Posted on 13th May 2014 by AWD in Economy

The more you learn about crony capitalist Warren Buffett, the more evil you realize he is.

He made billions via Goldman Sachs during the 2007/2008 crisis, billions stolen from taxpayers via TARP. His “I should be paying more taxes” schtick is a joke. He does everything in his power to avoid paying taxes. He actively lobbies the criminals in Washington for loans and favorable treatment for his myriad businesses.

And he gives $1.2 billion to people that kill babies. Rich liberal billionaire cronies enjoy the power of life and death. Screw Warren Buffett, the asshole of Omaha.


Warren Buffett has given $1.2 billion to abortion groups

By Dan Gainor Published May 13, 2014

May 13, 2014, marks one year since Philadelphia abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell was convicted of first-degree murder “in the deaths of three babies who were delivered alive and then killed with scissors at his grimy, ‘house of horrors’ clinic,” according to the Associated Press. Gosnell instantly became the face of abortion in the prolife community.

But there’s another, more recognizable face pushing abortion in the U.S. – liberal billionaire Warren Buffett. The so-called “Oracle of Omaha” has donated more than $1.2 billion to abortion organizations from 2001 to 2012.

That’s equal to the cost of roughly 2.7 million first-trimester abortions – more than twice the number of abortions that occur in an entire year in the United States. Unlike Gosnell, however, everything Buffett has done has been entirely legal. But Buffett does share something else in common with the abortionist. Both their stories have been largely unreported.

Imagine the equivalent of the lives of 2.7 million children snuffed out to serve the whims of the third richest man in the world. Most people would say that’s a story, most likely several.

Oh no, supporters will cry. Planned Parenthood, NARAL and other similar groups do more than just abortions. And Buffett does more than fund the abortion industry. But that is the core of his agenda, just as it is theirs.

Buffett’s own charity, The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, is named after his first wife who was an abortion supporter. Its domestic operation is led by pro-abortion activist Tracy Weitz, Ph.D., MPA. Weitz has worked at Planned Parenthood, The Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health and once defined abortion as “a moral action undertaken by moral agents.”

None of that is obvious from the charity’s website. It includes information on college scholarships and the “Alice Buffett Outstanding Teacher Award.” Neither that award, for “Outstanding Omaha Public School Teachers (K –12),” nor the scholarships even hint at the darker direction of the massive charity.

The site itself seems deliberately insular. Copyrights on the pages read “2008” and the charity makes it clear: “The Buffett Foundation responds to questions about College Scholarships and the Alice Buffett Outstanding Teacher Award only. We will not respond to any other inquiries.”

No wonder. They wouldn’t want to damage Warren Buffett’s incredible media profile by telling the nearly half of America that is prolife how he spends some of his billions. Lord knows the American media would never do that.

Since 2001, there has only been one tangential mention of Buffett’s support for abortion on the broadcast TV network morning and evening news shows. It wasn’t even really about Buffett. It was the NBC “Nightly News” obituary for his wife and it included her support for Planned Parenthood. That’s out of at least 545 appearances or mentions of the Berkshire Hathaway chairman and CEO.

Nowhere did the media explain how Buffett has given $289,811,421 to Planned Parenthood since 2001. Buffett was never mentioned as a top donor when Live Action embarrassed Planned Parenthood with two videos of staffers assisting a Live Action actor with a possible sex selection abortion.

That wasn’t the only embarrassment for the abortion provider. In early 2011, Live Action’s Lila Rose and Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe set up a sting where Rose pretended to be a 15-year-old prostitute and O’Keefe her pimp. Planned Parenthood workers were quite willing to help provide underage abortions.

No mention of Buffett’s billions then either.

Instead we get grandfatherly Buffett, tax-hiking Buffett, investor Buffett. As a reliable liberal businessman, journalists turn to him as a source for almost any commentary

It’s easy to understand. If you give $1,000 to a ballot initiative to defend traditional marriage, that’s controversial. If you give $1.25 billion to promote abortion, journalists, who are wildly pro-abortion, don’t dare see any controversy.

But now the information is out there. Watch as the supposedly “neutral” news media does its best to hide it.




Posted on 1st May 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

It was another normal Spring day in Philly yesterday. We received two months worth of rain in 24 hours. Most of the region got 5 to 7 inches of rain.

And the Flyers got knocked out of the playoffs without winning the Stanley Cup for the 39th straight year. I was 10 years old when I skipped school to go to the Flyers Stanley Cup parade. I don’t think I”ll be alive for the next one.

Pennsylvania Sure Has It’s Priorities Straight


Posted on 1st May 2014 by harry p. in Politics |Social Issues


It even amazes a pessimistice cynic like me sometimes when I read what goes on in PA.  We have amazing shitties like Shittsburgh and Detroitadelphia, consistently rank amongst the worst for roads, take money from New Jersey so they can dump their shit in our state, have had great leadership like Ed Rendell, Corbett and Linda Thompson running our cities and state.  I heard 2 bits of news in the last 12 hours that proclaim how messed up our priorities are.

Here is House Bill 1259 that moves to ban anyone 16 years old or younger from using an indoor tanning salon.

HARRISBURG  — Legislation that prohibits children from using indoor tanning salons is awaiting the signature of Governor Tom Corbett.

House Bill 1259 cleared its final legislative hurdle Monday when it was approved by the state Senate.

The measure bans anyone 16 years old or younger from using an indoor tanning salon.

An amendment to the bill will allow 17-year-olds to use a tanning salon with parental consent.

Supporters of the measure say it will protect children from the potential dangers related to exposure.


So 16 year olds aren’t capable of determining whether or not they should or shouldn’t get tan at a salon.   I thought they couldn’t afford it anymore because Obamacare was going to tax tanning salons.  I have a question, will this bill only safeguard the chilrun from commercial tanning salons or will it outlaw their use for minors even in private homes.  To ensure their safety we need to create a special task force that will monitor energy levels of homes and do no-knock raids on those suspected of allowing their the community’s chilrun to partake in black market tanning.

no knock raid
Better not be tanning illegally in there oh, by the way soon we won’t need a warrant to enter your house

And then the PA Supreme Cocksuckers say the Keystone Copfuks don’t need a warrant to search your vehicle, they only need probable cause and reasonable suspicion.  Because we are all viewed as threats, enemy combatants and suspects that means our vehicles cane be searched anytime, anyplace for any conceivable reason.  I am sure this is an adequate safeguard; the same type of people making sure this isn’t abused are the same types that choked this kid unconcious because they said he was resisting arrest (Story of PA Supreme’s ruling below).

so this is what resisting looks like

Divided Pa. Supreme Court OKs warrantless searches of cars

April 30, 2014 at 12:36 PM, updated April 30, 2014 at 10:00 PM

As of this week, police in Pennsylvania no longer have to secure a warrant to search your car.

A sharply-split state Supreme Court ensured that by ruling Tuesday that Pennsylvania will henceforth follow federal law that requires only that police officers have probable cause before searching vehicles.

Supreme Court justice Seamus P. McCaffery
Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice Seamus P. McCaffery. Read McCaffery’s profile.

Previously, officers in the Keystone State generally were required to obtain warrants before searching a vehicle unless the car’s  owner gave consent for a search.

The decision to adopt the federal approach came on a 4-2 decision, with Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille, and Justices J. Michael Eakin, Seamus P. McCaffery and Thomas G. Saylor in the majority.

