Oh No, I so sowwy! Did I huwt youw wittwe feewings?

Danny Quinney

It has been a crazy busy week.  I have soooooooo much I want to write about.  I’m tempted to write about Fast and Furious (it’s complicated, but I think I’ll understand it better if I write it out), I want to write about Mayor Bloomberg doubling down on his stupid idea to ban soft drinks.  He is now including popcorn in the ban (OH, and just so you know, Los Angeles, and Cambridge, MA are also considering similar bans.)  What really got me going today was an email a friend of mine sent me last week.  It annoys me so much I, almost, wish I didn’t read it.

On June 11, Todd Starnes wrote an article titled, “NYC Educators Back Ban on Patriotic Song.”  The article describes an incident where, Greta Hawkins, the principal of the Edna Cohen School in Coney Island, instructed teachers to remove the song from the upcoming program, a kindergarten graduation ceremony. Staffers at the school told the New York Post that Hawkins was afraid the song might “offend other cultures.”

What song was it she found so offensive?  “God Bless the USA”

Here are the lyrics to the song:

God Bless The USA

by Lee Greenwood

If tomorrow all the things were gone,
I’d worked for all my life.
And I had to start again,
with just my children and my wife.

I’d thank my lucky stars,
to be livin here today.
Cause the flag still stands for freedom,
and they can’t take that away.

And I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.

And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA.

From the lakes of Minnesota,
to the hills of Tennessee.
Across the plains of Texas,
From sea to shining sea.

From Detroit down to Houston,
and New York to L.A.
Well there’s pride in every American heart,
and its time we stand and say.

That I’m proud to be an American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.

And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA.

And I’m proud to be and American,
where at least I know I’m free.
And I wont forget the men who died,
who gave that right to me.

And I gladly stand up,
next to you and defend her still today.
Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land,
God bless the USA

I KNOW!!!  How offensive are those lyrics?  Whoever wrote them must be a monster!

Normally, I souport publik edekasion but this is just beyond ridiculous.  Instead of this patriotic song, “God Bless the USA” students performed “Baby,” a Justin Bieber song about teenage romance.  Ahhhhhh isn’t that just super cute?

Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY) issued a statement condemning the principal’s actions.

“I have just one question for this principal – who exactly are we offending?  The only thing offensive about any of this is the anti-American message being ingrained in our youth. We all should be proud to be American and we should never ever apologize for it.” He added, “It’s time we stop letting our political correctness destroy our values and American traditions, and start embracing the exceptional people and cultures that make our country great.”

The New York City Board of Education defended the principal’s decision.  In a statement to the Post, Dennis Walcott, the chancellor of NYC schools, defended Hawkins by saying, “It’s her judgment to make that decision.  You have to really wonder about some of the lyrics in the song, so I have to rely on the principal’s judgment along that line.”

You have to “wonder” about the lyrics?  Wonder about what?  Now, I’m not the most highly educated man.  Sincerely, I’m one of the stupidest people I know, but I have brainwashed myself into believing it is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense.

Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said Hawkins has been unfairly attacked for banning the song.

Unfairly attacked?  Guess what Mr. Unfairly attacked?  The Pity Train has just derailed at the intersection of Suck It Up & Move On, and crashed into Get Over Yourself, before coming to a complete stop at Pull Your Head Out. If you have any complaints forward em to 1-800-waa-aaah.  Guess what sunshine! Life doesn’t revolve around you.

Lee Greenwood, who wrote the popular patriotic anthem, told television station WNYW that he was troubled by the principal’s actions.

“I take exception that she said the lyrics are not age appropriate,” he said. “If my lyrics aren’t appropriate, then what is?”

No kidding.

Just for fun let’s take this “ohmigosh we might offend someone” mentality and fast forward a few years.  If an American song is dangerous because it is offensive how long until other patriotic things “offend” other cultures?  Will the American flag offend?  Remember last year five high school students were sent home for wearing an American flag on their T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo.  What about the Pledge of Allegiance?  How long until that becomes offensive?  It does, after all, have the words “America” “Flag” and “God” (which is being challenged constantly).  When did it become wrong to be proud to be an American?  Why is it wrong to teach patriotism to children and to establish a sense of pride for their country?

