Buyers' remorse from Baucus?

Heard some talk about Max Baucus making a fool of himself on the floor of the senate. At first, I thought they were just talking about the socialized medicine bill. Then I heard there's a video of it at YouTube. Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1byjtWkE2PY

So apparently Baucus made a fool himself on the floor of the senate by sponsoring the socialized medicine bill, and then he went out and got drunk.

I find his rant interesting. Apparently he understands that the socialized medicine bill totally sucks, and somehow he's trying to blame it on the Republicans.

I didn't think Baucus was up for re-election next year, and here he's already laying the groundwork for the Democrats' certain failure. I mean, failure that even Baucus, as a Democrat, can predict very easily.

The Republicans did not contribute to that bill at all. But when Baucus claims the Republicans didn't "contribute," what he seems to mean is that they wouldn't vote for it. The Republicans offered at least a dozen proposals. The ones that were actually discussed during the (very limited) amendment process were shot down. Grassley backed out because he listened to his constituents. The Democrats ignored their constituents and shoved the bill through only with heavy applications of bribery and extortion.

So what the hell? I mean, who does Baucus think he's kidding? It's his and the Democrats' bill. They are the sole proprietors. The Republicans had nothing to do with it. The Republicans just stood on the shore and watched the Democrat machine sink slowly into the murky depths of socialist oblivion to please their Comrade in the White House.

Perhaps Baucus had a moment to step back, consider the crummy and despicable process by which this bill was created, and now has enough decency left to be ashamed. Or... somehow I doubt that. Maybe he just watched "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" over the weekend and wants to wrap his own humble and non-thinking bow to the White House in a cloak of righteousness.

In any case, blaming someone else for your own inadequacies and shortcomings is getting to be the hallmark of the Democrats. It seems the Comrade hinted today that that silly person who set his pants on fire on the plane heading into Detroit was -- somehow -- all George Bush's fault. Oh well, better than Janet Napolitano's insistence that things like this only prove that the security system is working.

No matter what anyone thinks about George Bush, I don't recall him ever once saying that 9/11 or Hurricane Katrina were all because of Bill Clinton. Although the 9/11 Commission did suggest that fairly strongly. For that reason alone, I'd happily vote for George again. He isn't a whiner.

Yes, those prisoners from Guantanamo who were released to Yemen apparently are still doing all they can to destroy the US. And it was the Bush administration that released them.

On the other hand, the Comrade and his people have been laboring night and day trying to find some excuse to release even more prisoners from Guantanamo to Yemen or to any other place that would have them. So, hey, do you suppose this might be what the Comrade would call "a teachable moment"? I mean, do you think he might actually learn something?

Nah. Probably not.

Waiting for the rest of the world to grow up

Apparently nothing has been happening in the world except that more islamo-terrorists are incompetently attacking the USA. Yawn....

Regarding what's-his-face, the Nigerian guy who tried to blow up a plane and only set his pants on fire.... It must be getting more and more difficult in the third world to find people with the wherewithall to light a match. I mean, is that hard? al-aqaeda (I'm not going to capitalize them anymore) must be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Must admit, when I heard the guy was related to a "Nigerian Banker," I just had to laugh. So does this mean I'll be getting fewer spam emails?

The Comrade took about 10 minutes off his vacation and said something about the terrorist -- only, shucks, he's not a terrorist, is he? -- about this wannabe creator of man-made disasters, and apparently also tried to support the Iranian protesters, who are demonstrating once again. This time, reports say that 15 people or so were killed in Iran. Only the Iranian government's story is that the dead were run over by cars. Or an elephant sat on them. Stuff like that.

So much for "unclenching the fist" and extending a friendly hand. And the Comrade was so kind to them, and even tried to get Europe on-board some kind of boycott to convince the Iranian mullahs that they don't need nuclear weapons.

Did that work, Comrade? What are you going to do now? Maybe time to cuddle up next to Israel, hey? If you haven't entirely severed that tie with your sympathy for the islamo-terrorists.

Somehow, this sounds like a replay of something George W. Bush went through about seven or eight years ago. Only now the Comrade gets to deal with it. Poor guy, he holds out an unclenched fist, and they put a lit grenade in it. Gee, life is tough. Especially when your philosophy is so far off the mark in terms of relating to real life and the genuine demons who only want to see you dead.

It occurs to me that Iran will be able to reach European capitols with their nuclear warheads a long time before they're able to reach the USA. So what is Europe doing about it?

Same as they always do: not much. I suppose they'll have a bunch of talks and then vote for more socialist freebies. Europe's role in the world is to let America take care of any problems and then bitch about the outcome. They can grow up or shut up.

And ya know, Comrade, we've got demonstrations in the USA, too, and you ignore them. Easy just to fly away, isn't it, instead of addressing the real problem? How's the surf?

I do believe more people are opposed to socialized medicine than voted for the Comrade. Something to think about.

In addition, tuned into Coast-to-coast AM tonight -- a radio show that usually talks about things like UFOs and Bigfoot -- only to hear some diatribe by a guy named Perkins who suggests that capitalism is the cause of all the problems in the world.

For a minute, I thought I was listening to Howard Dean.

Author Perkins noted that third world terrorists are absolutely desperate people just trying to make a living. The radio show host, Ian Punnett, pointed out that Osama Bin Laden actually was tremendously wealthy and not in any way desperate.

So Perkins started whining about people who sounded like Somali pirates, they're just trying to make a living -- and for their kids, too. (sniff-sniff) A lot of the Somali pirates are stoned off their butts all the time chewing "khat" and many are 14 or 15 years old. Somehow, I'm not buying Perkins' argument about their desperate and single-minded dedication to taking care of their infant dependents.

Perkins, in general, sounds like an apologist for the Comrade's State Department.

Anyway, I actually had a day off work today and slept all day. I'm not in a good mood. I've got to think up a way to make a living underground, so I get to keep some of the money.

Or maybe I should just get a little boat and attack the ships passing by on Lake Michigan. Let's see if Perkins will write about me.

You can't fix stupid

Been busy working over the holiday. Also was so angry I didn't think I could write anything except a long string of cusswords.

Bad storms meant that I couldn't watch much TV. I have DirecTV, so anytime there's a storm between your house and the equator, the picture goes out. No matter what their commercials say. Call them up, and they tell you that there's something wrong with your dish. So how come I can get the local channels? she asks. One customer service person hung up on me.

Anyway.... due to the inaccessibility of Fox, I watched I believe it was the ABC-TV morning show -- not sure which morning, as over an extended holiday, all the days tend to run into each other. Anyway, it was shortly after the senate passed its socialized medicine bill. Might have been Dec. 25 or 26. One of the TV anchors asked a congressman if he thought the vote might have dire consequences for Democrats in the 2010 elections.

The dolt said something like, "Oh, I don't think so. By Election Day, they'll be seeing the benefits from this bill."

See, this is why he's a dolt (and possibly that's why he's a Democrat.) The taxes for socialized medicine go into place four years before anyone gets any benefits from it. Medicare will be cut. We'll all be forced to buy an insurance policy. The Medicare deduction from paychecks will be higher. And on and on and on. And yet, not one little stinking "benefit" until 2013 -- which would be conveniently AFTER the Comrade would have made his second run for the White House. (And he'll lose for sure if he chooses to run at all.)

Think that was an accident?

But what extraordinarily bad timing. We'll all be paying, and paying, and paying, and helping Gramma and Grampa pay for YEARS before socialized medicine really kicks in -- at which time we'll have the opportunity to stand in line for 15 hours to see a triage nurse. Like Canada. I can do that now. Go down to Cook County Hospital and just take a number. And probably bleed to death before anyone looks at you.

Oh yeah, we'll forget all about this crap before next Election Day. I'm absolutely convinced now that the Democrats have gone completely bonkers. They really don't have the vaguest idea what they voted for, do they? Happily we won't have to look at them anymore after next November.

Watched Fox News Sunday today, and Chris Wallace was talking to a Maryland Democrat named Von Hollen or something like that. It was funny. Wallace asked what are Demcrats going to do about jobs, since they've already spent every penny every American will earn for the next 30 years or so. The butthead Von Hollen said something like the feds will bring the economy back slowly, in a nice, controlled way.

Yeah. Like... hmmmm... Stalin controlled the economy? Like Hitler did? Like Napolean Bonaparte did? Like Louis XVI did? Like Jimmy Carter did? Like the British PM's since WWII have? Oh yeah, the Dems have it down pat. Even Roosevelt couldn't control the economy, though God knows, he tried and tried.

Yeah. A nice "controlled" economy. Democrats can't even control their own spending, let alone the earnings and spending of 300 million individuals who are pretty resistent to control. Some people just never learn.

What's that saying? "You can't fix stupid."

On the bright side, I ended up watching this really bad movie on Turner Movie Channel Saturday night. It was directed by and starred Ray Milland. I didn't know Ray Milland directed movies. Anyway, the movie is called "Panic in Year Zero!" and it's about this California family that was vacationing in the mountains when a nuclear bomb hit Los Angeles.

Forget for the moment that a nuclear bomb going off in Los Angeles would probably wipe out the Sierras... The story was about how this family -- along with dozens of others -- descended into a kind of mean-spirited every-man-for-himself psychology. Ray Milland robbed a hardware store, for example, and his son, Frankie Avalon, shot at a guy who was threatening to shoot Ray Milland. Anyway, at the very end, the army comes in and assures everyone that the worst was over.

At some point in all of this, a doctor noted, "Scrape the scabs off and apply enough disinfectant, and civilization might recover."

That kinda stuck in my mind relevant to today's real-life situation, with the Democrats dropping economic bombs willy-nilly all across the nation. Civilization might just recover. It might. We all just have to remember the Democrats on Election Day. Just look at your paychecks -- there's a living testament to insanity. And remember the Comrade did that. Not the Republicans or anyone else, but the Comrade, Pelosi, Reid, and most other Democrats in the 111th congress. And vote accordingly.

Good-by USA. I'll miss ya.

