker wants to enact a law that would ban most toy guns in the city and fine parents whose children are caught playing with the toys outdoors.
    Alderwoman Cynthia A. Carter, Democrat, said the law would ban all toy guns except for clear, brightly colored plastic guns. Mrs. Carter said the law also would give prosecutors more leverage against defendants who use toy guns to hold up banks or other establishments.
    "If someone commits a felony with one, they will not only be charged with the crime but also with using a toy gun," said Mrs. Carter, who has been a member on the Annapolis City Council since 1997.
    Mrs. Carter said she doesn't know how much of a fine she will propose. She said she hopes her legislation, which she plans to introduce next month, will set a precedent for other cities to follow. Four of the nine city council members have come out in support of Mrs. Carter's proposal.
    "Anything that can be done to deglamorize guns is a plus," said Annapolis Mayor Ellen O. Moyer, Democrat. The mayor said she would withhold further comment until the bill has been introduced and a public hearing is held.
    Yesterday, officials with the Annapolis Police Department said if such a law is enacted they would not pull officers off their regular beats to catch children playing with water pistols and cap guns in schoolyards or on neighborhood streets.
    "We wouldn't do that," said Officer Hal Dalton, a spokesman for the city police department.
    Mrs. Carter decided to draft her proposal after a 7-year-old boy in April used a silver toy revolver and announced to several employees at a Hollywood Video store in Annapolis that he would hold up the store. The plastic orange tip typically found on the muzzles of toy guns had been removed, preventing two store employees from realizing it was fake.
    "Children have got to be alerted that this is a dangerous thing," Mrs. Carter said. "Guns are not a toy, no matter how you look at it."
    Mrs. Carter's legislation is based on a similar New York City proposal, which bans anyone from selling or possessing a "toy or imitation firearm" that can be mistaken for a real weapon. The ban excludes brightly colored or clear plastic guns. Police, however, could impose a $50 fine if the toy gun is altered to look like a real weapon.
    New York City police would enforce the law only if a child causes a disruption in public with a toy gun. But Lupe Todd, a spokeswoman for the New York City Council, said she does not expect officers to seek out children playing with toy guns.
    Mrs. Carter said she wants the toy companies to take more responsibility when creating guns.
    "Toy companies think that they can put the little reflective tip on the end and they will be OK," Mrs. Carter said. "But it is not enough."
    Shannon Eis, spokeswoman for the Toy Industry Association, said the group already complies with national standards that regulate the production of realistic toy weapons. "Toy guns are just a small component of the violent medium that kids nowadays are exposed to," she said.
    Mrs. Eis said the association will comply with Annapolis regulations if they are approved and will try to appease parents who think the toys are a serious contributing factor to violence. "I don't agree that it is," she said.
    Karalyn Mulligan, executive director of Prevent Child Abuse Maryland, said there is always a concern about children's safety when it comes to guns. But she said the idea of restricting toy guns deserves further investigation.
    Mrs. Carter is known for her efforts on toy guns. In 2000, Mrs. Carter organized a toy-gun buyback that yielded 12 toy guns.
    Mrs. Carter said she anticipates full support from all council members. The council is made up of two Republicans and seven Democrats. She speculates that her greatest obstacle will be fathers, who she believes encourage their sons to play with guns and take them to target practice.
    Despite her stance on toy guns, Mrs. Carter said she supports her son, Richard Perry, 38, who is an avid hunter and a member of the National Rifle Association. "He is a grown man. That was his decision," she said.
    Mrs. Carter said she would eventually like to see a ban imposed on the possession of all real-looking toy guns. "Anything that looks like or resembles a weapon of any kind or was altered to look like, even the cigarette lighters, they are not going to be acceptable," she said.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.

Thomas Jefferson

America is a police state
Neal Boortz

About 10 days ago, some obscure British diplomat opined that America was becoming a police state. This utterance brought on the usual expressions of outrage from Americans who have grown somewhat weary of the anti-American sentiments of foreign leftists.

Happy reading.

It would be an absurdity for jurors to be required to accept the judge's view of the law, against their own opinion, judgment, and conscience.

John Adams

The Left's Weapons Of Mass Distraction

You'll enjoy this one.  Adam Sparks gives you the true meanings behind many of the words the left uses in its war against individuality, freedom and common sense.

Words are power in motion. The war over words and how they're used by our society has become the new battleground of the Left. The primary tool in their arsenal is an effort to change the conventional meanings of words used in our daily communication. The morphing of our language is now the front line of the war on our culture and a powerful means for gaining political ground for the Left.

