Quote of the Day

"Always look to the future, that's where you'll spend the rest of your life."
-George Burns

Vice President Cheney's Hunting Accident - NOT Attempted Murder

Okay, so he goes hunting at the well known Armstrong ranch in Texas for a weekend of R&R. No biggie, right? Until the media got wind that he accidentally shot a fellow hunter and friend, the millionaire attorney Harry Whittington, wounding him in the face, neck and chest.

Ordinarily, this would not even have made it into the news (hunting accidents do occur from time to time) unless, of course, you're the vice president, a Republican, or both. The media wasted no time jumping on this and trying to make it into something that it isn't: news. When I watched the local news (KTVU-Ch.2), they aired footage of the press gallery that questioned the Vice President's press secretary. One member asked the stupidest of all questions, "Is this a criminal offense that would warrant his stepping down?"

Sheesh, wouldn't THEY, the liberal media, just LOVE to see that happen? Why don't other people who have committed the same "offense" get fired from their jobs or be put before a firing squad? I mean, for crying out loud, IT WAS AN ACCIDENT! If anything should be a criminal offense that would warrant a person's stepping down are the media that purport to cover the news.

A non-story becomes a news story and they're crying for blood because they didn't know about it immediately. Well, spank everybody for just trying to take care of the accident and leave them be in peace!

The Vice President's medical staff, who followed him, provided medical care for Mr. Whittington until he was transported to Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi-Memorial in Corpus Christi. From other reports, Cheney was apologetic for the mishap and even visited Whittington in the hospital before returning to Washington, D.C.

From what was understood, Mr. Whittington had gone into the tall grass to retrieve his quarry and failed to let the Vice President know. This is a cardinal rule for hunters: KNOW where everybody is. The news account from Yahoo! can be found here.

I wish I had linked the news story from the previous day, but that already fell out of the queue (or was it removed in favor of this one which has the more inflammatory headline of 'Cheney Violates Cardinal Rule of Hunting'?).

The reason why he didn't make the statement himself was that Katharine Armstrong, owner of the property where the group was hunting, said that she would make the statement to the local paper for him, and he agreed to that. Also, when you read the Yahoo! news story, it also states that the head of the local Secret Service office contacted the sheriff's office to report the accident, they came out to interview the Vice President on Sunday morning, the day after the shooting incident.

There was no cover-up, as much as the media and liberals would love to claim. This was simply and unfortunate and, obviously, embarrassing accident. But, because Dick Cheney is the Vice President and a public figure, he will always be under more scrutiny than the average Joe Schmoe. Of course, even MORE so because he's a Republican.

The media should be taken out to those same fields and see how much better they fare in the same situation...me, I think they should just be shot.

Quotation About Asking Questions

My quote for today (as an instructor/tutor):

"It never hurts to ask, but it hurts to never ask."

San Francisco to Humboldt: SHUT UP!

I've been hearing about the flap that Humboldt County has given San Francisco over its homeless busing program over the last few days now and I also read the Op-Ed piece by Ken Garcia in the San Francisco Examiner.

From what information I've gathered, the folks up north are indignant because they feel like they're a "dumping ground" for homeless people. Well, here's a reality check: YOUR people (for those who are current and former Humboldt County residents) are coming to San Francisco because they feel that they can get a free ride from the City's General Assistance programs.

Ever since Mayor Gavin Newsom proposed and implemented the Care Not Cash program, there has been less handed out in freebies and more handed out in REAL services (shelter, food, vouchers). This was a good thing. I voted for Care Not Cash because it made sense. San Francisco businesses and property owners were behind it because they felt that it would reduce the amount of aggressive panhandling and perpetuation of the cycle of poverty because the homeless were wasting their money on alcohol and drugs. Also, as people who have a lot at stake in the city (they are the ones paying business and property taxes and NOT the freeloaders), they tend to take the biggest hit when the liberal Democraps on the Board of Stupidvisors always float bonds to the populace to pay for additional programs that are duplicates of others already in place. The people who were against it were those who claim they help the homeless such as stupidvisors Tom Ammiano, Jake Goldrick, Matt Gonzalez and most of the non-profits that serve the homeless population like the Coalition on Homelessness in San Francisco.

In fact, a Google search produced the following hits which I am excerpting from:

Here is an article taken from the San Francisco Bay Guardian's sfbg.com website via Google search results.

In summary, Jennifer Friedenbach is totally against Prop. N (Care Not Cash) because she fears that it will cut the money that her organization will receive for referring homeless people for services. The language she uses in her opinion piece is alarmist and completely reactionary. She gives no real basis for her arguments except that she's against it. Even today, she feels that Care Not Cash is no good and has not worked. Oh, really? So, we should just continue to throw free money to people who really could work but choose not to?