"From rationing care to infringing on the doctor-patient relationship, this government-run system will guarantee US taxpayers a staggering tax burden for generations to come," Grassley said on the Senate floor.

Not to mention that Uncle Sam has seized enough power to tell us all how to run our lives and eliminated the very concept of individual liberty from the face of the earth.

Now we can all descend into the darkness of ignorance and stupidity, where kissing the ring of some slob politician is the only way to make a way in the world.

We are all now slaves to the state.

The republic anihilated.

The democrats must be proud and happy... but they're democrats, after all. Deaf, dumb, and blind.

Pond scum

Just watched part of an amazing spectacle the senate democrats put on, all congratulationg themselves for betraying the public trust and pushing through a major piece of legislation that no one wants.

They seemed so blissfully unaware that 60% of the US population -- from both the left and the right -- were watching the senators all patting each other on the back, and thinking, "Pond scum."

How can these senators believe this is "good for the nation"? It's the worst catastrophe we've faced yet.

I couldn't watch this whole show. Frankly, I felt my lunch backing up. These jerks just have no concept the people or the nation they're supposed to represent.

Praying for a few plane crashes as they make their home for the holidays. Very little other recourse, is there?

Nebraska objects; still time for Ben Nelson to redeem himself

Very interesting news today. First of all, Nebraska as a whole seems to be distancing itself from its Dem. Senator Ben Nelson.

Republican Senator Mike Johanns, also from Nebraska, addressed the Senate today:

Mr. President [President of the Senate, Joe Biden], I rise today to share with my colleagues the reactions of Nebraskans to the special deal that got cut for Nebraska that came to light over the weekend as the managers' amendment was released and analyzed. Less than 24 hours at announcement of the special deal for Nebraska with virtually no warning, no preparation to speak up, 2,000 people gathered in Omaha, Nebraska. Nebraskans who in one voice cried foul. Nebraskans are frustrated and angry that our beloved state has been thrust into the same pot with all of the other special deals that get cut here.

In fact, Mr. President, they're outraged that a backroom deal for our state might have been what puts this bill across the finish line. You see, Mr. President, I fundamentally believe that if this health care bill is so good, it should stand on its own merits. There should be no special deals, for anyone in this health care bill. Not for states. Not for states. Not for insurance companies. And not for individual senators....

The special deal struck on abortion is enormously tragic and insufficient. It breaks my heart. This is a far cry from the 30 years of policy by this United States government. You see, when this is done and over, what we will be reporting to our citizens is that taxpayer funds will fund abortions if this bill passes. You see, no watered-down accounting gimmick will convince the pro-life community in my state or otherwise. In fact, they have publicly said they feel betrayed.

Johanns also issued a press release stating:

"Nebraskans don't want a special deal, they want good policy. They don't believe the Federal Government is the answer to every problem and they don't like backroom deals.

Below is a sample of special deals he offered to strike:

• Eliminating or reducing the Medicaid unfunded mandate on Nebraska, Vermont, and Massachusetts (starting on page 96, line 9)
• Exempting certain health insurance companies in Nebraska and Michigan from taxes and fees (starting on page 367, line 6)
• Providing automatic Medicare coverage for anyone living in Libby, Montana (starting on page 194 - section 10323)
• Earmarking $100 million for a "Health Care Facility" reportedly in Connecticut (starting on page 328) [Should be noted, Connecticut is the 4th-richest state in the union; its citizens enjoy a median annual income of $55,970. Do they need to come begging to Washington to build them a hospital, or is it rather that Senatore Chris Dodd just can't keep his hands out of the till?]
• Giving special treatment to Hawaii's Disproportionate Share Hospitals (starting on page 101, line 6) [Hawaii also got $28 billion for health care in the recently-passed Defense Bill. Go figure. Does this means Hawaiians stand a greater risk of being drafted? Perhaps they should.]
• Boosting reimbursement rates for certain hospitals in Michigan and Connecticut (starting on page 174 - section 10317)
• Mandating special treatment for hospitals in "Frontier" States like Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Wyoming (starting on page 208 -- Sec 10324)"

 Then there was this from Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman:

(Lincoln, Neb.) Gov. Dave Heineman today sent the following letter to U.S. Senator Ben Nelson regarding the health care reform:

Thank you for your December 20th letter.

Regarding the unfunded Medicaid mandate, Nebraskans expect a fair deal not a special deal. Governors all across America are troubled by this unfunded Medicaid mandate. If the U.S. Senate plans to address the unfunded mandates issue, all states must receive fair and equal treatment. Neither Nevada, Vermont, Massachusetts, Louisiana, Nebraska, nor any other state should receive a special Medicaid deal that is not available to other states. It is imperative that every state is treated fairly and equally or all special deals must be removed.

However, the bottom line remains this bill is bad news for Nebraska and bad news for America. The effects on our State and the Nation will be disastrous and Nebraskans are asking you to stop this bill in its tracks. Nebraska’s businesses, as expressed by the State Chamber, are worried about middle class tax increases and the loss of jobs. Nebraska’s seniors are outraged about Medicare cuts. Nebraska’s pro-life community is furious with your compromise. Nebraska families are concerned about future increased premiums.

Senator Nelson, Nebraskans are strongly opposed to this bill. As Governor, I urge you to reconsider your position and vote “No” on the next cloture vote currently scheduled for tomorrow morning.

Thank you, Nebraska! You deserve better representation.

Also saw Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow on Greta Van Susteren tonight, trying to explain Michigan's perks and exemptions. You know, the big labor unions with the so-called "Cadillac health plans" do not have to pay the 40% tax on them that non-union people will have to pay. And it's really only the big labor unions and executives like those getting the big AIG and Goldman Sachs bonuses that even have these policies. Interesting... Makes you wonder what Stabenow, a woman, did behind those closed doors to work her little deals. "Whore" seems to apply here, too. There's some biker slang that might also work, but enough bad language.

Meanwhile, Harry Reid has called for more civility and for senators to act more "gentlemanly."

You know, Senator, when somebody sticks a knife in your ribs, civilty tends to go right out the window.

Think about it, Jerk -- the mess you're making is not going to get any better, I guarantee. NO AMERICAN CITIZEN IS EVER GOING TO FORGET WHAT YOU AND ALL THE OTHER WHORES IN THIS SENATE HOG WALLOW HAVE DONE.

And it is historic, but not without precedent. Benedict Arnold set the pattern of shafting the ideals behind the USA. And he still lives in the national memory, too.

More news from the swine wallow

Just briefly....

Heard on the news today that not only is the socialized medicine bill a travesty and disgrace on the nation, but it also contains a provision that it can't be repealed.

Those bastards in the Swine Wallow better look sharp when they go home. That's all I can say.

And no offense to pigs or hogs, who are, after all, honest creatures, unlike our soon-to-be-unelected congresscritters.

"This is not legislation; this is corruption"

We've been treated to the disgusting spectacle today of the Comrade lying and lying again about how socialized medicine is going to cut expenses. In the unlikely chance that he is being honest, then he's the only person in America stupid enough to believe it.

The fact is, even going by the bogus numbers in the senate socialized medicine bill, taxes go up by $500 BILLION dollars over the next 10 years. More realistically, taxes will go up by more than $1 TRILLION over the next 10 years to pay for this bullshit -- and with the Medicare budget cut in half, reductions in the numbers of health care professionals, and rationing.

What a boon for American citizens, huh? Aren't you glad you voted for this marxist son of a bitch?

I've seen a half-dozen public polls about socialized medicine. They range from 54% to 61% public opposition to socialized medicine. According to other polls, 57% to 60% of Americans would prefer congress DO NOTHING about health care rather than adopt the socialized medicine bills.

So who the hell is congress working for? Decidedly NOT for the people who elected them.

Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) noted, "This proces is not legislation; this process is corruption." Truer words were never spoken.

How did this piece of shit get through the senate? Well, Lieberman held out for a policy change. Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Mary Landrieu (D-LA) were bought off -- famously so, and they're damn proud of it. "Whore" is too good a word for it. Whores are honest about the work they do. They don't pretend to be anything but whores. These dolts in the senate are liars as well as whores. Self-deluded if not downright sociopathic, like serial killers.

What a bunch of pigs, huh? And they're supposed to represent us. Anyone else find that insulting? I wouldn't want to get close enough to any of them to spit on them.

Do you want to donate $300 billion of your tax dollars to help Louisiana remain sucking on the public tit? How about Nebraska? They won't have to pay into the bullshit taxes that fund what McConnell (R-KY) calls this "train-wreck" bill.

Let's blow Nebraska off the map. They've never been anything but trouble, starting with John Brown in the 1850's. Let's do move Offut somewhere else. If Nebraska is getting all this federal welfare, they don't deserve an Air Force base, too, and frankly, I don't trust them with it. Maybe they'll corrupt the Air Force, too.

Of course, Nevada -- Harry Reid's home state -- also is getting some kind of exemption. And socialist Vermont. The corruption and pay-offs aren't limited to conservatives.

I suppose Reid was also offering peep shows and lap dances in that little back room in the Capitol where he cut his private deals. Hashish? Cocaine? Viagra? Sure, step right up! Anything your little heart desires! Just give us your vote.

This is probably the most disgusting display of political corruption I've ever seen -- and I've lived in one of the most corrupt states in the union all my life.

And to Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, and all you other political whores -- it's obvious by the polls that the people you represent people didn't want a payoff; they wanted you to spare them from socialized medicine.

So now we know exactly what kind of "hope" and "change" the Comrade stands for: slime, corruption, the destruction of politcal idealism, personal liberty, and everything the USA has ever stood for.

Told ya so. 

All we've got left

If the mother fuckers in Washington refuse to listen, this is all we've got left:

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to that separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable 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 when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or 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 affect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing those forms to which they have become accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, persuing invariable the same object, evinces a design to render them under absolute depotism, it is their right it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of
government. . . .

