Chag kasher v'somayach 13 Nissan 5768

Democrats practicing age discrimination
Website dedicated to making McCain's age an issue

When I was in college a mere 15 plus years ago, I recall being exposed to some of the most ignorant and disturbing viewpoints that I have ever come across. I'll never forget being at a social gathering of student government colleagues and the conversation turned to why it was OK to expose children to pornography. To clarify no illegal substances were being taken by the conversation participants, in fact the beer had not even arrived yet. Sober students of supposed sound mind had taken this position. In fact I was looked at as being a weirdo for not agreeing.

A few days later I heard Rush Limbaugh talking about why people who say it's not important how you vote, it's that you at least do your civic duty, were wrong. Why would you want ignorant or uninformed people electing leaders? That was Limbaugh's point and he couldn't be more correct.

When it became obvious this week that the Democratic smear machine had decided to engage in Ageism against John McCain, I was taken back to my college days and my belief that most of my fellow students where too naive, ignorant or morally deprived to be determining the future of America. Young people back then are now approaching middle-age and even though most of us have matured and regained our moral compass, I don't see any advantage my generation or the previous one has over baby-boomers in deciding the future of America.

Today the average life expectancy in the United states is near 80. So why would the age of a soon-to-be 72 year old male, whose family gene pool includes a vibrant 96 year-old mother is an issue, doesn't make any sense to your brilliant blogger. Actually it does when it comes to politics.

Old white men are a connection to the past, lacking vision and understanding of what the future holds. The media portrays them in a dark, closed-minded often bigoted light. A country that supposedly teaches respect for ones elders sure treats them like garbage when their lifetime of experience can be utilized for the greater good.

Younger people are vibrant and a refreshing change from the past. A past that is mostly honorable, but portrayed as shameful in the media. Youth equals hope and strength, while old means weak and despair in our culture.

People respond more positively to youth, concentrating on looks, ignoring substance. Kennedy and Nixon is the best example and to a smaller extent Gary Hart and Walter Mondale in 1984. The case for using your opponents senior status against them has had success and is no doubt being used today against John McCain.

While Barack Obama's bigoted spiritual leader, incompetent foreign policy team and connection to Chicago political corruption will remain an issue, as well as Hillary's habitual lying, McCain's age will undoubtedly be a monkey on his back.

In McCain's case the age issue won't stick, even with denture grip (couldn't resist). His age may become an issue is if he appears tired or lackluster during the debate against his younger opponent. However as long as he appears vibrant and prances out his pretty younger wife, the Dems will need another issue to dwell-on to defeat him.


Shake, Rattle and Holy Sh*t
Earthquake hits Chicago, centered south of Indianapolis

As I write this it's approximately 5AM CST and an earthquake has just hit the Midwest. I have never experienced the earth move, with a few exceptions (thanks honey), and to my disappointment I still haven't. According to news reports Chicago has just experienced an 5.4 magnitude earthquake that apparently centered near Evansville, Indiana.

As for your brilliant blogger, I never felt a thing, but it turns out people as far North as southern Michigan, to the east in Ohio and as south as Louisville, felt the trembles. I always miss the fun.

Hey man, how much for a Snickers?
Fascist educators create sugar coated underground

Limited government icon Paul Jacob has an entertaining and disturbing edition of "Common Sense," regarding the current banning of refined sugar in many public schools. Following in the footsteps of Prohibition and Drugs, bureaucrats have inspired a new black market and have turned some of our children into sugar pushers.

If your child is of junior high school age and attends one of these fascist institutions of meager education, there is a good chance that he/she often seeks out the Candy-man or the Hostess whore. "Hey man, how much for a Ding Dong," is heard in the boys bathroom of the local middle and high school.

The playground is no longer safe for our kids because 12-year old Billy has a backpack filled with Skittles and M&M's and he is willing to give you a sugar-high for a price. I don't even want to think about what our daughters may be doing after their allowance runs out and they are Jonesing for a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup. Oh the humanity!

The new black market (sweet underground) has infiltrated our children in the Peoples Republic of California, where the sugar ban is statewide. The sugar pushers are sneaking in the sweet snacks into our classrooms, walking around with wads of cash, sometimes as much as forty dollars according to Jim Nason, principal of Hook Junior High School.

In Connecticut eighth-grader and honors student Michael Sheridan was suspended for a day for buying a bag of Skittles. They also banned him from an honors student dinner as well as forced him to resign as class vice-president. I'm sure he learned his lesson. Everyone knows Skittles is a gateway candy to Starburst eventually hooking the abuser on fruit-cake.

Is banning candy and snack cakes from public school a bad thing? Actually it is. It's another example of government forcing their will on the people. In this case bureaucrats deciding what is best for children instead of the parents. If a parent wants to put a Ho Ho in a lunchbox, it's their right. Just like alcohol and drugs, when you ban it, people want it more. Kids and sweets won't be any different.

If a school decides to not sell junk food, that is their right. Forbidding Hersey bars and Twinkies from the vending machine or lunch counter is a reasonable decision. Put another check mark in the column of why America desperately needs school choice. Nutrition would easily be another reason a parent may decide to send their child to a particular instituion.

"Public schools are always panicking over something. Now, it’s sugar," Jacob wrote. "When will they panic over poor education?"

Isn't that the bottom line. Stop worrying about my child's eating habits, that's the parents job. In the meantime just don't sell the garbage and increase the time alotted for gym class. How about hiring a gym teacher that doesn't need to drop 75 pounds and gives a damn. Better yet let me decide which school my kids should go too. I'll be happy to take responsibility for my child's education and will certainly take into account exercise curriculum and nutrition standards.

I'm Jonesing for school choice.

Paulie

I'm back Wednesday after a quick family getaway.