The Pyramid of Nicholas Cage

We'll Be Stuck With Him Forever

It's not unusual to see well known people walk down any New Orleans street.  Many have homes here, Harry Shearer, Brad Pitt, Tom Jones, Sandra Bullock, Harry Connick, Jr .....because there is no city like New Orleans. Here they are treated like neighbors and not so much like a star. They live here for the laid back, easy going atmosphere far from the cosmopolitan crowd, the incredible food and where you can always find a reason for a party. One such famous resident recently caused a bit of a stir. But it's seems in line with his reputation of being..... a bit kooky.

Last time I checked, Nicholas Cage was not dead. Neither was he a Pharaoh (at least not in this dimension). Yet, he has his built his own kingly pyramid tomb in the thickly populated historic St. Louis Cemetery of New Orleans.

"Saint Louis Cemetery is a two-hundred-year-old cemetery located in New Orleans, that holds the remains of some of the city’s most famous personalities including the voodoo Queen Marie Laveau.  Despite being already congested, in 2010, Hollywood star Nicholas Cage managed to acquire a rather large plot in his name, where he built a stark, nine-foot-tall stone pyramid. The pyramid bears no inscription but the Latin motto "Omnia Ab Uno", which translates as "Everything From One".

"While there is no doubt, the pyramid was chosen by the actor to be his final resting place, Nicolas Cage himself has never made a public declaration as to why he bought the pyramid-shaped tomb. Some speculate that the actor prescribes to the beliefs of the illuminati, others attempt to make a weak connection to the picture of a pyramid that appeared on the poster of the movie “National Treasure” in which Nicholas Cage acted. There is even a wild theory that the pyramid is full of gold and cash that the actor is trying to shelter from his well known problems with the IRS. 

Public opinion is divided. Purists hate Cage's pyramid, tour guides ridicule him and New Orleans locals are furious that he was even able to obtain a plot the size of four ordinary burial plots in the cramped graveyard. 

Female fans, on the other hand, love it – leaving lipstick prints on Cage’s tomb." 

(source)

If Young Voters Are Up for Grabs, Dems Are in Trouble...

Jonathan S. Tobin

Heading into the 2016 presidential election, Democrats remain convinced that their victory is already baked into the electoral cake. The last two presidential votes have seen them rack up enormous majorities among minorities, women, and young voters. With immigration reform stymied, they think the growing numbers of Hispanic voters are firmly in their pockets. And they are sure that Hillary Clinton’s presence at the top of their ticket will ensure a clear advantage among women.

They’re also sure that young voters will be as liberal next year as they were in 2008 and 2012 when they turned out in record numbers to back Barack Obama. But what if their assumptions about the nation’s youth are wrong? That’s the question Democrats need to ask themselves today after the publication of a new poll from Harvard University’s Institute on Politics. According to the poll, voters aged 18-29 are now far less likely to vote for a Democratic presidential candidate in 2016 than they were in the last two such elections. That sets up a race that resembles 2004 more than 2008, which is a possible recipe for a Republican victory.
Most pundits assumed that the Republicans’ stronger showing among young voters in the 2014 midterms was a statistical glitch produced by the lower turnout in that election than in a presidential year. But the type of advantage that Democrats enjoyed when Barack Obama was their candidate may vanish when he retires.

The Harvard poll shows that a generic Democratic candidate will still win the 18-29 year old vote in 2016 by a 55-40 percent margin. That’s a clear edge, but it is nowhere near as decisive as President Obama’s 66-32 percent win among young voters in 2008 or his 60-37 victory in that demographic in 2012. In fact that 55-40 result bears a startling resemblance to the 54-45 margin among 18-29 year olds that John Kerry won over President Bush in 2004.
What possible reason could there be for such a swing among voters assumed to be so liberal on social issues that they’d never consider voting for the GOP?

One is obvious. Barack Obama’s historic importance as our first African-American president as well as his personal appeal made him a unique political figure. No other Democrat, not even the person trying to be the first female president, can match his hold on the electorate, especially young people who were particularly vulnerable to Obama’s “hope and change” mantra. As much as many Democrats would prefer to think the gains they made in 2008 and 2012 are now part of the permanent infrastructure of American politics, they may be ephemeral.

The second is that the changing economic environment for young people entering the work force may be leading them to think more about fiscal issues than social ones like gay marriage and abortion that work to the advantage of liberals. Moreover, the anti-Iraq war sentiments that dominated the 2008 election may have gradually moderated to the point where a lot of young people are worrying as much if not more about the threat of terrorism.

The caveat here is that elections are not fought and won by generic candidates. If Republicans nominate someone who turns off young voters or who emphasizes social issues that hurt the GOP then they may slip back. By the same token, one who can run as a representative of a new generation seeking to challenge a tired and possibly corrupt retread such as Hillary Clinton stands a chance of exceeding the 2004 totals. Also troubling for Democrats is the real possibility that Clinton fatigue, accentuated by the Clinton Cash charges that continue to drip, drip, drip out, will further depress the Democrats’ brand.

But the main conclusion to draw from these figures is that no one in either party should make any assumptions about the 2016 electorate from 2008 or 2012. Change is the one constant in politics as well as life and that means things could get better for the Democrats, but also the very real possibility that they could get worse. Either way, the path to an Electoral College majority for Republicans that many on the left have come to see as a fantasy may be far more realistic than they care to think. If, as the Harvard poll illustrates, young voters are up for grabs, anything is possible.