You know, the goal of terrorism isn't a coup -- that is, a strike at a government to topple it. The goal of terrorism is to destabilize a government, destroy its legitimacy and support of the public.

That's what this fucking marxist in the White House is trying to do.

So as happy as I would be to grab a gun and head out for the Potomac, I wouldn't give him the satisfaction. Why make him a martyr?

Cling to the ideals in the Declaration of Independence. Even though they are being snuffed out as we all sit and watch, cling to the ideals. Teach your children so they can teach their children. The human race will rise again.

May you rot in hell, Ben Nelson

'Nuff said.

The stupid son of a bitch will be remembered forever for his help in wrecking the nation.

There's always Honduras.

Storm over Copenhagen

Wonder when they did the planning for the socialist-confab-disguised-as-a-climate-conference in Copenhagen. Usually these things are scheduled a couple years in advance. Perhaps employing the UN and IPCC climate models, conference planners expected tropical weather in Copenhagen at this time of year. But apparently the city is under blizzard conditions just now. A big Oops! on that one, huh?

Read in the Wall Street Journal that Hillary Clinton has committed the USA to "assisting to raise" $100 billion per year for poor countries to help them green up. Only, Clinton made the commitment dependent upon getting China to agree to the same. Very clever. China must know that any $100 billion that comes from the USA will have to be borrowed from China first. Think they'll agree to that?

Clinton's position is all a diplomatic smokescreen to make the US look compliant to these stupid, global-socialism policies. Better just to admit that they're stupid policies and get it over with. I mean, really, who needs this crap? Why enable it?

I, for one, will never work my butt off to build windmills in Angola. Sorry about that. The USA was a wilderness at one time, too -- and not so very long ago -- and somehow this nation developed without the aid of global meddling and hand-outs. We did, however, have the advantage of foreign investment in many cases -- something that's still available to developing nations.

But you do know which ingredient is missing in the underdeveloped states, don't you? That is, you know what they need to make them attractive investments: POLTICAL LIBERTY AND FREE MARKET CAPITALISM. Who wants to invest in a country if the investment is going to be nationalized or burned to the ground by a bunch of machete-toting barbarians? Or islamic terrorists. Take your pick -- same basic lack of respect for human life and individual rights.

The best thing the developed nations can do for the 3rd world is to leave them alone, except as trade partners. They are capable of finding their own way and developing their own economies. For a while, they begged for independence. Isn't that what they all claimed to want as imperialist European colonialism was breathing its last gasps following WWII? They even have the benefit now of being able to get educations here and in Europe to take advantage of all the knowledge the human race has accumulated. So what's holding them back, except sorry-ass domestic leadership and misguidance from globalist do-gooders?

At any rate, 3rd world nations must begin by providing themselves with some kind of a politically stable environment and the establishment and enforcement of private property rights. The UN can't give them that, except under force of arms. They just have to grow up and take another approach. Instead of whining to the UN with hat in hand, begging for aid and spinning tales of civil war and poltical cannibalism, they must embrace the concept of equal individual rights and build on that. And stop eating each other's children, figurately speaking.

'Course that's not what the marxist-socialist one-worlders want, or even these nations' own home-grown totalitarian leadership. The one-worlders would prefer to keep them as dependent colonies at the beck and call of heaven-only-knows-who -- some supreme global conference of the divinely enlightened. Some Super Comrade. An Ubermensch. So as they develop, the Ubermensch can pillage and redistribute their wealth.

That's exactly what will happen unless the people themselves of those nations rise up to stand against it. Like Honduras.

Anyway, personally, I refuse to fund anything less that kind of freedom. It's just pouring my labor and my ideas and my money down a rat-hole. Ain't gonna happen, I guarantee. They'd have to pry those dollars out of my cold, dead hands. And they'd have to get to me before the IRS does.

The party of "know"

Been very busy lately with work and all, but I listen to the radio while I work and heard Sean Hannity with senators Tim DeMint (R-SC) and Coburn (R-OK), about insisting that a 767-page amendment to the socialized medicine bill proposed by Bernie Sanders (Socialist-VT) be read aloud on the floor of the Senate. Sanders' amendment proposed an entirely socialized single-payer health care system. After about three hours of droning on and on, Sanders withdrew the proposal. Embarrassed at having it exposed to the public or what?

The Republicans are finally taking the gloves off, apparently. About all they can do is delay the bill so long that any kind of vote on it will slop over into the 112th Congressional Session, beginning in January. By then, the socialized medicine bill will be "old business." It will also come up after the senators have had the opportunity to go home and listen to their consitutents' opinions of it.

A recent poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and NBC news -- so likely any biases would cancel each other out -- showed that the general public is 53% opposed to socialized medicine. That's kinda the same margin that swept the Comrade into the White House, isn't it? By the same poll, and also Rasmussen's Daily Presidential Tracking poll, the Comrade's popularity seems to rise and fall tied to socialized medicine. He's at an all-time low right now -- in the low 40% approval range -- even according to polls done by the likes of the Washington Post, which probably cheers him on. The Comrade did get a little and temporary boost when he decided to send troops to Afghanistan.

Anyway, from what I've heard, the Republicans, who apparently also are reading the polls, have decided that "nyet" and "obstructionism" might not be such a bad thing in regard to socialized medicine. Right. Glad they finally figured that out. DeMint and Coburn have always been outspoken on the issue, as have other Republicans. I'm just glad they've finally found the stones to do whatever they can to block this garbage legislation. The nation is behind them -- or as behind them as the nation ever gets.

Matter of fact, being a reader of the Congressional Globe, the 19th century forerunner to the Congressional Record, which documents all the palaver in congress, it struck me a little while back that the Republicans -- or someone -- should insist on having these mammoth bills read on the floor. That's in the congressional rules, you know. The bills are supposed to be read when they're introduced (got that from the old Globe.) Usually, reading the bills is waived, but it has to be waived by a unanimous vote of the chamber. One member of congress wants it read aloud, and it must be read aloud.

In addition, according to these same polls, more people would rather have NO HEALTH CARE REFORM AT ALL than the socialized medicine legislation from either the House or the Senate.

So, good move, DeMint and Coburn. Insisting they be read on the floor may be the only way to really find out what the hell is in these bills, as well as being an effective obstructionist tactic.

Please. Feel free to throw up as many roadblocks as you can devise. The American public applauds you. We've had our fingers crossed all these many months that something like this would happen.

On another, but closely related subject. Saw Glenn Beck today, and he reported on a item that appeared in the Weekly Standard. OK. So Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) is something of a Blue Dog Democrat -- conservative. He seriously questions the abortion provisions in the socialized medicine bill and a bunch of other things. Like, in his state, if payments to doctors for Medicare are reduced even further, you won't be able to find too many doctors in Nebraska. It's a largely agricultural and rural state, with not a lot of doctors to begin with. Underpay them, and they won't be able to survive.

So the revelation from the Weekly Standard and Glenn Beck is that someone from the White House, possibly Ram Emanuel, contacted Senator Nelson's office and threatened to shut down Offut Air Force Base if Nelson doesn't fall into line and vote "yes" on socialized medicine. Offut is in Nebraska and is the home base of what used to be called the Strategic Air Command. You know, in those old Cold War movies, when the people in the underground bunkers watched missiles sailing across the US borders.... you know how they always showed these Air Force pilots scrambling into fighter jets? That was the Strategic Air Command.

Actually, the way it's done now, I believe, is that some of those jets are constantly airborne and ready to attack at any moment to defend US borders. But I'm not sure about that.

So the White House wants to shut down Offut? And move 100+ islamic terrorists to Illinois. Hey, you know what? Why not just touch off a couple atom bombs in the Heartland and get it over with, Jackass. I mean, what do the Democrats care, as long as they get socialized medicine? These people are... I really don't want to use that kind of language.

Anyway, that's extortion pure and simple. That's politics Chicago-style. Nothing is beneath these slimebags. It boggles the mind.

So anything the Republicans can come up with to stop the assault on the nation from the Merry Marxists will guarantee those Republicans a place in history. That is, if the nation does manage to survive this administration. That remains to be seen.

But I'm beginning to feel hopeful again.

(And I'm sorry. I had to edit this three times! I'm very tired.)

Transparency, White House style

The Comrade was just on TV delivering a brief sales pitch on socialized medicine. He claims opponents of the bill -- which include about 57% of the US population -- are using scare tactics to defeat socialized medicine. Then he goes on to say that without socialized medicine, families will go without health insurance, businesses won't be able to provide insurance for employees, and Medicare will go bankrupt.... in short, using a bunch of scare tactics to sell socialized medicine.

He says "there's a broad consensus" in favor of the bill -- only the US public doesnt want it, and the senate can't pass it. So where is this consensus, outside the Comrade's own fevered imagination? I suppose the majority of the cabinet supports it, and probably everyone the Comrade talks to. (He doesn't talk to Republicans or the public, mainly only to Andy Stern, head of SEIU, and other radical marxists.)

He says "we invite everyone, including member of the press, to scrutinize the bill." In order to do this, Comrade, you've got to make the bill public, which no one has yet. It was written behind closed doors, and now, with recent changes, apparently resides behind a different set of closed doors while the Congressional Budget Office assesses how much it will cost. This is not exactly transparent, is it? Even Dick(head) Durbin, Senate majority whip, noted that he hadn't been allowed to see it.

The Comrade is such a huge liar. It would be comical except that it promises to destroy us all and the nation. White is black to him, black is white. We're supposed to believe him rather than our own perceptions and logic.

You see, this is where "enlightenment" comes in and living "by your own lights" -- the ability to use your own brain and your own judgment, rather than just blindly following leaders or obeying out of fear of reprisal. It's indispensable to political freedom.

What is increasingly more and more transparent is that the Comrade is a monumental liar. No lie is beneath him. He seems to think that if he says something, everyone will believe him rather than the facts at hand. 'Course, there are no facts at at hand in this case due to the "transparency" of the senate bill so far, so.....

