Only a Liberal…

This story disgusts me. A message board on another website shows this to be a polarizing issue. So I will lay it all out as to why I feel the way I do.

A high school girls basketball team beat another team 100-0. As is usually the case in a blowout in any sport, rather than be embarrassed about the inability of the coach or team to compete, the losers whined about it. Even the winning team’s administration whined about it, going so far as to request that their team be punished with a forfeit. (story link)

In response to the media attention and local news stories, the coach of the team contacted the local newspaper and made it clear he was unapologetic about the victory. After writing this letter, he was fired, though the school administration has not confirmed the reason for his firing (story link) .

It is the responsibility of a high school basketball coach to get the players to play at the highest level as possible for numerous obvious reasons. It is also their responsibility to prepare them to be competitive with other teams.

When the outcome of a game cannot change with a reasonable scenario, I do feel it is the responsibility of the coach to remove the starters and allow backups to play, mainly for their benefit, not the benefit of the other team’s ego. If their are 15 players on a basketball team, and the worst 5 players on the team continue to dominate the starters of another, the only person at fault is the coach of the other team. Either for not preparing his team or for scheduling a game with an infinitely superior team in the first place. You cannot expect the coach that is winning to instruct the players to not play as hard. That is disgusting, immoral nonsense. The last string player on a talented team deserves to excel just as much as any other player. What if they have never scored 10 points in a game before? Do you punish her for doing that, when she never ever gets any other chances?

The knee-jerk reaction that this coach that got fired was a meanie that should have been fired is dangerously pervasive nonsense. Celebrating mediocrity to spare ego-maniacal shame is unacceptable and un-American. If a team is that good, they deserve to break records, even at the expense of the other team’s self esteem.

The ACLU and other want Guantanamo Bay detainees to receive their day in court, and for the detention center to be shut down. This is idiotic on two fronts.

1. The evidence for the guilt of some of the detainees cannot be revealed due to national security reasons, and therefore those detainees will get off, even if they’re guilty.
2. If you give them their day in court, some of them will be found guilty and sentenced to jail terms unrelated to our occupation of the country we arrested them in. In other words, a prisoner of war will remain in jail even if the war in question ends.

I don’t blame random Iraqi citizens for shooting at American invaders. They did what they thought they had to do, but now they have to wait for the war/occupation to end before they can go home. Sorry, but when its over, you get to go home and you won’t be charged with any domestic crimes like attempted murder. You have to distinguish between peace-time violence and war-time violence.
That would be similar to us charging Japanese POWs with murder and keeping them in American prisons for decades after World War II. That is insane. The ACLU and its liberal friends want to put these guys on trial to set them free. Some of them won’t be set free, and they will enter our penal system as though they committed a crime. POWs should go home at the end of a war, but while it is still going on, they should remain in POW camps so that they can’t re-enter the combat. We have already encountered some that were released from Guantanamo back on the battle field.

It should also be mentioned that in some cases, we have tried to send Gitmo detainees back to their country of origin, but those countries have refused to take them. Why?

Another solution the liberals give is to move the detainees to American prisons. I don’t see what the point would be, but I guess its to feel better about themselves. Unfortunately this solution wouldn’t work in reality. The “torture” that liberals so want to save Gitmo detainees from does not compare to the “death by angry American inmate” that they would encounter in the cafeterias and exercise yards of our penitentiary system.

The unpleasant truth is perhaps the biggest enemy of the liberal. I should say, the kool-aid drinking liberal, whether Republican or Democrat or whatever. Ann Coulter does go out of her way to say things that will offend, but you will be hard-pressed to disprove any of it, as the cast of The View found out. If you avoid the facts, then you are avoiding the debate. There are a few points to cover, but the main issue is when she talks about race.

She points out that both Barack Obama and Halle Barry chose to brag about their black heritage while ignoring or downplaying their white heritage. This is a valid, factual observation that should be addressed, yet the hostesses have no interest. They never really get their statements out, but it sounds like they’re basically gonna say since you are not Barack or Halle, you have no right to comment on how they racially identify themselves. NONSENSE! The fact that Obama wrote a biography where the title mentions the father that had nothing to do with raising him is extremely relevant and telling. Ann details a strong pattern, deviated by few if any other than Tiger Woods, of partially black celebrities only talking about how black they are. It is pseudo-self-victimization to paint one’s self as the underdog because of partial-DNA. You wanna talk about your black heritage: fine, but you should occasionally mention your white heritage as well. These celebrities don’t, other than Obama who is occasionally forced to, and then even talks in the third person (grandmother is a “typical white person”). Hey Barack… you’re white! So are you Halle. I’m sorry it’s less interesting to you, but it’s a fact.

