Ok - Time for some crazy talk

We try to stay on point - and to 'keep it real' here. But, once in a while we get taken away in a flight of fancy. This is one of those times.

Now, you know we love Thomas Jefferson here. At one time in his career as our country's most brilliant founder, he wrote:

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

For those of you that spent your formative years in public city schools, that is from the Declaration of Independence. It formed the basis for our break from the English Crown - and the emergence of the US, the greatest country ever known.

Now, there are those out there, in increasing numbers, that think we are headed down the same road. The difference, of course, is that we are not dealing with a king. Instead, the people in this country voted for the twits that are now racing this country towards all out Socialism. So what is to be done?

Well, the most popular, and practical, is for a state or states to move on their own to re-establish a just government. To do this, though, you would need to be free of Federal entanglements. How could a State do this? Well - by succeeding from the Union and forming their own independent country!

I told you it was time for crazy talk. Oklahoma and Texas have both made noise in that direction. As, in the past, have a couple of Western States. My vote would be for a state with an ocean port - gotta get your goods in somewhere. It would have to be a very gun friendly state - no need to dwell on THAT. A state where the National Guard would ignore a federalization order.

Alaska would be nice. It is far away and hard to get to. Kind of cold, so dress warm. Sarah is already there...So I think we would be welcomed. They have lots of oil - so money would not be problem. There would be no fighting for land to build on.

Just some food for thought. Things are going to get bad here - and sooner rather than later. When you need some thought to help you escape our reality here --- think the Independent Commonwealth of Alaska!

And this is a suprise to whom?

As we pointed out here in a previous post, we think The Messiah's idea saying he will close Guantanamo is a truly bad idea. Turns out, there are truly bad people being held there!

Reading this story from the AP, it seems that this fact may have finally dawned on the new dimwit running the Justice Department, Eric 'I love gun control' Holder.

AG Holder says closing Guantanamo won't be easy
WASHINGTON (AP) - Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday the Guantanamo detention center is a well-run, professional facility that will be difficult to close—but he's still going to do it. Holder visited the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Monday and spoke to reporters about his trip during a news conference Wednesday.

Closing Guantanamo, he said, "will not be an easy process. It's one we will do in a way that ensures that people are treated fairly and that the American people are kept safe."

President Barack Obama selected Holder to lead the new administration's effort to close the detention facility within a year.

Much of the year will be spent reviewing the individual case histories of the roughly 245 inmates, the attorney general said.

"It's going to take us a good portion of that time to look at all of the files that we have to examine, until we get our hands around what Guantanamo is, and also what Guantanamo was," he said.

Holder said his visit to the site was instructive. He met with military officials and toured the facilities, including the court setting where military commissions were to be held until Obama suspended them.

He said he did not witness any rough treatment of detainees, and in fact found the military staff and leadership performing admirably.

"I did not witness any mistreatment of prisoners. I think, to the contrary, what I saw was a very conscious attempt by these guards to conduct themselves in an appropriate way," he said.

The attorney general said none of those impressions alters the administration's goal of closing Guantanamo by January 2010.

"It does not in any way decrease our determination to close the facility, even though as I said it is being well-run now," he said.

In his confirmation hearings before the Senate, Holder said lawyers will have to examine each detainee's case, and determine who can be brought to the U.S. for a criminal trial, sent to foreign countries or tried and held by the U.S. in some other fashion.

Now, really? It will be hard! Shocking. Our allies have already said they will not take any 'really' bad guys. Well, we already let the 'good' ones go. And, it turns out, a good number of them are already back at the Jihad.

So, our allies won't take them. It is a bad deal to bring them to US soil. The liberals want to treat them like common criminals. You know, lawyers, rules of evidence, etc. etc. Problem is, these guys are enemy combatants. They were trying to kill our soldiers. Never in our history have we extended people like like civil trials - it is just a BAD idea.

So, can't send them to our allies. Should not bring them here. What is left? Send them back to whatever hell hole, American hating country they came from?

If we do that to 245 Jihadists - you will be able to time with a stopwatch how long it will be before the next American gets killed by these vermin.

Yes, Mr. Holder - doing the stupid thing - Closing Gitmo - SHOULD be hard. So hard in fact, that you should give up the idea before you do something really, really stupid and wind up getting some us killed.

Ok - This is just funny

I got this in an e-mail. It purports to have been posted on Craig's list. I cannot verify this. No matter - it is still funny.

I am a big gun rights supporter, have a concealed weapons permit, and have been known to carry on occasion um sometimes um a lot um you guess a concealed firearm. That make this especially funny to me.

Posted to Craig's List Personals:


To the Guy Who Mugged Me Downtown (Downtown, Savannah )
Reply to: pers-982078099@craigslist.org [ ?]
Date: 2009-01-06, 3:43AM EST

I was the white guy with the black Burrberry jacket that you demanded I hand over shortly after you pulled the knife on me and my girlfriend. You also asked for my girlfriend's purse and earrings. I hope you somehow come across this message. I'd like to apologize.

