• Amazon Takes Grand Gesture a Step Too Far

    Amazon recently announced they will give pay raises to their employees and set a new policy that their minimum wage is $15.00 per hour. Employees making more than $15.00 per hour will also see pay increases.

    Great! I was surprised and even impressed. The action seems a result of the strong economy and the success of President Trump’s economic policies. Still, it was also a reaction to negative stories about a significant portion of Amazon’s workforce collecting food stamps due to the corporate monolith’s notoriously low pay, especially when compared with its billions of dollars in profits annually.

    But, back to the positive. Amazon is encouraging its competitors to match the wage hike, which is fine. We’re still in the realm of voluntary.

    Then Amazon added something not so great. This part neither impressed nor, sadly, surprised me, considering the company’s politically left leaning public facade.

    The company jumped on the leftist dias and called for raising the federal minimum wage to $15.00 per hour. According to CNBC.com “Amazon said it will also advocate for an increase to the federal minimum wage.”

    How nice. One of the largest and richest corporations to have ever existed on the planet makes a grand, free market, capitalist, voluntary, American gesture. Then they ruin it by calling on the federal government to force their competitors to match Amazon’s “generosity.”

    Hey, Amazon! How about you stick to being generous with your own money and let others decide how to spend theirs?

  • Not Exactly the Zombie Apocalypse – ‘Distempered’ Raccoons in Ohio

  • Bad Dope, Better Dope, and Parachutes!

    Bad Dope, Better Dope, and Parachutes!

  • The Donut Diaries: Firefighters vs. Cops

    The Donut Diaries – Firefighters vs. Cops

  • Are Millennials to Blame for Police Recruiting Shortages?

  • Not Everyone Gets a Trophy.

    The leftist activists’ perpetual and obnoxious attempts to impersonate the Tea Party movement bring something to mind. I wonder if the left’s inability to accept an election result stems from the recent decades-long phenomenon hammered into our kid’s psyche: Everyone-gets-a-trophy

    The problem for the left is in an election you must keep score: Whoever wins the most electoral votes becomes president—gets the trophy. There is no trophy for second place. The left didn’t get a trophy, but, it seems, they still feel they deserve one. But, like Democrat President Obama told Republican Senator McCain, “The election’s over.” In that quip, President Obama told us, elections have consequences, losing has consequences. He may have been arrogant, but he was right.

    The left is throwing one big, I’m-taking-my-ball-and-going-home, tantrum. Congresswoman Maxine Waters, for example, doesn’t seem interested in participating as a part of a loyal opposition. She employs vicious hyperbole and irresponsible disengagement, preferring to not even work with the President. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so damaging to the political and social health of our great nation. 

    Democrat leaders want you to believe the leftist malcontents, engaging in violence during demonstration after demonstration, are a minority. That’s true. However, if the Democrats continue to recognize these groups officially despite their violence and disrespect for the First Amendment rights of others, and if the mainstream media continue to project this leftist minority as ordinary citizens who finally got fed up, got up off the couch, and hit the streets to protest some catchall oppression, then this minority of violent agitators, and the so-called “peaceful demonstrators” who provide them cover, will be viewed as more influential and legitimate than they merit. 

    The current administration hasn’t had time to create anything—to do anything–to cause any reasonable person to be “fed up.” To this date, President Trump’s cabinet hasn’t been fully staffed due to Senate Democrat delays.

    Why is the left so upset? What significant thing has the Republican administration done to them, other than win an election? Nothing. Could it be they’re angry they lost and didn’t get a trophy?

  • A Seattle Liberal Attacks City’s Protest Culture

    The other day I read something fascinatingly waggish and oh, so very Seattle in its irony. The source of my amusement came from an opinion piece: “Stop protesting Seattle Asian Art Museum renovation” (Seattle Times, January 13, 2017).


    First, a preface: I have affection for the SAAM. The museum is in the precinct I patrolled during my over two-decades-long career. I enjoyed the beautiful building and speaking with many wonderful patrons. I also agree with the writer of the piece, Glenn Nelson, that people should stop protesting SAAM renovations, although I acknowledge (and announce) their right to do so. Renovations are overdue, appropriate, and will enhance Seattle’s cultural resources.  


    But where exactly does Mr. Nelson, obviously a liberal/progressive, acquire his moral authority to ask others to stop protesting anything? Has Mr. Nelson forgotten in what city he lives? Seattle has planted, cultivated, and harvested its current protest (crop) culture for many years. Oh, before continuing, I should modify my contention for clarity: Its liberal/progressive protest culture.


    Years ago, I remember protesters descending on SPD’s East Precinct to protest…wait for it… the U.S. Navy bombing uninhabited islands for training in… again, wait for it… Puerto Rico!!! I can’t count the number of protests I’ve worked: APEC, WTO, and the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade; Critical Mass, anarchists, and Black Lives Matter, and no such list would be complete (though this one is far from complete) without Occupy Wall Street’s 99%ers. During the last years of my career, leftist demonstrations were a monthly and many times weekly occurrence.


    Mr. Nelson, who dutifully introduces himself in his first sentence, “as a person of color,” provides his liberal/progressive bona fides and curriculum vitae throughout the article. He cites his Asian American heritage, green space, the ADA, diversity, inclusion, and Seattle’s Race and Social Justice Initiative.


    It seems that his fellow Seattleites’ objections are not worthy of protest because, according to Mr. Nelson, he has determined that “The ‘encroachment’ on green space [and impact on neighborhood traffic] is too negligible to be considered a source for opposition.” Just like so many liberals, Mr. Nelson finds no problem dismissing other people’s concerns when they fail to fall in line with his preferred narrative–his desires. Remember, Mr. Nelson did not simply write that he disagrees with the protesters; he declares they, “stop protesting….”


    Now, I do not wish to make light of Mr. Nelson’s heart-felt plea on behalf of himself and people he loves and cares about. He obviously believes his perspective is correct. But it seems there’s a lesson here for Seattle’s liberal/progressive activists with their emerald green penchant for protest: opposing points of view are not always, in every way, and every circumstance wrong, and certainly not racist or otherwise evil just because they’re put forth by the “another side” of an argument. Opposing political perspectives, ideologies, and issues are simply that: positions held by people who simply oppose your view. They are due the same respect you feel you deserve, not slander, libel, and demonization.       

  • Things that Make You Go, Huh?

    So, we were out this bright sunny morning doing a couple of chores after a nice jaunt around Green Lake. On our way home we noticed something—um, let’s go with—interesting.

    A city street cleaner was cruising down the street cleaning loose debris. As a motorcyclist, I appreciate clean roads. But it was also laying down a sheen of water. It was 31 degrees! The roads were dry–well, had been, anyway.

    And, as if we needed more validation of the silliness of a city street sweeper impersonating a Zamboni, a few blocks later we saw the telltale lines on the asphalt, indicating a city de-icing truck had recently passed this way.

    Not sure there’s much more to say about this one.



  • Myth Affects Cops

    I went to a retirement party the other night for one of the best cops I’ve ever known. The term legendary came up many times during the evening. Most of the stories we told about him were great fun to tell, but it was something he said during his speech that struck me.

    After acknowledging “going out while still vertical,” he said, “I make no apologies for being a cop. I am not ashamed of being a police officer. I am proud of my career.”

    What a sorry state for American law enforcement that a cop like him felt it necessary to say this. The room was full of cops, friends, and family. Yet, the mood of the nation (as expressed by anti-police factions) descended on the celebration.

    As an officer and a sergeant, this man served his community for over three decades. Nearly all of it was in patrol where most police work is done. Sadly, there are people who couldn’t care less about this man’s service and dedication.

    Those people work hard to perpetuate the myth that the cops are “broken,” so they can destroy what cops work hard to build–safe communities.

    The cop haters should be the ones making apologies and feeling ashamed, not the cops.

  • Why Does it Have to be Because You’re a Minority?

    Boycott the Academy Awards? I do it every year.

    Generally, I don’t comment on cultural issues unless they run tangent to my law enforcement or libertarian topics. Since libertarianism involves individualism and not group-think, I believe the Oscars boycott initiated by Jada Pinkett Smith, of whom I am a fan, and Spike Lee, of whom I am, not so much, trips the wire.

    Upset a good movie didn’t get nominated. Join the club.

    Apparently, they are upset that there aren’t more black artists nominated for Academy Awards. I don’t think it’s a stretch to infer that Mrs. Smith feels a personal affront that her husband, Will Smith (one of my favorite actors) was not nominated for his performance in the movie Concussion. I haven’t seen it, yet, but, because Will Smith is in it, I will see it.

    White out!

    At first glance, it appears they might have a point. From what I understand, the vast majority of the “Academy” is white and male. Now, does this automatically make them racist? Of course not. In fact, the accusation is quite insulting. However, it can make one wonder, legitimately, about certain types of “diversity” in Hollywood. However, another category the white-male “Academy” fits into, based on its voting track record, is liberal, progressive—essentially—politically left. If Smith and Lee don’t think blacks get a fair shake in Hollywood, try being politically conservative. It’s rare for conservative people to be nominated for, never mind win, Academy Awards they should have been considered for.

    Maybe you just suck.

    The problem I see is the dominant liberal media and educational culture that teaches minorities to presume that whenever they fail, it is, ALWAYS, because of their minority status. Someone gives you bad service, it’s because you’re gay, you don’t get that job, it’s because you’re Hispanic, you don’t get that promotion, it’s because you’re a woman, or you don’t get that Academy Award—well, it must be because you’re black.

    Did they really deserve it?

    So, what happens if the boycotters get their way, and the Academy becomes more diverse—racially, anyway? Will we look at future black winners and wonder how or why they were chosen? All of the nominees will be good actors, but were the winners the best or did their race push them over the finish line? It is likely that, from now on, minority winners will be looked upon as if there is an asterisk after their names–even by other minorities or themselves.