Bill and Hillary Wedding Ceremony Photo Uncovered

Washington Post Claims Freddie Gray Did Himself In

Prisoner in van said Freddie Gray was ‘banging against the walls’ during ride 

"BALTIMORE — A prisoner sharing a police transport van with Freddie Gray told investigators that he could hear Gray “banging against the walls” of the vehicle and believed that he “was intentionally trying to injure himself,” according to a police document obtained by The Washington Post.

The prisoner, who is currently in jail, was separated from Gray by a metal partition and could not see him. His statement is contained in an application for a search warrant, which is sealed by the court. The Post was given the document under the condition that the prisoner not be named because the person who provided it feared for the inmate’s safety......"

Not going to mean much to anyone until they release the autopsy report to back up the story........

New York Times Stumbles onto the Truth

Discovers Why Blacks Riot.

American Renaissance

An article from yesterdays New York Times about the relative calm in Baltimore stumbled by accident onto something like the real reason why blacks were rioting. Near the famous burned-out CVS–the city had begged the company to “invest” in a dodgy neighborhood–the Times reporter found someone it identified as “Robert Wilson, a college student who went to high school in Baltimore.” The article concludes with Mr. Wilson’s explanation of why blacks rioted. He said nothing about Freddie Gray or police brutality. Instead, he said this:

We’re just angry at the surroundings–like this is all that is given to us?–and we’re tired of this, like nobody wants to wake up and see broken-down buildings. They take away the community centers, they take away our fathers, and now we have traffic lights that don’t work, we have houses that are crumbling, falling down.

This quote almost perfectly captures the black mentality that leads to rioting. Blacks live in neighborhoods that they, themselves, have wrecked, and then ask, “This is all that is given to us?”

Hard-working white people built the “broken-down” buildings Mr. Wilson is complaining about. Many had parquet floors, high ceilings, and fine moldings found today only in the most expensive new construction.

After the riots in Baltimore in 1968, whites panicked and sold their property at desperation prices. Now, these houses are “broken down” because blacks didn’t maintain them. This pattern of white flight and “broken down” houses was repeated in Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, New York, Washington, St. Louis, Memphis, Atlanta, Birmingham, Jacksonville, and countless other American cities. Some of the best city housing in the world was handed over to blacks who wrecked it. Neighborhoods filled with irreplaceable architecture are now wastelands.

Mr. Wilson complains that “we have houses that are crumbling, falling down.” The remedy for crumbling houses is for the people who live in them to fix them, but instead, Mr. Wilson asks, “Is this all that is given to us?”  Mr. Wilson says Baltimore’s blacks rioted because they are “angry at the surroundings.” Blacks make their surroundings ugly and miserable, and then make them even more ugly and miserable by burning them down. And then they ask, “Is this all that is given us?”

Mr. Wilson has more complaints: “They take away the community centers, they take away our fathers.” Mayor Rawlings-Blake cut funding for 20 of 55 city-run community centers in 2013, but private foundations and neighborhood organizations kept most of them going. Rioters burned one down on Monday.

And fathers? In 1983, Baltimore had the highest black illegitimacy rate in the country: 76 percent, at a time when the national rate for blacks was about 55 percent. Now that the national black rate is 72 percent, what is the figure likely to be for Baltimore? Ninety percent? Ninety-five percent? Whoever “they” are didn’t have to work very hard to “take away our fathers.” Black fathers were never there to begin with.

It’s no surprise that Mr. Wilson thinks blacks haven’t been “given” what they deserve, and that “they” took away his father. He’s a college student–probably on scholarship–and that’s what blacks are taught from grade school.

The New York Times invariably blames “racism” and white privilege for the plight of blacks. It assumes that if only whites could curb their bigotry, blacks would bloom and flourish. It is remarkable that it concluded this article with a quotation that so brutally undercuts its own assumptions. People who think “they” have taken away their fathers, who blame others for their “broken down buildings,” who look at misery of their own making and ask “Is this all that is given to us?”–such people will not bloom and flourish no matter what white people do.  

Rev. Al Packs His Bags for Baltimore

Purported reverend and MSNBC host Al Sharpton has announced he will visit violence-plagued Baltimore and then embark on a two-day march to Washington in an effort to visit the IRS and pay his back taxes exploit the Freddie Gray situation.

In response, Bishop E.W. Jackson has a little advice for Sharpton when he arrives in Baltimore:

“He needs to march right back to New York and go back to MSNBC, whatever place he chooses to espouse his demagoguery."  

"The good people in Baltimore need to stand up and tell these folks you don’t represent us, Al Sharpton, you don’t represent us, “We will solve our own problems working together with our elected leadership.”  

Jackson said that it’s ironic that the protests in Baltimore are happening in a city with a black mayor while we have a black president and a black U.S. attorney general. He noted that President Barack Obama reportedly told the governor of Maryland to exercise restraint in dealing with the protests. The reverend urged Baltimore residents to stand up against the likes of Sharpton and his race agitators.  Jackson has previously ripped Sharpton’s efforts at exploiting tragedy and wrapping that exploitation in a cloak of ‘civil rights.’

During the Ferguson riots, Jackson stated “Michael Brown is not Emmett Till, Officer Darren Wilson is not a member of the KKK, and Al Sharpton is definitely not Martin Luther King Jr.”

(h/t Political Insider)

One Angry Black Man.........and for Good Reason

Warning: Strong Language 

You Too Can Have an Exciting Career as an Outside Agitator........

Poll: Just 26% Says Obama’s “Progressive” Utopia Leading America In Right Direction…

Rasmussen