We're still inthe midst of the debt ceiling thing, largely because Brain-dead Harry Reid killed the Republican House bill in the Senate and is trying to substitute his own.
Funny thing is, though (and forgive any typos 'cause I'm laughing) Reid can't get enough votes in the dem-controlled Senate to support it.
In addition, the House gave the language in Reid's bill a run-through and it was heavily defeated by a bipartisan mix of dems and Reps.
I've read everything I could get my hands on about Reid's bill. Tough, because it's a weekend and reporters also like some time off every now and then. And I don't go to the networks for news. That leaves all the leftist newspapers and Fox.
Anyway, what I've been able to gather is that the Reid bill calls for raising the debt ceiling by $2.9 TRILLION through around March, 2013 -- conveniently after the 2012 elections so the dems can avoid walking around with egg on their faces during their election campaigns. And the bill also offers budget cuts of about $2.4 TRILLION -- OVER TEN YEARS.
Yeah, right. I'm looking for that flight of donkeys that should be over the roof right about now. Nothing so far.
Boehner's bill allows for raising the debt ceiling by $900 billion through around January, 2012, with $917 billion in cuts taken immediately. It requires congress to vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment. (70% of US voters favor this. Apparently everyone but hard-core far-left dems.) Also, a committee would take up the issue of finding further budget cuts, these to be available by January, 2012. And the debt ceiling will come up again for consideration in January 2013. Historically, most debt ceiling increases have run only about six to seven months.
Then the Comrade sticks his ugly mug into the debate again regarding "triggers" that are intended to enforce the controls on spending. (Actually, I don't see any controls on spending in the Reid bill, but maybe that's just 'cause I live outside the Beltway. So far from the fantasy.)
Apparently in the Boehner bill, if the feds fail to make the promised budget cuts, and spending rises over a certain level, that triggers cuts in federal spending somehow.
What the Comrade prefers in an "enforcement clause" is that if spending exceeds certain limits, taxes will automatically go up.
He certainly is slick, isn't he? Under the Reid bill, and if it includes the Comrade's fondest wishes, the Comrade won't have to answer to voters about how badly he's wrecked the economy with his reckless indifference toward Other Peoples' Money. AND he hopes to reward himself with automatice tax hikes that will be no one's responsibility. Hey, shit happens. Ain't the Comrade's fault.
So, Comrade, try this for one of your heartwarming little radio addresses. "Too bad you poor dumb slobs in the hinterland have had to give up electricity this month to pay your taxes. Sigh... But vote for me, because I am blameless." That will be his 2012 campaign bumper sticker. "I have done NOTHING!"
And that's still better than the truth.
Did you know that according Rasmussen Reports, the Comrade's approval rating is about the lowest it's ever been? Also saw a recent number stating that while the Comrade got an extraordinary 98% of the black vote in the 2008 election, his support from blacks now is down around 77%. So I guess the supposed historical significance of the Comrade's election is wearing pretty thin as an excuse to keep him in office.
Reid delayed the Senate vote on his bill until this afternoon, Sunday, 7/31. My bet is that the vote won't be taken at all. He won't be able to round up enough support. 'Cause you know, the Comrade is not the only one running in 2012, and members of congress don't get helicopters and limos and Secret Service. They get the heat and noise at the Town Halls.
Save the Republic.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Bait'n'switch on debt ceiling bill
Well, it seems since House Speaker John Boehner and the House got a debt ceiling bill through, it's really the only game in town in terms of reducing the debt, staving off default, and restoring the USA's credit rating.
The bill in question was tabled in the Senate without any consideration whatsoever, and it seems the strategy to move forward is pretty dodgy and disgusting. But just about what you'd expect from the reprobates in congress.
See, Brain-dead Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, also introduced a bill that's pretty much a piece of crap, It has only phoney spending cuts in it, no enforcement of said "cuts," and raises the debt ceiling so high, the issue won't have to be revisited until after the 2012 election. He doesn't have the votes in the Senate to pass this piece of crap legislation and it certainly wouldn't make it through the House.
Apparently Brain-dead Harry's bill was devised solely for the purpose of getting the Comrade and the merry marxists re-elected without putting on pulic parade (again) all the underhanded lying and deception, irresponsible spending and generally dictatorial and nation-killing polices of the dems. Brain-dead's bill raises the debt ceiling by $2.4 TRILLION, which the dope believes will be good enough to cover USA profligate spending until 2013.
