Slick Willie rides to the rescue

Sounds like the name of a song, doesn't it? "Slick Willie to the rescue."

I'm sorry, I'm just rolling on the floor laughing.

Mentioned the budding scandal about Joe Sestak, who ran against Arlen Specter in the dem primary in Pennsylvania for a US Senate seat. Specter earlier had switched political parties because he didn't think he could win in the Republican primary -- and the Comrade also wanted Specter's vote for his socialist agenda, beginning with the $787 billion bail-out.

So Specter changes parties, expecting the Comrade's support in the dem primary in Pennsylvania.

Then this guy, Joe Sestak, a dem member of the US House decides to run against Specter in the dem Senate primary. Specter was supposed to get the backing of the dem national organization -- for whatever that's worth -- and apparently he did. In a variety of ways.

Seems that someone connected to the White House offered Joe Sestak some hot job in the federal government if Sestak would drop out of the primary and just hand over the Senate candidacy to Specter. Sestak -- who didn't have the backing of the dem national org -- announced this publicly.

And the whole thing is s-o-o-o-o Chicago. You wanna get rid of an attractive potential candidate? Offer him a job with the Park District or something like that. Big bucks, no political clout. He's happy, he can buy a new house, and he shuts his face and tows the line. Everyone's happy, no?

Anyway, so someone in the White House, Sestak says, pulled this on him. He wouldn't say who he talked to, or which job specifically was offered. Speculation had it that it was Ram Emanuel and Secretary of the Navy, since Sestak was an admiral in the Navy. Sestak didn't take the offer.

So Sestak wins the primary against Specter backed by some kinda weak support from the White House -- I believe it was a TV ad that featured the Comrade. O-o-o-h, that's worth selling your soul, isn't it? And as has happened several times now, the Comrade's endorsement proved to be the kiss of death. Specter lost. Sestak won. He'll run as a dem for US Senator from Pennsyvania, and will probably lose to the Republican candidate, Toomey.

But now evreyone is trying to find out who tried to buy off Sestak to prevent him from running against Specter. Because as it turns out, that's a felony. It's very much like bribery.

The Comrade wasn't talking, and no one else did either. I mean, now that Sestak won the dem primary, he needs the support of the national dem machine. He's not so feisty toward it anymore.

So today the White House has "Slick Willie" "Can't Keep It Zipped" Bill Clinton come out and say something like, "Oh yeah, we talked about Sestak serving as an unpaid advisor" on some committee or another.

I'm sorry for laughing. But who in the world would recruit Slick Willie Clinton to serve as a character witness? These people are just so twisted. I mean, imagine where your head is at if you consider Bill Clinton a credible source of... anything. It's funny.

The beauty part is that no one really gave Sestak (or Specter) much of a chance against the Republican Toomey for the Senate seat. And surely, those good people of Pennsylvania will take another look at Sestak now and ensure that he doesn't get into the Senate.

We can only hope.

Save the republic.

What troubles me

Let me start by saying that I truly believe the USA would right now have the GDP and world standing of Uganda if it weren't for Fox Cable News, and especially Glenn Beck.

He's right now talking about the devastating financial bill -- which I mentioned a week or two ago, and which has passed the Senate and is awaiting the rubber stamp of the House. Dudd & Fudd (Chris Dudd and Barney Fudd) authored this piece of crap and we all know where they're coming from. More graft and corruption for all -- Oops! Not for all, just for those Rasmussen calls "the political class."

Little late on that one, Glenn.

To his credit -- and with a kind of courage that I don't have -- Glenn Beck has exposed all the sad and ruinous machinations behind this *^#%%@ marxist regime. And the recognition Beck gets from Washington is absurd and nonsensical accusations about catering to advertisers from that pipsqueak opportunist, Anthony Weiner.

Apparently Weiner has attached himself to Beck's coattails to generate some publicity for himself. He doesn't seem to do anything really positive and constructive. Weiner, by the way, is a protege of Chucklehead Schumer. Read all about it at David Horowitz's FrontPage web site. No surprise. If Weiner and Schumer didn't have each other, they'd have no friends at all. Who else could stand spending any time with any of them? But can you imagine fighting for a spot in the camera in front of either one of them?

Anyway, so I truly do admire what Glenn Beck is doing. Honestly, where would we be without him?

My one objection about Beck is that, after detailing what looks like a global scam -- I mean scheme -- to crush US capitalist prosperity, private property, and political liberty -- Glenn then unveils his simple solution for it all:

Pray.

No offense, Glenn, but God let the Nazis murder 11 million people. God gave the 9/11 terrorists a bright sunny day to smash the World Trade Center. God and the Pope locked Galileo and Bacon in isolated towers for suggesting the earth revolved around the sun. And I could go on with a litany of other horrendous incidents where God simply turned a blind eye to the fate of all us made of mortal clay, perhaps implying, "You people figure it out."

And that's Deism: maybe there is a God, but he doesn't get involved.

I've said before, I'm not religious. I was raised Catholic. After that psychological nightmare of unearned guilt and shame, I spent a lot of time despising religion in general for teaching altruism and promoting a kind of social slavery.  I mean, where did that blockhead Marx get the inspiration for "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need," if not from the Catholic church? Which was, by the way, an out-of-control and near-terrorist political organization for centuries in Europe. Ever hear of the Inquisition? And look at the wreckage it's left behind....

Anyway, I'm over most of my revulsion for organized religion (excluding terrorist Islam, shar'ia law and that whole bundle of snakes) and have been for a while. People NEED something to believe in. If they don't have something positive to believe in, they make it up -- like communist utopias and the like.

But I don't think surrendering myself to whatever God is supposed to be will save the nation. Hasn't happened yet. Never. Not once in human history, except perhaps when the Spanish Armada sunk in the North Sea, or a Chinese fleet was similarly destroyed by the Divine Wind en route to conquest of Japan.

So, as they said during WWII, Praise the Lord! AND PASS THE AMMUNITION.

Democrat follies

Lots of talk lately about Joe Sestak, who's running for US Senate in Pennsylvania, claiming that someone in the Comrade's administration offered him a job to prevent him from running against Arlen Specter in the dem primary. Apparently that's a felony.

Gee, really? In Chicago, it's business as usual. (Wrote about this many months ago right here, as part of what "Chicago-style politics" is.) I bet the Comrade didn't even know it was illegal.

This should be interesting. Even the dems want an investigation, and it's an impeachable offense.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Meanwhile, British Pete keeps pumping barrels of raw crude into the Gulf of Mexico, and the EPA won't clear Louisiana's request to build a sand barrier to protect the shore. They're trying to complete a -- get this -- impact study. On building the sand bar or not building the sand bar? Or maybe they just can't decide.

The EPA is always so helpful in protecting our natural resources, isn't it?

Let it leak for another month or two, and the Comrade's regime will have a real emergency, not just the crap they've trumped up so far. We've seen that river in Cincinatti or someplace go up in flames. Wonder what the Atlantic Ocean would look like on fire. We just might find out.

If Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault, then the BP oil leak is on the Comrade's head. Fair is fair.

And apparently McCain, Kyl, and other congressmen from Arizona met with the Comrade and really got on his case about the violence on the border and the Comrade's poking and prodding it to really tick off Latinos in hopes that they'll vote democratic in November. People in attendance said the Comrade got angrier and angrier through the whole thing. Apparently one attendee wrote in his notes, "Thin-skinned. Thin-skinned."

Poor little red leader, are you unhappy in your work? He gets so upset when people fail to recognize him as the Second Coming.

So the Comrade said nothing, then put out a memo that he's sending 1,200 desk jobs to the border to do.... something. Oh well, it will soak up some of that stimulus money that hasn't been spent yet.

Meanwhile, butthead Carol Browner (how very appropriate), head of the EPA or something -- no, I guess that's Lisa Jackson.  Anyway, Carol Browner, who's served as head the Socialist Party of the US or something like that, so serving in the Comrade's cabinet is kind of a horizontal move, was all pissed when someone asked her if the feds had any real control of the oil-leak situation.

She puffed all up like a really skinny, agitated rooster and declared, "We're in control! We're in control!"

No she isn't. Not unless she's suggesting that she's prolonging this oil-leak thing on purpose. Like this do-nothing and let-Louisiana-rot attitude is some kind of deliberate strategy. 'Course it just might be.... though I haven't figured out how or why it should get the Comrade re-elected. But then I don't understand how or why what he does would get anyone elected to anything ever. I'm dense in that way.

What else?  Hmmmmm.....

Was watching a show on PBS the other day. The sponsor for one show has a website at www-bread-dot-org, although I don't remember the org's name. They had this slogan they kept repeating, and I paraphrase:  Bringing justice to the world's poor so they can have bread.

I don't know. If I was hungry and someone offered me justice? I thnk I'd rather have a pizza.

You really have to be an Obamista for bread.org's argument to make any sense whatsoever. The misuse of the language is the marxist jargon, you know, the secret handshake, the wink-and-nod code by which the committed recognize each other. Or the need-to-be-committed. And Ivy League grad students.

And they wouldn't know justice if it bit them in the ass.

Save the republic.

The good, the bad, and the really, really ugly

I was going to write today about some good guys in congress, like Jim DeMint, who, when asked if he'd consider running for president, answered quickly and unequivocally, "No! At my age, it would be too much house and yard." 

Also Eric Cantor, for his "YouCut" website, where you can go in, pick an issue and/or pick from a set of issues for Cantor and others to submit as bills to congress. Trying to re-connect with the publiic, which has largely been ignored by this regime.

Also Paul Ryan, my favorite right now, for actually developing a program to reduce government spending, and Newt Gingrich, for his new book, "To Save America." I've only read the first chapter so far -- and it's available free at http://www.newt.org/ -- but have ordered the rest of the book. In 1994, Newt helped author the Contract with America, which spared us from what could have been Obama-like excesses during the Clinton regime.

The Clintons were, and continue to be, monumental idiots. A Republican congress saved their asses and prevented them from doing too much damage. And Bill gave us an enduring peek into the rather sordid and disgusting side of life under the desk in the Oval Office.

So that's what this blog was going to be about -- accentuate the positive and shove the negativity to a back burner for a while.

But no.... congress is once again asking the US citizen to bend over. Now, we're supposed to bail out the pension funds of the profligate labor unions, including SEIU, AUW, etc etc etc.

Hey, you know, if these stupid shits put their money away and invested it, the way they're supposed to, instead of paying off legislators and bussing their people around to terrorize bankers -- if they behaved responsibly with their members' dues, they wouldn't need a bail out. But it's easy to see where their priorities lie -- much more important to graft a permanent attachment to the public tit than to actually get any work done.

I've been in unions. I know exactly how they work.

The unions bullied and intimidated their employers into cadillac health care plans and lifetimes of retirement cruises to the Greek Isles and such. They bullied and intimidated their employers straight into bankruptcy in many cases. So now non-union American citizens are supposed to cover their foul-smelling asses?

I don't think so.

Let the silly shits subsist on Social Security hand-outs like the rest of us.

Anyone else getting the idea that this regime is almost incredibly incompetent? And also totally dedicated to destroying the USA?

Can we afford two and half more years of this bullshit?

Save ther republic.

The wreckage the Comrade leaves behind

A few weeks ago -- before the release of his new book -- Newt Gingrich was on a couple talk shows. In discussing the primary elections and such, and possible Republican strategies, Newt said that whoever wins office in the next elections will have to do something about "the wreckage that they leave behind." He was referring to the Comrade, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the merry marxists.

The phrase caught my attention. I picture Pearl Harbor at about noon, Hawaiian time, on December 7, 1941. Smoldering hulls and conning towers sticking up out of oil-slicked waters, the bodies of countless sailors amidst the debris, a stunned citizenry facing the task of assessing the damage, trying to recover and move on.

Or, perhaps more relevant, Manhattan at about noon on September 11, 2001. And those images are still very fresh.

Every day, the Comrade's regime takes on more and more features of a frat house out of control. And that's being kind to them, calling them merely reckless and irresponsible rather than deliberately toxic to the USA and dedicated to its destruction -- which comes to look like the true situation here.

Take the Arizona immigration law for example. It's entirely in line with federal law, and actually provides more protections to prevent racial profiling than the federal law. It has the support of just about 70% of the US population generally and the same level of support inside of Arizona. However, the Comrade apparently doesn't like it. He sends idiots like Holder and Napolitano to make fools of themselves at congressional hearings, claiming that although they're agin' it, No, they haven't read it.

So what are they? Just knee-jerk Obama-istas? Kinda like the "Good Germans" of the 1930s and 1940s.

If that isn't vile enough, the Comrade then gets a marionette called somebody Morton, who heads up ICE, the agency in charge of doing nothing about illegal immigration, to make a public announcement that his agency will not process any illegals turned over to them by Arizona.

Just like if you can't pass crap-n-tax, get the EPA to start breaking heads with no law at all.

Putting the concept of our republic aside for the moment, what the hell ever happened to democracy in America?

It's beginning to look an awful lot like a dictatorship, isn't it?

Just think about it.

Those elected in November and in 2012 will have a large job in front of them. But we can do it. We're Americans.

Politicizing Wall Street

Comrade Osama is on TV right now -- or he was a minute ago. I had to turn it off. I can't even look at him anymore without retching.

Apparently the bill to nationalize the credit industry has gained closure in the Senate.

The stock market dropped 900+ points. Those irresponsible, greedy hate-mongers and capitalist pigs. Imagine, trying to salvage your income! What's wrong with those people?

Unemployment went up two-tenths of a point, and new applications for unemployment increased. Although Comrade Osama announced that as "good news" and as a sign of economic recovery. Yeah. And "Arbeit Mach Frei." ("Work Makes You Free." It was a slogan hanging over the entrance to Auschwitz.)

So the Comrade is out there selling what a fantastic job he and his merry marxists are doing with the economy. Flying directly in the face of real, known, measurable facts.