I didn't expect you to crap your pants when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. Truth is, I was wearing the jacket for a reason that evening, and it wasn't that cold outside. You see, my girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber 1911 .45 ACP pistol for Christmas, and we had just picked up a shoulder holster for it that evening. Beautiful pistol, eh? It's a very intimidating weapon when pointed at your head, isn't it?

I know it probably wasn't a great deal of fun walking back to wherever you'd come from with that brown sludge flopping about in your pants. I'm sure it was even worse since you also ended up leaving your shoes, cell phone, and wallet with me. I couldn't have you calling up any of your buddies to come help you try to mug us again. I took the liberty of calling your mother, or "Momma" as you had her listed in your cell, and explaining to her your situation. I also bought myself some gas on your card. I gave your shoes to one of the homeless guys over by Vinnie Van Go Go's, along with all of the cash in your wallet, then I threw the wallet itself in a dumpster.

I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell. They'll be on your bill in case you'd like to know which ones. Alltel recently shut down the line, and I've only had the phone for a little over a day now, so I don't know what's going on with that. I hope they haven't permanently cut off your service. I was about to make some threatening phone calls to the DA's office with it. Oh well.

So, about your pants. I know that I was a little rough on you when you did this whole attempted mugging thing, so I'd like to make it up to you. I'm sure you've already washed your pants, so I'd like to help you out. I'd like to reimburse you for the detergent you used on the pants. What brand did you use, and was it liquid or powder? I'd also like to apologize for not killing you and instead making you walk back home humiliated. I'm hoping that you'll reconsider your choice of path in life. Next time you might not be so lucky. If you read this message, email me and we'll do lunch and laundry. Peace!

Anti-Global Warming Articles

Updated - Feb 26

Every few days it seems, another publication has the balls to publish the truth about Global warming. I have decided to keep a running list of articles that I found - and found interesting - that dispute the so-called consensus that global warming is man-made.

For you Liberals out there, lacking any appreciable degree of intellectual curiosity at all(You heard the Gorecle state it, and you believe it), I will condense it for you. These articles basically say: Global warming is not man-made. It is a natural cycle, and the Sun has a lot to do with it!! I know, shocking!

And, remember to check here to see if you can be the first one to see a sunspot if one ever comes back! First one to report seeing a sunspot wins your choice of this or this.

These are in no particular order

• Japanese Break with UN over Global Warming - It is Ancient Astrology
  
• Former astronaut speaks out on global warming
  
• Blue Planet in Green Shackles
  
• Czech President questions Al Gore's Sanity
  The Warm Turns
  
• 2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
  
• Global warming: Reasons why it might not actually exist
  
• Bad weather was good for Alaska glaciers
  
• Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof
  
• The Great Global Warming Hoax? If you went to public school, you probably won't understand this one.
  
• The Global Warming Hoax: The Beginning of Its End
  It's time to pray for global warming
  
• Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’
  
• The Global Warming Scam
  
• The Mammoth Global Warming Scam
  
• Mistake in calculating Polar Ice. You won't find this in the MSM
  
  

Islam's continuing problem of violence

In a tragic case, a Muslim woman, Aasiya Hassan, was murdered and subsequently beheaded by her husband. Her crime? Filing for divorce!

Now, was this some wild-eyed terrorist type? Did he pose with his AK-47? Did he record himself saying 'Allahu Akbar'? No.

This couple had founded a TV network aimed at improving the image of Islam and Muslims in the US! Needless to say, that is not working out so well now.


As you might expect, this story has garnered a lot of attention in the press. Recently, though the 'tone' has changed. A recent AP article is an example.

The spin - violence against women is a problem that needs to be addressed. Sorry - completely wrong emphasis. Yes, violence against women is a big problem. But, let's be honest. Violence against women is when some schlub punches his wife because he is drunk and she is 'not listening'. When was the last time you read about an 'American' beheading his wife? Yah, me either.

Beheadings seem to be pretty much a Muslim thing. And, one should point out, not limited to wives who are divorcing you. Muslims really need to do some 21st century soul searching. The type the Catholic church had to do after the Inquisitions. The whole bloody Jihad against the infidel is pretty 7th century.

Islam struggles with a distinction between religion and politics. In the west, this is an established, respected idea. Everyone is free to have their religion. Your view of politics is informed by your faith. But, and this is the big deal, your politics operates outside the control of whatever religion (or lack there of) that you happen to practice. Moral issues like abortion cause heated debates - but this is the exception.

In Islam, as we see it practiced most places, EVERYTHING in politics is viewed through the prism of religion. They are two sides of the same coin.

So, I am not buying into the spin surrounding this article. Here we have a pissed off, though generally peaceful, man beheading his wife in the style set forth by his holy text. The other adherents to his faith try to distract us by moralizing about 'violence against women'.

The real issue that they need to be confronting - how are they going to move beyond the whole 'death to infidels' thing? It is a long journey from the 7th century to the 21st - time to start packing for the trip.

View of today's American from Past Presidents

We have some Giants in our history. Men who formed this country. Scholars, statesmen, true intellectuals (not what populates our colleges today). These men had a classical education. They could comment on the works of Greek philosophers after having read their work in the original language. Today we have Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank!

John Kennedy knew this. He spoke these words to a group of 'really smart people' who were gathered at the White House:

I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of Human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House -- with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

Why do I bring this up? Jefferson left us with a good understanding of his view of history, as well as of the future. We really don't have to 'wonder' what he would think about the events of today - I believe we already know.

The Democrats are all patting themselves on the back having just passed the Porkulis bill. The Republicans have plenty to be ashamed of - given the way they spent money the last 6 years. With all that is going on, we should ask WWJS. What would Jefferson say?

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government

We already have way to much - and we are getting ready to make it exponentially worse. The Republicans TALK about smaller government - but do the opposite. The Dems are genetically unable to even utter the phrase.

“To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical,”

Well, this has been going on for decades. And as far as Porkulis is concerned. 65+% of the people say NO - but congress says 'The hell with you - we won the election, get out of our way'.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them

and

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

Well, Porkulis strikes again! The rationale for the TRILLION plus in spending? Well, if we don't do 'something', people will suffer.

It seems like Jefferson does not think that is governments role. Neither, as it turns out, can we afford it. It also turns out, that most of the spending in Porkulis would have been viewed as unconstitutional by the guy that wrote the constitution.

Think of that! We have strayed very far from the meaning of the constitution. I frankly do not give a damned how the Supreme Court of today 'interprets' Jefferson's meaning in the constitution. Not when I can read the thoughts of Jefferson himself.

Some other pretty smart guys have weighed in along these lines. Lincoln (the REAL Lincoln - not Oba-Lincoln) said:

“When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

Based on that, the end is near. Or, it has already arrived and we just don't realize it yet.

Calvin Coolidge (Ok- he is a light-weight - but he managed to say something profound):

“We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”

Yah - too late for that.

Folks - these guys are right about several things:

• The Constitution forbids the kind of wealth transfer going on today.
  
• Our form of government will not survive the wholesale theft, through taxes, of wealth from one so that it can be bestowed on another
  
• Our government has gotten too large to not become tyrannical
  
• The principle of higher taxes to help the economy is foolishness on its face

But, history also tells us that be have crossed the Rubicon. What is done is done. As Caesar said prior to crossing the literal Rubicon - The Die is Cast.

The Truth from a Liberal -

Bill Press, a non-consequential member of the Liberal talking head class, let slip the real reason he favors the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

First, Press was on with Megan Kelly on Fox. He got, I think, kicked around by Megan on the issue of letting the market decide what kind of Talk radio should be on.


Later, he went on WOR and admitted, in this exchange on air this tidbit (the quote is at about 8 minutes in):

I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard

Ahhh - the truth comes out!!! He wants the 'Fairness Doctrine' because he wants to make money and he wants to be hear! Poor Bill..... I want people to read my blog - but I am not running to the FCC because it is not happening at the speed I would like.

Bill, the reason you don't make money is because you are not heard. The reason you are not heard is because no one WANTS to listen! Forcing radio stations to carry you will not force people to listen.... It is all about the MARKET, Bill.

Just pray you don't get sick

In a recent article in the LA Times, a concern about drug resistant bacteria was examined. These infections typically attack people that are in a weakened condition - like those you find in hospitals.

Turns out, this is turning into a serious problem. The infections are of a type known as gram-negative. They are tough to kill. More troubling, they are developing resistance to our 'drugs of last resort'.

This type of infection recently killed Miss Brazil. She initially had a urinary tract infection. She wound up losing her hands, her feet, her kidneys, and finally - her life.

So, why post a blog about this? Because we are heading down a road where we will see more of this.

The Federal Government is taking over more and more of the health care in this country. Along with that, they will more tightly control the flow of funding in the health care sector. This could well lead the evil drug companies to re-think the massive investment needed to bring cutting edge drugs to market. It costs hundreds of millions of dollars to bring a new drug to market. This is due to the length of time (10 years) required to pass FDA screening. The 'F' in FDA is FEDERAL.

So, not only will the FEDs control the approval process, they are now positioned to also control the price the companies can charge. If you were a business, is that where you would choose to invest your stockholders capital? I doubt it.

They will revert to making cold pills, acne cream, or anything else the government deems to be 'cost effective'.

Just hope you don't contract MRSA,Pseudomonas aeruginosa, or some other resistant bacteria while you are in the hospital. There probably won't be any 'cost effective' medications for you. Goodbye hands, feet, kidneys....life.

One, Two, Three, Eleven, Eleventy-Three

I like to watch Sesame street with my two-ish year old grand-daughters. One of my favorites is 'The Count'. You know, the Dracula-lite little puppet that is always counting things.

Well, Count, it seems you will be needed in Washington soon. And take Oscar the garbage-can dwelling Grouch with you. We need you for your counting skills, and Oscar for his ability to deal with GARBAGE.

I case you haven't read about it, the White House (read The Messiah and his mini-me Rahm Emanuel, are moving to take DIRECT control of the 2010 census!! It has historically been done by the Commerce Department (it was about the only thing they actually did, as far as anyone knows). But no more.

Why is this a concern. Well, it seems The Messiah does not think all that 'counting' is really that big of a deal. Instead, the Democrats want to use something called 'statistical sampling'. The idea here is 1) you count the best you can, the 2) you make up the final numbers based on 'statisitics'. Remember, figures don't lie, but liars can figure.

So, here is how it will play out. We will have the pretext of an actual count. Then, Rahm and his boys will apply 'factors', 'weightings', 'normalizations', and possibly even 'correlation coefficients' to come up with the final result.

I will save you the suspense, here is what the net result will be. Areas that voted 'Blue' in the last election will gain people - a LOT of people. The 'Red' areas will lose people. This will mean several things. First, we will probably have a couple of extra Democratic congress-critters in the next congress (unless things keep going like they have the last couple weeks - in which case little can be done to save the Dems). Also, the big cities, where all of these 'new' citizens will be found to be living, will get an extra chunk from suckling at the Federal Teat.

With all that is going on - will anyone notice? Or care? Probably - a little. But it won't matter. Because, BHO is taking a page right out of the 'Dictators Handbook'. Ok, I made that up. But if there were such a thing - one of the rules would be - do whatever is needed to distort the outcomes of elections in your favor. The Messiah is doing it preemptively...good strategy. Omerika - can you here us yet?

Nationalize Health Care - Part One

Guess what was slipped into the recently passed 'Porkulis' economic stimulus bill?? We have taken a huge first step towards the Federal Government having final say over what health care you can get!! This is the same bunch that brought you

• Public Education (Broken)
  
• Social Security (Bankrupt)
  
• Congress (Clueless)
  
• The BWM (Inefficient)
  
• Welfare (Destroyed the Black Family)
  
• The Tax Code (Bloated)
  
• The IRS and BATF (Oppressive)
  

So forgive me if I am less than enthusiastic about the Feds wading any further into health card.

What is it, exactly, that they have done in the Porkulis bill that will lead to Nationalized Health Care? Well, two things actually.
First, they have are creating a nationwide data base to collect all of YOUR health records in one place. This is coupled with an organization that is supposed to research the 'effectiveness' of treatments - with the goal of 'assisting' your doctor in selecting the most 'effective' treatment.

There in lies the rub! The government's idea of 'effectiveness' will factor in, very heavily, the idea of 'cost effective'. This article gives a couple of specific examples.

Treatments for older Americans will be limited. They have fewer years to benefit from a treatment. Treatments for them are then, by definition, less 'cost' effective than a similar treatment for younger folks.

Now, the argument will be made that this bill does not ACTUALLY put these controls in place. True enough - for now. But, that is just a temporary reprieve for us. Let's face it, once they have this huge database, and they have been doing 'research' on cost-effectiveness - you honestly think they will stop there? Hardly.

The draw will be too great. A couple of simple changes in the language of this bill by a subsequent Congress, and presto-chango - the Federal Government controlled doctor will see you now. Or not, depending on how cost effective treating you is.

This same concept is what drives us Gun Owners to so forcefully resist any type of gun registration. Once they have you all registered - what will they do with that data. It lets them put in tighter controls (make felons out of lawful gun owners where no felon existed before), or as a tool for eventual confiscation (like happened in England and Australia).

Lists and/or databases in the hands of bureaucrats are a dangerous thing. You cannot count on them to limit their use to the original purpose. In fact, you can count on them making mischief with the data. That kind of data concentrated in one place is just too much a temptation.

Folks, why are we allowing this? My God - look at what the Federal Government meddles in already!! And now, do you want them to put themselves in the position to decide which medical treatment your doctor can choose for you? Heaven help us!!

The Taliban - Too bad they aren't really this funny

My recently acquire son-in-law sent this to me. I thought I was worth sharing. If he continues to provide this kind of material - I may revise my initial opinion of him. (Ok - I already have!!) LOL


1. You refine heroin for a living, but you have a moral objection to beer.
2. You own a $3,000 machine gun and $5,000 rocket launcher, but you can't afford shoes.
3. You have more wives than teeth..
4. You wipe your butt with your bare left hand, but consider bacon 'unclean.'
5. You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide.
6. You can't think of anyone you HAVEN'T declared Jihad against.
7. You consider television dangerous, but routinely carry explosives in your clothing.
8. You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting off roadside bombs.
9. You've often uttered the phrase, 'I love what you've done with your cave.'
10. You have nothing against women and think every man should own at least one.
11. You bathe at least monthly whether necessary or not.
12. You have a crush on your neighbor's goat.

