The Three Most Important Videos You Will Ever Watch

In 1991, Suzanna Gatia Hupp was dining at Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, TX with her parents when a crazed gunman smashed his truck through the front of the restaurant, entered the building and proceeded to EXECUTE 20 patrons.

Suzanna had a permit to carry a firearm, but at that time Texas law prohibited her from carrying it into a restaurant:

In (or about) 2008 a former/retired law enforcement officer (read: cop) advises an entire lecture class why you should NEVER TALK TO THE POLICE:

And the following film is a dramatization of societal/social collapse and survival following an outbreak of Avian Flu, how preparations can help, but also who you share your bounty with can ultimately turn into a nightmare:

Share these videos with everyone you know.

New York City's "Racist" Public School Entrance Qualification Exams

As if there was not already undeniable proof of the untenable nature of the "public" school system in America - the "no child left behind" canard (among others) - we witness the collision, once again, of cultures which place value on VERY DIFFERENT achievements and aspiration.  This, from an article in the New York Times:

On Saturday, more than 15,000 students are expected to file into classrooms to take a grueling 95-question test for admission to New York City’s elite public high schools.

No one will be surprised if Asian students, who make up 14 percent of the city’s public school students, once again win most of the seats, and if black and Hispanic students win few. Last school year, of the 14,415 students enrolled in the eight specialized high schools that require a test for admissions, 8,549 were Asian.

What an articulate and reasonably intelligent person might be able to glean from this article is that Asians spend a substantial amount of time - sacrificing social interaction and other extracurriculars - to improve academically and provide themselves with the kinds of opportunities which only come from applying oneself to academia.

Of course, when any one demographic excels in any activity or outperforms the others on some test, the very first to cry "Foul!" and drag out the race card are the blacks.  Never mind that the Asian child gets up at 4AM to study for two hours before going to work at his parents' shop before school, spends every spare minute poring over practice exams and study materials, comes home, has supper and then studies for four more hours before going to bed - then gets up and does it all over again.

Never mind that the parents - immigrants and entrepreneurs - send their children to private prep courses costing up to $200 per weekend session, sacrificing of themselves for the betterment of their kin.

Blacks find this dedication and commitment "racist".  They claim that the tests are unfairly biased and that because these are "public" schools (similar to the academy schools in Virginia Beach) they deserve to be more fairly represented.  Fair, of course, to any victim class, means more.  Regardless of the reasons, blacks and hispanics lament that they are unable to "afford" the advanced preparatory courses and that New York should provide tutoring to them to compensate:

Because of the disparity, some have begun calling for an end to the policy of using the test as the sole basis of admission to the schools, and last month, civil rights groups filed a complaint with the federal government, contending that the policy discriminated against students, many of whom are black or Hispanic, who cannot afford the score-raising tutoring that other students can.

Reading further along in the article we find that just a few years ago the City began offering a free preparatory course JUST FOR BLACKS AND HISPANICS.

When your priorities are in different places, you find ways to make opportunities for yourself.  Many Asians come from communities and cultures where merely finding enough food to eat was a daily struggle.  Families escaping from the killing fields of Cambodia and Communist regimes of China, North Korea, Laos... these people do not take for granted the freedom to succeed that "American" blacks do.  They do not believe they are "owed" anything.  They go out and earn it.

The argument stems from the Civil Rights movement of the '60s and the landmark Brown -v- Board of Education decision ending the "separate but equal" segregation.  People who had moved to certain communities and determined to live and function socially as they saw fit were forced to integrate and "diversify" to fit an arbitrary and abstract definition of diversity which relied solely on skin color.

And, as with anything in the purview of the "public" schools, there is absolutely no room for individual achievement.  There have been numerous Title IX lawsuits complaining that facilities for boys (baseball) and girls (softball) are not equitable.

These arguments invariably center on the conditions of the fields and the participation/support elicited by the school's faculty and/or administration.  They typically claim that boys' sports teams receive a disproportionate amount of funding and as a result enjoy better playing conditions, greater publicity and visibility.  What they overlook is that the parents/booster clubs for the boys sports inject those sports with enthusiasm and PRIVATE funds.  They (and the team members) spend their weekends and free time tidying and manicuring fields, cleaning and polishing equipment and sacrificing of themselves to make their sport more appealing to play and spectate.