Justices Debra McCloskeyTodd and Max Baer opposed the move. In a sharply-worded dissenting opinion, Todd contended that the majority’s decision “heedlessly contravenes over 225 years of unyielding protection against unreasonable search and seizure which our people have enjoyed as their birthright.”

In the majority opinion, McCaffery said adopting the federal stance will ensure that police in Pennsylvania follow a “uniform standard for a warrantless search of a motor vehicle, applicable in federal and state court, to avoid unnecessary confusion, conflict and inconsistency in this often-litigated area.”

Requiring that police have probable cause for warrantless vehicle searches “is a strong and sufficient safeguard against illegal searches of motor vehicles,” he wrote in the 62-page majority decision.

The Supreme Court’s ruling stems from a legal battle over a January 2010 traffic stop in Philadelphia.

Two police officers pulled over a sport-utility vehicle driven by Shiem Gary because they believed its window tinting was too dark. The officers then claimed they smelled marijuana coming from the SUV and that Gary told them there was “weed” in the vehicle.

Police said a drug-sniffing dog hit on the SUV and a subsequent warrantless search discovered about 2 pounds of marijuana hidden under the hood.

Supreme Court justice Debra McCloskey
Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice Debra McCloskey Todd. Read McCloskey Todd’s profile.

Gary challenged whether the police had legally obtained the drug evidence. The case came to the Supreme Court on appeal after the state Superior Court backed Gary.

In the Supreme Court’s majority decision, McCaffery noted the federal law allowing warrantless searches of vehicles with probable cause evolved from federal rulings that date to the Prohibition Era of the 1920s, when federal agents were chasing bootleggers.

McCaffery wrote that, while police must secure warrants before searching homes or offices, “there is a diminished expectation of privacy in motor vehicles” that is recognized not only by the feds, but by other states as well.

Todd countered in her dissenting opinion that the majority’s decision “severely diminishes” the  “important personal privacy rights which owners and occupants of automobiles possess therein.”

“Advances in technology have caused cars to become data repositories revealing the most discrete information about how and where individuals drive, whom they call from their car and any number of other revealing insights into what they do in their daily lives,” she wrote. “For most people, the automobile…has become a rolling repository of their private possessions.”

When warrants are required before vehicle searches, at least a neutral judge, and not the police, makes the call regarding whether searches are legally permissible, she wrote.

In any case, Todd noted, advances in communications now enable police to obtain search warrants almost immediately, so time constraints that once might have hindered investigations no longer exist.

Original HERE.

Check your privelege and know your enemy.



Posted on 30th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

The Fourth Amendment is dead in PA. The copfuks are ecstatic that they can intimidate drivers and search the vehicles of all citizens without cause. The noose continues to tighten. It really is us versus them. Know your enemy.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Cops No Longer Need Warrants to Search Vehicles

..heedlessly contravenes over 225 years of unyielding protection against unreasonable search and seizure..”

Adan Salazar
April 30, 2014

Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court has ruled police officers in the Commonwealth are no longer required to obtain a warrant prior to searching a vehicle, a decision that essentially overturns the protections enumerated in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and in Pennsylvania’s own state constitution.

 San Francisco Police searching a vehicle after a stop in 2008. / Photo: Drew Stephens, Wikimedia Commons

San Francisco Police searching a vehicle after a stop in 2008. / Photo: Drew Stephens, Wikimedia Commons

Yesterday, Justice Seamus McCaffery issued the court’s opinion, stemming from a 2010 Philadelphia police department traffic stop of a man for having dark tinted windows, who was later found to be hiding two pounds of marijuana under the hood of his vehicle.

In a 4-2 vote, the court decided “the prerequisite for a warrantless search of a motor vehicle is probable cause to search.”

Previously, as explained by Lancaster Online, police were not allowed to search a vehicle unless a driver consented, “or if the illegal substances were in plain view.”

“Now, based on the opinion, it only takes reasonable probable cause for an officer to go ahead with the search without a warrant,” writes Brett Hambright.

Not surprisingly, police are ecstatic.

“It is a ruling that helps law enforcement as they continue to find people in possession of illegal drugs,” said New Holland Police Lt. Jonathan Heisse, reports Hambright.

However, in her dissenting opinion, Justice Debra McCloskey Todd rightly noted the ruling “heedlessly contravenes over 225 years of unyielding protection against unreasonable search and seizure which our people have enjoyed as their birthright.” Todd also called the decision “diametrically contrary to the deep historical and legal traditions” of Pennsylvania, according to Associated Press.

Several defense attorneys also view the court’s ruling as a monumental government overreach that could negatively impact the normal, day-to-day lives of ordinary citizens.

“It’s an expanding encroachment of government power,” Jeffrey Conrad, a defense attorney with the law firm Clymer Musser & Conrad told Hambright today regarding the court’s final opinion. “It’s a protection we had two days ago, that we don’t have today. It’s disappointing from a citizens’ rights perspective.”

“I am concerned,” another defense attorney, Christopher Patterson, expressed to Hambright, “that we are on a slippery slope that will eliminate personal privacy and freedom in the name of expediency for law enforcement.”

Another lawyer clarified that the ruling does not grant police the authority to search vehicles arbitrarily.

“This does not mean that they may search every vehicle they stop,” Mike Winters with the law firm McMahon & Winters said. “They must still develop probable cause before they are permitted to search your vehicle without a warrant.”

Raising Up Compliant Children in the American Police State


Posted on 29th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

Guest Post By John W. Whitehead

“[The aim of public education is not] to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. . . . Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim . . . is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States…”Henry Mencken, American Journalist (April 1924)

How do you persuade a nation of relatively freedom-loving individuals to march in lock step with a police state? You start by convincing them that they’re in danger, and only the government can protect them. Keep them keyed up with constant danger alerts, and the occasional terrorist incident, whether real or staged. Distract them with wall-to-wall news coverage about sinking ships, disappearing planes and pseudo-celebrities spouting racist diatribes. Use blockbuster movies, reality shows and violent video games to hype them up on military tactics, and then while they’re distracted and numb to all that is taking place around them, indoctrinate their young people to your way of thinking, relying primarily on the public schools and popular culture.

After all, public education the world over has always been the vehicle for statist propaganda of one sort or another, whether it’s religion, militarism, democracy or totalitarianism, and America is no exception. In fact, today’s public schools, far from being bastions of free speech, are merely microcosms of the world beyond the schoolhouse gates, and increasingly, it’s a world hostile to freedom.

As I show in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, within America’s public schools can be found almost every aspect of the American police state that plagues those of us on the “outside”: metal detectors, surveillance cameras, militarized police, drug-sniffing dogs, tasers, cyber-surveillance, random searches, the list goes on. Whether it takes the form of draconian zero tolerance policies, overreaching anti-bullying statutes, police officers charged with tasering and arresting so-called unruly children, standardized testing with its emphasis on rote answers, political correctness, or the extensive surveillance systems cropping up in schools all over the country, young people in America are first in line to be indoctrinated into compliant citizens of the new American police state.

Zero tolerance policies, which punish all offenses severely, no matter how minor, condition young people to steer clear of doing anything that might be considered out of line, whether it’s pointing their fingers like a gun, drawing on their desks, or chewing their gum too loudly. Although the Obama administration recently called on schools to rethink how they discipline and punish students who misbehave, their guidelines to help schools re-evaluate their disciplinary policies fail to address the source of the problem: the quasi-prison atmosphere of public schools.

Surveillance technologies, used by school officials, police, NSA agents, and corporate entities to track the everyday activities of students, accustom young people to life in an electronic concentration camp, with all of their movements monitored, their interactions assessed, and their activities recorded and archived. For example, the Department of Education (DOE) has created a system to track, archive and disseminate data on every single part of a child’s educational career with colleges and state agencies such as the Department of Labor and the offices of Technology and Children and Family Services. The system relies on a database called inBloom, which is funded by corporate magnates such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. DOE has also received $40 million from various state and federal agencies to help fund the program.

Metal detectors at school entrances and police patrolling school hallways acclimatize young people to being viewed as suspects. Funded in part by federal grants, school districts across the country have “paid local police agencies to provide armed ‘school resource officers’ for high schools, middle schools and sometimes even elementary schools.” As the New York Times reports, “Hundreds of additional districts, including those in Houston, Los Angeles and Philadelphia, have created police forces of their own, employing thousands of sworn officers.” The problem, of course, is that the very presence of these police officers in the schools results in greater numbers of students being arrested or charged with crimes for nonviolent, childish behavior. In Texas, for example, school police officers write more than 100,000 misdemeanor tickets a year, each ticket amounting to hundreds of dollars in court fines—a convenient financial windfall for the states. All too often, these incidents remain on students’ permanent records, impacting college and job applications.

Weapons of compliance, such as tasers which deliver electrical shocks lethal enough to kill, not only teach young people to fear the police, the face of our militarized government, but teach them that torture is an accepted means of controlling the population. It’s a problem that has grown exponentially as the schools have increasingly clamored for—and hired on—their own police forces. One high school student in Texas suffered severe brain damage and nearly died after being tasered. A 15-year-old disabled North Carolina student was tasered three times, resulting in punctured lungs. A New York student was similarly tasered for lying on the floor and crying.

Standardized testing and Common Core programs, which discourage students from thinking for themselves while rewarding them for regurgitating whatever the government, through its so-called educational standards, dictates they should be taught, will create a generation of test-takers capable of little else, molded and shaped by the federal government and its corporate allies into what it considers to be ideal citizens. Incredibly, despite the fact that the U.S. invests more money in public education (roughly $8,000 per child per year) than many other developed countries, we rank 27th in the world for school educational achievement.

Overt censorship, monitoring and political correctness, which manifest themselves in a variety of ways, from Internet filters on school computers to sexual harassment policies, habituate young people to a world in which nonconformist, divergent, politically incorrect ideas and speech are treated as unacceptable or dangerous. In such an environment, a science teacher criticizing evolution can get fired for insubordination, a 9-year-old boy remarking that his teacher is “cute” can be suspended for sexual harassment, students detected using their smart phones during class time can be reported for not paying attention in class, and those accused of engaging in “bullying, cyber-bullying, hate and shaming activities, depression, harm and self harm, self hate and suicide, crime, vandalism, substance abuse and truancy” on social media such as Twitter or Facebook, will have their posts and comments analyzed by an outside government contractor.

So far I’ve only mentioned what’s happening within the public schools. It doesn’t even begin to touch on extracurricular activities such as the Explorers program, which trains young people—“ages 14 to 21 who have a C average”—to be future agents of the police state. Explorers meet weekly, train for competitions and spend their weekends working on service projects. In one Border Patrol training exercise, teenagers as young as 14, suited up in military gear with lethal-looking airsoft guns, were “instructed on how to quiet an obstreperous lookout,” reports the New York Times. “Put him on his face and put a knee in his back,” a Border Patrol agent explained. “I guarantee that he’ll shut up.”

Then there’s the military’s use of video games and blockbuster movies to propagandize war and recruit young people. Thanks to a collaboration between the Department of Defense and the entertainment industry, the American taxpayer is paying for what amounts to a propaganda campaign aimed at entrenching the power of the military in American society. As author Nick Turse points out, “Today, almost everywhere you look, whether at the latest blockbuster on the big screen or what’s on much smaller screens in your own home – likely made by a defense contractor like Sony, Samsung, Panasonic or Toshiba – you’ll find the Pentagon or its corporate partners.”

What’s really unnerving, however, are the similarities between our own system of youth indoctrination and that of Nazi Germany, with its Hitler Youth programs and overt campaign of educational indoctrination. Now before I’m drowned out by howls of outrage, note that while I am not suggesting the United States is deliberately attempting to raise up a generation of Hitler Youth, our schools and society at large are teaching young people to march in lockstep with the all-powerful government—which may be just as dangerous in the end.

You don’t have to take my word for it. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum provides some valuable insight into education in the Nazi state, which was responsible for winning “millions of German young people … over to Nazism in the classroom and through extracurricular activities.” The similarities are startling, ranging from the dismissal of teachers deemed to be “politically unreliable” to the introduction of classroom textbooks that taught students obedience to state authority and militarism. “Board games and toys for children served as another way to spread racial and political propaganda to German youth. Toys were also used as propaganda vehicles to indoctrinate children into militarism.” And then there was the Hitler Youth, a paramilitary youth group intended to train young people for future service in the armed forces and government.

Hitler himself recognized the value of indoctrinating young people. As he noted, “When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side, and you will not get me on your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to me already. A people lives forever. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants however now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.’”

We’re certainly not doing ourselves or our young people any favors by allowing them to be indoctrinated into a police state mindset from early on, with no knowledge that they have any rights or any sense that they are the descendants of revolutionaries who stood up to tyrannical regimes.

If there is one glimmer of hope for this younger generation, it may be found in the unlikeliest of places: young adult literature, specifically dystopian literature, which is all the rage among young people today. Serial books such as Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, The Bone Season and The Giver all speak to a growing awareness among young people that the future awaiting them is far from secure, and that freedom ultimately rests in their ability to take on the powers-that-be.



Posted on 26th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

Guest Post by Mike Krieger


Say Goodbye to “Net Neutrality” – New FCC Proposal Will Permit Discrimination of Web Content

The concept of “net neutrality” is not an easy one to wrap your head around. Particularly if you aren’t an expert in how the internet works and if you don’t work for an ISP (internet service provider). In fact, I think that lobbyists and special interest groups make the concept intentionally difficult and convoluted so that the average person’s eyes glaze over and they move on to the next topic. I am by no means an expert in this area; however, in this post I will try to explain in as simple terms as possible what “net neutrality” means and what is at risk with the latest FCC proposal. I also highlight a wide variety of articles on the subject, so I hope this post can serve as a one-stop-shop on the issue.

The concept of “net neutrality” describes how broadband access across the internet currently works. Essentially, the ISPs are not allowed to discriminate amongst the content being delivered to the consumer. A small site like Liberty Blitzkrieg, will be delivered in the same manner as content from a huge site like CNN that has massive traffic and a major budget. This is precisely why the internet has become such a huge force for free speech. It has allowed the “little guy” with no budget to compete equally in the “market of ideas” with the largest media behemoths on the planet. It has allowed for a quantum leap in the democratization and decentralization in the flow of information like nothing since the invention and proliferation of the printing press itself. It is one of the most powerful tools ever created by humanity, and must be guarded as the treasure it is.

