What’s wrong with this picture?


, ,

Why can’t we all just throw down and get along?

Well, the primary culprit is our lack of responsibility in communicating, otherwise called a lack of news judgment. It is rarely exercised in the social media. More and more, news judgment is taking a back seat — nah, it’s back on the boat trailer behind the car — to sensationalism.

These days, man regularly bites dog just for the frivolous fun of it. Plus, we have knocked down the wall between blatant opinion versus truthful, accurate and impartial news reporting.

Used to be that editors in newsrooms and television studios would exercise their news judgment in deciding between what was newsworthy, and what got tossed in the trash unreported.

These days, we have websites, tweets, texts, e-mails, 24/7 “news and information” channels and any means necessary to communicate whatever might pass through our noggins. Communicators now seek any avenue to make end runs around responsible reporting online, on paper and on the televised nightly news.

Here, during a single news cycle, are some headlines over examples from a couple of  “news” websites offering reports amounting to pap and pandering that would have been better left on the cutting-room floor:

Eminem fuels Nicki Minaj dating rumors

Maureen Dowd: Obama is just too good for us

Duterte stirs controversy by kissing woman on the lips

Woman says she killed husband because he beat the cat

Another fake veterinarian turns himself in after deadly neutering

Pelosi: Gay marriage moves us ‘closer to fulfilling the full promise of our creed … all are created equal’

Gimme a break already.


‘Narrow’ ruling? How so?


, , ,

Once again, nearly a week after the fact, we continue to read that the U.S. Supreme Court “narrowly” ruled in favor of Colorado baker Jack Phillips, who voiced his religious objections in 2012 and refused to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

The high court’s ruling last Monday was a hefty 7-2 decision in favor of the Lakewood dough-puncher.

How can such a lopsided vote be described as “narrow”? Why are we continually bombarded with the judgmental adverb “narrowly” (which is defined as “by only a small margin”)?

What’s narrow in some of the press headlines and summaries of this decision are the minds of the liberal reporters who write about it and their like-minded editors who don’t know enough to enforce accuracy and impartiality.

One more observation: It was Jack Phillips’ right under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to reject the request of the two cupcakes who wanted to get married. Phillips could not comport with the message the cake represented, just as he refuses to make cakes for Halloween or those that would reflect anti-American themes. 

Moreover, after being refused, the two plaintiffs in the case — Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig — were free to approach other bakers to fulfill their wildest dreams.

If we’re going to say, “Hey! It’s a free country,” then it’s got to be free on both sides of the counter, don’t you think?

More power to you, Mr. Phillips!

Wither Trump impeachment? Not happening


, ,

U.S. Rep. Al Green, a Texas Democrat, recently threatened President Donald Trump with impeachment proceedings if the Democrats win back a majority in the U.S. House come November.

His vitriol – and that of about 60 other far-left Democrats and certain RINOs – is pretty lamely spelled out in a list created by someone identified only as “Tom” on a web site called “News Lists.”

If the mostly emotional accusations – 33 of them, and some of them are redundant and not worth revisiting – are the basis for any future House proceedings, it’ll be a cold day in hell if a Trump impeachment ever materializes.

Specifically, the charges against the president (and why they are weak or totally ineffectual) are:

— “Disrespecting and disparaging women” — Green’s words. (That charge is painted with too broad a brushstroke. Rep. Green will have an insurmountable challenge is trying to prove it. That Green would even level such a charge is ironic, given that in 2008, former staff member Lucinda Daniels sued Green for sexual assault. Green answered by filing a workplace-discrimination counter-suit, accusing Daniels of threatening to sue him if he did not pay her. Both lawsuits eventually were withdrawn. But because both actions are a matter of record, does that paint Green as being any more “disrespecting and disparaging of women” than do the unproven allegations against Trump?)

— Banning transgenders from serving in the U.S. armed forces. (Trump took that action last July, citing “tremendous medical costs and disruption in the ranks that transgenders in uniform would entail.” That’s something Green would never understand because he never served in the U.S. armed forces. It’s a moot point now, anyway, because Trump’s decision was rescinded in December in the face of multiple lawsuits.)

