People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Monday, May 23, 2005

Playing By Democrat Rules

NFL quiz: When are you allowed to maintain possession of the football even though your offense failed to gain the necessary ten yards? There are actually two answers. (1) If the Democratic party is interpretting the rules and has the ball or (2) if the person giving the quiz doesn't know the first thing about football.

Actually I enjoy reading things like this.
Sports Fans Cry Foul on Math Question

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) -- The state's test writers tried to come up with a math question about football and ended up with a fumble.

On an end-of-grade test this month, seventh-graders had to calculate the average gain for a team on the game's first six plays. But the team did not gain 10 yards on the first four plays and would have lost possession before a fifth and sixth play.

The team opened with a 6-yard loss, a 3-yard gain and a 2-yard loss, which would have made it fourth down with 15 yards to go for a first down. The team's fourth play was just a 7-yard gain, yet it maintained possession for a 12-yard gain and a 4-yard gain on two additional plays.

"Whoever wrote it didn't think it through," said Gene Daniels, athletics director of Salem Middle School in Apex. (link)
Someone feels mighty stupid right about now.

How To Get Ahead On Campus

This not-so-startling news comes to us from the New York Daily News this morning.

Top prof sparks outrage
Devout are 'moral retards,' he sez

A Brooklyn College professor who called religious people "moral retards" was elected to head his department this month - sparking a campus uproar.

E-mails expressing alarm that Timothy Shortell was now chairman of the sociology department circulated among students last week on the school's Midwood campus.

Shortell has written in an online academic publication that the devout "are an ugly, violent lot. In the name of their faith, these moral retards are running around pointing fingers."

Shortell's remarks - which included lines such as "Christians claim that theirs is faith based on love, but they'll just as soon kill you" - elicited a multifaith backlash among university groups.

"He's intolerant," fumed Alex Selsky of the school's Hillel chapter, a Jewish campus organization. "With this kind of unreasonable thinking, I don't know how he can be elected to head of a department."(link)

With an attitude like his, expect to see Shortell's fortunes continue to soar. My guess is he'll be head of the Democratic National Committee before too long.

The World's Gone Mad

The latest trend in our government's drive to be all things to all people: Keeping sex offenders in a permanent state of arousal - at taxpayer expense. You can't make this up.

N.Y. Audit: Sex Offenders Getting Viagra
By MICHAEL VIRTANEN, Associated Press Writer

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -- Scores of convicted rapists and other high-risk sex offenders in New York have been getting Viagra paid by Medicaid for the last five years, the state's comptroller said Sunday.

Audits by Comptroller Alan Hevesi's office showed that between January 2000 and March 2005, 198 sex offenders in New York received Medicaid-reimbursed Viagra after their convictions. Those included crimes against children as young as 2 years old, he said. (link)
We can all laugh at the liberal do-gooders in New York finding new ways to waste taxpayer money. But this is a medicaid expenditure. You're paying for it.

Not laughing?

Getting To The Real Story

Have you ever been perplexed when you've read about the efforts of (a vocal portion of) a California community to ban Wal-Mart from its city limits? Or for certain boroughs of New York to do the same when consumers there are desperate for choices? Or for the state legislature in Maryland to pass a law requiring that Wal-Mart devote a certain percentage of its revenue to employee healthcare? Ever wonder what's really going on here? Well, let me boil it down for you, because all these circumstances arise from the same source.

Wal-Mart is non-union.
Putting on the Brakes
Local Grocery Workers Union Leads the Fight to Block Wal-Mart's Efforts to Infiltrate Inner Suburbs, District
By Michael Barbaro, Washington Post Staff Writer

At first glance, the numbers seem arbitrary.

Legislation before the D.C. Council would ban new stores with more than 80,000 square feet that devote 15 percent of their space to food and other nontaxable merchandise.

A bill passed by the Maryland General Assembly would require companies with more than 10,000 employees to spend 8 percent of payroll on health care.

A zoning rule approved in Montgomery County restricts the location of outlets larger than 120,000 square feet with a full-service grocery and pharmacy.

But behind the hodgepodge of figures is a very specific goal: Keeping out Wal-Mart Stores Inc. As the discount giant shifts its focus from the Washington region's fast-growing fringes to its dense urban center, it has become locked in a bitter behind-the-scenes struggle with the local unionized grocery industry, which is scrambling to erect legislative barriers to the chain's growth. (link)
Unionized grocery employees trying to protect their businesses in large cities is only half the story. The other half is this: America's unions want Wal-Mart. They believe that if they can (1) force Wal-Mart's costs of doing business to rise and (2) make America's number one corporation look like an ogre in the eyes of the public and (3) continue to apply pressure to employees at individual Wal-Mart locations to organize, they can eventually unionize the entire company.

And they are getting plenty of help from their bought-and-paid-for Democratic party. That's how it is Wal-Mart has been banned from certain cities (all run by liberal Democrats) and has been directed by the heavily Democratic Maryland legislature to cough up more money to employee healthcare (the legislation has been vetoed by the Republican governor but a legislative override is expected) - the only company in Maryland history to be so directed.

So, next time you read a story about Wal-Mart not being wanted here or is being stingy to employees there, understand who is really behind the story.

He's wearing the union label.