Wednesday, October 31, 2007
I guess last night was one of those occasions were there was a bit of a dust up. Tough guys John Edwards and Barac Obama decided it was time to start taking on Shrillary themselves. In the past the two macho men have sent their wives out to take on the Shrill one – the 300 pound gorilla of the Democrat Presidential Primary. That’s a mental image that shouldn’t require too much imagination to conjure up.
So they came out blasting away at the front runner with both toy guns. They blasted her on her “support” of the war; for her being a Washington insider; they intimated that the Republicans actually wanted her to win because Reps knew they could beat her; they attacked her for voting to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. The Shrillmeister shrugged it all off blaming everything on America’s greatest enemy and presumed Rep Presidential nominee George Bush. Oh that’s right; Bush has said he’s not running for a third term. Anyway, for the kook Dem fringe, blaming Bush is always the right answer.
Then there was the substantive part of the debate. That was all of the talk of UFOs and Denis Kucinich’s close encounter on Shirley the tree talker MacLaine’s patio. Hey Dennis the obvious answer would have been, “Of course I saw a UFO. We all saw it.” Who is “we all?” “Why the trees of course, just ask them.”
This whole thing was a day early and bag of candy short. The thought of this bunch of clowns, losers, ambulance chasers, plagiarizers, fantasy peddlers and morons being “most qualified” to run the greatest country (for now anyway) in the history of the world should be enough to scare any sane person silly.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
This would be a great opportunity for conservatives, if they had the brains to take advantage of it. The problem is that every pol has the tendency, the want, the need, the desire to appear noble and high minded. So they hem and haw around waterboarding as if it were deciding between cheesecake and the chocolate fudge brownie on the dessert menu. The average American, on the other hand have none of these reservations. They just want to be safe.
Try this scenario with the (g)assbags. I’ll even clean the scenario up so it doesn’t appear as if I’m profiling murderous Islamo-terror-fascists that anyone with a brain recognizes as the enemy. Sven and his band of blue eyed, blonde haired, light skinned is Norwegians are sick and tired of American educational institutions’ tolerance of everything but conservative thought. They decide to take over a high school in the Midwest and kill all of the liberals. Ahhh, but Sven stops off in Minnesota for a curling event and after having one too many Norwegian Icebergs to tamp the chill down, let’s details of his nefarious plan slip. He’s arrested by the FBI.
Now Mzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Clinton, Sven’s merry band of Norwegian high school bombers are lose in America ready to strike in 12 hours, what do you do? You’ve already tried reading him his rights in a stern manner; given him 3 hour to meet with a lawyer – enough to break any sane man; fed him the gourmet prison cuisine at Gitmo and given him a warm bath before getting REALLY rough and making him stand on one foot for 15 minutes, while watching Rosie O’Donnell’s web cam. But Sven is tough and doesn’t break. What now?
I believe that any reasonable person would begin shoving bamboo pieces under Sven’s fingernails at about the ten second mark into the process if it were his children at risk. I also believe that the preening (g)assbags class now ready to stomp on the Mukasey nomination are doing so for purely political reasons. After all, we know that, for pols, it is always better to appear to be high minded than to actually have to use their mind.
Monday, October 29, 2007
I suppose that was extreme hyperbole and Tress meant “warrior” in the sense of fake warriors like Popeye, the Fantastic Four or Conan the Barbarian. Certainly he couldn’t possibly have meant it as a comparison to real warriors such as Lt. Michael Murphy or Sgt. Ray Smith.
Tress could not possibly be comparing a guy playing a game on a hurt ankle to a guy who jumps up on an amtrack to man an M-2 .50 Cal machine gun and single handedly take on over a 100 armed men. Then, after laying waste to his enemy and saving his company, the valiant machine gunner succumbs to several gunshot wounds received in the fight; or a guy who dashes from relative safety, exposing himself to enemy fire, to call for help to save his three comrades. In the process he is shot twice in the back but returns to his position to fight on. Later, he too succumbs to his numerous wounds, but his actions saves the life of one of his men - sort of makes the ankle thing look pretty insignificant by comparison.
Hey Tress, two of these guys are warriors. The other guy is a college football player. Does Tress want to inspire his team with the spirit of real warriors such as Smith and Murphy? Is it like the Indian name in the post below? I hope so. But we knew the we were not real Indians.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Wow! Dems did that? Could it be that Shrillary doesn’t want to deal with the problem during her administration? So she votes in favor of Bush taking care of the problem during the last months of his administration. That way the real world is unlikely to intrude on her four year effort to tax America out of existence. But when Bush does go after Iran’s nukes, the smartest and most used woman in the world will feign outrage and cry foul about how Bush tricked her…again.
Then there was the carefully leaked news yesterday that the Air Force was going to re-fit B-2 stealth bombers with technology that would allow them to drop 30,000 pound bunker buster bombs. Holy bomb blast Batman - 30,000 pounds! Then came the reassuring news that the B-2 project wouldn’t be complete until 2009. Yeah riiiiight. No way THAT timetable could be accelerated.
Also, there were the comforting words of Defense Secretary Gates that the 30,000 pound bomb was part of the “normal contingency planning process.” Riiiiiiight, contingency planning for dropping 30,000 pound bombs. What other “contingency plans” do we have? “Contingency plans” for dropping 30,000 pound bombs comes right after the “contingency plan” for invading Mars. Or the “contingency plan” for draining the Pacific Ocean to create a land bridge to invade China. Even as over staffed as the Pentagon is, it doesn’t have the man power to waste for guys sitting around shooting the bull over a cup of Joe about dropping 30,000 pound bombs.