Just as many sports fans need a program to see who's who or what's what on the field, many citizens need a guide to understanding the Leftist lexicon. So, here's a brief primer into what the Left actually means when they say:

Advantaged, the: 1) Anyone who has a strong sense of self-responsibility, works hard for their money or pays taxes. 2) Anyone who believes in the American Dream. 3) White or Asian American.

Affirmative Action: Getting back at the Advantaged.

Affordable Housing: 1) Tax-supported housing, built by the government, that costs twice as much to build than if built by a typical builder, while simultaneously preventing new, for-profit housing construction. 2) A program that requires the Advantaged to spend their taxes to pay for the lifetime housing of couch potatoes and slackers.

Animal Rights: 1) The concept of the supremacy of animals' rights over those of humans. 2) The application of the U.S. Constitution to animals in their legal defense.

Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD): A new disease cured by taking bright kids bored to tears by the poor academic curriculum in our public schools and drugging them to death.

Basic Rights: New rights not found anywhere in the Constitution that include the right for slackers to get free food, free housing, free medical care and conjugal visits in prison, plus permission to deal drugs, defecate in the streets and aggressively panhandle, as well as get enough welfare money to trade their cars in every three years.

Conservative, a: 1) Anyone fighting the socialist aspirations of the radical Left or anyone who is either Advantaged or wants to be Advantaged. 2) A person proud to be an American, and one who holds ideals like honesty and morality and heralds individual rights over group rights. 3) Dumb taxpayers who love America.

Diversity: 1) Making sure we highlight and celebrate our different qualities and our hyphenated countries of origin, while still bashing America and, particularly, rejecting the idea that there is or should be any unity of thought or purpose of America. 2) Making sure we have, in all levels of government and corporations, a proportionate number of people of color and those of different sexual orientations, unless they are conservatives. Conservatives are not a part of diversity.

Environmentalism: 1) A way of stopping America's technological progress, farming practices, new housing and job creation. This is perpetrated by a cabal of both tassled-shoe lawyers (who have never actually stepped foot in a wilderness area) and scraggly neo-hippies. 2) Repeating the mantra that Republicans are "poisoning the air and water" to a gullible public. 3) An attempt by "progressives" to regress technologically by reestablishing the technology of the 19th century here in America.

Fascist, a: 1) Anyone who is not a Progressive (see below). 2) People who believe in America's system of merit and capitalism. 3) Conservatives. (Note: Doesn't include Leftist genocidal tyrants who brutalize their people in nations throughout the world.) 4) George W. Bush.

Fetus, a: Tissue mass in a pregnant woman that often starts moving and kicking at two months of age.

Free Speech: 1) The ability to incite riots against America and its capitalist system by the use of hateful speech. 2) Speech that disparages the goals, purposes or ambitions of patriotic, taxpaying Americans.

Hate Speech: Speech by either the Advantaged or Conservatives that doesn't promote a socialist "progressive" agenda.

Homeless, the: Drifters, druggies, bums, winos, slackers and petty thieves.

Homeless Advocates: Leftists actually paid by taxpayers who lobby for more big government and movement toward a "progressive," socialist-nanny state.

Individual Rights: The concept espoused by confused and hapless taxpayers who actually believe their and their own family's well-being comes before those of Environmentalists, the Homeless and the beneficiaries of Animal Rights. 2) A major doctrine that terrifies Progressives.

Judgmental: As in, "Don't be judgmental." 1) Said of persons who can actually distinguish between right and wrong. 2) Said of those actually trying to use the aforementioned moral code publicly to restore order and decency in American policy. 3) Fascists (see above).

Left Winger, a: This term doesn't exist. Don't speak it or think it. You may have seen the term "right winger," as it's frequently used in connection with both political or religious leaders by the Left and their friends in the media, but you won't see "left winger." To the Left, there are only right wingers, dumb taxpayers and Progressives.

Mean Spirited: 1) Said of anyone who doesn't support brutal dictators around the world. 2) Said of anyone who loves America. 3) Said of anyone who doesn't buy into the entire socialist "progressive" agenda. 4) Said of talk-show hosts.

Multiculturalism: 1) The principle underlying any bashing ceremony against all things American by representatives of nations or ideologies foreign to America. 2) The foundation of being proud to be from a country while simultaneously demeaning America. An idea espoused particularly by persons who like to hyphenate their demographic categorization by using their country or continent of ancestral origin as a part of their identity. 3) The underpinning of any cultural event, ideology or celebration that weakens or denigrates the American spirit of unity. 4) The justification for resegregation both at school and work with separate race-based organizations, distinct graduation ceremonies, etc.

Oreo, an: A racist and derogatory term used by Progressives, but parroted with glee by the media, to indicate a black person who works hard to achieve or who doesn't think like a socialist bum.

