Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Housing Market 101

It's very simple.

Back in the 1990s, I think, the feds decided that people who couldn't afford houses should be able to buy them anyway. I mean, why should a lack of money prevent you from doing anything?  (They can't afford Cadillacs, either, so why isn't Government Motors being compelled to give every person a Caddie?)

Anyway, this proved to be extremely problematic, stupid, and destructive, so naturally it was picked up and promoted by everyone in Washington.

Those who claim to defend the poor thought it was great to give a house to people who couldn't afford it. Never mind the difficulties associated with expensive maintenance and property taxes.The whole idea just sent thrills up the legs of the teary-eyed liberals who count the poor among their most loyal constituents.

Then we had the Dot.Com bubble, a big hot-air balloon that kept the economy booming for more than a decade. As the century turned, investors were concluding, "We're not making anything off this stuff," and the economy started to sag.

The feds -- which would include Clinton and Bush and Greenspan at the Federal Reserve -- looked at the housing market as a nice place to inflate and -- BONUS POINTS! -- without spending any federal dollars. Just keep Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac writing blank checks, keep interest rates low.

So the housing market carried the economy along after a fashion, and even for a time after 9/11, when just about everything else was going kaput.

But the chickens come home to roost, right? Housing prices were inflated above any reasonable value, and without enough people with enough income to pay for them. These were was the glorious "Flip this House" year(s), when houses took on a resemblance to poker chips, used as a kind of toy investment and having little more value than that to growing numbers of wannabe speculators and get-rich-quickers. (Can you tear out a wall? You could be the next real estate millionaire!)

So the housing market collapsed.

You know what this is now? This is reality catching up with pie-in-the-sky.

The bankruptcies, foreclosures, and collapsing prices all represent what has been known euphemistically as a "rolling readjustment." That is, time to step back and re-evaluate what these houses are really worth on the market -- and a market of buyers who are increasingly jobless and non-creditworthy. ('Course, that didn't mean they couldn't get a mortage 10 years ago. Hopefully, the banks are wiser and telling the feds to burn in hell.)

When the price eventually falls in line with what buyers are willing to pay, the housing market will correct itself. So let it collapse so we can move on.

Pumping more money into the housing market to artificially keep prices high will only keep the market stagnant and depressed.

It's really, really simple. If you don't get this, you need to go back and take Capitalism 101.

Save the Republic

Saturday, May 28, 2011

The problem with raising taxes

I see Slappy Joe Biden, or The King of Taxes, has decided that his sheep in the dem party will not vote for a budget that does not raise taxes.

Hey, Slappy, got a question for you:  Where the hell do we citizens get any more spare change to send to you assholes in Washington?

Got any suggestions?

You make it impossible to do business -- burden us with stupid, half-assed regulations that intrude into our lives, and do just all about you can to drive industry out the country.

You sit on your big fat asses and tell all of us what to do, how to spend our money, what we need to be happy -- meanwhile, your heads are so far up your butts you can see your tonsils.

You take away not only existing jobs, but guarantee that they will never be replaced. AND THEN YOU EXPECT US TO PAY YOU ASSHOLES MORE MONEY.

What's wrong with this picture?

You do realize that every single dem that I know of, and a good many Republicans as well, truly don't give a damn about this country. They're only playing some juvenile version of Capture the Flag.

Just think about it, clowns. All of you. This isn't a game. You're ruining peoples' lives.

I think ol' Slappy Joe might be even dumber and more naive than the Comrade (who's in Europe now, promising to support Egypt and Tunisia at the expense of the USA). And I didn't even think that was possible.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

26th NY demonstrates effect of splitting conservative vote

Right now -- and even on Fox -- everyone is saying how the Republicans lost a special election in a heavily Republican district... all because of Paul Ryan's Medicare reform bill.

I don't think so. What happened -- in addition to the dems jumping out of closets and (boogada-boogada!) terrifying seniors -- is that the conservative vote was split. A third-party candidate, Jack Davis or something like that, who had run several times as a dem -- he threw his hat in the ring claiming to be a Tea Party candidate. No support from local Tea Party groups. But he got 9% of the vote, and the Republican lost by 5%.