On the plus side, apparently the senate took the government option out of the bill, as well as the promise to entirely destroy Medicare by overburdening a system that's already tottering on the brink of bankruptcy. I think they dropped that provision. I didn't notice the Comrade giving out any facts, just doing his usual socialist-promotion shtick. However, that's what the news people said.

And let's give Joe Lieberman a big hug for not caving under pressure from the White House and the political majority. Though I don't agree with him on a lot of things, Joe Lieberman seems to be an honorable man. A rare and valuable treasure in Washington DC.

When they're down, kick them

I have absolutely no idea what's in the proposed legislation to regulate the banking and credit industry. Don't know and frankly, am afraid to look.

Despite the Comrade and his Merry Marxists' remarks about George Bush single-handedly destroying the US economy, what really caused the collapse was feel-good legislation.

You may not recall that the so-called "Dot-Com Bubble" burst towards the beginning of year 2001. The economy was already slipping into a recession, which was overshadowed by the islamic terrorist attack on the World Trade Center later that year. The events of 9/11 only further wrecked the economy -- by bringing it to a screeching halt for a couple days and then throwing the nation into a state of uncertainty.

So how to boost the economy? Hmmm, let's see. There was something called the CRA, the Credit something Act (could it be "redistribution"?), passed in the 1990s, I believe. What this did was give whoever was in charge the authority to bully the banks into giving mortgages to the unemployed, the poor, apparently any ol' vagrant who needed a place to stay. So the Fed and others meddling in financial affairs began to lean heavily on the banks to extend these ill-advised mortgage loans.

Well, there was a lot of building going on, for a while. The money trickled around, for a while. Then the bill came due, and in October, 2008, the whole house of cards came crashing down. The insurance industry was deeply impacted because, after all, the insurance industry covers construction, but also because all those bad mortgages ended up in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac funds, backed by the "full faith and credit of the USA." Insurance companies had invested in the crappy mortgage loans.

So now we're supposed to believe that congress suddenly has gained an in-depth and useful understanding of the financial industry? God knows, they've done wonders with TARP and the Stimulus Bill, haven't they? I mean, things are booming, aren't they? Apparently they are inside the Beltway, because the government and government employment is expanding by leaps and bounds. But the private economy is still on its back.

Honestly, I shudder to think what congress might do to the financial industry. It's not like Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, and anyone else in the House leadership has any faint idea of how financing actually works. I suspect they're just trying to establish regulations that will force banks to pass out hundred-dollar bills to anyone who steps up to the window. Isn't that how the CRA mortgage thing worked (or didn't work.)

But the Comrade says he didn't run for office to help "Fat Cat Bankers." Well, Comrade, they're citizens, too. Unfortunately you represent all of us. The presidency and vice presidency are the only offices in the US that represent all the people. And apparently, the Comrade believes he can just raid the piggy banks of all the financial institutions in the nation, and all will be well. I doubt it.

For one thing, a lot of those financial institutions are still dealing with all those "toxic assets" created by the Fed's loaning guidelines and the CRA legislation. No one has completely recovered from that yet. For another thing -- and this is a big one -- the state and federal governments are now competing in a big way for credit. When there are large government deficits, government borrowing tends to crowd out the private sector. I wonder how many banks are buying T-Bills (US Treasury notes) rather than lending to Joe SixPack to expand his HVAC business.

And, for that matter, how many voters elected the Comrade to pour the nation's treasure into groups like ACORN or to fork it all over to SEIU? Or to give Al Gore-Nancy Pelosi-funded green companies huge doses of investment and all kinds of legislative and unlegislated regulatory "encouragement" at taxpayer expense.

The ten most chilling words in the English language are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

What additonal horrors can we expect as Washington "fixes" the financial industry?

The new world order

I think I figured it out.... Anyone remember some time ago in Red China when Mao -- still alive -- sponsored some kind of renewal and commitment to his brand of totalitarian communism? Children were encouraged to rat out their parents if the parents spoke seditiously about freedom and rights at home. Many of the kids did do this. Their parents ended up in re-education camps, if they were allowed to live that long.

So in the US now, the Comrade and the Democrats are encouraging the quick deaths of everyone over 55. That is, they're reducing Medicare support for seniors, at the same time expanding the category of those who'll be stuck with Medicare.

The idea is to do away with anyone who remembers freedom, and to get rid of them as quickly as possible, before they poison the minds of innocent youth, who are naive enough to believe Santa Claus lives in the White House -- since that's been pounded into their brains since kindergarten.

Older people and, generally, "parents," tend to be authorities who can successfully compete with government. Are the kids going to listen to their parents, who love and care for them, or to the Comrade, who regards them as cannon fodder for a marxist state? Well, then, lets get rid of their parents. The USA is essentially too soft and civilized to go the route of Red China. Better strategy in the USA is to just let the elders die of neglect. As quickly as possible.

Ordinarily, I wouldn't argue in favor of Medicare. It is, after all, a huge, wasteful, and ultimately destructive government-run socialized medicine scheme. Like the misnamed "Social Security." However, over decades -- over the lifetimes of a couple generations now -- the government has appropriated the incomes of its citizens to underwrite this bullshit. These appropriated funds, poured down the rat-hole of socialized pensions and health care, could have been re-invested in private enterprise to assure a vibrant capitalist system and supply retired folks with a viable income. But they weren't. And the money's gone now. So the elderly are truly dependent on government aid and assistance.

Easy to dispose of them and the information they've collected, based on real-life experience over decades.

Isn't this what the Comrade's youth workers voted for, in their little red t-shirts with the hammer-and-sickle? Have any of them found jobs yet, by the way?

On another subject....

Watched Alford, the head of the Black Chamber of Commerce, on Glenn Beck. He was saying how even Conyers (D-Mich.) is beginning to question the Comrade.

Hey, black folks, don't you get it? Franklin Roosevelt recruited blacks as voters when he lost the rich with his communist schemes. FDR, and just about every Democrat since then, has regarded the black community as a blindly loyal source of support. Throw them a few bones -- AFDC and the Civil Rights Act -- and they'll be in your corner forever. The leadership doesn't expect and clearly doesn't want black folks to actually exercise their rights and their intellect. The leadership just wants blacks to support them in everything they do. And unfortunately, many blacks do.

I mean, look at Al Sharpton whining that Tiger Woods' whores are all white chicks. He urges Tiger and others like him to screw some black women, spread the wealth around to the black community. Hey, Al, ever consider that maybe black women have more self-respect?

Jesse Jackson is sort of a joke anymore. People have noticed that, although he's never had a real job, he's a friggin' millionnaire. Where did all that money come from? The so-called "charitable" organizations he worked with? How did it end up in his hands, instead of being applied to his social causes?

Michelle Obama helped the larger hospitals in Chicago to turn away poor blacks. She found some kind of loophole to allow the hospitals, which are located smack-dab in the middle of the black communities, to refuse to accept poor blacks in need of health care. They were sent down the street to over-burdened, badly-funded clinics (no doubt operated by groups like Jesse Jackson's Operation Push.)

Alford noted that the unions have always been racist and that many of the jobs created by the Stimulus Bill are going to white union labor imported from miles away from the work sites. A friend of mine, a white guy, was working for the USPS when black workers there decided to form their own union because the existing, largely white union, refused to accept them as members. My friend supported the black union and even joined the black union. The police found him beaten to death in his apartment. No one was ever arrested for it. The case was never investigated. It was regarded as a "suicide." Like those Freedom Riders in Mississippi? Is it really possible to crush your own skull?

So, let's get a black guy into the presidency, one who's so narcissistic, so ambitious and unprincipled he's willing to sell out other blacks. Well, there was a kid named Obama working for "social justice" on the South Side..... He's a dedicated marxist, doesn't care about color, except as a political tool -- in the typical Chicago style.

This is all so tragic.

All this socialist crap isn't helping anyone and isn't intended to help anyone. It's all to consolidate power in the hands of a few sociopaths -- as usual. It's a story repeated over and over again through human history. The USA was constructed through a conscious effort to ensure that this kind of abuse of power could never happen here. Well, it's happening here. And there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it. The totalitarians are using the limitations and other roadblocks built into the Constitution to preserve freedom -- they're using those provisions to empower themselves. Kinda like the way the islamic terrorists used American freedoms to hijack passenger planes and fly them into the World Trade Center. In America, anyone can get on a passenger plane. Anyone can run for office. And apparently anyone can win an office.

Will there be enough of the USA left to salvage next year? Even if the Democrats lose their majority in congress, the executive branch is right now so busily consolidating its own power -- look at the totalitarian EPA -- that congress will be irrelevant by then. In addition, the executive branch, with the Fed, has its own operating budget now, and seems to believe it can spend anyway it wants, with or without consent of congress. Matter of fact, congress is right now voting to give them another $1.1 TRILLION to play with.

So I ask you again, is this what you voted for? Is this what you want for the USA?

He should get the prize for hypocrisy, too

Watched much of the Comrade's speech in Norway. Even the commentators on Fox seemed to like it. They didn't notice, but I did, that that was the first speech the Magic Marxist has made where he mentioned the USA and pride in the same sentence.

Maybe he's coming along.

On the other hand, what really bowled me over was the monumental hypocrisy in that speech:

• He talks about peace being built on a foundation of individual rights, while he's destroying individual rights in the USA.
• He mentioned "people marching in the streets of Iran" as heroic; but blew off the two million who marched in the streets of Washington DC on Sept. 12.
• He talks about democracy while wielding the EPA like a club to bully congress into adopting a useless and destructive crap-and-tax scheme to enrich his socialist tree-hugger pals.
• He would not know "justice" if it sneaked up and bit him in the ass.

And the Comrade now is apparently off to Copenhagen, to sell the USA down the river in the name of a fraudulent conspiracy.

Hey guys, if the earth is getting warmer -- prove it!!

Where's your documentation?

EPA the new Hitler

Look, comparing the EPA to the Nazi Third Reich is no exaggeration. The EPA can do whatever it wants. They don't need no stinkin' congress. And with a half-wit Democrat majority in both houses, the congress can't even rein in the EPA. The stupid shits in congress probably applaud the EPA's ability to completely and entirely ignore the American public. I'm sure congress envies them for that.