And just like the entrance exam quandary, the "victim" class of individuals (girls teams), rather than take proactive steps to improve their own facilities employing the same ingenuity and commitment, demand that the schools give them more money so that they can be "equal".

It is just another of a nearly unlimited number of fallacious ploys to redistribute funds in the name of fairness, somehow confusing the prospect of equal money with equal results.  Nowhere in the history of the world has this proven true, and it's a fair bet that we will not witness it within our lifetimes or ever.

Insanity.  Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Cash For Clunkers For Idiots

Assume you drive 12,000 miles in a year in an old car that gets 12 mpg.  In an average year you will purchase 1000 gallons of gasoline which at $3.50/gallon equates to $3,500 in fuel costs.  Assuming you are a responsible driver and get your oil changed by the "pros" at Jiffy Lube every 3,000 miles ($29,95) you spend another $120 per year on minimum maintenance.

Assume your "clunker" is valued at $4,000, of which you pay about $50 in personal property tax for the "privilege" of owning a car.

Now, you decide to trade in this "clunker" which you own, free and clear, towards a brand-new, higher-mileage car.  You get Kelly Blue Book top dollar for your trade-in, having kept it in immaculate, showroom condition all these years.  You negotiate a great price on a 2013 Ford Fusion SE - $23,000.  After taxes and tags you owe $24,380, minus your trade PLUS the extra grand you brought with you to sweeten the pot = $19,380 which you agree to finance on-site at a great rate of 2.9%.

Your new car payment is $594.59/mo for 36 months (three years).  Not to worry, though, this new car gets 25 mpg around town and a staggering 37 mpg on the highway.  Well, your commute is mostly highway miles and you never get caught in traffic, so you assume you average about 32 mpg per tank.  Your driving habits don't change all that much the first three years, so you purchase 375 gallons of fuel at $3.50/gallon, totalling $1,312.50 in total fuel costs.  Your new car has a smart oil feature and only requires oil changes every 6000 miles, and they're included at no charge with your new car service program.  LUCKY YOU!

So, let's add it up.  Your old car, over 36 months would have cost you $11,010 to own.  Your shiny new car?  Well it is taxed at almost $415 annually on top of your fuel and payment, $26,587.73 for a net savings... hey, wait a doggone minute!  It costs over $15,000 MORE to own that new car !  And discounting basic maintenance (tires, filters, etc) for most vehicles as even-up, it would take EIGHT YEARS for the new car to begin to put you on the positive side of that equation.

And let's face it, by then you'll be wanting a new car again anyway.  Sucker.

(Please, by all means, verify or refute my thought process.)

Obama -vs- Romney: Misinformation Showdown

In a recent flurry of campaign advertisements by the big-two candidates it has become evident, now more than ever, that both of these moral reprobates has no interest in facts or reasonable dialog regarding the economic state of this country.

Sure, there are other facets, but I am going to concentrate on two (2) disparate television ads which I had the unpleasant experience of viewing back-to-back last night.

First, let's explore Mitt Romney's patently ridiculous attack on what he refers to as the "Obama Plan".  According to the Romney ad, Obama's defense cuts will strip Virginia of 130,000 jobs.  He doesn't mention that under Obama, military expenditures have continued right on from George Bush's administration.  What he goes on to claim is, at least in Virginia, that his administration will "create" 360,000 new jobs.

It does not require a PhD to conclude from this rhetoric that those jobs will be defense-sector jobs, jobs which do not produce wealth but rather subsidize militarism and are paid for by... tax dollars.  These jobs, in essence, create welfare queens.  Just like the public works projects of the New Deal, these jobs do not generate services or products for the private market.  They generate new layers of government bureaucracy and further financial burden (including future liabilities) to a litany of critically unfunded federal programs.

Now, to be perfectly fair and bipartisan, let's take a look at Messr Obama's ad.