Are those footsteps I hear? They are coming for your free speech rights

In a truly audacious comment, Slick Willie Clinton said, in answer to the amazing question "Is it time for some type of media accountability?

"Well, you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side," Clinton said, "because essentially there's always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows and let face it, you know, Rush Limbaugh is fairly entertaining even when he is saying things that I think are ridiculous.

Now, let's examine this statement, which is actually quite illustrative.

For those of you who went to public school, let me remind you what the First Amendment to the Constitution says (Yes, it was written by dead white men, deal with it)

Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech...

Now, that seems quite clear to me. What confuses me is how the hell you reconcile that with 'enforced media accountability'. Who the hell does Congress think they are??

Clinton says we need 'balance'. No one is stopping any Liberal who wants to from taking to the air waves and competing in the marketplace of ideas. Air America tried, several times. Of course, their audience numbered in the dozens and they failed repeatedly. Why is that?

Clinton would have you believe that there is more money to fund conservative talk. How can this possibly be true? Obama out-raised McCain by 4 to 1! There is clearly plenty of Liberal money out there.

But next, Clinton slips up and admits the truth.

Rush Limbaugh is fairly entertaining

Ah hah - we have a winner ladies and gentlemen. Clinton gives Rush props that he is entertaining. (Now, he did only say 'fairly' entertaining. But coming from a Liberal, this is high praise indeed).Which must mean, by comparison, he knows that Liberal Radio is NOT entertaining. Well, duh!! If it was entertaining, it would not fail every time it is tried.

So, what are we left with? If you want to force 'balance', you have two choices. You can build up the smaller, or tear down the larger.

1) Increase the listenership of Liberal talk. It is unclear to me how one would do this. People have tried - they have failed. The Liberals on the radio are all angry - and not the least bit funny or entertaining.

2) You can DECREASE the availability of Conservative talk. This is the true goal. The Liberals are pissed about talk radio - shutting it down is their answer.

By the way, where is the call for 'balance' in TV news? One the Liberal side: ABC,NBC,CBS,MSNBC,CNN, and CNBC. One the Conservative side: Fox.


When the leveling wind of socialism, dictatorship, or censorship blows -- it does not level by filling in the low spots and valleys. No. It levels by flattening out the high spots.

Those high spots, successful people, are the result of those people exercising their freedom to engage in commerce and in the marketplace of ideas. This notion of government imposed 'balance' is nothing more that squashing down the successful in order to make the 'losers' in the game feel 'better' about themselves. I don't give a damned about 'balance' our the self esteem of the Liberal talks hosts or of the Congress-critters who have their feelings hurt by what is said about them on the radio.

All I give a damned about is Freedom - and about getting the Government to back the hell up away from trying to take our Freedoms away. It has been a long, slow drain. But, with The Messiah in office - I see sure signs that the brakes are coming off. They want to regulate every aspect of the economy (the bail-outs and the 'stimulus' package are the tools), how we utilize our resources (through environmental laws) , and now - how much speech we are allowed to engage it.

People, wake up! This is nothing short of tyranny. If this trend continues and is enforced, I shall be forced to review with my readers another of our Founding documents, the Declaration of Independence. In particular, the Preamble. To wit:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth...

Tone Deaf Democrats - Which Americans are YOU listening to?

The always annoying Charles Schumer, Democrat from New York was on the Senate floor recently. Apparently he peeved about all of us chattering out here about the Pork in the pending Porkulis bill.

Those little, tiny Porky amendments? Hey, Chuck - add them up. They run into the hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars. I guess in Washington, when you are spending someone else's money - Billions and Billions and Billions IS tiny.

Now, I don't know who he is listening to, but here in Ohio (aka 'flyover country') we are plenty pissed about all the pork. I doubt the Chuck even knows where Ohio is - because if he did, he would have shut his mouth before he put his foot in it.

Using sarcasm and ridicule is not the way for someone of Chuck's supposed stature to be dealing with the people who put him in office. Oh - and SHAME on New York.

Rules for Radicals in action - Brought to you by Obama himself

Back in the 70's a guy named Saul Alinsky wrote a book called Rules for Radicals. It was a guide book for 'community organizers' to foment discontent amongst the 'powerless'. In introducing his book, Alinsky wrote:

"What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away".

Now, why is this interesting. Well, The Messiah was a student of Alinsky. He applied his principles in his 'community organizing' in Chicago. (As a side note, BHO never did explain what, exactly, he DID as a community organizer!). I am not even sure what a C/O is.

Anyway, you recently saw one of Alinsky's rules in action. To wit,

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies.