The EPA is a collection of stupid sons of bitches who want US business and jobs to move to the 3td World. They are actively working toward that end.

The EPA says it's going to take a "command and control" approach to crippling the US economy through regulation and by pricing energy out of the market if congress won't act. It's a ploy from the Comrade and his collection of thugs to beat America back to the Stone age. If congress doesn't shit on the American public, the Comrade will just get the EPA to do it.

Where are the islamic terrorist bombers when you need them?

The EPA has yet to address the question -- much like the Comrade -- of who is going to pay for their perks after they finish laying to waste US industry. They don't care. Got that? They don't care if you starve and die, as long as they can preserve the snail darter -- which, by the way, is not now and never has been an endangered species.

Just another bunch of stupid blockheads. Add them to the list.

I'm beginning to suspect that one of the prerequisites to getting a job in government is that you be of subhuman intelligence and display a sociopathic personality disorder. Like Bill Clinton and the Comrade.

But go ahead. Grab all you can with both hands. Line us all up against the wall and shoot us down -- after we dig our own communal grave, that is. Isn't that how it's done usually? Dig a ditch, dump the bodies, sprinkle them with lime so they won't stink so bad while they rot. The government finally found a useful purpose for American citizens -- landfill.

That's what's left for the EPA to wield absolute power over.

Happy now?

Foreign pigs bullying their way to the US trough?

Interesting news day and I didn't even get to hear reports about all of it because it was snowing, the satellite dish was out -- as usual -- and only came back on after midnight. I asked the CSR at DirecTV, "How come it works in a hurricane, like your TV commercial, but not in snow?" And, by the way, just rain south of me, sleet here, snow north. The CSR gave me some half-assed mumbo-jumbo technological explanation that I doubt she understands. Like something from "The Prisoner" or a Harry Potter movie.

Anyway.... got to see Stenie Hoyer (D-Maryland) lying through his teeth to Greta Van Susteren. Or, quite possibly, he's not lying, only senile and confused and can't keep track of the monstrous spending bills the Dummycrats have bulldozed through this year. Hoyer suggested that last year, after the election, but before The Comrade took office, that the Stimulus Bill was written and approved by the Republicans, Hoyer lies, because George Bush approved it, and the Republicans, of course, wanted to support their president.

I think Hoyer doesn't know the difference between the TARP legislation and the Stimulus Bill, and/or the $410 billion Omnibus Pork Bill that followed closely. He doesn't know the difference between them and he's a position of authority.

What a damn fool.

Many years ago I had to write an article about some non-political department (staff) in the Maryland State House. Annapolis is a cool city, I must say, if you don't mind driving in circles... At any rate, the department head I interviewed was a very pleasant person, and we sat around for a while, joking, competing about whose state was the most corrupt -- Maryland or my home state of Illinois. I think Louisiana is probably neck-and-neck there, too.

So it's no surprise that Pelosi and Hoyer are both congenital liars and apparently even believe the lies they tell themselves. It's inherent in the political process of Maryland. And little wonder that the both of them get along so well with the political thugs and bullies from Chicago. As they all view it, that's just the way things are supposed to be.

And for some reason, the Dummycrats seemed to have declared Open Season on the Republicans, when the Republicans haven't had much to do this session, except stand by and wait to get run over by the majority. The Dummycrats blame the Republicans for that? The Dummycrats keep insisting that the Republicans haven't proposed any alternatives.

No, blockheads, the Republicans have proposed any number of alternatives, you buttheads are just too damn busy talking to listen. You're a bunch of useless horses' asses.

Wanted to get more information about Copenhagen. I couldn't hear the details, but it seems the world stupido congress over there has decided that the world needs to pillage the USA.

Good luck, blockheados -- THERE AIN'T NOTHING LEFT TO STEAL.

GONE -- SHITHEADS -- IT'S ALL GONE!

Dumb, dumber, and just plain ignorant

Didn't I say yesterday the government would give me some new lows to report on? Well, the week got off to a bang.

Harry Reid (D-Nevada), Senate Majority Leader, today said Republicans have always been "on the wrong side of history," and accused them of being in favor of slavery, just as they oppose socialized medicine. In this comment, he not only displays a rather vicious desperation, but he's factually completely wrong.

The Republican Party was founded by anti-slavery people. They weren't all abolitionists -- that is, in favor of abolishing slavery all together -- but they opposed the expansion of slavery. Abe Lincoln believed if slavery could not be expanded into the western territories, it would wither and die.

Abraham Lincoln was the Republican candidate in only the second presidential election that party had participated in. Lincoln was a moderate, too. Seward, an early Republican front-runner for the presidential nomination, made a speech where he claimed the slave and non-slave states were so divided on the issue that it was an "irrepressible conflict" that would end in civil war.

No one wanted a civil war.

Lincoln was nominated because he was milder, not so fiery. In addition, the Republican platform promised to leave slavery alone where it was in the southern states; they just refused to support its expansion into the new states being carved out of the Louisiana Purchase territories.

Lincoln was elected Nov. 7, 1860. He was not on the ballot at all in any of the southern states. In the slave South, you could vote for a Southern Democrat -- this vehemently pro-slavery faction having separated itself from the party as a whole -- or the Whig, though that party was on the skids and calling itself another name.

So the Southern Democrat state of South Carolina seceded from the union on Dec. 10, 1860, claiming the election of a Republican -- and not necessarily Abe Lincoln, but any anti-slavery Republican -- meant the death of slavery. That couldn't and wouldn't be tolerated. The Confederate States of America was founded in February, 1861. Lincoln was inaugurated in March, 1861. The civil war began in Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, with the bombardment of Fort Sumter on April 14, 1861.

And for 100+ years afterward, the former slave states of the south were a solid Democrat voting bloc. They never forgave the Republicans for freeing the slaves. They passed and brutally enforced Jim Crow laws, denied blacks the vote and even a decent education.

Those are your Democrats, Harry. Heroic, no?

With the Civil Rights Act of 1964 proposed, debate in the Senate was fillibustered -- the fillibuster supported 80% by DEMOCRATS, 20% by Republicans.

So, Harry, you're not only stupid, but also monumentally ignorant. Sounds like you flunked your 8th grade American history class. Busy campaigning for class president?

What's that line from Republican Mark Twain? "Better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt."

In another but related incident, Bill O'Reilly showed a clip of he being interviewed by Robin Roberts on Good Morning America. I like Robin Roberts. But the conversation turned to socialized medicine, and O'Reilly said he was, more or less, agin' it. Robin Roberts said:

"But don't you think passing this bill would be a historic moment?"

Yeah. A historic moment like Pearl Harbor or 9/11. Or the still-dark and rather stormy morning that the CSA opened up on Fort Sumter. All historic moments.

Just because it's historic, Robin, doesn't mean it's good for the nation. But apparently ol' Robin's a Democrat, so, as my dad would say, "She don't know what's good."

So Robin Roberts and Harry Reid get to share today's "Damn! I'm Stupid" award for this week. So far. Have a feeling that with the tree-huggers assembled pompously and in a non-environmentally friendly way in Copenhagen this week, and the Comrade getting his silly Norwegian award and slated to speak at Copenhagen, we'll be seeing whopping stupid comments tossed around like confetti in the days to come.

Stay tuned.

Dumb and Dumber

What's that old joke about Democrats being stupid enough to waste the nation's treasure, and the Republicans even more stupid for helping them find ways to pay for it? I'm not stating it correctly, or in a humorous way. Anyway, it really isn't funny anymore.

Oh... The Democrats are dedicated to pie-in-the-sky tax-and-spend legislation to ruin the nation, and the Republicans are dedicated to helping them make it work.

Somehow it's still not funny.

Been listening to the news intermittently, when there's nothing else on. And if there's anything more barren and depressing than the American government right now, it's TV programming. At any rate, apparently Bill O'Reilly wants a national sales tax to pay for the $12 TRILLION national debt, and Glenn Beck is stumping for a V.A.T. to do the same. Proving that these guys really don't know much about politics or economics. (And I'm almost done with Glenn Beck. His show is becoming nothing but paid promotional programming for his various books and live shows.)

Given the minus-level IQ's of those in congress, do you really think any additional revenues that come to the goverment will be spent to pay down the debt? No, Pazzo Pelosi and the Comrade's Merry Marxists would be jumping up and down with glee and clapping their hands, saliva dripping from their lolling tongues, as they busily contrived some new way to spend it.

We'll all need a complete inventory of Barbie Dolls or gold-plated alien-radio-signal-blocking helmets. They'll argue it's all necessary for the health and well-being of the nation, and that it will save money in the long run.

These people are terminally stupid. Just accept it. Don't give them any more money.

A friend of mine once dated a guy who came into an $80,000.00 inheritance from his father's death. He himself was dead in six months from alcoholic poisoning. The money only enabled his alcoholism and self-destructiveness.

Don't give these jerks any more money. In fact, I'd be happy to make a case for a tax revolt. Unless you have money coming back, don't file and don't pay. They can't arrest all of us. They wouldn't have the money to build the jails to hold us all.

That may be the only thing these idiots understand. But then, probably not. They've proven themselves so incredibly dense, I don't think there's any hope for them at all. So don't file, don't pay, because you'll need the money you earned to keep yourself and your kids alive -- and survival of the non-government-employed population is not an issue congress cares much about. We're all on our own on that one.

In other news: Tiger Woods caught cheating on his wife. Does anyone really care?

Gate crashers at a White House dinner. Well, the White House invited Iranians over for a 4th of July barbecue. If they don't give a damn about their own security, why should I? Matter of fact.... Oh well, I won't go there.

They had a "Job Fair" or something like that in DC this week. A photo op of the Comrade looking concerned. They didn't invite any business people. The current administration really is in so far over their heads. How stupid can they really be? Wait until next week and I'll report on the new low.

