Thursday, December 29, 2005


Wall Street Journal Editorial

American blacks who are affiliated with the Republican Party are vigorously vilified by Democrats, especially black Democrats. Uncle Tom, sell-out, Oreo -- the list of slurs is long.
But it is not only insults. I am the founder and director of a unique, progressive homeless facility in downtown Los Angeles, known as the Dome Village. Yet the 35 men, women and children and their pets who call the Dome Village home are being "evicted" from privately owned property after 12-and-a-half years -- apparently on account of my political beliefs and activities. You see, though I am a leading homeless activist, I am also a conservative Republican and a strong supporter of President Bush.

Here's how the situation played out. Recently, I was invited to address a local Republican Women's Club; my landlord read an article in the local paper reporting on the event. Soon after, I received a notice raising the Dome Village rent from $2,500 a month to $18,330.

Shocked, I inquired as to the seriousness of the change and the property owner blurted out that the cause of our "eviction" was "because you are Republican."
He said that as a Democrat, he was tired of helping me and the Dome Village. In other words, let the homeless be damned.
And people think the Democrats are the party of compassion and tolerance. Private property should be protected, of course, and I have no intention of causing any trouble for this property owner as we part ways. Whatever he does with his valuable land -- it is only a few blocks from the Staples Center -- is no concern of mine, and I will not go to court.
Still, I cannot help but be saddened by the whole business. When I founded the Dome Village 12 years ago, we had an understanding that he could ask for his property back at any time for any reason, and I would say "absolutely" without hesitation. Still, his reason was prejudice against Republicans.
We see this across the country. Michael Steele, the lieutenant governor of Maryland and a Republican candidate for the Senate, has been crudely denigrated on racial grounds. A prominent leftist Web site, for instance, depicted him as "Sambo," among other aspersions. When Condoleezza Rice was nominated as Secretary of State, she faced similar treatment: editorial cartoons depicting her as a racial caricature, personalities calling her "Aunt Jemima" on liberal talk radio, and so forth. Clarence Thomas, Ward Connerly, Colin Powell, Thomas Sowell and other black conservatives regularly face similar smears.

These conservatives are attacked not because of the validity or judicious consideration of their views but because those views are supposedly heterodox for American blacks. Yet it is my opinion that many black people in the U.S. are politically and philosophically conservative -- and many are in fact actually closeted Republicans, fearful of persecution by friends, business associates, society clubs, school mates and even churches.

It is time for American blacks to have a conversation about the phenomenon of Democrats persecuting black Republicans. Why is this happening? What is it that the Democrats don't want black folks to understand about Republicans? What is it that the Democrats don't want black folks to know about Democrats? And how is it that we have come to this point -- after having endured so much -- where we have ourselves curtailed the freedom of political expression through the threat of retaliatory consequences?

Mr. Hayes is a homeless activist in Los Angeles


There is nothing on the news, so I have to revert back to my Oprah mode today.
In recent weeks, I have posted shit on the craziness of women, mainly because it’s all over the news, and on the web. I have even read some blogs of women who are frankly fucken nutz! Hell, even this morning I was peeping the Today show and the topic was about young teenage girl bullies.
I wish I could put my finger on it but young teen girls, young adult women and women in general are more fucked up today than ever.
Is it lack of dads growing up, sorry ass moms, television, movies, the web, hell I don’t know but the trend of craziness is growing.
Now keep this a secret..... but I have been watching this show called “L-Word”. So this topic is not something I have pulled out of my ass.

Now before you start ranting I love women. My mom and wife both live with me (and get along with each other, (I am blessed). I am moodier then both of them put together, so what I’m about to say isn’t about them. (Yes Mrs. Snoop reads this blog on occasion). And I love other women too. My surrogate sisters, my daughters, my daughter-in-laws. Even my interns at work! I’ve often said if I ever had my own company, I’d hire all women. They’re often better employees - harder working, smarter, and just nicer people in general. Plus, I like looking at the pretty ones. I’m not a woman hater or basher.
I have worked in two places where I was the only man in the department. Frankly I prefer to be surrounded by women.

NOW with that said, I’m just wondering: What is fuck is up with some of you women? Seriously. I can’t tell you how many otherwise normal females I have lately seem to totally wacked out over what are essentially small things, and then (this is the part that fucks with my head) they wonder why no one sane wants to be around them.
Hello!! Who wants to have anything to do with someone who is throwing things (whether its mean words or objects) at anyone who comes near?

The trigger can be something their man does or doesn’t do (he didn’t call me for a day, he forgot my favorite color, he didn’t notice my new perfume, etc). It can be over some slight at work (they praised her and not me, he implied I was lazy, she didn’t want to have lunch with me, etc.). Or it can be an upset caused by mere strangers (she acted like she was better then me, he stared at my tits, they cut me off in mid-sentence, etc.). Things that are truly aggravating, to be sure. However, my road rage or upset over losing a football game is nothing compared to the drama and chaos some women seem to engage in on a regular basis. Let’s get real for a minute.
If a man who normally means the world to you and who treats you like a princess does one tiny inconsiderate thing, does that mean you are going to be mad at him for weeks or that it’s entirely over with him? If it does, he’s lucky to out of your crazy world!

