Category: Uncategorized

As most of are aware on Sundays I pay tribute to someone who has demonstrated unusual personal fortitude or bravery. At the present time the names of minors are often withheld in news stories. Usually I do not disagree with this policy, but with regards to the following story, I wish that I knew the name of this Michigan minor.

From BlazeNews:

A Michigan boy is being heralded as a hero for allegedly using his slingshot to save his little sister from being abducted from their back yard, according to police.

The 8-year-old sister was reportedly hunting for mushrooms on Wednesday in the back yard of her home in Alpena, Michigan. Suddenly, a 17-year-old suspect emerged from the woods, covered the girl’s mouth, grabbed her around the waist, and attempted to drag her into the woods.

The girl’s 14-year-old brother was inside the family’s home when he witnessed the attempted abduction. The boy sprang into action by grabbing his slingshot and running outside.

“He was able to grab his slingshot and was able to slingshot something that hit the suspect right in the head. And that caused him to let go. The girl was able to struggle and get away, and he shot another one, hit the suspect in the chest, and then fled the scene,” said Alpena Post Commander Lt. John Grimshaw.

The Michigan State Police released a description of the suspect, and he was quickly located – hiding at a nearby gas station. The suspect had injuries on his head and chest, which authorities said helped confirm that he was the alleged kidnapper.

Grimshaw credited the brother’s heroic actions for saving the life of his sister.

“He really is the one that, I believe, saved his sister’s life or from having something seriously bad happening to her,” he stated. “For a 14-year-old to see that and to pop into action that quickly is extraordinary.”

Extraordinary, indeed! A true hero!

6/4/23

Today I read an article concerning the truthfulness of comments, and the success of restoring one’s reputation once it has been besmirched. If one’s reputation has been wrongly tarnished by a newspaper, then the newspaper might eventually issue a retraction. This “mea culpa” could  be buried on page 59, whereas the original untruths could have been on page 2. … Fair?  No, not in the least as the original damage to the person’s reputation  is what often mainly sticks in the reader’s head. Of course, the person whose good names was smeared can bring suit against the newspaper, and sometimes the newspaper will have to pay big bucks for the slanderous comments. e.g. the student from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky)

However, what if the slander was not directed at a person? Is there a way to correct the damage that had been done? Realistically, no. Take for example, the drug, Hydroxychloroquine (HQ).

An investigation has found that among the hundreds of COVID-19 research papers that have been withdrawn, a retracted study linking the drug hydroxychloroquine to increased mortality was the most cited paper.

With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis” long after it was retracted.

So as I see it, Hydroxychloroquine was in appropriately maligned. In large part this was because Donald Trump spoke glowingly of it, and from then on basically the liberal press maligned it. A subsequent paper came out which continued to malign HQ. This paper was retracted, but its memory lived on!

How many lives could have been saved if HQ was used to treat Covid?

How many lives could have been saved if the initial, subsequently retracted paper that falsely accused HQ, was rejected in the first place?

6/5/

I have always been interested in geography. Actually, probably not always, but at least since fourth grade. In fourth grade I had Ms. Conroy, who looked to be about eighty. Most likely she was not eighty because she was still teaching, but to a nine year old she looked very very old. In addition to looking ancient, her vision was not very good, and she never, ever got out of her desk chair. 

So what does this have to do with liking geography? In the beginning it was my fourth grade geography book that I liked a lot. It was a big rectangular book … tall enough that Ms. Conroy could not see the student  sitting behind the propped-up book at his desk. This unique combination allowed for uber chicanery in that classroom during Geography, as the boys, including yours truly, could leave their desks and crawl around on the floor to anywhere in that classroom. … Fourth grade Geography was so much fun!

Back to the real world geography. How many of you can tell me where Uganda is? Yes, it’s in Africa. But where? What about the capital of Uganda? 

FYI: Uganda is a landlocked country in eastern central Africa bordered by Kenya and South Sudan, and is on the north end of Lake Victoria. The capital is Kampala. After reading that you probably know more about Kenya than President Biden, who just spurted:

“This shameful act is the latest development in an alarming trend of human rights abuses and corruption in Uganda.”