That takes an awful lot of nerve. Or an awful lot of lying to yourself. Which do you think it is?

Either that, or he's so stupid he can't add and subtract.

He blabs about bringing "accountability and responsibility" to Wall Street. This from a blockhead who's sunk the USA $14 TRILLION in debt? And is sitting up nights cooking up new schemes to destroy American prosperity. I mean really. How stupid does he think we are?

Do you believe him or your own perceptions?

No legislation will "fix" Wall Street or make it any better or any safer, and it shouldn't. Wall Street is a crap shoot. That's all it ever was. Traders bet on who they think will succeed or fail. Most regulatory efforts have only made the stock market more unpredictable, due to "unintended consequences." Which means most legislators are blockheads when it comes to economics and financials. They haven't got a clue. All they have are opportunistic, power-mad intentions.

For one thing, if you take no risk, you don't get much in the way of rewards. That's the name of the game.  In a free market, only the traders take the risk. If they win, THEY win; if they lose, THEY lose. They carry the burden and rake in the rewards. In a socialist economy, like Greece or the USA under this regime, the people and the government carry and pay for the risk. And there's really no way for them to win when traders are hamstrung by regulations.

So what kind of a crock is the Comrade pushing, huh? I think he was just never exposed to American traditions, American values, American institutions. He just doesn't know any better. He has absolutely no relevant standard to use to judge the issues, let alone attempt to influence these issues. The Framers were right in insisting that any president be a natural-born citizen, though they should have added "raised in the USA."

And Senator Greg Judd was on a while ago, saying he introduced a bill that would refuse the feds bailing out California and other blockhead spendthrift states. The bill was defeated.

Why not let them go down in flames? (And my state, Illinois, is apparently a good candidate for the fire.) The alternative is not a federal "rescue," but rather them taking the rest of the nation down with them.

You know what? Screw them. They blew it. Let them pay for their mistakes themselves one way or another. Look at this all as a "teachable moment." Maybe they'll learn something. Maybe.... but I doubt it. Can't teach a pig to sing.

I want the free market. I want the rationality and order of people taking care of themselves and their own interests, not the daily crash-and-burn chaos of socialism -- of each of us shouldering the burdens of those too stupid and irresponsible to take care of themselves.

I want the Comrade to go quickly to hell and burn very slowly on a spit flanked by Reid and Pelosi. Anthony Weiner and Dick(head) Durbin can be the hors d'oeuvres. (Or "horse doovers," which may be the more appropriate term.)

That's all for now.

Dems find a use for all those illlegals

This has got to be one of the stupidest issues to come along in a while.

I've been looking for information on the costs of illegal immigration. Interesting, as recently as February 2, according to the LA Times, the state of California was begging the feds for money to help defray the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants who have broken the law -- or other laws apart from the immigration laws. And according to the same story, the Comrade wanted to eliminate federal payments for this incarceration:

LA Times
February 01, 2010
By Richard Simon

Reporting from Washington — California stands to receive more than $1 billion from President Obama's budget plan to help cover healthcare for the poor and the cost of jailing illegal immigrants.

The budget proposal includes $25 billion in additional Medicaid funds for states, of which California is projected to receive $1.5 billion. States received a funding boost in the economic stimulus bill that Congress passed one year ago. Obama's budget plan would extend the funding through mid-2011.

A spokesman for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said a bipartisan group of senators would be working to increase that funding.

Still, the White House's inclusion of the money is an acknowledgment of the bipartisan support in Congress for the prison funding; last year, lawmakers rejected Obama's effort to eliminate the payments.

I don't know. Does "bizarre" kinda cover it?

Maybe the Comrade believes that illegal immigrants who break additional laws shouldn't be put in jail. What the hell? They get free health care. The Comrade doesn't seem to want to do anything about their law-breaking as it relates to immigration law. Apparently, he just didn't want to pay for it last year.

But wait! Maybe now he's found another use for defending illegal immigrants! Whaddaya think?

Clearly, the Comrade and his minions -- Napolitano, Holder -- are hoping to inspire anger over this issue. For one thing, their knee-jerk response is to threaten to sue Arizona. For another thing, they both claim they haven't read the bill, which is probably just a lame cop-out so they don't have to debate the issue. They just want to see fireworks.

Exactly what are the benefits of inflaming the illegal population? They can't vote.... yet.... but San Francisco legislators are looking at giving illegals voting rights. (One way to keep their jobs?)

Perhaps the Comrade and the democrats in general are running out of abused and disaffected and disenfranchised American citizens to exalt to Victim Status, so now they're searching off-shore for people to feel sorry for, spend money on, and use as pawns to fan liberal guilt.

I don't know. However, it is patently absurd to claim that any nation has "no right" to protect its borders and control the influx of immigrants. It's insane to claim that, conversely, non-citizens have "a right" to come and go across the border as they please. 

For Mexico's President Calderon to stand up beside the Butthead-in-Chief at a press conference and whine that Mexican citizens are being abused by Arizonans is actually laughable.

Looking for statistics, found a study done by Pew in 2008 about Hispanics in the USA. Pew says there were 11.9 million Mexican illegals here that year, and also that 11% of the Mexicans born in Mexico now live in the USA.

Rather than complain about how badly the USA might conceivably treat illegal aliens, President Calderon might more profitably spend his time figuring out ways to keep his people at home. But I suspect that having the USA next door is something of a safety valve for Mexico. When life gets too grim and hopeless under the yoke and cost of unbridled political corruption, those who would otherwise revolt and try to correct Mexico can simply slip across the border.

And while Calderon's indignation may be laughable, the real, genuine disgrace is some jerk from the State Department actually commiserating with representatives from Red China about the possibility that Arizona police might inconvenience illegal immigrants in the US. I'm sure Red China has absolutely no grip at all on the problem of people clamoring to enter its borders. I suppose that guy from Red China was secretly wondering why the USA doesn't force the illegals into dumping melamine into pet food products, or spray-painting infant toys with lead-based paint. I mean, what the heck? If you've got all these people flooding across the border, take advantage. Put them to work in your Peoples' Factories.

And the brainless bobble-head from the US State Department smiles and agrees.

My God, this regime is lame. And embarrassing. Not for exposing the alleged "faults" of the USA, but for its inability to even grasp the issues. It's so quick to sell-out the USA. None of the Comrade's merry marxists are worthy of being street sweepers, let alone policy-makers.

All the Comrade really cares about is promoting the Communist Manifesto. Breaking eggs to make omelets, as it were. And he has no qualms whatsoever about recruiting illegal immigrants to help him do this.

The real question is -- Why do illegal Mexican immigrants go along with that program? They won't gain anything from it. The Comrade is collapsing the US economy. Smaller pie, smaller pieces for everyone. In 10 years, the Mexicans will be much better off at home.

Save the republic.

Got to get around the "political class"

Today is Election Day in several states. Mostly primaries, but also a special election to replace John (the oaf) Murtha, who just might be second only to Harry Byrd of West Virginia when it comes to piling up pork. Sorry, though most legislators seem to think that's a noble pursuit, I find it a disgusting abuse of the US government.

