Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Live Stream KSDK: Streets of Ferguson

On Ferguson

The morning after the made for TV event that was the spectacle of the first night's rioting in Ferguson (I write it that way as there is probably more to come) and social media is alive with comment. Conservatives and law and order types are doing a bit of an end-zone dance at Officer Wilson's not having been indicted, and Liberals are falling all over themselves to burnish their empathy credentials by showing how "down" they are with the miscreants burning, looting, and injuring.

Like any of these incendiary situations, there really are only "less bad" outcomes, and no real good ones. There are parents, and friends, and relatives who grieve the death of their son and friend. There is a policeman who feared for his life and reacted. There are people who believe they cannot get a square deal from the police. There are people who believe those people should be more restrained in their reactions. Their are business owners waking up today to ruin.

Let's face it. There is no rational logic to looting, burning, and destroying police cars--but this isn't a logical or rational reaction. This is emotion, and we need to view it in those terms. A grand jury has reviewed the evidence and decided not to indict--something RARE indeed in grand jury proceedings (a sign of just how weak the case was). Every single witness corroborating Officer Wilson's testimony was black. No person who made statements about him having shot Mr. Brown in the back actually witnessed the conflict. Those of us sitting in our comfy places watching and tut-tutting probably don't understand deeply enough the mistrust that exists between a good bit of the black community and police forces. I'll wager that if we were to get some of these hooligans to sit down and present them with the evidence, they might even come to the same conclusion as the grand jury--but their reactions would still be the same. This isn't necessarily about Brown's death, it is about perceptions built up over years and simmering rage. The Ferguson incident simply provides a convenient outlet for these emotions.

The inconvenient thing though, is that another man's life and liberty were on the line here, a man paid to protect and keep order, a man who approached two men walking down the middle of the street impeding traffic, when sidewalks were available to them. Putting aside for a moment, this clearly unobjectionable instance of where we as a civil society would wish our police to get involved, upon closer inspection, the men met the description of two men who had just robbed a convenience store and roughed up the proprietor, something store videos later confirmed. I truly believe that there are those protesting in the streets and those sitting in comfy dens of liberal smugness who find none of this important, and that deep down, they would have us sacrifice Officer Brown's freedom in order to sate their sense of injury. They would have us believe that it is better that Wilson go to prison an innocent man, than the "wrongful death" of the "unarmed", "gentle giant" Michael Brown go unpunished and "the community's" rage go untended.

What good comes of this tragic situation? For one thing, the riots last summer and the response shown by law enforcement raise important questions about the increasing militarization of police departments, something that causes me a good deal of pause. Secondly, and this is something Mr. Brown's family has taken up as a cause, there is the growing sense that police should wear body cameras not whose purpose would be not unlike that of the dashboard cameras with which we have all become familiar. These cameras are for the protection of the public AND police alike, and rather than spending gobs of cash on uparmored HUMVEES, I'd like to see cops on the beat so equipped.

And so Ferguson will burn for a few more days, innocent businesses will be ruined, cable news will be fed, and race victimization merchants will take to the hustings, chief among them our President and Attorney General. And the Party which birthed them (Messers Obama and Holder) will continue to treat African Americans as vassals, beholden to the machine that keeps them in the conditions that create the tensions we see spilling over on our TV sets.

Remember.....It's All About Mike

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Earl Takes the Time Machine for a Spin

After Middle Finger News recent acquisition of a fully functional 2nd hand Time Machine and a successful test run, intrepid MFNS Reporter Earl of Taint decided to take it for a spin, and further into the future then before. The brave and daring Earl decided to see what the future held for our present Fearless Leader, B.H. Obama. 

With the inquisitive boldness that is the hallmark of Earls award winning reporting, he travels to the the year of 2044 and gives us this insight. Earl is home and resting well. 

Friday, November 21, 2014

A Time Machine Leak of B.H.Obama’s Job Exit Interview


Barack Obama 2017
The latest trend in the world of human resources is the so-called exit interview. In theory, it gives a departing employee an opportunity to express their grievances while at the same time providing useful feedback to the employer.