Obama claims that Mitt Romney is out of touch with the middle class. This is a middle class who Obama TWICE approved TARP bailout funds to private mega-banks while hundreds of thousands of private citizens were foreclosed on.  With official unemployment stagnant near 8.3% (and real unemployment anywhere between 13 and 21%, depending on which source you quote on any given day; I prefer the BLS) this administration's M.O. has been to continuously blame George Bush and the DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED House of Representatives for each and every failure of the past 45 months.  All Obama needs is one more term and he can put it all right.

The ad claims that Mitt Rommey's tax plan would add an average of $2,000 in taxes to every middle-class household's annual liabilities.  In the next breath the ad states that multi-millionaires would see up to $250,000 in tax breaks.

Obama claims Romney doesn't understand the middle class because of his relationship with Bain Capital, a resource and venture capital firms which buys and sells companies for profit.  Obama, who has never held a real job and who, in just this past year, sent his own wife and children on numerous multi-million dollar vacations/excursions - whose very same wife wagged her finger at the American people condescendingly and said "The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."

Her vitriol and latent disconnect from the people of this country can only find its equal in the likes of a quote oft-times attributed (though likely exaggerated) to Marie Antoinette who said "Let them eat cake", an epithet of her royalty overshadowing good sense and common decency in a time when millions were scraping just to get by, yet the glorious leaders spared no expense for their own comfort.

At least they had an excuse - they were French.  And we all know what happened to them: they were beheaded and the monarchy overthrown in one of the most bloody and brutal revolutions/coups in all of modern(ish) history.

What I want the reader to take away from this is that NEITHER of these disgusting people deserves to be president of the country envisioned by the founding fathers.  The good news is that country was destroyed long ago...

Evolutionary "Theory"

Some people say that "evolution" has been proven by science.  I am not sure what that means, exactly.  The "theory" of evolution states that the earth formed from a molten ball of gases and that through photo- and chemical synthesis of INORGANIC components over millions (billions?) of years eventually developed into bits of organic material which in turn transmogrified into single-celled organisms, and then combined to create more and more complex lifeforms - millions of different ones which all developed and evolved independently - through a series of upward-trending mutations until eventually they produced an organism capable of reason and rational thought.

Never in any controlled experiment conducted under laboratory conditions has an upward-trending mutation been observed.

"They" say that the fossil record proves evolution.  Comparing independent samples of similar organisms which may or may not have lived simultaneously or concurrently with one another is their source of validation.

And even if this theory was true, is it to say that there wasn't a great force working as a catalyst?  Of course not.  In order for ANY evolutionary theory to be true one would still have to discount the LAW of conservation of mass.

Let us not also forget that several MILLION years ago, nearly all life was supposedly wiped off of the earth by a cataclysm that has heretofore never been repeated.  99% of all living things save a few mammalian ground-dwellers and relatives of the Palmetto Bug were completely eradicated.  Respectfully, evolution was given a clean slate about 65 million years ago.  If the earth is considered to be 4.5 billion years old, that would mean that the evolutionary chain which produced ONLY reptiles in the first 4,435,000,000 years magically ACCELERATED that process to produce humans from what amount to rats and lemurs in one tenth of the time, and on a planet which would spend the next ten million years or so recuperating itself from asteroidal devastation.

I mean, that is really miraculous if you stop to think about it.  It almost defies reason.

Oh, wait.  It does defy reason.  It absolutely and completely defies reason and continues to baffle scientists who have been unable to discover the "missing" link between our species and the one they desperately need to be our predecessor for even a fraction of their theory to begin to be viable.

Evolutionary theory is just that: theory.

Atheism as Religion

Ah, the belief that there was nothing and then nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything.

Until and unless the existence of the much ballyhooed "Higgs Boson" (also known as the "God") particle is confirmed and qualified as being a truly self-regenerative and non-depletive source of sub-sub-sub atomic energy, it should be a foregone conclusion to anyone with an elementary understanding of the most fundamental concepts of physics and chemistry this:

The law of conservation of mass ("laws" in the science world are accepted as immutable truths, absolutes) is that matter (energy) can neither be created nor destroyed.  To accept this truth is an invitation to paradox, the greatest known catch-22:

If matter cannot be created or destroyed, then where did matter come from?