Anyway, Brain-dead Harry's strategy seems to be to take the House bill that's in the Senate now, slice it open like a codfish, empty out all the guts, and stuff it full of the unacceptable bullshit that's in Brain-dead Harry's bill. Then send it back to the House for "reconciliation."
Bait'n'switch, dontcha know. That's when you're lured into a deal by a great, high-quality product, but what you get is a cheap knock-off that doesn't work. It's something con artists do, and it's a crime -- unless you're in the U.S. Senate and believe you're above the law.
Totally disgusting. And does Brain-dead and his little comrades -- and big Comrade -- think the American people aren't going to notice this foul maneuver and won't object? Where have they been for the last few years?
I don't know. They pull these cheap tricks right in front of us and expect no one will notice. Theylie straight-faced and NBC, ABC, and CBS simply pass along the lies. I mean, who the hell do the people think they're dealing with?
I could make a few suggestions about how to handle this whole situation, but then I'd probably be arrested. And these turds aren't worth me spending time in jail. I'll be happy simply thnking of them roasting on spit over a large bonfire in hell.
Well, Brain-dead Harry, go on ahead and play your stupid and treasonous games. And see what good it will get you. You'll go down in history as the man greased the skids for the collapse of the greatest nation that ever existed. 'Course what the hell do you care about things like that? Simply over your head.
Save the Republic.
The bill in question was tabled in the Senate without any consideration whatsoever, and it seems the strategy to move forward is pretty dodgy and disgusting. But just about what you'd expect from the reprobates in congress.
See, Brain-dead Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, also introduced a bill that's pretty much a piece of crap, It has only phoney spending cuts in it, no enforcement of said "cuts," and raises the debt ceiling so high, the issue won't have to be revisited until after the 2012 election. He doesn't have the votes in the Senate to pass this piece of crap legislation and it certainly wouldn't make it through the House.
Apparently Brain-dead Harry's bill was devised solely for the purpose of getting the Comrade and the merry marxists re-elected without putting on pulic parade (again) all the underhanded lying and deception, irresponsible spending and generally dictatorial and nation-killing polices of the dems. Brain-dead's bill raises the debt ceiling by $2.4 TRILLION, which the dope believes will be good enough to cover USA profligate spending until 2013.
Anyway, Brain-dead Harry's strategy seems to be to take the House bill that's in the Senate now, slice it open like a codfish, empty out all the guts, and stuff it full of the unacceptable bullshit that's in Brain-dead Harry's bill. Then send it back to the House for "reconciliation."
Bait'n'switch, dontcha know. That's when you're lured into a deal by a great, high-quality product, but what you get is a cheap knock-off that doesn't work. It's something con artists do, and it's a crime -- unless you're in the U.S. Senate and believe you're above the law.
Totally disgusting. And does Brain-dead and his little comrades -- and big Comrade -- think the American people aren't going to notice this foul maneuver and won't object? Where have they been for the last few years?
I don't know. They pull these cheap tricks right in front of us and expect no one will notice. Theylie straight-faced and NBC, ABC, and CBS simply pass along the lies. I mean, who the hell do the people think they're dealing with?
I could make a few suggestions about how to handle this whole situation, but then I'd probably be arrested. And these turds aren't worth me spending time in jail. I'll be happy simply thnking of them roasting on spit over a large bonfire in hell.
Well, Brain-dead Harry, go on ahead and play your stupid and treasonous games. And see what good it will get you. You'll go down in history as the man greased the skids for the collapse of the greatest nation that ever existed. 'Course what the hell do you care about things like that? Simply over your head.
Save the Republic.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Exactly where is "Planet Reid"?
Weird day in politics today.
It started out with Chuckelhead Schumer, Brain-Dead Reid, Dickhead Durbin and others in press conferences, bacially crowing and hectoring John Boehner, because Boehner's Second debt ceiling bill hadn't got through the House yet. Boehner was having a hard time lining up votes behind it -- the Tea Party reps stood their ground and wanted to attach a Constitutional amendment to the bill calling for a balanced budget for the federal government.
I might add, among all voters, a Balanced Budget Amendment polls with about a 70% approval rating. That proposal has a higher approval rating than any member of congress. Just so you know.
But the dem gang from the Senate continued insisting this was so "extremist" that not even the Republicans in the House would vote for it. They kind of reminded me of, you know, in gangster movies, like "Goodfellas," where the gang stands around a guy on the ground and keeps kicking him. That's the visual Schumer, Reid, and Durbin presented. Not pretty.
As it turns out, however, Boehner got the bill passed in the House with a few votes to spare. And then it went to the Senate.
Brain-Dead Harry wanted to table it, just like he tabled the earlier TWO House budget bills, and guess what? Ol' Brain-Dead didn't have the 60 votes he needed to kill the bill in the Senate.
About this time I was rolling on the floor laughing, coffee shooting out my nose.
So Ol' Brain-Dead did what he usually does when he's losing -- he changed the rules of the game. Can't get a two-thirds majority? Well, then change the rules to a simple majority, that is 51 votes. He did get that and House bill was tabled.
Don't you wish, when your team's down 6-5, that suddenly you could count "reaching second base" as a home run? The Senate really is a mess, ain't it? No wonder they all have such a hard time with reality.
So now what? Turns out, Ol' Brain-Dead did submit his own debt ceiling bill about a week ago. It's all crap. No real spending cuts in it at all -- just things like, "Hey, let's agree NOT to launch free trips to the moon for every illegal alien under 18." See, by NOT passing that legislation, see how much money Brain-Dead's bill saves?
Not quite a cut, but Brain-Dead has demonstrated repeatedly that he doesn't know how to count to 10, or to 60, for that matter. And guess what, Brain-Dead doesn't have the votes in the Senate to even pass that lame and uselss proposal.
And I can't seriously imagine it would go anywhere in the House.
Meahwhile, the Comrade got his little face on TV today, early, also whining about extremists and all that kinda useless crap. Apparently he also promised a bunch of tree-huggers that he will continue to do his best to anihilate whatever remains of the American auto industry.
Didn't I say months -- if not years -- ago that the Comrade is so far out of the mainstream that he was making himself irrelevant to the political system? He's about reached that destination -- Planet Reid.
So -- to cap this all off with a good laugh.... Ol' Brain-Dead doesn't have the votes to get his own stupid debt ceiling measure through the Senate. So, in his usual fashion, he declared that the Republicans are "filibustering" the Senate.
The Republicans don't really have enough people in the Senate to do a filibuster. If they did, I think the Republican bill from the House would still be on the floor.
Kinda makes you wonder, again, about exactly how many marbles Ol' Brain-Dead Reid has lost over recent weeks. OK, this is how you get to Planet Reid: close your eyes and pretend you're surrounded by supportive voters who believe anything you say. Or picture an SEIU meeting.
Save the Republic.
It started out with Chuckelhead Schumer, Brain-Dead Reid, Dickhead Durbin and others in press conferences, bacially crowing and hectoring John Boehner, because Boehner's Second debt ceiling bill hadn't got through the House yet. Boehner was having a hard time lining up votes behind it -- the Tea Party reps stood their ground and wanted to attach a Constitutional amendment to the bill calling for a balanced budget for the federal government.
I might add, among all voters, a Balanced Budget Amendment polls with about a 70% approval rating. That proposal has a higher approval rating than any member of congress. Just so you know.
But the dem gang from the Senate continued insisting this was so "extremist" that not even the Republicans in the House would vote for it. They kind of reminded me of, you know, in gangster movies, like "Goodfellas," where the gang stands around a guy on the ground and keeps kicking him. That's the visual Schumer, Reid, and Durbin presented. Not pretty.
As it turns out, however, Boehner got the bill passed in the House with a few votes to spare. And then it went to the Senate.
Brain-Dead Harry wanted to table it, just like he tabled the earlier TWO House budget bills, and guess what? Ol' Brain-Dead didn't have the 60 votes he needed to kill the bill in the Senate.
About this time I was rolling on the floor laughing, coffee shooting out my nose.
So Ol' Brain-Dead did what he usually does when he's losing -- he changed the rules of the game. Can't get a two-thirds majority? Well, then change the rules to a simple majority, that is 51 votes. He did get that and House bill was tabled.
Don't you wish, when your team's down 6-5, that suddenly you could count "reaching second base" as a home run? The Senate really is a mess, ain't it? No wonder they all have such a hard time with reality.
So now what? Turns out, Ol' Brain-Dead did submit his own debt ceiling bill about a week ago. It's all crap. No real spending cuts in it at all -- just things like, "Hey, let's agree NOT to launch free trips to the moon for every illegal alien under 18." See, by NOT passing that legislation, see how much money Brain-Dead's bill saves?
