Rock: You are the survivors. The others have run off. It would seem that evil retreats when forcibly confronted.

Star Trek: The Savage Curtain 1969

On April 19th in response to the Battle of Berkeley I asked this question:

So it’s time for administrators to decide, are they going to continue to sit back watch while the left gets beaten the same way the right was, or are they, now that their ox is being gored, finally going to decide the free speech and assembly are things that are going to be enforced in their cities and on their campuses?

Yesterday in Berkeley we got the answer. Both the left and the right showed up (without Ann Coulter) as did people ready to record the actions of the authorities and suddenly the rule of law was prevailed.

Police showed up in force

Empty leftist threats were laughed off

The laws concerning wearing a mask were being enforced:

The reading of Ann Coulter’s speech by Gavin McInnes didn’t result in a riot

And Lauren Southern spoke without harm to herself and others

In other words all went as it should, people spoke, other people who didn’t like the speech either didn’t show up or protested or went to their empathy tents and everyone went home without any bloodshed because the police enforced the law.

The question is why? What was the difference, why were the police enforcing the law instead of hanging back? Why did Antifa choose “Narp” instead of “Yarp“?  Simple

The people in danger of being beaten were not the conservatives who were speaking but the ANTIFA thugs who wanted to stop them.

Once it became clear that it was the hired thugs of the left and not the conservatives that they loathed in danger suddenly Berkeley decided that the rule of law was worth enforcing to make sure nobody got hurt.  It was Lexington Green all over again, only this time the Redcoats declined to start a war.

And the fact that the right is learning this lesson is making all the right people angry:

Strange, is it now, how the SPLC never seems to take notice of antifa or any other violent left-wing group no matter how many people they assault. But when people merely begin to plan to start defending themselves against the violent left that is attacking them, well, it’s THE SHOAH ALL OVAH AGAIN, again.

So let me congratulate the left, which has taught the right that showing up ready to fight is the best way to stay safe and and to show up and be aware that from this point on when the right sees something like this:

The Seattle City Council passed a unanimous resolution this week which declares May 1 a “day of action” on which city employees are encouraged to attend planned anti-Trump protests instead of going to work.

The resolution—drafted by Councilmember Kshama Sawant, a member of the Socialist Alternative party—instructs supervisors of city government departments to remind their workers that they are entitled to take two days of unpaid leave for “days of faith and conscience,” and that attending Monday’s protests is a legitimate use of this leave.

and this:

“If we truly want to build a summer of resistance against Trump and the billionaire class,” Sawant said in a Tuesday interview on King5, an NBC affiliate, “then we will need disruptive action like shutting down airports, and shutting down highways.”

Other Seattle government officials, while eager to sign on to this “day of action,” are less keen about Sawant’s call for “disruptive action.” Mayor Ed Murray provided some rather impotent pushback saying, “We need to keep our freeways and our on and off ramps…the state, of course, needs to keep our on and off ramps open.”

Directed against them, rest assured they will not only be ready to answer speech with speech, but show up with enough muscle to make sure they can safely make said speech.

May you enjoy the incentive system you have created.


If you think this and all we do is worthwhile and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

A while back I was the training department head, called the “N7” in department head speak.  One of the divisions I owned was indoc, which has new people at our command before they go to their jobs.  Indoc gives new Sailors a place to work while they get their stuff moved in, find a place to live, and finish required paperwork they need for their new jobs.  This division included our junior officers, young ensigns that have recently graduated college and attended a few weeks of Navy training.  When I took over the job initially, I thought I would enjoy mentoring them upon arrival.

I was in for a rude awakening when one of my first check-ins told me “I’m really concerned about work/life balance.”  I told him “Uhm, you’ve had a lot of life and not a lot of work, so yes, you’re out of balance.”  It probably seemed like a dick-thing to say at the time, but it was true.

Seems doable…From Dilbert.com

Your first job out of college is a big challenge.  You have to prove yourself to your employer and your fellow employees, plus you have to learn about your industry.  This holds true for Naval Officers, who have to learn about the Navy, their specific job, and how to lead Sailors, all while getting qualified.  Oh, and occasionally contribute to the local community.  Until you get qualified, it’s an uphill battle that takes much more than 40 hours a week.

Increasingly people are graduating college with flawed ideas about work and a lack of critical thinking skills.  I’m shocked at the junior officers who can’t write a cohesive paper, can’t arrive on time for work, and think that the Navy’s rules about physical readiness are flexible.  Part of the point of college was to eradicate these bad habits, but college is increasingly becoming an extension of high school, rather than an adult incubator.  I used to think “adulting” memes were cute, but now I sadly realize they honestly reflect the internal thoughts of most graduates.