How does that conversation even come up among sane people? Hey guys listen to this. I was sitting at the dinner table last night when it struck me. What could we do with a 30,000 pound bomb? That’s not the way it works.
It works like this. First, the military identifies a problem, like say, some unstable nut job is a state sponsor of Islamo-terror-fascists. Said nut job knows he’s on a short list of nut jobs called the axis of evil scheduled for “regime change.” Said nut job has seen one of his fellow axis of evil nut jobs swinging from the gallows and decides to hedge his bet. So he starts to assemble the parts for nuclear weapons and buries them a mile or two underground.
So the military guys sit around and “worse case it.” What would it take to destroy the nut job's buried nukes? Guys with pocket protectors and lots of pens and pencils in their shirt pockets and slide rules strapped to their belts step in. The military guys tell them, “look we only want to have to do this once, so get right the first time.” So the pocket protector brigade run their numbers. Then run them again and again and again. They arrive at a number and add 25-30% to that.
Then the military guys turn that number over to some more smart guys and say, “design something that weighs 30,000 pounds, will fit into a B-2, and accomplish the following, like say destroy a nuclear facility buried a mile or two underground.”
If I were the nut job, I’d be reading the tea leaves and pull a Mohmar Kadhafi. Nuclear program? What nuclear program? Why, I’ve decided against that. Come look for yourself.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Shortly after arriving, I was assigned as Officer in Charge of the Las Pulgas firefighting platoon. I had visions of winning a commendation for dashing into a burning building and carrying the battalion CO out on my back.
“No sir. It’s not that kind of firefighting platoon lieutenant,” said the saltiest Gunnery Sergeant ever, an impossibly thin fit black guy whose name escapes me. “We basically sit around and wait for some shiftless commie bastard* to flick his half smoked butt out the window of his POV (privately owned vehicle) which in turn catches the surrounding desert floor on fire. Then, we quick get on line and stamp it out. See, loooootenant, California has only three seasons, the green season, which is what everyone sees on TV. Then there’s the brown season, which we have just entered. Soon will come the black season, which will be as soon as that shiftless commie bastard flicks his butt out the window and burns the countryside black. It happens every year.”
*Yeah, commie bastards were the threat back then. Ahh the good ol’ days, when the only thing we had to worry about was thermo nuclear annihilation.
So the SoCal countryside is once again ablaze and the only thing that has changed is the proximate cause of the fires. Back then it was shiftless commie bastards armed with cigarettes. Toady, according to Dems, it’s global warming and the war in Iraq.
Dopey Harry the runt Reid blamed the calamity on global warming. Odd the SoCal countryside was burning every year back in the 70s & 80s when we were debunking the global cooling hysteria. Then Babs Boxer and the CA Lt Gov. some dolt named John Garamendi, blamed the spread of the fires not on the yearly Santa Anna winds but on a lack of National Guard troops because of deployments to Iraq.
The head of the National Guard, General Steven Blum, as directly and forcefully as any military man will ever tell a pandering pol he/she is full of it, told Babs and Garemendi they were full of it. CA has 2,000 National Guard troop deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan combined, leaving 17,000 troops available to support the state in case of emergencies. The Gov has yet call up all of those troops.
Dems, for the most part, are shameless pandering dopes. You can start counting backward from 10 at the start of any event, from a school shooting to a failed garage sale somewhere, before Chuckles Schumer and other Dems push their way in front of the nearest TV cameras to declare the event a result of the war in Iraq, George Bush’s incompetence and not enough tax money for the poor.
The next yearly even in CA will be the mud slides that occur as a result of the lack of vegetation on hill sides burned off due to the fires and the winter rains. No doubt Harry the runt and other Dems will be declaring the mudslides the worse ever due to global warming and the war, Bush incompetent for not stopping the rain and the need for more taxes because rain and mudslides respond to such things.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
DICK Lugar ran unopposed last year so he considers himself safe enough not to have to worry about bucking the will of 80% of the American people on this issue. And really America, why shouldn’t we trust career Pols like DICK to run our lives for us? Hagel just announced his intension to leave the senate – not soon enough Charlie.
If a Rep presidential candidate wants to separate himself from the field, he should come out hard against this bill exposing EFBs Lugar and Hagel as the pandering dim wits that they are. Thompson is just the guy. He came out yesterday with a Lex like plan that calls for reducing illegals through attrition by limiting government aide, fining employers and cutting federal aide to cities and states that facilitate illegal aliens. Hmmm that sounds familiar.
The current crop of EFBs that populate our congress just don’t get it. America sounds off loud and clear on this issue during the Comprehensive Grahamnesty and the first go round of the Dream Act - which is nothing more than trying to pass comprehensive Grahamnesty one sliver at a time. Yet here we are again. Lex fired off the following to DICK:
What part of NO AMNESTY don’t you get? You, Dick, seem to be having a problem with the will of about 80% of Americans. We said no to the Comprehensive Grahamnesty bill. We said no to the first go round of the Dream Act which is nothing more than the senate trying to pass Comprehensive Grahamnesty one sliver at a time. But you, Dick, don’t seem to get it. Let me see if I can clear it up for you, Dick:
Seal the border
Fine employers who break laws
End sanctuary cities
End government benefits for illegals
This will be the result of your idiocy:
According to an analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies of the March 2007 Current Population Survey (CPS) collected by the Census Bureau, an estimated 800,000 illegal immigrants under age 17 have been here long enough to qualify for legalization under the Dream Act. There are an estimated 900,000 parents of these illegal aliens. It is unclear under the Dream Act whether the government would deport these parents. It is also unclear what would happen to the siblings of legalized illegals who are themselves illegal, but do not meet the Act’s requirements. There are an estimated 500,000 of these siblings. The Dream Act also allows illegal aliens ages 18 to 29 to become legal if they arrived prior to age 16. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that 1.3 million meet this requirement.