Why this sudden interest in Uganda?

From Coffee and Covid:

On Monday, 5/29/23, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed some new laws including the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality,” which was defined as same-sex rape of a child. Biden somehow immediately issued a statement condemning Uganda’s new law and pledging strong sanctions against the small African country.

“And we are considering additional steps, including the application of sanctions and restriction of entry into the United States against anyone involved in serious human rights abuses or corruption,” said Biden, obviously meaning Ugandans. He also mentioned in his statement: canceling AIDS Relief money, deleting other foreign aid to Uganda, nixing Uganda’s eligibility for international programs promoting economic growth in Africa, and suspending travel visas for some or all Ugandans.”

Wow, this really has JB steamed!

One might ask where is the similar indignation when it comes to the other infamous ‘U’ … the Uyghurs in China.  As most are aware the  Chinese government has committed a series of ongoing human rights abuses against Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang that is often characterized as genocide. With reference to the Uyghurs, I have not heard him say: “This shameful act is the latest development in an alarming trend of human rights abuses and corruption …”

Whereas Uganda gets a ‘boom,” from J.B, China and the Uyghurs get the silent treatment. Does that have anything to do with geography?  No, more likely is it that the Uyghurs do not vote?!

6/3/23

After reading about what is happening both in the East and in the West, it is becoming apparent that this “trans” nonsense is slowly coming to a boil. It has been simmering for a while and now the heat is being turned up.

First from Vermont:

Last month, the girls’ varsity basketball team at Mid Vermont Christian School forfeited a playoff game rather than compete against Long Trail Mountain, a team that has a male player who claims to be female. Consequently,  the Vermont Principals’ Association (VPA) has decided to punish the Christian school as a result.

“If you don’t want to follow Vermont Principal Association’s  rules, that’s fine,” said Jay Nichols, the VPA’s executive director. “But then you’re just not a VPA member. It’s fairly simple. That’s really all we’re gonna really say about it.”

The “rules” to which Nichols referred are the VPA’s so-called “Best Practices for Schools Regarding Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students.” Those “best practices” demand that Christian schools jettison their religious beliefs and instead allow supposedly “transgender and gender nonconforming students … to participate in physical education and sports in accordance with the student’s gender identity.”

This dictum means that boy’s teams from Mid Vermont Christian School will also not be able to compete!

Common sense tells me that mandating confirmation against a school’s Christian beliefs will be found to be unconstitutional. In the end this will result in a lot of wasted money spent defending this arbitrary VPA “rule.”

Second from BlazeNews from Oregon:

Lakeridge High School students have apparently been removing tampon dispensers from the walls of boys’ bathrooms and depositing them in the toilet.

According to the Daily Caller, the school sent out an email about the issue and reportedly attached a photo of a dispenser in a boys’ restroom toilet.

Oregon state law requires public schools to supply free tampons and sanitary pads in bathroom dispensers, including in restrooms designated for males.

“Each time that the dispensers are taken down, the school needs to spend time and resources putting them back up in order to be compliant with House Bill 3294 [Menstrual Dignity Act],” the email noted, according to the Daily Caller.

“This is a perfect example of throwing away tax dollars in Oregon public schools,” vice president of Parents Defending Education Caroline Moore noted, according to the outlet. “This isn’t about vandalizing school property — we all know that is bad. The boys are signaling they are not girls and they want to be left alone. It is appalling that any school district is furthering the bizarre agenda from the left where they neglect science and believe men require tampons. Aren’t the teachers supposed to be teaching them elementary facts, like I don’t know, anatomy?”

Again, this will end up costing Oregon taxpayers a lot of money as this phenomenon of putting tampon dispensers in toilets will just continue, and will likely spread.

Mark my words, these two examples are just the beginning as this entire issue is slowly coming to a boil!

6/2/23

The following incredulous story was reported on multiple sites including The New York Post, Fox News, Yahoo News, the Insider, and undoubtedly many more. The reason that is was reported everywhere is because it is so unbelievable.

From PJMedia:

Rachel Rogers was employed as a sales associate at the Lululemon store in Peachtree Corners, Ga., for five years. But after the same group of looters attacked the store for the fourth or fifth time, making off with thousands of dollars in merchandise, she called 911.

