Will A Gay Apple CEO Make My iPhone Work Better?

Photo credit: The Climate Group (Flickr)

Last week, Apple CEO Tim Cook made it official.

He wrote in Business Week that he’s gay and proud of it.

Memo to Tim:

I’m a pretty good customer of yours.  I have an iPhone 5, an iPad 3, several ipods, and an Apple TV box.  That makes me a very lucrative customer of iTunes, iBooks, and the app store.

Will your being gay extend the battery life of my iPhone 5?  Will it affect Apple stock options long term? Will it cause my iPad 3 to be rendered obsolete by the new Air series? Will IOs 8.1 not be as big a disaster as IOs7 because you are proud of being gay?

I know, having read your article, that you think having sex with other men has made you more empathetic because you are part of a minority and, ergo, a better CEO. But you know what? I don’t care. I don’t buy my smartphone on the basis of your empathy as a CEO.

I didn’t care that Steve Jobs had sex with women, and I don’t care that you have sex with men.  Include me out of your personal life.

But what you’d better be concerned about is that the iPhone 7 has enough to make me want to replace my iPhone 5 with it, because the iPhone 6 was a big yawner.  If that’s the best you can do, then I’m looking at Samsung, Alcatel, ZTE, and other innovators in the Android space. For the record, I already have a cheap Android tablet and a second Android smartphone. I like them.

My relationship with you is that you are the CEO of a company another guy made great; and under your leadership, I’m beginning to see cracks. My willingness to go somewhere else has nothing to do with your sex life.  It’s very self-centered.  If I can get a better deal from Samsung, if their Android stuff works better for me and is easier to use, I’m gone.

We no longer use Macintosh computers for video editing, as an example, because Windows-based machines are much more cost effective and, I might add, available at Wal Mart at 3am.  Your being gay and proud of it has no effect on the market share of the Macintosh.

Tim, I’m not trying to diminish your personal feelings and accomplishments.  I’m only pointing out what’s relevant.

You said that being gay had given you the skin of a rhino, which is a useful trait as the CEO of Apple.

Great.

Be the CEO of Apple.

I don’t need to know about and/or approve of your sex life any more than I need to know about President Obama’s or President Bush’s.

Sex is something that is supposed to be practiced behind closed doors.  I know that makes me sound old and unhip, but I’ll bet you that if you take a poll of the people who buy your products—even as hip as you guys try to be—a vast majority will agree with me.

Pages: 1 2

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

History Shows Ebola Not The Threat That Political Chattering Heads Say It Is

Photo credit: shutterstock.com

As much as I enjoy beating this President up for his own personal incompetence and that of his sycophants, we need to put Ebola into perspective.

In 2012—the last year for which we have verified statistics—roughly 92 people a day died on our highways.

So far, one guy came into a Dallas hospital from West Africa after having been exposed to Ebola—having lied about where he had been—and died. He infected two nurses who treated him.

This is definitely a matter of concern, but hardly the political contagion that the Sunday morning TV talking heads seem to think it; nor is it the leading edge of a bubonic plague-like outbreak in our cities.

That said, fixing this would be a lot easier if the citizens actually believed that their government was competent to fix the problems government is actually supposed to fix.

We learned something very important during and after 2005’s Hurricane Katrina, which smacked down New Orleans.

We learned that if you truly want to be safe from a disaster, you cannot depend on the government to bail you out.

In that case, the single most corrupt city in the single most corrupt state in the entire nation was depending on the usual slate of clowns they had elected to step up and show some leadership–and it didn’t happen.

So they blamed George Bush, who happened to be President.

Never mind that first response to things like Hurricanes and pandemics is from the local authorities.

And in absolute fairness to this President, that is still the case.

It should tell you something about this country that even after the thorough screwing the healthcare system in this nation has taken from the current administration in terms of economics, the Ebola “outbreak” was limited, even though our treatments for this strain of the virus are only experimental.

It goes to show you what a little attention to cleanliness and public health will do. If this had been the late 19th century, the numbers might have been a stark contrast.

The point here is that Ebola is just another in the continuum of threats we face every day, and it doesn’t even rank as high up on the list as bad driving. Not nearly as high.

Those politicians who are seeking some advantage from the very small incident that occurred in Texas are going to find that the American public is a lot smarter than they are.

Can radical jihadists attack the United States with some bio-terror threat?

Of course. So can anybody else who wants to—somebody like the late Tim McVeigh whose weapon of choice was fertilizer and diesel fuel in Oklahoma City. You don’t have to be too technically sophisticated; and if you are willing to die in the process, it’s even easier.

There is, however, a limit to the number of people who are willing to kill themselves along with you.