Thus, an estimated 2.1 million illegal immigrants would receive amnesty under the Dream Act, and an additional 1.4 million (estimated) parents and siblings might end up with de facto amnesty. Moreover, these estimates do not take into account the likelihood of fraud, which has plagued prior legalization programs. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, one fourth (700,000) of those legalized in the 1986 amnesty are estimated to have accomplished this fraudulently.
NO AMNESTY. Clear enough?
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Yesterday Harry’s bearded buddy with a new dye job pulled a Lee Corso and said not so fast my friend. This Petraeus guy didn’t get your memo that America had been defeated. He’s kicking our backsides from door to door and souk to souk in Iraq. Now it’s getting down right hard to find jihadis to blow themselves up for the cause – which is losing ground fast.
Even Dingy Harry’s normally reliable propaganda arm – the US MSM – is beginning to see what a bunch of (g)assbags Harry and other cut –and-run hide under the bed sheets Dems really are – and no I’m not questioning their patriotism. At this point, I don’t need to, it’s obvious where their loyalties lay. Hint: If it hurts Bush, no matter how much it also hurts America, it’s good for Dems. Here’s what ABC had to say:
Showing apparent signs of concern over events in Iraq, al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden urged insurgents to "unite your lines into one" in an audiotape played on al Jazeera Monday.
"Don't be arrogant," bin Laden warned. "Your enemies are trying to break up the jihadi groups. I urge you all to work in one united group."
People familiar with bin Laden's voice say the tape appeared to be authentic, although there was no reference to any event that would indicate when it was recorded.
Bin Laden's message comes at a time when U.S. strategy to split Iraqi insurgent groups from al Qaeda units appears to be working.
So now that the strategy of the man blockhead Harry once called incompetent is working, it’s time for Harry and Osama to regroup. Osama must be mad as hell with his cronies in the Democrat party for not holding up their end of the deal. Osama kept the jihad going but tiny Harry and other Dems couldn’t persuade enough Americans that surrender would look bad for Bush but not America.
Harry Reid will go down in history as the pathetic little runt of a...let see "man" isn't the right word aaah yes...weasel that he is.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Fred told Mitt that his (Fred’s) conservatism wasn’t pegged to whatever region of the country he happened to talking in. He told Mitt that he (Mitt) tried to run to left of Teddy Kennedy. He said that he didn’t know there was any room to left of Teddy or for that matter, in a slam fat Teddy’s fatness, any room to right.
He answered the questions yes and no. He gave direct answers to questions and often was direct enough to not to use up the allotted time.
The big looser was Shrillary Clinton. The candidates all rolled in her and her extreme brand of liberalism that she passes off as “progressive.” Rudy’s “Ya gotta be kidding” line when asked if he and Shrill weren’t about the same was a good one. Ruddy went on to note the two things that they had in common. First, they were both Yankee fans, big laugh. Though Rudy became one growing up in New York and Shrill became one growing up in, if you can believe it, Chicago. Yeah right. Then Rudy brought up the soon to famous Shrill quote, “I have million ideas. America just can’t them.” Rudy added, “America just can’t afford Hillary.”
Now the MSM will talk about how the all of the Rep talked about Shrill, as if that is some kind of faux pas. But when Dems spend the night slamming Bush, who isn’t even running by the way, that’s just good politics. It’s insane but what do you expect?
All in all, it was a good night for the Reps. I’m predisposed to give the edge to Fred. So I will. He was the winner.
Friday, October 19, 2007
As small as the HS was, it had a reputation for hard nosed, clean athletic teams in football, basketball, track and baseball. Nobody, regardless of how big or how successful, took the Indians from tiny Canal Winchester lightly.
From the late 60s, when my family moved to town, until the early 80s, when I finally managed enough credits at THE Ohio State University to leave and join the Marine Corps, the Indians won championships, beat teams from schools several times their size and one year had the highest scoring basketball team in the county.
We were the mighty Indians from Canal Winchester and everyone knew that they’d better strap it down a bit tighter and bring their A game when they came into our house or we showed up at theirs.
Those memories are why I was a bit disappointed when I received an e-mail from the Griffin telling me the name Indians was in jeopardy. It was bound to happen.
I get two mental pictures of people who engage in such senseless pettiness, some uneducated, overweight, greasy, toothless, trailer dwelling, white trash woman with a cigarette, a way too tight stretch top and sweat pants bottom complaining in front of her dilapidated double wide to the local TV news while her uneducated, overweight, greasy, toothless, trailer dwelling, white trash kids make faces for the camera behind her; or some over educated, emaciated, prim and proper, Prius driving, tofu eating, save the whales, end global warming, woman wearing Birkenstock flip flops a baggy burlap like shirt and pants that hang on her skeleton like frame as if it were hung on a hanger complaining to the local TV news while her over educated, emaciated, prim and proper, Prius driving, tofu eating, save the whales, end global warming, Birkenstock wearing kids lay around too emaciated to get up.
I wonder which type of Lib idiot is leading the charge in CW to destroy another tradition.
So the Indian mascot is under attack, even though I cannot recall a single incident where the mascot was ever defamed, ridiculed or made fun of – hell we wanted to be like the Indians.