Scientists herald the "discovery" (rather, the act of identifying) of the higgs-boson to be tantamount to discovering the origins of the universe.  Atheists laud it as proof that God, the God of Abraham and the Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, does not exist, does not need to exist and that human frailty is the result of a complex array of miracle-like coincidences which occurred over hundreds of billions of years.  Miracle-like, because calling it a "miracle" would imply the existence of a higher power and that violates the atheist's sensibilities.

As such, atheists are much like a religious cult and science is their deity.  Whenever a Christian proclaims his heart to the Lord or rails against immorality or unChristian behaviours, the atheist invariably takes one of two paths - they either trudge right to the book of Leviticus to show that while we believe homosexuality is immoral, so is eating shellfish; or they defer to science as proof that God does not exist, Jesus was not crucified, dead and buried and then rose once more.

The first group of atheists hates Christianity.  They hate that our morality directs us to eschew behaviours which God has instructed us to avoid.  We are not always successful, but we try, knowing that our Salvation comes not from being perfect, but for asking forgiveness of our imperfections.  Atheists LOVE to cite Leviticus against Christianity, because if homosexuality is wrong then having intercourse with a woman who is menstruating is also wrong.  The argument falls flat because I do not know of one Christian who will deny this.  It is merely folly, fanciful hyperbole, to use one example of an immoral behaviour to defend the practice of another.  This atheist hates that their immorality is not "tolerated" by Christians and seeks to defame Christianity by citing religious pretext.  This atheist is a hypocrite of the highest order.

The second group of atheists are practically a religious movement themselves, somewhere in the neighborhood of the Heaven's Gate cult.

The second group has such absolute faith in science, regardless of their knowledge, understanding or even personal experience with the subject, that they believe if they science something long enough, they will PROVE that there is no God.  The only problem with their belief system is that every time they think they have the ultimate answer, that they have solved the ecclesiastical equivalent of the Poincare conjecture, it takes them further down the rabbit hole.

It takes an awful lot of faith to continue a belief system in which every answer issues forth its own new set of questions... don't you think?

Secession Declaration for Scotland?

In a recent article on The Independent Institute the upcoming Parliamentary consideration for the recognition of a free and independent Scotland is being discussed.  Personally I could not be more supportive of any movement, with the sole exception being a free and independent South.

You see, what the Scottish people have been struggling for for over 600 years is the same thing Southern Americans wanted in 1861.  They want to make their own decisions.  They want to be governed by a government of their own choosing, they want their resources to be expended on their own interests and they want to enjoy the fruits of their own labours, rather than being legislated into poverty by the mandates of people with who their only bond is being hoarded under the same federality.

An excerpt from the Declaration:

I believe that it is fundamentally better for us all, if decisions about Scotland's future are taken by the people who care most about Scotland, that is, by the people of Scotland.

Being independent means Scotland's future will be in Scotland's hands.

There is no doubt that Scotland has great potential. We are blessed with talent, resources and creativity. We have the opportunity to make our nation a better place to live, for this and future generations. We can build a greener, fairer and more prosperous society that is stronger and more successful than it is today.

I want a Scotland that speaks with her own voice and makes her own unique contribution to the world: a Scotland that stands alongside the other nations on these isles, as an independent nation.

If you have the literal skills, you could EASILY substitute the word "Dixie" for the word "Scotland" in the above passage and it reads EXACTLY THE SAME.  The argument for independence is nearly spot-on identical.  The South is blessed with talent, resources and creativity.  Without the union hegemony we would have the opportunity to make our country a better place to live for this and future generations.  We could build a greener, fairer and more prosperous society.  We could speak with our OWN VOICE and make our own unique contribution to the world.  Our future would be in OUR HANDS.

Who wouldn't want that for themselves?  Their families?  Their countrymen?

In far-flung corners of the world, the united State sends legions of soldiers to aid other countries in securing independence from governments or regimes that oppress and subjugate their people, but when you mention it here people immediately think you want to reinstate chattel slavery and live on cotton plantations.