— For saying National Football League athletes should stand for the National Anthem when it is played before football games. (That’s an impeachable utterance, Mr. Green? Is the president of the United States not entitled to his First Amendment right to free speech? If you, sir, were only half as patriotic as the NFL players who stand up for the anthem without being ordered or prompted, you might gain a whole lot of new respect.)

— For being “friends” with Russian president/dictator Vladimir Putin – a charge leveled by the misguided U.S Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif. (Anybody who believes this accusation doesn’t understand the difference between diplomacy and friendship. Those people should pack their bags and go home at the earliest opportunity.)

— For being “a clear and present danger to America.”  (We look forward with great anticipation to the details against Trump on that score, after Trump stared down North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, after Trump ordered a surgical strike in April against Syria to take out targets that allowed Syrian despot Bashar al-Assad to launch deadly chemical attacks on his own people, and after Trump fulfilled a campaign promise to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to its rightful place in Jerusalem.)

— For putting the health and safety of Americans at risk. (This comes from Tom Steyer, a billionaire hedge-fund manager from California who has been accused of employing felons to gather signatures on a petition drive in neighboring Arizona. Again, where’s the proof behind the accusation?)

— For being an “inciter” of “hatred.”  (Such an accusation perhaps should be reserved for the likes of former Alabama governor George Wallace, or Nazi monster Adolf Hitler. But to hold Trump accountable for the public hatred displayed by mobs of people described by Hillary Clinton as “deplorables” led by self-serving race-baiters who disagree with the president – well, that’s a bit over the top, wouldn’t you say?)

— Ditto for the accusations of inciting “bigotry,” for promoting “xenophobia, and for being an “inciter” of “ethnocentrism” – charges all leveled by Green. (Prove it, sir.)

— For “undermining the federal judiciary,” a charge leveled by U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, another billionaire hedge-fund manager and a Tennessee Democrat when he filed articles of impeachment last November. (His effort wound up in the trash. But not before Cohen claimed the president obstructed justice by firing former FBI director James Comey, that Trump violated the foreign emoluments clause by taking compensation from foreign powers, that Trump violated the domestic emoluments clause by profiting off of the Trump brand during his presidency, and that the president undermined the freedom of the press with his persistent badgering of the news media. Cohen further claimed that Trump undermined the federal judiciary when he pardoned former Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio’s criminal-contempt conviction. Arpaio, a tireless crusader against illegal immigrants on the nation’s southern border, was found guilty of defying a judge’s 2011 court order to refrain from racially profiling Latinos during patrols, then turning them over to federal immigration authorities. None of the accusations holds water.)

Just as ridiculous are the arguments that Trump:

— Engaged in lewd conversation captured on an “Access Hollywood” tape about women with TV host Billy Bush in 2005. (It happened before Trump was elected. It reflected poor judgment, but it was not felonious. And let’s face it – boys will be boys, on tape, or not.)

— Mocked a disabled journalist. (Again, it reflected poor taste, but is that an impeachable offense?)

— Threatened the media. (Well, who hasn’t?)

— Took money from foreign governments. (Asked, and answered.)

— Is guilty of dereliction of duty. (When? Where? What are the details, Ted Lieu? If you don’t recognize the name, Lieu is a congressman from Los Angeles.)

— Is incompetent. (Really? His critics could honestly think that after Trump championed a major tax cut for U.S. workers?)

— Has brought dishonor upon the United States. (When? Oh … like when Trump pulled us out of the bogus, planet-wide “climate change” accord? Fugedaboudit.)

— Is “psychologically deranged.” (Accuser Richard Painter, a Republican turned Democrat from Minnesota and a former White House ethics lawyer during the George W. Bush administration, might want to take a long look in a mirror before he melts down again over Trump.)

— For not believing in the U.S. Constitution. (Now, that’s just horse hockey.)

— For being racist, sexist and Islamaphobic.  (That, too, amounts to road apples.)

— For being “unfit” for public office. (Wouldn’t it be fun to watch accuser Tom Steyer go toe-to-toe against The Donald on this allegation?)