So the Griffin asked if I had any ideas for a new mascot. I racked my small brain. Damn if all the good animals, weather phenomenon, fictitious creatures and characters had already been taken.
Well then, how about The Fighting White Men. We’ll follow up with a sarcastic editorial to the Cols Dispatch agreeing that our school’s tribute to the strength and character of Indian tribes was wrong. Then explain why it was wrong.
Why in the world would we ever want to pay tribute to the fighting skills, esprit and brotherhood of a bunch of backward Godless heathen nomads whose asses we kicked off of their own damned land after traveling 5,000 miles. Talk about an away game. And besides, we all know white men rule - literally. It’s time we paid tribute to our own fighting skills, esprit and brotherhood.
Of course Libs don't get sarcasm or irony. We’d be branded a racist and taken to trial for a hate crime. Proof once again no good deed goes unpunished.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
U.S. not founded on Christianity
I would like to disabuse Sen. John McCain of the notion that the Constitution establishes the United States as a Christian nation. The legacy of the Founding Fathers, deists all, not Christians, is clear.
John Adams noted, “It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service (forming American government) had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven.” The Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the Senate and signed into law by President John Adams in 1797, says the “government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
I would invite McCain to point to the relevant clause in the Constitution establishing the U.S. as a Christian nation. McCain claims America was founded on “the values of Judeo-Christian values, which were translated by our Founding Fathers which is basically the rights of human dignity and human rights.” However, Thomas Jefferson observed that “Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned.” Benjamin Franklin revealed that he believes Christians have always been persecutors.
If a person is unaware of what the Constitution says, he or she has no business running for office.
STEVEN B. TODD Fort Wayne
The Nation's founders were indeed Christians
Steven E. Todd claims that, because he was able to muster three or four quotes from the founders supporting his claim, the US was not founded on Judeo-Christian principles. This approach ignores the mountain of evidence to the contrary and gives undo weight to the few references Todd was able to dig up.
How does Todd square President Adams’s remark in a letter to Jefferson that the nation was founded on "the general principles of Christianity” with Adams’s Tripoli Treaty? How does he explain the almost universal presence of the Bible and prayer in schools, chaplains in Congress, missionaries paid for by tax dollars, Church Services held in the US Capitol for nearly 70 years? How does he explain Washington’s first inaugural address and his adding "So help me God" to the oath of office? Explain Washington's first Thanksgiving message? The list of letters, documents and deeds supporting the founders’ Christian beliefs is nearly endless.
Todd’s use of the Tripoli Treaty is odd on two counts. First, the Tripoli Treaty is perhaps the first example in our nation’s history that appeasement does not work. The treaty was forged with an earlier form of Muslim extremists, the Barbary pirates, in a misguided effort to stop Barbary piracy and enslavement of Christian sea crews. Second, the treaty was more a statement that America was not constituted as a Christian theocracy – unlike other Christian nations of the time Spain, England and Germany as well as the Muslim entities with which the treaty was formed – than a repudiation of or clarification to our First Amendment. In a lesson we continue to learn today, appeasing evil extremists is never a good idea. The treaty failed utterly. Barbary piracy continued until Jefferson sent the US Navy and Marines “to the shores of Tripoli” to route the pirates in 1803.
Throwing in Jefferson’s and Franklin’s quotes about atrocities that happened to have been committed in Christianity’s name in no way changes the principles upon which this country was founded any more than noting that Howard Hughes was a bit of an eccentric changes the fact that he was a brilliant businessman and aviator. The religious persecution noted here has as much to do with why America was founded in the first place as it does with any one of a long line of Inquisitions. At any rate, this argument is a red herring nothing more.
Todd’s ability to ignore the overwhelming preponderance evidence supporting our Christian heritage in favor of a miniscule few out of context quotes is truly breathtaking. Using the same logic, I suppose Todd would make the argument that because it has a row of resturants and a souvenir shop near the exit Disneyland is not an amusement park. Like the argument against “Christian founders,” you’d have to be willing to ignore all of the evidence.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
History repeating with deceptions
If it weren’t so frightening, it would be amusing to watch again as the Republicans utterly disregard history as they continue to promote Bush’s pointless war in Iraq. The latest case in point is their hyperbolic eruption over MoveOn.org’s ad that portrays the war’s supreme cheerleader, Gen. David Petraeus, as being possibly challenged when it comes to telling the full truth.
Far from being unpatriotic and showing a lack of support for the troops, the ad simply points to another historical truth.
As a Vietnam-era veteran, I remember all too well our commanding general, Gen. William Westmoreland, who constantly assured the president, Congress and the public that there was “light at the end of the tunnel.”
Think how many American and Vietnamese lives could have been saved if his wildly off-base assertions had been challenged at the time.
How ironic that three decades after we “abandoned” Vietnam to its own devices, the country has a booming economy, in large part due to American tourists.
WORTH WELLER North Manchester
Real history ignored
I concur with Mr. Worth Weller’s assertion that there should be a healthy skepticism of anyone in the room at a congressional hearing. That skepticism should begin with the preening gasbags asking the questions.
I further agree that America was ill served during the Vietnam War by a military so willing to accomplish its mission that it never honestly assessed the effect political restrictions placed on the operations to win the war.
There is a rather stark difference that escapes Mr. Weller between condemning Gen Westmoreland with more than 30 years of hindsight and calling Gen Petraeus a traitor in a full page New York Times ad BEFORE he’d even taken his seat at the hearings. If he can’t figure that out on his own, even a 1,000 words here won’t help.
It’s rather telling that Mr. Weller doesn’t focus his point on how the Vietnam War might have been won, but rather on how we might have quit sooner.