Here are the medical facts of life.

When we needed an antibiotic in the world, a Scottish scientist discovered penicillin in a moldy petri dish. Scientists from the Northern Regional Research Lab in Peoria, Illinois during World War Two figured out from a moldy cantaloupe how to mass produce it.

Pages: 1 2

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Here’s Why I Think Rahm Emanuel’s Brother (“Dr. Death”) Is Full Of Crap

Photo credit: The Aspen Institute (Flickr)

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm’s brother, says that, all other things being equal, he’d just as soon die at age 75—in his case, 18 years from now.

My take on that is that he should go first.

Just like those jihadist “leaders” who tell their followers that it is a good idea to kill themselves with suicide vests because they will be rewarded in heaven with 72 virgins.

They never seem to want to go first, either. Somehow, they’re too important to “the cause”.

What’s jarring about the article Emanuel wrote in this month’s Atlantic Monthly and the adoring TV interviews on the mainstream media is that this is the guy who, for all practical intents and purposes, designed that abortion waiting to happen, Obamacare.

These guys always talk and write in code.

They talk about “sustainability” and “end of life decisions” the same way animal “shelters” use the term “euthanizing” as opposed to “whacking” or “killing”.

Now, my father lived until he was 86. He never met a candy bar he didn’t like, and he wasn’t a real fanatic at taking care of himself. The Mickey Mantle of college professors. According to my sister, who studies these things, his ancestors tended to live almost a decade longer, although his father was felled with a massive stroke when he was 67.

My father—until the last six months or so of his life—was in pretty good shape and, in general, a net contributor to society. Granted, he didn’t found any schools or television stations in the last 11 years of his life; but he did enjoy his retirement, his children, grandchildren, and his great grandchildren. He did have a sense of mortality. But he wasn’t as ready to check out until very near the end as Rambo’s brother says he will be at age 75.

Dr. Death-At-75 says that it is not true that 70 is the new 50.

Perhaps he’s a bit tetched (as Granny on “The Beverly Hillbillies” would have said) in the head.

When I was 50, I didn’t feel nearly as old as I was told I was supposed to feel. Most of my similarly aged friends didn’t either. When I turned 60, although I discovered that certain body parts need more frequent attention, I still couldn’t pass for the “senior citizen” the 60-year-olds saw themselves as in my youth. That was also the case for my similarly aged friends.

I remember watching Chris Wallace interview his father, the late Mike Wallace, on Fox News Sunday (a coup for Fox and a big ad for CBS News).

Near age 90, the great inquisitor told his son that getting old was not for sissies. When he was 75, he was as feared and as gifted as when he was 60. He died at 93.

For the World War Two greatest generation, that was a bit on the far side of normal; but I also saw an 86-year-old vet jump out of an airplane onto Utah Beach during the 70th anniversary of the Normandy invasion and tell the media that this jump was a lot easier than in 1944 because nobody was shooting at him.

Pages: 1 2

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

“Reverend” Al Should Crawl Back Under His Rock

Photo credit: a katz / Shutterstock.com<br />
a katz / Shutterstock.com

I find myself with great sympathy for those in Ferguson, Missouri who have a serious problem with both the local police department’s handling of the killing of a young man and the subsequent handling of the perfectly legitimate protests that followed.

I also have a problem with the Al Sharptons of the world who rushed to Ferguson to fan the flames.

I grew up about 150 miles north in Peoria, Illinois; so I have some personal experience in the area.

Does the St. Louis area have a long history of racism? You bet. I’m just old enough to remember Chet Walker, playing basketball for Bradley University, as one of the first black players in the Missouri Valley Conference. When they played St. Louis University at the old Kiel Auditorium, they used to have to stop the game periodically to sweep up the broken glass from the beer bottles thrown at Walker by the crowd while they called Chet the Jet a “nigger.” That’s hard for an eight-year-old kid to forget, even 54 years after the fact.

Is that racism still in evidence? Apparently.

There’s simply no excuse for a town being 66% black and having only three out of fifty black police officers. What the hell can the city fathers be thinking? In the immortal words of Judge Judy, “don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining outside.” You can yammer about changes in demographics, but the fact is that there is no way a statistic like that happens by accident.

So when a flaming arrow hits a natural tinderbox, all hell breaks loose.

Now, I’m not prepared to indict the officer who killed the young man–although it doesn’t look like there’s a really good explanation other than he just screwed up. After all, this is hardly the first police officer to pull a trigger when he probably should have thought the better of it. Las Vegas is littered with bodies (and Federal investigations) on that basis.

And, in fairness, the young man’s parents called for peace almost immediately.