— For saying some nations are “shitholes.” (Again, First Amendment. And by the way, some are. Why else would we be flooded with refugees seeking asylum from those countries?)

— For his aides talking to Russians. (My oh my. Shame on them. And shame on you, Cory Booker, for being so gol-darned shallow.)

— For urging Attorney General Jeff Sessions to investigate Hillary. (On the flip side, many folks believe Sessions is dragging his feet on this. All in due time, folks; good things never come easy.)

— For not being respectful. (Again, this comes – believe it or else — from Maxine Waters. Looks like it’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Wait. Was that a racist comment? It wasn’t intended to be, but I’m sure somebody will pounce on it.)

— For being “the most dangerous president in American history.” (Make your case, Tom Perez. And pardon those of us who might chuckle. Given your toxic leadership, no wonder the Democratic party has run amok.)

— For name-calling. (Aw, jeepers, Maxine. Didn’t your momma teach you that sticks and stones might break your bones, but names will never hurt you? Grow up, for pity’s sake.)

— For allowing Sessions to fire acting FBI director Andrew McCabe the day before McCabe was eligible to retire. (Attorney Danny Cevallos, who floated the criticism, described that action as obstructing justice on Trump’s part. Never mind that the Justice Department’s inspector general identified wrongdoing on McCabe’s part during the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s e-mails.)

— For being “unworthy” and “despicable.” (We guess it takes one to know one, eh, Maxine?)

Yet another sideshow on gun controls


, ,

The survey question on the political-news web site asks: “Should Nancy Pelosi be removed from office — yes, or no?”

It’s a bogus question. Why? Because a member of the House of Representatives can only be impeached — or removed from office — if convicted of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Unfortunately, being lame-brained is neither a high crime nor a misdemeanor. 

To remove Pelosi would take the successful creation of a House resolution, which then would have to survive a committee vote just to be scheduled for a full vote of the House. If the resolution reached the House floor, the measure would have to garner a two-thirds “yes” majority to impeach the individual targeted. Those are the rules of the House.

Moreover, the only other way to remove Pelosi from the House would be by recall — a formal vote by those she represents. The voters of California’s 12th Congressional District sent her to Washington. Why on Earth would they vote to bring her back home?

Besides, why would Republicans want to sideline or even expel Pelosi? She’s the most vocal mouthpiece and the best reason out there for voters to choose GOP candidates this fall and in 2020.

Lest you have forgotten, Nancy Pelosi, 78, is a California Democrat who represents most of San Francisco. She currently serves as House minority leader and has an estimated net worth of nearly $30 million.

These days, Pelosi continues to use her position to state the obvious, then generate her share of gratuitous and all-but-meaningless political blah-blah. Her latest come Friday in the wake of a mass shooting at a high school in Santa Fe, N.M., that claimed the lives of 10 people. Of the Santa Fe massacre, Pelosi stated, in part:

“This morning, our nation was heartbroken by the horrific murder of innocent children and a teacher at Santa Fe High School. All Americans grieve for those whose lives were stolen by this tragedy … . Children should never have to fear for their lives in a school classroom. Millions of young people are raising their voices and bravely, eloquently insisting on action to end the gun violence epidemic,” stated Pelosi, who publicly favors more stringent gun controls on top of the already-stringent gun laws on the books.

How much longer before ol’ Nancy and her tunnel vision ride into the sunset?

Big Brother indeed is watching


, , ,

Privacy is all but dead.

That stark reminder pops into your head when you fire up your computer, and your Google search engine magically appears. You look at the little illustration above the search window, where some famous character in history – had he or she lived – would have turned 284 years old on this date.

But this day, instead of yesterday’s under-the-radar celebrity being featured, there’s a goofy looking gaggle of fake-flame candles lined up to spell “GOOGLE.” Then you slide your cursor over the googly-eyed candles, and a pop-up message appears, stating: “Happy Birthday, (Whatever-Your-First-Name-Is).”