You saw this in his recent attack on Rush Limbaugh. He said, to Republicans (who asked for The Messiah's advice? Anyone?)that they should stop listening to Rush if they want to get things done. Now, since the Dems have a majority in both houses, they don't need the Republicans help. Judging by his actions, tone, and speeches lately - he does not want their help. He even reminded them that 'I won' the election - as a way to brush them off.

So, why attack Rush. And I say attack because it is HIGHLY unusual for a sitting POTUS to call out an individual my name. It is something, historically, that is just thought to be below the office. So why?

The Dems are afraid of Talk Radio. They want to silence it - as they will try with the so-called Fairness Doctine. This is another angle. Rush is the face of Talk Radio. So, BHO did not attack the whole medium - it would violate the 'do not attack abstract..' part of Rule 11. Instead, personalize it - You call Rush out by name. Try to freeze him by putting him on the defensive - and that worked - Rush had to respond. Then polarize it - Try to show that he IS the problem. Basically, you are fools if you follow him.

So, just in case you did not 'get it' before the election that BHO was actually a student of old Saul...Can you hear me now?

Will our opinions matter? Um, NO!

A recent Rasmussen (Feb 7) poll said a number of interesting things. They asked 1000 adults some questions.

• Does increased Federal spending help or hurt the economy? 35% Help, 48% Hurt
  
• Does a decrease Federal spending help or hurt? 45% Help,29% Hurt
  
• Do you want more tax cuts or more spending? 62% More tax cuts, 14% More spending
  

Will this matter in Washington? I say - NO!.

The stimulus package is nothing more than 10 years of pent-up Liberal spending urges. It is rolled together in one, big, disgusting package. The Libs are using the so-called 'crisis' in the economy as political cover. They figure that if we are afraid enough, we will accept anything. They are wrong. We are not THAT afraid.

If we wait 6-9 months, and the government did NOTHING, this recession would start to turn around on it own.

But, the Dems are not likely to let this crisis go by without fully exploiting it. It is sad.

But, we elected these idiots - and gave them a new Idiot in Chief to sign off on their nonsense. So, we are about to get what we asked for, and so richly deserve.

Heaven help us.

Honoring our Last Serving Vietnam Draftee

Command Sergeant Major Jeffrey Mellinger was drafted in 1972. That would not set him apart from hundreds of thousands of other soldiers. What does set him apart? He is the last active duty soldier who was drafted!

He has served honorably for 37 years, and now is the 'ripe' old age of 55. While in Iraq, he was the highest ranking enlisted man in country. I never had the honor to serve - but I know enough to know that Command Sergeant Major is a BIG deal.

We do our small part to honor his service. Here is a link to an article about CSM Mellinger. And here you can find a blurb from 2004.

Your country thanks you for your service.

What the hell is a Moderate, anyway?

What exactly is a Moderate in politics? This is more than a rhetorical question. What core values does a Moderate hold? There are several so-called Moderates in the Republican party. They are more than moderately successful at screwing the rest of us. To wit, Susan Collins
.

The Senator can be counted on to side with the Democrats on most issues of deep concern to Conservatives. She voted for the recent 'bi-partisan' Pork-laden 'Stimulus' bill. She claims 'It is the best we could do'. Oh, BS - It was NOT the best you could do. But, Susan is from Maine - not exactly the heartland. She is probably what passes for a conservative up there.

On the other hand, you have Arlen Specter;

As a conservative, I find Arlen truly detestable. And SHAME on the people of Pennsylvania for returning this little turd to office. He should have been taken out in the Primary. Anyway. Arlen routinely votes against conservative interests with regard to Taxes, the military, judicial appointments, and now - Porkulus.

For the life of me, I try to understand these types that are regarded as 'moderate'. Sometimes they are portrayed in glowing terms, like 'consensus builder', or 'reaching across the isle'. That is laughable. From where I sit, they have not core values. No defining principles by which to judge legislation. Instead, it is however the wind is blowing. This stimulus bill as an example. They are all worried - the sky is falling - we have to do 'something'. No, we don't. And if we choose to do something, let's not lurch towards socialism in the process.

The liberals see this only as a chance to release 10 years of pent-up spending urges.(Like Rahm said - Never let a good crisis go to waste). Conservatives see this as the existential threat to the free-market that it is. Those are identifiable, core, passionate positions. You can debate the relative merits - but each group is being true to their core values.

The moderates? What is guiding them? Concern for the economy? Concern for people? Concern for their reputation? Who the hell knows. They know they want to do 'something'. But without core values to guide them, they have no way of knowing what 'something' should be. So, they take up with the Liberals. The Liberals are more popular right now - so let's side with them. Then they get a few minor cosmetic changes to the bill. Now they can say they had an 'impact'. Then vote with the Liberals -- AGAIN.

