Why Expecting Subway Passengers to Pay Is Racist

A select group of Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) passengers discovered what happens when government ignores the “Broken Windows” theory of policing in favor of the left’s “Let It All Hang Out” philosophy.

Bart with gun Logo“Broken Windows,” introduced by James Wilson and George Kelling, held that a community starts to deteriorate when political leadership de–emphasizes enforcement of “quality of life” ordinances.

Wilson and Kelling used the example of a building with a couple of broken windows. If the windows aren’t repaired, vandals will continue to break windows until there is no glass at all. Failure to repair the first few signals that there won’t be any consequences for breaking more in the future.

Deterioration continues until vandals break into the building and destroy the inside, too.

The social scientists contended the same thing happens in cities. If law enforcement ignores “quality of life” crimes like public urination, drinking in public, littering, graffiti and vandalism then disorder spreads and escalates.

By 1990 William Bratton, chief of New York City’s Transit Police, was tired of supervising the transit equivalent of Subway from Hell so he ordered his troops to crackdown on quality of life offenders. Plainclothes cops started arresting fare jumpers, aggressive panhandlers and vandals. Crime plummeted as a result of enhanced enforcement.

New York’s subway system became safe enough for politicians to ride.

In 2017 BART discovered it, too, has a problem with fare jumpers. The San Francisco Chronicle reports “22,000 people a day may be illegally riding BART for free — and depriving the transit system of as much as $25 million a year.”

For most of us that’s a lot of money, but for some BART board members it was a small price to pay if it kept BART cops from harassing minorities.

BART board member Lateefah Simon — a former fare–jumper herself— is convinced there are just as many upper–income seniors jumping fares as there are minority leapers, but BART cops will someone concentrate their enforcement on “teens, minorities and the homeless.”

“We don’t want to create more problems than we solve,” she explained.

So while the board was dithering a problem created itself.

Five days after Simon pooh–poohed a plan for fare enforcement, a mob hijacked a BART train. As reported by SFGate, “A mob of 40­60 young people streamed onto a BART train in Oakland Saturday night, robbing multiple riders of bags and cell phones and injuring at least two people.

“Juveniles jumped the fare gates and rushed aboard at least two cars of a Dublin-bound train at Coliseum Station shortly before 9:30 p.m. Some members of the group held doors open, stalling the train, while others ran through cars and some robbed and assaulted passengers.”

BART management was contrite: “Before all else, our hearts go out to the passengers who were victims of Saturday’s robbery.”

Once the sympathy was out of the way, BART reverted to best practices for leftists that put a higher priority on political correctness than keeping the peace. It lied.

“Overall, crime has been on the decline, and we want to stress that this robbery is neither reflective of the safety of our system nor of public transportation generally. We strive to provide a safe place for our passengers….”

Only crime isn’t down. Crime is up 22 percent in the first quarter of 2017. In fact crime is so obvious and out of control that acting chief Jeffery Jennings has declared a state of emergency.

Sympathy after the fact would not have been necessary if BART management practiced competence before the incident. Ignoring an obvious and expensive problem like rampant fare jumping only encourages the practitioners to push the limits and escalate their law breaking.

A sensible solution would be to let the data determine where to enforce. I think the term for that is science and the left claims to be the party of science.

The system has cameras in the stations and it can determine which stations are hotspots and at what time incidents occur. This common sense research might have prevented the taking of the BART train, since it occurred right after a juvenile–heavy event ended.

There is no indication the board will even try to mine the data. Adopting a “Broken Windows” policy might result in too many minority arrests, so the board is willing to risk a few broken heads.

I’m not so sure passengers on the Dublin–bound train agree with that choice.

Quality of life laws aren’t designed to inflict discrimination; they’re designed to establish a baseline for public behavior. These laws protect the elderly, the infirm, the young, the female and the wimpy, while restraining the unruly.

Regardless of whether government tolerates broken windows or broken turnstiles, it always leads to broken heads in the end.

Helping Chuck Schumer Commit Political Suicide

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is preparing to offer Majority Leader Mitch McConnell the gift of a lifetime, but I don’t know if McConnell is astute enough to accept it. Mitch McClellan’s career has been defined by a gopher–like reluctance to risk anything that causes him to stray too far from the safety of his den. (To learn how McConnell earned the nickname “Mitch McClellan,” click here.)