How dare a white woman critique the racial comments of a black woman! This kind of knee-jerk nonsense has to stop. Coulter even points out that when you take single-motherhood out of the equation, crime rates of blacks and whites are equal. WHAT AN AMAZING STATISTIC!!! You’d think she’d be praised for finding and pointing out something like this. Even though our society has progressed way beyond a racism to be concerned with, people still “know” that blacks go to jail more than whites. The numbers she cites seem to show that it isn’t because of a race, but because of single-parenthood. Ann is attacking a subgroup of single-mothers, but because it may include good people, the hostesses only focus on the attack, not the root problem.

Ann: “Its selfish for a single mother to have a baby without a father.”

Just because there are a significant number of single mothers who produce healthy productive citizens does not mean that it isn’t selfish to force a child to grow up without a father. Children do better in a two-parent home for obvious logistical reasons. Two people can do a job better than one can. Ann is only talking about those single mothers who choose on their own to be single, not those that are forced to because of abusive or addict fathers, etc. Just those that do it cuz they “wanna.” That is selfish. That is putting your wants ahead of the needs of the baby. You are entitled to be selfish in a free society, but don’t tell us it isn’t selfish. “What about single women who want to have children?” Note the word WANT. What about what the child wants? Let me re-iterate, I’m not saying, and neither is Ann, that single-motherhood should be banned. This is a free country, and people are free to not give away their money and free to selfishly have kids in a single-parent home.

The basic point of the “View” hostesses, including Hasselbeck, is that Ann Coulter is a meanie. I think Ann would agree 100%. She doesn’t concern herself with being sensitive. She is only about discussing unpleasant truths, and doesn’t seem to find any opponents who want to engage her on substance. We need more people who stop worrying about whose feelings get hurt when serious issues should be discussed.

22-year-old Oscar Grant was shot at a BART train station in Oakland 2am on New Years Day. I think a taser fired at the closest standing antagonist in the crowd or Grant would have been a better choice for calming the crowd than shooting a guy laying on the ground, but I would say based on the 3rd video that Hotair.com has up, the crowd, not Oscar Grant, the crowd is lucky only one person got shot. Watch the 3rd video at that link first, then the others

Let me be clear. White guy shoots black person is not always a race issue. If it is, Officer Mehserle deserves to burn. What this officer did is horrendous, but the notion that he purposely executed an unarmed man in front of 100 witnesses is ludicrous. The main theory appears to be he mistook his firearm for his taser. This kind of keystone cop nonsense is appalling and should be prosecuted in a court of law. But don’t turn this into some race war. A handful of cops were surrounded by an intoxicated, loudmouth mob, and the good guys made a mistake. The fact he made a mistake doesn’t mean he should go free, but don’t blow this out of proportion.

Gunshot occurs at 2:57 in the video. As you can see multiple crowd members keep approaching the cops menacingly after multiple requests to stay back. I’d say at least 30-40 people are yelling incessantly at the cops, making this an extremely dangerous situation. There appear to be multiple crowd members pointing cell phones from multiple vantage points, so now cops have to keep making sure none of the arms pointed at them have guns. Pay attention around 2:15, when people start approaching the cops, including the guy in the red hat. At 2:51 and 2:55 there are a few popping noises, and you see a guy with red shoes, I assume to match the red hat, laying on the floor with a cop on top of him. He is not the guy that got shot, but evidently he ignored the cops when he kept approaching them. Then the shot at 2:57, which that 3rd video doesn’t capture.

Turns out Grant may be a felon, but I don’t know if the officer knew that when he shot Grant. I have heard people say it was a weapon felony, but again I don’t know if the officer knew that. BUT IF HE DID, that changes everything you think you know about this crime.
All I ask is wait for the facts to come out. These race monger a-holes running around Oakland talking about slavery is disgusting. This shooting has NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to do with slavery. Officer Johannes Mehserle deserves his day in court. The businesses of Oakland don’t deserve these riots anymore than Oscar Grant deserved to die. White guy shoots black person is not always a race issue. If it is, Officer Mehserle deserves to burn.

All the liberals on all sides are 100% sure that energy independence from the Middle East is vital for national security. I completely disagree. They claim that energy dependence is bad for America, ostensibly because its bad to depend on the Middle East. That’s true, but it ignores that dependence in this instance is two-sided.

Yes, we need their oil, but they depend on our money. They can’t do without it. If you remove that relationship, they no longer have any incentive to be friendly with us at all.
We might be better off severing oil ties with the Middle East, but we need to have some sort of co-dependent relationship with them economically in order to ensure our national security. Isolationism will create an environment where our enemies have no incentive to be peaceful. If that means paying them for oil, we should do everything we can to continue doing that.