People have been worried about internet censorship in the USA for a long time. What people need to understand is that censorship in so-called “first world” countries cannot be implemented in the same manner as in societies used to authoritarian rule. The status quo in the U.S. understands that the illusion of freedom must be maintained even as civil liberties are eroded to zero. In the UK, the approach to internet censorship has been the creation of “internet filters.” The guise is fighting porn, but in the end you get censorship. This is something I highlighted in my post: How Internet in the UK is “Sleepwalking into Censorship.”

In the U.S., it appears the tactic might take the form of new FCC rules on “net neutrality,” which the Wall Street Journal first broke earlier this week. While the exact rules won’t become public until May 15th, what we know now is that the FCC intends to allow ISPs to create a “fast lane” for internet content, which established content providers with big bucks can pay for in order to gain preferred access to consumers on the other end.

This is truly the American way of censorship. Figure out how those with the deepest pockets can smother the free speech of those with little or no voice on the one medium in which information flow is still treated equally. The nightmare scenario here would be that status quo companies use their funds to price out everyone else. It would kill innovation on the web before it starts. It’s just another example of the status quo attempting to build a moat around itself that we have already seen in so many other areas of the economy. The internet really is the last bastion of freedom and dynamism in the U.S. economy and this proposal could put that at serious risk. Oh, and to make matters worse, the current FCC is filled to the brim with revolving door industry lobbyists. More on this later.

So that’s my two cents. Now I will provide excerpts from some of the many articles that have been written on the topic in recent days.

First, from the article that started it all in the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON—Regulators are proposing new rules on Internet traffic that would allow broadband providers to charge companies a premium for access to their fastest lanes.

If the rule is adopted, winners would be the major broadband providers that would be able to charge both consumers and content providers for access to their networks. Companies like Google Inc. or Netflix Inc. that offer voice or video services that rely on broadband could take advantage of such arrangements by paying to ensure that their traffic reaches consumers without disruption. Those companies could pay for preferential treatment on the “last mile” of broadband networks that connects directly to consumers’ homes.

Startups and other small companies not capable of paying for preferential treatment are likely to suffer under the proposal, say net neutrality supporters, along with content companies that might have to pay a toll to guarantee optimal service.

In Silicon Valley, there has been a long-standing unease with owners of broadband pipes treating some content as more equal than others. Large companies have been mostly silent about the FCC’s moves regarding broadband service, but some smaller firms or investors in startups have said the FCC needs to tread carefully so Internet policies don’t disadvantage young companies that can’t afford tolls to the Web.

“For technologists and entrepreneurs alike this is a worst-case scenario,” said Eric Klinker, chief executive of BitTorrent Inc., a popular Internet technology for people to swap digital movies or other content. “Creating a fast lane for those that can afford it is by its very definition discrimination.”

Some consumer advocacy groups reacted strongly against the proposal. The American Civil Liberties Union said, “If the FCC embraces this reported reversal in its stance toward net neutrality, barriers to innovation will rise, the marketplace of ideas on the Internet will be constrained, and consumers will ultimately pay the price.” Free Press, a nonpartisan organization that is a frequent critic of the FCC, said, “With this proposal, the FCC is aiding and abetting the largest ISPs in their efforts to destroy the open Internet.”

The New York Times also covered the story:

Still, the regulations could radically reshape how Internet content is delivered to consumers. For example, if a gaming company cannot afford the fast track to players, customers could lose interest and its product could fail.

Consumer groups immediately attacked the proposal, saying that not only would costs rise, but also that big, rich companies with the money to pay large fees to Internet service providers would be favored over small start-ups with innovative business models — stifling the birth of the next Facebook or Twitter.

“If it goes forward, this capitulation will represent Washington at its worst,” said Todd O’Boyle, program director of Common Cause’s Media and Democracy Reform Initiative. “Americans were promised, and deserve, an Internet that is free of toll roads, fast lanes and censorship — corporate or governmental.”

Let’s not forget that Comcast is attempting to take over Time Warner (I wrote my opinion on that here). So this whole thing seems like a gigantic, status quo consolidation cluster fuck.

Also, Comcast is asking for government permission to take over Time Warner Cable, the third-largest broadband provider, and opponents of the merger say that expanding its reach as a broadband company will give Comcast more incentive to favor its own content over that of unaffiliated programmers.


“The very essence of a ‘commercial reasonableness’ standard is discrimination,” Michael Weinberg, a vice president at Public Knowledge, a consumer advocacy group, said in a statement. “And the core of net neutrality is nondiscrimination.”

“This standard allows Internet service providers to impose a new price of entry for innovation on the Internet,” he said.

Now from TechCrunch’s article, The FCC’s New Net Neutrality Rules Will Brutalize The Internet:

The FCC will propose new net neutrality rules that at once protect content from discrimination, but also allow content companies to pay for preferential treatment. The news, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, would in fact create a two-tiered system in which wealthy companies can “better serve the market” at the expense of younger, less well-capitalized firms. 

The above is only “net neutrality” in that it protects all content from having its delivery degraded on a whim. The rubric reported doesn’t actually force neutrality at all, but instead carves out a way for extant potentates to crowd out the next generation of players by leaning on their cash advantage.

In practice this puts new companies and new ideas at a disadvantage, as they come into the market with a larger disadvantage than they otherwise might have. Any cost that we introduce that a large company can afford, and a startup can’t, either makes the startup poorer should it pay or degrades its service by comparison if it doesn’t.

This will slow innovation and enrich the status quo. That’s a shame.

So given the potential disastrous consequences noted above, why is the FCC pushing this through? After all, “net neutrality” was one of candidate Barack Obama’s key campaign promises (just the latest in a series of completely broken promises and lies).

As usual, you can simply follow the money. While FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is hiding behind a recent court decision that seemingly struck down net neutrality, the court gave him the option to declare the internet a public utility, which would have prevented this outcome. Yet, he didn’t go that route. Why? The revolving door of course!

An article by Lee Fang at Vice sheds a great deal of light on the issue:

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal dropped something of a bombshell with leaked news that the Federal Communications Commission is planning to abandon so-called “net neutrality” regulations—rules to ensure that Internet providers are prevented from discriminating based on content. Under the new proposed system, companies such as Comcast or Verizon will be able to create a tiered Internet, in which websites will have to pay more money for faster speeds, a change that observers predict will curb free speech, stifle innovation and increase costs for consumers.

Like so many problems in American government, the policy shift may relate to the pernicious corruption of the revolving door. The FCC is stocked with staffers who have recently worked for Internet Service Providers (ISP) that stand to benefit tremendously from the defeat of net neutrality.

The American way.

Take Daniel Alvarez, an attorney who has long represented Comcast through the law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP. In 2010, Alvarez wrote a letter to the FCC on behalf of Comcast protesting net neutrality rules, arguing that regulators failed to appreciate “socially beneficial discrimination.” The proposed rules, Alvarez wrote in the letter co-authored with a top Comcast lobbyist named Joe Waz, should be reconsidered.

Today, someone in Comcast’s Philadelphia headquarters is probably smiling. Alvarez is now on the other side, working among a small group of legal advisors hired directly under Tom Wheeler, the new FCC Commissioner who began his job in November.

As soon as Wheeler came into office, he also announced the hiring of former Ambassador Philip Verveer as his senior counselor. A records request reveals that Verveer also worked for Comcast in the last year. In addition, he was retained by two industry groups that have worked to block net neutrality, the Wireless Association (CTIA) and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.