At any rate, just today got around to reading the Rasmussen Report from yesterday. You can subscribe to it free, you know, if you're interested in keeping up with the polls.

Found this interesting: 

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% favor repeal of the [socialized medicine] law, while 39% are opposed. Support for repeal is unchanged from a week ago. That support is also proving to be just as consistent as opposition to the health care plan before it was passed into law....

The health care bill produces an enormous perception gap between the Political Class and the rest of the country. While most voters nationwide favor repeal, the Political Class is opposed to repeal by an 88% to eight percent (8%) margin.

Overall, 39% of voters believe the law will be good for the country, and 50% say it will be bad. Among the Political Class, 97% see the law as good, while 64% of Mainstream voters say it will be bad.

So what does this mean? Exactly who is the "political class"? All the buttheads in Washington? Do they actually believe Dick(head) Durbin, that since citizens have socialized medicine now, we'll never let it go?

You know what? Socialized medicine is not yet a reality. It's something we can all discuss in a somewhat leisurely way.

Wait until 2014 when this particular pile of shit hits the fan.

Then it will be too late?

No. I don't think so. But it will be much easier to dump it now before the Comrade and merry marxists have hired 300,000 more federal employees to advise us on how many jumping jacks we need to do every morning.

So please, let's not forgot the horror of this bill going into today's and any other upcoming primaries, and surely not in November.

We need to get rid of this crappy socialist legislation before it drags the nation into the black hole of unsustainable debt, slavery to the state, and last but not least -- Death panels, rationing, and the demise of quaity medical care in the USA. Remember -- there will be no place else to go for that surgery or cancer treatment.

If the "political class" is unwilling to commit to this, we can always find a different set of legislators. And I'm so happy to see that that is already happening.

Save the republic.

Pazzo Pelosi underwriting your dreams

Pazzo Pelosi has apprently been catching up on her reading -- of Marx's Kapital, that is.

She made (another) idiot statement the other day:  "You can leave your work and pursue creative work as a musician... or whatever... knowing that your health insurance will be covered."

First of all -- the socialized medicine legislation doesn't allow for someone else to cover your insurance. It forces you to buy it  -- and not just any ol' policy, but some kind of cadillac model with a whole lot of coverage you probably don't need. It will certainly push me further into debt, and heaven only knows what impact it will have on the republic. We can only imagine.

And suppose Pazzo had actually read the legislation, which it seems she hasn't. OK. Where would I send the rent bill? Would I qualify for food stamps? I'm going to  need a rather generous fund for Internet services, subscriptions, utilities, entertainment, and I'd like to get another cat to engage my playful side to help keep my dreams alive. Should I just address these funding requirement to Pazzo Pelosi, Capitol, DC? Or perhaps to her taxpayer-funded jumbo jet, where she and her staff spend so much time and money?

Blockhead Karl Marx had a similar dream. He'll sit on his ass developing boils and scribble out his fantasies of a dream life where he sits on his ass scribbling out his fantasies, and the State pays for it. Actually, it was Engels who funded Marx, but that was before the glorious revolution.

Marx was dreaming of a world where Engels' burden would be carried by those thousands of happy workers who, like the Seven Dwarves, march happily to work every day, whistling and shouldering shovels, to support other peoples' lives and dreams. "Heigh-ho! Heigh-ho! It's off to work I go...."

Sort of brings to mind all those antebellum happy darkies gamboling on the plantation lawn in the gloaming -- after a personally satisfying day of picking cotton and boiling cane -- admidst the heady scent of magnolia blossoms, strumming their banjos while the beloved ol' Massa and saintly Missus look on...

And compare the Marx-Pelosi vision against how communism actually worked in the USSR, how it functions now in Red China, Cuba, Venezuela, or any other place on earth that has been saddled with that hideous wreck of social and economic oppression.

The real, visible, and painful result is brutal and violent political repression, slave labor, and dire poverty, except for the very few at the top of the food-chain, such as the White House and congressional leadership. I'm quite sure Pazzo places herself among that pampered elite; not likely she'll volunteer to work the night shift at a laundry, a job that is probably more in keeping with her capabilities than the job she has now.

Pazzo, surely with your admittedly insane imagination, you can do better than borrowing a stale and discredited fantasy from a twisted wannabe messiah who refused to take a day job. (And I mean Marx, not the Comrade, though the Comrade qualfies.)

Save the republic. Dump this assholette in the next election. Or at least render her a two-bit back-bencher in the minority party. And that's way more than she can handle.

Eric Holder: Emblematic idiot

Anyone else see Eric Holder 1.) admitting that he's never read the Arizona immigration law, even though he's claimed it's unconstitutional; and 2.) bending over backwards to pretend that terrorism is unrelated to "radical islam," which he apparently believes does not exist.

Can I add anything to this to make him look more buffoonish? This person is a numbskull. Point One speaks for itself. Holder is just hopping on the Comrade's bandwagon, trying to inspire riots and divisions based on "racism." Apparently they believe it gives them an "issue" that justifies totalitarian control dressed up as "social justice."

Yet while this blockhead is so quick to charge American citizens with racism -- and without reading the law -- he's comically reluctant to conclude that Jihad has anything at all to with islam. Seems he hasn't read the Koran, either. Or even listened to what terrorists themselves claim as a motive. Ever hear of Jihad or even Shar'ria, Blockhead? But that's just one version of blah-blah-blah-blah-blah.....

Holder is emblematic of this whole travesty of an administration. Kinda like Bill Clinton having so much trouble figuring out what "is" is.

We all know they're lying and dissembling. They seem to believe they don't need to defend themselves, or even provide a reasonable explanation for their actions to American citizens. They won the election. They seem to be confusing the USA with Ancient Athens, where elected tyrants were absolute dictators.

Apparently they haven't read the Constitution, either. Rule by law, not by man, buttheads.

And decent people, like Colmes a few mnutes ago on Fox, still carry the water for these fools.

At what point are reasonable liberals (if, in fact there is such a thing) going to refuse to be made figures of fun for the buttheads in the White House and the leadership in congress? Have they no self-respect, either? No brains. Their job is only to stand and applaud?

Idiots on parade.

And what the hell is with Elena Kagan? She has no background as a judge, and the White House has barred any contact with the press. So we get things like Diane Sawyer (or was that Leslie Stahl?) gushing things like: "She's a 5'3" powerhouse, loves baseball and poker!"

Yeah, I guess that qualifies her to be a Supreme Court Justice. Look no further! But based on that, one would suspect that at least 60% of the population has better credentials.

Just now watching one of the last launches -- perhaps the last -- of the space shuttle. Kind of like watching the USA retreat into history.

"Don't let it be forgot
That once there was a spot
For one brief shining moment....."

Save the republic.

Who owns the truth?

I'm becoming increasingly alarmed about the Comrade and his regime's attacks on the First Amendment. This is truly enough to make your hair stand up on end, given that for many years, things like Radio Free Europe kept the human race alive inside the Communist Bloc, and things like that. 'Course, we wouldn't expect the Comrade to regard that as anything positive.

