Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

Posts Tagged ‘FOX News’

Immoral Businesses Shutting Down

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/09/01

FOX News is about to report on “three Atlantic City Casinos closing for good.” Good. Would that all casinos closed for good. On one side, you have immoral people preying on immoral lemmings. On the other side, you have immoral lemmings having less money than they used to. And the outcome is, they both lose. What’s not to like?

What do casinos produce? Nothing. They offer the most expensive places in the world to sit down. I suppose the entertainment value of pulling a lever and watching wheels spin can be attractive to some fools. But seriously, what uplifting value do casinos have? What societal benefit do they provide? They produce nothing. They add nothing to the growth of a community. They only take what that community provides. But the Obama Recovery (which would be a long-term recession or even depression in any other administration) means Society doesn’t have enough for the casinos to siphon.

So, the blood-suckers are dying off because there isn’t enough blood for them to suck. The tapeworms are dying because their hosts are emaciated. The Crimea River is in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted in Culture, economics, Entertainment, Humor - For Some, media, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, society | Tagged: , , , , | Comments Off on Immoral Businesses Shutting Down

Who Do YOU Shower With?

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/09/01

Yeah, the title is grammatically incorrect. I won’t suggest you sue me, because there are morons who do just that for other frivolous crap. (I’m looking at you, Wee Willy Widebody (and barely keeping my lunch down) and your idol, TDPK.)

So, I’m watching FOX News, and they tease an upcoming report regarding Michael Sam and ESPN. Yes, as I write this, ESPN reported on Michael Sam’s showering habits in regard to the rest of the team. And later apologized.

But that brings up an important point.

For many decades, pro sports did not allow women journalists into the locker rooms where men tend to be naked or almost naked. Likewise, pro sports did not allow their athletes to shower with the cheerleaders. Well, due to some blow-hards, there are women journalists in locker rooms with naked men. Movies like Jerry Maguire do comedic bits with this. Woman journalist asks naked man a question; woman journalist drops microphone; woman journalist looks away as she squats down and fishes for dropped microphone. But there are still rules preventing the football team from showering with the cheerleading squad.

I don’t think there is any reasonable person or group of people who would suggest the Lakers should be able to shower with the Laker Girls, or the Raiders should shower with the Raiderettes. And for good reason. Pregnant cheerleaders are kind of a turn-off. A Family Feud winner’s question session (I don’t know what they actually call it) asked 100 men about the visual rating (you know, rate a girl from 1 to 10) of a pregnant girl. It was extremely low.

Okay, there was some snark there. But it was based on the facts that are there, too. What happens when you put a bunch of naked alpha-males and a bunch of naked beautiful women in a group shower? You get a bunch of naked sex. Not every time, but it will happen.

There is also the morality aspect. Millennia of moral standards say women and men should not do such a thing. It will inevitably lead to the slippery slope of immorality. Yes, the slippery slope is real; thus, not a logic fallacy.

But what does the Cavaliers showering with the Cavalier Girls have to do with Michael Sam showering with his teammates? As “The Plague” said to “Zero Cool”, “think about it.” If you are against homosexual “marriage” (like me) or you are for it; if you think the Bible is truthful in calling homosexuality an abomination (like me) or you disregard the Bible; if you think homosexuality is abnormal (like me) or you think it’s normal, you have to agree that homosexual people showering with those of the same sex (the people they are attracted to) has to be a bad idea, because of what can result.

What can result if men and women shower together? Sex. Rape. Assaualt and battery. Murder. Self-defense – caused death. Appropriately modest people having to decide to stay stinky or violate their own modesty rules. Ostracization due to a person’s modesty. Ostracization due to a person’s lack of modesty. Ostracization due to a person’s Christian values. Ostracization due to a person’s refusal to bow down to the Leftist PC bovine byproduct.

Why should Michael Sam not have the option to shower with other football players? He is sexually attracted to what is between their legs. It’s the very same reason no football team should have the option to shower with the cheerleaders. They are sexually attracted to what is between the cheerleaders’ legs.