In February, Matthew DelNero was brought into the agency to work specifically on net neutrality. DelNero has previously worked as an attorney for TDS Telecom, an Internet service provider that has lobbied on net neutrality, according to filings.

In his first term, Obama’s administration proposed net neutrality rules, but in January of this year, a federal court tossed the regulations in a case brought by Verizon. The decision left open the possibility of new rules, but only if the FCC were to reclassify the Internet as a utility. The Wall Street Journal story with details about the FCC’s leaked plans claims the agency will not be reclassifying the web as a utility. The revised rules to be announced by the FCC will allow ISPs to “give preferential treatment to traffic from some content providers, as long as such arrangements are available on ‘commercially reasonable’ terms,” reports journalist Gautham Nagesh.

Well how about chairman Wheeler himself?

Critics have been quick to highlight the fact that chairman Wheeler, the new head of the FCC, is a former lobbyist with close ties to the telecommunications industry. In March, telecom companies—including Comcast, Verizon, and the US Telecom Association—filled the sponsor list for a reception to toast Wheeler and other commissioners. Many of these companies have been furiously lobbying Wheeler and other FCC officials on the expected rule since the Verizon ruling.

But overall, the FCC is one of many agencies that have fallen victim to regulatory capture. Beyond campaign contributions and other more visible aspects of the influence trade in Washington, moneyed special interest groups control the regulatory process by placing their representatives into public office, while dangling lucrative salaries to those in office who are considering retirement. The incentives, with pay often rising to seven and eight figure salaries on K Street, are enough to give large corporations effective control over the rule-making process.

Ars Technica also covered the revolving door angle in its article:

The CTIA Wireless Association today announced that Meredith Attwell Baker—a former FCC Commissioner and former Comcast employee—will become its president and CEO on June 2, replacing Steve Largent, a former member of Congress (and former NFL player). 

Largent himself became the cellular lobby’s leader when he replaced Tom Wheeler—who is now the chairman of the FCC. Wheeler is also the former president and CEO of the NCTA (National Cable & Telecommunications Association), which… wait for it… is now led by former FCC Chairman Michael Powell.

To sum up, the top cable and wireless lobby groups in the US are led by a former FCC chairman and former FCC commissioner, while the FCC itself is led by a man who formerly led both the cable and wireless lobby groups.

I mean, you can’t make this stuff up.

But wait, it gets worse.

Among current FCC commissioners, Republican Ajit Pai previously served as associate general counsel for Verizon and held numerous government positions before becoming a commissioner in 2012.

It is extraordinarily tragic that the greed of a small group of crony crooks revolving between the corridors of corporate America and Washington D.C. may be about to ruin the open internet as we know it.

Please share this article far and wide and perhaps enough public awareness can make a difference.

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger



Posted on 16th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , ,

My University operates on a July 1 to June 30 year. Therefore, our open enrollment for benefits started this week. Since our year crosses into 2015, we tend to be the canary in the coal mine for health insurance premium increases. I just logged on to see my new rates. I was breathlessly anticipating that $2,500 per family health cost savings I was promised by Obama in 2009 when he was selling Obamacare to the gullible masses. Sadly, I was disappointed once again.

It seems my SAVINGS is actually a 12% increase in my premiums. Being the fastidious financial person who has been using Quicken as my checkbook for the last 23 years, I am able to easily go back and see the increases in my monthly insurance premiums since Obama promised me those savings. Here are my increases since 2010:

2010 – 10% increase

2011 – 8% increase

2012 – 6% increase

2013 – 20% increase (12% premium increase and new $1,000 deductible instituted)

2014 – 12% increase

These increases are not for some gold-plated plan. I have the basic Keystone HMO plan. There are two other far more expensive options. I have to stay within the HMO network, get referrals, etc.

Isn’t it ironic that since Obama and his liberal minions jammed Obamacare down our throats in 2009, my annual cost for premiums is now $2,500 higher than it was in 2009? Maybe he mixed up his signs while reading the teleprompter back in 2009. This doesn’t even take into account my co-pays going from $15 per visit to $25 per visit over this same time frame. With a family of five, the number of doctors visits per year is substantial.

Obama touts how his law “allowed” kids up to the age of 26  to stay on their parents’ insurance plans. It didn’t allow anything. It forced insurance companies to expand coverage. They expanded the coverage by raising premiums on everyone. That was the 10% increase in 2010.

We now know the risk pool of those 7.1 million people who signed up for their “free” Obamacare is skewed towards older sicker people and not the young healthy people used to model the finances of Obamacare.

The 12% increase in my premiums is going to cover the skewed risk pool. These are the facts on the ground in the real world. And the reality of Obamacare hasn’t even really hit yet. Wait until 30% of the 7.1 million fail to pay their premiums. The insurance companies will be threatened by Obama to keep quiet about the non-payment and will just pass on the cost to the paying customers like you and me.

I happen to work for the largest employer in Philadelphia, with the most clout when it comes to negotiating insurance rates. If my premiums are going up 12% to 20% per year, imagine the increases hitting employees at small businesses. You understand why small businesses are closing down or not hiring new employees. Those still in business are just doing away with insurance for their employees and letting them sign up for Obamacare.

There is no way to describe Obamacare other than as an unmitigated disaster. And he has unilaterally changed the law by delaying the really bad mandated stuff until after the 2014 mid-term elections. We wouldn’t want the Democrats to stand behind their penultimate legislative accomplishment.

I’ve just addressed the financial aspects to a an average family. HZK and AWD can expound upon the horrible impact on doctors. Millions have poured into the Medicaid system, which will eventually bankrupt the states and limit the care options to practically nothing for the poor. The quality of care will deteriorate rapidly as Obamacare reaches its zenith.

But my increase declined from 20% to 12%, so my trend is down. Well done Savior.




Posted on 9th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , ,

The storyline all winter from the government, propaganda spewing media, and Wall Street shyster economists has been that consumers weren’t spending because it was cold and snowy. We know that is a shocking circumstance during the winter. Well Spring has sprung and March was a sedate weather month. Storyline OBLITERATED again. Consumers did not increase their spending over the level of February. Consumer spending was LOWER than last March.

If the unemployment rate has plunged in the last year from 7.5% to 6.7% how come real people living in the real world are spending less than one year ago? Inquiring minds want to know. Of course, maybe it has something to do with another 1.2 million working age people leaving the workforce, real wages declining, 90% of the “new” jobs paying less than $35,000 per year, Obamacare driving insurance costs up 20%, taxes being increased, and prices for food and fuel rising by 5% or more.

Credit card debt outstanding continues to decline month after month. And this is with more and more people using credit cards to pay their utilities, property taxes, and income taxes. Total consumer credit outstanding continues to skyrocket as our beloved corrupt politician leaders continue to hand out your tax dollars to subprime borrowers in West Philly so they can drive Cadillac Escalades until they default, and to subprime University of Phoenix dolts sitting in their basements in their boxer shorts seeking a degree in black lesbian African studies with a minor in basket weaving. The average student loan borrower is taking out $2,500 more than their actual tuition and materials bill. Do you think Obama and his minions are worried about your tax dollars being paid back?

Despite all the FREE MONEY being redistributed by Obama and the mainstream media propaganda about our economic recovery, the proof is in the spending. Average non-Free Shit Army Americans are tapped out. They’re broke. Credit card bills have to be paid back and carry an average interest rate of 13% to 20%. Americans are sustaining themselves on credit cards. Therefore, they are buying less and less unnecessary crap. That is why retailers are closing thousands of stores.