Not quite a cut, but Brain-Dead has demonstrated repeatedly that he doesn't know how to count to 10, or to 60, for that matter. And guess what, Brain-Dead doesn't have the votes in the Senate to even pass that lame and uselss proposal.
And I can't seriously imagine it would go anywhere in the House.
Meahwhile, the Comrade got his little face on TV today, early, also whining about extremists and all that kinda useless crap. Apparently he also promised a bunch of tree-huggers that he will continue to do his best to anihilate whatever remains of the American auto industry.
Didn't I say months -- if not years -- ago that the Comrade is so far out of the mainstream that he was making himself irrelevant to the political system? He's about reached that destination -- Planet Reid.
So -- to cap this all off with a good laugh.... Ol' Brain-Dead doesn't have the votes to get his own stupid debt ceiling measure through the Senate. So, in his usual fashion, he declared that the Republicans are "filibustering" the Senate.
The Republicans don't really have enough people in the Senate to do a filibuster. If they did, I think the Republican bill from the House would still be on the floor.
Kinda makes you wonder, again, about exactly how many marbles Ol' Brain-Dead Reid has lost over recent weeks. OK, this is how you get to Planet Reid: close your eyes and pretend you're surrounded by supportive voters who believe anything you say. Or picture an SEIU meeting.
Save the Republic.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
"Extreme" is the the new America. Deal with it.
Well, Senator Chucklehead Schumer (d-NY) a few weeks ago sent out a memo to his dem gang members advising them to always tack on the adjective "extreme" when speaking of Republicans. See, the democrats are incapable of independent thought, so they need these kinds of directives. Otherwise they just stand around like Pazzo Pelosi, waving their hands around like theiy're doing slow-motion Karate exercises and mumbling complete nonsense that no one can quite figure out. Anyway, so now all the dems are claiming that "extreme" Republicans are holding up the debt ceiling legislation.
OK, let's just think about this for a minute.
The dems have spent $4 TRILLION over the last 2.5 years. I'm tellin' ya, I wouldn't have any idea how to get rid of that much money in such a short time. What the hell are they doing? Burning it?
In addition, the feds now have to borrow 40 to 43 cents of every dollar they spend -- because they don't have all this money they're spending. And this huge debt is one major reason that the USA is unable to recover from the ongoing economic depression.
But it's "extreme" when Republicans try to put the brakes on spending to help fix the economy?
Exactly what universe do these people live in?
I mean, would it make sense to you to go out and rent a penthouse for $5,000 a month when your entire income is like about $3,000 a month? And you have no idea where to get the additional funds? And Mommy and Daddy Taxpayer getting pretty damn impatient about your recklessness and irresponsibility.
Please explain to me how this kind of profligate spending would be "reasonable" or "moderate."
The only answer the dems have for that would be, "Well, we NEED to spend. In fact, we can't get anybody to vote for us unless we buy them things."
And then ol' Chucklehead, in lock-step with brain-dead Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, complains that they can't do anything in the Senate until they get a bill from the House.
THEY HAVE TWO BUDGET BILLS FROM THE HOUSE ALREADY IN THE SENATE. ONE WAS KILLED IN COMMITTEE (Ryan budget) AND THE OTHER WAS TABLED (Cut, Cap and Balance).
In addition, Brain-dead Harry says he won't allow the Senate to consider any bill the House would present.
So, why on earth should the Republicans in the House even bother?
But the Republicans are "extreme" and "unwilling to compromise"-- is this is gibberish the dems are peddling today?
I'd like to add that the "extreme" Republicans represent the MAINSTREAM of America. Look at the results from the November 2010 elections, buttheads. Read 'em and weep. You'll only get more of the same in 2012. Especially after this fiasco.
Went to sleep last night in America and woke up in Never-Neverland, populated by a bunch of half-baked, donkey-headed Peter Pans who "never gonna grow up, never gonna grow up, never gonna grow!"
Save the Republic.
OK, let's just think about this for a minute.
The dems have spent $4 TRILLION over the last 2.5 years. I'm tellin' ya, I wouldn't have any idea how to get rid of that much money in such a short time. What the hell are they doing? Burning it?
In addition, the feds now have to borrow 40 to 43 cents of every dollar they spend -- because they don't have all this money they're spending. And this huge debt is one major reason that the USA is unable to recover from the ongoing economic depression.
But it's "extreme" when Republicans try to put the brakes on spending to help fix the economy?