Since the statistics show that more people have gone into permanent housing (1,450 with another 200 waiting for more openings) and are weaning themselves off of public assistance, isn't that a good thing? Isn't that what the Coalition on Homelessness is supposed to do, help the homeless become part of the regular mainstream population? Or are they actually trying to perpetuate the cycle of poverty so that they have a reason to exist and get more gee-golly money for themselves?

When she states that there are those who have fallen off the public assistance rolls and have refused shelter or permanent housing, who does she blame? The mayor! While I do not always agree with what the mayor does, this is one of the few things which I do agree with him about and I think that Friedenbach is off base. First of all, nobody is FORCED into anything. If they choose to not move into transitional housing and on to permanent housing, whose fault is that? It's the individual's fault, not the mayor's! If people have "fallen off the roll" because their cash handouts have been reduced from $442 down to $64 per month, wouldn't this give a person more of an incentive to get themselves out of their current situation into one where they can stand on their own two feet?

I mean, ANY job is better than NO job, even if it is minimum wage. They are earning money which they can put towards their own future and get themselves out of poverty. I believe that if a person is able-bodied and does not suffer from any mental or medical disorders, then they should be able to get themselves cleaned up, retrained and finish up an education to help further themselves.

In a San Francisco neighborhood newspaper, The Noe Valley Voice ran an article that sounded more cynical than anything else before Care Not Cash was even implemented. Plus, to show how BIASED they were, they only spoke to homeless people and didn't even include anybody else to balance out the story. You call this unbiased journalism? Puhleeeeze!

Additionally, a previous article in the San Francisco Examiner also provides some information on the issue at hand.

Now, back to Humboldt County and their whiners...

Because 13 identified homeless people were found to have used San Francisco's "Homeward Bound" program to go to their county, they are all bent out of shape. My god, THIRTEEN HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE ON THE STREETS IN HUMBOLDT COUNTY!!! STOP THE PRESSES!!! GET THE NATIONAL GUARD!!! WE HAVE A MAJOR CRISIS ON OUR HANDS!!!

To them, I say: "GET A LIFE!" If they had even an inkling of what our city has to deal with here, they would do well to shut the hell up. I don't think they've even come down here and walked the streets of San Francisco to see what it is that the city faces on a daily basis. But, I don't want to rehash what Ken Garcia has spoken about in his article. Garcia actually did a good job of outlining what is happening and given a sound response.

Therefore, I feel that the "officials" in Humboldt County have no basis for their complaint. Maybe we should try sending some of our homeless up there and see how they like it. After all, turnabout's fair play, right?

So, should we continue to be a dumping ground for the rest of the state's homeless population? Hell no! If they're your residents, YOU take care of them! If they choose to come here because they think they can get free money so they can go squander it on something else, then they deserve to be sent back from whence they came. Just be glad we're not sending you the bill for services rendered during their stay in San Francisco.

Let's see how much you'll holler when we start doing that...

My Own Quotation About Knowledge

My quote for today (which I came up with on my own):

"The only difference between an honest man and a criminal is what he does with his knowledge."

Next time you see an emergency vehicle: YIELD!

Okay, so I am driving my son to school along Geary Boulevard in San Francisco's Richmond District when I see the flashing lights in my rear view mirror. The aerial ladder truck is still about three blocks away or so, but I'm already looking for a place to pull over because those things are huge and, by law, you're supposed to yield to emergency vehicles anyway.

Well, I'm watching the fire vehicles honking their horns (there was a truck and a medic unit) for people to get out of the way when I notice a nimrod who thinks they're speed racer and can outrun a fire truck. The woman, who was driving in her Benz E320 sedan, didn't seem to care that the truck was just about right on her ass and she doesn't yield until she's up on traffic that is stopped at a red light ahead of her. She continued to drive ahead of the emergency vehicles for TWO BLOCKS before she decides she can't go any further! This is the stupidity that many a liberal seems to exhibit in our city: I can't be inconvenienced, I don't like to wait, I've got more important things to do, I'm somebody important don't you know that?

How stupid can she be? Obviously, very stupid, indeed. The most common complaint I hear from those who work in emergency services (especially the fire department) is that people fail to yield when they are supposed to.

They should realize a few things:
1) You are required by law to yield to emergency vehicles when they have their flashing lights and sirens/horns on. Failure to do so will result in a fine and citation.

2) You will ALWAYS LOSE when you collide with one of those heavy fire trucks/engines. They're larger, heavier and made out of sturdier craftsmanship than your average car. Your aluminum can of a car can't stand up to their 50-gallon drum of a truck/engine.

3) You're impeding their ability to get to their destination. Think about it, if it were your place that was on fire or a loved one who was having a medical emergency, wouldn't you want them to get there ASAP? Yeah? Then do yourself a favor and get the hell out of the way before you cost somebody their life, okay?

4) You will look incredibly stupid to those who have already pulled over. Yep, you're going to stick out like a sore thumb because you're the only nimrod who thinks they're Speed Racer and refuses to get out of the way "because I can't be inconvenienced and I hate having to wait." So, dear idiot, drive, DRIVE LIKE THE WIND!!!