Neither of these mental midgets can give a coherent, well reasoned, explanation of the philisophical underpinnings of the approach. No, but,,you know,,, we had to do SOMETHING. Really? Even if that 'something' is going to make things worse. But, you have no basis on which to make that judgement - cuz you are a MODERATE.

New Obama Anthem

I was noodling with the idea of a new National Anthem honoring the Messiah. I listen to Quinn in the morning, and he uses the old Soviet National Anthem as his Obama update theme. So, I was thinking of lyrics I could use.

Well, luckily, someone beat me too it. I propose, for the next four years, this is what we use (with a bump to Glenn Beck):



All hail the messiah
Obama, Obama
The path to the new socialist motherland
Our savior, our savior
Obama, Obama
The leader more famous than Lindsay Lohan
Bow down and praise the one
Give him your money and your guns
Give us a country
That makes your wife proud
Lord Barry heal the bitter ones
White and Clinging to faith and to guns
Hope for the change of the hope of the change!

What do you think? Rousing, isn't it? It does not have the gravity of the original lyrics:

CHORUS:

Sing to the Motherland, home of the free,
Bulwark of people, in brotherhood strong!
Oh! Party of Lenin! The strength of the people.
To Communism's triumph lead us on!

But, still....

Why do I have to see stories about Celebritards?

Cebeltritard: (A morph of Celebrity and Retard)

(n) A well-known person who believes that the world desperately needs to hear their atrociously uninformed opinion on any given subject simply due to the fact they have easy access to the bully pulpit.

As I read various publications, I keep seeing stories about this or that's celebrity's opinion about politics or the economy. Why is this reported as news? Unless they are talking about the impact of Federal policy on the movie business - they have nothing of importance to say.

Some examples:

The stupid 'I Pledge' video showcasing all manner of air-heads

• Cher saying that the Bush years 'almost killed me'. Who cares?
  
• Ashley Judd, going off about Sarah Palin and saving animals.
  
• Sean Penn (idiot) publishing an 'open letter' to President Bush about the war. So now Sean is a diplomat?
  
• John Legend giving his opinion about why we need higher taxes
  
• Oprah Winfrey wading into the election
  
• Any Hollywood type lecturing us about the environment - from the comfort of their bazillion square foot, beachfront house.
  
• Any Hollywood type lecturing us about 'giving' more, when they only donate their 'time', not their money.
  

I understand this crap being in People or US Magazine. Let's not pollute the rest of the media, OK? Leave the celebritards to the celebrity gossip pages.

Homage to Jim Quinn

I am huge fan of Quinn and Rose. They do a syndicated radio program in the mornings. It comes out of Pittsburgh, has about a dozen affiliates, and is on XM. Jim has what he calls 'Quinns Laws'. I have found Quinn's laws oh so true, and I quote them to my friends often.

I thought I would share them with you:

1. Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent.

2. If you want to know what liberals are up to, pay attention to what they accuse the conservatives of.

3. The amount of wealth in any given area is inversely proportional to the amount of Democrats running it.

4. Liberalism only succeeds when the public is scared into believing that it will not survive without it.

5. When liberalism conflicts with reality, reality must give way.

6. Facts are the enemy of liberalism.

7. Things are different when you are a Democrat [regarding criticism from the press for scandal, misconduct, or inconsistency].

8. A Liberal is any person for whom two thousand years of human experience and history means nothing now that they are here.

9. To liberals, intentions are more significant than the outcomes they achieve.

10. Liberals never think what they are doing is wrong, they only think they haven’t done enough of it yet or it is underfunded.

11. Profiling is what groups call bigotry when they have a problem they don’t want to talk about.

12. Democrats and liberals do not engage in debate, they try to silence you. If they engaged in debate, they’d lose.

13. Democrats are political opportunists.

14. Liberalism is based on unproven and/or disproven theory.

15. Every culture is unquestionable except the West’s

16. Liberals view the world the way they think it should be, not the way it is.

17. Being a liberal is the art of standing on ones own head and telling the rest of the world that they are upside down.

A wee bit of sense in the debate over Porkulis

In a rather stunning admission, the Chairman of the Senate Budget committee said that 20% of the upcoming 'stimulus' package should be cut!

While I admire this move, the 20% is just a START. The bill as it stands contains many things that should be handled through the normal budget process. Many of the others should just be scrapped altogether.

In an even more stunning development, George Voinovich actually said something that made sense!!!


Now, George was our Governor here in Ohio for much too long. I was so glad to see him leave. Sadly, he left and went right to the Senate. But, I digress.

George suggested some criteria for the stimulus:

• Is it a federal responsibility? Since I have read the constitution (you should try it), the only things that would really be 'OK' would be roads/bridges and anything related to the Military. So, by that standard, strictly applied, most of the stimulus package would fail.
  
• Is it shovel-ready. Here he means - can we do it quick? It is not much of a stimulus it is 3 years away.
  