This is the ultimate affront personifying socially invasive surgery. While a birthday salutation might be considered friendly and a good-hearted basis for happy thoughts, it also might be considered intrusive, rude, thoughtless, unsolicited, displeasing and disturbing – especially coming from an anonymous stranger.

Yes, Big Brother is watching. He has invaded your space. He knows how to get into your “safe spot.” He has big eyes and an even bigger appetite. However, Big Brother is not who you think he is. He is not the federal government. He is Big Business, cloaked in Greed and Crony Capitalism.

Who’s to blame?

We are, because too many among us constantly seek the easy way out. Too many of us want to trust everyone. Too many of us would rather sit in a corner and play video games or exchange mindless messages with our BFFs instead of teaching our kids history or teaching them how to tell time on a clock with three hands and 12 numbers. Too many of us think nothing of protecting our identities and our personal information – believing that surely there are no bad apples in our little worlds.

We are, because we open ourselves up to the online spyware of Apple, Google, YouTube, LinkedIn, Tumbir, Xing, MyHeritage, MyLife, Classmates.com, NetLog and the like.

We are, because we fall victim to novelty trends that might tell us more than we want to know about ourselves. We jump right in at the offer of some big-name provider who promises that if you spit into a sealable sleeve and send it in for analysis, in return you will get a map of how your DNA is related to anybody and everybody going all the way back to Adam and Eve. Never mind that once you have shared your DNA with the provider, it goes into a data bank that can be hacked for any reason by anybody diabolical enough to do it and use it to slam you, damn you, jam you or spam you.

Now, how’s that for a “happy birthday” wish?

Where have all the wallflowers gone?


, , , , , ,

What’s it take to wake the sleeping giant? — Iran lied about its nuclear program, eh? What else is new? Many observers in the West have expressed strong suspicions for many months about Iran’s dogged and hidden pursuit of making us glow in the dark.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is offering convincing evidence – half a ton of documents Israel has purloined from the Iranians and numerous recorded CDs – to back up his assertion that Iran cheated and continues to do so on the 2015 Iran nuclear nonproliferation deal.

What more does President Donald Trump need by the deadline two weeks from now to trash the deal that his predecessor blindly signed?

It’s way too early to crank up the Nobel chatter — South Korean President Moon Jae-in reportedly has suggested that President Trump should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for Trump’s efforts to unify Korea.

Moon’s comment came after what Korea-watchers are calling a historic summit on Friday that brought the South Korean chief executive together with North Korea’s madman dictator Kim Jong Un. They supposedly agreed to the complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

But before we get all warm and fuzzy inside, perhaps we ought to wait for the other shoe to drop – and odds are that it will hit the floor somewhere north of the DMZ. After all, this is international politics at its best (or worst). Too bad we can’t get Great Britain’s appeaser-in-chief, Neville Chamberlain, to weigh in on this “historic summit” between the two Koreas.

In case you forgot (or never learned it in the first place): Chamberlain was the British prime minister who signed the so-called Munich Agreement in 1938, giving up the region of Czechoslovakia to Adolf Hitler so the latter would stop his Nazi aggression into Europe. Well, that didn’t happen.

Chamberlain died a year before Pearl Harbor, so he never lived to see the folly of the Munich accord. The United States had to jump into World War II to deliver TKO punches to both Hitler and to Emperor Hirohito of Japan so the black cloud of planet-wide totalitarianism could evaporate.

Forecast: Stormy, with little chance of feathernesting – Stormy Daniels has filed yet another lawsuit against President Donald Trump, this time alleging defamation of character over for a tweet in which the sometimes brazen president stated that a forensic sketch of a man who allegedly threatened Daniels in 2011 was “a total con job.”

According to NBC and other news outlets, Daniels (aka Stephani Clifford) claims she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and was warned by an unidentified man to keep quiet about it five years later, after she granted an interview to a gossip magazine. This latest lawsuit piles on the original one aimed at dissolving a confidentiality agreement Daniels signed days before the 2016 election, in exchange for $130,000.