Neither does Mr. Weller seem to care one wit about the fall of Laos to communists; two million dead Cambodians; hundreds of thousands of dead and tortured Vietnamese, or the millions of displaced Vietnamese that occurred as a result of our withdrawal from that war.
But hey, as long as they have a “booming economy” now, that probably makes up for everything. Right Worth?
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
The Griffin asked a good question, shouldn’t AlGore’s Nobel category have been in science? No, because the science doesn’t support the movie. See, except for in public schools, science is one of those funny subjects, like math, where there are rarely two, totally different but equally correct answers. So AlGore’s tribute to himself can’t be science. Were the prize based on the book rather than the movie, it could have been in literature. But really, name one Nobel prize winner in literature since John Steinbeck in 1962 - yeah I had to look it up.
So, poor pathetic AlGore couldn’t win in science because there is very little settled science in his Power Point presentation. He couldn’t win in literature because his book isn’t good enough, even by the modern day Noble committee standards. So he gets lumped in with peace prize winners like Yaser Arafat, Jimmy Carter, Kofi Annan et al. He received this honor in spite of the fact that his efforts to spread fear about climate change in no way met even one of the Nobel committee’s criteria for awarding the prize to wit:
"to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".
Fraternity between nations? Nope. If anything AlGore’s scare mongering has led to deeper rifts between developed and developing nations.
Reduction of standing armies? Nope none, nada, zilch, zero. Not even one soldier has laid down his rifle as a result of AlGore’s lunatic theories on global warming.
Holding of peace congresses? Nope. AlGore never did that or even tried to do that.
So AlGore’s Nobel medal, like his movie, is a fraud.
Which brings us back to the original question, what to do with AlGore? Well, were I president, I’d make him my Middle East envoy. I’d have him into my office and say, “Look AlGore you got a peace medal for essentially doing nothing. Now it’s time to earn your ill gotten gains. You’re going to the Middle East and you’re staying there until you reach a suitable agreement between Israel and the Arabs.”
It’s a win win for the president. If there’s peace, it happens on his watch. If it fails, it’s AlGore’s fault but at least the president tried. He sent a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate in as his envoy. Who could be better qualified? And then there’s the whole bi-partisan thing he would get credit for. Send AlGore to the Middle East and make him earn his peace prize.
Monday, October 15, 2007
First off, let’s suppose “it’s for the children” is not Democrat demagogic code that really means “it’s to create a nanny state.” Let’s pretend that it really is for the children. So what? Ft. Wayne recently asked taxpayers for a half a billion dollars to fix public schools “for the children.” The taxpayers politely and overwhelmingly told the school board to get bent.
Half a billion dollars for the Ft. Wayne public schools is ridiculous. It was nothing more than a ploy so when the board asks for $350 million next year, everyone will think they are being responsible. Even if the Corvette really is for the children, do the children really need a Corvette or will a Ford Fusion be good enough? Or heaven forbid a late model used car. Children don't need and shouldn't get everything they want. Mom and dad need to say no now and again.
So now we have S-CHIP and of course, it’s for the children. But where exactly in the constitution does it say we’re supposed to pool our money at the federal level to pay for each other’s health care? What does the S in S-CHIP stand for? Oh yeah, State. Brilliant! Let the states do it. Can anyone figure out why we send money to Washington D.C. so that crooked pols can turn around and redistribute that money back to the states? If health care for low income children is so important, why don’t governors do something about it? Why is Nancy Pelosi acting as the national school nurse?
So the Democrats, who have proven there is nobody they won’t try to exploit, role out a 12 year old to tell Americans what a meanie George Bush is. How she and kids like her can’t get insurance because Bush vetoed the S-CHIP bill.
Slight problem for Democrats. The youngster would be covered under the old bill. The youngster’s family owns two properties and three premium automobiles. The youngster’s family refuses to disclose their income. The youngster’s family showed no interest in insuring the youngster until she needed medical attention. In short, the youngster is actually a poster child for what is wrong with S-CHIP rather than a credible advocate. She is living proof that S-CHIP is a middle class entitlement woefully mismanaged from Washington.
Democrats thrust this child into the public light filling her mouth full of lies and half-truths. Then in true Democrat double speak, anyone pointing these things out is called a low ball bastard for attacking a child. And you thought only terrorist used children as human shields. Democrats really have no shame.
Friday, October 12, 2007
So after the worst president since and before James Polk picks up a prize for badgering Israel to just let the Palestinians annihilate them, AlGore gets one for making a movie of himself delivering an error riddled global warming lecture. Yagottabekidding! Tell me this doesn’t remind you of the fat kid on your son’s baseball team that never got hit and could be counted on to turn an error every time he touched the ball getting the same trophy at the end of the season as the kid who pitched three innings of shutout ball every week and hit .600.
Were it not so politically obvious it’d be an outrage. Now fat Albert gets to prop his Nobel medal up on his mantel next to ill gotten Oscar and Emmy. The good news for AlGore is that this prize comes with million and half bucks that he can use to buy up some more carbon credits from himself so can jet around the cocktail circuit showing off his medal, all the while pumping tons of pollution into the atmosphere he wants to protect.
The really sad part of all of this though is that somewhere, somebody has chosen a lifetime of service to poor desperate people. That somebody has given everything his life has to offer in the service of other people. But the Nobel Committee can’t find one of these poor schleps who do the real work and would use the prize money to further their work rather than to add a new addition on to their mansion. Instead they honor a fat hypocritical (g)assbag whose personal carbon footprint is 100 times larger than that of the average citizen.