Accepting Schumer’s gift will require Mitch to go head–to–head in the arena of public opinion, which he is evidently reluctant to do since, like most of the Republican leadership in Congress, he doesn’t believe enough in conservative principles to make a compelling case in public.

This is why Trump is president and McConnell isn’t, but that’s another column entirely, which can be found here.

So let me explain another missed opportunity for Republicans to show the American public just how far out of the mainstream Democrats are.

AP reports Schumer “has concluded that denying President Trump his wall is perhaps the surest major defeat Democrats can hand the President in his first year.” And he plans to do it by filibustering the wall.

This is the biggest tactical error Schumer has made since he didn’t object to Fauxcahontas being sworn in.

If only McClellan would exploit Schumer’s gift.

So what can the Curator of the Senate do to exploit Schumer’s gift? All the exciting details can be yours by clicking on the link below and being whisked to my Newsmax.com column. Thanks.

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/mitch-mcconnell-chuck-schumer-border-wall-filibuster/2017/03/07/id/777474/

 

Both Parties Should Adopt the Barbara Bush Rule

The most frightening observation in connection with the Donald Trump presidential campaign came during a call to the Rush Limbaugh Show. Barely able to contain his excitement, the caller breathlessly proclaimed that after the RNC convention speeches by the Trump children, “We are seeing the birth of a new political dynasty!”

So far that’s the only valid reason I’ve heard to vote against Trump.

Jeb & HillaryNipping political dynasties in the bud should be one of the top priorities of constitutional conservatives. Passing political office from one glad–handing relative to another is a recipe for national decline. It’s a short, wobbly step from talking about “Camelot” to gushing over Ted Kennedy; “The Hero of Chappaquiddick” or “The Lush of the Senate.” Take your choice.

It’s bad enough when states become fiefdoms of some dynasty. Think of the Byrds in Virginia, the Longs in Louisiana and the La Folletes in Wisconsin. If you get tired of the cornpone conspiracy in Mississippi you can always move to Oklahoma. National dynasties are inescapable, unless you want to join Susan Sarandon in Canada.

Governing Magazine has the genuinely horrifying news that “…a professor at the University of Southwestern Louisiana estimated that one-fourth of state and parish officials had another relative in office. In a 2010 analysis of Congress, Harvard University’s Brian Feinstein concluded that 12 percent of U.S. House candidates from 1994 to 2006 were members of a political dynasty.”

You’ll know you’ve fallen into dynasty thinking when you refer to “Joe Biden’s Senate seat” or “Eric Cantor’s House seat.” When it’s not their seat at all, it belongs to the voters, God help them.

I agree wholeheartedly with the statement Barbara Bush made on The Today Show. When one of the hairdos asked her what she thought of presidential rumors (at that time) surrounding Jeb she stated emphatically, “There are a lot of great families, and it’s not just four families or whatever. There are other people out there that are very qualified, and we’ve had enough Bushes.”

Quite. We’ve had enough Bushes, Kennedys and Clintons.

When the electorate of a formerly fiercely independent republic starts selecting its leaders from hereditary political dynasties it’s a strong indicator of national decline. Sharing a famous name doesn’t grant any particular political or leadership ability — although it may give one a leg up when applying for a job at select presidential libraries.

Can you imagine Billy Carter in office or Roger Clinton?

Yet lemming Democrats chose Hillary Clinton as their nominee for president.

The choice would have been unthinkable if her name was still Hillary Rodham. Compared to Hill without Bill, former Gov. Martin O’Malley is a paragon of political accomplishment, fully qualified for the Democrat nomination.

I will give her credit, Hillary Clinton is the only woman in America who could turn a trial separation into a New York Senate seat and then use that as a convenient stepping–stone to a presidential nomination.

Hillary’s the nation’s fierce feminist role model, yet you couldn’t peel her fingers off Bill’s coattails with a pair of Vice–Grip pliers.

The Democrat elite joins the political class in Syria, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in making heredity the prime component in selecting the next leader.