While perusing the flea-market in Canton Texas, a staffer of MFNS spotted a interesting 2nd hand Time Machine, and managed to trade a pristine, played only once Grand Funk Railroad vinyl album and a badly chipped Hope and Change Coffee Mug for it.  After a raucous after- hours office party at MFNS headquarters, the slightly inebriated staffer was convinced to try it out.  The intrepid reporter managed to make it into the future and back successfully, and with a copy of the exit interview with the 44th President of the United States two years hence:

Executive Branch Human Resources Dept.
Barack H. Obama - 44th President - Jan 5, 2017:

What is your main reason for leaving?

"Basically, my failure in both nullifying the 2016 election and ramming through an amendment allowing me a third and fourth term, which I thought was only fair considering all my predecessors were white folks."

Did anything trigger your decision to leave?

"The deadline of January 20, 2017 obviously had a lot to do with it but, getting away from those crazy Republicans and getting Joe Biden out of my hair came in a close second."

What was most satisfying about your job?

"Sleeping late and being the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth......and working in a building big enough to get away from Michelle most of the day." 

What was the least satisfying thing about your job?

"Being made fun of by that bully Alex Putin. 

Did your job duties turn out to be as you expected?

"A big “n o” on that one. I thought I’d be entertaining celebrities and eating good and setting a legislative agenda to help guide America's future. I didn't expect that I'd spend half my time meeting with foreign leaders and their fat ass wives I never heard of and couldn't understand a word they were saying.

Did you receive adequate training to do your job?

"Well, I never took lessons, but I did play with some of the best golfers in the world" 

Did you receive sufficient feedback about your performance?

You kiddin'? Ever listen to talk radio?

Were you able to fulfill your career goals?

"Not really. I always wanted to be a point guard for the Knicks."

What would you change to make your workplace better?

"Close down the House of Representatives and the Supreme Court. Seriously, though, how about shutting down the House and the Supreme Court?"

Did any policies or procedures make your job more difficult?

"Yes, the Constitution often got in the way of what I wanted to accomplish. Also, I wasn't always a big fan of the judicial system."

Would you consider working again for this employer?

"Well, obviously I can’t be President anymore, but I might try and get on at the DMV or something.  But after the Ferguson riots, my Health-care reforms being overturned, the Mexicans turning on me and my party....not to mention that little thing with the male intern, I don't think that's going to happen."

Did anyone discriminate against you, harass you or cause hostile working conditions?

"Two words....McConnell and Boehner ."

Based on your experience, what do you think it takes to succeed in your position?

"Probably a “coup d’etat.” Am I still allowed to say “coup d’etat”?

 What did you like most about your job?

"The private and untraceable Internet connection on Air Force One. Man. you could stream any kind of videos you could want......if you get my drift?"

What did you like least about your job?

"Dealing with  that frickin' Netanyahu.... and Putin's damn gay comments on my Facebook page.....and Pelois farting in Leadership meetings all the time....and Harry Reid's nose hairs, and Biden babbling about the squirrels outside on the lawn..."

Mr. President...

.....and Michelle bitchin' about me sneaking a smoke on the terrace... and Boehner drinking up all the oval office booze....and Valerie Jarrett kicking me under the table in cabinet meets....and Barney Frank's naked pictures in his Christmas cards....and "

Mr. President!

 Before leaving, did you consider a transfer?

"Yes, many times I considered transferring Joe Biden."

Do you have any tips or advice to help your replacement?

"Yes! Replace the mattress in the White House residence. Seriously, replace it!  If that thing could talk!

Other than that, I think President-Elect Ted Cruz needs no advise from me."

A Few of the Rave Reviews From Last Night...

Oval Office Outlaw

Obama's Agenda and the Democrat Party Long-Term Health

"President Obama's biggest problem over the next two years may not be coming from recalcitrant Republicans, but from members of his own party blanching at his activist agenda over the final years of his presidency. While the midterm election results suggested widespread dissatisfaction with the president's policies, Obama nonetheless is planning to press forward on several polarizing decisions in his final two years. It could help advance his legacy, but come at the expense of the Democratic Party's long-term health.
 "Three of the administration's biggest agenda items -- threatening a veto of bipartisan legislation authorizing construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, reaching a nuclear deal with Iran, and issuing an executive order legalizing millions of illegal immigrants -- divide Democrats, and unite Republicans. If the president moves forward with all of them, it would aggravate fissures in an increasingly-divided Democratic Party. 
And it would put Hillary Clinton, his party's expected 2016 standard-bearer, in an uncomfortable position even before she announces her candidacy. She's already avoided taking stances, if not outright rejecting the direction Obama is heading during his final two years in office." — Josh Kraushaar, National Journal