And, quite frankly, I should not have to shower with someone who is sexually attracted to sexual parts people of my sex have. Women should not have to shower with someone who is sexually attracted to their sexual parts. And women have no business being in a locker room full of men who are fully or partially naked.

Period. (For you Limeys who frequent this site, that means Full Stop.)

Posted in 1st Amendment, Character, Christianity, Constitution, Culture, funny business, Law, Liberal, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, society, truth | Tagged: , , , , , | Comments Off on Who Do YOU Shower With?

The Outsized Political Might Of Unions

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/06/09

Public Employee Unions and private sector Unions have far too much political influence compared to their size. And that political influence is bought through the forced Union dues paid by many people who are diametrically opposed to the political goals of those Unions, like the Ohio teacher who had her Union dues spent to fight her husband’s political candidacy. Her husband won the election, despite the Ohio Education Association stealing her money and then using that ill gotten booty to attack her husband.

Here are Jade Thompson’s own words:

Teachers should be free to spend their hard-earned dollars to contribute to the candidates and causes they actually support. The OEA and its parent organization, the NEA, refuse to acquiesce because they have an obvious agenda. After all, as the general counsel for the NEA once said in federal court, “if you take away payroll deduction, you won’t collect a penny from these people, and it has nothing to do with voluntary or involuntary. I think it has to do with the nature of the beast, and the beasts who are our teachers … (They) simply don’t come up with the money regardless of the purpose.” Teachers, this is what your union thinks of you.


 

Do Unions forcibly take Union dues away from people who do not want to be in the Unions? Yes, they do. Do those same Unions then spend those Union dollars on political campaigns many of their members vehemently oppose? Yes, they do. And it’s sinful and tyrannical.

Now, how big are the unions? Not very big when compared to the rest of the people. The Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics spells it out rather clearly in its January, 2012 summary.

In 2011, the union membership rate–the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of a union–was 11.8 percent, essentially unchanged from 11.9 percent in 2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions, at 14.8 million, also showed little movement over the year. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were 17.7 million union workers.

So, less than 12 percent of America’s workers are members of Unions (and I already pointed out that many of those Union members are unwilling members but were forced to be members against their will). But the news for the American public is much worse than that. A reasonable person would tend to believe there are more private sector Union members than public sector Union members simply because there are vastly more private sector jobs than public sector jobs. That reasonable person would be grossly in error.

From the same Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics report comes the data. Of the 14.8 million Union members, representing a mere 11.8 percent of the workforce, 7.2 million are in private sector Unions while 7.6 million are in public sector Unions. 51.4 percent of all Union members have public sector jobs while only 48.6 percent of all Union members work for businesses. That means Public Employee Unions represent 6.06 percent of all people in the workforce, or barely over 1 in 20 employees. And yet, as the chart on the right, from Open Secrets, shows, Public Employee Unions are among the absolute biggest political spenders in the nation. And they’re almost monolithic in their support for the Democrat Party (as opposed to businesses, which are far more balanced in their political spending, and spend far less money in politics). The top 4 highlighted groups on that chart are Public Employee Unions, and the 5th highlighted one is a group of Unions that contain both PEUs and private sector Unions. That, alone, would show an over-stated position of political power compared to their relatively small size.

But this isn’t about just the Public Employee Unions. It’s about all the Unions. So take a look at that chart of the biggest political spenders again.
3. Public Employee Union
5. Public Employee Union
7. Public Employee Union
9. Union
10. Public Employee Union
11. Union
12. Union (that I was a forced member of, twice)
13. Union
14. union
17. Union
18. Union
20. Union
29. Union
30. group of Unions

14 of the top 30 biggest political spenders are all Unions, and yet, Unions represent less than 12 percent of the workforce. But the Union spending doesn’t stop there.