If you have a bigger issue with someone then just that “Straw that broke the camels back” then own up to it and stop pretending it was just that one small item that set you off. If it was that one small item, then get a fucken grip!

I’m not going to blame hormones or let the LADIES off with that excuse. If you are intelligent enough to figure out your own zip code, you have to know whether or not you get crazy once a month, and if so take steps not to nuke every person and relationship you value during your crazy time. Given warning, most males or people with a survival instinct will do all they can to avoid a crazy ass woman who is otherwise normal most of the month. But just don’t expect us to not notice and resent the craziness!

If the worst and the best day of your life happens in the same week, you have got “roller coaster” problems, and are probably addicted to drama and chaos. Those of you who have a habit of making poor life decisions should just stop blaming the rest of the world for the fact that you can’t seem to be happy....Whose fault is it if you cannot make it a month (or less) without blowing up over something.

Stop taking out your problems on other people. If you like drama that much, you might want to try acting! There’s plenty of community theaters looking for performers! If you need to abuse something or someone, join the roller derby or take up boxing, write a blog!

Most people (especially men) are not mind readers. If you have something to say, then fucken say it. Or step off. Don’t drop hints. Don’t be passive aggressive. Don’t wait for someone to care. (cause most of time we don’t) Say what you want to say, and then face the consequences (don’t expect someone to like being bitched at!).
Try to be logical!! If you want a male to understand what you are communicating, it is going to have to make some sense to them. So ranting will not get your message across, unless your message is “I am crazy. Run away fast!”

If you have an issue with someone, there is no need to communicate that fact while in tears, or through veiled innuendoes, or fucken losing your mind.
If you can’t be calm, then don’t try to do anything important while you are (mental) That’s not time to make important decisions.
If you need to vent, or some time to calm down, then explain that fact (quickly) and wait until you are “normal” (whatever that is for you) before trying to talk with another human being about what is bothering you. You won’t do nearly as much damage to yourself and your relationships! Most people, especially men, do not hear what you are saying if you are crying or yelling or just being an idiot!

If you want other people to figure you out, (you) better have yourself figured out first . If you are chronically unhappy but think that those around you need to cut you some slack, the odds are real high that you are a crazy person, and the only slack you deserve may be in the arms of your straight jacket!

Here’s a hint to women (or people in general) who can’t seem to EVER really be happy in life if every relationship, job, or activity in your life ends (often in pain) or at the very least is often on the brink of ending, THE PROBLEM MAY BE WITH YOU!! Nothing lasts forever, but most people don’t prematurely, and deliberately, kill off the good things they find! People who go from one thing to another (relationship, job, career, hobby, etc), but never find lasting happiness, are often subconsciously sabotaging any chance at a sustained contented life. Why? Because they are masochistic, they actually like the chaos, or they don’t believe they deserve good things!

OK, here’s a short quiz to help you figure it out if you are nutz.... oops if this pertains to you. Just answer “yes” or “no” to these 10 questions:

1. Have you had two or more spouses?

2. Have you broken up with the same someone (or just about) more than 3 times in one year? Extra points if the (near or real) break-ups were all within 6 months.

3. Has anyone ever told you that you were high maintenance (you get extra points for each person who’s said that to you)? It doesn’t matter if you believed them or agree.

4. Do you think that no one in your life has every really truly understood or appreciated you?

5. Do you often rely upon drugs or liquor to help you calm down?

6. Does your own family avoid being around most of the time, or vice versa?

7. Do you rarely go a full day without feeling “different” or “weird” or just extra “unique”?

8. Do you often think other people (especially other women) are jealous of you?

9. Was the last calm & happy period in your life so far back in time that you don’t really remember it very well?

10. Do you think most happy or content people are just settling for less than they could get if they just insisted on more, held out for better, or pushed harder?

Give yourself one point for each yes answer. If you score 5 or higher, you are approaching crazy and need to step back before you get that far. If you score 7 or more you are fucked up and need to either get professional help or get used to living alone without any truly good close friends!

Stop the madness. If you don’t want to be treated like some crazy bitch, then just don’t act crazy! Get some therapy if you are unhappy most of the time. Or get used to being a bitch and embrace all that comes with it. If you think it’s fine to be so crazy go for it - just don’t expect me or other sane people to stick around you for long! The world does not revolve around you. It revolves around me!