Assistant Manager Jennifer Ferguson described the scene. “All of a sudden we see some gentlemen run into the store in masks and hoodies,” Ferguson said, “They swiped until they couldn’t hold any more product and ran out the door.”

Certainly one can understand a company directing employees not to interfere in a looting incident. But Rogers was fired for disobeying a company policy that prevented her from calling the police to the scene. As it was, the same group of thieves hit another Lululemon store in the area the next day and were caught.

The “no 911 call” policy was initiated to protect the company, said Ferguson.

A week later, Rogers was fired. She had apparently run afoul of a company policy that had a “zero tolerance” for calling 911.

Regional Manager for Lululemon openly questioned why they would call the police. Stating that it would “look bad for Lululemon to be the company calling the police”. 

. 

Understand that I have never set foot in any of the three Lululemon stores in the San Diego area, and probably never will especially after reading this story, which is absurd on so many levels that it’s hard to know where to start.

First of all: If the policy of Lululemon is just to allow shoplifters free reign, then it stands to reason that it’s prices must be way too high as the other Lululemon customers are, in essence, paying for all of the losses incurred because of the shoplifters.

Second: How many times should Lululemon just ignore the same brazen shoplifters?  One? Two? Three? This was the fourth or fifth time that these same shoplifters had victimized that same store! I cannot belief that this Lululemon store had allowed it to go on for so long.

Third: Once the word gets out that Lululemon is just going to look the other way when someone is robbing store A, then how long before these brazen thieves hit Lululemon stores B,C,etcetera? To me closing one’s eyes while sustaining losses in multiple stores, is not a good long term way to run a business.

Fourth: It’s amazing that two employees were fired because they were trying to look out for their employer. I sincerely doubt that there will be a line of people trying to work for a company that treats their employees this badly.

And finally: If the regional manager who fired the employees for calling 911, is still working for Lululemon, then Lululemon deserves all that it gets!

6/1/23

To be clear, as I have stated many times in the past, I grew up in a Ford family. Perhaps, better stated, my dad was a big time “Ford guy.” For whatever reason, he would only buy Ford cars, and so consequently I learned to drive on a Ford. For many years a Ford was the only car I knew.

I sometimes wonder if my dad is now flipping over in his grave, as the Ford Motor Company seems to be going the way of most of the other automobile manufacturers by going all-in with EVs.

FYI: Since 1985 I have been a “Toyota guy,” and have had no regrets.

However, for all of you who are still “Ford fans,” caution, as the following is not pretty.

From the Manhattan Contrarian on What’s Up With That:

“In March, Ford Motor Company announced that it lost $2.1 billion on its EV business last year. Those losses were double the losses it had on EVs in 2021. As I noted in a video I posted on TikTok on March 23, Ford made 61,575 EVs in 2022. Thus, the company lost about $34,000 on every EV it sold last year. I also noted that the costs of making EVs aren’t falling. Last year, the cost of battery packs for EVs went up by 7%. . . . Indeed, it appears Ford’s 2022 losses were only a warm-up lap. Yesterday afternoon, Ford reported a $722 million loss on its EV business over the first three months of 2023. During that span, Ford sold 10,866 EVs, meaning it lost $66,446 on every EV it sold.”

Now admittedly, I am no businessman, but losing a substantial amount of money on each EV built does not sound like a credible business plan! These losses are disastrous, and continuing to forge ahead without blinders is “looney tunes!”

5/30/23

As I predicted the new Mayor of Chicago’s “brilliant” plan to control violence in Chicago is off to a “good” start!

From BlazeNews:

Days earlier, the progressive Democrat mayor, Brandon Johnson, unveiled his plan to cut down on violence in Chicago.

“My administration’s top priority is making sure there is a comprehensive, whole of government strategy across our city and that its making people safe,” Johnson said at a news conference on Thursday, 5/25.

One person was reportedly shot and killed on Saturday less than two blocks from the West Side home of newly-elected Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson.

(How’s that strategy working out so far Mr. Mayor? A “good” start ?)