Nothing could be further from the truth - and seeing Scotland vying for liberty from the British Crown (and doing so both politically AND peacefully) gives great hope to the potential for a similarly successful venture in the South, or ANYWHERE where people do not wish to continue under the government which they suffer.

What Ron Paul REALLY Means to America

Don't be fooled. Ron Paul is the first (and, likely, nearly ONLY) true statesman in generations of the electoral process to suggest the kinds of radical restoration that he is suggesting.

He wants to audit the Fed.  He wants to eliminate the IRS and the income tax.  He wants to reign in the EPA, DEA, DHS, TSA and dozens of other alphabet agencies which function outside of Constitutional directive and answer to no one.

But does Dr. Paul truly appreciate the ramifications of his proposal?  If (and it is a MIGHTY BIG IF) he was to be elected and was successful in his endeavor to reduce government spending and intrusion into the lives of every American citizen... what would be the result?

The result would be crippling unemployment the likes of which this country has NEVER seen before.  Think of your ten closest friends and then think about how many of them either rely on the government directly (postal carrier, airport security screener) or indirectly (prison guard, tax preparer) for the bulk of their employment.  Is there only one?  Maybe two or three?

Now, think very carefully about how many of those direct and indirect jobs would be rendered obsolete and further, those employees otherwise UNEMPLOYABLE as anything other than call-center operators, vacuum salesmen or window washers and you may begin to see the utter folly of your desires.

You see, wishing to have a President like Dr. Paul is the epitome of selfishness.  Don't you see that if you were to get your way, your friends would be unemployed and destitute in just a few short weeks as the wars on terror and drugs are shut down completely and the military/industrial complex fostered by the very nature of their perpetuality came to a screeching halt?

Police departments, prisons, military enlistment and recruiting, rehabilitation, welfare, attorneys, repossession specialists, private security consortiums, testing labs, major pharmaceutical companies and banking cartels would all be nearly immediately and completely superfluous.  Where will all of those people go when the source(s) of livelihoods derived exclusively from the generated fear and propaganda of Dr. Paul's predecessors vanishes?

What is the safety net for someone who only knows how to bark orders or process government forms for a living?

How dare you.  Don't you see that wanting more freedom will only bring pain, anguish and humiliation to millions (and I do mean MILLIONS) of American "workers" and their families?  Shame on you.

As Promised: The Scourge of 2WD SUVs

There are literally MILES and MILES of gorgeous, pristine beachfront along the Atlantic coast of North Carolina's Outer Banks largely included within the Cape Hatteras National Seashore and the right to traverse those beaches, a right which has been enjoyed by generations of residents and visitors alike has been threatened by the yankee government. Read more about that HERE

For decades it has been a foregone conclusion that if you traveled to Rodanthe, Waves, Kitty Hawk, Corolla, Buxton, Irmo or Ocracoke you would need a 4WD truck, Jeep or SUV (formerly known as a "truck") to conquer the barrier sand dunes and foray out onto the shore. It seemed you couldn't swing a cat without hitting a set of 44" Mickey Thompsons or TSL Thornbirds. The people who owned, drove and LOVED their 4x4s were resourceful, sturdy and unassuming. They were kings of the road and it was unusual for anyone who did not have a legitimate, practical reason to be driving a Toyota 4Runner or Chevy Tahoe. They weren't necessarily economical. They weren't necessarily comfortable. They certainly weren't much to look at.

And then something happened in the mid-'90s. Gas prices stagnated and automobile manufacturers, inspired by obscene profits, minimal testing standards and cheap steel started to promote the SUV (Sport Utility Vehicle) to an emergent market demographic. The "minivan" (invented by Volkswagen in the '50s but commandeered by Chrysler in the '80s) and the station wagon were no longer "cool".

Let me take you back a little further. If you grew up in the '60s, '70s or even the early '80s you probably know what it was like to sit in the rumble seat in the back of a Buick or Oldsmobile touring wagon. You would stuff the car to the gills, and you and your little brother would sit in the seat furthest from mom and dad so you could make obscene hand gestures out of the back window at passing motorists.