I can’t wait to hear about consumer spending being weak this summer because it was too hot.

Guest Post from David Stockman’s Contra Corner

No “Escape Velocity” Here: Gallup Reports First Y/Y Consumer Spending Decline Since 2009

Gallup’s survey of consumer spending in February conformed largely to the orthodox script of weather-beaten households forgoing January purchases. The large drop in January was thus assumed a temporary condition that would simply spillover into February. And that was the sense gained by Gallup’s results, with a large increase in February over January.

ABOOK Apr 2014 Gallup Spending Feb

Americans’ daily self-reports of spending averaged $87 in February, a solid recovery after dipping to $78 in January, which had been the lowest estimate in 14 months.

While that focus of January-to-February led this analysis into more optimistic conjecture, it left off another pertinent observation. Outside of a few monthly peaks, spending appears to have flat-lined overall since the early portion of 2013 (clearly captured in Gallup’s own results above). Since concentration remained on the January to February change, Gallup left its February report with that noted sanguinity and confidence.

Spending typically picks up over the course of the year, and Gallup has observed increases from February to March the past four years. This year’s strong February spending could be a positive sign of things to come.

With the release of figures for March, it seems such weather-worn optimism was not as much warranted. There was, in fact, no change at all between February and March despite a much more favorable national weather pattern.

ABOOK Apr 2014 Gallup Spending Mar

Worse than that, as Gallup commendably pointed out without qualification, March 2014 spending was actually below March 2013. That was the first negative March comp since 2009.

But the stall in spending, both month-over-month and compared with a year ago, most likely signals a continuation of the lackluster retail sales seen so far in 2014. Although government figures show that total retail sales, excluding motor vehicles (in line with Gallup’s definition of consumer spending), rebounded in February after January’s anemic sales, year-over-year sales were up by only 1.6% in January and 1.3% in February — the weakest retail growth figures since November 2009. Given the Gallup data, it is reasonable to expect that the March report, due April 14, will show more of the same.

That presents a fair and reasonable recap. What is left out is why. Again, as the calendar advances further away from winter we can put this silly appeal to temperature correlation behind. I have no doubt about the cleverness with which economists can find excuses for this sinking economic trajectory (the latest being demographic), however it should be increasingly clear that there is a larger macro component at work here (or, more precisely, a lack of work).

Thus the explanation for January’s deplorable state is not cold weather, but that consumers have reached an exhaustive point. Given that holiday sales were the weakest since the Great Recession, and further that even reduced spending in December led to such a slide in January, that does not position the economy for a robust rebound but rather toward the denouement of a cyclical slope inside a structural ruse.


Click here to sign up for our free weekly e-newsletter.

“Wealth preservation and accumulation through thoughtful investing.”

For information on Alhambra Investment Partners’ money management services and global portfolio approach to capital preservation, contact us at: [email protected]  or 561-686-6844 . You can also book an appointment for a free, no-obligation consultation using our contact form.

This is a syndicated repost courtesy of Alhambra Investment Partners – We Are Different.. To view original, click here.



Posted on 7th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , ,

When I saw the story below on the news the other night I was infuriated. The local news talking heads blathered about the tragedy, the mother  portrayed the grieving parent and the police that were interviewed said how sad the story was. I drive by 37th and Wallace Street every damn day. This death occurred one block form the infamous Mantua Square low income housing townhouse estates with gates. Mantua is one of Obama’s PROMISE ZONES. Do you think more of your tax dollars dumped into this culture of entitlement, ignorance and violence will change these people?

My reaction to the story was sadness for the little girl and outrage and anger towards the mother and her unidentified “male friend”. What kind of ignorant animal brings a loaded 357 Magnum with an 8 inch barrel into a house with four children under the age of 14? This pitiful excuse for a human being then leaves the gun on the refrigerator. How can a mother allow a person like this into her house? How can she allow him to leave this loaded gun? This is the fucking gun Clint Eastwood used to blow perps away in the Dirty Harry movies.  


How could an adult allow this loaded weapon in a house full of children? The mother and the scumbag who left the gun are solely responsible for this death. It isn’t some tragic mistake. It is due to the reckless disregard for human life by two adults. They should go to prison for their actions. Not in good old liberal Philadelphia. No one will be held accountable. Maybe tougher gun laws will save the day. I’m sure the scumbag registered this weapon properly and had all of his paperwork in order. My disgust and contempt for the people of West Philly grows exponentially by the day. I’m sure this won’t happen once Obama works his Promise Zone magic.


Girl, 11, fatally shot in West Phila. house

Friends and family members gather outside the house on Wallace Street in Mantua after Saturday's fatal shooting.

By Maria Panaritis and Jonathan Lai, Inquirer Staff Writers

An 11-year-old girl was shot and killed, evidently accidentally by her 2-year-old sibling, after one of the girl’s siblings found a loaded gun left atop a refrigerator in a house on the 3800 block of Wallace Street in Philadelphia on Saturday, police said.The girl was struck in the right shoulder at 9:53 a.m., the bullet tearing through her chest so badly that efforts at emergency surgery at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia could not keep her alive, said Lt. John Walker.

A male friend of the victim’s mother had left the gun in the house, police said.

Police found the girl in her mother’s arms when they arrived, a scene Walker described as highly emotional.

Police placed the girl in the back of a squad car and raced her to nearby Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, only for her to be pronounced dead there within minutes, at 10:29, Walker said.

No charges were immediately filed, and it was unclear who, other than the four children, was home at the time of the shooting, Walker said. All four siblings appeared to have been in the second-floor bedroom when the gun, a .357-caliber handgun now in police custody, went off in the 2-year-old’s hands.

Walker said police still were trying to ascertain which of the siblings – who ranged in age from 2 to 14 years old – had found the weapon, carried it up the stairs, and taken it into the room where the 11-year-old was playing on a sunny start to a spring weekend.

The children were “distraught,” the lieutenant said.

Walker said police were trying to respect the mother’s grief while also questioning her.

“Mom is extremely distraught,” he said. “These are just horrible situations.”

Walker said that police were “not even at that point” of considering criminal charges and that investigators would consult with the District Attorney’s Office.

He said detectives would conduct a fresh examination of the weapon – a handgun with an 8-inch barrel – and work their way back from there, he said. Police were investigating whether the weapon was legally registered and if so, to whom.

“The mom is in a really tough state of mind,” Walker said. She called 911, but Walker said he did not know if she was inside when the gun was fired.

The dead child, whose identity was not being disclosed, had lived with her family for years in the house in the city’s Mantua section, near the campuses of Drexel University and the University of Pennsylvania, said one neighbor, Alice Freeman, who said she had lived on the 3800 block of Wallace for more than two decades.

Some time during the morning, according to police, the child’s mother was home and welcomed a visitor – a male friend of the family’s.

“A gun was placed on top of a refrigerator inside of the house . . . by this male,” Walker said. When the man left, the gun was left behind.

On Saturday morning, one of the children found the handgun and took it up the steps to a second-floor bedroom.

“It’s a tragedy. It’s a sad thing,” said Maxine Seward, 59, a neighbor. “I don’t know what to say. It’s just a sad thing. A child is gone.”

Inquirer staff writer Andrew Maykuth contributed to this article.