Political dynasties on a national scale are a recent development. No one to my knowledge was agitating for Eleanor to make a run after FDR died. It took television, Democrat media and Jack Kennedy to validate heredity as a selection criterion.

Had JFK served out his term, political history may have been different, but one can’t have “Camelot” without an entitled aristocracy.

Dynasty talk died out during the Carter interregnum and it would have been unthinkable to promote a Reagan dynasty. It took Bill Clinton and his grasping wife to revive the politics of name identification.

Of course the coat–holders in the GOP are no better. They were eager to give the nomination to Juan “Ball–o–Fire” Bush until Trump crashed the party — in more ways than one.

Yet none of the chattering classes is bothered by the inequality of “who’s your daddy?” politics. They’re as dazzled by a security cortege as the lowliest Walmart shopper. In the past the chosen ruled by the divine right of king’s, now the select benefit from the divine right of celebrity.

My solution is not an outright unconstitutional ban on wives, husbands, brothers, sons, daughters, cousins, uncles, aunts or in–laws who’ve assumed the name. Instead, I would give any of that lot my blessing to run for office, as long as they changed political parties to do it.

Sudden Jihad Syndrome’s Related Pathology

islamophobia-a-word-created-by-fascists-and-used-by-cowards-to-manipulate-moronsMost of us with a cable, newspaper or Internet subscription are familiar with the 21st Century’s global epidemic: Sudden Jihad Syndrome. First identified outside the laboratory by Daniel Pipes, the disease is typically confined to males.

There also appears to be a correlation with Islam, but that’s controversial.

Mainstream media practitioners usually apply the Sudden Jihad Syndrome diagnosis to quiet, younger men who keep to themselves and do a great deal of research on YouTube. Hobbies include building pipe bombs, going to the shooting range and collecting anhydrous ammonia.

The rest of us know we’re in a Sudden Jihad Syndrome outbreak when, for no particular reason, the young man yells Allahu Akbar and either starts shooting or explodes.

Now, in the wake of the Philadelphia attack on a police officer, I’ve identified a related pathology called Sudden Imam Syndrome. This occurs when a secular politician, typically a Democrat although weak–minded Republicans exhibit low resistance, assures us after an attack that the Moslem terrorist “had nothing to do with Islam.”

In Philly the shooter was captured on camera firing at Officer Jesse Hartnett 11 times, scoring three hits. At the news conference announcing the arrest, Police Commissioner Richard Ross said: “According to him, he believed that the police defend laws that are contrary to the teachings of the [Koran].”

Police Captain James Clark added the suspect “stated that he pledges his allegiance to Islamic State, he follows Allah and that is the reason he was called upon to do this.”

Mayor Jim Kenney — in office all of four days, but learning fast — stepped up to the microphone and suddenly underwent a startling transformation. Imam Kenney assured us that in spite of what the shooter admitted, “In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on the screen.”

CAIR (Conceal All Islam Responsibility) seconded the mayor’s propaganda. Reuters reported “At this hour, it does not appear that he was an observant or mosque–going Muslim.”

As much as I respect the mayor’s reputation as an Islamic theologian, I’m going to have to lean toward the shooter’s explanation of his motive.

Reuters interviewed Jannah Abdulsalaam “who asked to be identified by her [Moslem] name.” (?!!!) She said the shooter was “’exceptionally knowledgeable’ about Islam. A neighbor said she saw him attend services at the local mosque “each Friday” and another acquaintance said the triggerman was quite familiar with Arabic before he signed up for classes at the mosque.

(Evidently CAIR was calling mosques in Philadelphia, MS a mistake anyone could make in the heat of the moment.)

Mayor Kenney appears to be the kind of cafeteria Catholic who can support a Democrat party that worships at the altar of abortion, while still claiming to be a Christian. So if Kenney’s so shaky on Christian doctrine, what gives him any credibility on the Koran?

Here we have an ISIS–pledging attacker wearing a dishdasha, screaming the traditional “Allahu Akbar” while trying to kill a cop and it “has nothing to do with Islam”? It’s like saying Japanese kamikaze pilots wearing a hackimaki headband had nothing to do with Bushido.