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

About to Commit An Act of Constitutional Infamy

by Peter Wehner 
"Mr. Obama is now acting like, in his words, an “emperor.” His hypocrisy is, even by his standards, staggering.  But hypocrisy is not unusual in politicians and presidents; firing a missile aimed at our constitutional form of government is. And that is what Mr. Obama is about to do.
As the liberal law professor Jonathan Turley put it last night, this is a “particularly dangerous moment” for the president to defy the will of Congress yet again, just 15 days after an election in which the American people registered their emphatic (anti-Obama) judgment. “What the president is suggesting is tearing at the very fabric of the Constitution,” according to Professor Turley. “We have a separation of powers that gives us balance. And that doesn’t protect the branches — it’s not there to protect the executive branch or legislative branch — it’s to protect liberty. It’s to prevent any branch from assuming so much control that they become a threat to liberty.”
What is about to happen may be the low point in a presidency filled with them. Mr. Obama is acting in a way that he himself knows–that he himself has said–is unconstitutional and indefensible. No matter. In an act of unmatched narcissism and selfishness, the president will create–he is thirsting to create–a constitutional crisis that is utterly unnecessary and will further polarize our political culture.
Mr. Obama is about to commit an act of constitutional infamy. This is a stain that will stay with him."

Obama Unleashes New Grubergate Damage Control Team

Think-Progress Takes Race Baiting to a Whole New Level

Fracking in California is taking place on the southern, coastal counties of California such as Monterey, Kern, and Ventura.  They’re statistically more likely to have non-white students because most people in these counties are non-white, therefore most children in school are non-white. This means that any school that is close to where fracking is taking places in these counties has a higher chance of being primarily non-white. DUH!

Considering the price of gasoline in California, I can’t imagine why one would want to oppose fracking. Liberals often cite groundwater contamination, while also claiming Republicans are anti-science.  The most hazardous possibility is a surface spill, however those possibilities are always present with conventional drilling as well. 

I was going to say, the only thing that is going to happen to anyone by being “exposed” to hydraulic fracturing is perhaps some of these people may receive a good paying job they so desperately need in the People's Republic of California and this god-awful Obama economy.

Think-Progress loves to play on their audience's ignorance.

Liberal Jonathan Turley Agrees To Serve as Lead Counsel for House of Representatives in Constitutional Challenge

This is a very interesting development.  Jonathan Turley is a leading liberal lawyer and a supporter of some form of national health care, but has also been a strong voice criticizing Obama’s unconstitutional usurpations.  I still think seeking judicial refereeing of a political fight between the other two branches is a weak move, but I’ll be nonetheless interested to hear his arguments.

Originally posted on JONATHAN TURLEY

"As many on this blog are aware, I have previously testified, written, and litigated in opposition to the rise of executive power and the countervailing decline in congressional power in our tripartite system.  I have also spent years encouraging Congress, under both Democratic and Republican presidents, to more actively defend its authority, including seeking judicial review in separation of powers conflicts. For that reason, it may come as little surprise this morning that I have agreed to represent the United States House of Representatives in its challenge of unilateral, unconstitutional actions taken by the Obama Administration with respect to implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)."  

"It is an honor to represent the institution in this historic lawsuit and to work with the talented staff of the House General Counsel’s Office.  As in the past, this posting is meant to be transparent about my representation as well as my need to be circumspect about my comments in the future on related stories."

"I have previously testified that I believe that judicial review is needed to rebalance the powers of the branches in our system after years of erosion of legislative authority.  Clearly, some take the view of a fait accompli in this fundamental change in our constitutional system.  This resignation over the dominance of the Executive Branch is the subject of much of my recent academic writings, including two forthcoming works.  For that reason, to quote the movie Jerry Maguire, the House “had me at hello” in seeking a ruling to reinforce the line of authority between the branches."


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...