Posted on 4th April 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

Just over a week ago I wrote a post called You Can’t Educate Feral Animals about Bartram High School in Southwest Philadelphia. This institution of higher learning spends $12,000 per year per “student” trying to teach feral animals who are the result of a total breakdown of the black community due to the welfare policies over the last 50 years. If you think I’m over the top referring to them as feral animals, watch this video. The School district and politicians promised changes after a faculty member was knocked unconscious by a 17 year old thug two weeks ago. Well guess what. The 17 year old criminal thug was roaming the hallways of Bartram High School this week. I wonder how the faculty feel about that. Maybe the solution will be for the staff and faculty to wear bullet proof vests. The answer from politicians and union officials will be to spend more taxpayer money. It won’t work. Children with no parents turn into feral dogs. The black community of Philadelphia is responsible. Whitey had nothing to do with this. Bartram High School is a holding pen for future inmates.

Violence persists at troubled Bartram High

Trouble persists at Bartram High.

A brawl erupted in the school cafeteria this week, with teenagers punching and stomping on one another and on school police. Students set off firecrackers inside the building. And the student who last month knocked a staffer unconscious was back in the halls of the Southwest Philadelphia school.

“It’s normal for Bartram,” said one teacher, insisting on anonymity. “It’s our new normal.”

Two weeks after “conflict resolution specialist” Alphonso Stevenson suffered a fractured skull and other injuries at the hands of a 17-year-old student, Philadelphia School District officials have sent a team to assess conditions inside the school, and added veteran troubleshooter Ozzie Wright as coprincipal. They have also reacted with dismay to what a spokesman called a “shocking” video of the cafeteria brawl.

Four additional Philadelphia and school police officers will be in place at the school by Monday, a district spokesman said. Police and school teams have assessed Bartram’s building conditions and staff deployment plan. A community

meeting is planned, and the district has reached out to city officials to get social-services help for students who need it.

“We want to show students that this is a place where you come in, you learn, and adults are here to help you, to take care of you,” district spokesman Fernando Gallard said.

But it’s going to be a long road, said science teacher Antoinette Calimag. Bartram has been a problem all school year, with more students, less staff, one principal removed less than two weeks into the school year, and rampant class-cutting, fights, smoking, and other student problems.

“You can’t just snap your fingers and say, ‘OK, it’s school time now,’ ” said Calimag, Bartram’s Philadelphia Federation of Teachers building representative. “We’re so deep into the school year. What if we’re just treading water until June?”

Staffers were shocked when they saw that the 17-year-old who assaulted Stephenson was back in the school this week, some said. The youth has been charged as a juvenile with aggravated assault, simple assault, and related offenses.

“He was cutting class, roaming the hallways,” said a teacher, who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution. “He spent two days in the building this week, and it seems the administration was not aware.”

Teachers said the student spent at least part of one day in classes, even discussing the Stephenson assault with a friend. That fits a pattern, teachers said – administrators have had a difficult time removing problem students all year.

Gallard said the student who assaulted Stephenson initially reported to Bartram for a required conference before his transfer to a disciplinary school but was turned away because he did not bring his parents.

When the teen returned with his parents, he was allowed to remain, but only for the meeting, and he will not be allowed back, Gallard said.

Told of the teachers’ accounts of the boy’s presence in the building over two days, Gallard said: “That’s not my understanding.”

The larger problem at the 1,100-student school, those inside said, is the continued culture of chaos and disregard for authority.

On Tuesday, “firecrackers were lit off in the building, on two separate floors,” Calimag said.

The lunchroom melee also happened Tuesday morning. As captured by a cellphone camera, with footage posted on social media, the fight appears serious – dozens gathered, with several students exchanging punches. A male school police officer attempts to separate the combatants as the room fills with screams.

In short order, a larger brawl erupts, mostly

between female students. A female police officer attempts to break up one skirmish, then others. At one point in the video, that officer appears to fall to the floor.

Gallard said the fight was coded by school officials as a disorderly conduct and fighting. Nine students were suspended, and only minor injuries – one girl suffered a bump on the head, another scratches – were recorded.

“I guess people didn’t think it was a big deal, because there was no blood, there were no serious injuries,” said another teacher, who also fears retribution.

Gallard called it a “shocking” video.

“There is no reaction from the students – they just continue fighting as if this is a normal way to behave. It’s shocking to see individuals behave this way, and to do it so brazenly in a school,” said Gallard, adding that the school police officers showed bravery by jumping into the brawl to try to break it up and protect students.

“It’s disturbing to see how helpless our staff feel,” the district spokesman said after viewing the video.

The fight affirms the need for the actions the district is taking, Gallard said.

More officers will help, he said, “but we have to go beyond police officers. We’ve got to figure out a way to get these young people to care for others.”

Teachers said that even with the attention given to Bartram after Stephenson’s injury and an Inquirer story detailing conditions inside the school, deep dysfunction persists.

“It’s unsettled,” Calimag said. “There’s just a sense of uneasiness.”

The administration has begun attempting to crack down on students who come late to school, and those who ditch class or use cellphones, but many students, accustomed to having wide latitude in the building, aren’t taking the adults seriously.

Thursday was a relatively calm day, staff said.

But even so, “there’s always groups of students in the halls,” a teacher said. “I constantly have to guard my door.”



Posted on 26th March 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , ,

There was an accident on the Schuylkill Expressway this morning, so I had the pleasure of driving the 30 Blocks of Squalor for the first time in a couple months. You’ll be happy to know the snow has melted and the garbage, debris, used drug paraphernalia  and trash on the streets and sidewalks are visible again. Spring in the Squalor has arrived. The rats are squeaking instead of birds chirping. Dodging the gaping potholes along Chestnut Street kept me alert on the drive in. Who needs coffee? I only noticed five or six houses that looked like they would collapse in a stiff wind. The murals of black people doing great things still tower above the Squalor. I’m sure the bankrupt City of Philadelphia is allocating more funds to paint additional murals than allocated to filling the 10,000 potholes swallowing cars throughout the city.

As I passed the new West Philly High School, with no windows below 2nd floor level (I wonder why?), my mind was jolted by the absolutely disgusting news report I saw last night about John Bartram High School, which is located in Southwest Philly not far from the 30 Blocks of Squalor. As I watched this news report I was appalled and disgusted. I thought to myself, what kind of animal would do such a thing to another human being. Luckily, in this age of cell phone videos and youtube, we are all able to witness the utter disregard for human life exhibited by the feral animals inhabiting our inner city ghetto schools. It seems every desperately poor teenager in Philadelphia can somehow afford an iPhone and the $50 per month fee.

After watching this news report I had a number of observations and questions.


I went to high school. I have two kids in high school. What kind of hell hole requires a climate manager/conflict resolution specialist who is used to dealing with confrontations and fights between students in the halls of the school? The position sounds like a zoo keeper whose job is to keep the animals from attacking each other. This time the zookeeper was attacked by one of the wild animals.

They interviewed two teachers. The science teacher just happened to be the union rep. She matter of factly mentioned that two teachers were injured last week breaking up fights. Rather than put the blame where it belongs – the ignorant animals roaming the hallways and the parents/community that raised these derelicts – she immediately blamed the violence on underfunding. That’s a load of bullshit.