And where do these non–Arabic speaking instant imams gain the confidence to interpret Islam? I’m very familiar with pre–Christ Judaism, but I wouldn’t presume to tell a Jew where he’s gone wrong. Just as I wouldn’t tell a druid he’s worshiping the wrong shrub or a wiccan she’s mistaken grass clippings for sacred herbs. But both the mayor of Philadelphia and Sen. Bob Casey assure the nation there’s no Islam here.

But there is Islam here, just as there was in San Bernardino, Ft. Hood, 9/11 and the rest of the terror attacks. It’s commonality among these events that’s inescapable, yet the powers–that–be won’t acknowledge it.

The fact is a Christian who becomes confused about Christianity will often be seen supporting homosexual marriage or Joel Osteen, but when a Moslem gets confused about Islam the result frequently involves the coroner.

There is no hope for a reform of Islam unless Moslems admit there is something wrong and Islamic leadership unites to solve the problem. Relying on condescending practitioners of Sudden Imam Syndrome to deflect blame only serves to create more suspicion and distrust.

The Supreme Court & Robert’s Rules of Raisins

Evidently the philosophy of the Roberts’ Supreme Court is follow the Constitution when convenient, but if a decision strikes at the heart of the Big Government welfare state or would cause invitations from the Georgetown cocktail circuit to dry up, then the Constitution takes a backseat to the alliance of intellectuals and government dependents that rules our nation.

Fortunately for Marvin Horne, his case didn’t involve one of Obama’s signature initiatives like Obamacare. He was fighting a policy from our first socialist president: FDR’s Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 that fixed prices for farm products.

This meant Washington bureaucrats, whose only knowledge of soil and farming came when they cleaned the dirt from under their nails, arbitrarily set the price of farm products AND decided how much a farmer could grow. Just like the Soviet Union, except no gulag.

Marvin wasn’t going to take it anymore and he fought the law and the Horne won. Complete details in my Newsmax column:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/Supreme-Court-FDA-Raisins-subsidy/2015/06/26/id/652418/

 

How Apple Computer Delivered Gen. Jubal Early’s Last Defeat

Censorship graphicThis is what happens when people who lack common sense or even a sense of proportion try to stay current with the latest PC hysteria. The cultural surfers at Apple were having trouble catching a wave in the wake of the cowardly shooting at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, SC.

There was no obvious alternative lifestyle angle, so a hot letter from CEO Tim Cook threatening to prohibit Apple employees from attending gun shows and reenactments was out. And then came the gift: The state’s Republican governor, Nikki Haley, called for the removal of the Confederate battle flag from the state capital grounds.

This discussion gave some pencil–neck at Apple an opportunity. The company ostentatiously announced a ban of all Civil War games in the Apple Store that used the image of the battle flag. Which would be every last one of them.

In a computer game the battle flag is an accurate historical representation of how units identified themselves. Quite by accident this exhibitionist edict will temporarily increase the accuracy of the games, because at the small icon size the official CSA flag is so similar to the US flag players, like generals in 1861, will have trouble telling the units apart.

A better question is what difference does it make? There may be game players whose goal is to succeed where Robert E. Lee failed. Thereby preserving slavery and the CSA in his imaginary White supremacist fantasy. But like viewing pornography, this revisionism takes place in the privacy of their own home. The only people damaged are the delusional player and his immediate family.

Apple’s self–serving explanation for the ban was “apps containing references or commentary about a religious, cultural or ethnic group that are defamatory, offensive, mean-spirited or likely to expose the targeted group to harm or violence will be rejected.” Which proves the ban was bogus because Civil War apps did none of that.

If Apple is declaring war on offensiveness, what about the farm simulations in the Apple store? Unless it’s Mrs. McDonald being milked, instead of the cows, vegans are going to be offended.

And where does it stop? Will Apple ban the Twitter app, since only 49 of 3,000 employees are black?

The outrage is selective and hypocritical. Case in point: If the United Daughters of the Confederacy attempted to open a meeting hall across the street from the Emanuel Church where nine blacks were murdered, the outrage would be instantaneous. It would be the largest simultaneous influx of Northern invaders since Gen. Sherman crossed the border.