I tried very hard to watch all the episodes of "The Prisoner," the miniseries that was sort of a remake of the old British show with Patrick McGoohan. In the old show, the Prisoner was trapped forever at something like a silly Brighton Holiday Resort. In the remake, looked like everyone was stranded in Saudi Arabia.

The show seemed like it might be interesting. I mean, here's a bunch of people all denying their history, out in the middle of nowhere, all acting happy as unflappable little clams all the time. Only there's this undercurrent of discontent. Some people have "memories" of someplace else and another time away from The Village.

Sounded to me like fertile fodder for a parody on the current administration. Or at least a cautionary tale about believing in Utopia. Like, have you ever really thought about the dead tedium of someplace like what John Lennon describes in "Imagine"? No one with any reason for living, no need to earn money, no conflict of any kind. So what do you do? Stay stoned and have exotic sex. That seemed to be Lennon's recommendation. Sounds kinda boring to me.

Anyway, "The Prisoner" appeared to have some potential. But no, it all sort of degenerated into unintelligible drivel about how the whole Village was all just an idea in some woman's mind. And her husband kept her stoned into unconciousness all the time. Somehow, The Village needed her -- or someone -- to be stoned into unconciousness all the time. Maybe John Lennon wrote it.

And all the trouble started when the main character resigned from a giant corporation of some kind. Sort of weird. I mean, sort of mixed signals. Big corporations have been stock Hollywood Bad Guys since the collapse of the USSR. But in "The Prisoner," it was always The Village that was the antagonist. At least in the original, which I thought was a true parody on the Labour Party's socialist England. The original only had 16 episodes, if that. I mean, there's only so many ways you can try to escape from a resort and fail. Then it gets very predictable.

So, "The Prisoner" remake ended up being a really bizarre mishmash of stuff. Sort of a badly-written sci-fi version of "The Firm." Always seemed about 12 different story lines unfolding at the same time, but not necessarily in any kind of logical sequence. And as far as I know, they never did explain the sink holes. You'd think someone, especially someone who wanted to escape, would at least explore one of those sink holes, don't you? Might have livened things up a bit.

I kept falling asleep through it. Yeah -- the mood was so thick, the plot had barely enough energy to move at all. If there was a plot. Still not sure about that.

Anyway, I've had some work lately, and there hasn't been anything on TV but the Washington Stooges, as usual.

Thank heavens for music. Listened for four hours last night to a radio station from Milwaukee that played all Christmas Carols, all the time! Bing Crosby, lots of Dean Martin and Johnny Mathis. Andy Williams. Even Ella Fitzgerald. It was nice, reminiscent of living in a civilized country. We get so little of that anymore.

"Climate-Gate": Caught in the act?

Since I believe man-caused climate change is largely a crock, I've been thrilled to glean whatever little bits and pieces of information are available about the so-called scientists at East Anglia University, one guy from Penn State that I've heard about, et. al., being busted for essentially fabricating the evidence that's supposed to support their views, manipulating the peer-review process, suppressing contrary opinions, etc. etc. etc.

Does anyone remember Michael Bellesiles? He was a professor at Emory University, and in 2000, published a book called Arming America: the Origins of a National Gun Culture. He even won a Bancroft Award for the book, quite a prize for a historian.

The book argued that guns were not nearly as prevalent in the colonies and in early America as our national mythology believes. Bellesiles said he went through probate court records, among other local county-level records, trying to actually count how many guns might have been available in an early American community. Probate courts recorded legacies, inventories of household goods for wills, and stuff like that.

Based on this evidence -- and perhaps information from other sources as well -- Bellesiles concluded that guns weren't nearly as available on the frontier as American mythology would lead us to believe. Basically he was undermining the traditional view of guns as an acceptable feature of everday life throughout American history. The liberals loved him. His research helped them, they thought, to build a case against the Second Amendment.

The thing is, on the frontier especially, early Americans had weapons of all kinds. They didn't use them for sport, but for hunting, for chasing off predators, for defending their own property against whatever came down the pike. Guns were an indispensable feature of life on the frontier, perhaps less so on the eastern seaboard as on the frontier that moved steadily west through the first 150 years of American history. If you couldn't hunt or defend yourself, you probably couldn't survive very well for too long.

For example, I read one pioneer's account of regularly loading his shotgun with salt as a means of chasing off wolves, bears and such without wasting ammunition, which apparently could cost a lot of money so far from the cities. (You bought the lead and powder and made shot yourself.) Shotguns were recommended for the farmer's household, while rifles, like the Hawken or Browning initially, were the weapons of choice for hunters, trappers, and others who actually made a living havesting beaver and buffalo. They were all terrified of Indians, too, who were pretty well armed themselves via the trading posts established first by the British and French, even before the Louisiana Purchase.

Anyway, for all these reasons, other historians questioned Bellesiles' data and a few of them actually began checking his footnotes and sources. In some cases, his sources didn't exist -- like, he said he drew information from sets of documents in communities around what's now San Francisco. However, all of those documents were destroyed in the catastrophic earthquake of 1906. No way Bellesiles could have had access to that data.

When others asked to review his notes, Bellesiles claimed that there had been a fire in his office building, which apparently was true, and that his notes had been destroyed when the sprinklers went off. He had a lot of excuses. Basically, his dog ate his notes.

The result was that his Bancroft Award was taken back, he was suspended and eventually resigned from Emory, and he's been thoroughly discredited as a historian.

So now we hear a similar story from the Climate Change researchers. They claim they had something like 150 years of weather and climate data, and that their computer models and projections about climate change were built on that hard data.

Only, guess what? They don't have that data anymore. It was all destroyed way back in the 1980s, so all that's left of it, they say, is the conclusions they drew from it -- which have proven to be inaccurate at best. That is to say, the models failed to predict the global cooling of the last 10 or 11 years, so why should anyone believe their projection for the next 30 years would be anymore accurate?

At the time of Bellesiles scandal, he was accused of letting his zeal for gun control get in the way of his better judgment as a historian.

Think the same kind of thing could be at work currently among the Climate Change "scientists?" The triuimph of ideology over the scientific method?

So before the US congress, or any other congress for that matter, goes about instituting guidelines and treaties that will dismantle the industry of the First World and demand hefty economic aid, or the "redistribution of wealth" to the Third World -- before destroying the world as we know it, can we get some REAL data on this?

Or are the tree-huggers such lunatics that they don't require facts, just ill-considered and destructive action? But I guess we all know the answer to that one.

About West Point

I listened to the Comrade's speech tonight about sending 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. Surprised he mention 9/11 as a real event. I thought the liberals were regarding it as an action-disaster movie that was only so-so and entirely forgetable. I'm glad he's reinforcing our military in Afghanistan. We'll see how it goes. It's not the number McChrystal wanted, and the danger of too few is a possibility.

Anyway, what I found more interesting was media reaction to the speech. I listened to it on WLS radio in Chicago. This time slot usually belongs to Hannity, but local guy, Bruce Dumont, who has a regular show called "Inside the Beltway" on WLS, took reaction calls when the speech concluded.

Must say, I don't listen to "Inside the Beltway" very often. It's on when I'm not usually tuned into the radio. Anyway, I don't know which way Bruce Dumont leans on the issues, but tonight, he sounded very much like he was apologizing to liberals and defending the Comrade's decision to send more troops. I thought that was strange.

Most of his callers did seem to have a negative reaction to the Comrade's decision for one reason or another. One caller was deadset against it, and that's about the only intelligible thing the caller said. But Dumont seemed to be working from the liberal perspective, trying to assuage callers that the Comrade hadn't betrayed them. Since I'm not against the war in Afghanistan, I found that very weird.

I missed a large part of Greta Van Susteren's interview with Henry Kissinger, which I assume was about the speech. She started talking about something else, so I changed the channel to MSNBC, and watched a few minutes of Chris Matthews. He's really strange.

FYI Mr. Matthews -- West Point is located in upper New York State, well within the bounds of the USA. The cadets there are training to join the US Army. West Point is not an "enemy camp"; they're on our side.

Went back to radio and Mark Levin, who thought the Comrade's speech was really terrible -- self-serving for the Comrade, too stingy with military support, etc.

One point where I strongly agree with Mark Levin: How come every time the Comrade talks about anything at all, he has to refer to his actions as "cleaning up" or "mopping up" after the Bush Administration? The Comrade always, always, always has to attack someone. That's just nasty.

FYI Mr. Comrade -- George W. Bush has been out of office for almost a year now. And beside that, we didn't ask you "How did this happen?" We asked you, "What are you going to do about it?"

Comrade, please try to stay focused on the real issue rather than whining about it and feeling sorry for yourself. I, for one, would much rather have someone else in the position you occupy, someone who appreciates and loves the USA. I promise, you won't have to deal with it for any longer than the Constitution allows. And whoever follows you will assuredly have much more to "mop up" than you have. Let's just hope he or she has more grace about it than you do.

I'm glad McChrystal is getting some of the troops he needs. I hope the military can do the job with that.

The Comrade talked about money to fund the war, too. I was half expecting him to try to promote Dopey-Obey's surtax to pay for the war, so Dopey et. al. can continue to dispense what he considers "social justice." Suspected the Comrade was going to do something similar.

He still might. I don't really trust him. He lies too often, and he's dreadfully spiteful, his spite mostly directed at the US. You'd think he'd have more respect for the nation he presides over, wouldn't you?

Home for the holidays

Honestly, I go nuts when I'm not working. I'm so deep in debt, the minute I finish, or at least get up from one project, I actively look for something else to do that may be a moneymaker. Or invent something that might be a moneymaker. No big bestseller thing, just something that sells all the time.

So I worked Thanksgiving and I'll probably work on Christmas. I'm also working on Sunday, which I usually get off. And writing a little informational book in the meanwhile. And waiting to get the proof of another little book I've just finished. Then I've got a couple more little books planned after that. Non-fiction. Not even political.

I'd love to have New Year's Eve off, but only if some channel is running all those old Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers movies. Especially love when they do "The Continental," and "Dancing Cheek to Cheek."

Had the opportunity to listen to a Johnny Carson show through headphones a little while ago. That band was really fantastic, it really was, though at the time, I didn't have any sound equipment that could capture how good it was. Now I can't stop thinking about Johnny Carson. I really miss him.

To get to my house, you have to drive through a cornfield a little ways. So I'm driving through this cornfield, and the old song, "Love Is Blue," came on the radio. I was still in high school when that came out. Maybe. About that time.

Anyway, I burst into tears.

Tonight very late on a movie channel, I caught the last 10 minutes of a promo film made about the making of "2010," the sequel to "2001." The sequel came out in the mid-1980s. This little movie-about-the-movie had interviews with Roy Scheider -- famous for "Jaws," but my favorite of his is "All That Jazz." They interviewed John Lithgow, when he was just a slip of a lad. And Helen Mirren -- she was so beautiful.

And was struck with this terrible sorrow -- when they made that movie, they thought America would still be here in 2010.

"Obey" as in "Dopey"

A congressman named David R. Obey (D-Wisconsin), the name pronounced like "Dopey", has made an interesting proposal. He wants a "war tax" because, he said, national security interests are getting in the way of pushing socialized medicine and probably another half-dozen other socialist measures he supports.

He should be named "Jackass."

Let's take a vote:

How many in favor of preventing another 9/11 attack?

How many want socialized medicine?

The bill Rep. Jackass is promoting calls for raising $900 billion to pay for the War in Afghanistan, which Jackass and his cohorts estimate to cost $1 million per year per soldier. Any documentation to back that up?

The national defense budget is about 12% - 14% of the entire US budget. By contrast, Medicare, Medicaid and all the other socialist crap consumes right now about 70% of the US budget, and socialized medicine will only expand that.

But, hey, look at it this way: We're gonna need plenty of health care when al-Qaeda and those of their kind are allowed to do whatever they damn please in terms of hijacking planes, blowing up buildings, planting car bombs, poisoning subway systems and commuter trains, shooting up military posts, and whatever else they may be planning. There would be plenty of jobs in the health care industry for any survivors.

Rep. Jackass is apparently dumber than a box of rocks. If there's no damn nation, Rep. Jackass, there's no need to provide socialized medicine for it, is there? Ever consider that? Or is your head so far up your....

Under which moss-covered rocks is the Democrat party finding these idiots? Really, it boggles the mind.

I always used to like northern Wisconsin. Now I'd think twice about going there. You never know what kind of lamebrains might be on the highway.

And you know what? If Obey is so fearless about the terrorist threat to the USA, why not transport all those guys at Guantanamo to northern Wisconsin, Rep. Jackass's district, and put them up in public housing? No need for maximum security or any special security at all, right? They represent no threat or danger to the USA or private citizens, right? Let's ignore history and just let them roam free, take advantage of Rep. Jackass's socialized medicine scheme and all the other entitlements Rep. Jackass wants to force upon the nation.

These people just get dumber and dumber. It's absolutely stunning. Makes you wonder how the USA has survived this long, doesn't it?

Clilmate change travesty

Apparently a big batch of emails that passed between various bigwigs in the Climate Change movement have been released. Many of the scientists and researchers sending-receiving the emails, if not most of them, are involved in the IPCC, the global organization that has set itself up as the final authority on this b.s. The emails seem to indicate that these so-called scientists have been scrambling of late to sustain their silly claims that "The Sky Is Falling!" in the face of geologic realities.

They seem to discuss the importance of all staying on the same page about climate change, and the emails suggest that there has been some dummying up of the numbers behind their dire claims of melting polar ice caps, rising ocean levels, etc. etc. etc. It seems that some of them also tried to manipulate the peer-review process, whereby one researcher's work is read and criticized by other researchers. Well, if all your peers know each other, and all agree to perpetrate the hoax of Global Warming and other nonsense, then you pretty much end up with some bizarre kind of conspiracy among scientists to deliberately mislead the public.

Gee, I wonder why someone would do something like that.

One scientist wrote that trying to defend Global Warming when the earth is actually cooling has been a "travesty."

Yeah. The whole damn thing has always been a travesty. I mean, Global Warming. Since the globe isn't warming, they rename it Climate Change. Like Pazzo Pelosi suggesting congress rename the socialized medicine government option "One Hot Taco" or something like that so more people would like it. But in both cases, the issues have more than just marketing problems.

And hey, ya know, change happens hour-to-hour in terms of the weather. At least it does in the Chicago area. And as far as climate goes, it seems these "scientists" were taking a rather short-range view of the subject instead of standing back and looking at the whole picture long-term.

Oh, they've been extemely busy projecting long-term futuristic scenarios of the earth turning into a popsicle and/or self-incinerating, they just never looked at data from far enough back to recognize that the earth is constantly changing, always has been, always will. Doesn't mean it's going to freeze or burn up. Doesn't mean that it won't, though, either. But I doubt there's much the human race can do about it.

What it does mean is that these so-called climate scientists will probably go the way of phrenologists and alchemists. And the quicker the better for my money.

Of course, that doesn't mean congress won't try to pass the crap-and-tax energy bill. No, see, congress likes fraudulent public movements that generate lots of hype, as long as congress can figure out some way to raise taxes over it. Climate change is a big one. Doesn't matter if it's true, only if they can create a panic about it, convince people it's some kind of urgent issue and absolutely requires some ridiculous level of funding. How about $920 kajillion? Think that'll do it? I'm sure Pelosi and Reid will get right on it, and the Comrade will fly around the country giving speeches about it.

It's all just an excuse to try to take control over peoples' lives, eliminate individual liberty. Climate change has never been much more than that, though some people, like Al Gore, have figured out how to make a pretty good living off of it.

The socialized medicine new math

Just wanted to point out one little fact about the senate's socialized medicine bill.

It carries a price tag of $849 billion -- and that's using kinda fuzzy figures, like it relies on cutting about $500 billion from Medicare (which probably won't happen) and other economic fundamentals that equate to building a 100-storey highrise on a sandy beach.

Anyway, so it costs $849 billion that Harry Reid and Baucus will admit to.

But the CBO says it will save the USA $167 billion over ten years. Whoopee!!!!!

I wonder if the CBO has factored in the inflation this kind of spending will cause -- in medical demand as well as in dollars -- the unhappy repercussions of the collapse of the private insurance industry, and a permanent unemployment rate of maybe something like 20%.

Hot dang! Kinda like one of those deals where you buy a machine for $5,000.00, and it will save you $37.50 in labor costs over the first year of installation -- or actually the fifth year of installation, if we stick to the timeline of the senate socialized medicine bill. How's that for return-on-investment? Who wouldn't want a stake in something like that?

I don't know... Does this make any sense? Spend $849 billion, get $167 billion in return. Somehow, that fails to impress. It's a real deal ONLY if you ignore the cost.

You can tell those jokers in congress don't know anything about economics. Or about math, either, for that matter.

And this doesn't even touch on things like the shortage of health care professionals that will result in unacceptable wait-times for service, rationed care -- especially to seniors (stick 'em on an ice floe and shove 'em off to sea) -- the serious loss of medical research and development that may prove to be catastrophic over time, and other likely effects of socialized medicine. "Likely" because this is exactly what has happened in every other nation on earth that has socialized medicine.

And no one will have an America to go to anymore for "real" care -- or for freedom from instrusive and predatory government, either. That's the very worst of it.

Why not just line us all up against a wall and shoot us? Hey, think of all the money you'd save!!

And you know what? The very moment you adopt the "we" assumption -- as in "we" spend too much for health care -- you're buying into the socialist's irrationality and bad logic. It's only "we" if we allow the government to force us into some big ugly, faceless pool where we become no more than numbers on a ledger sheet. Otherwise, it's "you" or "me" as individuals spend whatever we want on health care. That is, we get to keep our own choices and freedom in the matter.

Which scenario do you prefer?

R.I.P. USA - It was terrific while it lasted

Well, the US Senate has even come in below my estimate. They voted -- along strict party lines -- to debate socialized medicine.

Oh, and I've got an anecdote for for Mary Landrieu and for the countless other political whores it applies to. You know who you are.

Playwright George Bernard Shaw was at a party one evening. He was saying that people will do anything for money. A grand lady objected, saying she wouldn't.

GBS asked her, "Would you sleep with me for a million pounds?"

Flustered, she said, "Well, for that much, I might consider it."

He said, "Would you sleep with me for 10 shillings?"

"Certainly not!" she said. "What do you take me for?"

GBS: "We've already established what you are. We're only fixing the price."

So the US Congress now is just a bunch of dumb sluts chasing cash. Blindly. Stupidly. Selling out the nation for.... What was it? $100 million. A lot of them will and have abandoned any pretense of principle for a lot less.

Here's another way to look at it:

Since the USA was established, or actually before it was quite established, something like 658,995 soliders have given their lives for it -- and that's only combat deaths.

These guys undoubtedly believed they were fighting for freedom, to ensure that their kids would have a better life, to defend America as "The Beacon on the Hill," the light of liberty for the world.

The joke's on those guys. What they really fought for was so that Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and the Comrade could buy off willing voters and simply stff-arm the rest in a disgusting scramble to grab power and seize control of the life of every US citizen.

It's sickening. It's unworthy of any American. It's the end of the nation, and it doesn't leave the rest of the world with much hope, either.

And there are things that are worse than death -- like living in a socialist-communist dictatorship, the Comrade's vision of Utopia.

The dead are the lucky ones. They don't have to witness the hogs stampeding to the trough, abandoning any shred of intelligence and humanity. They died thinking something good would come of it.

Has everyone lost their minds?

Well. I actually was trying to NOT watch the news on Friday. It's too upsetting. It's just one disaster after another. I ended up taking notes and I'll probably still leave a few things out.