This school receives $12,000 per year to educate these students. The student to faculty ratio is 13 to 1, with 1,100 students and 85 full time union teachers. The other teacher interviewed says he feels safe in his classroom with the doors locked, but doesn’t go into the hallway. My high school had a student to faculty ratio of 25 to 1. Even today it is 17 to 1. And it was safe to walk in the hallways. It is still safe to walk in the hallways. Here is a picture of John Bartram High School, home to future prison occupants. Very inviting, don’t you think?

With a little research you can find everything you need to know about this pitiful excuse for a learning institution and the fine upstanding community surrounding this tribute to union teaching excellence.

The demographics of Bartram High School are as you would expect:

  • There are 1,100 students
  • 92% of the students are black
  • 2% of the students are white – and scared
  • 100% are in the free lunch program
  • A full 56% actually graduate

Their academic performance is astounding. Astoundingly bad. On a national basis, a 1,550 score on the SAT predicts a 65% chance that you can achieve a B minus average in college. The national average in 2013 was 1,498. The average in Pennsylvania was 1,480. Drum roll please. Only the best of the best at Bartram even take the SAT exam. Their average was 1,007. The taxpayers of PA spend $13.2 million per year on this “school” to get this result:

  • It ranks 630 out of 639 schools in PA.
  • 74% of the students scored below proficient in reading
  • 79% of the students scored below proficient in math
  • 17% of the students don’t show up on a daily basis
  • 60% of the students in the state are proficient at math versus 12% at Bartram
  • 67% of the students in the state are proficient at reading versus 17% at Bartram
  • 40% of the students in the state are proficient at science versus 1% at Bartram
  • 81% of the students in the state are proficient at writing versus 48% at Bartram

So it is beyond question that Bartram is graduating dullards onto the streets of Southwest Philly. Now for the funniest fact. With an average SAT score 35% below the minimum needed to predict a chance at success in college, 44% of the Bartram graduates enroll in college. Do you think the government student loans doled out to these fine students will get repaid? The Bartram School website actually has this as their mission:


John Bartram High School is a neighborhood school located in Southwest Philadelphia. In the 2010-11 school year, we were removed from the state list of persistently dangerous schools, a testament to the hard work of staff, parents, and students towards building a positive learning environment. We take pride in the achievements of our students and the opportunities available to them.

Do you really think more money doled out to union teachers and armed cops roaming the hallways will improve the results of this disgrace? The future inmates in this school were produced by someone and raised in the community surrounding this high school. Some the data for this neighborhood sheds more light:

  • 75% of the population is black
  • 33% of households are on SNAP
  • Median household income of $30,000 is 40% lower than the PA median
  • 35% of households are below poverty levels.
  • Only 32% of households are occupied by married couples
  • Only 50% of working age people are employed
  • Crime is rampant

Here is a list of the thriving industry in this neighborhood:

Name Count Name Count
7-Eleven 2 Foot Locker 1
AutoZone 1 H&R Block 1
Baskin-Robbins 1 Nike 3
CVS 1 Payless 1
Cricket Wireless 1 Rite Aid 1
Dunkin Donuts 2 U-Haul 1
FedEx 1


It seems those in abject poverty are able to afford Air Jordans, donuts, and cell phones. They need drugstores to get their free Obamacare drugs and a tax prep outlet to get their earned income tax credit refunds. Bartram High School and the black community in Southwest Philly responsible for raising the children have failed. They can’t blame anyone but themselves. This is not due to insufficient funding. This is due to insufficient parenting, personal responsibility and accountability. Black men impregnating black women and not taking responsibility for raising their children is the single biggest factor in feral animals roaming the hallways of Bartram high school assaulting teachers and other students. White liberal guilt will not fix this. Money won’t fix it. The black community has to take responsibility for raising their children like human beings. Is that racist?



Posted on 25th March 2014 by AWD in Economy

It’s nice to know the knock-out game isn’t just for male black yuffs. The females can play too! What fun! They get to knock out creepy ass crackers with a brick, that way they don’t damage their $100 nail jobs they got with the EBT cards. Just another day in Philadelphia. Hope admin wears a crash helmet when he drives through the 30 blocks of squalor.



I went to Temple University and all I got was a brick in the face! Oh, and a hundred grand of debt to risk life and limb to attend a university in Philthadelphia, the city of brova-ly hatred of crackas.

A female student being indoctrinated to be another politically correct brick in the wall at a liberal northeastern university wound up learning reality by getting a brick in the face!

No, I didn’t go graduate from Temple. I’m much too intelligent to attend or send my children to be offered up as prey to savage black ghetto “yoofs.” Unfortunately, a Temple co-ed’s parents do not share common wisdom in terms of racial reality. And their daughter got a brick to the face and several knocked out teeth because of her belief that ghetto blacks can act any other way except uncivilized. Ain’t diversity great? Racist, you say? Reality, sad reality, I say!

The NY Daily News reported:

A gang of teens and children beat a Temple University student in the face with a brick during a Friday night stroll with her boyfriend.

The 19-year-old girl had dislocated teeth and several injuries to her face, according to the 20-year-old boyfriend, who wouldn’t show his face to NBC Philadelphia cameras.

“It was terrible, it was terrifying,” he said.

The couple was going to get some food, but the gang followed them until just outside the campus and taunted them.

Nice job protecting your girlfriend, Lance. Better hurry up, you wouldn’t be want to be late for your latest class on the the greed of white privilege you enjoy! Oh, better change your tampon first.

The yoots taunting them were probably upset that the white students are fans of Milton Friedman and shouted taunts such as “You, monetarists, you!” to provoke a spirited street debate. The yoots are undoubtedly adherents of the economic policies of John Maynard Keynes. As such, the gang of street terrorists advocate the use of fiscal and monetary measures to mitigate the adverse effects of economic recessions and depressions and merely altered Keynesian “priming the pump” theory into “bashing the face” with a brick to make their points to the crackas. Economic theory reduced to the ghetto level.

How many times do we have to see this Knockout Game scenario play itself out until we realize the fastest way to become a victim of violent crime is to be in close proximity to urban black street terrorists? Life expectancy is probably much greater walking the streets of Gaza dressed as an orthodox Jew than walking any of America’s inner cities dressed as a cracka!

The PC propaganda media, of course, didn’t report the race of the attackers. That would be racist. Because the attackers are ALWAYS black. And the PC propaganda media has a sworn duty to cover the sins of any black criminal as much as they can. However, at this point, the media doesn’t really need to point out the race of the attackers in street violence, Knockout Games, or Flash Mobbing….we already know. However, to be fair, whites also participate in flash mobs. You can always spot them hauling cellos and tubas around city centers and malls.

The Philadelphia Police released this photo of the attackers:


The Police noted: While the photo appears to show African-American youth, we cannot be sure. The attackers could be rich, well-tanned, suburban white women just back from their latest pleasure cruise so let’s not jump to conclusions. Please.

Don’t expect any comments from Hopenchange about the savage behavior of “his daughters.” That is, unless the cracka students had pulled a gun and killed the little savages. Nor can we expect Eric “I Hate Me Some Crackas” to push Hate Law charges. Hate laws only apply should a white (or Hispanic Cracka) kill a black person. Blacks attacking or killing white people is, in his mind, righteous retribution. Slavery, you know.

Aren’t there schools in cracka areas like Idaho or Utah where your children actually can walk the campus without their cracka-ness making them prey to ghetto “yoots?” Oh yeah, sorry. Those white schools don’t embrace diversity. Or bricks to the face.