Judge Upholds Eviction of Mom of 6.

That headline is from the Altoona Mirror, September 24, 2009. And one would be forgiven for asking, where's the compassion? How could he do such a heartless thing? Let's go to the story itself, because it's instructive of the kind of tragedy created (I submit, intentionally) by generations of social engineers in the inner cities. And now it's spreading to smaller towns.

Shaquita...

We pause after the first word in the story because that's the first hint that trouble's afoot. Social engineers have created an inner city culture that separates itself from (and often visibly despises) the rest of America. One demarcation line is the invention of new names. Not that there's anything wrong with creating new names in a country with 300 million people. We can only have so many "Mikes." It's just that the practice pretty much started in some of the worst communities in the country. So as soon as you hear "Shaquita," you can pretty safely guess that something bad's coming next. Rarely do you see the name "Shaquita" followed by the words, "won a prestigious award."

Shaquita Young, 28, who came to Altoona three years ago from Chicago...

She left a bustling city three years ago to come to a contracting small town with a rampant drug problem and overly generous access to welfare. That rampant drug problem started after someone in Altoona (too cowardly to step up and take credit) put the word out to New York City, New Jersey, Philly and other inner city Meccas that Housing Authority-owned dwellings in Altoona were abundant and vacant (due to lack of need). (Aside: How long do you think Altoona will be a solid Republican vote with people moving in from big city slums? Do you honestly believe that's not by design?)

... said she didn't know what she was going to do.

Young, whose children range in age from 8 months to 11 years...

Another staple of the leftist-designed inner city: illegitimate children, helping to realize Karl Marx' dream of the destruction of the traditional family. Who needs a family with a dad bringing home the bacon when the government cuts a check to replace him? This reality is learned young, as evidenced by the fact that Shaquita was a mom at 17. So she very well could have been pregnant at 16.

Let's skip down the story fo find out who fathered that child when Shaquita was 17...

She said the father of her oldest son "did terrible things" in Chicago, and in retaliation, his brother and grandmother were gunned down. She said the killings stemmed from gang activity.

I won't comment on the abject stupidity of getting knocked up by a gang banger, but focus on another staple of the social engineered inner city: the gang. An expensive yet worthless government education system produces men with no skills other than to gang up and peddle dope. And of course, vote for people who play the race card and promise more welfare or more money for inner city schools. But not school choice, of course. These inner city kids might become productive citizens who don't need welfare. Too big a risk for the political poverty pimps.

The children's fathers...

Note the plurals. Yet another result of the welfare culture and another nail in the coffin of the traditional family. ("Yay!" cried Karl Marx.)

The children's fathers do not contribute to their support.

Of course they don't. They don't have to. The government has a check ready for those kids and their mom. And if the fathers are all the caliber of daddy #1, what would they contribute? Weed?

The leaders of the American left have sold society-dividing snake oil from a bottle labeled "compassion" since the 1950s. The result: people who create not only their own hell, but one for the next generation. And the next. And the next...

Find the compassion there for me. Because frankly, I'm having a hard time finding it. And no one who looks closely can honestly see it either, especially the people who created this mess.

Everything is working out for Shaquita just the way it was designed to. I don't for a minute believe that the politicians who have peddled this "compassion" have ever thought that it would help people escape poverty. They wrapped their malicious scheme in Christian-baiting words to tug at the hearts of good people who want to help. They knew it would only expand and institutionalize poverty — and their own power.

It's working perfectly.

Havin' Fun at the G20

With the impending arrival of G20 dignitaries and their entourage of rent-a-mob protesters, the fed has seen fit to evacuate all mailboxes from the downtown area. This move should also serve to discourage al-qaeda from trying to parcel-post a suicide bomber to the proceedings.

No doubt, bandanna-ed groups like The Coalition for Broccoli Equality will be attacking anything that remotely conveys government ownership or control. Which in Pittsburgh is pretty much everything but the pigeons. But apparently, mailboxes, pacifists that they are, are most at risk. And therein lies a tremendous opportunity for the City of Pittsburgh to send a message to the world. That message is: start a riot and we'll shoot you!

So here's what they should do. Get a hold of the guys from those hunting shows on Versus and post them up on a building. Then, leave one mailbox out in the open and let the cameras roll. While the guy in Real Tree camo whispers on and on about the wind and the sun and travel routes and the one he missed in Seattle awhile back, protesters will start sneaking out of the shadows and start sniffing warily around the mailbox. Eventually, one will have a go at it. At which point, the Versus guy stops whispering to the camera and BLAM.

It's just like baitin' a bear.

"Woo! Look at him! He... is... a... beauty! Looks to be about six foot, has to weigh 128 pounds! That's huge for a protester!"

Then, as a guitar and a harmonica play a gentle down-home ditty in the background, we see our Versus fellow carting off his quarry with a deer drag, and hear the voice of Sam Elliot say, "There's nothing like spending a day afield in protester country."

And somewhere, a whole slew of other rent-a-mob protesters will start thinking, "Yeah, I don't want to play anymore."