Sorry, ol’ girl. You latest lawsuit has no more merit than the original action. Why? Because you’re a public figure. You cast yourself into the national spotlight, opening yourself up to whatever slings and arrows might come your way – from any direction.

Bad news, and more bad news – Bloomberg is reporting that the U.S. Treasury Department borrowed $488 billion from January through March — a record high for the quarter. Our central government just can’t seem to get a handle on what it takes to balance a budget.

Meanwhile, The Associated Press is reporting that crude-oil prices are about to top $70 a barrel — the highest level in more than three years. That means drivers can expect to continue paying even more at the nation’s filling stations. The U.S. daily national average for regular gasoline stands at $2.81 per gallon — up from about $2.39 a gallon a year ago, according to the Oil Price Information Service. In various spots across the land, 13 percent of gasoline stations are charging $3 per gallon or more, according to the American Automobile Association. So, forget riding any wave of prosperity from the federal income-tax cut. What Trump giveth, the greedy private sector mired in crony capitalism taketh away. (We won’t even touch on what’s happening to food prices here.)

Finally, if the fried food don’t getcha, the weedkiller will. Internal documents obtained by the Manchester Guardian show the federal Food and Drug Administration has found it difficult to identify any food on U.S tables or in restaurants that does not carry traces of glyphosate, which is used in pesticides and weedkillers. Only broccoli tested glyphosate-free. Back in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Guess it’s time to go on a broccoli-and-water diet.

How NOT to get laughs from an audience — By now, you’ve likely heard all about gutter celebrity Michelle Wolf and how she tore up last weekend’s White House Correspondents Dinner with her offensive, deplorable and demeaning one-liners.

The so-called comedian would be better characterized as a “lamebrained doodoo-mouth.” Who needs her? Or her wretched and raunchy rhetoric?

Goes double for so-called funny folks Kathy Griffin, Jimmy Kimmel, Jane Lynch, Seth Meyers, Rosie O’Donnell, David Alan Grier and others who worship at the trough of demeaning, hurtful un-comedy.

Swamp still alive and thriving


, , ,

Two news reports reflect the fact that not much of significance has changed in Washington since the nation elected an “outsider” – Donald J. Trump – as president. Trump said he would wade in wearing hip boots and “drain the swamp” of an overbearing and deficit-poor bureaucracy.

Granted, one man can’t do it all, especially in a republic where a constitutional balance of power is built into the bedrock of federal governance and when any significant activity on Capitol Hill moves at the speed of evolution. But to continue learning that little has changed – and in some cases grown even worse — in the status quo since November 2016 is disheartening enough to foment despair in believing that ANYthing broken at the federal level will ever be fixed.

The federal Department of Health and Human Services just reported that improper Medicaid payouts during fiscal 2017 skyrocketed by more than $7.5 trillion over the previous two fiscal years, reflecting a 26 percent increase. Unfortunately, too many political sideshows have deflected the attention of our elected representatives away from this critical example of fraud and waste that continue to fly under the radar.

Instead of focusing on the whimpering of a flamboyant and fired FBI director, the Russian concussion surrounding an investigation that has come up empty-handed, and useless conjecture on whether the U.S. House is going to flip come the fall elections, where is the justice being pursued into the crookedness of the Medicaid program?

And then, there is the monthly U.S. Treasury report stating that the federal government collected a record $736.2 trillion in individual income taxes through the first six months of fiscal 2018 (Oct. 1, 2017 through the end of March). That’s nearly $24.5 trillion more than the $711.8 trillion collected in the first six months of fiscal 2017. That’s good, right?

Wait … not so fast. Treasury officials also reported that the federal government once again spent more than it took in — running a deficit of $599.7 trillion for the first six months of this fiscal year. That embarrassingly reflects the fact that the feds outspent what was in their wallet by more than $60.4 trillion above and beyond the deficit they ran up during the same period in the previous fiscal year.

Can ANYbody in Washington balance a budget? If not, why not? Those are the hard questions that need to be asked but seemingly never are. Besides, the answers we would settle for come from the mouths of politicians who speak with forked tongues, who doublespeak their excuses for being compliant spendthrifts. 