A couple weeks ago, Glenn Beck did a show all about Sam Adams. Beck presents Sam Adams as a religious figure, a man of deep faith. OK, maybe he was. Adams had been educated at Hahvahd when it was a Methodist (I believe) seminary. He was qualified to be a religious minister, but I don't believe he ever was. He did work as a tax collector for time. He refused to collect the taxes. The Brits fired him. Boston re-elected him as Tax Collector. Apparently Bostonians liked the way he handled the job. Sam Adams was one cool dude.

Curiously, Glenn Beck shied away from the notion that Sam Adams was a propagandist -- which Adams surely was. Adams constructed and worked diligently to sustain the Committees of Correspondence, which eventually evolved into the Continental Congress. Some people claim he organized the Sons of Liberty, though I don't know that that's proven. He definitely had a finger in the radical political pies in Boston and encouraged their efforts.

Adams was the first to get the word out about the Boston Massacree -- through the Committees of Correspondence -- and picked and harped at it as cause for... maybe armed revolt? He did the same for events at Lexington and Concord. He was a relentless rabble-rouser, the "rabble" being 12 other colonies hundreds of miles distant from each other.

After the American Revolution, the French, who were quite pleased to see the wild colonials give Britain a big black eye, elevated Ben Franklin and Sam Adams to legendary fame as the two men most responsible for putting the United States together.

About 30 years ago, I did a term paper on propaganda during the American Revolution. That's how I met Sam Adams. The term paper was supposed to be something like 12 to 15 pages. I wrote 39 pages. It was fascinating. Imagine, no telephone, TV, radio, and barely a post office (until Ben Franklin), and Sam Adams managed to get 13 very disparate colonies with varying interests to hang together and defeat British rule.

That is mind-boggling. Sam Adams -- helped greatly by George Washington, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, and numerous others whom he recruited -- managed to persuade four million skeptical British subjects to cast off the authority of the Crown. He convinced them that they didn't need British law, British trade, or British protection -- in a wilderness that had yet to be mapped and was still prey to every naval power in the world.

I ended that term paper with the thought that the men who created the USA enshrined their rhetorical and propagandist efforts into one simple legal provision:  The First Amendment.

They understood the power of speech, the power of ideas. They had created the American Revolution through speech and propaganda, and they ended up advocating free speech as one of the most indispensable elements of a just and righteous government, one dedicated to exalting the human race rather than enslaving it.

The cure for bad arguments and lies, they said, or for "bad" speech -- the cure for that was MORE speech -- to defend or counteract, correct, or refine every idea. It all gets milled and ground down to the basics, considered and reconsidered, built up or knocked down, amplified or forgotten, allowing each of us to make the best decisions possible to control our own lives to achieve our own goals.

There is no such thing as "too much information." There's only a vicious and anti-humanitarian concern about who should "control" information.

No one controls it. No one ever SHOULD control it. Anyone who wants to control it is, without any doubt at all, looking to take away your liberty and control you. There is NO DOUBT about that whatsoever, no other explanation or rationale for that position.

This goes directly to the issue of living by your own lights. Giving however much time and effort you want to a particular issue, you listen to the various sides of the argument, you research the background, you review and assess your own situation, and you make up your own mind about what makes sense to you and what you believe in. This is applies to everything from, "Should I buy hot dogs or hamburgers?" to "Who should I vote for?" or "Which church should I attend, if any?"

Without any information -- or only limited information -- to make a decision, you're hamstrung and completely at the mercy of the guys with the guns.

But then, the whole idea behind government control is taking away citizens' ability to make their own decisions. The totalitarian government does all the decision-making for you. You just roll up in a ball and suck your thumb and hope you're not the one who gets the beating today. This is exactly the way the slave-owners managed their "dependencies."  This is exactly why it was illegal in most states to teach slaves how to read and right. And the slave states also censored the mail.... "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and The New York Tribune was not allowed in the slave states.

This regime's concerns about the unhampered dissemination of information over the Internet, through radio, and other media is the most serious kind of bullshit I've ever heard -- and to hear it coming from a US president is a shocking disgrace. Comrade Butthead announced that the unfettered and chaotic information available to Americans today via a wide range of media, is a "distraction" and a "diversion, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than a means of emancipation."

So now he's telling us what information "should" be and how we "should" use it? And how do you suggest we get it, Mr. Wonderful? And from whom? I'm waiting for that shoe to drop. Possibly exclusively from this Liar-in-Chief? And his tireless propaganda machine? Half-grown 18-year-olds in red shirts displaying the hammer and sickle? Weary and stale old hippies -- those who managed to survive the Reagan Administration in spider-holes in Canada -- or at the University of Illinois? The Comrade's voter base?

Whatever goes around usually comes around, know what I mean? This jerk in the White House can dish it out, but he can't take it. And the answer?

MORE INFORMATION!!!! Crank up those Tea Parties another notch. More signs and bumper-stickers. Why not burn a few people in effigy while we're at it? That's how Sam Adama and the Sons of Liberty went about it. And it worked. Free speech has always worked. And it will again. Truth will out.
Save the republic.

Sewage by any other name....

Wasn't going to write about this, except that I've heard about it from at least a half-dozen sources over the last 24 hours... That's the new crap-n-tax bill, called "The American Power Bill," sponsored by Kerry and Lieberman. Apparently they think we won't recognize this crap if they dress it up and rename it.

Briefly, from what I understand, it promises to raise the price of gasoline to about $10 per gallon and otherwise destroy life as we know it.

Of course, the dems will flock to it. I'm sure Pazzo Pelosi is four-square behind it. Anything that will help to destroy the USA will have her enthusiastic (though nutsy) endorsement.

Do we need this? Do we citizens continually have to battle the idiots in Washington? Why the hell don't they just leave us alone?

Everything they do only makes things much, much worse.

I'm just so sick and tired of it.

Laissez-faire! That means, literal translation from French:  Leave us alone!

Louis XVI didn't listen, and look what happened to him. And the silly-ass big-spending queen he rode in on.

In defense of history

I shouldn't continue to criticize History Channel's "Story of Us." I'm not opposed to it, really. It might inspire an interest in history in those who think it's a cold, dead topic. It's not. It's really fun. It's a drama, full of unbelievable achievements, blood-curdling terror, and colorful people. But "The Story of Us" just kinda turns this wonderful rainbow into a gray blur.

Had to watch the Civil War episode because I really do know quite a bit about the Civil War. I can use that as a way to gauge the historical accuracy. The program got the technology right, most of the time, and how it helped the Union war effort. Something they overlooked in talking about the "industrialized" North vs. the "agricultural" South (both were vastly more agricultural than industrial) is that the Yankees liked machines because in the North, labor was expensive. Not a problem in the slave South.

Wish I could say the battles and the significance of the Civil War were recounted with better accuracy. Seems that show's researchers spent some time poring over SCV (Sons of Confederate Veterans) web sites, actually read a little bit about Stonewall in the Valley and 2nd Manassas, then figured, "Oh to hell with it. That's enough to fill up 10 minutes."

Had to chuckle at the show's proclaiming that Ulysses S. Grant's major accomplishment as general of the Union Army was appointing W.T. Sherman to head up the Army of the West. I'm laughing at that right now, though Sherman is one of my favorite characters. And the show confused the Atlanta Campaign with the March to the Sea. Two different things employing two different tactics, driven by two different purposes.

What? No Peninsula Campaign? No Chancellorsville? No Gettysburg? No Vicksburg or Richmond Campaign? No. Only Sherman pillaging the countryside on the way to Atlanta -- which didn't happen, by the way. It's about 100 miles from Chattanooga to Atlanta, and it took Sherman something like five months to cross that ground. He built railroads and bridges as he went -- or rebuilt them after the rebs tore them up behind them as they retreated. Matter of fact, Sherman gave his engineers (not railroad engineers, but construction engineers) a large part of the credit for his survival en route to Atlanta. There's even a pretty famous joke:

"How'd Sherman get across the river?"

"He took the bridge."

"Where'd he get a bridge? We burnt that bridge."

"He brought it with him."

The railroads between Atlanta and the sea were a different matter. That's where "Sherman"s hairpins" and "Sherman's bow-ties" came into play -- rails torn up and twisted around trees and so forth. And not just bent, because they could be straightened, but twisted, so they couldn't be used again for track. And without a railroad, Sherman licensed "living off the land." His army didn't burn crops in the field. First of all, it was November-December and there weren't any crops in the field. Second, he wouldn't burn the crops when he needed them to feed his army. His army left Atlanta (smoldering, so it couldn't serve as base for any rebs coming up behind him) with about a week's rations. It took about six weeks to get to Savannah, and then he had to win Savannah, or at least convince it to surrender.

And historian Al Sharpton commenting on how the Emancipation Proclamation made slaves equal? No, not really. Even with emancipation, slaves weren't quite citizens and couldn't vote except in a few states that allowed it. They were allowed to join the US Army, though, and did fight valiantly most of the time. For their "ingratitude," they were especially targeted by the Confederates, and if they survived capture, they were sold back into slavery.  But believe it was the 15th Amendment, a few years after the Civil War, that granted citizenship to blacks and former slaves. That was part of Reconstruction, which doesn't seem to have occurred at all in "The Story of Us."

Then the thing about killing all the buffalo... Yeah, to make belts for weaving looms in Lowell, Mass. OK. But nothing at all said about Sherman and Sheridan regarding the deliberate anihilation of the buffalo herds as a very effective way of starving the Sioux and Cheyenne into dependency on the government. The show regarded that as a by-product of the buffalo slaughter, never mentioned it as one of its causes. I do believe it was Sheridan who said, "The only good Indian is a dead one," or something to that effect.

Custer got very short shrift, too, and he probably deserved it. But Custer was not quite as stupid as the program suggests. Nearly so, but not quite....

I'm glad they talked about the black cowboys, though. Wonder if they'll bring up the Buffalo Soldiers? And you know, the word "buckaroo," meaning "cowboy", comes from the Spanish "vacarro," which I probably didn't spell right, but that also means "cowboy". Just about everything the cowboys knew they learned from Mexican vacarros -- going way back to before the Mexican War.

I was rather peeved at this person named Jeanette Wall or Waller or something, who apologized for gun ownership in the New World by claiming it had something to do with a determination to take care of yourself. Just a silly kinda macho thing we don't need to take too seriously.

OK. Number One, if you couldn't take care of yourself in the New World, you didn't survive. That simple. It's not like you could order take-out. The New World, and especially the Great Plains, were way short of grocery stores. If you couldn't shoot or trap your dinner, you didn't get much to eat. Number Two, snakes, bears, and a range of other predators. Number Three, by the time the white settlers were moving west in droves, the Indians were a real threat, along with assorted bandits who took refuge from the law in the West, thieves and cutthroats of all kinds. People who wouldn't think twice about killing you for your horse.

And, hey, about horses. They keep showing these pioneer wagons being drawn by horses. The army didn't even use that many horses -- or not as many horses as mules. And the pioneers, if they brought a horse, it was a dray to pull the plow when and where they settled. Horses were too delicate and skittish and the Indians would steal them. For the Plains Indians, horses were like their bank accounts.

The pioneers used oxen. You tried to start with about a dozen oxen -- a couple of teams -- and most of them would be dead for one reason or another by the time you reached the Parting of the Ways, just the other side of the Rockies. Horses would never survive that trip hauling the cargo the pioneers were carrying. And you don't sit on the wagon box to drive oxen. You walk beside them with a long bull whip. Only the sick, the feeble, maybe little kids and pregnant women near the time of birth rode in the wagons. The wagons were for hauling food, tools, and furniture, and you didn't exhaust the animals by loading them up with people who could move on their own. Didn't carry much water, either -- way too heavy. You had to follow the rivers.

They didn't use Conestogas, which were the 18-wheelers of the day, used mainly on the Santa Fe and Cimarron and other southern trails, initially to supply the US Army during the Mexican War. The Conestogas were way too big and heavy to negotiate the mountains and river crossings on the Oregon-California Trail. You needed like ten or twelve mules to pull a Conestoga, and that livestock had to eat. The pioneers used plain old farm wagons most of the time. The Reeds, one family in the Donner Party, had a special double-decker wagon made for the trip, but most people just used farm wagons. Many people, especially during the Gold Rush, abandoned their wagons at Fort Laramie when most of their supplies were gone, and packed mules the rest of the way, through the mountains.

And you left in May, April was too early for the grass you needed to support your stock, and you tried to arrive early September at the latest. Think you could walk from around Kansas City to the Pacific Coast in that time?  With no McDonalds or Applebee's, no Holiday Inns or Motel Sixes.

If you want to know about the real history, you've got to dig a little deeper. All I'm saying is there's a lot more to "The Story of Us" than has been included so far. It's missing all the texture.

One pretty positive thing about the show -- it makes it plain that building the USA was not a federal project. It was done by individuals. Some pretty tough and sometimes pretty goofy individuals who just wanted to be free, or rich, or something. In the first wave of immigration across the Mississippi in the 1840s, there was a saying that if you could go to your farthest field and scream and anyone could hear you, the neighborhood was just getting too crowded. Apart from establishing the borders, and holding the whole thing together during the Civil War, the government didn't have much to do with the actual hands-on building of the USA at all.

The most beneficial thing the feds did for the nation was to stay out of the way of citizens as much as possible. Just about every time the feds got involved, there was corruption and fraud -- like Credit Mobile, which "The Story of Us" didn't mention. It was a scheme to raise money to fund the transcontinental railway. Certain people were authorized by the feds to form a corporation and sell stock and such; mostly those in charge spent whatever they got on big cigars and lobbying, then absconded with whatever was left. It was a huge scandal. A precursor to Modern Times.

Anyway, it was limited government and the resulting personal liberty -- hungry people free to get a living the best way they could -- that built this country from zippo to the most developed and prosperous in the world.