I Wouldn't Want to be Starbucks Today

Starbucks was successful not because of the crunchy atmosphere or the cache or the eco-conscious, earth-friendly, shade-grown, fair trade blah, blah, blah. It was successful because for many years, it was the only place in the country that served really good coffee. It freed millions of coffee drinkers from the tyranny of Maxwell House. And because of that, it was able to charge unheard-of amounts of money for a simple cup of java.

But then McDonalds caught on and started brewing their own excellent blend. And Dunkin' Donuts one-upped Mickey-D's with their own outstanding offerings. Both were blows to Starbucks' bottom line.

And then this morning...

This morning, I was jonesing for a cup of coffee. I stopped at the Sunoco A-Plus convenience store/gas station because I'd noticed they'd upgraded their coffee machines. I grabbed a 16-oz. cup, added a bit of real half-and-half and filled up with Sumatra.

It was excellent. And it was $1.25.

If the Sunoco A-Plus in Crafton Borough, Pennsylvania has caught on to the premium coffee trend, it's a fair bet that pretty much everywhere else in America has as well. There may be a million Starbucks in the U.S., but there are a lot more everywhere-elses. And if they're just as good as Starbucks, more convenient and less money, Starbucks opened its doors this morning on a totally different world.

It'll be interesting to watch how they react to it.

Some Free Advice to the UFL

I don’t know what the United Football league is going to look like, but I can guess. It’s going to try to look like the NFL. Other leagues have come and gone by trying to be the NFL, only with lesser talent. None have succeeded.

Or they’ve tried to look at where the NFL is now, guess where it’s going, and get there first (the remote-controlled hover cameras of the XFL, for example). This too has failed.

So rather than trying to imitate and/or innovate, the UFL ought to do something completely unexpected: the exact opposite.

Retrovate.

Hey, there’s a reason why Mitchell and Ness can charge over $300 for a 1970-style Johnny Unitas uniform and Steelers crowds are still packed with fans wearing Lambert jerseys. Fans loved what professional football used to be.

The UFL should look at what made pro football different, fun, popular and wildly successful. Then give that back to football fans. Forget about drawing in new fans. That’s what the NFL has been all about for twenty-five years now — changing the rules to create more offense, making broadcasts as much spectacle as sport, turning game day into an event. They should imitate what the NFL used to be when it caught the imagination of the sport-loving public. Put the goal posts on the goal line. (That’s why they’re called “goal posts” not “back of the end zone posts.”) Bring back wider hash marks and sportsmanlike conduct. Kill the TV time-outs and video reviews. Start games at the same time every week. (That’s how kids get into a habit of watching it.) Take it back to when a guy was down only when he had two knees on the ground and was actually touched. Forget the muff rule and the five-yard rule. Bring back the rule that you can’t act like a five-year-old desperate for attention every time you make a tackle. And forget uniforms that look like something the Jetsons would wear. No one is ever going to spend $300 for them in the future.

Want to be really retrovative? Get rid of some of the padding. Heck, go with leather helmets. Sure, you’ll have more broken noses, but you’ll have fewer cases of pugilistic dementia. Guys won’t go helmet-to-helmet if what’s covering their melon is only slightly more than a tossel cap.

Try it. Why not? Everything else has been tried before. And failed.

Oh, Well Hey There, Sex Offender!

The scuttlebutt last night was unpleasant and unnerving: we have us a sex offender living and lurking in the neighborhood. Well, living, at least. We don't know if he's technically "lurking."

That's because we don't know what he did. Is this a guy who did something unspeakable to a defenseless child? Or a guy who, at 23, found himself in the company of a willing, 16-year-old, scantily clad skank? No one knows. All we know is there's a registered sex offender living in an apartment right behind a family with four children.

But there are only two possibilities: 1) he's a threat; 2) he's not a threat.

If it's #1, why is this person not in prison? Clearly, the law considers it important that everyone know when a sex offender has moved in, so they must consider him a threat. So why isn't he in prison if he's committed a sex crime in the past and considered likely to do so again? What are the residents supposed to do with that information? Restrict their own freedom or that of their children? Run the guy out? Arm themselves? Set a trap? What are they supposed to do? I mean, other than live with worry, fear and trepidation?

If it's #2, then why make the guy register as a sex offender and alert all of his neighbors to a crime he's supposed to have paid for already? Prison isn't supposed to be about punishment, we're told by lofty thinkers. It's about reform. OK, he's out. So he's reformed, right? Why turn all of his neighbors against him and throw a dark cloud over every home in the immediate vicinity? All that's happened is life has been made a little less pleasant for everyone around him.

Thanks for that, legal system.

Laws making it mandatory to register sex offenders were created because some people repeated their crimes after serving time. And no doubt, Borough Council will be asked to pass more laws and ordinances that will make it necessary for this man to move. They'll say that registered sex offenders can't live within a mile of a playground or school. They'll make it incumbent upon landlords to check backgrounds of tenants. They'll drive him out to...

Some other neighborhood.

Wouldn't a simpler solution be to use some common sense? If it's a true sex crime involving a child (rather than the aforementioned skank), the guy never gets out of jail. He's no threat there. And his sentence might just serve as a deterrent to other would-be predators who instead of seeking a victim might instead seek help.

Either way, the neighborhood isn't punished.