If Shrillary values a Nobel Prize more than the White House, she should go about throwing next November’s election. That would assure her of serious Nobel consideration, because that award is quickly becoming nothing more than a consolation prize for liberal losers.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Rudy: Winner. He was on message and when not sparring with Romney over a .6% difference in their tax cutting records, saved his sharpest jabs for the ol’ (carpet)bag most deserving of them – Shrillary. Rudy also seemed the most confident and optimistic. He can probably give Shrillary the best run.
Mitt: Smartest guy in the room award. He comes off like the guy you’d go get if your company, Olympics or state needed to be fixed. But wait, he’s already fixed all of those things. Everyone wonders, given his mental acumen, savvy business persona and success as a beep blue state governor, why he hasn’t broken away from the pack. One word. Mormon. Bigotry is alive and well. Mitt hurt himself when he referred to sitting down with the lawyers before bombing Iran. A better answer would have been, “Whatever else we do, lawyers won’t have a say in the decision.”
Fred: Good enough award. I thought he was spot on, if a bit uninspiring, in most of answers. When the Money Honey asked Fred if the government should intervene in an imminent strike at Chrysler, Thompson said, “No.” The gal followed up with, “Why?” Thompson went on to give a solid answer, after which Christopher said, “That was a rather long answer. You should have stopped at no.” Thompson having none of Matthews’s crap responded, “No one asked your opinion Christopher.” After that, there were chuckles and for Matthews a long and uncomfortable silence. By the way the Chrysler strike has come and gone in less than one day with no government interference. Even during the Christopher’s gottcha’ question about who is the PM of Canada, Thompson delivered the correct answer by naming PM Harper. A better answer might have been, after giving the correct response, follow up with a quick, “Why is that relevant Christopher? Are they building nukes to destroy us?” When Rudy begins to pound Mitt for his lawyers remark, and Rudy will hit him hard, Fred will gain in the race. And by the way, as was the case during most of the debate, Thompson got the Iran question dead right with his reference to using the congress to insure the people are on board and the War Powers Act – which ironically would require a team of 1,000 lawyers a hundred years to interpret case by case.
Note to pols: Any mention of lawyers should be immediately followed with a reference to how they drowned.
Huckabee: Most conservative. Can’t beat Shrillary. Christopher strangely only asked Huckabee about S-Chip and only then after framing the question using every Democrat talking point on subject – but he’s not in the bag for the Dems. Sure Christopher, and I have received an Internet check. Would you mind earning an unbelievably large fee for doing nothing more than cashing it for me?
Ron Paul: When you strip away his loony notion about protecting America by building a moat around it, he’s not as crazy as some think. A rousing endorsement if ever there was one. Vote for Ron Paul, he’s not as crazy as you think.
Hunter/Tancrado: Too protectionist/isolationist. We’ve been down that road. It doesn’t work. It was good though because Tancrado turned every question into an immigration question.
Brownback: Huh. Who?
And some other guy I don’t recall, the guy who thinks the First Amendment is a bad thing when it’s used to criticize sleazy pols who take money from some guy named Keating. Oh, yeah McCain.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
So sad too bad, right? Not in the Democrat nanny state. Shrill no doubt will then come up with a “plan” called Big Brother’s Re-entitlement Plan for the children of parent who spent Wayne’s $5,000. The mantra, “It’s for the children” will morph into “It’s for the young adults.” But Wayne has his own plan. At age 16 he starts procreating himself so he can get the bass boat and the four wheeler he always wanted.
Then there’s Juan and Maria. Maria is 8 ½ months pregnant. The Mexican government has provided Juan and Maria and every other poor pregnant Mexican woman transportation to the US border where the Mexican government pays Mexican government coyotes to haul the women to nearest US hospital emergency room where they are dumped. In return the dumpees pay the Mexican government half of Shrill’s stipend and everyone – and I do mean everyone, every poor man, woman and child in Mexico – is happy.
OK so once Shrill has being born in America subsidized, it’s time to take care dying. But who really cares about dead people. Dead people are in fact a large Dem constituency and like most Dems, the dead vote early and often. But Dems don’t have to buy their votes, which save a lot money.
So Shrill will take money from the dead by taxing any wealth they have managed to accrue while alive through a death tax. Then that money will be redistributed to the poor through government run 401Ks. Brilliant!! What lobbying group speaks up for dead rich people? Now, a cynic might say that Shrill’s plan resembles George Bush’s Social Security privatization plan. The big difference is that Ws plan uses a taxpayer's own money already going into an underachieving Social Security account. Shrill’s plan is a new government entitlement – read redistribution of wealth from people who earn it to people who don’t.
No doubt the American people will go ga ga over Shill’s plan. Who wouldn’t? It’s a chance to get something for nothing right up to the point the program goes the way of Social Security and most government endevors...which is belly up. Then of course there will be a new and even more odious government program to take its place.
Democrats have promised everything to everyone and all of it is to be paid for by the rich. They have promised so much to so many that the definition of rich is going to have to change from Bill Gates to Joe Sixpack. “Rich” Americans will wonder why they are busting their butts for people who don’t do much more than sit on their butts. When that happens, the whole house of cards gets knocked down.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
I reject the premise of your question. You read an unsubstantiated rumor in a discredited New York rag, the same rag that brought us Jason Blair, declared the Duke Lacrosse players and Marines at Hadeitha guilty before one shred of evidence had been produced. The paper that ran hundreds of stories on the so called atrocities at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo but runs few if any stories on the heroism on display every hour of every day in Iraq and Afghanistan by US troops. Using the most quoted man in American media today, “an unnamed source,” the New York rag regularly makes front page news of national secrets. The compromise of those secrets assists the Islamo-Terror-Fascists in avoiding capture and thereby allows them to go on killing and planning to destroy us.