But now the station wagon and even the minivan were losing favor. The "SUV" afforded the driver an elevated, commanding view of the road, presumed increased protection during collisions (it's a truck, right?) and the ability to carry nearly an entire pee-wee hockey team to practice, plus their gear. Many of these new, shiny products included options that beachcombers twenty years prior had only dreamed about - Pushbutton 4WD. Fold-flat seats. Modular roof racks.

But a strange thing happened next. Catty socialites and soccer moms began to appear in the driver's seats of the newest generation of behemoths. Shopping center parking lots began to fill with small land yachts being parked in as haphazard a manner as the sedans they'd once driven, but now twice the size and half the margin of error.

And even though many of these vehicles came with 4WD (or AWD) standard, the closest those vehicles would ever come to offroading is cutting the shoulder lane to beat a left-turn light. Many owners would proclaim that they could use the 4WD if it ever snowed which, in Southeastern Virginia is generally once a year, at most. But what most of these 4X4 neophytes fail to comprehend is that 4WD does not make you a better driver. It does not imbue upon you special abilities to drive through mountains of ice and snow or to stop on a dime in inclement weather. Like any other tool, it can only be utilized when its function and potential are properly understood.

Generations of North Carolinians know these things. Wait until it snows (or even rains) and see how many people in their indestructible 4WD monstrosities end up in collisions. This has further added to the danger of anyone NOT driving an iron behemoth because you are that much more likely to be pulverized by one of them in an accident. It is a simple equation when brought down to its most basic terms comes to their 5500 lb SUV bearing down on your 3500 sedan.

But that's not where it stops. Discovering that people with more money than sense (quite a lot of them) the manufacturers of these massive machines discovered that they could save thousands of dollars in manufacturing costs and sell more of these leviathans by removing one of the very components which made them so desirable in the first place - the 4WD transfer.

So now there are hundreds of thousands (if not MILLIONS) of 2WD SUVs out there being driven not as even remotely vehicles of practical convenience or UTILITY but as status symbols and grocery-getters.

America is supposedly "great" because people are free to make their own decisions and should be able to drive whatever vehicle they choose. My argument is not against the automakers who are looking to make a profit. My argument is not even against the state for licensing these passably (but barely) literate amateurs, but against the individuals for believing that they NEED a SUV. Forgetting for a minute that not a one of them knows to reduce their tire pressure before driving onto the ramp at Oregon Inlet, but let me make this perfectly clear, there is absolutely no way these vehicles should be driven onto the beach at Hatteras. Drivers of these vehicles are a danger to themselves and others and probably shouldn't be on ANY road.

To finish this argument I will share a little bit about the vehicles I drive and have driven. Presently my 2008 Dodge Dakota is a 4WD. I use the 4WD about once a week working on my property and in the summer I use it to pull my Hobie Cat onto and off of the beach at Chesapeake Park. Prior to that I owned a 2WD Dodge Dakota which I drove until the wheels nearly fell off it. I used it to haul building materials and tow the PA trailer for my band. When I needed 4WD to move my boat I borrowed my wife's GMC Jimmy, which we also took on annual trips to Hatteras and out onto the beach. Now that we have two children we purchased a Honda Pilot w/ 4WD for essentially the same purpose. We keep an offroad emergency kit aboard and a portable inflator for refilling our tires when we exit the beach.

I guess the point is that for my family 4WD has a practical and frequent use. Like thousands of families who live and work in conditions where 4WD is NECESSARY to their ability to work their jobs or maintain their homes and properties, we use trucks and SUVs for their intended purpose - doing work.

For those out there clogging the roads and driving outside your league - go home, sell your Chevy Suburban or Ford Expedition and buy a Camry. You don't need a truck. You shouldn't have one. Make the right decision.

Bill Maher: Another South-hating Liberal Mouthpiece

According to liberal pundit Bill Maher the South deserves to be as marginalized as the Irish, calling us "crackers" and implying that celebrations of our Confederate HERITAGE would involve incest.

His comparison of Southerners (citizens of an occupied nation) to Irish immigrants (with their own country quite far away) is disingenuous, and deliberately so.

Our flags wave proudly EVERY DAY proclaiming the respect our fallen ancestors deserve and true hope that our people may someday be free of the yoke of yankee oppression and occupation.