So if you’re a soon-to-be college graduate, and you’re looking forward to a graduation speech about taking on the world and how you’re going to solve world hunger, all within a 9 to 5, Monday to Thursday workweek…please stop yourself.  Get a job, and get a mentor or two that are successful.  Talk with someone successful about finances and how you build wealth in your twenties.  The “cool kids” that are drinking their pay checks and scamming out of paying student loans?  They aren’t going to be the cool kids in their thirties.  Trust me, it won’t mean working yourself to death, but it will involve a bit of sacrifice and thinking ahead.  The thing is, you’ll find real happiness and satisfaction when you do.


This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy or any other agency.

Have you checked out my blog?  Have you donated to Da Tip Jar?  Because you know you should!


Vice President Pence speaking at March for Life, from Fox News

I watched Vice President Pence’s speech at the March for Life. It was…OK. As far as speeches go, it was along the lines of “Blah blah, President Trump loves you. Blah blah, you are making America Great Again.” Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad he was there, but I wish he had said something like this:

I am so honored to be the first Vice President to speak at the March for Life. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” the first right he listed was for life, for all Americans.

The right to life is amazing because it cuts across all Americans, regardless of color, gender, or any other subgroup you could come up with. Some in America want us to keep these divisions, and we saw that last week. But today, we unite across those boundaries. Today, we welcome those that see life as a central part of this great country.

We also welcome those that perhaps chose death in the past, but now regret that choice. The right to life is for all Americans, including them. I have heard from those Americans, and the suffering they have gone through after making this choice…it just makes me sad. They have a voice in this movement, a voice that we welcome with open arms, just as we welcome them.

I implore you to carry the life affirming message into the world. Talk to your neighbors. Talk to your doctors. Talk to your family. And yes, even engage on Facebook once in a while. The media is happy to squelch what you say, although President Trump and I will do our best to change that. But changing hearts towards preserving life isn’t accomplished through news media. Changing hearts comes from heart to heart conversations that are full of love. Have those conversations with those you love and care about, and even those that perhaps you don’t.

Thank you for what you do and for what you stand for!


This post represents the views of the author, no the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other agency. If you want more of his professional views, check out his blog here.

I was working into the wee hours of the morning when I saw this at the Huffington Post

Southwest Plane Turns Pink Lights On For Women’s March Participants

The story said the following

Things got lit on a Southwest Airlines plane carrying men and women to the Women’s March on Washington.

Two women shared pictures of their Thursday flight, which turned on pink lights apparently in support of its passengers to mark Saturday’s special occasion.

“When your Southwest flight crew celebrate a plane full of kickass women and men going to the Women’s March by lighting it up #lit #womensmarchonwashington #lovetrumpshate,” Instagram user @kpmagnolia wrote in the caption of her photo of the colorful pink lights.

Now this would seem a bad idea as Southwest Airlines is not a niche market that caters exclusively to pro-abortion anti-trump people who think believing Catholics are Nazis so I wrote the following email to Southwest to clarify their position.

Hello:

I will be writing a story concerning the decision of a southwest crew to honor the so called “women’s march” on Washington DC as reported by the Huffington Post here

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/southwest-plane-carrying-womens-march-participants-turns-pink_us_58822e01e4b0e3a735687c05?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067

I have several questions:

1. The so called “Woman’s march” specifically excluded pro-life women, does this mean that southwest Airlines embraces the Agenda of Planned Parenthood and those who oppose this administration and reject the hundreds of millions of pro-life people such as the hundreds of thousands who will be going to Washington for the march for life later this month?

2. The so called “Woman’s march” was explicitly anti-trump. does this mean that South West Airlines endorses the anti-trump message of the so called “Woman’s march” and embraces the designation of President Trump and his supporters as “anti-woman” and “nazis” by the marchers?

3. According to the Huffington post a statement by Southwest on the matter said this:

While we’re unaware of details surrounding a specific flight, our flight crews celebrate, commemorate, acknowledge and share in special moments with our customers all the time,

That being the case, given the fact that the March for life brings 100,000+ people to DC each year and the inauguration of Donald Trump brought 500,000 supporters to the capital can you cite a single instance of a southwest crew celebrating, commemorating or acknowledging these pro-life or pro-trump flyers?

4. Tens of millions of supporters of Americans voted for Donald Trump and he won the popular vote in 30 US states, what assurance can you give votes like myself who voted Trump that this is not a signal by Southwest that it will treat those who oppose the president in a more favorable manor that those who supported him, and given this public support of those who oppose the president that is now being reported nationwide what tangible proof of support will you give voters Trump voters who like all Americans have many choices when it’s time to fly, that flying southwest airlines does not constitute financial and moral support for those who oppose this administration and those who voted for it? [note the “and” in that last sentence should have been vs]

I intend to publish my piece by Monday 5 AM EST Said piece will include this email and the questions within. I will be glad to publish your response to these questions with them if I received them by 5 PM EST Sunday. If I receive them at any later time I will publish their response the following day.