Pacifist, a: A person who holds that the defense of no one's life -- or any idea, such as freedom -- is so dear that it rises to the level of "worth fighting for."

People of Color: The current politically correct appellation for minorities. We've come a long way since that very offensive term "colored people."

Poor, the: 1) Those who don't want a minimum-wage job, because they're too good for it, so they take the dole. 2) People who choose to have six children without caring about how they will afford them. 3) People who think America's taxpayers owe them Basic Rights (see above).

Progressive: 1) Socialist. (The word socialist became real unpopular after the fall of the Soviet empire and was quickly replaced by a more easily digested word.) 2) A cruel joke on the American people. A word intentionally meant to deceive the hapless taxpayer into believing that the "progressive" ideology is somehow related to real progress. In reality, progressive and progress are antonyms.

Progressives: 1) Those who advocate the slow, clandestine progress of big government and command-and-control socialism in America. 2) Liberal Democrats.

Racists: 1) Fascists (see above). 2) The Advantaged (see above). 3) White people.

Rich, the: Anyone not Poor (see above), i.e. "This is a tax cut for the rich."

Right Winger: Conservative (see above).

Tolerance: 1) The act of ignoring your inner moral code and just believing that anyone doing anything is OK, no matter what. 2) Does not apply to Conservatives, the Advantaged and Oreos (see above). 3) Applies to dictators committing genocide against their people.

Underrepresented Minority, an: A minority who isn't from a group that does too well in the classroom, like the Chinese or Japanese.

Undocumented Immigrant, an: 1) An illegal alien. Someone who entered the country illegally and continues to remain here unlawfully, frequently working in the underground economy or, alternatively, getting on the taxpayer-supported dole. 2) Anyone of those the Left uses as "useful idiots" to inflict their socialist agenda on America. 3) One of a class of people who must not be denied their Basic Rights (see above).

Victim, a: Anyone of the class of either vicious criminals that have been busted and have been victimized by a mean police officer during an arrest, or an Undocumented Immigrant who has been denied his or her Basic Rights and is now engaging in protests against America.

Working Class, the: Those who are either socialists, collect welfare, are unemployed or have a job but get paid under the table to avoid taxes. This category allows the Left to then say, "This tax rebate doesn't benefit the working class."

If moderates and Conservatives -- the dumb taxpayers -- are ever to take back our country, we'll need to first take back our language.

From whence comes income?

Walter Williams takes on the economic idiots who can’t see why a movie star would make more money than a fast food worker.

Here's part of a letter from a reader: "A hard-working, conscientious person can earn $10,000 a year in a fast-food restaurant. At the same time, movie stars and athletes, who make very little contribution to society, can earn in excess of $10,000,000 a year. A baseball player earns more with every swing of the bat than many people do in a year."

The reader's inference is that there's something unfair about income differences of such magnitude. It also reflects ignorance about the sources of income in a free society; that's music to the ears of political demagogues with an insatiable taste for command and control.

I think some of the ignorance and much of the demagoguery stems from the usage of the phrase "income distribution." It might make some people think income is distributed; in other words, there's a dealer of dollars. The reason that some people have few dollars while others have millions upon millions is that the dollar dealer is unjust.

An alternative vision might be that there's a pile of money intended for all of us. The reason why some are rich and some are poor is that the greedy rich got to the pile first and took their unfair share. Clearly, in either case, justice would require a re-dealing, or redistribution, of the dollars, where the government takes ill-gotten gains of the few and returns them to their rightful owners.

Most people, except a few congressmen, would view those explanations of the sources of income as nonsense. In a free society, for the most part, income is earned. It's earned by serving and pleasing one's fellow man.

Why is it that Michael Jordan earns $33 million a year and I don't even earn one-half of one percent of that? I can play basketball, but my problem is with my fellow man, who'd plunk down $200 to see Jordan play and wouldn't pay a dollar to see me play. I'm also willing to sell my name as endorsements for sneakers and sport clothing, but no one has approached me.

The bottom line explanation of Michael Jordan's income relative to mine lies in his capacity to please his fellow man. The person who takes exception to Jordan's salary or sees him, as my letter-writer does, as making "little contribution to society" is really disagreeing with decisions made by millions upon millions of independent decision-makers who decided to fork over their money to see Jordan play. The suggestion that Congress ought to take part of Jordan's earnings and give it to someone else is the same as arrogantly saying, "I know better who ought to receive those dollars."

Another part of the explanation for Jordan's high salary is simply a matter of supply and demand. If there were tens and tens of millions of people with Jordan's talents, you can rest assured he wouldn't be earning $33 million a year. And similarly you can bet that if people really valued hamburgers and there were only a few people with those skills, they'd be earning much more than they currently earn.