1. Has it occurred to anyone else that an acquittal for Khalid Sheik Mohammed, or whatever his name is -- the brains behind 9/11 -- might not be as bad as it might seem at first glance? After all, if the prosecutors have to drop the charges because, as a WAR CRIMINAL, he wasn't read his rights, he could just walk out of that New York City courtroom a free man.

They ought to just let him walk out of there. Let's see if he makes it to the sidewalk without somebody accidentally beating him into bloody mush.

Better yet, get him a police escort. How many of New York's Finest were incinerated in those towers?

I mean, look on the bright side.


2. The Senate has offered Mary Landrieu, US Senator from Louisiana, a $100 million bribe to vote in favor of socialized medicine.

Didn't I tell you that bill would be packed with pork to get those suckers to vote for it? And Landrieu just may be stupid enough to accept it. Don't know if she's committed herself one way or the other.

The bonehead from Nebraska has apparently caved under pressure. These people have no spines, you know, and quite obviously, no principles or ethics, either.

So, go ahead, Senator Landrieu, vote "yes," collect your $100 million, and five or ten years from now, you will be facing a fate similar to Khalid Sheik Mohammed. She may not even have to wait that long. I was thinking when the provisions of that bill go into effect five years from now (when the Comrade will be a lame duck if he gets re-elected at all), but the taxes come first, don't they? Five or six long years of everyone seeing their paychecks vanish before their very eyes -- and it will be all your fault, Ms. Landrieu. Don't think we'll forget. Not a chance.

Consider that the senate bill is, according to the Wall Street Journal, one of the worst piece-of-crap legislative proposals that's ever been cobbled together, and that it will destroy the nation -- take away all of our distinctly American freedoms, turn us all into genuine slaves of the state, and bankrupt the country.

But you get your little $100 million. Enjoy it, wench.

It would be nice if Bobby Jindal would talk some sense into the senator, but I don't know if that's going to happen. If she's stupid enough to even consider voting yes, she probably has remarkably little capacity for rational thought. It's been pointed out before that you can't teach a pig to sing.


3. Have you noticed? They're already putting the rationing in place with all the changes in the "guidelines" for even self-examination for breast cancer, and for reducing the recommended frequency for PAP smears for cervical cancer.

Right now, you can still get the mammograms and PAP smears -- because you're paying for it yourself. But just wait until we get socialized medicine.

You know, there's a case in the U.K., a fairly recent one, of a young woman who got cervical cancer at age of about 20 years or so.... In the U.K., they won't pay for PAP smears for women under 23 or so. I think she might even be dead by now. The case was famous because she was trying to sue somebody over that -- for the lunkheaded stupidity that ruined her life. Seems to be characteristic of most governments.


4. Then there's the that senate socialized medicine bill just in general. I couldn't even listen to the news about it on TV. Do people really and truly have cement for brains?

"I know," said the Merry Marxists, "Let's double the cost of health care, lock people up if they refuse to pay it, cut care and access to care in half, and tell the people that we're doing them a big favor! We can get the mainstream media to back us up. They're so hot to stand in the warmth of our magnificence, they'll buy anything!"

My God, and a large percentage of the population in this country is so damn stupid they believe it. They honestly and truly think that somehow they're going to get something for nothing. They pretty much deserve the obvious consequences -- but all the rest of us will be paying for it, too. Or go to jail.

I wouldn't mind going to jail at this point. What do they say? "Three hots and a cot." That may be preferable to what's coming in a ruined nation.


5. Harping on this old string -- If you kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, you're pretty much screwed.

So go ahead, anihilate free enterprise and private wealth. Then who's going to pay for all this?

HAS NO ONE ELSE EVEN CONSIDERED THAT ANGLE?

I will have the joy of standing on the curb laughing my ass off: "Told you so!!" Somehow, though, I'd rather keep my freedoms.

It simply blows my mind that the congress is being run by such absolute blockheads. How the hell did these idiots ever get elected?

Oh boy, has the senate got a deal for you!

Just heard a few details about the Senate socialized medicine bill.

Guess what? Surprise! Surprise! It has a "government option."

Hey, Senator Snowe from Maine... Looks like you've been had!! Ha-ha!! That was a good one, huh? Maybe you should be more careful about the way you vote. Pretend that your vote means something next time, OK?

And the bill only costs about $100 billion MORE than the House bill -- if you can imagine that. That's that crack government fiscal responsibility thing at work.

You know what? For the $800+ billion it's supposed to cost, they could give every American family $10,000+ and tell us to buy our own insurance. Or better yet, just let us keep the money -- no income tax -- and we'll all get a policy we want.

But n-o-o-o-o... In fact, guess who gets to pay for this drek? Betcha got that one right.

Socialized Medicine deductions from your paychecks -- higher than they are now. Medicare funds cut dramatically -- but the seniors will get a nice check for $500.00 to make up for it. $500.00 won't cover that heart valve replacement, but what the heck? You can be sure we're getting rationing along with this piece of crap, too, so let the rationing begin -- by denying seniors health care.

And so many more goodies jammed into this bill. You just wouldn't believe it. And it's even longer page-wise than the House bill. Better in every conceivable way!

Taxes on medical devices. Taxes on plastic surgery. And I'm sure I'm leaving a whole lot out. After all, nobody's had a chance to read the whole thing yet. Only about four or five Democrat senators who were locked inside that little room in the Capitol building along wth Ram Emanual -- them and the accountants from the CBO -- those are the only people who've even seen the whole damn thing! Yes, it's true! It's the Comrade's new transparency policy in operation!

Isn't it wonderful? Do you like this?

If so, please leave me a message here. I've got some real estate available you might also be interested in.

They'll move in next door and marry your daughter

So, Dick(head) Durbin, US Senator from Illinois, has graciously offered to host the terrorists from Guantanamo Bay here in Illinois. Apparently there's a vacant maximum security prison in Thomson, on the Mississippi River, that the state wants the feds to buy.

Busiest airport in the nation, tallest building left standing... Sounds like a good place to harbor islamic terrorists. I'm sure all their friends will be anxious to come and visit regularly.

You know, there's another fairly new and really kinda "hyper-max" security prison in Illinois. It's called Tams. It's so secure, the prisoners are kept in such fortified conditions, that some of the prisoners locked up were transferred out, having gone nuts there. That might be a good place to put the Guantanamo people. And Tams is in southern Illinois.... In fact, it may even be in Durbin's home district. Why don't they put the islamic terrorists down there in Durbin's neighborhood?

Never heard of Thomson before, where the prison-in-question is located, but I looked it up on the map, and actually I probably drove through it a couple of times. It's on the Mississippi River Road -- a scenic drive type of deal. I do recall driving through Savanna, a few miles north of Thomson and on the same road. It was autumn. The highway was lined by trees, branches arching over the road, leaves all brilliant red, yellow, and orange. It was strikingly beautiful. Like, that must have been 20 years ago and I never forgot it.

Lots of people in Illinois are not too crazy about housing creeps who have no respect for human life and who have masses of ruthless buddies who share that frame of mind. The local Fox News affiliate interviewed Durbin about this. One reporter asked him, "Why not let the voters have a referendum on it?"

Durbin looked like he was going to burst out laughing. "No. I don't think so."

After all, it's not like people in Illinois have any damn thing to say about their own lives and property. Why would anyone think to ask them what they want?

Reminds me of an incident a long, long time ago.... some debate on TV about something. I believe it was Lowell Weikert, who represented Connecticut in some capacity. Someone noted to Weikert that his constituents were dead set against some measure or another. Weikert looked up bemused, kind of scoffing, and assured everyone, "The voters don't know what they want."

Kinda like Durbin's attitude. He's so condescending. So patronizing. So getting sent packing in the next election -- however, unfortunately, he has a six-year term as a senator, so his departure can't come soon enough.

Chicago also lost another trade show. The city, once the major convention center in the nation, has shed at least a dozen trade shows over the last few years. The reason? The unions. Too hard to get set up, costs way too much.

When I worked at an ad agency, we had several clients at one show at McCormick Place. I was in the Loop office when my boss called me and asked if I could bring down some yardsticks -- they were printed with the name of one of our clients and were a giveaway for people who stopped by the booth.

So I got in a cab with this very awkward and heavy box of yardsticks. Got to McCormick Place and was standing at a velvet rope in the lobby, waiting for my boss to meet me as promised, when two big union guys came up and asked me what the hell I thought I was doing with a box full of yardsticks. That was when my boss arrived and he took care of it somehow. Do believe he had to pay the union to carry the box, though.

You ask for an extension cord at McCormick Place, and it takes two union guys to carry it to you, and then another one has to plug it in.

Working for another company that participated in shows at McCormick Place. We were talking to a guy who was designing the booth. My boss suggested setting up TV sets around the booth for some kind of display. You're advised to take the TVs down and lock them up every night, though. But the booth designer warned against the idea. He said another client of his lost about a half-dozen TV sets from "secure storage" in the course of one show.

So businesses are tired of it? Or compelled to be practical during an economic depression? And the union whines about "We made concessions....."

Either it's too little too late, or you didn't go far enough, pal.

Anyway, that's Chicago and Illinois. I seriously think I may move out. I'm just so tired of it.


Another interesting note on a completely different but recurring topic:

Senator Judd Gregg from New Hampshire or someplace, the guy who agreed to serve in the White House, then changed his mind and went back to the Senate.... Anyway, he's a pretty solid guy on the numbers, and he estimates the House socialized medicine bill will cost $3 trillion when you cut out all the phony crap hype around it, and through all the hiding and disguising of costs.

Again, I must ask: Why the hell is congress doing this to us? What is their problem? Nobody wants socialized medicine. The nation can't afford it. What the hell is the point?

Think I may have mentioned it before, but in the run-up to the American Revolution, the colonials might have been more cooperative and the revolution might even have been postponed for a time, had not the British rammed through one crappy piece of tax legislation after another. It got to the point the British probably didn't even need the money, they just wanted to prove they were still in charge.

Well, here's some news: They weren't in charge. It was all a delusion of grandeur for them, nothing more.