Peter “DaTechGuy” Ingemi
Datechguyblog.com
Featuring DaTechGuy’s Magnificent Seven
Have Fedora Will Travel

P.S. As both a journalist who has often used Southwest airlines to go to events I am covering and as a voter who voted for Mr. Trump this time around your responses will be instrumental to my choice of airlines in the future.

Sunday morning Southwest replied with the following email:

Hi, Peter,

Here’s our statement in its entirety; we don’t have additional details to share at this time:

While we’re unaware of details surrounding specific flights, our Flight Crews celebrate, commemorate, acknowledge and share in special moments with our Customers all the time.  Some of our aircraft are equipped with mood lighting and while this was not a companywide initiative, at times, our Flight Crews will adjust the lighting for a Customer or group of Customers traveling on their flight.  For example, in October, one of our Flight Crews changed the lighting to honor a breast cancer survivor onboard their flight.

Emily

This is pretty much a reiteration of the statement already given.

Now I’ve flown Southwest & I like them and it’s not out of character for them to accommodate a particular batch of passengers, so to me vital question of this batch actually is #3  If Southwest can produce examples of their aircrews acting to support a group of pro-life or pro-trump flyers in a public way like this one I and I suspect others will be satisfied that this was the attempt of a particular crew attempting to inspire a particular group of passengers and give this a pass, but to do so risks the wrath of folks who have already demonstrated a willingness to retaliate with violence.

So how do we of he right respond?

Do we follow  the example described by Shelby Foote of Robert E. Lee who in late 1863 when an angry southern woman brought a group of young southern ladies before him who had attended a concert given by Union General John Sedgwick while occupying their area responded to both the indignant woman and the embarrassed girls thus:

I know General Sedgwick very well.  It is  just like him to be so kindly and considerate, and to have his band there to entertain them.  So, young ladies, if the music is good, go and hear it as often as you can, and enjoy yourselves.  You will fin that General Sedgwick will have none but agreeable gentlemen about him.

This is the line of Becca Lower a person not unfamiliar with the wrath of the left who reacted saying

In other words emulating General Lee, this is just a Southwest crew being nice so she’ll it go. This is certainly a Christian approach and consistent with American Values as they once were in our culture.

Alas another Lee from our modern era named Spike has, this very week, given us an example that is much less forgiving on accommodating those who encourage the political enemies of the left:

One singer, however, has learned the hard way that you don’t cross the elite in the entertainment world without paying a price. Grammy winning artist Chrisette Michele performed at one of the balls last night, reportedly receiving $250K for her efforts and an international audience. But that’s not all she got. She also received what amounted to a pink slip from Spike Lee who was reportedly “considering” using her music in an upcoming project.

Director Spike Lee has revealed he was considering using a song by Grammy winner Chrisette Michele in an upcoming project but has decided not to following her decision to perform at the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump.

Thus following Spike’s example the response would be:  “If Southwest wants to accommodate the anti-trump left and doesn’t do the same for us they can join join the list of companies who have decided to take sides in the culture wars and can pay the price as pro-life people and Trump supporters have plenty of other airlines to choose from.”

This would also be consistant with what Jazz Shaw calls the new rules of engagment in political warfare:

But as far as I can tell, the gloves are now fully off and there are no longer any rules on the political battlefield. Democrats and liberals in vast numbers are trying to destroy the Trump presidency before it’s even begun and the silence of the Fourth Estate has placed the media seal of approval on the effort. They are hoping to shut down the executive branch and are clearly willing to engage in a scorched earth policy to achieve that goal. So the next time a Democrat winds up winning the White House, you can expect the same in return. I don’t care if they elect a white man, a black woman or a transgender Latino pirate. I don’t want to hear any kvetching from MSNBC about racism, sexism or any other isms. Everyone is free to simply swamp the public square and reject the election results if they don’t like them, no matter what the next president has done or, more likely, not even had time to do.

Progressives started this phase of the war

Perhaps almost as important, we must remember that if we emulate Robert E Lee’s forgiving and understanding response, no matter how proper it might sound to us as Christians, we are by emulating a Confederate General which by our current media template would make us all slavery supporting racists.

While if instead we emulate Spike Lee and retaliate against Southwest and any other company that serves the general public giving notice from this point on if they aid the enemies of this administration they are our enemies and we will no longer patronize them, we are emulating a person who is considered a black pioneer for equality in culture by that same media template.