We might think of dollars as being "certificates of performance." The better I serve my fellow man, and the higher the value he places on that service, the more certificates of performance he gives me. The more certificates I earn, the greater my claim on the goods my fellow man produces. That's the morality of the market. In order for one to have a claim on what his fellow man produces, he must first serve him. Contrast that moral standard to Congress' standing offer, "Vote for me and I'll take what your fellow man produces and give it to you."

Zero tolerance or zero common sense?

Parents are laughing at the intolerance of the zero tolerance rules that have been instituted in so many public schools. Laughing, that is, unless it is their own sons who are victimized by policies that seem to lack common sense. It's a serious matter when a good child is expelled from school, suspended or sent to a detention facility to take classes with real delinquents. Here are some recent examples of how the zero tolerance hatchet is wielded in public schools.

A first-grader at Struthers Elementary School in Youngstown, Ohio, was suspended for 10 days for taking home a plastic knife from the school cafeteria in his book bag. The 6-year-old wasn't threatening anyone; he just wanted to show his mother he had learned how to spread butter on his bread.

A third-grader at O'Rourke Elementary School in Mobile, Ala., was given a five-day suspension for violating the substance abuse policy after classmates reported that he took a "purple pill." His offense was taking a multivitamin with his lunch.

At LaSalle Middle School in Greeley, Colo., three 13-year-old boys were given one-year suspensions because one of the students brought to school a key chain with a 2 1/2-inch laser pointer. The school called it a "firearm facsimile" and sent one of the boys, a good student who had never before been in trouble, to an alternative program where he is taking classes with young criminals and juvenile delinquents in "anger management," "conflict resolution" and gangs.

Four kindergartners at Wilson Elementary School in Sayreville, N.J., were suspended for three days for playing a make-believe game of cops and robbers during recess, using their fingers as guns. This case is now before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

When seven fourth-grade boys, who had never before been in trouble, at Dry Creek Elementary School in Colorado were discovered pointing "finger guns" at each other while playing a game of soldiers and aliens during recess, the principal found them in violation of the school's zero tolerance policy. After quizzing them about whether their parents owned guns, she required them to serve a one-week detention during lunchtime, sitting in the hall where they were teased and taunted by other students.

An 8-year-old at South Elementary school in Jonesboro, Ark., was punished with detention for pointing a chicken strip at another student in the cafeteria while saying "pow, pow, pow."

A 7-year-old at the Edgewood Independent School District in San Antonio, Texas, was banished for 11 days to an "alternative school" for troubled students when he was caught bringing a pocketknife to school. For three days, he was the only first-grader at the facility among older students guilty of serious offenses.

A 12-year-old at Magoffin Middle School in El Paso, Texas, stuck out his tongue at a girl who had declined his invitation to be his girlfriend. School administrators called this sexual harassment and suspended him for three days.

When the Fred A. Anderson Elementary School in Bayboro, N.C., held a Camouflage Day, a 9-year-old proudly came in his new duck-hunting outfit. His joy was smashed when the teacher discovered an empty shotgun shell in his pocket left over from a weekend outing with his father, and punished the straight-A student with a five-day suspension.

In Hurst, Texas, a 16-year-old honor student was expelled from high school after a security guard found a butter knife in the bed of his pickup truck parked on school grounds. The knife apparently fell out of a box of household items he and his father had transported the previous day from his grandmother's home to a local Goodwill store. School officials claimed that the butter knife was a danger to other students and placed him in a disciplinary alternative school for five days.

Two 8-year-old boys who pointed paper guns at classmates in Irvington, N.J., were charged with "making terrorist threats." A judge ultimately dismissed their case, but the incident may remain on court records until the boys are 18.

In a North Carolina preschool called Kids Gym Schoolhouse, the state evaluator deducted five points from its high rating because plastic soldiers were found in the play area. The toys were said to "reflect stereotyping and violence and can be potentially dangerous if children use them to act out violent themes."

Zero tolerance is not protecting us from terrorists or criminals. It is making good children disrespect school authorities.

Quebec man suing Loto-Quebec for not winning

Idiot welfare recipient sues Canadian lottery because he hasn't won.  Says they only sell losing tickets.  By the way, he’s on welfare.  I’m glad this type of thing happens elsewhere too.

SHERBROOKE, Que.  A Quebec man is suing Loto-Quebec, saying it fooled him and that the provincial lottery only sells losing tickets.

The man, who is on welfare, spent $840 last March on a variety of tickets that didn't win. He is now suing Loto-Quebec for $879.58.

He wants his money back and he wants Loto-Quebec to pick up expenses of $5.75 for a registered letter he sent them. He also wants $28.85 and $7 for gas and parking for the cost of a trip he made to their Montreal offices.