The mind-boggling advantages of just letting people do things for themselves is one of history's best lessons. Ambition, imagination, starvation -- that's what the USA is made on. And all of that is largely shoved aside as anti-social in the eat-your-brother syndrome of the welfare state. So if "The Story of Us" does anything to promote the amazing value of personal liberty, it's not all bad. It's a start, anyway.

Legacy from my mom

Today is Mothers' Day.

My mother died several years ago. She was getting dementia and had a stroke, which made the dementia worse, as well as paralyzing one side of her body. She spent the last few years in a nursing home because she required professional care. Don't want to go too much into that...

Funny, I have this very acute memory. Friends of mine rely on me to recall events from their own lives and I usually can. Like, I remember being in a crib, with my sister, a year older than me, poking her fingers through the bars to torment me. That relationship never changed....

Anyway, I remember one day -- musta been summer -- being out in the back yard with Mom. She had been doing laundry in the basement with one of those wringer washers, then hanging it out on clotheslines in the back yard to dry. It always smelled so good after it dried. And this just a couple miles outside of a major American metropolis and decades before EPA protection.

So we had this enormous oak tree in the backyard. That house has been torn down for 40 years at least and an apartment building stands there now. There's still a big dip in the parking lot -- site of that old oak tree.

I was walking around the oak tree. Around and around the oak tree -- don't know why -- as Mom was pinning wet sheets and stuff on the clothesline.

OK.  Then there's Dad, who was a rabid Roosevelt democrat. He used to get in heated arguments all the time with one of my uncles, who apparently was a rabid Republican. We lived in a mostly-Republican suburb of Chicago, and my dad used to run for local office as a democrat, just so the Republican would have some opposition. Dad died when I was 11 years old, and my teacher at school at the time told me she'd been proud to have a member of my family in her class. I was unaware at the time that anyone knew my dad outside of the immediate family.  But I digress.

My dad was very into politics, an avid TV news watcher, avid newspaper reader. Another one of my uncles, who I believe was, like Dad, rather more sympathetic to the dems than the Reps, had this real disgust for people who didn't keep aware of politics, even though he'd been a bootlegger during Prohibition and did time for it. So above my head was an ogoing political discussion all the time.

So I was about five years old, out in the yard with Mom, her hanging laundry, me walking around and around the oak tree. And I asked her, "Mom, what's the government?"

Ike was in office then. No idea what any of that had to do with any of us.

She said, "The people. The people are the government."

That didn't seem to make any sense and she wouldn't explain. I clearly recall my frustration. Set me on a rather tortured and twisted path.

Save the republc.

Dick Durbin's vision of the future

A little while back, after muscling socialist health care legislation through congress, Dick(head) Durbin, US Senator from Illinois -- senator of my state, but don't blame me, I never voted for him -- said that passing that crap legislation will secure a dem victory in upcoming elections because citizens won't be willing to give up their health care benefits. That is to say, once we all snuggle up nice and cozy with the nanny state, we'll never want to cut the apron strings.

You mean like Greece?

Been watching the riots in Greece. Apparently the rabid crowds blew up a bank or something. Like a bank -- any bank -- could be the source of their problems. 'Course, given the ignorant and childishly simplistic world-view of most socialists, they probably believe that banks are the source of money and wealth. No. Banks are more like hotels for the money that's been created by bank customers. Then the banks pimp that money out to make their own profits, and their profits are really pretty marginal and underwhelming, if they're honest.

Anyway, it seems the Greeks have all become so accustomed to sucking the public tit, they resent the hell out of the idea of having to work for a living. They certainly can't blame themselves for failure, so they attack the banks. Pretty shameful. Worse, their credit has run out and they have to go hat in hand to the IMF, begging for charity. From nations who aren't much better off, and who demand that Greece behaves more responsibly.

So Greek citizens stage a mass temper tantrum and burn down buildings and fight with each other. Does that work? Does that solve the problem? Does that make them any money to pay their own freight?

But I guess this is Dick(head) Durbin's lofty vision of the future of the USA. We'll all become so used to dependency and being owned by the federal government that if it threatens to deny us any goodies, we'll go into fits of rage, like a spoiled brat in a toy store.

Boy, that's something to look forward to, isn't it? Doesn't that just fill you with a sense of pride and self-respect? I'm broke. Let me go set fire to something and beat someone up.

Good grief. How would you like to live inside of Durbin's head with that kind of an outlook? What a genuine horror show that must be. He just assumes we're all sociopaths. No wonder he's so hot to try to control us and run our lives. Really scary world he lives in. Uncivilized.

Then I saw this guy named Mike Norman on Neil Cavuto. I couldn't believe this Norman guy. He looks like a grown-up. He's at least the size of Neil Cavuto and his voice has changed. But apparently he has a lasting and unshakeable faith in Santa Claus, and especially the federal-government-as-Santa-Claus.

So I googled Mike Norman and found something called "Mike Norman Is An Idiot." He sure is. Happy to know I'm not alone in my assessment.

Here, back to Economics 101. The government does not create wealth. The government can print money.... I was going to say "mint" money, but it can't mint money unless it owns some valuable metal, which it doesn't anymore. Most of the stuff in Fort Knox belongs to other people. We're just babysitting it. I believe it was Nixon who decided to entirely sever the value of the US dollar from anything real and let it "float" on the international currency market. So it's only paper and a promise, and the promise has proven to be pretty much of a crock in the hands of legislators hell-bent on bribing citizens to vote for them.

At any rate, the government does not produce anything. Every single service the government provides could be provided by a private citizen or company. It's just more convenient and much more orderly for a society or culture to grant its legislative and judicial authority to a single organization -- a government. We pay for that with our taxes. All the government does is create laws and enforce them. That's it. How much of that do you want to pay for? How much has any value for you?

Some of law is worthwhile. I'm not an anarchist. I'd happily support a police force and a military, but the EPA? Not so much. And when a government starts forcing you to pay for services you don't want or need -- what do you call that? Especially when the government has the authority to force you to pay for it. The tail begins wagging the dog. Eventually you end up with some kind of totalitarian nightmare that serves only a handful of tyrants at the expense of all other citizens. That's slavery no matter how you look at it.

So anyway, this Mike Norman person, like Dick(head) Durbin, and like the Comrade, doesn't seem to understand that value needs to be something more than good intentions. (Or maybe, not-so-good intentions.) You can't just dream up a treasury. Not even socialists, not even the Comrade, has been able to do that, though the Comrade seems to continue to believe that "Yes! I can!"

You can make all kinds of promises and borrow the money to pay for it -- for a while. But when the bill comes due in an idiotic socialist nation, like Greece, you end up with people killing each other. It's happened over and over and over again throughout history, and every couple generations, we get some new get-rich-quick scheme from some butthead like Karl Marx or John Kennth Galbraith.

Better we should hang onto to our liberties, each pay our own way, and respect others' right to do the same.

Save the republic. Preserve and promote capitalism and free enterprise. And by "free," I mean "unregulated" by anything but the common sense of every individual for and by him/herself.