So if the end result is that employees of business all over the nation are terrified of saying or doing anything that could be construed as being supportive of one side vs the other, (Can you imagine the result if President Trump tweets on this to his 20 million followers?) I’m sure our media and cultural better will tell us that’s certainly a small price to pay to avoid emulating a rebel general suggesting reconciliation even if it means that the right now has the same power to intimidate business that the left enjoyed in the past.

Isn’t it?


2016 Fabulous 50 Blog AwardsIt’s 2017 and we have a new chance to make our annual goal which requires $61 a day.

[As of Jan 11th between subscribers and tip jar hitters we are at a 64.9% pace for 2017 $436 of $671 based on our daily goal]

If you’d like to help support our award winning independent non MSM journalism and opinion from writers all over the nation like Baldilocks, RH, Fausta, JD Rucker Christopher Harper, Pat Austin, and John Ruberry plus Monthly pieces from Jon Fournier, Tech Knight and Ellen Kolb and want to help pay their monthly wages (along with the cartoonist) and new writers I’m looking to hire) please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to go to CPAC and cover major events in person all over the country and maybe take some of Da Magnificent Seven writers with me.

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Gondorff: There ain’t a fix in the world gonna cool him out if he blows on ya.

Hooker: I’ll take him anyway.

Gondorff: Why?

Hooker: ‘Cause I don’t know enough about killin’ to kill him.

Paul Newman and Robert Redford in The Sting

“Sincerity? I could fake that.”

Alan Alda as Hawkeye Pierce, M*A*S*H,
“Foreign Affairs” Season 11, Episode 3

Christopher Harper did a great job of explaining liberalism in a recent post. I’d like to share a slightly different perspective.

I have long subscribed to Charles Krauthammer’s rule fundamental law of American politics that conservatives think liberals are stupid while liberals think conservatives are evil. Let’s face it, some of the policies that liberals promote are pretty stupid. But to ascribe many of the things liberals do to simple stupidity requires an underlying concession that they are good-hearted souls trying to do what they think is best for the country but, as Ronald Reagan said, “they know so much that isn’t so.”

However, seeing the behavior of the democrats since losing the election in November, and considering their behavior going back to Teddy Kennedy’s original “borking” of Judge Robert Bork in 1987, and his original immigration reform back in 1965, it’s obvious that, like in The Sting, they have been playing the “big con” for more than 50 years. In the space of a few hours, an entire party and their stenographers in the Press went from being “horrified” at the “direct threat to our democracy” that anyone might not accept the results of an election to not accepting the results of an election because John Podesta was too stupid to sniff out a phishing scam (hmmm… more evidence to support Dr. Krauthammer?). Even on what should be a decorous occasion for the “peaceful transfer of power” in the House of Representatives last week, Nancy Pelosi was ungracious enough to allege, with no evidence, that the election was “subverted by the dark operations of a foreign regime.” Everything they’ve done for the last two months has been to deligitimize the new administration, and for one very good reason. They are scared to death that Trump might actually Make America Great Again.

Having painted Trump and his cabinet nominees as hateful-corrupt-xenophobic-racist-homophobic-bigots who will be dedicated to accommodating their Russian masters to whom they owe their positions, the democrats have taken the only possible path out of the corner into which they’ve painted themselves. If Trump crashes and burns, they can say “we told you so” and if he succeeds, their only option is to try to claim credit for having chastened or otherwise boxed him in to prevent what would surely have been a disaster had it not been for their courageous stand against all they’re pretending he claimed to stand for.

How can anyone take seriously this group who, after painting Mitt Romney (Mitt Romney!) as the second coming of Satan four years ago, then urged the republicans to save themselves from the Trumpacolypse by screwing the rules and nominating Romney? Just like Hawkeye in MAS*H, they have become very good at faking sincerity, and I continue to be stunned how so much of our country can be so uninformed as not to notice. I submit that rather than thinking liberals are stupid, we conservatives would do better to recognize that liberals are power-craving weasels who will do anything to accumulate power for themselves regardless of whether it is good for the country as a whole or for the people in it. It will make it even more enjoyable to watch Trump’s cabinet get approved with a simple majority in the Senate after the Reid-weasels abolished the filibuster.

CxCW_xtUoAAv4wI

Hot Dog Vender:Got no opinions Sir, they’re bad for business

Inherit the Wind 1960

One of the values of a being either company operating in a niche market, or serving primarily a niche market is that if you have strong political opinions consistent with said niche market you can release them in public secure in the knowledge that such a move will not hurt the bottom line.

Another type of company with this advantage is one that sells a unique product that can not be easily obtained elsewhere.  When that is the case the customer base, no matter how offended by a particular public opinion, particularly a business, will have no choice but to swallow it’s pride and continue to use said company.

