Friday, May 30, 2014

Scientists at Stanford conducted a study that shows men who regularly eat grits are 70% more likely to have gay children..

Thursday, May 29, 2014


Liberal supremacists, under the guise of humanitarianism, have wasted uncountable amounts of money and resources in the futile attempt of equalizing the American Negro. Much like the war on drugs, hopelessness must at some time render into the verdict of a possible surrender. Despite decades of valiant efforts, street drugs are just as common as the unequal American Negro. By “unequal” I'm not referring to granted state rights or their validity as a human, rather the measured standard of the status quo.

Should contributors (ie taxpayers) not question the allocation of their money? Logic says, invest in that which will provide return.. some return.. any return! American Negros are still massively disproportionally represented in crime statistics, welfare programs, low income areas, and score terribly academically. When Americans hear the term “bad neighborhood” or “crime-infested area,” they know what that means (just as you the reader know without my translation).

Has the time arose to quit blaming “whitey's” institutional racism for the failures of the American Negro? Has the 60 year debacle not been convincing enough? Perhaps waving the white flag in defeat, and reformulating the distribution of social funds to those which are not only deserved, but will provide a return. In today's technological age, an investment in tomorrow's elite minds will produce miraculous returns. It's time to stop over-funding failure and under-funding greatness. The question is as basic as such: Invest in the pupils that will cure cancer, or donate to a perpetual statistical cancer?

Liberal supremacists have looked down upon the American Negro for the past 60 years and told us that Negros are unequal and unable to self-teach themselves at a level comparable to whites (due to “whitey's” institutional racism). Their solution was to funnel taxpayer money into urban, predominately Negro areas, with this ingenious concept that equal playing fields create equal results. Yet, with the liberal supremacists holding the American Negro's hand and walking them through detailed step-by-step, inequality still statistically exists. How? It was once said that you can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Perhaps the Negro just doesn't want to drink.

A valid question remains: Would the American Negro be better off without “whitey's” welfare? In areas populated with bears, there are signs that read, “Don't feed the bears.” Those signs aren't posted just to test the literacy of humans, they have a purpose. Feeding bears sets off a chain of ecological disruption. Bears quickly associate humans with a food source, thus eliminating instinctual fear of humans. The easy meal evolves into an expected meal, and ultimately bears become dependent upon humans for food. Why would bears hunt (work) when they can rely on humans for sustenance? What begins as compassionate nurture (feeding the hungry bears) results in dire consequences for both bears and humans. The analogy is comparable to the liberal supremacists coddling of the American Negro; difference being laws of nature vs political correctness (park rangers don't post signs in the ghettos that read, “Don't feed the Negros”). So, as with bears, Negros become dependent upon “whitey's” welfare, and not unlike the bears, it breeds laziness and dependence that ultimately is detrimental. So, would the American Negro be better off without “whitey's” welfare? As Holmes said, “elementary, my dear Watson.”

America's test scores remain stagnant as other countries continue to advance and surpass American students. Does the American Negro factor into this equation? If you eliminate the results of the American Negro's perpetually poor test scores, is the U.S. on par with the planet's elite? With proper funding, could the aforementioned elites unveil a solution for the American Negro's dilemma as opposed to repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result (ie insanity)?

Nobody questions why gazillions of dollars aren't spent leveling the playing field of competitive athletics. Some traits are just inherently genetic. In hypothetical summation, suppose the same amount of money spent on attaining educational equality for the American Negro were spent on non-Negro physical fitness programs in hopes of procuring an equal playing field in organized athletics, particularly the Olympic 100 meter dash. Non-Negro charter schools, which would be funded by tax dollars, equipped with the most advanced training facilities, and would recruit hopeful non-Negro athletes with the goal of eliminating racial inequality that persists in the Olympic 100 meter sprint – thus ultimately placing gold around the neck of a non-Negro sprinter (particularly considering that those of African decent have biological advantages that spotlights the legitimacy of inequality):

Per Wikipedia: It is believed that biological factors may be largely responsible for the notable success in sprinting events enjoyed by athletes of West African descent. Chief among these is a preponderance of natural fast twitch muscle fibers, which aid to obtain higher power, thus higher acceleration and speed. Scientists have concluded that elite-level sprinting is virtually impossible in the absence of the ACTN3 protein, a "speed gene" most common among persons of West African descent that renders fast twitch muscle fibers fast. African American 200 meter and 400 meter world champion Michael Johnson has suggested that the presence of ACTN3 is at the root of the success of these athletes in sprinting events. Top sprinters of differing ancestry, such as Christophe Lemaitre, are believed to be exceptions in that they too likely have the genes favourable for sprinting.

Now understanding that certain physical characteristics are biologically recognized (and advantageous), how does that differentiate innate or intellectual differences, such as mentioned in books like the Bell Curve, which statistically examines differences associated with IQ and race? Liberal supremacists (humanitarians) would clap and cheer as their favorite Negro sprinter crossed the finish line ahead of their non-Negro competitor, although the non-Negro was at a genetic disadvantage. Yet, the same “humanitarian” would scoff and slander any and all who didn't give the Negro an equal playing field socially or academically. Equality, you say?

In conclusion, what is equality? Is it just a buzz word like “racist”? Is it an excuse for failure? Is it synonymous for hypocrisy? Perhaps equality is only relevant in mathematics? Actually, the answer is E) all the above. Equality is a buzz word, which enables failure, that like hypocrisy always has an agenda -Yet, in reality, is only relevant in mathematics.

Equality may perhaps be a right, but no power on earth can ever turn it into a fact.” ~ Honore de Balzac  

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Coming to America

Three-quarters of homes in Japan have "smart toilets" (app-packed commodes that come with built in speakers, lids that lift automatically, seats that heat up and some even sync with users' smartphones via Bluetooth).

The Japanese producers plan to introduce and promote the toilets in America this year...

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Some measure wealth in dollars, others measure it in sense...

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Sunday, May 18, 2014

Friday, May 16, 2014

Big Pharm is Big $$$

* Fifteen cancer drugs introduced in the last five years cost more than $10,000 per month

* A cholesterol-lowering treatment for those with certain rare genetic disorders costs $311,000 per year

* A cystic fibrosis medicine costs $300,000 per year (development partially funded by charity)

* In 2012, Americans spent $263 billion on prescription drugs

* Generic drugs now make up 86% of all medicines used in the U.S.

*  The $19.3 billion lost to patent expirations in 2012 was offset by a $20 billion increase in prescription drug prices

Source - Bloomberg Businessweek

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

* Approximately a dozen states have laws that approve driver's licenses for illegal immigrants

* During the fiscal year of 2013, the U.S. reached an all-time high in deportations of illegal immigrants (368,644)

source - WSJ

Thursday, May 8, 2014


* Has a 2.7% unemployment rate (2012)

* Has a 10.4% average GDP  (2006-2008)

* Has eased residency requirements for immigrants from more than 40 nations (including U.S.)

* Immigrants can start a business by opening a $5,000 local bank account

* 10% white

* 8% speak English as first language (although most speak English)

* 93% of Panamanians are Christian

* Crime is moderate, but becoming less frequent

Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Via the right to write, a pseudonymous keyboard attendant has evolved into a Cyberian pseudo-intellectual - enabled by the praise of his alter ego...