The organizations would be attacked. The members would be attacked. The realtor would be attacked. There would be calls for an investigation. Demonstrators protesting the site would be heroes. While the worst possible motives would be ascribed to the individual behind the proposal.

No one on the left would warn that only 10 percent of the Daughters are also members of the Klan. The New York Times wouldn’t run a series on redneckophobia. And you wouldn’t see profiles of a Daughter oozing sympathy as her trip to Piggly Wiggly wearing a hoop skirt prompted strange looks from other shoppers.

Yet when plans were announced for the Ground Zero Mosque — a stone’s throw from a site where 2,606 Americans lost their lives at the hands of Islamic jihadists — the left attacked conservatives and patriots that were trying to block this example of Moslem thumb–in–your–eye triumphalism.

Pamela Geller, one of the principle opposition organizers was and is vilified by the MSM and the left. She’s known as an “anti–Islamic” writer and bigot, instead a patriot and a defender of free speech.

Banning the battle flag was right and proper. South Carolina was the first state to secede and was called “the cockpit of revolution” during the Civil War. Keeping a flag that represented the preservation of slavery on government land never made sense in a state that’s 29 percent black.

For that matter, it’s time to change the name of every US military base named after Confederate generals who earned their fame killing United States soldiers. I can’t think of another nation that has honored men dedicated to killing its troops by naming government facilities after the traitors.

There are plenty of honorable soldiers who fought in defense of the Union whose names can adorn those bases.

In their way the cultural commissars at Apple and the battle flag flagellators on the left are as bad as Major Gen. Jubal Early. His “Lost Cause” mythology scrubbed away the slavery from the Civil War and distorted American history instruction for 150 years. And now Cupertino and the rest of the PC police want to scrub away Jubal.

Does This Ballistic Vest Make Me Look Fat?

The Pentagon is experimenting with a variety of female ballistic armor designs.

The Pentagon is experimenting with a variety of female ballistic armor designs.

Developments on the women–in–combat front are cause for concern, even for leftists that have made cognitive dissonance a way of life, because the women don’t seem to be holding up their end of the ideological bargain.

If Ranger Sgt. Rosie Riveter is going to be leaping out of aircraft and putting paid to ISIS misogynists — either by a well–placed burst from her rifle or silently dispatching him with the Camel Clutch (first made famous by the Iron Shiek) — it would be a big help if she’d quit complaining about her shoes.

I was under the impression that if a shoe didn’t hurt a female wasn’t interested in wearing it, but evidently that’s not the case. Females deployed in Afghanistan are complaining they lack access to combat boots designed especially for them.

This is where the dissonance really bites.

Feminists believe “gender” is a social construct and men and women are interchangeable. Lefty women, secure in Washington think tanks, contend that denying other women the opportunity to be killed on the front line is patriarchal discrimination.

Meanwhile women actually in the Army are hoping for something a little more strappy with a semi–open toe.

Even in branches of the service that have essentially struck their colors, women aren’t happy about equality. The Washington Times quotes a middie (maybe widdie?) at the Naval Academy unhappy that the unisex unis “make women look like men.”

Navy Sec. Ray Mabus — no doubt wondering if women are ever happy — replied there are “skirt options on a bunch of women uniforms,” which didn’t earn him any points either.

The idea behind uniforms is the clothing exhibits, here’s that word again, uniformity. If everyone is accessorizing their look depending on circumstances you no longer have a military, you have a pride parade.

Although women’s slacks have a certain amount of variety when it comes to placement, for men zippers need to be in the front. That goes for the rest of the clothing designs. Uniforms should only differ by size with the exception of undershirts, ballistic vests and maxi–pads. One relaxed–fit BDU design should work for both sexes.

Rep. Niki Tsongas (D–Dr. Scholls) disagrees. The WT reports she is sponsoring a bill that will require the Pentagon to “devise a strategy to ensure that women are outfitted with the best combat footwear possible.”

That would seem to fly in the face of arguments from the women–as–cannon–fodder movement that women are just as capable as men. If that fanciful contention were true, then the only difference in the shoes should be size.