Neither of these would be considered accurate description of the Kellogg’s’ corporation.

Kellogg, citing ‘values,’ joins growing list of companies that pledged to stop advertising in Breitbart News

From the story

The company cited concerns that Breitbart News, which has been described by many as portraying alt-right ideals, does not align with its values.Kellogg’s has announced that it will pull all advertising from the site. The company cited concerns that Breitbart News, which has been described by many as portraying alt-right ideals, does not align with its values.

Breitbart is not amused

Kellogg’s offered no examples of how Breitbart’s 45 million monthly readers fail to align with the breakfast maker’s values. Indeed, the move appears to be one more example of an out-of-touch corporation embracing false left-wing narratives used to cynically smear the hard working Americans that populate this nation’s heartland.

Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alexander Marlow encouraged the boycott of Kellogg’s products, describing their war against Breitbart News as bigoted and anti-American: “Breitbart News is the largest platform for pro-family content anywhere on the Internet. We are fearless advocates for traditional American values, perhaps most important among them is freedom of speech, or our motto ‘more voices, not less.’ For Kellogg’s, an American brand, to blacklist Breitbart News in order to placate left-wing totalitarians is a disgraceful act of cowardice. They insult our incredibly diverse staff and spit in the face of our 45,000,000 highly engaged, highly perceptive, highly loyal readers, many of whom are Kellogg’s customers. Boycotting Breitbart News for presenting mainstream American ideas is an act of discrimination and intense prejudice. If you serve Kellogg’s products to your family, you are serving up bigotry at your breakfast table.”

In response, Breitbart launched its #DumpKelloggs petition to encourage its vast readership and the followers of its #1 in the world political Facebook and Twitter pages to ban bigotry from the breakfast table by boycotting Kellogg’s products. 

Given the results of the election, the fact that the former Chair of Breitbart is now the strategic advisor for the Trump administration and that alternatives to the products offered by Kellogg’s made by other companies abound, this public statement, as opposed to something more generic like claiming they are simply decreasing advertising on political news sites post election, would seem to have been an ill advised PR move.   The trending #dumpkelloggs hashtag on twitter, the eruptions on facebook with the loss of 2% of the stock’s value would suggest this,  so I decided to try & find out what Kellogg’s had to say about it directly.

I called Kellogg’s Consumer affairs line at 1-800-962-1413. I had a very long wait before I spoke to a very busy young lady who informed me that the line was for product related inquiries and that she didn’t have a media contact number but she did have both a number for corporate 269-961-2000 and HR 1-877-694-7554 that she was kind enough to give me.

From there I called the Corporate number. The switchboard operator transferred me to the media relations department but before she did commented that while she had only fielded 2 calls on the subject her co-worker next to here was inundated with them with all but one call objecting to the move.

I reached the voice mail of the media contact leaving a message with both my phone number and email address seeking comment before this piece went live. As of this writing I have not been contacted by either method which means I didn’t get a chance to ask any questions concerning Kellogg’s statement on values. Here are some obvious ones they raise first about how the decision came to be:

Given that this was a very public move by a major corporation whose product is sold in practically every single town in every single state blue and red, what was the procedure that led to this decision?

Who made the initial suggestion for this move?

Was the company approached by an outside entity concerning Breitbart or was this raised internally?

How Much discussion went into making this decision?

How many people were involved in making this decision and when the decision was made was it reached unanimously?

Who drafted the initial statement and at how many levels was said statement approved before it was released to the media?

Those are all statements concerning “cause”, I also have a few on “effect”

as Kellogg’s considers the breitbart sites to be inconsistent with their values, or as Hillary Clinton would say “Deplorable”, do they consider the 46 million readers of Breitbart site equally “deplorable” or inconsistent with the values of Kellogg’s?

Given that the former CEO of Breitbart now has a high position, some would say the most trusted position in the incoming Trump administration does their statement also mean that Kellogg’s considers the values of the incoming Trump administration and the voters who elected them, including in the state of Michigan inconsistent with the values espoused by Kelloggs?

Given that Breitbart.com is inconsistent with the values of Kelloggs will Kelloggs decide that readers and supporters of the Breitbart site need not apply for the positions offered at the site & promoted on Twitter under the Kellogg’s jobs site and that current readers of the Breitbart site employed by Kelloggs should consider finding other work?

And finally one on the aftermath of all of this

Given the rise of the #dumpkelloggs hashtag, the apparent large volume of calls complain and the apparent conclusion by conservatives on social media that their business is no longer desired by Kellogg’s and the implications that has for both the stock price and the bottom line for the company, what affirmative steps, if any, is the company planning to assure these very upset customers that they are valued members of the Kellogg’s customer community or do they plan to wait it out?