In a similar vein the Democratic Governor of Illinois chimed in with his new strategy. In anticipation of Memorial Day weekend violence, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker announced on Tuesday that there would be 30 “peacekeepers” to try to stop crime.

The initiative called the Citywide Crisis Prevention and Response Unit (CPRU) will send peacekeepers into Chicago streets to “provide essential assistance in de-escalation, conflict resolution, and crisis support across Chicago.”

Within hours of opening beaches in Chicago, the city was forced to shut down the popular North Avenue Beach after gunshots erupted when two groups of teens confronted each other.

‘HeyJackass.com’ a site dedicated to gun violence statistics in Chicago, reported that there were 10 people shot and killed in Chicago on Saturday. The site noted that in the more than 10 years of covering gun violence in Chicago, there were only three other days that tallied 10 or more homicides: 6/27/2020: 10 killed, 7/4/2020: 11 killed, 5/31/2020: 18 killed.

In total, Chicago suffered a bloody Memorial Day weekend with at least 51 people shot, including 12 who were fatally shot. The widespread gun violence occurred despite dozens of “peacekeepers’ patrolling the Windy City in an attempt to decrease bloodshed.

(How’s that “peacekeeper strategy” working out so far, Governor Pritzker?” A “good” start?”)

I’ll bet that those who live in Chicago can hardly wait for the heat of the summer when the Mayor’s plan and the Governor’s plan are in full swing. The July 4th long weekend should be a good test, depending on your definition of “good!”

5/29/23

As is typical for my Sunday blog, I highlight individuals who are worthy of our praise. My new hero is Maureen Martin.

While working for housing company L&Q, Maureen Martin, 57, had risen from a temp position to become a manager overseeing staff.

From Epoch Times –

The views that got her in hot water with the company had less to do with the insights she drew regarding the challenges facing minorities, including her own demographic, and more to do with the solution she proposed, as a mayoral candidate interested in bettering the lives of Londoners.

What insights were those? She cites that a staggering 75 percent of black children in the UK are born out of wedlock, which she calls “atrocious.” Similar statistics in the U.S. show some 73 percent of black children grow up in unwedded households. “We have more of our young black boys in prison, joining gangs, knife crime, failure in the academic arena—it shows in the results,” said Martin, president of the Christian People’s Alliance political party.

And her solution? This naturally concerns Martin, who aspires to represent London’s constituents. As a Christian minister, she credits the traditional family model—the nuclear family—with producing the most favorable results in raising children. “That model was created by God. He knew what he was doing,” she said, adding that this model is “the foundation of our Western culture.” “Any society where the family is broken down is doomed to failure.”

During her mayoral campaign, Martin published the following statement in her “six-point plan” leaflet:

I pledge to cut through political correctness and simply state the truth that natural marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental building block for a successful society, and the safest environment for raising children.

That didn’t go over well with heads at L&Q.

Shortly thereafter, despite her exemplary performance in the workplace, Martin was handed a letter of dismissal for “gross misconduct,” resulting from the statement in her manifesto. Rather than back down, though, Martin doubled down. Recanting her words didn’t even cross her mind. “It was a no brainer. They violated my rights on every level,” she said, citing the European Court of Human Rights’ enumeration of religious expression and free speech rights. “They’ve violated both articles—Article 10 of the European Human Rights Act.”

Lacking means to mount a legal solo offensive, she allied with Christian Concern, an organization that offers legal support in cases of religious discrimination. They put L&Q on notice that they would be defending themselves in court. “I accused them of unfair dismissal and discriminating against me because of my religion,” Martin said, adding that political speech in the UK is also protected. “My statement comes out in the category of political speech, because I was running legitimately in an electoral campaign.”

Ultimately doubling down proved very effective. The company folded. In January, L&Q chose an out-of-court settlement rather than battle it out—it would cost far more to litigate in the long run—in particular because Martin’s case was so strong.

Martin calls it “a massive win” for Christians. “If I hadn’t launched a campaign and just walked away, there’d be nothing,” she said. “So it’s important to challenge these cases and make sure that the perpetrators are put on notice: ‘You’re not going to get away with this.’”