Personally, I don’t care if someone’s patriotism offends anyone.  I think we should be able to be as ridiculously patriotic as we want to.  This is America.  You can’t show up here and expect us to not be Americans and proud of our country.  Can you imagine going to France and being offended everyone is speaking French? That’s probably not a great example.  They are, after all, the French.  How about visiting the Middle East and being offended when everyone faces Mecca and prays?  Could that be offensive to anyone?  Would they care?  No.  And they shouldn’t.  That’s their culture.  It’s what they do.  It’s part of the gig.

For over 200 years men and women have fought and died to protect our right to be as patriotic, or not patriotic, as we want to be.  So we could fly our flags, sing our songs, eat our hot dogs on the 4^th of July, then stand with one hand to our heart and pledge our allegiance to one freaking awesome flag and one amazingly wonderful country.  Or not,  if that is what we choose.

(Whew….)  I don’t know about you, but I feel better.  Oh, and if I have ever offended you with my opinion, you should hear the ones I keep to myself.

 

“Gulp”

Danny Quinny

New York must be a wonderful place to live.  Can you imagine a city with 100% employment, where crime is nonexistent, where every road is beautifully paved, and people just get along?  It MUST be nice.  Why else would the three-term Mayor decide to put soda on his target list?

Oh you read correctly, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is proposing a ban on large servings of soda and other sugary drinks at restaurants, delis, sports arenas and movie theaters.  He proposes limiting drinks to16 ounces.  16 OUNCES!!!  What kind of wuss only drinks 16 ounces?  Seriously, I could down that in one slurp.

Well done, Mayor Bloomberg, well done (clap, clap, clap).  You deserve a standing ovation from my tallest finger.

Why is he proposing something so silly?  He wants to save us all from obesity.

This guy is proof positive you can have all the money in the world and still not be able to buy any class (or a clue).  Bloomberg is the 11^th richest person in the US, but he forgot one little thing about the soda drinking ban.  It is NONE OF HIS BUSINESS.  Plus this is the same man who “recently issued a proclamation declaring Friday doughnut day in New York.”  Seriously!!!!

On the one hand I can see his point of view. Take me for instance.  I hate seeing a fat person when I’m working out (which is why I never go to gyms with mirrors).  And I TOTALLY agree that it is tragic when your country has an obesity epidemic and a skinny jean fad.  You see a larger person in skinny jeans and you can almost hear the seams of their pants screaming in pain.  I Get IT.

But how does it make any sense to have parts of the country legalizing weed, with others outlawing soda?  I’ll tell you, I’m starting to believe 99% of people in this world are stupid (luckily I’m in the other 2%).

Not to beat a dead horse here (although it does make a really interesting “thud” sound), won’t people just find other ways of being obese if that is what they choose to do?  Is soda the real problem, or is our lifestyle the problem?  How about sitting in front of a computer all day blogging, or playing “Minecraft?”  Bloomberg isn’t fighting obesity, he is advocating taking away a persons personal right to choose.  That is kind of what government does.  Ayn Rand once said, “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”  And slowly your freedom is stripped away.

According to MSNBC in 2012 there were 40,000 new state laws passed.  40,000!!! And that is only at the state level.

I found this quote by Alexis de Tocqueville from Democracy in America this morning. It literally jumped off my screen and smacked me in the face.

Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.” 
― Alexis de Tocqueville

So we are all on the same page, I have no problem with educating people about healthy food choices.  List the calories.  But after that “Let Them Eat Cake” and wash it down with whatever size beverages our freedom loving gullets want to splurge on!!

I remember that a seat belt law was passed when I was in high school.  They wouldn’t pull you over for not wearing one, but if you were pulled over for something else you would get nabbed for it too.  I believe it was called a “secondary offence”.  This morning, coming into work, I saw a “Click it or Ticket” billboard AND heard a commercial on the radio about it.  My question is, “Who is paying for the billboards and commercials?”  Are these our tax dollars at work?  As a mature adult (HA HA HA HA), I’m sorry.  I almost got that out without laughing. As an adult, I chose to wear my seat belt.  It makes complete sense to me.  But if I choose not to it does not affect one other driver at all. Not one little bit.  If I wrap my car around a pole and go flying out the window, who is the idiot?  I AM.

It is called “reaping what you sow.”

This may sound silly, but (you Darwin believers will love this), I almost think we should remove the warning labels from everything at let the herd thin itself.

We, supposedly, live in a country where we can choose to take care of ourselves.  It’s called FREEDOM.  Choose to live wisely, or don’t.  If you choose not to, you suffer the consequences.  Why does the government want to take away our basic right to care for ourselves and families the way that works for us?  What’s next, limiting the number of children we can have?