The paper is owned and staffed by a bunch of left wing fringe moonbats, much like yourself, who gave up any pretense of objectivity ten minutes after the Florida recount. Now the rag comes out with a story about how this administration is authorizing torture. Without questioning its sources or the genesis of the piece, you suspend all reason, all benefit of the doubt, all objectivity and without follow up, you just swallow the story hook line and sinker.
Well I don’t support torture. But I do support, now how did the Shrill one put it, oh yeah, “enhanced interrogation” wink wink. Gee, I wonder what she means by that? But you and the rest of the lame stream media are soooo much in the bag for her that you could not ask – could you?
You, a former aide to Democrat icon Tip O'Neil, stand there and ask us questions; then the loony fringe sports guy critiques our answers. You and the sports guy have about as much legitimacy in this forum as Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Beck. Actually they have a great deal more legitimacy than you, because they at least make some sense and are honest about who they are. You and the sports guy don't and are not. That is why this pathetic little network is and always will be mired in 6th place in a 3 horse race. I don't even know why we are doing this "debate" on this tiny little network. We could reach more people in the next hour and half walking door to door out on county line road 3 in in the northwest corner of Wyoming.
Now, you go on up and join the sports guy. We’re done taking questions from you. We will ask each other questions from here on in.
Tom Tancrato, you’ve done, what 50 debates, and nobody has once asked you a question on immigration, which is your key issue. Why don’t you take five minutes and give us some insight on that issue then ask another of us a question that’s on your mind.
Monday, October 08, 2007
Sadly, Bruce’s piece was too late to be included in any of the Hollywood anti-war movies. The movie makers too are swimming against the crowd of Hollywood elites that have lined in support of a robust defense of the country against Islamo-terror-fascists. Movies like, Rendition, Lions to Lambs, Fahrenheit 9/11, Valley of Elah, The Kingdom and few others are in stark contrast to the glut of war movies that make the American cause appear to be noble like…hummm….well there’s….how about…oh, didn’t they make one about 1stSgt Ray Smith the medal of honor winner…no they didn’t.
Well anyway the point is that these anti-war entertainers would have us believe that they are courageous beyond belief for going against the industry on this issue. They are, of course, as phony as Hillary’s laugh on a Sunday talk show when ask about Bill’s philandering.
Look, I don’t expect Bruce come out with the new “Over There” or Hollywood to make anything like “The Sands of Iwo Jima” ever again, but how about SOME balance. It seems to me that there is enough bravery on display by Americans day in and day out in the Middle East that there has to be at least one good news story worthy of a movie.
Violence where the good guy kicks the crap out of the bad guy was long ago abandoned by Hollywood. It started with “Little House on the Prairie” the first of the sissified westerns. In the American Western standard “Gun Smoke” Matt Dillon would gun down three greasy ner do wells who tried to rob the bank before the opening theme faded down. But Hollywood decided that rather than seeing a fair minded, gun toting sheriff using a gun for the good of the town’s people, we needed to see how an unarmed sod buster helped his neighbor raise his barn. Yawn.
OK fine. If Hollywood doesn’t want to do a story about the uncommon courage of the American soldier, it should find a story about how the Army engineers are building schools and hospitals in Iraq and Afghanistan - something, anything that places the American fighting man not necessarily in a good light but rather in a realistic light.
Don’t hold your breath. Hollywood and the entertainment industry will continue to churn out the same predictable “America sucks” crap. The industry and half-wit stars that populate it will continue in Springsteensque fashion telling us how they are bucking the system and having their patriotism questioned for their brave and lonely stand.
Friday, October 05, 2007
"It may be easier to recognize the central role of the mind when looking at advances in high technology. But Ayn Rand grasped the role of the mind in all aspects of business. Late in the novel, Dagny Taggart observes the reign of a kind of railroad czar empowered as chief regulator of the industry and surveys the havoc that his arbitrary decrees wreak on the rational planning of private businesses. That the central "planning" of government actually consists of the disruption of rational planning by millions of private individuals is a point that had already been made by pro-free-market economists like Ludwig von Mises. Ayn Rand grasped that these economic principle were not dry, academic abstractions, but dramas played out in the real world—that the laws of economics are a matter of life and death, of triumph or tragedy. Here is one episode of the tragedy that plays out in the novel's later pages:
Six weeks ago, Train Number 193 had been sent with a load of steel, not to Faulkton, Nebraska, where the Spencer Machine Tool Company, the best machine tool concern still in existence, had been idle for two weeks, waiting for the shipment—but to Sand Creek, Illinois, where Confederated Machines had been wallowing in debt for over a year, producing unreliable goods at unpredictable times. The steel had been allocated by a directive which explained that the Spencer Machine Tool Company was a rich concern, able to wait, while Confederated Machines was bankrupt and could not be allowed to collapse, being the sole source of livelihood of the community of Sand Creek, Illinois. The Spencer Machine Tool Company had closed a month ago. Confederated Machines had closed two weeks later.
The people of Sand Creek, Illinois, had been placed on national relief, but no food could be found for them in the empty granaries of the nation at the frantic call of the moment—so the seed grain of the farmers of Nebraska had been seized by order of the Unification Board—and Train Number 194 had carried the unplanted harvest and the future of the people of Nebraska to be consumed by the people of Illinois. "In this enlightened age," Eugene Lawson had said in a radio broadcast, "we have come, at last, to realize that each one of us is his brother's keeper."