Lecturing Liberal Lions of the Old Media

David Limbaugh

"You can call me anything you want, but do not call me a racist," said an indignant President George Bush on Dec. 12, commenting on the despicable, opportunistic suggestion that any inadequacies in the federal response to Hurricane Katrina were due to racism.
But veteran network media giants Ted Koppel and Tom Brokaw don't quite see it that way. Indeed, they don't appear to see eye-to-eye with President Bush on much of anything if their joint interview with Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press" is any indication.
Russert was uncharacteristically tame toward these two, offering them repeated softballs concerning the past year's main stories. But the relaxed atmosphere gave us a clearer picture of the worldview these men share, which is doubtless representative of most of the Old Media players.
From race and taxes to health care and Iraq, they spoke in a monolithic liberal voice, accented by its familiar air of moral superiority.
Koppel began by vigorously defending the media for introducing the issue of race into Katrina. "But the question had to be asked," said Koppel, "if that had been a section of a city that was populated by middle-class white people, would the response have been the same? ... I think there was just a feeling that you didn't have to be as engaged as I think the federal government would have been."
Brokaw agreed. "I think Ted is correct when he says it was not overt or active racism." But it sure must have been subconscious racism, huh, Tom?
It bothers me deeply when race hucksters play the race card on Katrina for political gain, knowing it is outrageously unfair. But I think it troubles me more to hear these two supposed paragons of 20th-century journalism smugly level the charge and, apparently, actually believe it.
Superficially distancing themselves from the allegation that racism was directly involved didn't mitigate it in the least. In fact, if President Bush's alleged bigotry were so deeply rooted as to affect his actions without even stirring his moral impulses, he would probably be a more consummate racist than the guy who consciously considers race while discriminating.
Isn't it ironic that in their sanctimony against perceived racism, presumably because of the evil of one group feeling superior to another, these two sermonizers reveal their absolute certitude of moral superiority over those who reject their liberal worldview? And their self-righteousness wasn't limited to race but included almost all other issues they discussed.
On Iraq, Brokaw talked about "this disconnect between those people who are in uniform and fighting this war over there and a large portion of our population because no sacrifice is being asked of anyone at home. The president is not asking us to conserve oil or to ration gasoline or to push hard for alternative sources of energy in this conflict."
Then Koppel eagerly chimed in, "Or to pay a nickel more in taxes."
Let's not allow the inanity of their analysis to obscure the thrust of their message: "We are better people than average Americans, especially conservatives, because we care more, even if we don't personally sacrifice more than they do."
On health care, Koppel observed, "You can get the best medical care in the world. ... I can. Most Americans can't. And there are 43 million Americans who aren't getting any medical care at all. That is a scandal."
No, what is scandalous is that Koppel so glibly equates lack of insurance with no medical care. What is repulsive is his implication that we have so many uninsured simply because we don't care enough. And what is intolerably hypocritical is that he probably gave Bill Clinton a pass when he didn't put a dent in the number of uninsured despite campaigning on the issue. Clinton was excused because he pretended to care.
It was amusing to witness the elitist duo adopt the Democratic Party line on other issues as well, from President Bush's reputed refusal to admit his "mistakes" to his unwillingness to reach across party lines. And let's not forget his failure to give inspections "a little more time" and "to reach out more" to other nations before attacking Iraq.
But why all the fuss? These venerable heavyweights aren't liberal. They just see the world through clearer lenses and operate on a higher moral plane. Reporting, even editorializing, from this perspective doesn't betray a liberal bias but defines objectivity. And those who deviate from their worldview are simply flawed, and racist, sexist, homophobic, greedy, uncompassionate and – oh, yes – conservative.


By Mark Miller

TOP HUMAN sexuality research team has just revealed the answer to one of man's greatest, age-old quandaries about women -- namely, what women think about while having sex!

The results of the five-year research study, published in the current Journal of Psychological Sexuality, make it clear that while in the midst of the typical act of intercourse, women have quite a lot on their minds.

"This contradicts the popular theory that during sex, women's minds go blank so they can focus totally on giving and receiving pleasure," reveals research study leader Rana Thomas, of the Spaulding Institute. "According to our research, the only time women's minds actually go blank is when they're attempting to watch and understand a sports game."

For the study, women were asked to fill out detailed questionnaires of their thoughts during each sex act. Some enthusiastic participants even filled out the questionnaires during their sex acts. The results -- 97 percent of women think about some or all of the following while making love:

•Whether or not she loves her partner and he loves her.
•If his sexual technique is "pleasing her."
•Her next shopping excursion.
•Brad Pitt.
•"While I appreciate the energy he's expending to find my G-Spot, he's no Christopher Columbus."
•Haagen-Dazs Chocolate Chocolate-Chip ice cream.
•"That ceiling could sure use another coating of paint."
•Whether her partner might think her rear end is too fat.
•Jackhammers. The remaining 3 percent of the women surveyed, who are primarily members of the Religious Right, were preoccupied during sex with the following thoughts:
•Hoping it ends soon.
•"Things would be so much less icky if people didn't have genitals."
•President Bush.
•Mel Gibson.
•Her husband in a nice suit.
•Shoes. In comparison, a similar research study directed toward men, revealed that 100 percent of all men, during sex, are thinking about:
•Pamela Anderson.
•Angelina Jolie.
•Halle Berry.
•Salma Hayek.
•"Oh, yeah, baby, I bet you never had it this good!"
•Friends, neighbors, and relatives they'd like to "bang."
•Favorite sports teams.
•Their dream job -- being a photographer for Playboy magazine.
•Acquiring the superpower of X-ray vision to see through women's clothing.
•Winning the state lottery.
•Jackhammers. Thomas is already at work on related studies, including what gays and lesbians think about during sex, what animals think about during sex, and what space aliens think about during sex.