The soda is just a symbol.  You can have my “Super Big Gulp” when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!!!

Apparently the word “murder” was already taken…

Danny Quinney

OHMIGOSH.  I have the funniest story.  Seriously, you are going to die laughing.  So picture this, my best friend and I are driving, and he said something that, I thought, was a little rude.  We often tease each other, but this was over the line.  I sat and stewed about it for a minute and then I decided to take action, so I took out my gun and shot him in the face.  HAHAHAHAHA!!!!  You should have seen how surprised he looked just before I pulled the trigger!!!  It was hilarious.  I was all…what?  You don’t think it was funny I shot my friend in my car?

Okay, picture this.  Same scenario, we are driving, he says something, I stew, as I’m dropping him off I decide to take action and I run over him with my car. HAHAHAHAHA!!!  You should have seen his face just as I slam into him.  It was so…what?!?!  You’re not happy with that story either?  In the first story I killed him in my car, in the second I killed in outside the car.  There is a HUGE difference here.  Oh, oh, wait?  It’s not where I killed him that bothers you, it’s that I killed him.  OHHHH…well, you are going to hate the rest of this article.

Before I launch into this, I know this isn’t my most “timely” article.  I try to do things a little more current.  I have just been super busy the last few weeks (actually I have being “normal” busy, I’ve just been wearing a cape.)  A few weeks ago (February 23, 2012) the Journal of Medical Ethics released an article entitled, “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” (Ironically the 23rd is my birthday).  Apparently the two authors Alberto Giubilini, and Francesca Minerva are a little shocked over the negativity they have experienced, because of their paper.

This is from the abstract of their paper:

“Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”

OHHHH YEAH!!!  What could possibly go wrong with this line of thinking?  I read every word of the paper, and let me tell you, there is not enough hand sanitizer in the world to “de-ibby jibbies” me. I really want to patent “brain bleach” for this type of article.   They conclude their paper with:

 “If criteria such as the costs (social, psychological, economic) for the potential parents are good enough reasons for having an abortion even when the fetus is healthy, if the moral status of the newborn is the same as that of the infant and if neither has any moral value by virtue of being a potential person, then the same reasons which justify abortion should also justify the killing of the potential person when it is at the stage of a newborn.”

My question is where will it lead?  What about the elderly?  “Grandpa, you don’t want to be a burden on society do you?”  What about the mentally handicapped, or borderline handicapped?  They don’t really contribute that much to society, do they? What about the fat and lazy? What if we could make it so that everyone who isn’t blond haired and blue eye just went away?  Oh wait, all my kids have brown eyes…well…as long as it fits the “criteria” (social, psychological, economic), and is better for society.  Sorry kids.

What’s their problem with adoption?  Well, it is better to perform an “after-birth abortion” (apparently the word “murder” was already taken) because, “Birthmothers are often reported to experience serious psychological problems due to the inability to elaborate their loss and to cope with their grief,” where as, “those who grieve a death must accept the irreversibility of the loss.”  Well, isn’t that cute?

Professor Savulescu, from the University of Oxford responded with, ”What is disturbing is not the arguments in this paper nor its publication in an ethics journal. It is the hostile, abusive, threatening responses that it has elicited … Proper academic discussion and freedom are under threat.”

Ohhhh, oh, I see, “proper academic discussion and freedom are under threat.” Now it could be these “ethicists” have evolved WAAAAY further then me, it could be I’m a little “Forrest Gumpy” because (imagine this in a Forrest Gump voice,) “I’m notta smort man, Jen-knee”, but in my humble opinion, I would say that statement proves you can be educated beyond your intelligence.  You know what, yeah, they have probably evolved further (Oh no, should I be worried about being a candidate for a future “death panel”?).

Now, I sincerely believe everyone is entitled to their opinion.  And it bothers me people have threatened death threats.  I don’t understand the mentality of bombing anything to make a political point. That line of thinking is stupid, but on a purely “proper academic discussion and freedom” way of thinking, it is ironic that they are upset people are threatening them when they are discussing killing others.  Just saying.  All I know is, I want to be there when karma comes back to punch them in the face… Just in case she needs help.

Read more:

Original paper

After birth Abortion Outrage

Ethicists give thumbs up to infanticide

Hooray for Boobies!

Danny Quinney

I rarely exercise.  And by “rarely” I mean NEVER.