Video HERE

Slightly Off-Topic Rant

Throughout and intertwined with nearly every political narrative, national or local news story, or MPAA rating is a common thread - "Won't someone PLEASE think of the children?!"

I don't know how it works in other parts of the country (or the world, for that matter) but there is an epidemic in Southeastern Virginia - School Zones. They are EVERYWHERE. It is virtually impossible to travel from any one location to any other location in the hours most would consider reserved for transit from their homes to their jobs without passing through at least ONE, and sometimes SEVERAL school zones.

For anyone who has been living under a rock on Mars for the past fifty-some-odd years, a School Zone is designated generally by signage and amber blinking lights instructing drivers to slow from the regular speed limit (let's say 45 MPH) to the state-mandated urban residential neighborhood crawl of 25 MPH. I understand the basic premise that slower speeds may somehow prevent students who happen to live within each school's designated "walking" zones from being run over because their parents never taught them to look both ways before crossing, but strangely, I rarely see students actually WALKING up to the schools. Ever.

But never mind that. There appears to be a new and much more unnecessary purpose for these zones, and that is to facilitate all of the mommies and daddies whose little prodigies are too good to ride the bus. We no longer have JUST blinking signs and a ½-mile pub crawl, we have a crossing guard occupying space in the median stopping four lanes of traffic so that literally HUNDREDS of minivans and 2wd SUVs (a topic for another rant altogether) can queue into and out of the school's drop-off lane.

When did so many kids become too "cool" to ride the bus or so many parents become so helicopteringly overprotective that they have to actually see their children enter the school building each day to assuage some crippling fear that their child might be assaulted/abducted/injured... it borders on the ludicrous.

I remember as a child the ONLY time my mother drove me to school was when I MISSED the bus, and that was if she didn't make me walk the six-plus miles as PUNISHMENT. What happened in the past twenty years? Why are today's parents, the ones who are largely my "peers" and went to school under the same conditions that I did becoming such lameoids?

Every day the queue and the delay seems to get longer as I drive a stretch of road which, under even moderate conditions, takes about ten minutes to traverse. Sometimes there are mornings when that same trip takes over twenty minutes because of that asinine School Zone and the hundreds of inconsiderate, "I'm better, more important and my kids shouldn't have to ride the bus" interlopers.

All of this falls back to the most primary of arguments which is that public schools, on the whole, do more damage to students and communities as a whole than good. These school zones alone likely cost millions of dollars in lost man-hours and fuel spent idling as we wait for a white-gloved academy washout to flag us through an intersection choked with semi-luxury vehicles festooned with decals proclaiming whether their child is an honor student, student athlete, super citizen or gosh-darn special in any number of other ways.

Osama Bin Laden Buried At Sea? From "Suspicious" to "Unlikely"

On May 2, 2011, nearly every major news outlet in the world proclaimed the same unbelievable headline "BIN LADEN DEAD". Apparently a crack team of Navy SEaLs based out of CDSA Dam Neck engaged and/or intercepted Bin Laden, a man who has been on top of the FBI's most-wanted list since shortly after September 11, 2001 for masterminding the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks in which commercial airliners are purported to have been flown into buildings while leaving almost no trace, causing two buildings to FREE FALL into their own footprints, a third to collapse after receiving only minor aesthetic damage, yet another to show no signs of engine nacelles or tail section impact (or debris) and yet ANOTHER leaving a debris field in middle Pennsylvania made up mostly of shredded paper.

Bin Laden, a man who is suspected to have died years ago from renal failure brought on by advanced kidney disease and poor access to medical dialysis, was "located" in a hideout in Pakistan, killed, airlifted to the USS Carl Vinson and DUMPED in the Arabian Sea mere hours later.

Then, to compound the suspiciousness of the event, not two weeks later the same "crack" team of America's finest surgical combat troops were riding in an obsolete, minimally-armored helicopter on a mission which would generally be considered "below their pay grade" and just happened to be shot down by an "insurgent".

All too convenient a coincidence, you say? Our own government would never leave a trail of bread crumbs which actually led right to their door?