If I get a response before I leave for my overnight job I’ll include it here or in an update if any shows up after the post goes up.

Exit Question:  Isn’t this either a class action or a “hostile work environment” case just waiting to erupt on Kellogg’s?

Update:  edited initial paragraph for clarity


If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the continual post presidential campaign meltdown of the left outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



openfloorplanLook at any listing for a modern house. I’m willing to bet that two things are present:

  1. An open floor plan, meaning that on the base level, one room opens into another.
  2. Almost all listings will have multiple pictures of the kitchen and almost no pictures of the garage.

kitchenThat’s a nice kitchen…but what about the smoking room?

The modern home listing is, frankly, very sexist.

Think about it. In almost every family I’ve seen, while both husband and wife cook, the wife organizes and runs the kitchen. If you don’t believe that, try (as a man) to reorganize your kitchen. Most women will have a serious issue with that. I know my wife did when I tried to clean up numerous drawers in our kitchen recently.

The open floor plan is terribly detrimental to men. For most men, if they get overwhelmed, they have to withdraw to a private space to gather their thoughts and de-stress. Try doing that in an open floor plan. Essentially, I’d have to lock myself in my bedroom, which I (like most) share with my wife.

Complicate this with the desire by many women to kick men’s hobbies out of the home and into the most undesirable rooms like the garage and basement. I see most guys hanging out in the garage because that is the only place they can store their hobby. Personally, I think garages are unheated storage for cars, not your quiet space.

garageAlthough if your garage looked like this and had an easy chair, it might not be so bad

The average guy today is probably told by his father that his house is his castle. He also probably doesn’t feel like that, at least in today’s world.

Layer on top of this:

  • That more men come from families broken by divorce, or in many cases a cohabitating couple that later splits, and lacks a good male role model
  • That society continues to change the bar for men, so it’s hard to define what is “good”

  • That all-male or predominantly-male institutions, including our veteran’s groups and church groups, are increasingly in decline

  • That our stagnant economy makes it hard to get a job, which is a critical expectation of men

  • and we shouldn’t be surprised that young men still commit suicide more often than women and have a lower life expectancy.

    We’ve setup a system that doesn’t inspire creation of good family men. It’s caused more than a few to go on strike, and single, angry, unemployed men don’t work well for any government (just ask Tunisia). The anger may have contributed to many men switching their votes to Trump this last election. It’s my hope that as the dust settles, we as a society take a serious look at what expectations we place on our young men.


    This post is the work of the author and does not represent any other organization’s views. And yes, rearranging things in your kitchen is a good way to stir up marital strife, so proceed with caution!


    Check out my blog when you get a chance, and drop a tip in Da Tip Jar!

    Polls are only good for strippers and cross-country skiers

    Sarah Palin two days before the election

    There is one aspect of the Donald Trump victory that is not getting much press. the fact that it is yet another huge win for Sarah Palin over the media and culture.

    In 2010 I wrote about how Sarah Palin (Along with Rush Limbaugh) was the big winner in the first big red wave:

    CBS news pointed out Sarah Palin endorsed 43 house candidates of which 30 won while winning 7 of 12 Senate endorsed candidates. Senator Jim Demitt said “she’s done a lot of good for the Republican Party, and for our country.” And Rush Limbaugh, having none of the spin of the majority of the Mainstream media on the 4th said: “If anybody is an obvious winner here, aside, of course, from me, it would be Palin.”

    So to conservatives who are basking in the joy of a historic question I say to you : “Never forget that it is to Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin that you really owe these victories.”

    Later I wrote about Sarah Palin as a political venture capitalist

    Sarah Palin is the perfect political capitalist, she has taken her political capital, invested it in the candidates of her choice and come out with even more. No amount of political snark or clever Conan skits will change that.

    Palin had become a punchline for the MSM who ignored the fact that her diving into the culture via all kinds of TV projects was a case of fighting for her values on the MSM’s turf, the media culture. She created a whole new narrative that the wonks didn’t see coming.

    Furthermore in Trump she recognized that Trump was a person who knew how to play the media game & her endorsement of Trump while spoofed at SNL

    bailed him out (to my disappointment at the time) at a time when Cruz had flanked him on the right

    Ted Cruz had run circles around him on the Birther Issue but had very effectively turned what was a winning debate moment for Trump, (NY Values) into a negative. Cruz had managed to do what Perry, Bush, Paul and Graham could not, counter Trump effectively. It was so bad that Trump found himself booed by activists which is not something he is used to.

    Talk radio hosts had either advised him against his attacks on Cruz or directly hit him for these attacks. It was a moment of crisis, one of the first moments of crisis for the campaign.

    Then comes the Sarah Palin endorsement and the narrative changes

    Now the topic becomes how Trump got this key endorsement over Cruz.