• Is it proper. Ok, he had 2 out 3 good ideas. Just by his history, this is a big improvement for George. Anyway, I am not clear as to what 'proper' means. I would have deferred to 'is it constitutional?', but that is me.
  

I am glad to see George finally adding some value in Washington. I am also glad to know he is retiring. He has been taking up oxygen there for too long.

Anyway - it is good to hear this serious discussion, from both sides, about the outrageous size and stunning scope of Porkulis.

Oh the Liberals are Pissed Now - Here comes the Fairness Doctrine

We have warned here before about the so-called Fairness Doctrine. It is designed to shut down talk radio, which is dominated by Conservatives. It is named in a way to make you believe that it is altruistic. It is not. It is hardball politics at it's worse.

Liberals, for some reason, cannot figure out how to be successful in talk radio. Air America tried. Their audience numbered in the dozens. It went bankrupt (I think, actually, more than once).

Recently, 1260 in DC of all places is switching formats AWAY from Liberal talk to financial news. Dude, I have to tell you: if you can't make it in talk radio in DC - you are hopeless, hapless, AND clueless.

Speaking of clueless, this brings me to Debbie Stabenow.

Now, Debbie (as we knew her when she was a Narc in my high school in the 70's) is an idiot. She was an idiot then, she is an idiot now. For whatever reason, The Messiah asked her for advice on his economic plan. My God, she is from Michigan. What the hell could she know about a good economic plan? The fact that she got elected (and re-elected) make me wonder about the sanity of the people of Michigan. But, I digress.

In a recent interview Debbie said she wants 'hearings' and on the lack of 'balance' in talk radio. They are looking for 'accountability'.

Let me decode that for you.

• 'Hearings' are what congress does when they are looking for someone to blame for some problem. The current problem is that the American people have figured out what BS this 'stimulus' bill is. We don't like the bill - because we know what is it. We got a lot of that info from talk radio. This pisses the Libs off. Hence, hearings.
  
  
• Balance is what they say they are looking for. They are really looking to silence the opposition in the one area of media that they do not dominate. They dominate cable news (Fox being the only bright spot). They dominate the big news papers and magazines. (Is the Messiah on the cover of Time THIS week?). They fail at talk radio.
  
  
• Accountability is to make it sound official. Point here - Free Speech is NOT ACCOUNTABLE to the government. We are using our free speech to attempt to hold the POLITICIANS to account. Hey - Stabenow, you want accountability? Find out where our $350 Billion in bail out money went. Find out why Charlie Rangel got his interest and penalties waved when he paid his delinquent taxes. Find out what moron in the White House has been vetting your tax-cheating Cabinet nominees.
  

Bottom line, the Libs are pissed that they can't compete in Talk Radio. They know the so-called Fairness Doctrine will not cause MORE liberal talk - it will just reduce Conservative talk to zero. Because when you both have zero - it IS balanced.

Rules for Republicans

A bump to Scott over at Conservatism Today for posting a link to this. It came originally from IMAO. Let me summarize:
It seems The Messiah is drafting 'Rules for Republicans' to use if they want to get along with him. (I wonder how closely he will actually pattern it after 'Rules for Radicals' by his mentor, Bill 'I bombed the Pentagon' Ayers?). Anyway, the rules follow:

• Don’t bother reading the details of the stimulus bill; it’s boring.
  
• Stop sneaking up behind me and flicking my ears.
  
• In bills about the war, stop replacing the word “terrorist” with “Obama’s close personal friends.”
  
• Don’t get all hung up on this “capitalism” thing.
  
• Stop confusing my name with Osama. We’re very different. He has a beard and I don’t.
  
• Stop worrying about whether my cabinet is a bunch of law breakers; their job is to make laws, not follow them.
  
• Stop warning the American public about my secret police; then they won’t be secret anymore.
  
• Stop bringing up my wife’s odd, mannish features.
  
• Don’t tell me what’s happened on Lost; it’s on the Tivo and I haven’t had a chance to watch it yet.
  
• Stop saying, “Give me freedom or give me death.” Neither of those are on the table right now.
  

Global Warming BS - A politician who gets it

In the world of international politics, it is rare to find someone who really speaks for a position with which I agree. On the issue of Global Warming, Czech President Vaclav Klaus is such a man. In the meeting in Davos with all the UN muckity-mucks, Klaus spoke his mind, saying:

• I don't think that there is any global warming
  
• I don't see the statistical data for that.
  
• Environmentalism and the global warming alarmism is challenging our freedom.
  
• Al Gore is an important person in this movement.
  
• I'm afraid that the current crisis will be misused for radically constraining the functioning of the markets and market economy all around the world
  

You have to love this guy, and he is exactly right. The socialist element of the global warming hype must not be underestimated. If they get their way, companies will have to buy, through the cap and trade system, the 'right' to produce Carbon Dioxide. You know, the gas your create every time you exhale. This cap and trade will give the enviro-nazis just what they need to throttle and control the economy.

Let's not let it happen.