These two financial reports paint a bigger-than-life wall mural of irresponsibility. It’s just way too easy to spend somebody else’s money, eh? And who’s suffering for it? We are – the same taxpayers who will never catch up with the bureaucrats’ excessive squandering of the nation’s wealth, no matter how we vote.


Don’t fall for everything you hear on the Hill


, , , , ,

Well, the burned-out babe from Baltimore who wound up representing the San Francisco Bay area in the U.S. House has done it again.

First, House speaker-wannabe Nancy Pelosi — without smiling as she defended California’s so-called sanctuary status – said that illegal immigrants make America more American. How can that be? They’re not U.S. citizens. They’re from another part of the North American continent, which might make them Americans. But for the most part, they remain a blight on the rest of us who are citizens of the USA.

Then Pelosi — the most liberal of Democrats – follows that up by again trying to vilify rich people, saying that under the Trump/GOP tax overhaul, the USA’s wealthiest 1 percent “continue to hoard the benefits of the U.S. economy.” (Remember that her net worth these days by some estimates is somewhere in the neighborhood of $120 million. So, is she condemning herself?)

But what’s really the bottom line here? Laura Sanders of The Wall Street Journal just reported that this year, those earning top incomes will pay a higher share of income taxes. Sanders’ source is the Tax Policy Center, which stated that the top 20 percent of U.S. taxpayers – that is, households bringing home $150,000 or more in annual income — will pony up 87 percent of Washington’s income-tax revenue. That’s up from 84 percent the previous year.

Moreover, Tax Policy Center income-tax specialist Roberton Williams told the WSJ that based on his analysis, the share of taxes paid by the top 5 percent will rise, even though taxpayers in that grouping were the largest beneficiaries of the overhaul’s tax cut, both in dollars and percentages.

Then, according to CNSNews.com, Pelsoi says the federal jobs summary for March was “disappointing.” The Labor Department reported that 103,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy in March — U.S. factories alone added 22,000 jobs. How the heck can that be disappointing?

Furthermore, March reflected the 90th consecutive month of U.S. job growth, by far the longest streak on record. The unemployment rate of 4.1 percent remains at its lowest level since 2000. How can that be disappointing in the face of one of the harshest winters the nation has experienced in years?

And finally, it’s pretty shortsighted to be condemning the rival political party for pulling the rug out from under the nation’s blue-collar workers based on a single month’s statistics. That’s like saying Clemson (12-2 record last year) has a lousy football team because the Tigers lost the national championship to the Alabama Crimson Tide. It’s a ludicrous statement. Also, even the New York Times noted that economists in general caution against reading too much into the month-to-month data on wages — figures that are volatile and prone to distortions.

“Powerful special interests are reaping massive windfalls from the GOP tax scam,” Pelosi said, “while workers are denied the raises and good-paying jobs they deserve.”

Really, Mrs. Pelosi? What about the list of more than 160 companies that in January almost immediately after the tax plan was launched offered new bonuses, substantial wage increases, and bigger 401K contributions for employees. The list was compiled by John Kartch of Americans for Tax Reform, a widely respected tax watchdog.

That list, as reported by FOX News online, included companies as big as Bank of America, which paid a $1,000 bonus each to 70 percent of its 209,000 U.S. employees, as well as AAON heating and cooling in Tulsa, Oklahoma, which paid a $1,000 bonus to each of its 2,000 employees, not to mention the Anfinson Farm Store, a family business in Cushing, Iowa (population 223), which awarded $1,000 bonuses and raised wages 5 percent for all full-time employees as a result of the GOP tax reform initiative.

“Democrats are fighting to give the American people a better deal, with better jobs, better wages and a better future,” Mrs. Pelosi told CNSNews.com. “We are committed to creating millions of new good-paying jobs and raising wages, lowering the soaring cost of living for families and giving every American the tools to succeed in the 21st century economy.”

That’s political-speak if ever there was such jabberwocky.

“Democrats will never stop fighting for the hard-working middle class families who are the backbone of our nation,” she said.