You do the math. Looks like a devious and successful dem political strategy to me. Not a referendum on Medicare.

So the chickenshit "moderate" Republicans on Fox use this story as an excuse to say, "Gee, nice try, Paul, but the nation just isn't ready for reasonable change."

Look folks, the Republicans ran a so-called "moderate" in 2008. Did he win? I mean, did that work?

No. Because conservatives are CONSERVATIVE. They say over and over, "Give us somebody with some guts. Who'll actually stand up and defend our rights and our freedom."

Unfortunately, many people -- including many people at Fox -- think there's some kind of huge pool of "moderate" voters out there who aren't quite sure they value freedom, and maybe-sorta don't like the Comrade. They seem to believe the Republicans need a good-looking, well-spoken, muddle-headed compromiser willing to kiss every ass that presents itself.

And you know, Karl Rove (among others) there won't be any "moderates" in the 2012 race, not if the dems have anything to say about it. And just try shutting them up.

No matter who runs as a Republican, the dems and their lamestream media will paint him/her as a wild-eyed revolutionary. That's already happening.

And it looks like Fox kinda-sorta agrees with that.

Too bad. Because if the Republicans do run some wimp-ass "moderate" apologist. they'll lose for damn sure. And I don't think the USA can survive another four years with Comrade Osama.

Save the Republic.

I know, let's stand the American dream on its head!

Well, apparently the Comrade doesn't want the whole idea of budget cuts and over-spending to dirty his skirts this close (18 months?) to the next election, so he's given Slappy Joe Biden the job of talking to congress on the rather sticky subject of the federal government's credit limit. The nation is already scraping its head on that ceiling. Or maybe it was because Joe was out of the country for a couple weeks, so the Comrade could slide the whole issue under the bed for a while.

Anyway, Biden announced today that he wasn't interested in any budget that doesn't increase taxes. Yup, INCREASE taxes. Traditionally, tax increases are kinda like the death knell for any given regime, but the Comrade and the dems have worked so hard to give "the rich" a bad name that they believe it's fine to tax them. It's like, "Can't I just punch out the fat cats? I mean, really, what is power for?"

As usual, idiotic. Shortsighted. Reflective of a complete absence of any information about economics. What we've all come to expect from the Comrade's merry marxists.

Slappy and pals, the truth is that we-the-American-people can't trust you people with any more of our money. The governments in this nation -- and that includes most state governments as well -- are kind of like they rolled a drunk and need to rack up as many charges on his credit cards as possible before the guy wakes up and finds out somebody dipped his wallet.

Then there's the issue of "our money." Doncha wish? "Our money" was gone long ago. Now we're working on the money of the second and even third generation from now. Your grandkids. They'll be born hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and will spend their lives paying it off. What kind of life are they going to have?

Heaven forbid any of them achieve financial success and become slaves of the state.

You see, what you want nowadays is to be on the receiving end of the goodies, not the giving end. See, the way it works, if you reward people for failure and despair, they pursue failure and cultivate despair. Penalize them for productivity and independence, those things don't look so attractive anymore, and they've never been easy.

So, break a leg, kids -- literally. All the better if it's a compound fracture that doesn't heal and the doctors have to operate several times and you end up with one leg shorter than the other. Do I smell "permanent disability?"

Just think, you'll qualify for the handicapped parking spots. If your SDI payments don't quite cover living expenses, you can demand a sit-down, do-nothing job from any employer! Yet you'll still be able to function pretty much like everyone else.

A dream come true for your descendants, is it not? A "free" ride on the Federal Gravy Train? Who could ask for more?

Somehow, when ol' Thomas Jefferson mentioned something about a vision of "yeoman farmers," that is, people who were self-sufficient and self-directed, I don't think SDI was part of the plan. The only people who might sometimes really do damage to themselves to get out of working were the slaves. And I don't blame them for that. Why work if you can't keep what you earn?

Got that Slappy?

WHY WORK IF YOU CAN'T KEEP WHAT YOU EARN?

Just introducing a new idea into your palsied brain. You know, Biden never had a real job either. Always involved with government. He's got about as much of an idea about how real life works as his bud, the Comrade.

A couple of pretty useless clowns.

Save the Republic.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

While the Comrade's out of town....

Woke up this morning and turned on the TV to watch Benjamin Netanyahu addressing our congress -- both houses. (By the way, I finally remembered to note whether or not they got rid of that hideous red carpet they used to have. Looks like they did.)

Anyway, Netanyahu's speech rolled out like a State-of-the-Union. Like every time he made a declarative statement, everyone stood up and applauded. Afterwards, as Netanyahu left the podium and was surrounded by congress critters shaking his hand and having pictures taken with him, I noticed he and Joe Lieberman embraced. That's nice. I imagine Lieberman, like Schumer and Weiner, have had some very nervous moments trying to explain the Comrade's anti-Jewish posture to their constituents.

I admit to suffering from head-of-state envy.

After the Comrade's "Let's throw Israel under the bus" speech of last week, I emailed the Israeli Embassy in Washington and told them not to pay any attention to the Comrade. The people of U.S.A. still support Israel, and our nation will return to some improved kind of foreign policy sanity after the next election. Apparently I'm not the only person they heard from.

I mean, really, I was raised Catholic and have no personal stake in Israel, except in its position as a bulwark against the superstition and thuggery that generally holds reign over the Middle East. There's a reason the Middle East is tinder-box. Because it's populated mostly by warring tribes of self-proclaimed victims who haven't the enlightenment to see which side upon which their bread is buttered. Their leaders are mostly two-bit gangsters who, 1.) enjoy the ignorance of their "subjects" because it makes them easier to push around; and 2.) hate and despise anyone who rocks the little boats of their Medieval feofdoms.

What amazes me is that the Comrade claims from one side of his face to stand behind the "rights" of the oppressed everywhere while, at the same time, actively working to oppress them.

He hasn't got a clue how freedom works.

You're not free, Comrade, when someone else controls the puppet strings -- either through pie-in-the-sky promises of no-charge prosperity or by having the bigger guns.

***

Changing the subject for a moment. I just looked up "feofdom" to check the spelling. It's not in my dictionary, but "feoffment" and "feoffer" is.

Interesting world. It means according to Webster's 7th, "the granting of a fee." I guess like fee-offer. That's probably where it comes from. (Need I remind you, I have a degree in English... that explains it.)

Anyway, so apparently feoffment means that the king, or the Mayor Chicago, of the President of the United States and various congress critters -- will offer you the privilege of paying them a fee for... whatever.

Hey, known in Chicago -- and now inside the Beltway, too -- as "pay-to-play." "I will let you bribe me for political favors and government contracts."

Available to only the very few.

So maybe the whole game here really is Crusaders vs the Saracens. Whaddaya think?

Save the Republic.
I

Friday, May 20, 2011

Netanyahu an "enlightened" man

Well, today Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met for a couple hours with our disgraceful head of state, Comrade Osama.

Was working, but had to take a moment to watch the resulting photo op, which proved to be so much more.

Ol' BeBe (I believe that's what they call him) pretty much lambasted the Comrade, explaining is some very terse and eloquent detail why he's not accepting the Comrade's directive to slice and dice what remains of Israel. The Comrade looked on with a fixed and indifferent glare.

I like Netanyahu. At one time he was either Israel's delegate to the U.N. or the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Don't recall which. But even back then, I was impressed by him. And I remembered him. He is what I call an "enlightened" individual. And that's about the highest compliment I'll give anyone.

The Comrade would do well to take a hint from Netanyahu about what it means to love your country and be willing to stand up for it and defend it.

This is something Comrade Osama has yet to learn. In fact, the Comrade is twisted way 'round in the other direction. Next he'll suggest we cede Arizona and Texas to the whining murderous thugs like Hamas and Hezbollah. But I doubt even that would make them happy -- another thing the Comrade has yet to learn.

I would happily vote for Netanyahu for U.S. President, but he's already got a country that desperately needs him just now.

All for now.

Save the Republic -- like Netanyahu.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Going down fast

I've mentioned several times that I have a fear of flying. You know what that all boils down to?

You're strapped into a metal tube that may or may not be falling 39.000 feet or so to the ground. Dropping like a stone, maybe. And you're sitting there in your uncomfortable seat, more or less bound to the seat. The pilot maybe making a feeble attempt to be make reassuring sounds over the intercom while the stewardi also buckle themselves in and occasionally exchange terrified looks with each other when they believe the passengers can't see them.

We are going down pretty damn fast. Maybe the pilot's drunk or something? Maybe there's a loony-toons hate-crazed muslim standing behind him with a box cutter. Maybe he's a shit-for-brains leftist hell-bent on destroying the whole world. Allahu Akbar and all that kind of bullshit.

Who knows? But you're strapped into this thing, and it's going down fast.

Not a Goddamn thing you can do.

Until the next election.

Save the Republic.

Comrade: "Let's help push Israel into the sea"

Really tried to listen to the Comrade's speech this morning about the Middle East. However, it sounded like he was reading a college term paper. Not very exciting. Until the end.

The Comrade wants to take territory from Israel to form a Palestinian state.

That's what the so-called Palestinians want, or say they want. I believe it's actually just a first step toward Hamas, Abracadabrajab, the Arab Brotherhood and heaven knows who-all else, to annihilate Israel all together.

Makes me very sad. I don't know what Israel will do. The Comrade did say something about Israel being able to defend itself "on its own," which sounds rather catastrophic. At the same time, the Comrade wants to forgive Egypt's debt and financially support a newly-made Palestinian state. (Why not just get Red China to support them and skip the US's role as middle man? We don't have any money.) Looks like Comrade Butthead prefers murderous thugs who support al Qaeda to peaceful capitalists who helped develop, foster and encourage western values.

Should this be a surprise, or only the rather terrible demonstration of how completely misguided and really evil the Comrade is.

This is why so many people question -- still -- where the Comrade was born and/or where he grew up. He does not have American values. He just does not believe in the same things all the rest of us do. You watch what he does and you gotta ask, "Where the hell are you from?" Just as a point of information. He certainly does not belong here in the USA.

Apparently the Comrade is hoping to work off the death of bn Ladn as some kind of bully pulpit or platform from which to promote bn Ladn's program.

Haven't I written over and over again that the thugs and political gangstahs and wannabe tyrants are jealous of each other and will  happily kill each other to eliminate the competition? Quite possibly we've just seen that at work.

Anyway, I'm rather curious about what kind of phone calls US Sen. Chucklehead Schumer and US Rep and weiner, Anthony Weiner are getting from their constituents. While in the House, Schumer represented a district in New York that includes very conservative Jews. When Schumer moved to the Senate, Weiner was elected to replace him in that district.

What will they tell those people? Get ready for another holocaust. And sorry, this time don't count on any help from the USA. And gee, much as I want to stand up for this district, I really have to go along with the dem party, even though it's been hi-jacked by the very, very, very far left.

Is that it?

I'm really ashamed to be an American today.

Save -- no Resurrect the Republic.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Are you better off now than you were four years ago?

I swear, Sean Hannity is a mind reader. With all the publicity about Republican candidates, all that's been going through my mind about the much-anticipated 2012 campaign is Ronald's first campaign slogan:

"Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"

And if you were, Reagan suggested you go ahead and vote for Jimmy Carter once again.

Carter lost in a huge landslide for those who don't remember. And this seems to be one "lesson of history" that's going to repeat -- thank heavens.

Funny, no matter who I talk about what candidate -- like, "I really like former governor Blitz Blather, but he doesn't have any foreign policy background." Or "You know, I really liked Kerris Matick as a senator, too bad he got caught with that underwear model..."

No matter which deficiencies you point out in the backgrounds of the various candidates, the response I get from EVERYONE I talk to is:

"S/He's still better than what we got now. I'd for vote anyone who runs against the Comrade."

So anyway, I listen to Hannity's radio show all the time -- it's on while I'm working. And caught his TV show last night. And Hannity also resurrected Ronald Reagan's old slogan and read it in its entirely. But it comes down to the same thing:

Are you better off now than you were four years ago?

And the thing is, during the last presidential campaign, almost four years ago, the USA was already on the downswing. Lehman Brothers had defaulted, the housing market was collapsing, and you couldn't give away a new car.

And it's just gotten worse and worse.Now we have fuel shortages, food shortages, and inflation.

It's kinda like that $800 BILLION stimulus package was just used for toilet paper, isn't it? Only we still all owe for it. Which is exactly what I predicted as the more likely outcome than the Comrade's (and Paul Krugman's and Reich's) sunny castles-in-spain scenario.

And the Comrade is scheduled to make a speech tomorrow to unveil some new Middle East policy. Good lord, it's enough to give you ulcers. I'm just shaking with apprehension -- so afraid he's going to sell us out now to Hamas or someone. He's such an irresponsible, blockheaded jerk. To quote Will Rogers: It's kind of like when the baby gets hold of a hammer.

Save the Republic

Obamacare collapsing under its own weight

Interesting... something like 300 more "exemptions" to the Comrade's socialized medicine have been granted, with 38 of them in witch Pazzo Pelosi's congressional district.

Many unions also have been granted the privilege of opting out.

By the time this turd legislation actually goes into effect -- and it'll be struck down by the Supremes long before that -- it won't apply to anyone... except white middle class males and the self-employed. Because our job is just to pay. We're the stupid workhorses who keep on plugging away, pulling the whole load of entitlement manure.

And we will voluntarily retire early, probably, or move to Costa Rico, where the jobs are.Then where the USA be?

That's all the time I got right now.

Save the Republic.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Who the heck is Mitch Daniels?

Well, Fox has been promoting Mitch Daniels for president for more than a year. I mean, every time the 2012 elections come up -- and with the Comrade in office, the election comes up all the time -- someone on Fox mentions Mitch Daniels. So I looked him up.

He's 62 years old, was born in Pennsylvania, graduated from Princeton, and headed up pharmaceutical company Eli Lily & Co., which is headquartered in Indiana. Daniels served as chief of the federal Office of Budget Management under George W. Bush. Back in Indiana, he ran for governor and has served 1.5 terms there -- considerably improving the state budget.

Under his watch in Indiana, the state toll road was privatized (great idea!), a state-wide school voucher program has been established (great again!), and the teachers' union no longer has collective bargaining rights and teachers' raises, etc., are determined on merit.

On the personal side, his wife, Cheri, left him for another man in 1993, but apparently came back in 1997 or thereabouts (not sure I recall the years correctly) and they remarried.

So he's done a lot of very good things, I think. But even though he's governor of a state that neighbors Illinois, where I live, I'd never heard of him. And I also wonder if his proficiency on budgetary matters alone qualifies him to be President of the USA? I mean, it would be a huge, positive change from what we've got now, but the president does a whole lot more than manage the budget.

Same thing for Tim Pawlenty, former governor of Minnesota, who I also like -- and I know rather more about Tim Pawlenty because he's been campaigning.

Just today, Donal Trump announced that he's decided not to run -- surprise, surprise. And over the weekend, Mike Huckabee stated that he's not in it, either.

And Gingrich was on the "Meet the Press," and knocked Paul Ryan's health care program as "social engineering from the right," which he dislikes as much social engineering from the left. I don't agree. However, Newt has been involved with a think tank called Health Solutions since before the 2008 elections, so I suppose he's got a competing health care plan. But he also supports the notions of compelling everyone to have insurance -- which is the very crux of the unconstitutionality of the Comrade's socialized medicine plan. Funny, too, Gingrich at one time seemed to advocate some kind of voucher system for Medicare, which is kind of the foundation of Ryan's plan, which Gingrich believes is too radical. So I don't quite understand what's going on there, and will have to get more information.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney has decided not to apologize for Massachusetts' health care -- which has fostered a lot of fraud and abuse and made health care premiums in Massachusetts the highest in the USA -- saying that he believed it was the right thing to do for Massachusetts. But not at the federal level. Oh well....

Oh, and Ron Paul -- who once ran for President as a Libertarian and who has been a US Rep from Texas for decades -- also announced his availability as Republican candidate for president. I agree with Ron Paul on many, many things. But not his foreign policy. I know Libertarianism very, very well, and have a fundamental disagreement with the Libertarian notion that the US can just be "neutral" in foreign affairs, so that our foreign policy is basically trade agreements That works fine on paper. It's terrific theoretically. Until  lunatics begin attacking the country PRECISELY because of our trade agreements -- because we trade with them at all, invading their ancient cultures with rock'n'roll, blue jeans, and iPads, so that the foundations of their ancient cultures begin to crumble and fall away. (I'd love to go into this, and probably will in another blog.)

Anyway, I'm beginning to recognize some key differences in what might be considered "old guard" Republicans and maybe "new wave," which includes many Tea Party and other plain young Turks. The Old Guard, which I'm afraid includes Gingrich, seems to be kind of more interested in going back to some vision of a kind of "normal" for the USA that includes a federal government of paternal benevolence. I'm afraid that old vision of normal -- that paternal benevolence -- has resulted in the complete mess we have right now in this country. That old normal just doesn't work.

And the fact that Mitch Daniels headed up a huge pharma -- all the pharmas are tightly regulated by the FDA, DEA, you name it -- and then OMB under George Bush are not big pluses in his favor to my way of thinking. I don't know... is it a good idea to elect a bureaucrat to eliminate bureaucrats? Still don't know enough about him.

Save the Republic

Friday, May 13, 2011

Who's making money on energy?

Don’t have a lot of time, but want to just clarify a few things that have been in the “lamestream” news lately, and largely twisted and misinterpreted to make the Comrade and the merry Marxists look like they have a useful point. Which they really don’t have.

The media reports XXX billions of dollars of “profits” for the oil companies. Hey, you dopes! Please check your grammar and word usage, and while you’re at it, you might learn how to read a quarterly report. There is a huge difference between “profits” and “revenue.” “Revenue” is the total amount of money coming into an organization for its goods and services. “Profit” is what’s left over after they pay salaries, contractors, equipment costs, administrative costs. taxes, loan principle and interest, capital investment for things like exploration and maintenance, leases, legal fees, employee benefits and pensions, etc. 

More specifically, Exxon made about $9 billion profits on revenue of $383 billion, which is a little less than 2.5% profit. Not all that impressive, really. Looks like a lot when it’s in big pile, that’s all. And day to day, it’s not in one big pile. 

Radio show host Mark Levin broke this down for the price of a gallon of gas. He says oil companies make about 2 cents (as in two quasi-copper pennies) of profit on every gallon of gasoline they sell. Compare this to the state, federal, and local taxes of at least 10 cents  and usually much more that these government agencies collect on every gallon of gas that’s sold. And the government doesn’t have any production or sales expenses connected to this, they just skim their “revenues” off the top… excluding any likely bribes, pay-offs, pay-backs, political donations, give-my-reprobate-nephew-a-useless-high-paying-job situations, etc. that they don’t report. So who’s making money on energy?

Additionally, a business reporter noted today on TV that the oil companies on average pay $82 MIILION PER DAY IN TAXES TO THE FEDS. Versus General Electric Corp., which pays nothing.

I repeat: who’s making money on energy?

Save the Republic

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Life on the Mississippi

A brief note while awaiting the 4th US Circuit to announce its decision on Virginia's challenge to socialized medicine...

The Mississippi River has gone completely wild and is something like 45 to 50+ feet over flood level. The Army Corps (or as the Comrade would say, "corpse") of Engineers has blown up levees and is opening spillways and other things all along the river to try to save anything that borders the Big Muddy.

Too much rain and snow, and it all ends up in the Mississippi. The Mississippi is one of the longer rivers in the world, fed by tributaries that also are some of the longest rivers in the U.S., at least: the Ohio, Missouri, Arkansas.

Mark Twain wrote a book called Life on the Mississippi about his days as a river boat pilot. He started out describing the river in general, at one point comparing it to a snake that occasionally rolled over, pretty much wiping out everything around it. For example, during the Civil War, the Mississippi flowed just under the bluffs of Vicksburg. The Yankees couldn't get past the guns on those bluffs, and finally attacked Vicksburg from the land side and kept it under siege for a couple of months until the starving city surrendered.

I haven't seen it myself, but I've heard that nowadays, the Mississippi doesn't run in the same place anymore -- or at least it didn't. The river apparently is "reclaiming" Vicksburg as I write this.

And what's the cause of all this? The unusually high precipitation over last winter and earlier this spring. All the fault of Global Warming?

No, actually, it's something called La Nina -- "the girl" -- as opposed to El Nino -- "the boy." La Nina is a mass of atmospheric conditions in the Pacific Ocean that is actually COOLER than normal. El Nino is the heat.

And all last year there were very few sun spots, which is supposed -- maybe? -- also to have significant impact on weather on earth.

So the tree-huggers are wise to shift their stupid argument from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change." Yeah. 'Cause the climate changes. You can count on that.The earth doesn't sit still. Never has, never will. And it doesn't need any "rights" under human law. It's a law unto itself. And it makes our little efforts look silly, doesn't it?

You can also count on the fact that there's not a damn thing we human beings can do about it. We're not the cause, but we feel the effects.We don't control nature and to pretend that we do -- that we even can -- is a kind of mind-boggling arrogance. Nature doesn't need our protection. It does whatever it wants.

The only place politics can have anything to do with this is on the ground, in rescue and recovery efforts.

Save the Republic.

Monday, May 9, 2011

More useless speculation about the Middle East

Watching TV all day. Monday, so the "news cycle" resumes after a weekend full of ghost stories and "I Survived."

Pakistan is apparently quite teed off that the US charged over its borders to attack bn Ladn. The next time we do that, Pakistan says, they will respond with "full force" or whatever. They do have nuclear weapons.

Want to know what I think? Well, probably not, but it seems to me that Pakistan knew all about bn Ladn living amongst them. His compound was, after all, in what is a virtual military stronghold in Pakistan, and the compound was of such a size -- and secrecy -- that no one could fail to notice it and ask questions. Add to this the larger context of Pakistan's being a police state, and it's very hard to figure that the Pakistani government just didn't know bn Ladn was there.

Personally, I believe bn Ladn was there, surrounded by Pakistan military, so that they could keep close tabs on him. He was, after all, a proven threat to human civilization.

For the record, Pakistan also harbors the most violent elements of the Taliban and a bunch of other nasty terrorist-type freaks -- along with those sort of 10th Century tribes who've always demanded tribute of those trying to use the Khyber Pass. Providing shelter for murderous loonies seems to be Pakistan's specialty, the way they differentiate themselves in the marketplace. From the brochure: "Are you a violent, high-profile wannabe dictator looking for safe harbor? Come to beautiful Pakistan!"

Kadaffy -- here's the place for you!

At any rate, I suspect Pakistan was sheltering bn Ladn the way a poker player hoards his chips. Perhaps the Pakistanis believed bn Ladn might have some value in international politics. Like, the next time they offended America to the point that the US decided to cut off all aid, the Pakis could pull bn Ladn out of their pork-pie hats -- "Hey! If you stay friends, we could give you bn Ladn!"

So the Seals took that away, and boy is Pakistan pissed.

And by the way, the latest conspiracy theory claims that the CIA and upper echelons of the US government also knew the Pakis were harboring bn Ladn, and just decided that it was his time to go. Perhaps bn Ladn was about to spill the beans about his collusion with the Bush administration when Bush and Cheney blew up the World Trade Center. See how nicely that all dovetails?

Anyways, the Comrade actually did a enjoy a slight "bump" in popularity over the annihilation of bn Ladn, but it doesn't seem to be holding. And it also occurred too far in advance of the 2012 elections to have much impact probably. That's the silver lining.

Save the Republic.

What kind of enemy is this?

Well, I'm getting sick of hearing about 1.) Usama bn Ladn; and 2.) the Comrade.

Anyone else notice that the most successful policies of the current regime are those that the Comrade carried over from George W?

So, bn Ladn is dead. That doesn't make socialized medicine any more acceptable, doesn't do a thing about the price of gasoline or coffee. The Comrade has made an even bigger mess in America than bn Ladn did. Let's not forget about that. That hasn't changed.

Putting all that aside for the moment, I just read an article in the U.K.'s Guardian newspaper that's really a laugh and wanted to share it to brighten your day.

Iran's Abracadabrajab apparently has seen some successful challenges to his leadership recently. Not sure exactly what these are -- just a few people in the Iranian government who have apparently opposed him and won their little battles.

So Abracadabrajab is having them arrested and charged with "sorcery." Yup. sorcery. As in "black magic."  He says these guys must have some connections with the devil or evil entities from the spirit world.

Do you suppose Abaracadabrajab would be happy also to arrest the U.S. CIA and Navy Seals on the same charges?

Good grief. Is this what we're up against?

Do you supposed the "trials" for these people will include dunking stools? Or maybe the defendants will be buried under rocks to see if they can continue breathing, thus proving that they're "in league with the devil."

Here's the thing -- you can't reason with people like Abracadabrajab. He's engaged in this game called "Crusaders vs. the Saracens." Nothing has changed or evolved since like about 1150 A.D. Of course, he probably doesn't recognize anything like "A.D." either.

And the Comrade hopes to open some kind of dialog with this person?

I think what the Middle East -- or Arab culture or whatever -- what it really needs is the Renaissance, which  skipped right over them, apparently. Then another couple hundred years and they might reach Enlightenment.

Enough for now. I'm very tired.

Save the Republic.

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Hypocrisy on stilts, or show me the head of Usama bn Ladn

Last night I went to the Web site of a radio show I sometimes listen to at night. The show kind of specializes in off-beat topics. Including rants from wingnut conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. I don't listen when he's on.

Anyway, this Web site had a poll open for votes about the death of bn Ladn. Three choices -- you could vote that yeah, they got the right guy. No, they didn't get the right guy. Or it's all a conspiracy.

Guess which option was leading? Had to laugh. However, must admit, until I see some photos, I'm not entirely convinced. I mean, really, we should respect Satan's religion and "bury" him within 24 hours?

When did he ever respect western religion? And people who believe islam is somehow related to peace claim that bn Ladn was not a "real" muslim anyway. So why bother? Except to get rid of the evidence? The least they could have done is let him "lie in state" at Guantanamo and let the vultures pick his eyes out. Invite the international press to document the whole thing.

At any rate, whether or not bn Ladn is dead, I find it rather disconcerting that the Comrade is trying to make political hay over it. After all, the Comrade and the merry marxists, like Pazzo Pelosi, last year this time were accusing the CIA of being liars and torturers. Now the Hypocrite-in-Chief loves the intelligence agency and is willing to stake his political future on information it's gathered.

Funny things happen when you're launching a re-election campaign and your approval rating is hovering around 40%.

If events unfolded as related -- and that is a possibility -- I do have to give Comrade Butthead credit for issuing the "go." After all, wimp lump Bill "Can't-keep-it-zipped" Clinton had two opportunities to annihilate bn Ladn, and he choked in both cases. Apparently his wife has more guts. Or perhaps desperation is at work here.

And I totally resented the Comrade trying to link the assassination of bn Ladn with the Comrade's socialist economic policies. At the end of his speech, the Comrade noted that America can do anything it sets its mind to, including regaining prosperity.

However, we can only regain prosperity if and when we dump the Comrade.

And it's been a hoot listening to the broadcasters on all the TV/radio stations confusing the names Osama and Obama. They're practically interchangeable, after all.

Save the Republic.

Monday, May 2, 2011

Bn Ladn killed by U.S. forces in Pakistan

Well, so they finally got Usama bn Ladn.

Good. Apparently he was "hiding" in a well-appointed and likely custom-built compound behind 12-foot walls in Abbottsabad, a military-run city in Pakistan. So I guess we can assume where Pakistan's sentiments lie.

Last I heard, bn Ladn's body was being "handled appropriate to muslim custom."

Here's another idea, according to ancient western custom:

Cut off his fucking head, impale it on a pike, and display it in front of the World Trade Center.

Save the Republic.