Well, apparently those of us who never bought the "official" story about Bin Laden's capture (read: assassination) may be looking for apologies from the rest of you soon. According to Wikileaks content acquired and posted by Anonymous there may be an even bigger ongoing coverup emerging.

Read more about the VERY LIKELY POSSIBILITY that, once again, you have all been played the fool by your government at Huffington Post.

Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011

As promised I want to let the fine men and women of Virginia who have perhaps not heard or wholly understand a piece of legislation which has just been passed nearly UNCONTESTED by the federal government despite vociferous opposition by the general public and most, if not ALL civil rights groups.

It is known as the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 and it is essentially a direct and complete violation of the 1st Amendment rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech.

The premise of the resolution, as enacted, is to prevent opposition or protest groups from convening on federal (or other) property when the (p)resident or anyone designated by the (p)resident to be a "special" person is scheduled to appear AND the White House. It includes additional punitive charges for anyone who carries a "weapon or firearm" (§1752(b)(1)(B)).

The government is more and more interested in protecting itself from public access, scrutiny and criticism. EVERY SINGLE GOVERNMENT in history which has employed these tactics (including that of Lincoln) has journeyed further towards tyranny before being turned back by righteous and rightfully disenfranchised citizens through force of arms.

Unfortunately the armies of Lincoln were victorious and that government now believes it not only has the right, but the DUTY to legislate limitations on freedoms which we consider unconditional.

More HERE.

Bills Signed Into Law By Governor McDonnell

List available HERE

Be advised that the bills are listed in NUMERICAL order and not chronologically. So if a bill has not been signed (or sent to the governor for signature) yet it may not appear in the list.

Also keep in mind that any bills signed into law do not take effect until July 1st.

Most recently added to this list was a BILL to prohibit localities (or state agencies) from confiscating or prohibiting lawfully-carried firearms during a period of declared emergency in the Commonwealth. This has the added benefit of a provision which makes it illegal to restrict ones admission to an emergency facility or shelter AND disarm him.

Virginia Senate Passes Bill Nullifying NDAA

One of the most onerous pieces of legislation which has ever been introduced and passed by the yankee government (look for a follow-up post on the other one), the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (or NDAA, for short) has the terrible and terrifying potential to allow indefinite detention of AMERICAN CITIZENS without due process nor being formally charged with the commission of any crime.

Virginia's General Assembly immediately recognized the Constitutional invalidity of such a decree and has already passed through both its House and Senate by landslide, veto-proof legislation a BILL which says, quite plainly, that no Virginia law enforcement, Defense or National Guard may act in any way which aids the federal government in its enforcement of the NDAA.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/11025-virginias-ndaa-nullifying-bill-being-deliberated-by-a-split-state-senate

Seven other states at the time of this writing have introduced and/or passed similar legislation. The NDAA undermines the 5th and 6th Amendments by providing the executive branch the authority to designate American citizens as enemy combatants ("terrorists"), pursue them, incarcerate them and HOLD THEM INDEFINITELY without trial and without formally being charged.

The very idea goes against everything which we hold dear as Americans and should not be overlooked that the federal bill was passed with nearly unanimous bipartisan support. The entire government on the federal level thinks this is a good idea.

Do you?

Inflation: Not as low as you think

Your savings has been wiped out by high housing, food and transportation costs and a shocking 0.05% standard savings rate while banksters and CEOs have reaped WINDFALL profits and seen their portfolios and wealth skyrocket.

According to one CBS News 'Blogger ACTUAL inflation, which discounts major one-time purchases like homes and vehicles, is closer to 8% and rising.

While the Bernanke and the Obama continue to print more money and dump it on the raging inferno that is this country's economy, unemployment - REAL UNEMPLOYMENT - is above 15% nationwide with pockets of 50% and higher unemployment in numerous metropolitan/industrial centers.

In an election year which sees the potential for the first-time-ever lame-ducking of a wartime (p)resident, the economy and unemployment will be the professed bailiwick of whichever candidates are vetted by the international banking cartels to duke it out for supremacy over the next four years of continued deterioration of American liberty, Christian and family values, and our once coveted position as #1 in the global economic and industrial arena.