Maureen Martin is my new hero!

5/28/23

This was written by yours truly on 5/1/21 and the title still holds true today.

First right off the top . . .  No, I did not watch president biden’s first formal address to a joint session of Congress on the evening of 4/28/21. At that time (6pm pacific) I was watching a soccer game (Columbus vs. Monterey). You see, I knew that the soccer game would be exciting . . . it was. A 2-2 tie with the tying goal scored in the last thirty seconds. In addition, I knew that j.b.’s spiel would probably be . . .  what’s the right word? . . . soporific, and I heard it was.

According to the New York Times (NYT) and Nielsen’s, j.b.’s address drew 27 million viewers. Not too bad, some might say, as the recent Oscar’s drew only 10 million viewers. (To me that’s like comparing a root canal to an outdoor ice cold shower in February . . . which is more appealing?) Anyway 27 million is impressive, isn’t it? Err, actually ‘No,’ as j.b. is no D.T. The audience for j.b. was significantly smaller than TV audience for President Donald J. Trump’s first formal address to Congress in 2017, which drew 48 million viewers (almost twice as many) . . . indeed j.b. is no D.T. when it comes to interest, enthusiasm, and innumerable other things.

Also the television audience for Mr. Biden’s address also fell shy of those for equivalent speeches by other recent presidents – Barack Obama in 2009; George W. Bush in 2001; and Bill Clinton in 1993.

Perhaps if I lived on the east coast I would have been more inclined to watch j.b., as some nights I have a bit of difficulty falling asleep, and j.b.’s lullaby would probably have been perfect. Do I wish that I had recorded it to use on those inability-to-sleep future nights … err, no, I think I might rather have another root canal.

Come to think of it even though I watched many D.T. speeches I have never dozed off during any of them . . . in this respect D.T. is no j.b.!

5/1/21

5/27/23

I have always supposed that becoming the CEO of a company is not a random event. I always assumed that these individuals have risen through the ranks of their company because for the most part they are among the smartest and the wisest. Each one has individually climbed up the company pyramid to reach the top. In addition, I have thought that CEOs would demonstrate competence when it comes to hiring and promoting similarly competent individuals. 

At this point perhaps one should ask, “what is the main purpose of a CEO?” To me the answer is intuitively obvious … to make a profit for his/her company. Hand in hand with making a profit for the company is keeping the shareholders happy. Shareholders are typically interested in the security of their investment. They either want a steady dividend or they want the price of the company’s stock to increase over time.

Companies pay their individual CEOs big bucks to achieve these purposes. What should be obvious is that companies do not pay their CEOs to lose money. They do not pay their CEOs to make decisions that will inevitably make the shareholders unhappy. Shareholders should be confident that the CEO will neither make poor decisions nor promote individuals who make poor decisions. 

So what are we seeing now? 

First Target:

From BlazeNews:

Target has lost billions in market value since the controversy stemming from the retailer’s rollout of its eyebrow-raising LGBTQ Pride collection.

Last Wednesday, Target’s stock closed at $160.96 a share — giving the big-box retail chain a market capitalization of $74.3 billion. However, Target’s stock was trading at $141.76 — dropping the market capitalization to $65.3 billion. Within a week, Target dropped by 12% and lost $9 billion in market share.

$9Billion! … Wow!

Second Anheuser-Busch:

Investor’s Business Daily reported that the market value of Anheuser-Busch InBev has dropped $15.7 billion since April 1 on account of the Bud Light boycott. That figure is based upon data from S&P Global Market Intelligence.

Jared Dinges, beverage analyst at JPMorgan Chase, revealed to clients that Bud Light sales were down more than 23% as of the week ending May 6, reported Investor’s Business Daily.

23Billion! … Double Wow!

CEOs that make decisions based on “wokefullness” are proving that they are ineffective leaders. Since “trans” individuals make up less than 1% of the population, CEOs that make decisions that are meant to please 1% or less of the population and simultaneously anger the vast majority of others should be fired.

To the CEOs of both Target and Anheuser-Busch, “Since you have proven to be an ineffectual leader …. ‘good riddance!’”

5/27/23