    As late as nine days ago we saw stories poking her like this one from the Detroit Free Press: Sarah Palin stumps for Trump in Detroit for few supporters, hecklers

    About a dozen supporters came to the bar for the stop, but several people walking by started pounding on the window when they noticed her. One said “I have no respect for you.” And someone sprayed some sort of substance into the bar from outside that had many in the tavern momentarily coughing.

    That person is now likely hiding in a safe space after Trump took Michigan.

    What does all this mean, just this:

    Sarah Palin picked up the mantle of conservatism after the election of Barack Obama when everyone else was ready to give up.  She helped deliver two big red waves and now 8 years after the news media, the media culture and the establishment GOP began laughing at her nonstop  without grasping what she has been doing we have Donald Trump, who she endorsed in the White House, with a Republican house and a Republican senate and the prospect of her being the next Secretary of the Interior.

    None of which the now celebrating GOP members got from the establishment.

    So let me close by reminding my fellow conservatives  who are still enjoying the media’s distress and the sight of special snowflakes showing how valueless their $50,000 a year educations are as they melt to pieces over the thought of our newfound power, of something they might have forgotten.

    Never forget that it is to Sarah Palin that we owe these victories 


    If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




    Olimometer 2.52

    Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

    If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

    And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


    Choose a Subscription level



    “I only know this is wrong.”

    – Guinan
    Star Trek: The Next Generation
    “Yesterday’s Enterprise”

    I’m a sucker for time-travel stories. Whether it’s Harry Potter, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Back to the Future, Stephen King’s 11/22/63 or anything else, a good story about the hero traveling back in time and affecting (or restoring) “the timeline” is one of my favorite diversions. If the plot is clever and resolves itself well, I’m even willing to put up with hokey dialog and two-dimensional characters. I just love it when a story, which can easily open itself to paradox, cliché and deus ex machina anti-climax, manages to apply self-consistent logic and arrive at an exciting, thought-provoking and satisfying ending.

    Of course, we know that time travel is impossible. You can’t go back in time and murder your grandfather, there are no alternate universes and there is no grand government conspiracy hiding an actual time travel device so we just think it’s impossible. But that doesn’t mean that it’s impossible to change the past, at least not if you’re a progressive, or whatever term the left chooses to apply to itself. The only hard part is getting yourself into a position to do it, such as becoming a Supreme Court Justice.

    If you’re like me, and believe that words have meanings and expect that logical self-consistency is essential for any set of laws to make sense, then you would agree that once a law is passed it’s meaning should remain constant until such time as the legislature chooses to amend or repeal the law. That’s a pretty basic feature of any “government of laws, not of men.” The problem, as the left sees it, is that our Constitution was set up to make it hard to change the law, but we conservatives see this as a feature, not a bug.

    The way the Constitution says you change a law is to advocate for the change and convince the legislature to pass the amendment, get it approved by the other house and have the president sign it into law. But that can be difficult since (ideally) each legislator is beholden to a constituency (those pesky “we the people” again), so they have to convince them that it’s a good idea too. If they can’t, then they may get voted out in the next election. At least, that’s how it’s supposed to work. What if there were an easier way?

    Let’s suppose that time travel were actually possible. Our legislative crusader could go back in time, maybe to the Constitutional Convention, and actually advocate to change the Constitution. Maybe convince James Madison that the first amendment should include that phrase “Congress shall make no law limiting the ability of a mother to kill her unborn child at any time during her pregnancy.” Then the Supreme Court never would have had to wrestle with the abortion question in Roe v. Wade.

    Instead, the left has discovered that Legislative Time Travel is much easier. All they have to do is decide what policy they want to enact and then declare that the meaning of the appropriate legislation is actually different from what everyone thought it was originally, and – surprise! – it actually means just what it needs to mean to enact whatever policy they want. They did it with abortion, they did it with gay “marriage” and now they’re doing it with “transgenderism.” Instead of going back in time and convincing Madison, all they have to say is “Madison really meant whatever I wish he’d meant.”

    And the Obama administration doesn’t even have to go back that far. By reinterpreting Title IX to include the nebulous term “gender identity” they have the chutzpah to tell legislators, many of whom are still around, that the law they passed to prohibit discrimination based on sex now means something completely different.

    So now we find ourselves in an alternate reality where laws are no longer logically self-consistent, since “gender identity” is completely subjective and this made-up interpretation of plainly written law is now in direct contradiction of the First Amendment in forcing churches and religious organizations and employers to go against the practice of their faith (i.e. the free exercise of their religion) to accommodate what the American College of Pediatricians has classified as a psychological disorder.

