“This is an open letter that I sent to Mr. Terry Holt who gave me a very negative review when I asked him kindly to finish my review after over a month of waiting for the review. He only gave me a review after I threaten him with a deadline.”
Dear Mr. Holt,
You got your chance to do your review and now I’m going to do a video and post it on my website and a review of the lousy job you did. I don’t care about your review or if you agree with me. Unlike you or the rest of you dam liberals I speak my mind and I don’t care if you like it or not. If you think for one minute I believe that you was going to give me a review before I sent you the last email, believe me you are not fooling me.
If you look at my Youtube Channel you will see that criticism does not bother me it actual fuels me. When I saw that you were from Illinois I figured you were a flaming liberal, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. You think I don’t have a life too. So I don’t want to hear about how busy you were. This is why that dam Liberal Keith Olbermann was fired. He was not doing is dam job. Liberals like you are always making excuses on why they did not get a job done. Use the Nike slogan and “just do it”.
We would not be at this particular crossroad if you had done what you were supposed to do. Your unprofessional comment on the review on Amazon and your website tells me all I need to know. “I must say my thoughts on this book were not like everyone else reviewing it for Amazon, and that’s not because of the author’s negativity towards me because I was not getting his review out fast enough for him.” Why would you make a comment publicly about a conversation that we were having privately. I can tell you why you did it. It’s because you are a partisan flaming liberal who lets his personal feelings get in his way giving grown up reviews.
It is obvious that you are in the wrong dam business just like most media hack liberals who are reporting. That’s what’s wrong with our little boys now, people are telling them not to discuss or show their true emotions. You dam right I’m angry! I’m angry at how little boys can’t even play cops and robbers because they are displaying too much aggression. I’m angry that when my kids have kids you’re President has run the country in the ground so much that they will not have any money nor the opportunities that we had. It is time out for hiding your anger, no if you are not upset now it is because you are brain dead. If the house is on fire you don’t stroll care free and say in a low voice “the house is on fire.” No you go through the house screaming “THE HOUSE IS ON FIRE.”
By the way the house is on fire and I’m, going to scream fire to anyone who is willing to get out of the house, or put the dam fire out. If you had gave me this review before I had sent email after email, I would have given you the benefit of the doubt. Let’s not forget that you contacted me for my book I did not contact you. But I’m going to teach you a lesson that it is painfully obvious you have never learned. When you say you are going to do something, don’t get mad because someone ask you do what you said you would do.
I was more than patient with you, because you had the book longer than a month, and when I inquired you about progress you got snappy. In the days of old when men would get angry about injustice they would express anger. We have been teaching this positive thinking and not being angry for the last 10 or 15 years and we are failing our children miserably. The Titanic is going down and I refuse to pretend that everything is alright. Get your liberal head out of your butt and act like a man.
I bet you are ashamed to scream and holler if you even watch sports, because you do not want to come off as angry or be accused of showing to much aggression. You also said in your review “It was written it felt like to me, by someone who got very angry one day and decide to put all down on paper. There are many things in this world today that do not make sense and could be done better, but when you express it this way, it only scares people, instead of take notice. Anger comes from a lack of patience….so let’s be patient.” Listen you little Winnie I hope I can scare you and a lot more people and maybe they will get their heads out of their behinds. I’m not patient with wimpy men nor can I tolerate unfounded arguments and utter ignorance.
Did you remember chapter 22 of the book where I discuss “The Media Is To Blame? I bet you have never blamed Keith Olbermann for being angry or Bill Maher for being negative. I call this convenient over concern with outrage at the truth. So if you plan on staying in this business maybe you can show some patience and discipline when you review someone’s work. I’m sending this open letter to you and all the rest of the bias media who give people negative reports based primary on their own difference of opinion.
In closing I want you to know that I kept all the email exchanges between us to prove my case. I can show were you first contacted me and I show how I responded professionally until it became evident that you were stalling. It was not until I gave you a deadline and threaten to contact Amazon who you review for that you rushed your comments over. Learn some type of ethics if you plan on staying in this business Mr. Holt.
The other day, the Daily Mail ran a piece by Samantha Brick that wasn’t titled – but should have been – Women Hate Me Because I’m Beautiful. It’s now gone viral, prompting another essay from Brick herself.
To sum up the original piece, though it’s best if you read it for yourself if you have time (and patience) to spare, Brick is basically saying she’s so pretty that every woman hates her.
Female bosses have constantly set obstacles in the path of her career, friends have ditched her because they wrongly assume their husbands fancy her, and women in general have nothing but hate for her.
Men, on the other hand, love her. They love to pay for stuff for her, to open doors and offer small tokens of their appreciation, she wrote.
Ms. Brick even offered examples of the many advantages she has in life for being so incredibly beautiful (photo attached), and they range from having the captain of the plane send champagne to her seat to bartenders refusing her credit card because they want to pay the bill themselves.
We’ll not interpret Ms. Brick’s words in any way, which is why it’s probably best if you read the piece and make up your own mind about it.
The bottom line is that it went viral: over 5,000 people commented on it over at the Mail, it registered over 1 million hits, and sparked an insane debate on Twitter and Facebook.
According to most, Samantha is deluded and she’s so arrogant it’s a wonder she can still fit her head through the door when she goes to work every morning.
Others believe that it’s not her beauty that pushes people away, but her insufferable attitude.
In a new essay, Ms. Brick herself says the outpour of “vitriol” has done nothing but confirm for her the obvious: people do hate her because she’s pretty.
She also compares herself to Angelina Jolie and Victoria Beckham. This piece too is a must read.
“While I’ve been shocked and hurt by the global condemnation, I have just this to say: my detractors have simply proved my point. Their level of anger only underlines that no one in this world is more reviled than a pretty woman,” Samantha Brick says.
Elect Me For President, Because I can Do A Better Job Than Obama
Obamacare dominated the 2010 midterms, driving its Democratic authors to a historic electoral shellacking. But since then, the issue has slipped quietly underground.
Now it’s back, summoned to the national stage by the confluence of three disparate events: the release of new Congressional Budget Office cost estimates, the approach of Supreme Court hearings on the law’s constitutionality and the issuance of a compulsory contraception mandate.
Cost:
Obamacare was carefully constructed to manipulate the standard 10-year cost projections of the CBO. Because benefits would not fully kick in for four years, President Obama could trumpet 10-year gross costs of less than $1 trillion — $938 billion to be exact.
But now that the near-costless years 2010 and 2011 have elapsed, the true 10-year price tag comes into focus. From 2013 through 2022, the CBO reports, the costs of Obamacare come to $1.76 trillion — almost twice the phony original number.
It gets worse. Annual gross costs after 2021 are more than a quarter of $1 trillion every year — until the end of time. That, for a new entitlement in a country already drowning in $16 trillion of debt.
Constitutionality:
Beginning Monday, the Supreme Court will hear challenges to the law. The American people, by an astonishing two-thirds majority, want the law and/or the individual mandate tossed out by the court. In practice, however, questions this momentous are generally decided 5 to 4 — i.e., they depend on whatever side of the bed Justice Anthony Kennedy gets out of that morning.
Ultimately, the question will hinge on whether the Commerce Clause has any limits. If the federal government can compel a private citizen, under threat of a federally imposed penalty, to engage in a private contract with a private entity (to buy health insurance), is there anything the federal government cannot compel the citizen to do?
If Obamacare is upheld, it fundamentally changes the nature of the American social contract. It means the effective end of a government of enumerated powers — i.e., finite, delineated powers beyond which the government may not go, beyond which lies the free realm of the people and their voluntary institutions. The new post-Obamacare dispensation is a central government of unlimited power from which citizen and civil society struggle to carve out and maintain spheres of autonomy.
Figure becomes ground; ground becomes figure. The stakes could not be higher.
Coerciveness.
Serendipitously, the recently issued regulation on contraceptive coverage has allowed us to see exactly how this new power works. All institutions — excepting only churches, but not excepting church-run charities, hospitals, etc. — will be required to offer health care that must include free contraception, sterilization and drugs that cause abortion.
Consider the cascade of arbitrary bureaucratic decisions that resulted in this edict:
(1) Contraception, sterilization and abortion pills are classified as medical prevention. On whose authority? The secretary of health and human services, invoking the Institute of Medicine. But surely categorizing pregnancy as a disease equivalent is a value decision disguised as science. If contraception is prevention, what are fertility clinics? Disease inducers? And if contraception is prevention because it lessens morbidity and saves money, by that logic, mass sterilization would be the greatest boon to public health since the pasteurization of milk.
(2) This type of prevention is free — no co-pay. Why? Is contraception morally superior to or more socially vital than — and thus more of a “right” than — penicillin for a child with pneumonia?
(3) “Religious” exemptions to this edict extend only to churches, places where the faithful worship God, and not to church-run hospitals and charities, places where the faithful do God’s work. Who promulgated this definition, so stunningly ignorant of the very idea of religious vocation? The almighty HHS secretary.
Today, it’s the Catholic Church whose free-exercise powers are under assault from this cascade of diktats sanctioned by — indeed required by — Obamacare. Tomorrow it will be the turn of other institutions of civil society that dare stand between unfettered state and atomized citizen.
Rarely has one law so exemplified the worst of the Leviathan state — grotesque cost, questionable constitutionality and arbitrary bureaucratic coerciveness. Little wonder the president barely mentioned it in his latest State of the Union address. He wants to be reelected. He’d rather talk about other things.
But there’s no escaping it now. Oral arguments begin Monday at 10 a.m.
Black-on-black violence is a “disease” that deserves a “national investigation,” Philadelphia
mayor michael nutter on black on black crime
told a Youth Violence Prevention forum in Washington on Monday.
“It is a disease,” Nutter said. “It’s a rash, and if there were a rash killing a hundred and some odd young people on a daily basis we’d be doing something about it.”
Nutter said tainted food gets more attention than young people killing each other: “If there were five bad bags of spinach on the shelf somewhere, someone would put out a national alert. Every bag would be snatched off the shelves until someone figured out where they came from, what was going on, and there would be a national investigation.”
But, Nutter added, “There is no national investigation about this issue–that black people are killing black people all across the United States of America.”
Nutter noted that homicide is the leading cause of death for black men between the ages of 16 and 34. In Philadelphia last year, 75 percent of the city’s 316 murder victims were black men and 80 percent of the arrests involved black men, he said.
Nutter told CNSNews.com that the Trayvon Martin case has received a great deal of attention, partly because the two people involved were of different races. While Martin is black, the neighborhood watch captain suspected of shooting him is half white and half Hispanic.
When You Find Common Sense, Please Tell Her That I Am Looking For Her Also
It might be common sense that happiness is in the eye of the beholder, but don’t let a little thing like that stand in the way of the Federal Government spending money to try to quantify it. A new study being undertaken by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is dedicated to trying to put a number to the amount of happiness any given person feels. Why the government wants to study topic has not been explained, though presumably, it could be applied to manipulating poll numbers.
One potential reason why the study is being done is due to widespread dissatisfaction among liberal social scientists with the prevailing idea that Gross National Product (GNP), or Gross Domestic Product (GDP), are good approximations for national happiness. The Washington Post, which caught this story, quotes a Robert Kennedy speech on this topic.
“Our gross national product, if we should judge America by that, counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage . . .it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile,” Robert Kennedy said in a 1968 speech.
In other words, GDP is just too objective and economics-focused for HHS, which wants to measure feelings. Certainly President Obama has welcomed the effort, to the point of naming a researcher on the concept of happiness, Alan Krueger, to be Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers.
The Post picks up the story from here:
According to proponents, a measure of happiness could help assess the success or failure of a range of government policies. It could gauge the virtues of a health benefit or establish whether education has more value than simply higher incomes. It might also detect extremes of inequality or imbalances in how people divide their time between work and leisure.
The phrase ‘pursuit of happiness’ is in the Declaration of Independence, so it’s not a huge stretch to say we might want to measure life satisfaction,” said panel member Carol Graham, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the author of a book on the topic.[…]
In Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron has embraced the idea, and last year the government began asking survey respondents things like “Overall, how happy did you feel yesterday?” and “Overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays?” The U.K. Economic and Social Research Council is also funding the U.S. panel’s $370,000 budget. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy in 2008 launched a commission including two Nobel winners, Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, which opined that the “time is ripe for our measurement system to shift emphasis from measuring economic production to measuring people’s well-being.”
Reportedly, a number of methodological approaches have been proposed to try to measure “happiness.” Most of them contain obvious methodological problems, but the government experts responsible for this study are presumably prepared to try to iron those out.
Rep. Allen West (R-FL) has made headlines for criticizing Democratic leaders including President Barack Obama, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
“This is a battlefield that we must stand upon. And we need to let President Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and my dear friend, chairman of the Democrat National Committee, we need to let them know that Florida ain’t on the table,” West said last Saturday at a Lincoln Day Dinner in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Rep. West went on to say that Democratic leaders should take their message of “economic dependency” and “get the hell out of the United States of America.”
Apparently, his comments proved too much for The Five’s co-host Bob Beckel.
“I’m going to try to be as calm here as I possibly can here in deference to my friends here at this table,” Beckel said.
“In my 30 years of politics, I have never heard anything more disgraceful in my life. I think that Allen West owes an apology to a lot of people. He’s lucky to have that seat in the first place. I’ll tell you this, Mr. West; When you start shooting your mouth off like that – and I admire the fact that you were in the military and you served your country. I understand that,” Beckel said.
“But before you start saying that, at the end of it, you said ‘Get the hell out of the United States,’ then you didn’t say the policies. Now, there’s 20 percent of us or 22 percent of us that happen to be Progressives, who believe in what Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi say. You go on to say 100 percent of America. We’re 20 percent of America and we’re not going anywhere whether you like it or not,” Beckel added.
“And you better be careful, my friend, because you’re getting on the edge there and you’re taking that Tea Party crowd with you,” Beckel added, wagging his finger at an imaginary Rep. West (isn’t that supposed to be the “ultimate insult”?).
Co-host Greg Gutfeld argued that Beckel’s righteous indignation was misplaced.
“During the break, I made a list of outspoken black liberals,” Greg Gutfeld said, “Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, Black Panthers. . .Jesse Jackson, Angela Davis, Cornel West, Public Enemy, Eric Dyson!”
“In our culture,” Gutfeld continued, “We celebrate outspoken black leftists. So, now you have one, provocative, American, black conservative, and you liberals whine? I wanna’ see more Allen West. He’s not the first one, but he’s the beginning. And it’s refreshing–”
“You wanna’ see more of that hatred? You wanna’ see that kind of hatred in America?” Beckel interrupted.
“That’s not hatred,” Gutfeld shot back.
“It’s is hatred,” Beckel interrupted again, “It’s the worst most disgraceful, despicable, disgusting—“
“I just listed for you a dozen, black liberals who spoke in very extreme language in the last 20, 30 years,” Gutfeld said, putting an abrupt end to Beckel’s brief experiment with alliteration.
Later in the segment, as Beckel was trying to explain that Rep. West represents an extreme element in the Republican party, it was co-host Eric Bolling’s turn to interrupt.
“Let me just point something out,” Bolling said, “You’re calling him ‘Allen West.’ Either call him Representative West—“
“I’m not going to call him Representative anything!” Beckel responded indignantly, demonstrating that it’s perfectly acceptable for a TV personality to disregard “civility” when criticizing an elected official and war veteran, but that it is wholly unacceptable – indeed, “disgusting” and “despicable” — if that elected official and war veteran is not “civil” enough when criticizing Democratic leadership.
“–or call him Lieutenant Colonel West,” Bolling added.
“I’m not going to call him that either,” Beckel said, almost surprised that Bolling would suggest such a thing.
Despite repeated attempts to convince Beckel that Rep. West was not indeed a “hater,” as Beckel so eloquently put it, their efforts went unrewarded and the segment ended on this note:
