Saturday, December 24, 2011

"We could be totalitarian, except 'the other side' resisted"

Been watching clips on TV from an interview the Comrade gave to Barbara Walters. She asked him if he'd made any mistakes.

He said yes, he did. In trying to protect the American people, he spared us from knowing just how bad the economy was when he took office.

So it's still all George Bush's fault. The Comrade was only being a big cuddly daddy, lying to spare us from the reality we all live day-to-day? Is this making any sense to anyone? If you get laid off from your job and can't find another for two years, are you unaware of how bad things are? Oh, save us, Comrade!

In truth, I don't believe the Comrade had a clue how bad the economy was. In fact, he still doesn't have a clue how bad the economy is. If he knew anything about economics at all, he'd recognize that all his policies to date have only fueled failure and made recovery impossible.

And of course, since he must have a glimmer by now -- if he reads the polls that show about 70% of the nation believes the USA is "moving in the wrong direction" -- that the population is a bit weary of the "George W. made me do it" b.s. So now the Comrade is setting up congress to take the blame.

He told Barbara Walters that the nation could have made a lot more progress, had not "the other side" blocked so many of his policies. Note, he didn't signify progress toward what.

First of all, what policies? What, exactly, has the Comrade ever proposed? The only things that come to mind are socialized medicine and cap-and-trade. BECAUSE THE COMRADE HAD DEMOCRAT MAJORITIES IN BOTH HOUSES THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF HIS TERM, he did manage to extort and intimidate and bribe his way to getting socialized medicine legislated. Not cap-and-trade specifically, but a whole range of equally stupid and destructive measures the EPA has passed as simple edicts.

The result is the same -- the destruction of free enterprise and prosperity in the USA.

And second, as far congress opposing him? THIS congress, the 112th, was elected in 2010, after two years of watching Pazzo Pelosi, blissfully brainless, destroy the republic. The current Republican majority in the House resulted in large part as a backlash against the Comrade's communist-fascist policies. We the people want congress to obstruct all the totalitarian bullshit that's going on in Washington. That's why we elected them.

The Comrade just doesn't get it. NOBODY WANTS HIS MARXIST POLICIES.

And after three years, he still doesn't recognize this, making him either monumentally stupid or a rigid ideaolgue who doesn't give a damn what the population wants. He wants a totalitarian marxist state, and to him, that's all that matters. His sociopathic arrogance has blinded him to reality.

SOMETIMES IT'S GOOD TO BE AN OBSTRUCTIONIST. I THANK GOD FOR WHATEVER FASCIST-SOCIALIST POLICIES CONGRESS HAS BLOCKED.

And Merry Christmas! And don't forget, 2012 is an election year!

Save the Republic.

Friday, December 23, 2011

Dem "victory" on tax cuts? It's all spin

It's all spin, you know. Saying the democrats have won some kind of victory on extending the tax cuts is, overall, a loss for them.

Even if the cuts are extended only two month, the "tax the rich" provisions have been dropped, and the language demanding a decision on the Keystone Pipeline is included.

In addtion, the Comrade initially wanted a year-long extension. So how is settling for a two-month extension any kind of "win" for him?

This is so totally stupid. Like I recall a video clip or something from years ago, showing a cat skating across a newly-waxed floor and smashing into the wall. The caption read, "I meant to do that."

That's kind of the same spirit as the dems declaring a win in this debacle.

Supposedly they made the Republicans "look bad." Only the brainless might think so. I mean, what is the advantage to the citizen to get a rather insignificant tax cut for two months rather than having the tax cut for 12 months?

I'm afraid I don't get it. It's like.... stupid.

The Republicans decidedly won this round, minus the yeal-long extension, and many Republicans opposed any extension at all because that revenue only depletes the Social Security fund. So what, exactly, did they lose?

No, this is a big win for Republicans. A major win. But somehow there's so much spin on it, it's been totally twisted around.

All for now.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Had my fill of negativity already

Mitt Romney has given several interviews lately on TV, and I found myself warming up to him a bit.

He seems to be the person that Fox and many Washington insiders, and Ann Coulter, support for the Republican nomination for president.

However, I do not like, and never have liked, negative campaigning.

It's like making war, you know? It's like you if can't offer a strong and persuasive argument, then the other option is just to attack and destroy the competition. It's like the TV show Survivor, which I don't like and never watch. I mean who wins? The slimy, sniveling pig you wish had been voted out. The weakest runt of the litter who's just mooched off everyone else's accomplishments.

I can't respect this. As a matter of fact, I expect such a negative campaign to be the democrats' strategy next year, since the Comrade and all his twisted little buddies have failed to produce anything positive over his years in office thus far. He has nothing to offer, so attack the other guy. He's very obviously got nothing else to run on.

It's pretty disgusting from the democrats -- though actually more or less in character. And it's really disappointing from Mitt Romney.

I won't vote for anyone who runs a negative campaign. In fact, I really liked Michelle Bachman until everything that came out her mouth was an attack against her opponents. No wonder she's fallen so far in the polls. And I've been taking another look at Rick Perry since he stopped attacking everyone else.

So now Romney seems to think this negativity thing is going to work for him.

Well, it doesn't work for me. That's all I can say about it.

Save the Republic.

49ers should think about day games

In San Francisco over the weekend, Candlestick Park saw two power outages during a night football game.

Well, maybe they should move to day games. I mean, it's only friendly to the environment, isn't it? Like,  how many redwoods will they have to cut down to continue playing at night? That is, in the absence of coal, oil, and natural gas?

Last year, about 30 coal-fueled electricity generation plants were shut down. Another 30 will be shut down this year. And this all due to new EPA rules that claim these plants are responsible for giving people asthma. Many of these plants have been in operation for decades. All of a sudden, they're giving people asthma?

We won't look too closely at the science behind that, or the lack of it.

Anyway, those coal-powered plants, a total of 60+ of them, provide 10% of the electrincal power available in the USA. And the Comrade and his henchmen don't like the idea of the Keystone Pipeline, which would bring Canadian oil to the USA to be refined.

Remember during his presidential campaign how the Comrade promised he'd make the cost of electricity "skyrocket?" Well, this is one promise he'll be keeping. Many people predict exactly that -- skyrocketing costs, and eventually rolling brown-outs as well.

And isn't Karma a wonderful thing? No power in A) "candlestick" park in, B) San Francisco. Pazzo Pelosi's home turf. I'm sure she's very proud of her work on this issue.

They asked for it. They got it. They like it?

Hope they have a really hot summer, too. And aw shucks, no water either. Got to spare those little fish that clog up the plumbing. But it is OK to walk around naked in San Francisco.

Save the Republic.

Monday, December 19, 2011

Obamanomics feeds on class warfare

I watched part of "The Week" on ABC-tv yesterday, mainly because Paul Ryan was on. Interesting show. Host Christiane Amanpour had Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) and columnist Geoge Will on one side, and Barney Fudd (D-Mass.) and Robert (Third)Reich, an economist who had been in the Clinton cabinest, on the other. They were discussing their very different views on economics. Kinda like watching Milton Friedman and Karl Marx go at it.

Anyway, anyone who pays attention at all is already familiar with the arguments. It was the guests' summary comments at the end that were very enlightening.

OK, George Will, speaking on behalf of political freedom and private property rights, noted that these are two things upon which the USA was founded, and because of which it has thrived.

Then Robert (Third)Reich offered his concluding statement, which I found very interesting, if not downright terrifying. He said something like we shouldn't be arguing anymore over what kind of government we have. He said the more appropriate question is: "Who should government be for?"

Well, there's your class warfare. If, according to (Third)Reich's view, government should be an active advocate for... someone... then, naturally, you're going to have all kinds of groups vying for government's attention and investment. Sort of like baby birds in the nest, mouths open, waiting for the pre-digested worms. But these are baby birds, not human adults capable of fending for themselves.

And, since government doesn't really produce anything, it has to tax someone, seize the fruits of someone's labor, in order to have anything to give to anyone else. So, it's the old Robin Hood thing, "Give from the [fill in the name of any victim], to give to the [fill in the name of the most effective whiner, or campaign donor, as it turns out}."

The thing is, class warfare still doesn't work in the USA. Sure, people will grudgingly agree with "Tax the rich." Sure, steal my neighbor's hog, not mine. But apparently no one but the OWies are actively out there hating the rich. Rather, after a month or two of the OWies' clueless complaints, their redistribution of filth and criminal activity, the public got very, very tired of them. The rich are a whole lot more appealing on a personal level.

I mean, who would you rather be? Some brainless idiot, stripping down on a Manhattan street corner to attract attention to yourself and begging for a hand-out, or one of the Wall Street "Fat Cats," or actually "worker bees," trying to pick their way through the stench and filth on the streets to get to their offices? Rather dramatic contrast in your choices there.

And, good grief, Barney Fudd is not only stupid, but extremely vocal and rude about it. Hard to get a word in edgewise over his aggressaive, non-stop drivel. Apparently he subscribes to the theory that if you can shout down your detractors, you win. What an idiot. It's like when he was 12 or 13 years old, someone called him a prodigy and he decided then to rest on his laurels. He's never learned another thing -- not even after seeing how ruinous are the policies he enacted and continues to defend in the face of their absolutely disastrous results. He continues to blame the banks for making stupid mortgage investments, when it was Fudd that forced them to it. He's retiring after this term. So we do have something to be thankful for. Now hopefully others can get on with the business of cleaning up the wreckage he leaves behind.

Anyway, enough of this for now.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Go ahead, Mr. Prez, wreck the nation; see if that will get you re-elected

Things are not looking up. The Comrade, our president, won't allow it.

Domestically, the House passed a comprehensive appropriations bill that includes exentensions for unemployment payments and payroll tax cuts. The tax cuts are minimal, wouldn't keep anyone in beer and cigarettes, but the Comrade thinks they make him look concerned and magnanimous, so they stay. These cuts have the added bonus of speeding up the bankruptcy of Social Security, but I'm not planning on being able to retire -- ever -- anyway.

The House also folded into the bill a request that the Comrade make a decision on the Keystone Pipeline proposal -- that is, building a pipeline from Canada to carry the oil sands to refineries in the USA.

The Comrade already said he wouldn't sign a bill that included the Keystone Pipeline. See, the Comrade would sacrifice 20,000 jobs and a big assist to the USA's energy independence so that he can collect a couple dozen votes from the more rabid tree-huggers.

Hey, Comrade, the radical environmentalists will never know. They're all living in caves and one-room soddies in the deep woods and refuse to use electricity -- likely no communications. Don't worry about it. They probably don't vote anyway. That would involve having a permanent address, and I do believe they just sorta swing from tree to tree on kudzu vines. That way they don't have to use gasoline, can keep an eye on those spotted owls, and make sure no one from the Dept. of Interior is clearing up the flammable deadwood and overgrowth from the forest floor.

Anyway, Brain-dead Harry Reid will not allow the Senate to review this bill, even though it passed the House with votes from both Republicans and democrats. And apparently the House dems even tried to enlist a few allies among democrat senators.

Ol' Brain-dead is just that though -- brain dead. They just wheel out his corpse, Hannibal-Lecter-style, occasionally, and prop him up in front of a microphone to mumble his unintelligible gibberish. I think he gave another speech about cowboy poetry or something the other day. Hard to tell. He was barely conscious.

Me, I'm wondering what the Senate is getting paid for. They've done nothing all year but sit on their dead asses.

I may personally mount a "Dump Durbn" campaign in Illinois. Do believe he'll be up for election next year.

On another subject, one of our Stealth Drones landed in Iran. Apparently no one really knows how that happened.

Some remote-control operator probably let Slappy Joe Biden sit at his desk for a minute, and boom! There goes the military technology. Just couldn't keep his hands off the joystick.

Anyway, apparently the Comrade, as commander-in-chief, had the option to blow up the drone remotely, but he decided not to. Better to let Iran have this technology so they can show it to their good friends around the world and further neutralize the US military.

And now the Comrade gets to make a humiliating spectacle of himself and the USA, crawling on his knees and begging for the return of the drone. I think the Comrade's afraid of the hairy little twit in the 1950's golf jacket, Abracadabrajab.

At any rate, does "bumbling idiot" ring any bells? The whole idea of the Comrade as commander-in-chief is like something from a horror movie. Or really more like Inspector Clouceau of "Pink Panther" fame. I mean, the Comrade never heard of "corpse-men" before he got into office.

So, I'm not happy about any of this. Do have my fingers crossed, though, that a couple blue-dog dems in the Senate will knock Brain-dead Harry over the head, tie him up in a burlap sack, and toss him off the 12th Street Bridge.

That would be a huge and very appreciated Christmas gift to the nation.

And then the heroic blue-dogs can go before the inevitable congressional investigation and explain, "I know nothng!" That seems to work in Washington these days.

Save the Republic.

Monday, December 12, 2011

Picking apart Republicans

Watched the debate Saturday night among Republican candidates and thought it came off fairly well. And I have to say, after Mitt Romney has been sort of immune, or at least untouched by attacks from fellow Rpublicans or anyone else for that matter, he seems to be wearing a target on his back now.

Apparently the dems started running negative ads about him. Seems they assumed he would be the presidential candidate and they wanted to get an early start on their smear campaign.

And now it seems like Romney can't a break at all -- but not due to the dems.

During the debate, Rick Perry again brought up Romney's recommendation that the whole nation adopt the Massachusett's model for socialized medicine. Perry says the line was in the earlier editions of Romney's book, but has been deleted.

Romney swears the comment was never in the book and offered a $10,000.00 bet that it was not. Perry declined.

So since the rest of the debate (and even this part, from my point of view) was pretty civil, many in the press have now jumped on Romney, claiming that "$10,000.00 to him is like $10.00 to anyone else. He's out of touch with the American middle class."

No, actually, I think Romney was only naming a very large amount to emphasize the point that he would put his money where his mouth is. A LOT of money.

But nothing else really for the press to crank on, so they jump on Romney for that.

Gingrich also came under some criticism. The question came up about character and lying to your wife and all... turns out, Newt was the only candidate on the stage with multiple wives and a history of infidelity, etc. But Newt handled it with considerable grace, I thought. He probably doesn't make everyone happy, but at least he's not running away from it.

Funny, too, some key differences between Newt and Romney -- Romney is a sort of hard-core gentleman. Newt still is a bit inclined toward the controversial. But I agree with him when he says thre never really was a "Palestinian state." I looked that up myself not too long ago, and Palestine never existed except as a kind of region, in the same way you might refer to "New England" or "the Pacific Northwest." 'Course, Newt is not supposed to point that out because he might hurt some peoples' feelings.

Oh, and the Comrade was on 60 Minutes last night. I didn't see it. I'm sick of liars.

Save the Republic.

Friday, December 9, 2011

The Sgt. Schultz defense: "I know nothing!"

Anyone remember the TV show, Hogan's Heroes? It was about Ally prisoners in a German POW camp in WWII. Sgt. Schultz was a camp guard who often stumbled upon the espionage and sabotage done by the POWs. However, Schultz didn't want to be transfered to the Eastern Front, didn't want to rock the boat. So whenever he came upon some plan the POWs had cooked up, he just shut his eyes and walked away. His standard lines were: "I know nothing! I see nothing!"

That used to be funny. Such cowardice and corruption.

Now it's the hallmark of the US Dept. of Justice and especially its director, Eric Holder.

So Holder and his people apparently were informed about Fast & Furious, a program whereby agents of Mexican drug cartels were allowed to buy all kinds of high-powered weaponry in the USA and ship it to the criminal drug gangs in Mexico. Apparently about 1,500 guns -- maybe more, I've heard a range of numbers -- were allowed to "walk" across the border into the welcome arms of the drug lords.

The BATF and other agencies received complaints from gun dealers. The dealers reported that a host of shady characters were milling around their stores with wads of money. The BATF and apparently FBI as well told the gun dealers, "Go ahead. Make the sales." In one or two cases, the agents even videotaped the sales with a hidden camera in a gun shop.

The federal agents seemed to believe the guns would be tracked in Mexico and would lead them to the gang members and encampments. Maybe. Who knows?

The result was, the feds lost track of the guns. However, one weapon did show up next to the dead body an ICE agent. Apparently it was used by a drug runner to kill the ICE agent, Brian Terry. So at least the feds found one of the guns, huh?

So Rep. Darryl Issa (R-CA) is running a congressional investigation into this whole affair. Eric Holder, head of the Dept of Justice, and the ultimate boss of the FBI and the BATF, has testified twice in front of Issa's committee.

The first time, Holder took the Sgt. Schultz defense: "I know nothing." He whined that the DoJ is big operation and he can't, after all, be expected to know what his employees are doing.

My queston at the time: So what is this dumb ass getting paid for?

Well, then a bunch of emails and memos have turned up, documenting the fact that Eric Holder had been informed about the Fast & Furious program. Holder says he doesn't read the information his deputies and agencies send to him.

My question again: So what is this dumb ass getting paid for?

Furthermore, there's documentation that indicates that Eric Holder is lying through his teeth. He calls these lies "inaccuracies." Yeah. That they are. Deliberate inaccuraces? That would make them "lies" wouldn't it?

So what is this dumb ass getting paid for?

Meanwhile, since Fast & Furious first came to the public's attention -- largely via the murder of Officer Brian Terry -- it's been suggested that Holder et. al. advanced the whole program to deliberately get American-made weapons into Mexico. Why? So that a case could be made to clamp down harder on US gun manufacturers, dealers, and eventually gun owners.

And guess what? A few democrats in congress are pointing to Fast & Furious and claimng: "See? Now we have to clamp down harder on US gun manufacturers, dealers, and eventually restrict gun ownership rights."

Funny how that how all works out, isn't it? Create a freakish mess, blame the victims, and use it as a reason to tighten the government's reach and control.

Gee.... where do we see that scenario played out... over and over and over again?

And apparently following Eric Holder's brilliant strategy, John Corzine, former US Senator and former Governor of New Jersey, former head of Goldman Sachs fnancial firm, is also using the Sgt. Schultz defense in a unhappy situation of his own.

When Corzine left as Gov. of New Jersey, he became part of a firm called MF Global, an investment company that seems to have sunk lots of money into European ventures -- many of which are currently spiraling the drain.

So the feds apparently launched some sort of investigaton into his activities. And as it turns out, there's something like $1.2 BILLION of investments that Corzine and MF Global have simply lost track of.

Look, investors aren't all fat cats. There are, for example, "institutional investors" that buy all kinds of bonds and stocks and such to support various programs -- often county or municipal pension funds and things like that. There also are private investors, people who maybe saved $200,000 over their lifetimes and invested it to fund their retirement.

So these are the investors in MF Global. With the missing $1.2 BILLION.

On the show The Five, Kimberley Guilfoyle wondered exactly how you could misplace $1.2 BILLION dollars. She noted it's not like quarters falling out of a hole your pocket.

When asked about these missing funds, Corzine told congress: "I don't know what happened to it."

I know nothing! I see nothing!

Corzine admits he was responsible for MF Global's business operations, but he doesn't seem too interested in figuring out what happened to all that money -- or in making any kind of reparations for it. He just might end up in jail. We can only hope. He could share a cell with Bernie Madoff.

And these are the people who are running things?

Good God...

Save the Republic.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

"Fairness" -- define that, too

Well I found something that the Comrade and I agree on. In the speech he delivered in Kansas yesterday, He was correct in saying that right now is what he called "a defining moment" for the nation. To both the Comrade as well as to me, though we're on different sides, this means that we right now have to pick: Do we want the USA to continue as a free country or do we want to crush it down into some kind of dictatorial socialist state?

We are making the decisions right now -- all of us, every citizen. If you don't vote and refuse to otherwise participate -- well, as Edmund Burke once said, "All that's needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." In other words, you might as well burn the flag.

Just to make this simple and squish it all into a handy metaphor, let's think about the Comrade's notion of "fairness."

"Fairness" to him is masses of little cookier-cutter people, all happy little cogs in a great big wheel driven by Washington, all with the same needs, the same ambitions, the same principles and beliefs. As Time magazine (or was it Newsweek?) claimed upon the Comrade's election "We're all socialists now."

On a discussion list a few years ago, I noted that communism destroys individuality. That claim was quickly countered by some dude with Ivy League credentials who corrected me by saying, "Have you ever read Marx? Marx was all about the individual."

My response: "All three volumes of Das Kaptal. But it doesn't work."

Why doesn't it work? Because when you have a single decision-maker for the whole nation, then the whole nation gets the same thing. We're all treated exactly the same. We have the same kinds of jobs, wear the same clothing, watch the same movies, read the same books, get the same health care, eat the same food, etc.

Washington is not going to say, "OK, how many pairs of white levis do you want? How many traditonal blue jeans? Embroidered denim? Anyone?" The government won't do that. For them, it's too damn inefficient. We will all have blue jeans, maybe, or whatever whim pops into the head of a particular decision-maker at that particular defining moment.

Like health care. You have cancer? Right now, the feds are determining First, Second, and Third lines of treatment. Doctors do the first. Doesn't work, they do the second. Still doesn't work, try the third. Still doesn't work... they'll give you some end-of-life counseling.

A Dr. Janda, who was campaigning for a congressional candidate in Michigan in 2010 gave a speech (it's on YouTube, look it up) about this treatment methodology. He had a patient with cancer and had tried the first two recommended treatments. They didn't work. The patient was compelled to go to Medicaid or some-such, which would not allow any but those recommended lines of treatment. Which had been tried and didn't work.

Yet Dr. Janda says that for him to try other therapies with the patient, he, the doctor, would have been fined $100,000.00.

This is the Comrade's notion of "fairness" in action. One size fits all, even if it means chopping a few inches off your legs or taking your head off. The prescription from Washington will fit. At least there will be no other options.

Then think in terms of rewards. Some crazy right-wing student went around to fellow students on campus, asking their views on "income fairness" and "redistribution of wealth." Apparently most of them thought it was only "fair" that rich people should be taxed a lot more to pay for what poorer people couldn't pay.

So then the right-winger asked, "Well, what about grades? You got an A in Biology, right? Why don't you take a B so that some failing student could at least get a C?"

Interestingly enough, the interviewed students didn't go for that idea. One of them stridently complained, "But I worked for that A!"

Yeah, and nobody works for money, do they? It just falls off the trees in autumn. Or maybe it just resides somehow in Daddy's magic check book.

In the Comrade's Kansas speech, he asked something to the effect, "Do you believe you're better off when you're left alone to fend for yourself, play by your own rules?"

Well. Yeah. Isn't that what freedom is? Live by your own lights?

What are the options? Tax the rich? Cripple industry? Bankrupt and hamstring the financial industry? Nationalize the auto industry? Fork over corporations to labor leaders? Keep supporting dirt-poor backwards nations by refusing to develop our own fuel resources? Give our science to Red China for development and production by slave labor?

Anybody want to live in that kind of world? Nothing is your own, not even your mind and future. How many people are going to work and work and work, as they do now, if they don't get to keep what they earn? That wasn't very successful in the slave South -- except for the slave owners -- and I really doubt it will work now. Especially not with a bunch of infantile types schooled in nothing but "the world owes me a living."

Yes. This is a defining moment. And the outcome is up to all of us as citizens and voters. At least right now we still have a choice.

And I suspect the Comrade is going to lose this one.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Creating the "Imperial Presidency"

The Comrade gave a speech in Osawattomie, Kansas, yesterday, at the same place where Teddy Roosevelt apparently launched his third-party run (and loss) as a Progressive. The Comrade implied a comparison to TR, saying TR was called a "socialist, even a communist."

According to Wikipedia, here's the Progressiver Party (Bull Moose) platform:
  • A National Health Service to include all existing government medical agencies.
  • Social insurance, to provide for the elderly, the unemployed, and the disabled
  • Limited injunctions in strikes
  • A minimum wage law for women
  • An eight hour workday
  • A federal securities commission
  • Farm relief
  • Workers' compensation for work-related injuries
  • An inheritance tax
  • A Constitutional amendment to allow a Federal income tax
The political reforms proposed included:
  • Women's suffrage
  • Direct election of Senators [they had been elected by state legislatures]
  • Primary elections for state and federal nominations 
The platform also urged states to adopt measures for "direct democracy", including:
  • The recall election (citizens may remove an elected official before the end of his term
  • The referendum (citizens may decide on a law by popular vote)
  • The initiative (citizens may propose a law by petition and enact it by popular vote)
  • Judicial recall (when a court declares a law unconstitutional, the citizens may override that ruling by popular vote)
However, the main theme of the platform was an attack on the domination of politics by business interests, which allegedly controlled both established parties. The platform asserted that to destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day. To that end, the platform called for:
  • Strict limits and disclosure requirements on political campaign contributions
  • Registration of lobbyists
  • Recording and publication of Congressional committee proceedings

Besides these measures, the platform called for reductions in the tariff, limitations on naval armaments by international agreement and improvements to inland waterways.
The biggest controversy at the convention was over the platform section dealing with trusts and monopolies such as Standard Oil. The convention approved a strong "trust-busting" plank, but Roosevelt had it replaced with language that spoke only of "strong National regulation" and "permanent active [Federal] supervision" of major corporations.
So let's think about good ol' TR and his times. The big trusts did exist -- by act of congress. You can't have a trust or a cartel or anything like that unless you have legislation to enforce it. However, the Sherman Anti-Trust was already in place in 1912, when TR made his little Bull Moose bid. And the Sherman Act would have been unecessary had the Senate not strongly enforced the trusts. Many senators at the time owned pieces of the trusts. The trusts supposedly "protected" US trade and production, most notably the Sugar Trust, which banned import of sugar, or put really stiff tariffs on imports to "protect" the sugar industry mostly in Louisiana and Texas. Every state had their local hobby horse industry and the state legislatures elected the US Senators.

But read these above provisions carefully. The useful ones are in practice already. Many of them also were promoted by Woodrow Wilson, (I would call him a totalitarian and he was openly a racist) when he was in office. Some have been tried and abandoned -- actually much of the crap Wilson promoted was so disastrous economically and every other way it had to be repealed or reversed by Calvin Coolidge. And note that TR didn't favor the Anti-Trust laws, he wanted "strong National regulation" and "permanent active [Federal] supervision" of major corporations.

And exactly how do you break up the corrupt relationship between business and government by allowing the government to regulate business? Looks to me more like you're delivering a honey pot into the hands of poltiicians. And that's pretty much how it's all turned out, isn't it?

Additionally, in 1906/07, I think it was, the US suffered a major financial crisis. TR went to J.P. Morgan and asked for a bail-out. Morgan agreed. But TR didn't think it proper that a private financier had more money than the federal government. TR didn't trust private enterprise at all. You could say he was a control freak who didn't trust anything that he couldn't drag around by a bridle. TR was afraid J.P. Morgan would try to dictate to the federal government. Morgan never did. TR later commented that, unlike most robber barons, "J.P. Morgan is a gentleman."

I suspect TR was projecting his own power lust on the Captains of Industry and was genuinely and happily surprised that Morgan never even considered delcaring himself king.

Also, while he was President, TR also sent the US 7th fleet -- the Navy -- on a trip around the world, especially across the Pacific. This was partly in efforts to more or less shake a fist at Japan. The US and other western nations had ever had problems with Japan for not allowing ships like whalers into its ports for things like fresh food and water. Japan nurtured its resentments and struck back on Dec. 7, 1941.

In short, Teddy Roosevelt is regarded by many, if not most, historians as the man who created the "Imperial Presidency" in America. Before TR, the Office of the President was much, much weaker. Most power resided in Congress. TR wanted to weaken congress, shifting much of its power to the populace. Not a good idea. The USA has never been a democracy -- always a republic.

This is because the public tends to sway with fads and fancy -- and with specious promises of "free" milk and honey, a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage -- and that's not a rational or a viable way to govern. It's like Ben Franklin said, "pure" democracy is "two wolves and sheep deciding what to have for dinner."

Personally, I always considered the two Roosevelts -- Teddy and Franklin D. -- as the two presidents most destructive to personal liberty in the USA. And they were both very popular personally, like the Comrade. Some people call this combination of attractiveness and abuse of power "demogoguery." I do. John F. Kennedy was another one. He drove the steel industry out of the USA.

And I think the Comrade would like to take this all one step further and create the "Totalitarian Presidency."

What do you think?

Save the Republic.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

The mask is off: Leftists openly promote communism for US

Well, hate to say I toldya so, but in my Nov. 2 blog, titled "White House Game Plan," I outlined pretty damn accurately the Comrade's and the left's program for the future of the USA.

And now in the Dec. 1 Wall Street Journal, Andy Stern -- former head of the SEIU, currently a professor at Columbia, and one of the Comrade's love-bugs -- has suggested that since Red China is so far ahead of the USA economically (in their dreams, anyway), we should probably adopt Red China's economic model. Central planning, centralized control, government-owned and operated.

Read it here if you don't believe me:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204630904577056490023451980.html?KEYWORDS=China%27s+Superior+Economic+MOdel

See? What did I say? They create a huge mess, force a deadlock in congress, sieze control of and paralyze key components of the US economy like the banks, and use the EPA and Dept of Energy to hamstring free enterprise here --and then suggest:

HEY, THINGS ARE SUCH A MUDDLE, AREN'T THEY? WOULDN'T YOU JUST PREFER TO BE A SLAVE TO THE STATE? DON'T YOU REALLY, DEEP IN YOUR HEART, LONG TO LIVE UNDER A TOTALITARIAN DCTATORSHIP? (WITH THE LIKES OF STERN RUNNING THINGS, OF COURSE.)

Stern has balls, I got to say that.

I mean, it's not like anything the left has suggested has worked so far. So Stern suggests we demand more of it? He really thinks we're stupid. The SEIU is mostly unskilled and unschooled labor, dude. They run ads on Craigslist for paid protesters (read "Astro-Turf") for $10.00 an hour. Not exactly representative of the rest of the labor force. In fact, only a very tiny percentage.

The fact that Stern is actually employed at Columbia University doesn't say much for the Ivy League, either. Or actually it says a whole lot about the Ivy League, doesn't it?

Hey, Mr. Shit-for-brains Stern, we already have about three-quarters of the communist model and what is the result so far?

Got to ask: Are you better off now than you were three years ago?
Somehow I can't see how this economic mess is the result of free market capitalism, rather, just the opposite. It's the result of nanny-statism, over-regulation, illiterate political idiots running the US Senate, and a total incompetent blockhead in the White House. And I'm being kind; actually, I think the Comrade is a very shrewd sociopath -- a really mean and power-hungry bastard -- like Stern and all the other totalitarians who have preceded them.

You know what? I'm proud of myself. I'm almost never wrong about politics, you know. And I called this one.

And why, oh why, is the media -- with a few exceptions -- along with conservative politicians, so slow to call out these marxists? I mean call them "marxists." These creeps even admit it.

And what an inopportune moment for Stern to come out of the closet -- when everybody hates the Comrade, the economy's in the dumper due to his policies, and Stern's loyalists -- the OWies -- are proving themselves to be ignorant and even criminal slobs and mental defectives. I mean, does Stern think he's got a shot here? Exactly what does he have to offer?

Perhaps he's been too long at Columbia.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

The "Beacon on the Hill" or the sewer in Zucotti Park?

OK, we've all heard -- to death -- that the 2012 election will be one of the most impactful in American history. True. Probably the most impactful since the 1860 election that brought Lincoln into office and triggered the Civil War.

It's because the split in the nation is very wide, an ideological gap. Basically it's two very different views of the USA.

On the one hand, you the tradtional, conservative view of America as the Beacon on the Hill, the Shining City that supports the ideas of personal liberty based on individual rights, free enterprise, private property and prosperity gained through hard work.

Then we have the alternative view as the USA no better or worse than anyplace else, just a difference flag. And accompanying this view is an equally false perception of the human race as stupid, helpless, criminal, and even vicious. This view presents human beings sort of termnally stupid and incompetent to take care of themselves. (Generally the southern planter's view of black slaves, I might add.)

Which do you prefer? Which best encapsulizes the way you view the human race and the USA?

The Comrade is s proponent of the second view. To his eyes, human beings are drooling imbeciles who need a ruling class of "betters" to take care of them. The flotsam clogging Zucotti Park and other places across the nation are an example of this view. Do they represent the great mass of the human race?

And noting this negative attitude about human beings, Thomas Jefferson once noted: "If men are not fit to rule themselves, how then can they be fit to rule others?"

The Conrade's going to have a real hard time getting elected in 2012 because it's very clear now what he thinks of all of us. And, by the way, how he regards himself and others in the "political class" as a superior segment of the species. His arrogance is monumental and based on nothing but the intellectual snobbery he picked up at Ivy League institutions.

Well, many of the Comrade's principles have been put into motion through various pieces of legislation, but mostly by decree. Have they done any good? Or rather, are they compelling the collaps of the nation in a heap of helpless detritus? The Comrade creates misery by making it illegal -- and at the very least morally questionable -- to behave like a rational and productive individual.

In other words, if you weren't born stupid and helpless, and actually managed to survive the public schools with a whole soul, the Comrade will force to behave that way -- or go to jail.

And because of all this, the Comrade has nothing positive to run on. His record? Of what? Deliberate destruction? He leaves a swathe of closed businesses, unemployed workers, and general trash and used hyp needles in his wake.

So the only tactic he can take in his campaign is to trash his opponents. I think we've already had a little taste of this regarding Herman Cain. But this is only the start.

This may be the most disgusting presidential election the nation has ever seen. But I doubt anyone with any brains or self-respect will be able to stomach, let alone support, these kinds of tactics.

Save the Republic.

Don't forget Rick Perry

In my little survey the other day about the current Republican field, I didn't mention Rick Perry. I don't think he's got much of a chance right now -- too many gaffes -- but he seems to have improved quite a bit from his first debate appearances, and I think he has some really killer TV ads going.

What I love about his ideas -- and I guess this one comes from his book -- is that as he says, he wants to make Washington DC "inconsequential" in the lives of most Americans.

Love it! I even love the approach and the way it's phrased.

I will also not criticize anything Texas does on immigration because they have a long, long border with Mexico and have been dealing with immigration issues in more depth than just about anyone else, and since Texas joined the union. Matter of fact, Texas' border with Mexico has had historical problems... but we won't go into that here.

Anyway, Rick Perry started off on the worng foot, just kind of got tossed into the pile-up while the game was in play. I think he's adjusting -- making him a pretty quick learner. But it may be too late to repair his rank in the primaries. The trouble was the very high expectations when he announced his candidacy -- before he was really up to steam.

I've noticed, though, that several other candidates have borrowed from Rick Perry. In fact, if the debates are doing something really terrific, they're providng a cross-pollination of ideas. Sort of building a platform as the debates continue. It's kinda cool to see this evolve.

Also thought Rick Perry was A.) way too stiff and formal; and B.) too pugnacious in the first couple debates. He came off as a kind of a bully. He's really not. As he more or less grows into the race, he's getting a lot more likable. He seems a lot more comfortable.

On the other hand, Bachman is getting more and more aggressive, it seems. And no matter what her point, if she's right or wrong, when she goes on the attack, she loses points -- for the same reason Rick Perry did as he attacked Romney early on.

I'm sure Newt Gingrich's "we're all in this together" attitude is something that went a long way to resuurect him in the race. If there's anything I really hate, it's to see the candidates attacking each other. I hope it doesn't start now between Newt and Mitt. They'll both lose.

Anyway just thought this all was worth a mention. I think Rick Perry is being underestimated because of the bad start. But I also doubt he'll be able to capture the nomination -- this time. There will be other elections, as long as we can stop the Comrade from turning the USA into a dictatorial police state.

And that's it for now.

Save the Republic.

Monday, November 28, 2011

Shifting political landscape

Well, interesting shifts in the political landscape.

Newt Gingrich, who was supposed to be completely out of the running a month ago is now leading the Republican pack -- even beating Romney in some polls. I've always liked Newt -- I wrote about that before. I think he's also kind of in his element at defeating socialism. I think he'd be a good president, I really do. And he's also pragmatic, something the Tea Party doesn't find acceptable, but then the real fanatics on both sides are those who simply refuse to deal with reality -- instead they believe they can impose their own order (or agenda, take your pick) upon it. Reality isn't that flexible. You pretty much have to play it as it lays.

Not slamming the Tea Party, just the way-right fringe (like the way-left now in the White House) seem to think there are easy fixes. There aren't. The Tea Party is correct philosophically, but it's going to take to some time to restore America. It really is. And one reason is because of the damage that's already been done. The OWies are symptomatic. What do you do with a bunch of brainless idiots who cling to fantasy in the teeth of the direst facts of reality? Outside of medicating them and giving them a padlocked meadow somewhere in the Rockies to romp around in? I don't know. You can be sure they will eventually self-destruct... but that takes time, too.

I was willing to stick by Herman Cain for a time. But now another woman came out today, talking about a 13-year affair with him. Who knows if it's true? Certainly the democrats wouldn't want Cain on the Republican ticket -- that would neutalize their race card. What would Janine Garofalo have to talk about then? And certainly the dems are capable of character annihilation -- perhaps more painful than simple assassination. I like Herman Cain. But looks like he's been liked a little too much. Honestly, it breaks my heart.

Also saw an interview with Mitt Romney, and like him a bit more than I have. Funny how everyone on the East Coast seems to believe Romney is the only Republican who can win. Well, no, not funny. The East Coast is so liberal mostly -- at least north of Atlantic City -- and I do believe even eastern Republicans believe they've got to run someone with "liberal leanings," or some kind of "moderate" in order to attract independents. The easterners, looking around them, regard independents as liberal leaning. I'm not convinced that's true. I mean, look at New Hampshire.

These eastern-based Republicans -- who run the party pretty much after all -- like other East and West Coasters, tend to regard the "Fly-over zone" -- that is, everything between the Appalachins and the Rockies -- as inconsequential.

We'll see. Personally, I wouldn't live in California or New York for any reason. And I don't think a liberal or even a Republican moderate has much chance of settting the South on fire.

Anyway, I still worry about Romney and I worry about him in the White House. A little isolated cubicle surrounded by media. And the media is most rabidly leftst. So who's he going to believe? And if he shifts with the wind, where's he going to take the country?

So anyways, I'd be happy with Newt. And it's mainly because I know he understands America. He  might screw himself up occasionally, but I think he'd be extra careful what he does to the nation, just out of respect for it. He understands what's at stake.

Quite a different scenario from what we have now, n'est-ce pas?

And Barney Fudd announced today that he's not going to run again. Gee, I'm sorry. I was hoping he'd get another shot at running the House Banking Committee to see what further damage he could do. Maybe grind the US dollar into complete dust? What a jerk. He should have quit 10 years ago -- if he had, the housing market would probably be in much better shape. Bye-bye Barney. Good widdance.

That's enough for now. Been working on another novel. And it's really shaping up. Want to see if I can get it out in time for the campaign. It's kind of a "political thriller," but knowing the way I write, I just won't be able to disregard all characterization and serious themes like the blockbuster type of thing. So I guess I'll have to publish this one myself, too.

Save the Republic. And don't forget -- WE REALLY NEED TO SWEEP THE SENATE!

Monday, November 14, 2011

Laissez-faire by default -- not

As explained elsewhere in this blog, like years ago, laissez-faire capitalism is when the free market is genuinely free. That is, not regulated by government. And compared to what we got, it would be nice.

The term "laissez-faire" came about when France's Louis XVI asked this Swiss economist named Colbert what could be done to fix France's horrendous economy. See, at the time, the French court had reached a kind of pinnacle of arrogance and corruption. Louis had enjoyed a privileged upbringing and was totally infantile, his wife, Marie-Antoinette, was a spoiled Austrian clothes horse, and everyone else at court just kept taxing everything to support their lifestyles. They taxed the doors and windows of peasant cottages, stuff like that.

There was also a rising bourgeois -- middle class -- of merchants, manufacturers, artisans. They were very hard hit. And complaining.

So Louis asked Colbert for his recommendations. Colbert went to the bourgeois and asked them, "What can your divine monarch and supercilious ruling class do for you to improve your business and your lives?"

The answer was, very simply: "Laissez faire." Which means, leave me the hell alone.

So fast-forward 250 years or thereabouts and here in the USA we have a dolt who thinks he's a king, and a "ruling class" (they wish) in congress who can't do anything but raise taxes to support their lifestyles. Gulfstreams, limos, $30,000 a plate fund raisers, union leaders kissing your butt, pharmas sending you on expensive golf junkets in the Bahamas, etc. etc.

They in congress don't seem to have time to spend on things like developing a national budget -- cuts into their tee-times and attendance at sporting events and parades. So they appointed a committee of 12 to hammer out some kind of a budget.

As Newt Gingrich pointed out not too long ago, the USA already has a committee that's supposed to hammer out a budget. It's called "congress."

Be that as it may, this committee of 12 is supposed to come up with a budget by the end of this week or so, at least by Thanksgving, or supposedly there will be automatic cuts in spending for the military and entitlement programs -- like Medicare, but apparently not aid to useless professors.

And the committee of 12 doesn't seem to be coming up with anything. Doesn't matter, because deep in your heart you know Brain-dead Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, will just table it anyway. The Senate already has 16 budget bills passed by the House, and the Senate is just ignoring them. They have their fingers in their ears and they're humming "Hail to the Chief."

So now the word is, maybe those draconian cuts won't take place, because maybe the committee of 12 will put off the whole budget thing until after the next election.

LET ME ASK -- WHO THE HELL WANTS TO VOTE FOR ANY OF THESE BLOCKHEADS IF THEY CAN'T EVEN PUT A BUDGET TOGETHER? I MEAN, THEY'RE PROVING THEMSELVES TO BE USELESS IDIOTS.

IS THIS WHO YOU WANT REPRESENTING YOU?

And you'd think if the government had no budget, we'd get some kind of nice, happy laissez-faire situation, right?

Wrong -- because where congress fails to legislate all the socialist crap the Comrade wants, he turns loose the dogs of his executive branch to rule by decree. That is, with no input from and apparently no regard for the US public. And congress isn't doing anything to stop these dogs of regulation, even though I'm sure it's entirely unconstitutional.

Here's an idea: Clean Sweep. Throw them all out, along with all the over-paid, power-mad anal-retentive nannies in the executive branch, and start over with nothing but the Constitution.

Sound like a plan?

Oh, and by the way, Louis XVI didn't pay much attention to Colbert or the bourgeois. Marie in her wisdom suggested that if people had no bread, they should resort to cake. And they were both  beheaded. And all the ruling class was beheaded. The bourgeois and peasantry had a positive Beheading-Fest at Place de la Concorde, a still-hallowed, large plaza in the very heart of Paris. The carnage went on for months. La Guillotine was invented specially to accommodate the swift, painless, and quite entertaining anihilation of France's upper crust. And their cousins, cooks, seamstresses, barbers, and anyone else who was a known cohort of anyone with even a drop of blue blood.

Just something to keep in mind.

Save the Republic -- but this government we can live very happily without.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

President rubs salt into wounds

Have slacked off on blogging lately because I've been trying not to be too insulting. Wanted to write about the Republican debates. It is so terrific hearing people who have positive ideas and a passion to promote American exceptionalism and capitalism.

But what drives me to write is actually the anger.

So Comrade Butthead has been blaming American citizens and businesses for being "soft" and "lazy," and most recently for not working hard enough to attract foreign trade. What the hell, it's not like blowing off a deal with Canada to secure a reliable source of fuel, is it?

Yeah, jerk, push someone over a cliff then holler down, "Why are you laying down there? Too soft and lazy to work?"

It's getting harder and harder to describe how much I despise this individual who's stinking up the White House, destroying the nation, derailing the future, undermining political and economic institutions, and now has the gall to blame the victim

He really should go live in a little pup tent with his loyal few -- the slimy so-called "occupiers" who have pretty much dwindled down to criminals, drug addicts, mental defectives, and die-hard mooches. The Comrade's true following. I'm sure he'd be totally comfortable with the dopers. That's the wellspring of much of his personal experience, isn't it?

No one else wants to be seen with that sucker anymore.

He's either totally blind. moronically stupid, or taunting us.

In any case, he's an insult to the nation.

Save the Republic.

Friday, November 11, 2011

President continues push to wreck US economy

Many months ago I wondered in this blog, "What would it be like to have a president who liked the United States."

Apparently we won't know until we dump the Comrade.

Canadian oil sands have been in the news for a time. It's actually oil in heavy sand deposits, and there's plenty of it. I believe we even have some of it in the US. Well, anyway, Canada is mining it, and was hoping to get the US to buy it and refine it. We'd have to build a pipeline extension from central Canada to refineries located around Kansas City (it looks like) and in Texas.

This project would replace a part of the oil we buy from the Middle East and probably South America -- people who generally hate the US and only want to exploit us, the US being an endlessly wealthy fat cat, you know. The project would also create thousands of good-paying jobs, and for that reason, the labors unions have been promoting it.

But the environmentalists are appalled. Involving the US in this project would infinitely delay our migration into residential tree houses in the redwood forest. Or something like that. Who the hell knows what the environmentalists are after? Some kind of anti-tchnology Ted Kazinski scenario.

So Comrade Blockhead in the White House, being torn between sucking up to the unions or to the environmentalists, has "decided" not to decide anything about this. He says he'll made a decision about it -- after the next election.

Well, Canada isn't waiting. Canada has a couple billion dollars (or loonies, in Canada) sunk into developing the oil sands, and they have offers from other nations, like Red China.

Believe it was Senator John McCain who noted that the Comrade voted "present" on this project, just as the Comrade regularly voted present on just about everything while he was in the Illinois State Assembly. After all, you don't want to leave a record.

But, Comrade Butthead, copping out is also a decision, and a very bad one. We won't forget.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

The White House game plan

Well, I've thought about this long and hard, and listen to endless news reports, and have read Saul Alinsky. So I think the outline of the Comrade's long-term plan is emerging. I'll try to break it down into steps:

1.  Inheriting a big economic mess was probably the greatest "opportunity" (a la Ram Emanual) the Comrade could have received. It laid the perfect ground work for the rest of his "plan."

2.  Spend the USA into uncontrollable debt, disguising efforts as "stimulus" to get the economy going.

3.  Hamstring private enterprise so that there's no legal way for them to do business profitably.

4.  Meanwhile, shove through congress (while he had both houses in the first two years) every addle-brained, impractical, socialist scheme you can think of.

5.  Create a "permanent" class of unemployed and unemployable -- through destructive economic policies and by encouraging citizens to become dependent on the federal and state governments.

6.  Addenda to #5. -- prop up state goverments for the time being with things like Stimulus #1 and #2, which is probably never going to get through congress.

7.  Get Van Jones and the reconstituted Acorn organizations to go amongst the unemployed and unemployable, try to unite them behind some kind of "brotherhood of misery" banner. Maybe they plant themselves on Wall Street.

8.  Blame Republicans for all this. Or not even Republicans necessarily, but since Republicans are political rivals, they're a useful and available target. But also blame: the rich, Wall Street, banks, or anyone but the unions, the unemployed, and the unemployable.

9.  Comrade will use the "bully pulpit" of his position to try to whip up a frenzy among the newly-minted, permanent "underclass" in the USA so that they'll frighten and intimidate the rest of the nation into seeing communism as some kind of attractive alternative. The goal here is to incite social unrest, even violence. To foment a "manageable" revolution. Or even even unmanageable if that's the best he can do.

10.  Looking ahead -- phase out state governments and replace them with an overweening federal authority.

Ta-da! The USA is now a sorry replica of every failed state that came before it. All to the glory of Karl Marx.

But you know, Americans aren't buying all this crap. The OWies on Wall Street and elsewhere are starting to look more and more like a bunch of drug addicts, psychopaths, and professional mooches -- the kind of people who would jump in front of a train so they'd qualify for disability support. That and a bunch of really fringe loonies and whiners.

The Comrade's plan to achieve all of this in one four-year term. It hasn't worked. For one thing, the Tea Party. ("We shall not be moved.") Another big problem the Comrade has had is that, being Americans by tradition as well as by birth, most citizens -- even the dregs -- aren't familiar with the socialist-communist complaints and haven't figured out yet the communism is supposed to be the answer. Matter of fact, as every government "solution" fails, it becomes more and more obvious that government aid and assistance is the largest part of the problem.

So most us are sitting out here searching for the Comrade's replacement and wondering why the EPA has turned into such a terrorist organization in recent years. And can't figure out why we're buying foreign oil instead of developing our own resources. We're just not getting it. Duh....

Briefly -- all the crap isn't working. But give the Comrade another four years, and he'll wreak even more havoc on free enterprise and our tradition of a civil society.

He has to go.

Save the Republic.

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

So the president is Greek?

So last week Greece almost defaulted on its loans again -- debt equals 120% or so of that country's gross annual economic output -- and even New York Stock Exchange traders got nervous. I think it's not so much that the NYSE owns a big chunk of Greek bonds or whatever, but if Greece goes down, it will have unhappy impacts on nations like Germany and France and others in the European Union, who have been propping Greece up economically. And the NYSE does hold a lot of debt and investment in EU enterprises.

So the EU struck this deal to bail out Greece. Greek banks have to accept 50% back on their loans, more social benefits will be cut from Greek life, and Germany and the others will kick in more funds to keep Greece alive for a few more months, at least until the next due date on their loan payments. Apparently the EU plans to borrow from China. Everyone cheered. The crisi is solved. 

Oh yeah? Well, the Greeks might have something to say about that. The Greek head of state has decided to put the whole measure to a public referendum to secure some public support for it. Good idea for him, since Greeks are damn sick and tired of having other nations threaten to stop paying their bills. At the prospect of losing their social welfare benefits, the Greeks have been rioting non-stop. Rioting has become sort of like a national sport in Greece. I wouldn't be surprised if they suggested it as an new event in the next Olympics.

See, in Greece, if you're a hair dresser you can retire at age 50 with a government pension because you're involved in "hazardous" work.

My stars. how then do they classify those dancers who break the dishes? Talk about life-threatenting work.

So anyway, the Greeks seem to be laboring under the delusion that they have options.

They don't. Except to go down in flames.

Not that the USA is in much better shape. US debt now is 100% of our gross annual economic output, and rising fast due to interest demands. If we drop another point on the S&P Index -- which is more than likely -- interest on the debt will rise.

And the Comrade is out on his little campaign tours, promising to pay everyone's student loans, pay their mortgages, pay for their health care and prescriptions, etc. etc. Now, in a truly horrifying development, the Comrade is, as we speak, on a jet bound for France to discuss the impending collapse of the EU.

No doubt the Comrade will volunteer the US to provide some kind of economic aid to prop them up. Which the Comrade willl have to borrow from the Chinese. Or, the Comrade could just let the EU borrow directly from the Chinese, but I guess that's too simple and straightforward. I mean, look at it this way -- the Comrade has found another means of saddling us with even more crippling debt to more quickly anihilate the US economy and free enterprise.

I think the dispute about the Comrade being born outside the USA just may be true. I suspect deep in his cold little heart the Comrade's Greek.

Enough for now.

Save the Republic.

Friday, October 28, 2011

What happens at the DOJ stays at the DOJ?

Another interesting development over at the Department of Justice Not only did Operation Fast & Furious, the federal program to sell lethal weapons to Mexican drug lords, completely slip Attorney General Eric Holder's mind, but now he wants to be able to lie to the public when he feels like it. It seems he does anyway, but it is against the rules.

Ever hear of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). That's the provision that allows people like UFO hunters to pester the CIA and FBI and those kinds of folks to dig through their old archives looking for evidence of Project Majestic and stuff like that.

Or suppose you're in congress, and wanted to review a couple federal warrants, or inter-departmental memos about exactly HOW to sell lethal weapons to Mexican drug lords. Under the FOIA rules, the federal bureaus and agencies have to go through their files, find the information, black out whole pages that might contain classified stuff, and send it to you.

Eric Holder wants to be able to lie to you, so he can say, "Sorry, we have no record of that."

Man, if you want to bullet-proof the federal government, this is the way. No one could ever sue these bastards, or even gather information from them for a suit against someone else. Or even know what the hell the Dept. of Justice is even doing all day.

Amazing.

Not only is this current regime wildly irresponsble, now they don't even think they should be held accountable for what they do.

Yeah, what happens at Justice stays at Justice, is that it?

What the heck kind of a show is Comrade running, anyway?

This Holder critter needs to resign, big time.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Ooies in Oakland -- Why not occupy Pelosi's house?

Just saw on the news that the "OOies" -- that is, Occupy Oakland -- were run off last night by police with tear gas. The crowd wouldn't disperse when politely asked. They started throwing garbage and eggs at the cops, who threw back tear gas.

Why don't they move their HQ to Pazzo Pelosi's house in San Francisco? Or her vineyard? Plenty of room there. And Pazzo is sympathetic. Surely she'd be willing to let them crap on her lawn and beat tom-toms under her window all night.

She's rich, too. So the OOies could continue their protest against the wealthy without breaking their staggering steps. Who could ask for more?

Just a suggestion.

Save the Republic.

There goes the health care industry

A couple intereting developments in socialized medicine in the USA.

Last week or so, that Sibelius person who runs things in DC announced that the long-term health care provision in the socialized medicine act is more or less defunct. "Long-term health care" refers to an extended stay in someplace like a rehab center or nursing home, for instance, after a stroke or a serious car accident.

Under socialized medicine, the plan was to get a whole bunch of people to sign up (and we'd all just flock to it), and pay into the system for about 10 years before we were eligible for any benefits. Meanwhile, the money paid in would go toward funding socialized medicine in general. A Ponzi scheme that appears to use Social Security as a financial prototype.

Anyway, the only people who signed up for long-term care under socialized medicine apparently are people who NEED long-term right now. In other words, the system isn't financially sound (or actuarially sound, to use the insurance word). Not enough healthy people signing up. Not enough money collected to fund long-term care nor to help fund socialized medicine generally.

So Sibelius said something like the program was going to be canceled. Only the Comrade doesn't want that.

Well, then he can pay for it. How's that? Crack open your wallet, fat cat. Get your unions to buy into it. That might work. Oh, but the unions are exempt from socialized medicine. Sorry, I forgot.

In another area -- and this will surely go a long way toward killing off seniors -- health care providers' pay under Medicare is going to be reduced.

The so-called "Doc Fix" was not included in the socialized medicine bill. The Doc Fix was legislation that adjusts the amount that doctors and others are paid for the services they provide for seniors with Medicare. In the past, these payment amounts were reviewed every year or so and were adjusted for inflation or whatever. However, no Doc Fix has been passed since the socialized medicine bill went through. Most pundits believed this was because if doctors had to be paid, it would show that socialized medicine was financially unsustainable. So congress just ignored it.

The American Medical Assn., which really doesn't represent the majority of doctors in the US, wanted congress et. al., to scrap this system of annual reviews all together and replace it with something more stable. Well, careful what you wish for, dudes.

A group of bureaucrats known collectively as MedPac are now running the socialized medicine system in America. MedPac has decided to, yes, do away with the annual reviews for doctor pay and replace it -- with a 10-year program that will steadily but surely reduce Medican payments to doctors by about 30%.

General practitioners will get a 1% raise, but then their pay rate will be frozen for the next 10 years. Specialists are hardest hit. They get a 5.9% reduction in their pay each year for the next three years, then the rate is frozen for the next seven years.

The object is to get doctor pay aligned with pay for, like, hospital orderlies and the cleaning crew. You know, SEIU members.

You know what the impact of this is going to be. Right now, many doctors refuse to see Medicare patients because Medicare pays only about half of what doctors charge. Like $300.00 to do hip replacement surgery. Doctors -- and hospitals, by the way -- make up these losses by charging twice as much to insured patients. It's called "cost shifting," and it's the main reason why health insurance costs so much and why insurance premiums are skyrocketing.

This isn't going to get any better. And it strikes hardest at seniors on Medicare.

Doctors who work with Medicare patients will not be able to keep their offices open, hire staff, pay their own bills. Specialists won't be allowed to charge any more than GPs, even though many of them see far fewer patients.

The inevitable result will be rationing. Dr. Deathwish/Berwick and Sibelius are, I suppose, in the throes of orgasm right now. "We did it!" they shriek, jumping up and down and throwing confetti. "We've destroyed the health care industry in America!"

So, if you can't get the seniors in line behind your policies -- and a whole bunch of seniors actually voted for these policies, in hopes of increasing their freebies (see AARP) -- the simplest thing is to just kill them off. It's called attrition. Or maybe serves-you-right.

Nice, huh?

Save the Republic.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

White House tries "end run" around congress?

I find it interesting and somewhat sociopathic that the Comrade apparently believes seizing autocratic control of the U.S. government is the only way to "get something done." Yet he apparently supported Kadaffi's rather grim death, Kadaffi being only the latest in a long line of totalitarians who met rather sorry and bloody ends.

What makes the Comrade any different from them?

See, whether you decide if he's sociopath or a narcissist, the Comrade's greatest failure is his inability to see himself as anything but heroic and his opponents as anything more than competition. He can't see the other side. And the "other side" in this case is government limited by the US Constitution.

He's right. Everyone who opposes him is wrong. Any questions?

So, being a narcissist/sociopath, he somehow believes it's OK for him to ignore any but his own voice.

He's right. Everyone who opposes him is wrong. Very simple, really.

Now he's openly doing all  he can to crank up operations in the executive branch to get his policies put into place, since the US Congress won't approve them.

The Comrade blames the Republicans for congress's failure to support him. The truth is, the democratics in congress don't support him, either, except for Brain-dead Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader. And all Reid can manage to do is to throw a wrench into the works of the US Senate so that it's unable to look at or debate or vote on anything. And that's enough to neutralize congress.

By contrast, the Republican-lead House of Representatives is teeming with dozens of new ideas to fix the economy, kick-start trade, clean up the mortgage mess, etc. etc. But once any of this legislation passes the House, Harry Reid pigeon-holes it in the Senate, won't even let anything be taken up on the floor. Brain-dead Harry Reid is, well, brain dead.

The US government is structured in such a way that when we can't get a majority to support a particular policy or action, then it can't be enacted.

The Comrade is extremely uncomfortable with this, because he can't get any support from anyone -- except about 21% of far-left socialist-communist die-hards -- for aything he's proposing. The Comrade is extremely pissed off that nobody loves him anymore. But, convinced that he's still "right," despite the complete lack of any significant public or political support, he wants to do what he wants to do, and to the hell with the public and their representatives.

He's a diktator. Or wants to be. But he's hamstrung by the Constitution.

That's the Constitution's main job, doofus. That's what it's there for. To take the wind out of your sails and spare some personal and political liberty for the rest of us.

Good to know it's still working.

But with people like Jesse Jackson Jr. waddling around, whining about a "congressional rebellion," how long will that last? And how the hell can congress be rebelling? Congress was never intended to just fall in line behind the president. The legislative branch has just as much power and authority as the executive branch. Even Brain-dead Harry Reid can't get around that one.

So the Comrade says, "I want to turn this free, capitalistic nation into a socialist workers' paradise, just lilke Cuba, the USSR, Venezuela, Red China." The rest of the nation says no.

He doesn't think this kind of opposition should stop him. But then he's apparently a narcissistic sociopath who can't see the other side.

Save the Republic. Vote this clown out of office.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Nobody really likes a diktator

Hope the Comrade has closely watched those videos of Kadafffi's final moments.

Nobody likes a diktator, Comrade. It never ends well for them.

Save the Republic.

Biden comes out early with Halloween scare tactics

If I had the time and wanted to waste some money, I'd send Vice President Joe Biden a set of those wax vampire teeth kids used to have on Halloween. If the FDA hasn't banned them for being dangerously fun. Plus, they tasted like Bazooka chewing gum, maybe a carcinogen, no? (If you continually feed rhesus monkeys 33 pounds of chewing gum every two hours, they probably will get sick and die.)

But Joe's out of the Halloween box just a little early. "O-o-o-o-oh kids, you'll be raped and murdered if congress doesn't pass the Job Killer Bill."

In a separate event, he made an appearance at a grammar school and lectured a class of 8-year-olds on how this bill should be passed. Think they'll write their congressmen? Most of them were sittng there quite bored and confused. I mean, this is the clown they were promised?

I don't know where Joe Biden has spent most of life, but seems to me that the police are funded by local states and municipalities. Being very often unionized, I'm sure the police benefited from Stimulus I, but actual statistics indicate that crime has been going down, not up.

So Joe Biden is basically full of crap. But we all knew that. Doesn't stop him from mounting the ramparts to wave some kind of flag. "Tax the rich! Support the unions!"

And all the money that goes there will eventually be recycled, through donations, into the Comrade's campaign fund.

I'm insulted by this garbage. Also by the Owies, who don't seem to have any sense or any but personal problems, like with hygiene, but who apparently are supposed to be plucking the heartstrings of America. Here's a hint: white trash has never been sympathetic.

This is the Comrade on the campaign trail. He's been a disater as president, so he goes out and does what he knows how to do:  tell lies and raise rabble.

And stupid, clueless Joe Biden helps him work the crowd.

You want rape, Joe? A woman says she was raped by an Owie at a rally in Cleveland. What's really interesting is the media response. No attempt to identify the alleged perpetrator. Instead the lamestream media was all in a tizzy asking, "What kind of impact will this have on the movement?"

I didn't see Joe Biden rushing out to Cleveland to comfort the victim and lead the charge against the thug who assaulted her. 'Course, that's not his job. His job is to make a damnfool out of himself to spread a message so stupid even the Comrade doesn't want to be directly associated with it.

And now all over America Online, banner ads showing a smiling and confident First Family, urging people to sign up... for something. He needs the naive and ignorant vote. Appealing to the 13 and 14-year-olds on AOL? No one old enough to pay their own rent gives him any real attention anymore.

Comes down to same old thing -- Do you believe this b.s. or your own eyes?

It's up to you.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

The revolution has arrived! And it looks kinda silly

Just read an interesting article in the 10/18 Wall Street Journal by pollster Doug Schoen. Apparently his company sent someone down to Wall Street to actually survey the Owies, find out who they are, what they do, what they want, etc.

From the article:

Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn't represent unemployed America and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.

The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment rate (9.1%).

What the Owies seem to really want is revolution. Apparently many of them have been poised and waiting for this moment since 1965, and certainly since Woodstock.

To wit:

What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas.

Sixty-five percent say that government has a moral responsibility to guarantee all citizens access to affordable health care, a college education, and a secure retirement—no matter the cost. By a large margin (77%-22%), they support raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, but 58% oppose raising taxes for everybody, with only 36% in favor. And by a close margin, protesters are divided on whether the bank bailouts were necessary (49%) or unnecessary (51%).
Schoen goes on to discuss the political dangers the dems face by supporting these wingnuts. Like, David Fluff, White House mouthpiece, has noted that the Owies are representative of many Americans (which they aren't, by the way; the USA is in majority right of center), and Nancy Pelosi almost squeezed out a crocodile tear talking about them.

So Pazzo and Comrade, go ahead, embrace these loonies. See if that gets you re-elected. Yeah, Vive la revolution!

Meanwhile, another poll shows that the American city with the most millionnaires and highest per capita income is... wait for it... Washington, DC.

(Pause here, laughing, coffee shooting out my nose.)

Thus the Owies may be in the wrong place -- on several counts. As I've indicated several times, the Fat Cats and the greed on Wall Street is far surpassed the Fat Cats and the greed inside the Beltway.

Probably write more later.

Meanwhile, Save the Republic.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Missing the Solyndra issue

I listened to Darrel Issa (R-CA, heads up some oversight committee in congress making sure government corruption doesn't get TOTALLY out of hand) about Solyndra, and also a couple other pundits talking about it. And it occurs to me that people -- especially congresscritters -- are missing the key issue about Solyndra.

Seems to me that many other people are ticked off about the feds "picking winners and losers," and Solyndra -- a company set up to produce solar panels -- came in as a definite loser.

But that's not the point. Unlike myself and many others, Issa isn't concerned about the feds "investing" in private industry, or "fostering growth" as they like to pretend.

No, the real issue about Solyndra is that that company was tottering on the brink of bankruptcy when the Comrade gave it something like $527 million dollars. Wasn't that just shortly before Solyndra declared bankruptcy? I mean, at the time, nobody had much hope for that company's continued existence.

See, the money was never intended to support Solyndra and/or ensure its existence. The money was intended -- and apparently was used -- to pay back the company's key investors before it declared bankruptcy and ran out on its creditors. Think very high-level money laundering.

And, curiously enough, one of the key investors in Solyndra is a dem "bundler." That is, he raises funds from a number of different donors, then bundles them up and doles them out to whichever politician he deems "worthy" of them.

He gave a whole pile of money to the Comrade.

See how that works?

Maybe the Wall Street Owies should ponder on Solyndra for a while if they want something to really whine about.

It just amazes me how the Comrade manages to pilfer money out of the public treasury to support his campaigns. Often taking a round-about route, like running it throught the unions first, or some other leech organization. Give the money, jobs, contracts to them, they turn around and donate it to the Comrade. Who ends up footing the bill? You guessed it.

What I find stupefying, though, is that the Comrade is so ready to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Once he destroys the middle class and strips the rich of everything, he'll have no place else to go. No one else to rob. He's not thinking far enough ahead.

That's it for right now.

Save the Republic.

Monday, October 17, 2011

Wall street protesters: "Give me your money"

The so-called "occupy Wall Street" protesters -- Owies?? -- seem to be either overtaken by marxists or are clarifying their message.

Bottom line, what they seem to be saying is: "You have money. Give it to me."

The truth is, you have to run that kind of demand through congress -- that would legalize the theft.

The Owies don't seem to have the wherewithal to do that. They seem to be mainly competent in pooping on police cars, peeing in public, sharing drugs and needles, and making lots of noise.

So this is "class warfare"? This is the "class" we're all supposed to be concerned about?

Looks like trash to me, I'm sorry.

And now they seem to be threatening violence. In Rome, Italy, at an apparently sympathetic protest, violence actually did break out. Don't know the details. Don't care to know.

But it's unconscionable that the Comrade and the "lamestream" media seem to be egging these people on. They're rabble, you know, I'm not even sure they're marxists -- but those with the megaphones are. And they could be just trying to co-opt the Owies. Who knows? Good grief, if this is the Comrade's constituency, he's so far left as to be completely disconnected from the nation. Which he is, left's face it.

New York's Mayor Bloomberg first defended the Owies, and many people continue to try to explain them, empathize with them, etc. Then Bloomberg tried to sweep them out of Zuccotti Park near Wall Street because, apparently, the stench and filth is intolerable. They wouldn't move and apparently Bloomberg and the cops are afraid of violence. With such a rabble of unruly and apparently only half-civilized people, violence is always possible -- being uninformed and inarticulate, violence and acting out are all they can do. Especially when they don't know what they want, except other peoples' money.

But to pretned they represent any significant segment of the US population is quite insulting to us "53%-ers."

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Comrade offering grounds for impeachment?

Well, as expected, the Comrade's Job Killer Bill failed in the dem-dominated US Senate. He can't even blame that on Republicans. A member of the House said the bill was offered there, but none of the dem members of the House wanted to sign on to sponsor it.

So it's dead in the water. Nobody wants it. Even the Comrade's comrades won't touch it with a fork. Not even Durbin? Not even Pelosi? Just think about it.

So the Comrade addressed somethng called the Jobs Council today, and recommended that, since the bill failed, he and his people should "scour" their rules and regulations "to find access to act administratively without an authorization from congress."

In other words, he's saying, "Screw congress. Enact the provisions of the bill as bureaucratic regulatios and executive orders."

So, no surprise, the Comrade is on the record as an autocrat and a diktator.

This guy's a real piece of work, huh?

This moron is running America?

He should be impeached. He seems to be confusing the USA with Venezuela or Iran.

Save the Republic.

Iran the greatest danger to the world

Today Atty General Eric Holder announced that the feds had arrested a guy with dual US-Iranian citizenship in a plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the US in Washington, DC, and also to blow up the Israeli embassy (in Argentina or the US?) and the Saudi embassy in Argentina. This Iranian, named something like Arbabisar (maybe we should call him Arbeit-mach-frei, the slogan that hung over the gate to Auschwitz), was working with the Mexican drug cartel, the Zetas, to set the whole thing up.

Apparently Iran had promised the Zetas $1.5 million and a whole bunch of opium in exchange for their help. Opium is a huge cash crop in the Middle East, you know. That's where opium originated

And I suppose Eric Holder would have sold them the weapons.

Actually. Arbabisar contacted a person he believed to be a member of the Zetas, but the guy was a DEA informant. Arbabisar also was working with another Iranian, Shakura or something like that, who's in Iran, or someplace, right now.

Strikes me as a little strange that Arbabisar was arrested Sept. 29, and the event and the plot weren't revealed until yesterday, Oct. 11. I suppose it's Holder's way of demonstrating that he's doing something in office: having press conferences.

I really believe Iran is the greatest danger to world peace, mainly because it's developing nuclear weapons. And nobody's really doing much to stop them, except Israel. And the Comrade just isn't very fond of Jews, apparently, and doesn't seem to grasp that while Iran wants to push Israel into the sea, the Really Big Score for them is the Great Satan, the USA. Iranian president Abracadabrajab is crazy enough to actually do it.

And now maybe Eric Holder is getting an inkling of why the USA should secure its borders. And really, it's kinda stupid to not secure your borders. I mean, one of the definitions of a "cell" is that it's self-contained. It's like a biological principle that any stand-alone life form is defined by its borders. But apparently Holder doesn't understand "entityship" or believes it shouldn't apply to the USA. You'll have to ask him why. Maybe that's what he regards as "democracy." Pretty stupid to me.

And so much for the Comrade's moronic faith in Iran's "good intentions." 'Course, if he hadn't figured out before now that Iran actually believes it's at war with us, he's probably just completely incapable of rational thought altogether. Blinded by an idiotic ideology, you might say. "We are the world" and all that jazz.

That's all. I'm very tired.

Save the Republic.

Monday, October 10, 2011

Eric Holder needs to resign

Do you know what the Peter Principle is? It states that in many cases, people will continue to be promoted to the level of their incompetence. That is, to a job that's just beyond their capabilities. Like Eric Holder as US Attorney General.

Darrel Issa (R, CA), head of the congressional committee that asks questions about what the feds are doing to America (or something like that), has been trying to unravel the so-called "Fast & Furious" scandal. See, the ATF -- those folks who brought us the Ruby Ridge and David Koresh debacles -- apparently with assists from the FBI and DEA, have overseen the sale of at least 1,500 high-powered guns to "straw buyers" in the USA. The straw buyers act as conduits -- they turn around and sell the guns to Mexican drug cartels.

Under auspices of Eric Holder's Department of Justice, the ATF, FBI, and DEA have joined forces to make sure that these guns went to straw buyers, who in turn, sold them to Mexican drug cartels. In the cutesy language of law enforcement agencies, they let the guns "walk." Walk across the border, so they could be used to slaughter Mexican grammar school teachers, for example, and US border agents.

So in the congressional hearings, Issa asked Holder basically, "What the hell were you thinking?"

Holder answered, in essence, "What? Me? Thinking? That's not my job."

Holder's been so busy absolving Black Panthers of violating the voting rights of white people in Philadelphia and crafting legal loopholes so that Islamo-terrorists can run free and blow up a few more American cities that he hasn't had time to think about much else.

Holder's last job was defending terrorists in federal courts. So as chief of the Justice Dept... I mean, isn't that a little bit like putting, oh I don't know, Bonnie & Clyde, in charge of bank security? I mean, who picked this clown?

You see, Holder says he gets 100 "memos" a week. These are written documents that describe what his department is doing. He hasn't the time to bother reading them. But isn't managing the Dept. of Justice precisely his job? I mean, if he's too busy to run the Dept. of Justice, what's he getting paid for exactly? Seeing what he can do to skew DOJ in the direction of "social justice"?

Apparently he regards the arming of Mexican drug cartels as a useful function of establishing "social justice." I mean, killing US border guards would definitely enhance illegal border crosssings. See how nicely that works for the democrats?

The other theory that seems to explain Holder's lunacy is that he wanted all kinds of US-made weapons in Mexico, wanted the guns to be found at crime scenes, etc., so that he could say, "See, we need to more strictly control guns in the USA." But when you've actually ORDERED your department to make sure US-made weapons go to Mexican drug lords... well, that kinda screws up that scheme, doesn't it? I mean, the gun dealers didn't want to sell the guns to the straw buyers. The ATF insisted they do it.

So, reminiscent of Sgt. Shultz in "Hogan's Heroes," Holder announces, "I know nothing!" And the Comrade supports him. Or kinda like the driver who killed someone with his car claiming that it wasn't his fault because he was drunk at the time. (And if you're an illegal alien in the US, that seems to be a valid defense.)

So should this blockhead continue to hold any position of authority in the US government? 

If Holder had any honor, he'd resign. But there you go.

Save the Republic.

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Steve Jobs, R.I.P.

Got to say, I'm not now and never have been a fan of Mac/Apple computers. I don't have an iPad or an iPhone, and don't really want either one. But I still feel compelled to pay a tribute to one of the people who invented the 21st century.

I don't know anything about Steve Jobs. Have heard he was hard-driving and somewhat eccentric -- that is, very individualistic. And I suspect that's only part of what it takes to accomplish what Steve Jobs accomplished.

A man who worked for Xerox's PARC laboratory told me a story about many years ago, two fresh-faced kids touring the facility. PARC, by the way, was Xerox's very high-tech research center. It's closed now, I believe, and Xerox sold the patents and licenses on some of the remaining undeveloped concepts produced there.

At any rate, according to this man's story, these two computer geeks, Jobs and Wozniak, barely beyond their teen years, visited PARC and were given a demonstration of a very primitive graphic interface that employed icons and stuff like that instead of making users go through those long, long lists of DOS files. Xerox had no plans to do anything with it, but it was interesting.

Next thing that happened was the Macintosh, wtih that "user-friendly" interface featuring little cartoons of file folders, spinning hourglasses, and tiny hands to push things around the screen. It was cute. And more than that, Jobs and Wozniak made it useful.

Anyone but me recall that 1984 Super Bowl ad with the woman running into the grim, smoky meeting room... a scene taken from the movie, 1984, complete with Big Brother pontificating to the masses on a huge TV screen. The woman runs up and tosses a hammer into the screen, smashing conformity and introducing the Mac.

Fast forward to about 1997 or so, and I clearly recall writing a brief item on corporate quarterly reports for a business publication. In the last quarter of that year -- a short and apparently very painful three months -- Apple lost $700 million. I couldn't even conceive of it and suspected we wouldn't be hearing much from Apple anymore. The corporate market was using the Windows platform -- the concept of the user-friendly interface borrowed from Apple -- and Macs were rapidly becoming a niche product for graphic artists. The Mac remains the preferred system in the graphic arts. Macs have more power, really, to move big color files around and manipulate images.

So Jobs returns to the company and comes up with the iPod, the iPad, and the iPhone. And Bill Gates jokes about, "Gee, I wish I'd thought of that."

It's just amazing to me -- all of it is. I'm older than Steve Jobs, so he was born, grew up, prospered, and passed away all within my lifetime. And he changed the world.

And all without a government subsidy.

The world needs more like him. And we need an America ("the last, best hope of earth") where he or she will be free to dream and to turn the dreams, the what-ifs, the wouldn't-that-be-cools into something useful, beautiful, and profitable -- for everyone.

Save the Republic.

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Hey, Durbin, banking ain't free

The so-called "Durbin Fee," because it was the result of legislation introduced and promoted by U.S. Senator Dickhead Durbin (d-for-dummy, IL), has caused Bank of America to charge $5.00 per month for customers who use their debit cards.

Apparently Durbin believed the banks should not make any money by extending the debit card service. However, the banks have to pay third-party businesses to make debit cards functional. So if the banks have to pay for the service and not profit from it, the cost of it goes to the consumer.

There's no such thing as a free lunch, got it?

Durbin and the rest of the socialists (including the more articulate Wall Street Squatters) seem to have this vision of "capitalists" as people who have this closet full of gold bullion or something. And they're hogging it.

Therefore, the feds -- or any "needy person" really -- morally should be able to tap into that huge supply of capital. Or businesses should hire excess workers because "that's the right thing to do."

That's just not the way it works.

Profits -- apparently that huge, unlimited storehouse of gold -- in real life is revenues minus expenses. It's usually calculated as a percentage, and is known as a "profit margin."

Like I made sales of $100.00. My expenses were $90.00. I made a profit of $10.00. That's a 10% profit margin -- which is wa-a-a-a-a-y higher than what most businesses make. And investors, "venture capitalists," like to see a 20% profit margin before they'll sink their money into it. During the dot-com bubbble, a projected 20% profit margin looked possible and sometimes it was. But in most cases, a 20% profit margin is an "in your dreams" kind of thing. Most of the dot-coms failed, you know. At best, they were experimental.

So businesses watch their margins. If sales drop, you have to cut expenses to sustain those margins. You don't want to raise the prices on your products, because that inevitably will slow sales even more. First move is to cut expenses -- either by improving efficiencies, or last-resort, laying off employees. But you don't want to lay off employees because they know your business. Newbies cost a lot of money and usually aren't productive for their first few months or even longer.

In addition, in states like Illinois, employers have to pay fees to cover at least a part of the unemployment checks the state hands out. So the business pays for former employees who are no longer contributing to the business's profits. It's a black hole. A last resort. No business wants to do that.

So there's no warehouse full of unused cash -- there's basically only margins, which are quite fluid and change every day with sales and expense levels.

If you use the law to force businesses to cut their profits, the business loses investors. When they lose investors, they fold. This is particularly true of corporations. No profits or dividends, shareholders sell off their stock, walk away, the corporation folds, or looks around for another business to buy it out.

And no one, not even the feds, can afford to hire people as an act of charity. Employees cost money. A business's profit margins have to be able to support another employee. Or, market demand for your product has to be so hot you need more people to boost production and/or expand sales. Sales cost a lot of money. Support for sales is often the largest expense on the balance sheet. And when you add thousands of dollars onto the cost of an employee -- like through Obamacare -- you're making it much harder for businesses to hire new people.

See how easy that is, Dickie? See how stupid and destructive your blockhead legislation is? See why you're to blame for all the ticked off Bank of America customers?

See, Dickhead, because you don't understand anything about capitalism, you're destroying the whole very delicately balanced free enterprise system. It's like you just threw a rock through the front window. And you're so damn ignorant, you don't even understand that. Go ahead, go squat on Wall Street with the people who share your fantasy vision how the economy is divided into "fat cats" and "pathetic starving workers." Go and organize the non-productive deadbeats. See who you can get to pay any more to support them.

Dickhead Durbin would not be in office except for the dem machine that runs Chicago. However, Ram Emanual, as Mayor of Chicago, is just now trying to raise property taxes, public transportation fares, and has threatened to -- HORROR OF HORRORS! -- lay off city workers. My God, he's imperiling is voter base. Ram Emanual has got himself in a situation where he's been confronted with -- Hey, no warehouse full of cash! Not in the city, not in the city's businesses, not in taxpayer pockets. He's got himself too close to Main Street.

Socialism doesn't work. It's not based on reality. Got that? How many times do you have to hear it? Don't take my word for it. Just look around.

As the nation collapses around them, Durbin and like-minded blockheads believe the solution is to go out and make a bunch of "I am blameless" speeches. Like, "Yeah, I'm an ignorant blockhead, but you just can't help but love me, right? After all, my heart's in the 'right' place."

And you know what, that's not working, either. Not when it takes food off the table.

Save the Republic.