    Since we don’t believe in Legislative Time Travel, we need representatives who will follow the Constitution and not just make things up as they go along. Since Clinton has pledged to be Obama’s third term, we can expect more of the same if she is elected. It says a lot about how far left Clinton and the democrats have become that Donald Trump is actually the candidate who is more likely to restore our timeline to one that make sense.

    On June 21st after hearing about the College Republicans were suspended at the UC Irvine I decided to send When the news that the College Republicans were suspended at the UC Irvine I wrote an email to the two advisers who the College Republicans met with just before the decision was announced.  I include said email in full:

    Hello Ms. Esparza, Ms. Umali
    I am preparing a story on the suspension of the UCI college republicans at your university following this piece at Breitbart.com http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/06/21/irvine-republicans-suspended-punishment-milo-talk/ and I have several questions I wish to ask concerning assertions in the piece.
    The Breitbart piece states that the college republicans received notification of their suspension hours after a meeting with both of you.
    1.  Is this correct?
    1a:  Was the decision to suspend the College Republicans taken before or after that meeting?
    1b:  If before why were not the college republican informed at said meeting of their suspension, if after what action took place at the meeting that prompted this suspension
    The Breitbart piece states the group was suspended for the:  “group’s alleged failure to provide a certificate of insurance for the private security hired for the event to protect Milo.”
    2.  Is this correct, if not what was the rationale for the suspension?
    2a:  If it IS correct, have any other student group been suspended for failure to provide a certificate of insurance?  If so can you list any suspended over the last five years for this?
    2b:  Is the necessity to provide a certificate of insurance for private security an explicit rule, if so where is this rule listed, and have any groups who have failed to provide such a certificate of insurance avoided suspension?
    During Mr. Yiannopoulos appearances nationwide the danger that has required additional security has generally come from on campus students and organizations threatening to disrupt events.  Breitbart.com reported on such protests at UC Irvine
    3.  Did any such organization make such attempts and were they warned concerning security concerns?
    3a:  We’re such organizations sanctioned for disrupting said events or creating an “unsafe environment” if not why not?
    Many campus’ have rules concerning creating a “hostile environment” for students and employees
    4.  Does UC Irvine have any such regulations
    4a.  If so, given the necessity for increased security for Mr. Yiannopoulos have any of the student protesters been sanctioned for creating an “hostile environment” for those trying to attend Mr. Yiannopoulos speech in general or members of the college republicans for sponsoring the event.  If not why not?
    The suspension of a Student group is a significant event and presumably rare event
    5.  Can you provide a list of student groups that have been suspended over the last 5 years for any reasons and said reasons for those suspensions.
    I hope to have my piece up by the end of the week so an answer by Thursday evening would be most welcome.  If you wish to include a statement concerning these events independent of these question I would be happy to include it in the piece.
    Thank you for your time
    Peter “DaTechGuy” Ingemi
    Datechguyblog.com
    Featuring DaTechGuy’s Magnificent Seven
    Have Fedora Will Travel

    I didn’t receive an answer but the question has become moot as per this Breitbart report:

    College Republicans at UCI

    Dear Ms. Rowlands and the Authorized Signers of the College Republicans at UCI,

    I am contacting you on behalf of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs. As a follow-up to my letter sent yesterday, I want to share with you that the revocation of your privileges to access space on campus through UCI Student Center & Event Services has been withdrawn pending the final outcome of your appeal. At this time, your ability to access space on campus has been restored.

    As mentioned in the June 22 letter, the vice chancellor invites you to submit your appeal by July 1. We look forward to hearing from you.

    Sincerely,

    Edgar Dormitorio

    Chief of Staff
    Student Affairs

    The college republicans have no intention of entering any “appeal” process which would give their initial suspension a semblance of legitimacy that it doesn’t deserve

    The CRs, however, quickly declined to enter any sort of appeals process, saying it could be construed an admission of guilt, which they firmly deny.

    “We will under no circumstances be submitting an appeal for the decision by UCI as that would be an admittance to a wrongdoing we did not commit,” the CRs wrote in a statement. “We will not be silenced and we will not be stopped.”

    The most interesting, and encouraging part of the story was the reaction of other groups both inside and outside the university:

    Extraordinarily, even left-wingers on campus came out in support of their rivals’ right to free speech. In a rare display of bipartisan unity at the campus grassroots, the group for Bernie Sanders supporters at UCI issued a statement condemning the administration for “repeated mistreatment of political organizations that take part in open discourse on campus” and calling for the restoration of the College Republicans’ right to access college facilities.

    It’s a great thing to see that some of the left are seeing this for what it is.

    I predict that we will quietly see this entire “appeal” business dropped in the hope that all of this goes away.

    I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar




    Olimometer 2.52

    Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

    Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


    Choose a Subscription level