40. Union (that I was a forced member of for nearly 9 years)
43. Union
44. Union
49. Union
52. Union
57. Union
58. Union
59. Union
65. Union
75. Union
85. Union
117. Union
119. Union
128. Union
133. Union

For Unions to be proportionately representative, they would need to have only 15 of the top 140 biggest political spenders, and yet they have 14 of the top 30 and 15 of the top 40! Unions represent 29 of the top 140 biggest political spenders, or just over 20 percent. From 1989 to present, Unions in the top 140 biggest political spenders have spent a combined 667,321,417 dollars on politics, and almost monolithically Democrat/Leftist politics. The top 140 spent a combined 2,367,159,046 dollars on politics in that time period, meaning Unions spent 28.2 percent of the political money of the top 140, far in excess of their proportionate representation, even considering Unions’ 21 percent representation in 1983 (which has been steadily falling since then).

Again, since 1989, Unions have spent 667.3 million (over 2/3 of a billion) dollars on politics. How much has the Left’s bogeyman, the Koch brothers, spent? A paltry 12.7 million dollars. So, next time some radical Leftist complains about the Koch brothers, remind that person that Unions are outspending the Koch brothers nearly 55 to 1. And while you’re at it, remind them that Unions are outspending their representative proportion more than 2 to 1.

Oh, by the way, that great evil, FOX News? Its parent company is on the list, at number 81, with 51 percent of its political money going to Democrats and only 48 percent going to Republicans. But in Liberal la-la land, that means they’re in the tank for Republicans.

UPDATE
From Bill Whittle (via Hot Air) comes this strong video:

Posted in economics, Elections, Liberal, media, politics, truth | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Welcome, @CruzforSenate #tcot #TedCruz #USSenate

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/04/05

@CruzforSenate is now following my twitter feed, which broadcasts all Truth Before Dishonor articles! Yes, that would be the same Cruz as the Ted Cruz I endorsed some time ago to replace the squish Republican Senator who is retiring from the US Senate after having failed to unseat Governor Rick Perry. That would be the same Ted Cruz who is descended from Cuban immigrants to the US. That would be the same Ted Cruz who learned early in life that the “Progressive” (read Socialist) agenda would be the death of the US. That Ted Cruz campaign has decided to follow my twitter feeds.

This comes on the heels of a Breitbart blogger, Dan Riehl, and others tweeting my old article covering “The Dixiecrat Myth” (found in my side-bar) and declaring it a good article — causing a mini-lanche of over 300 visitors here. My Twitter feed now has members of the Breitbart family of blogs, the Daily Caller, FOX News personalities, and other people with “Names” following it! Yes, that former Senator from Tennessee who you can see in some of the reruns of Law & Order, is also following my Twitter feeds. So is that Sikh woman from South Carolina who just so happens to be the Republican Governor there.

With all those important figures following my Twitter feed of all the TBD articles, why aren’t you?

Posted in Blogging Matters, Conservative, Elections, media, politics, society | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Welcome, @CruzforSenate #tcot #TedCruz #USSenate

Obama Wants A Fawning Press Like Socialist Nations And Dictatorships Have

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/10/13

In other critical news, the sun is expected to rise in the East tomorrow.

HT Legal Insurrection.

“I didn’t know you were the spokesman for Mitt Romney. Uhhh uhhh let me uhhh…” As Professor Jacobson rightly said, Obama is thin-skinned. In other news, water is wet. And don’t you dare ever ask Obama a question and quote someone who is challenging him on anything. That is not permitted. Only fawning is permitted.

November, 2012 cannot come soon enough.

Posted in Character, Elections, military, Obama | Tagged: , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Wants A Fawning Press Like Socialist Nations And Dictatorships Have

When Your News Loses To RED EYE

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/06/30

… you’re in trouble. And that’s where CNN’s primetime news sits. Red Eye, the irreverent opinion/comedy show that airs on FOX News at 3am Eastern, has higher ratings than CNN’s primetime serious news program.

Posted in media | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on When Your News Loses To RED EYE

 
%d bloggers like this: