Mike McFeely: Pot Head

Mike McFeely needs to come clean about his illegal drug use.  He appears to be a pot head based on his recent column, “McFeely: Please, N.D. voters, legalize recreational marijuana”.  I tried searching for a logical argument to the legalization of an addictive, harmful drug in his column but I did not fine one.  His principal argument is that he wants to enrage old, white men who form our elected legislative and executive branches in Bismarck.

If he had as much disdain for our legislature if they were Black, homosexual or women, he would have to refer to them in racist, sexist, ageist, and anti-homosexual terms rather than “shriveled”, “men” and, by inference, old, heterosexual and white.

That Mike can’t make a cogent argument for or against a topic based on merit is nothing new or unexpected.  That Mike can’t make the argument without denigrating an entire class of Americans is nothing new or unexpected.  That the Fargo Forum continues to waste ink and electrons on his brand of so-called journalism is no longer unexpected.  The Fargo Forum and its publishers are all too comfortable with this level of journalism vis a vis Jim Shaw, Jack Zaleski and Jane Ahlin.  It is interesting to note that the Fab Four of Jim, Jack, Jane and Mike are white, heterosexual and ultra-liberal.  Jane is the only woman and Mike is the only somewhat young person.  I sense a trend with the Forum publishers here.

Back to topic of recreational marijuana.  It should not be legalized.

Marijuana is not benign.  It is addictive.  It is bad for an individual’s health.  It is bad for our healthcare system in that it increases costs for everyone.  Wow, that is 3 big negative factors which should obviate its need to remain illegal.

Marijuana is not a total addictive substance, that is, it appears to be addictive in 10-20% of users.  It is more addictive when started as a youth.

Marijuana is bad for your health.  It is not just a short-term health issue.  It causes irreversible damage to the brain.  Great, we need more US citizens with brain damage.

Based on the two items above is it any surprise that increased marijuana use leads to higher healthcare costs?  Can we simply pass the healthcare costs on to users?  Do we do that with cigarette users?  No.  Do we do that with obese people?  No.  Suffice it to conclude that we won’t do it with marijuana users.  Life insurance companies will do it but not healthcare insurance companies.

The marijuana user will admonish us that alcohol is worse than marijuana use.  They have a point but they also miss the mark in several areas.  Moderate alcohol use has beneficial effects whereas moderate marijuana use has no such beneficial effect on the brain.   Moderate alcohol use reduces the risk of heart disease, possiblly reduces the risk of diabetes and possibly reduces the risk of ischemic stroke.

Marijuana use has some medicinal effect and should be prescribed as such.  As with opioids, narcotics, steroids and antibiotics, their use must be medically controlled.

“Recreational” marijuana is a term associated with exercise.  When I think of recreation I think of exercise, not smoking something that will harm my brain or become addictive.  For those that think recreational marijuana is a good idea, why not just skip marijuana and move on to recreational heroin?  You get the idea.


Zaleski: Soul Selling

Count Jack Zaleski in with the uber liberal fringe in America that are still fuming over President Trump’s election at President of the United States.  It appears he, Mike McFeely and fellow Fargo Forum leftist Jim Shaw are trying to outdo each other and the Huffington Post for the most irrate, irrational liberals in America.  To be sure, we still have Chelsea Handler and Mark Ruffalo outdoing all of them but they are the gold medalists of crazy in our country.

Zaleski’s latest contribution to faux journalism is his December 17 poison pen opinion entitled “Zaleski:  It is risky to see your soul to the devil“.  Despite crazy uncle Jack’s somewhat contradictory opening sentence, “Republicans who believe they have souls need to do some serious soul-searching …”  Stop, right there.  Mentioning “soul” 3 times in the space of the title and opening sentence qualifies one to be a religious writer.  Jack must be some sort of right-wing Christian fanatic!  No.  He dispels that moniker rather quickly.  First, right wing fanatics don’t sell their souls.  They either have them or they lose them to the devil.  For the atheist in the audience, all this talk of soul is probably upsetting.

Also, if you have a soul that needs to be searched then you couldn’t have sold it to the devil.  I wish Jack would make up his mind.  Let’s assume Jack believes Republicans haven’t sold their soul but are only contemplating the sale.   That way, they can search their soul for the transgression Jack is ever so happy to explain to them.  In Jack’s world, a razor-thin margin of victory for a pro-abortion Democrat in conservative Alabama was a “political earthquake”.

The Democrats did their best to disqualify Judge Moore, the Republican candidate for US Senate in Alabama, after Moore won the Republican nomination.  The November Surprise pulled on Moore was shameless.  40-year-old claims of the worst kind, “accused pedophile” were the Ace up the sleeves of Democrats who saw a chance to pick up one seat in the US Senate.  None of these women who came forth with unsubstantiated claims for 40 years were to be found in the Republican primary.   It’s as if they and the Democrat party were setting a trap for the general election.

Their trap was sprung a bit early as it gave Roy Moore the opportunity to disprove much of what he was accused of doing.  When is it in American that the innocent have to prove their innocence?  It is an outrage.

Even with substantive issues of importance to debate and decide, this election was about painting one candidate as a child molester while the other one was left untouched by a political arty too often thinking elections are about issues and integrity.

But back to Jack Zaleski.  The bigger issue is to try to wrap Moore and Trump in the same cloth so that both can be tarred and feathered.  Zaleski accuses both of histories of of “misconduct, sexism and nativism.”  I’m sure Jack is the toast of his liberal friends at the holiday parties this season.  “Boy, you really skewered Trump good!” would exclaim one fawning liberal to Jack.  Hero to the local leftists must be a good feeling this time of year.

Yes, we Christians believe each person has a soul and that eventually that soul will be all that’s left of us, an eternity in Heaven or Hell.  But unlike Jack, who can glibly make the statement about President Trump as “… a vulgar, mercurial, self-centered and incompetent president …”, I’d prefer to look at Trump in the same way I looked at President Obama.  Both are flawed men, like me, who have a political agenda.  Both were elected based, in part, on that agenda.  But if I can focus on one word, “incompetent”, I can only think of one of those 2 men who earned that description, Obama.

My soul is fine.

McFeely: Wrong on Trump and Republicans

In the Fargo Forum’s December 18, 2017 Mike McFeely column, “McFeely: Maybe N.D. Republicans not so wise to crawl in bed with Trump” we are left wondering if Mr. McFeely thinks before he types.  We know he is a liberal.  We know he hates the President and Republicans.  We’ve known for a long time that he likes to lie and misrepresent conservatives.  We also know that he barely, if at all, researches facts before typing.

For example, his opening sentence, “President Donald Trump characterized white supremacists as “very fine people,” urged people in Alabama to vote for a credibly accsed pedophile and continues to see the list of women accusing him of creepy behavior grow.”

I researched the phrase “very fine people” in relation to Donald Trump and could not find a single instance where Donald Trump characterized white supremacists as very fine people.  The closest I could get would be in relation to the protests and violence in Charlottesville where he stated, “You had some very fine people on both sides.” when speaking about those in favor of removing statues of southern Civil War heroes and those in favor of keeping those same statues.  He condemned the extremists on both sides of those protests while praising the peaceful, issue-based opponents of the debate.  In McFeely’s own words, ‘strike one’.

President Trump did encourage Alabama voters to vote for the Republican in the special election for US Senate.  As for that Republican candidate, Roy Moore, being a “credibly accused pedophile”, one can point to that inflammatory language as being politically expedient rather than fact-based.  It’s not as if Roy Moore has any history of such behavior or that the alleged behavior happened recently.  No, he has a clean criminal record and the charges stem from behavior alleged to have occurred about 40 years ago.  The woman making the accusation has admitted to lying about some very important parts of her story, i.e. the yearbook inscription.  She has offered no proof and the timing of her accusations coincided with a massively important election.

Strike two, by McFeely’s arithmetic and we aren’t even finished with the first sentence of his article.

“… and continues to see the list of women accusing him of creepy behavior grow.”  The only thing growing faster than this list is the list of Democrat congressmen resigning or retiring.  But I digress.  The list I’ve seen is three deep.  One is a former beauty pageant contestant whose sexual harassment claim is that Donald Trump looked at her wrong.  He didn’t touch her.  He didn’t proposition her.  He didn’t criticize the form-fitting swimsuit she was dressed in.  He didn’t even say a word to her.  How many times have we heard young siblings whine to mom and dad about the other looking at them the wrong way.  None of those resulted in jail time or a lawsuit.  A second accuser claimed Trump tried to molest her in the first class section of an airplane 40 years ago.  A witness claimed otherwise.  The third and final accuser claimed Donald forced a kiss on her when she was a receptionist in New York.  No proof was offered but the long ago incident was worth bringing up for some reason.  Did it happen?

Strike three.  And now we can move on to the second and following sentences in his article.

McFeely states that Trump and the Republicans have a “white nationalist platform”.  Should the Republicans respond that the Democrats have brokered a deal with the Communists for control of America?  According to McFeely and the Fargo Forum, Trump and the Republican National Committee have “… gone all-in on the decision to sell their souls”.

McFeely is far from being a nuanced, flaming liberal.  He is purposely an in-your-face flaming liberal much like Keith Olberman.  Both have something to say about sports in addition to ranting about conservatives.

Like Chelsea Handler trying to tie President Trump to the wildfires in California (huh?), Mike McFeely tries to tie local, pro-white activist Peter Tefft to Trump and the Republican party.

I was thinking of trying to link Mike McFeely to John Conyers, Al Franken and Harvey Weinstein, but I felt like my integrity would slip if I did.  Instead, I’ll just link Mike McFeely to himself as it appears sufficient.

Terror in NY: Not According to the Forum

The Fargo Forum article entitled, “Explosion reported in Manhattan; New York police say one person in custody” does not mention the words, terror, ISIS, Muslim, radical or hate once.  The story is sourced from the Washington Post, that source of fake news owned by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, at war with the Trump Administration.

Meanwhile, even the liberal NY Times used the words “terrorist attack”, published the suspect’s name and said the explosive vest he was wearing went off prematurely.

Fox News reported the incident as a terrorist attack, ISIS-inspired and identified the suspect as Bangladeshi.

I doubt the suspect, Akayed Ullah, was a radicalized Free Methodist or Catholic, with a chip on his shoulder.  Even if it turns out he is Muslim, he does not represent mainstream Islamic thought.  He represents a very dangerous radical element in our society that believes mass murder, in the form of terrorism, is acceptable.  That this element is typically Islamic is of great concern.

However, the problem accented today is the Washington Post and the Fargo Forum.  If both of those news sources want to be know as REAL news, not FAKE news, then report the ACTUAL news.

Behind every sentence in the Fargo Forum article there is the specter of what is lying underneath the rock that the Forum does not want to tell us.  The Forum does not want to tell us it was terrorism.  The Forum does not want to tell us it was inspired by the Islamic State In Syria (ISIS).  The Forum, one could guess, would have happily reported that John Smith, not Akayed Ullah, was the suspect.  But alas, John Smith was not blowing up things on Monday morning, Akayed Ullah was.

An honest, fact-laced description is necessary for a free people to make logical decisions.  One cannot seem to get that from some of our slanted media.  With accurate information, the American people can judge for themselves who, what and when things took place.  They can then consider why those things took place.  They can help shape public policy, intelligent responses and even elect people to represent them.

As the Washington Post continues is sad history of politicizing the news in favor of its owner’s agenda and away from anything President Trump would advocate (yes, it’s that bad at the Post), then we can dismiss the Post out of hand.  And with it, the Fargo Forum’s national and international coverage.

[ Note:  Since the above column was written, the Washington Post has updated its story to include the possible link to terrorism, mentions that the suspect is originally from Bangladesh and and that ISIS had some link to the bombing. ]