So given America’s seeming unending appetite for Hillary care, $5,000 baby bonds, open borders, “free” college tuition, sub-prime housing bail outs, welfare, food stamps, HUD, ADC, each coming with central government control and huge price tags, how long will it be before the government starts to seize Nebraska corn and ships it to Illinois? We are headed down a treacherous path.
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Now as Lex has noted several times before, if I go out and try to buy a politician, they throw me in jail. But if a politician goes out and tries to buy voters, he is considered a savvy pol and is thrown into the presidential sweepstakes. I don’t much see the difference. We’re both trying to buy someone off and we’re both using my money to do it. It would seem to me, me buying someone off using my own money is a whole lot more honorable than a pol buying someone off using my money.
Some bright guy, Ben Franklin I think, said that our experiment in democracy would end when politicians discovered that they could buy the people’s votes and the people allowed them to do it. It seems to me Democrats have long ago discovered that they could buy votes, but fortunately the people have only intermittently fallen for their scheme.
This election is different. Never has so much been promised to so many to be paid for by so few. Take the SCHIP, a program to help poor children. That sounds good so far. It’s only until you get into the fine print that you discover that poor children includes those 200-400% over the poverty line and the word “children” includes those up to 25 years of age.
Then there’s this, Dems propose paying for the program with a tax on a legal product, cigarettes. Even with the tax, the program is woefully under funded. But wait it gets better. Studies show that every increase in the cost per pack drives a certain percentage of people out of the cigarette market. So as under funded as this program is now, when the cost of cigarettes goes up to pay for it, the program will be further undercut.
So what happens when the program turns out to be unworkable? End the program. No. Cut the program. No. Tax the rich. No. Tax you and me. There you go. Whenever Dems talk about tax increases aimed at the rich, they mean us. And it works every time. And it’ll work this time because after all, it’s for the children.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Clear Channel correctly and politely told the Democrats to go to hell.
Lex fired off the following to Sen Jim Webb of VA:
Of all the senators who signed it, I was most disappointed to see your name affixed to Harry Reid’s partisan attack on a private citizen. I listened live to the very show Mr. Reid is using to malign Rush. It is impossible for me to understand how anyone can listen to the tape of what was said on that show or even read the transcript and come to the conclusion that Rush was calling anyone but actual phonies “phony soldiers.”
As a former Marine myself, I’d hoped for better from you. I’d hoped you’d bring some sense of honor to what has become a soulless body more interested in gottcha politics than doing what is right for the country.
I hope that you were just lazy, have not listened to the tape and signed Mr. Reid’s letter in haste. Given your history, I doubt that is the case. Therefore I must conclude that you have already sold out. Your party loyalty has trumped national loyalty and you have chosen the path of the career politician. Shame on you.
In the hope you find your way,
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
A Tacoma man who falsely claimed he was a decorated war hero when he took the stage at demonstrations held in opposition to the U.S.'s role in Iraq was sentenced this morning to five months in prison in U.S. District Court in Seattle.Jesse MacBeth [aka Jesse Adam Al-Zaid], 23, was also sentenced to three months in a halfway house after his release and three years of probation.MacBeth claimed that he was an Army ranger who killed more than 200 people, many at close range, including some as they
prayed in a mosque.He spoke at an anti-war rally in Tacoma and appeared in a 20-minute anti-war video that circulated widely on the Internet.In reality, MacBeth made it through only six weeks of Army basic training and never set foot in Iraq.Conservative bloggers exposed MacBeth in May
2006, destroying his credibility and embarrassing the Seattle company that produced the video about his exploits.On June 7, MacBeth pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. MacBeth admitted that he filed a bogus claim for VA benefits in 2005, which included a fraudulent military-discharge form.MacBeth said on the
forms that he had been in the Army for more than three years and had achieved the rank of corporal.He also claimed he had been awarded a Purple Heart and that he was discharged because he suffered from post-traumatic-stress disorder.MacBeth spent 44 days as a private at Fort Benning, Ga., in 2003, but was released "for issues related to entry-level
performance and conduct," according to court papers.Pepper Spray Productions in Seattle produced the video titled "Jesse MacBeth: An Iraq Veteran Speaks Out."In the film, MacBeth told nuanced tales of brutal killings he carried out at the behest of his commanding officers."They would actually feel the hot muzzle of my rifle on their forehead," he reportedly said on the video, which is no longer in circulation.
This is what the Phony Senator said about Rush on the floor of the Senate:
“Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh’s unpatriotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast. We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a ‘phony soldier.’ We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and to ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments.”
Monday, October 01, 2007
As it turns out Iraqis are against partition in rather large numbers and the reason is simple. Ever since the Iraq war began the MSM has been telling us that the country is already divided; Kurds to the north, Shiite to the south and west and Sunni in the center east. It’s not so much autonomy and partitioned piece of Iraq that the faction are interested in; they already have that. It’s a fair share of oil revenue that is really the problem, and no amount of line drawing is going to make that problem go away. Some sort of equitable oil revenue sharing plan ought to be priority one.
Besides, let’s say there is universal agreement in the US that Iraq needs to be partitioned. How does one affect that plan without Iraqi consent? Is slow Joe advocating using the US military to initiate a forced partition? If it’s forced how long could such a partition be expected to hold? Absent an oil revenue sharing plan, wouldn’t such a partition just inflame sectarian violence?
We’ve dealt with this issue several times in our own history and in every case from the “trail of tears,” to Japanese internment, to segregation, it’s been an embarrassment. Why would we think it's going to be any different in Iraq?