I'd publish that idiot driver's license plate in my blog to shame them, but I don't want the liability of doing so. But, I did jot it down because she really pissed me off. Why am I getting pissed off over somebody else's stupidity? Let me explain: I work closely with emergency services and I know what goes on in our city. Seeing others doing something stupid that puts others in jeopardy over a few seconds makes me mad because those few seconds can be precious to those who need it most.

Next time, just do everybody else a favor and pull over.

Cindy Sheehan: Poster Child for Liberalism

I think Cindy Sheehan would make a great poster child for Democrats and liberals everywhere. She embodies what they represent: A total defiance of authority, a lack of respect for other people's feelings and being a media whore like the Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

Last year, the media elevated her to the status of being the most outspoken "Anti-war Protester" after losing her son, casey, in the war in Iraq. Also, she became the "nation's darling" because she garnered much attention for her protest in front of President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas.

First of all, let it be known that I don't think that she deserves that status. The media gave her way too much credit for being an outspoken opponent of the Iraq War. Now, you can't watch or hear the news without there being some mention of her. In fact, the news media outlets are touting how she is considering a run for a congressional seat against fellow Democrat Dianne Feinstein.

Her most recent high-profile leftist stunt of defiance was when she revealed a shirt with an anti-war slogan on it and was arrested on a misdemeanor charge for unlawful conduct. Sheehan was the guest of U.S. Representative Lynn Woolsey, a California Democrat, at the nation's capitol during President Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday, Jan. 31st.

There are strict rules about not having anything bearing slogans in the gallery at the Captiol building when it is in session, but NOOOOOOO, Cindy Sheehan believes that she's above the law and that it doesn't apply to her. So, she decides to take advantage of the opportunity to flash her message nationwide on television (like she hasn't done enough of that already?) in defiance of the rules! She was directed by security that she needed to cover up her shirt. She refused to. This is how many Democraps tend to behave: I'm special, I'm more important than you, rules don't apply to me!

The televised footage of Sheehan after being released told volumes: She was disappointed that she didn't get to ruin the President's State of the Union speech like she would have liked to. Am I editorializing? Perhaps, but the fact remains that as somebody who is outspoken against the President and all that he stands up for, she felt that she was above the law and didn't care whose toes she stepped on in the process.

Woolsey made no apologies for what Sheehan did because she is also outspoken about the war. Well, they certainly make for good bedfellows, yes? I'm surprised that Woolsey wasn't pissed that Sheehan wasted that ticket by getting her sorry butt arrested!

To be fair, in a wire report that I saw on Yahoo! News, Rep. Bill Young's wife, Beverly, was also removed from the gallery for her shirt which spoke out in support of our troops. Although I may share her sentiment, that was somewhat poor judgment on her behalf, so her being removed from the gallery was justified. Rules apply to everybody regardless of what their sentiment is.

Also, Sheehan's recent appearance in Venezula with president Hugo Chavez is also very telling. First of all, how is she affording all this travel? Somebody's gotta be paying for it and somebody the likes of her who is spending most of her waking moments protesting the president instead of being a good parent (she still has two kids) is not taking responsibility. She has decidedly removed herself from her parental responsibilities in favor of political outspokenness.

While I do agree that she has a right to speak her mind and participate in protests against the President (that is her Constitutional right, which she forgets is afforded to her because of the efforts of others who actually give instead of take), does she seriously think that she will single-handedly alter public policy?

Sheehan doesn't speak for me nor do I want her to speak for me. I can take care of my own speeches, thank you. Also, when you speak out against the war and what the military (our men and women) is trying to do, then you are slapping them in the face and telling them that they are bad people. Is that what you were trying to say to Casey? That he was a bad person because he joined the military? They are fighting to keep us safe because if we leave Iraq now, we will be sending the message that we are weak and we don't care. That we will run when the going gets tough and that we can't keep committments. They will then bring the war back onto our soil and further alter the way we already live. Is this the message you want to send to terrorists? I ask you this, Ms. Sheehan: If you were so against war, then why did you let your son join? Why didn't you try to stop him? You tried? Obviously, not hard enough for if you truly cared, you wouldn't have let him enlist.

I don't enjoy seeing any of our enlisted men and women dying or being maimed at such young ages, but remember this: Freedom isn't free. It always comes with a cost. Unfortunately, that cost comes in blood and we all knew this way back starting with the Revolutionary War.

As a result of your views and stance, you are now a divorcee and have moved from Vacaville to the den of liberalism, Berkeley. I hope you like your new home, it seems to suit you well and you're in good company. There are many more misguided leftists who you can commiserate with at the University of California, Berkeley campus over a nice cup of chai latte.

In the meantime, try something different, like following the rules instead of trying to break them. I know that liberals like yourself just love to bend things in your favor, but trying to upstage the President on the day of his speech is just plain RUDE!

So, get a clue and get off your pedestal. That fall is going to be a long and hard one!