But the response to those demonstrations was for the city and the county to show up with more military equipment than we used in Baghdad. In fact, much of it probably had been there and came home when President Obama pulled us out.

The way you deal with a sensitive situation like this is not with fully automatic M-16s aimed at demonstrators.

And grown-ups ought to know that.

Much of the media and the usual race baiters should be ashamed of themselves save for one thing—they do have a point in this case.

As did the demonstrators who assembled at the Bundy Ranch last April.

You have the absolute right in this country to demonstrate against an obvious wrong. Or virtually anything, for that matter. And a young man being shot to death in front of a crowd for no apparent reason is absolutely as wrong as the Federal Government stealing a family’s livelihood to protect a turtle.

A military response by civilian agencies to both situations is incredibly wrong.

Pages: 1 2

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Take Your Best Shot; I’m Not Backing Off From My Pro-Immigration Position One Inch!

Photo credit: lungstruck (Flickr)

Last week, I suggested that a legitimately conservative approach to immigration is to open our borders to most comers who really want to become Americans, sending the criminals back and making our new residents get jobs, an education, and become financially independent. Then, we’ll talk to them about citizenship.

Let me repeat in different words. We are not talking about taking on the Mariel boatlift, people. We are not talking about welfare. We’re talking about changing the law so that we remove its bias against people coming from the South.

Those comments were—as are most of my columns—picked up by the Western Center for Journalism.

And you would have thought, from the comments, that I had suggested using the Constitution as kindling to start the American Flag on fire.

I answered some of those comments individually, but I think it is more sensible to answer them in aggregate.

Here’s my favorite because it was short and to the point:

Martha
July 12, 2014 at 1:44 pm
Fred Weinberg, huh? I’ll remember that name and never ever click on another article written by him. His article shows his ignorance and his comments are sickening.

Many of those folks who wrote those comments are well meaning but hypocritical nutjobs. And I don’t necessarily mean that in the pejorative. We may actually agree on most issues.

Let’s look at the facts on immigration.

There is a perception that immigrants take “our” jobs.

That’s nonsense. Those jobs aren’t “yours”. This is America. We’re a meritocracy. If someone else gets a job you want, than you just got beat. Do you really think—as a conservative—that the government should step in and get your job back for you? Like a union?

If you do, then you’re not a conservative.

Then, there’s the perception than “illegals” disproportionately abuse our welfare state.

First of all, we shouldn’t have a welfare state. It should be a safety net designed to put people back on their feet. If you can live successfully for any length of time on “welfare,” then shame on us, not shame on you. But what are the actual facts?

The most interesting comments along those lines come from the Cato Institute, hardly a bastion of liberal thought:

“Since 1970, no pattern can be seen between the size of benefits a family of three gets under welfare programs like Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) and the level of immigration or ethnic and racial diversity. We (Cato) compared individual states because they largely decide the benefit levels for many welfare programs, and states’ levels of ethnic diversity vary tremendously along racial, ethnic and immigrant lines. For instance, in 2010 only 1.2% of West Virginia’s population was foreign-born while 27% of California’s was.

“Furthermore, the amount of TANF benefits also varied by states with similar demographics. For instance, in 2010 a California family of three received $694 a month in TANF benefits. But in Texas, an identical family received only $260. The size of the Hispanic population in each state is the same: 39%.”

Those are the unbiased facts. They come from a think take that leans so far right that the Clintons and the Obamas cross the street to avoid walking in front of their building. They believe in limited government.

If you cling to the idea that immigrants drive up welfare spending, you’re not a conservative because you aren’t willing to deal with the facts.

And then there is the common argument that they “broke the law” and are “illegal”.

That may actually be true as far as it goes.

But here is where that logic falls apart:

The way our Federal bureaucracy sees it, the average American commits at least one felony a day. We have gone out of our way to criminalize normal behavior; and we incarcerate more people per 100,000 residents than nations like China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia…you get the picture.

Perhaps prisons are good for capitalism?

If we changed some stupid laws, would those people who we now call “illegal” have their productivity rise simply by virtue of a change in status? Would it be easier to weed out and deport the criminals among them? The smart money would probably back those propositions.

What we are doing certainly isn’t working.

For all I know, “Martha” is a very nice but misguided lady. Maybe she (and the rest of the commenters) genuinely believed in facts that were wrong. You know, like liberals think the Hobby Lobby decision by the Supreme Court took away birth control from women.

But the facts are simple. Whatever we choose to do, we must do something. Our history tells us that we are at our best when we welcome people who genuinely wish to be here and help them establish themselves.

You can, for a short period of time, act like George Wallace (“segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”) and stand in the door to the University. How did that work out for him long term?

Photo credit: lungstruck (Flickr)

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom