Sambo's: Murdered By Overly Sensitive Victocrats

A blog entry at TF Stern's Rantings reminded me of a pancake house I used to frequent back in the early 1970's. Sambo's. I don't remember what their lunch and dinner menus were like, but I do recall that their breakfasts were very good and not terribly expensive.

Stern's rant comes as a result of a couple of incredibly stupid Dallas politicians (who are black, and apparently of the racist persuasion) who took offense at the fact that ".....someone said the county's collections office, Central Collections, has become a black hole." Better these thievin' bureaucrats should quit raping the productive residents of Dallas than make silly racial connections.

It brings to mind the true tale me of the equally moronic Washington bureaucrat who took offense at the use of the word "niggardly."

Stern wisely recalled the fact that the children's book Little Black Sambo has been pulled off the shelves of the libraries of most (if not all) government children's prisons because of the complaints of other stupid, overly sensitive black racists, in spite of the fact that the story is very complementary of the intelligence of the protagonist (who happens to be black).

Having read Stern's entry brought the late Sambo's to mind. Sambo's had about 1200 restaurants in 47 states by 1979. After the bad press caused by these bigoted individuals, and after various moves in the attempt to save the firm, Sambo's went bankrupt in 1981 and soon disappeared from the American landscape.

Well, I just learned the news: there is still one Sambo's left. It's the first and only remaining store, is located in Santa Barbara, and is owned by the grandson of one of the founders of the firm.

I guess I'll have to make it a deliberate place to visit every time I happen to be in Santa Barbara.

It takes better men to build than it does to destroy.

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

"....No Interracial Strife in Los Angeles" -Police Chief William Bratton



And, I'm sure there was never any interracial strife in New York City or Boston while he was police commissioner in those cities, either....NYC is the city in which police needed over 50 shots to hit an unarmed man 16 times and Boston was the city from whose airport the planes that flew into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. I don't think Bratton was police commissioner at either of those towns at the fateful moment, but his simple-minded policies certainly live on, even to this day.

Chief William Bratton, as is true with most fascist police officials, doesn't think individuals should be allowed to defend themselves. He doesn't think individuals should be able to carry guns, knives, or even clubbing type weapons. He stands in opposition to the natural right of every individual as is affirmed by the Bill of Rights--thus is not qualified to hold the office of Chief of Police, or even carry a badge as a traffic officer.

Sorry chief, when I'm out for a walk, I carry a walking stick of which Robin Hood would be envious, a passable knife and a tube of pepper spray. At times, I even carry a sidearm--tucked away somewhere handy.

In the past week, subhuman gang thugs have murdered two young men in Los Angeles. One was a 19-year-old who had been a foopbaw player at his children's prison, and was working as a security guard while going to a tech school. He was simply waiting for a bus. The other was 13-years of age and was found mortally wounded in the driveway in front of his home.

There was a huge press conference attended by el alcalde, MEChA member Antonio Vinaigrette, Chief Bratton and several other City Council members--those who were able to elbow, kick, punch and straightarm their way to the dais to get their mugs on camera. The gist of the blatherings offered to the press were that El Pueblo de Los Angeles is getting tough on gangs and that these crimes will not be tolerated.

Now, for reality: LAPD has been instructed, both by el alcalde and the City Council, to fight the gangs without actually hurting anyone of the minority class. Since most members of LA gangs are minorities--blacks or hispanics--it means that gangs will pretty much be left alone unless actually caught in the act. Then, of course, the police must treat them nicely according to the left's best politically correct rules. They will receive minimal punishments and then receive early releases to make room for nonviolent dope smokers.

Chief Bratton broke up the crowd by trying to stress that there is no racial tension in El Pueblo de Los Angeles. After the guffaws died down, one reporter pressed the Chief about racial tensions. Bratton pulled out his figurative truncheon and figuratively clubbed the hapless reporter to submission. Much as did his officers (for real) during mayday at MacArthur Park.

Only in LA.

Hispanic gangsters hate black gangsters with passion. They shoot each other whenever they see a chance. The hatred transfers as both fear and hatred in the poorer ethnic communities. Residents want the police to stop the violence, but they don't want anyone hurt.

The thing that must be done is to let the residents defend themselves. Just knowing that any man or woman on the street might be armed will severely diminish the violence with no further action. Prosecution must be stiff, just and equal for rich and poor; and among the races. Punishment should be geared toward restitution for the victims. Every criminal released from prison should be viscerally aware he's just had his ass figuratively kicked, and should never want to go through that again.

Chief William Bratton is not among those who wants to see that happen, nor will our hero be Antonio Vinaigrette.

Pictured: LA's most destructive gang.

Slouching toward lawlessness.

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

Cultural Competence

I learned a new phrase today. Here's how it happened: I was listening to a news broadcast on KFI-AM in Los Angeles. The newsbabe was lamenting over the "fact" that there are not enough medical doctors in the heavily hispanic areas of Los Angeles who are "culturally competent."

No definition was given during the very short news break, and so I decided to Google it and see if I could make anything intelligible out of it.

Lo! The first on a pages-long list of entries on "cultural competence" is the National Center for Cultural Competence at Georgetown University. I looked under a link that purported to offer a Definition of Cultural Competence. The link leads to text headed "Definition and conceptual framework of cultural competence."

I don't see a definition there. What I see is a lot of what organizations are required to do to achieve "cultural competence." I confess that I didn't take a lot of time to try to analyze this list, because it appeared to be a lot of shrinkanese double-talk--mixed, of course, with a couple of parts of undecipherable professional jargon.

What it seems to boil down to is that, if you're a physician not of hispanic heritage, you will be unable to treat patients of hispanic heritage. I think.

It won't do to merely learn Spanish, oh, no, no, no! You'd still be an Anglo who speaks pretty good Spanish. Only a Hispanic can treat a Hispanic. Only a Hispanic can know the subtleties that will translate to successful treatment of individuals who have the Hispanic temperament.

Using that thinking, of course, a Black individual could only be treated by a Black physician and there'd by a like requirement with respect to people of Chinese or Norwegian heritage.

Obviously, this is all racist nonsense. If there's a language issue, the physician must either be able to converse smoothly in the patient's language, or have a good translator at hand. Aside from that, we're all pretty much the same except for the differences in individuals that pretty much transcend race.

There are some illnesses that seem to key on certain racial or societal groups, but all competent physicians who keep up to date are aware of them.

So, let's put this "cultural competence" nonsense in the dustbin along with Jim Crow laws and coolie laborers, shall we? After all, I was treated by a Black doctor once and two Asian doctors at various times in my life. They did just fine. They were obviously "culturally competent."

Here I am writting about what appears to be another instance of political correctness but, not being a physician myself, I can easily imagine that there can be issues in this area of which I'm unaware. Corrections can be made in my Comments area.

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

An Excuse for a Civil Service Day Off

I admire Dr King in retrospect, but I didn't always. While I recognized that his thoughts on the need for equality of all before the law, regardless of race, I always wondered how and why such an intelligent man could be so conflicted. He was a preacher. A rational man shouldn't be a preacher. He seemed very far over on the left, politically. The left is no help to black people, nor of any of the so-called disadvantaged. I hope I don't have to make that case for anyone--it's been made so many times by better writers than I.

Yet his desire to put an end to American racism was sincere. I was and am fully in sympathy with that desire.

His intellectual heirs, though, seem not to be. Looking at the body of work and writing of Jesse Jackson, Kwazy McFume and others similarly inclined (to the left) , it appears that they'd rather prolong and promote racism, rather than to continue Dr King's work to end it. Sort of a "job security" attitude.

Edward Hudgins of The Objectivist Center has written an excellent tribute to Dr King. It describes my take on King's quest far better than I can.

Monday, January 16th, is the holiday designated by the feds to honor Dr King. Seemingly, it's the only thing the feds want to do toward racial equality.

The Civil Rights Act serves mainly to limit free association.

President LB Johnson's "War on Poverty" seems to have been designed to keep the poor poor.

For decades, politicians have worked to undo the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. The genesis of this movement has come from a fear of armed black people. Early gun control laws were specifically aimed at disarming blacks. Even in recent years, gun control advocates have targetted inexpensive firearms--firearms that a poor family might acquire for self defense in bad neighborhoods. These laws are clearly directed at poor minorities.

"Affirmative Action" laws not only work in utter opposition to Dr King's desires, but are clearly intended to assert the basic inferiority of black people, other racial minorites and women, and to keep them in a suspect position in society. Proof that these individuals don't deserve this superficial kind of catagorization is obvious by the observation that there are many, many self-made successful people in these groups.

Whenever one sees a $350-an-hour black attorney telling his tale of woe about the way black people have no chance, one sees this individual's case being utterly undone by his/her very existence.

Monday is the day we honor Dr Martin Luther King, but democrat politicians have done nothing but work to trash his movement toward racial equality. Republicans have enthusiastically helped make things more difficult for minorities.

I was in the post office yesterday, waiting in one of those DMV-type lines. I heard a customer mention needing to come in again Monday. The clerk told him the post office will be closed Monday. The customer asked why. The clerk replied, "Holiday. I think it's a president's birthday or something." That seems to emphisize the regard many government employees have toward minorities, whatever their stated positions.

There are good guys and bad guys in any group. Properly, we deal with each individual according to the way he presents himself. We associate with those whose acquaintance enhances our lives in some way. Nothing matters less than the race to which they belong or the hue of their skin.

They've killed Freedom! Those bastards!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California

Another Lynching in Mississippi

I'm still awaiting further information, but it's not necessary, really. The facts I have are enough.

A young man of the black persuasion, by the name of Cory Maye was accosted while he slept by one of those gangs of black armor-wearing jack-booted thugs known as SWAT teams. They apparently had some sort of a search warrant for the front half of a duplex, but also broke into the rear apartment at the same time. Whether there was a warrant for the rear apartment is still in question--the prosecutor says there was, but it has yet to be produced.

Maye, who had been sleeping in a chair, retreated to his baby daughter's room, found his handgun, loaded it and shot the first assailant to enter the bedroom, hitting the man in a vulnerable spot below his armor. He soon died. Maye states that he never heard the police knock nor announce themselves. Based on the reputation that Mississippi police departments have in black neighborhoods (and all police departments have in the so-called "War on Drugs) , I'm inclined to believe Mr Maye. You see, the officer who first to enter the apartment and who was killed was the son of the Chief or Police. More than enough facts to cause a Southern lynching are in place.

Maye was arrested, "tried," convicted and sentenced to be executed. The Agitator has written a far more detailed accout of the events than I, and has been following the story carefully as it progresses.

Whether or not there was a warrant, and whether or not the police tried to serve it properly is all beside the point.

No one has the right to dictate to any other what he may ingest. Whether or not there were drugs in the building is irrelevant. According to the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights, the police were guilty of breaking and entering and Mr Maye was fully within his rights to defend his home.

The government which presumes to order that the ownership and use of certain substances are illegal is wrong.

The goverment which presumes to send police into a neighborhood with which they're unfamiliar is wrong.

The government which presumes to issue pre-signed warrants from tear-off pads is wrong.

The government which presumes to send armored police into an individual's property without announcing is wrong.

The government which presumes to make nearly everything illegal so that they have an excuse to arrest anyone at any time is wrong.

It really doesn't matter if Mr. Maye happened to have a smoked roach in an ashtray (which was likely planted by the jack-booted thugs) or if the individuals in the front apartment were selling certain agricultural commodities, satisfying their customers' desires and making a profit in the process. That's the American way, is it not? Capitalism in its purest form.

Something has to be done about rogue cops and the immoral system that sanctions their existence.

Remember, VOTE FOR NO INCUMBENT!

Warm regards,

Col. Hogan
Stalag California