My wife on the other hand works out several times a week.  She is quite the little hard body.  And you know what they say, “a hard woman is good to find” (wicked grin).  The bummer part about having a workout queen for a wife is that she wants me to work out too.  Yuck.  She wakes up at the crack of dawn and bounces, or yoga’s around our room, I’ll lay there pretending to sleep RIDDLED with guilt.  She then talks about how great she feels after a good sweat.  Good sweat?  I don’t know how you can feel good after sweating.  I sweat all the time.  I’m sweating right now and I’m just sitting here.  All sweating makes me feel is sticky.  I try to convince her that I AM in shape, “Honey,” I tell her, “potato could be a shape.”

So I resolved to get in shape by THINKING about joining a gym.

I took one of those tours where one of the muscle bound employees’ shows you how all the different machines work.  I was on one of their torture machines that you put weights down on one end and pull down with your arms.  So there I am, arms out stretched, which, you can imagine, caused my shirt to untuck, revealing my rippling, cascading “flab-alanche.”  The guy who was showing me the torture machine looked at, and nodded toward my stomach said, “Cool tattoo.”  TATTOO?!?!?! I thought to myself…tattoo…what is this irritably fit guy talking about? I don’t have any tattoos.  I looked down and saw he was referring to the stretch marks etching across my protruding belly.  As quickly as I could I told him, “Oh yeah, yeah, I just got that done.  That’s the Chinese symbol for NEGLECT.”

I read a couple of articles this week which essentially (and literally) asked, “Is cosmetic surgery “ethically corrupt”?” The first article also posed a broader question, “Is aesthetic cosmetic surgery medicine or just exploitation?

When I first read it I thought, “What a stupid question.”  What if your child was born with a cleft palate?  Is it ethical to have it fixed?  If not, what about braces?  I could have saved thousands of dollars not getting my kids teeth fixed.  The fact of the matter is people have been altering their appearance for centuries.  In Thailand they wear brass rings around their necks to stretch themselves out.  Is that cultural, or morally wrong?

The second article I read was about breast implants (had I known that I would have read it first) it states, “Cosmetic surgery is nothing more than an industrial-scale scientific experiment.” It then went on to explain about a study published in the journal Psychological Medicine.  I read this article several times.  And…well…I think it’s flawed, flawed, flawed.  Here are a couple of examples of the dumbery:

Example # 1

“Next month, for example, the journal Psychological Medicine will publish a study of almost 1,600 Norwegian adolescent girls who were monitored over a 13-year period.”  So first the study is of ADOLESCENT girls monitored over 13 years?  That math is ALL messed up.  Let’s say they  mis-wrote that and the study is of adult women who, while adolescents, had cosmetic surgery. Even then, the study is skewed.  Where are the parents?  What father is going to say to his thirteen year old girl, “Honey, your mother and I have decided to get your some boobs for your next birthday.”  You get a young teenager, who doesn’t have the maturity, or developed moral compass a gift like that and it will be *DING DING DING*…Two Boobs, No Waiting!! Yeah, her life may be messed up.

Duh!!  Show me a study of 35 year olds followed over thirteen years and I’ll take it more seriously.

Example # 2

“The finding is that women who use cosmetic surgery do not (I added the italics)  have lower opinions of their general attractiveness than women who do not opt for surgery. However, they display more symptoms of depression and anxiety, use more illicit drugs and have stronger histories of self-harm and suicide attempts. And the surgery is likely to make things worse… As the researchers conclude: “A series of mental health symptoms predict cosmetic surgery. Cosmetic surgery does not in turn seem to alleviate such mental health problems.”.”  WHAAA?!?!  So the conclusion is COSMETIC surgery will NOT alleviate mental health problems?  Good work, Sherlock.  What was your first clue?  Seriously, who funded this research?

The article concludes with this, “Cosmetic breast implantation is a flawed and ethically corrupt psychological experiment, carried out for commercial profit on vulnerable women. And it should now be halted.”

Vulnerable women?  Are there black vans driving around abducting unsuspecting women and forcing breast implants on them?  I would imagine most women who choose to have the surgery save up their pennies to have it done.

Now, there is still a debate on rather or not there are health issues if silicone breast implants rupture (I can see there would be) but the article failed to mention saline implants.  If those rupture they would pose no threat to the health of a woman (other then the actual surgery).

For me, the bottom line is this: we have dominion over our own bodies.  If it makes me, or anyone, happy to let myself go, start working out, or have surgery to improve myself, as long as it doesn’t harm anyone else the government should butt out.