But it’s not true. The WT quotes a British study that found women suffer seven times the rate musculoskeletal injuries found in men and ten times the number of hip and pelvic fractures. And those figures don’t include statistics on pregnancy that, Bruce Jenner aside, don’t affect male combat trainees.

The Marines have had a great deal of trouble finding a few good women. So far the Infantry Officer Course remains undefeated. Recruiters scoured the Corps looking for 100 women eager for the chance to die in the mud and could only persuade 29 to give it a shot. Of those 29 every woman failed the course.

The Army, seven times larger than the Marines, found 113 women to try the Ranger Training Assessment Course. Out of the 113 women, 20 passed and began Ranger training. Out of those 20 every woman failed the course.

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, who knows all about photons and nothing about females, is eagerly awaiting the first women volunteers for SEAL training, scheduled to begin after Sec. Mabus determines the ideal length for a neoprene skirt.

Frankly if I were Sec. of Defense it would concern me that the only militaries wholeheartedly in favor of the US integrating women into frontline combat units belong to the enemy. As his increasingly disruptive and damaging search for Wonder Woman continues, maybe Carter should contact videogame manufacturers.

They seem to have no shortage of heroic women with large busts that are ready, willing and able to kick some behind, even if they are entirely imaginary.

Did You Know Farmers Used to Grow Food for Free?

One of the more brilliant Democrat ploys is getting consumers to pay for their groceries twice: Once in the form of tax dollars and then again at the grocery store. This scam has been going on for the past 80 years and now Republicans that don’t understand liberty or the Constitution are collaborating.

But that’s only true if you are a maker. If you are a taker then the USDA can help! We are now paying farmers to grow food and consumers to eat it. The government’s idea of an infinite loop.

Feel all the outrage in my Newsmax column at:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/National-Debt/2015/05/22/id/646376/

Laws that Are Good for Us Aren’t Good Enough for Them

Last December I wrote of Sen. David Vitter’s lonely fight to make our elected panjandrums and their courtesans live under that same laws we do. You can find that column here.

As you might imagine this is very difficult because our “public servants” mostly consider themselves better than the public they serve.

Sen. Vitter believes in the principle that restaurant food is better if the cook eats it, too. And the same goes for legislation, although politicians don’t have to eat the bill — not even Nancy Pelosi needs that much roughage.

Just live by the laws they pass, like the rest of us do.

I interviewed Sen. Vitter last week and he’s making progress on requiring Washington to suffer under Obamacare, too, but even with a Republican House and Senate the struggle remains an uphill climb.

Complete details are here in my Newsmax column:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/SenMitch-McConnell-No-Exemptions-Obamacare-SenDavid-Vitter/2015/02/26/id/627072/

Now Taxpayers Are Subsidizing Sexual Fantasies

If a man walks in the bathroom and sees Napoleon starring back from the mirror as he brushes his teeth it might be a harmless idiosyncrasy. But should he go into the French Embassy and loudly demand the emperor’s back pension checks a nice man in uniform would take him for a mandatory mental health evaluation.

If that same man saw Marilyn Monroe starring back as the Crest dribbled down his chin the situation would be entirely different.

All he has to do is buy pants that zip up the side and an entire psychosis–enabling industry springs into action at taxpayer expense. Under Obamacare insurance companies are being forced to pay for “gender reassignment surgery” — as if reproductive organs can be swapped out like a bad carburetor — and now Medicare is required to cover body vandalism because our government is incapable of distinguishing between legitimate health goals and dangerous delusions.

Medicare wouldn’t pay for my steroid injections if I thought 18” biceps were lurking just beneath the surface in my upper arms, so why should taxpayers be on the hook for surgery that essentially installs a kangaroo pouch on men?

What’s more, body vandalism on the taxpayer dime is expensive!

Male–to–“female” operations cost approximately $25,000 and the reverse female–to–“male” quadruples that at $100,000. I’m guessing the discrepancy in surgery charges is because clear–cutting is cheaper than construction. Or maybe $100,000 is the maximum charge from a sliding scale based on the size of the finished product: The “Obama” being much cheaper than the “Putin.”

Complete details on this latest outrage to the taxpayer wallet are in my Newsmax column at:

http://tinyurl.com/phynyap