Prove it, Mrs. Pelosi. Talk is cheap. And from where many of us sit, you’re all talk and no walk — except when you’re speed-walking the aisles of Congress, trying to avoid tough questions from impartial reporters.

Another stupid flag controversy


, , ,

Wayne Marchant is a patriot, and he is not afraid to show it.

But his Homeowners Association in Franklin, Ohio has told Marchant that he no longer can fly the American flag in his front yard, after the same group told him he could do so nine years ago.

What changed? The CNS News story doesn’t say. But dollars to doughnuts, the people at the top of the association’s pyramid changed to reflect the liberal side of things. And that likely led to a decision to enforce the cockamaymee association’s politically correct “community standards,” saying Marchant’s front-yard pole and flag must be removed.

Marchant served eight years in the U.S. armed forces – four on active duty, and four more as an Air Force reservist. He has earned the right to fly Old Glory outside his house.

“As a veteran, I wouldn’t think to erect a flagpole and fly the American flag would be something that I would have to get permission to do,” Marchant told WLWT-TV in Cincinnati.

Indeed. It’s his First Amendment right to fly the flag as he sees fit.

A spokesman for the Omni Community Association, parent of the homeowners association established in Franklin’s Renaissance Subdivision, said its board will revisit the association’s Deed Restrictions and/or Rules, review Marchant’s complaint and issue a final decision.

The CNS News report did not spell out when the board’s decision might be forthcoming. But whatever the board decides, its voting members would be wise to rule in Marchant’s favor, lest the board face the chaotic “other shoe” that surely will drop.

When silliness goes a little too far


, , ,

Some folks in the world of retail are letting their childishness and their impetuous emotions get in the way of their business common sense.

A dozen companies reportedly have canceled their advertising that airs during conservative FOX News commentator Laura Ingraham’s program, “Ingraham Angle.” (Ingraham is popularly regarded as the answer to MSNBC’s shallow and cynically liberal Rachel Maddow.)

Here’s what happened.

Student David Hogg, 17, survived the Valentine’s Day massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, and skyrocketed into the role of a national spokesman for tougher gun laws.

Hogg subsequently applied for entry at four colleges as soon as he graduates from high school in May. All four colleges – UCLA, the University of California San Diego, UC/Santa Barbara and UC/Irvine — rejected his applications.  However, Hogg has been accepted at Cal State San Marcos, Cal Polytechnic and Florida Atlantic in Boca Raton.

“At this point,” Hogg told the New York Post, “we’re already changing the world. If colleges want to support us in that, great. If they don’t, it doesn’t matter. We’re still going to change the world.”

Ingraham subsequently tweeted that Hogg essentially was a wimp, whining about being rejected by four colleges.

Hogg retorted that Ingraham essentially is a bully, and he urged any advertisers on Ingraham’s show who supported him to cancel their advertising.

Ingraham apologized.

Hogg rejected the apology as not being enough.

And at least a dozen of the “Ingraham Angle” advertisers reportedly canceled their ads, including Atlantis resorts, Expedia, Hulu, Jenny Craig, Johnson & Johnson, Nestle, Nutrish, Office Depot, Stitch Fix, TripAdvisor, and Wayfair.

Then Ingaham – willingly or not – announced she was taking a week off.

At this point, as the air-headed spokesman for Choice Hotels would say, “Badda-bing, badda-boom.”

That is, enough already! There’s no news here. It’s worthless sniping and less-than-shallow reporting.

Moreover, the retreating advertisers are doing nothing more than saving a few bucks at the expense of cutting off their own noses despite their faces. Why would you not want to hawk your goods and services on one of the most popular shows on TV, regardless of the venue’s politics?

And once the advertisers have pulled their scripts and are identified as forlorn champions of liberal bias, will they accept the political backlash that springboards from the other half of the nation? Is there no fear that conservative consumers will turn to the competition before opening their purses and wallets?

Or, does anybody really know what shopping day it is? Does anybody care?

There’s too much cat doodoo in the sandbox. Would somebody please start filtering this crap out of our consciousness? I’m starting … now.