The privilege of citizenship

Very briefly because I'm very busy and woke up late....

Fox is reporting that someone in congress is introducing a bill that would strip people of US citizenship, apparently if they blow up buildings and/or leave flammable SUV's in Times Square.

But is stripping them of their citizenship a bad thing for them?

I mean, without citizenship, they'll qualify for free health care and other benefits, and they'll be able to move across the borders completely unimpeded, no? As a matter of fact, if anyone tries to stop their crossing the borders whenever and wherever they please, the Comrade's regime will call up thousands of protesters to protect their "right" to do so, no? And they can bring whole gangs of thugs with them, controlled substances in large quantities, and any kind of weapons. They can shoot the locals with no retribution, shoot the cops, etc. etc. Hey, it's like they died and went to heaven.

So I'd say terrorists and other related wannabes are probably better off without US citizenship.

Being an American citizen just means you're liable to pay your "fair" share of the $14 TRILLION debt congress has squandered on, among other things, subsidizing non-citizens.

And a note on the debt.... Greece just voted to cut back its budget. Rioting in the streets, etc. What a bunch of idiots. Where do the rioters think their government is going to get the money to support their lazy lifestyles? The Greeks are just stupid. And a grievous reminder of how to turn proud people into dependents and slaves of the state.

Does the White House "get it" yet?

It's 2:00 am on Tuesday, May 3 here. Fox has been exhaustively repeating -- I mean reporting --  on the US Attorney General's middle-of-the-night announcement that they've arrested a US citizen with a Pakistani background for planting the exploding SUV in Times Square on Saturday night. Saw parts of AG Hold'em's statement. He seems about as braindead as Janet Napolitano, who seems to have such a hard time staying awake. Thank God for the NYPD. Hold'em suggested that Faisal Shazzam! (shades of Gomer Pyle) or whatever the arrested's name is, is actually a... well... a... gulp... "terrorist." He's trying to kill Americans.

OMG! Someone call the police!

So Fox is waking up all their commentators and reporters asking them why Hold'em is making this announcement in the middle of the night.

Apparently Hold'em wants to impress us all that the White House is finally convinced that "terrorists" truly do exist.

Do ya think? Next they'll be claiming that Iran is seriously developing an atom bomb. (Abracadabrajab was haranguing about that all day at the UN, but I'm sure the Comrade will just charm the pants off him and get him to change his mind about wiping Israel off the face of the earth.)

Perhaps, like Van Jones, right up until this moment, Hold'em and the rest of the merry marxists thought it really was George Bush who blew up the Twin Towers in a major power grab. After all, they probably would have.

But no... Hey, maybe there really is an al-Qaeda trying to kill Americans. Or a Taliban, or someone. Spooky.

What a bummer, huh? Maybe they better lock the guy up, what do you think?

Shazzam! was arrested at JFK airport as he was boarding a plane for Dubai. Oh dear, hope they didn't do any profiling in tracking this guy down. Maybe he looks like an Middle Easterner. Oh-oh -- there goes any chance of conviction at trial. I mean, you don't want to actually suggest that a Middle Eastern-looking person would be involved in anything like al-Qaeda or the Taliban. We must be fair. Hope they searched a few Swedes and Icelanders while they were at it.

They did read Shazzam! his rights. Think they'll maybe question him? No... better get him a lawyer. Maybe from Hold'em's former law firm doing their fair share of pro bono work. They seem to sympathize with people who are somehow vaguely connected to "man-made disasters." Especially when they happen in the United States.

What a damn circus, know what I mean?

And again, thank God for the NYPD. Deep in my heart, I don't believe the feds had anything to do with it.

Louisiana hit again

Poor Louisiana. The oil spill looks like a big and long-lasting mess.

Just wish I could believe it was all accidental, coming so closely on the heels of the Comrade's oh-so-generous announcement that he would "allow" people to think about drilling in the USA. So big of you, Comrade, to bless the obvious necessity. But who really needs you, anyway?

Anyone but me wondering if the Comrade counts himself among the number of those who have "made enough money"? Exactly how much is "enough," Comrade? I'm sure you have all the answers. And I'm sure you need much more money than most other people, being a step above all of us unwashed proletariat, right?

Look, it's late. I'm tired. I'm oh so tired of the crap coming out of Washington. Specifically the White House.

Worried about America and genuinely afraid of the underhanded and power-grabbing tactics of this regime.

And I can picture very clearly the scene from last Monday: Carol Brownose, David Axelgrease, and Ram Emanuel, all in black, faces smeared with camo paint, paddling a small rubber boat into the pitch black of the Gulf at midnight, and all of them wielding Bic lighters. The waves lap against the sides of the boat. The half moon disguises their tedious but determined progress toward the targeted oil platform....

Is this the Reichstag Fire yet? Are the buttheads still trying to sell crap-n-tax? Or trying to resurrect it?

It would be so nice to be able to trust someone in government again. Or at least trust that they're merely stupid, rather than stupid and evil.

And why did the Republicans decide to allow debate on the terrible dem financial regulation bill? Do the Republicans honestly believe that they can make some difference in it? Or, for that matter, that they can regulate better?

Funny... Happened across two of the three debates the Brits have been having for their upcoming election. This involves three parties: Conservative, Liberal, and Labor. Gordon Brown, current P.M., is Labor. David Cameron is Conservative, and there's this other guy trying to act like Obama who's the Liberal. He's a good speaker, young and enthusiastic, and a total socialist loony. In England, socialism is pretty acceptable and accepted. After all, they had George Bernard Shaw and John Maynard Keynes.

It's rather horrible listening to the debate. They discuss how they will carve up the U.K., what kinds of benefits their subjects will get, how much they'll have to pay in taxes, etc. And the people -- the subjects -- just sit there and take it in stride. They're in total compliance, but through most of their history, they always have been. Sort of starved into submission.

They don't have a Constitution like ours -- that is, written -- and I'm not overly impressed with the Magna Carta, though I guess it was a start. It was possibly the first thing written in Europe that tried to limit the powers of a monarch.

Anyway, thought it was interesting that the Conservative is in the lead in the polls. He would not be "conservative" in the USA, but for England I guess it's a start.

Also read somewhere that England is having tea parties -- I mean like ours, but rather more civilized. And they might actually involve the drinking of tea. Anyone else see any irony in that?

Got in a discussion with some Brits once about politics. You know, it was the USA that ruined the Empire via lend-lease in the early days of WWII, he said. OK. Like they could keep all their colonies and defeat Hitler at the same time. England might have done it, though. All of England is about the size of Illinois, and look what kind of an impact the Brits have had over history.

Then this other Brit asked if I knew whether or not it's true that Americans mostly prefers coffee to tea because of events in Boston Harbor. It's a possibility. Also, coffee is grown in South America while tea came from China. That might have had something to do with it, too.

Anyway, I need some sleep.

And I stand with Steven Hawking:  I don't believe the aliens are friendly and want to help us. I think it's probably more like that Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man." It's a cook book!