Exactly what universe do these people live in?
I mean, would it make sense to you to go out and rent a penthouse for $5,000 a month when your entire income is like about $3,000 a month? And you have no idea where to get the additional funds? And Mommy and Daddy Taxpayer getting pretty damn impatient about your recklessness and irresponsibility.
Please explain to me how this kind of profligate spending would be "reasonable" or "moderate."
The only answer the dems have for that would be, "Well, we NEED to spend. In fact, we can't get anybody to vote for us unless we buy them things."
And then ol' Chucklehead, in lock-step with brain-dead Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, complains that they can't do anything in the Senate until they get a bill from the House.
THEY HAVE TWO BUDGET BILLS FROM THE HOUSE ALREADY IN THE SENATE. ONE WAS KILLED IN COMMITTEE (Ryan budget) AND THE OTHER WAS TABLED (Cut, Cap and Balance).
In addition, Brain-dead Harry says he won't allow the Senate to consider any bill the House would present.
So, why on earth should the Republicans in the House even bother?
But the Republicans are "extreme" and "unwilling to compromise"-- is this is gibberish the dems are peddling today?
I'd like to add that the "extreme" Republicans represent the MAINSTREAM of America. Look at the results from the November 2010 elections, buttheads. Read 'em and weep. You'll only get more of the same in 2012. Especially after this fiasco.
Went to sleep last night in America and woke up in Never-Neverland, populated by a bunch of half-baked, donkey-headed Peter Pans who "never gonna grow up, never gonna grow up, never gonna grow!"
Save the Republic.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Clearly, president wants default
Well a pattern has emerged over the 2.something hell-years of the Comrade's tenure in the White House.
His aim is now and always has been to destroy the USA as we know it -- as a free country, as a free market, as a properous nation. That's what he's always intended: "fundamental transformation."
So with an economy as varied and powerful as the USA once enjoyed, you can take a two-pronged attack. Destroy individual industries where you can -- like housing and automotive and insurance through socialized medicine.
But the real prize is to wipe out private capital -- either through taxation -- which is tough, because the wealthy, including wealthy corporations, still have money coming in no matter how high you raise taxes.
So the other alternative is to wipe out the value of their holdings.
This is where we are now. The Comrade obliterating 234 years of hard work, innovation, creativity and just in general, the blood, sweat, and tears of every American who ever lived, had a dream, and made it work.
The Comrade doesn't like that. He can't control it. It makes him nervous. He just might pee his pants if anyone escapes his control.
This is a nasty, brutal, devious and power-mad sicko.
It's very clear.
What do we do now? We can't have this for even another two years.
Save the Republic.
His aim is now and always has been to destroy the USA as we know it -- as a free country, as a free market, as a properous nation. That's what he's always intended: "fundamental transformation."
So with an economy as varied and powerful as the USA once enjoyed, you can take a two-pronged attack. Destroy individual industries where you can -- like housing and automotive and insurance through socialized medicine.
But the real prize is to wipe out private capital -- either through taxation -- which is tough, because the wealthy, including wealthy corporations, still have money coming in no matter how high you raise taxes.
So the other alternative is to wipe out the value of their holdings.
This is where we are now. The Comrade obliterating 234 years of hard work, innovation, creativity and just in general, the blood, sweat, and tears of every American who ever lived, had a dream, and made it work.
The Comrade doesn't like that. He can't control it. It makes him nervous. He just might pee his pants if anyone escapes his control.
This is a nasty, brutal, devious and power-mad sicko.
It's very clear.
What do we do now? We can't have this for even another two years.
Save the Republic.
Monday, July 25, 2011
President remarkably useless
Listened to the Comrade addressing the nation tonight.
Call me naive, I thought he might add something to the debt ceiling debate. But no, just the same old b.s. To wit:
So I guess the Comrade was out all day golfing or talking to those he hopes are ignorant and uninformed voters -- those who may vote for him, soon as they turn 18 and/or get their citizenship papers before the 2012 election -- and missed all the congressional activity.
So the Comrade demonstrated that he's a total buffoon. Useless and irrelevant. He's still voting "present." And he thinks that will get him elected.
What an amazing asshole. Really, it boggles the mind.
And who's that silly Jackson bitch from Texas? The one who was jabbering away on her cell phone when a constituent was trying to talk to her during a Town Hall meeting last year. Shirley Jackson or somethig like that. She made a speech last week asking, "What is it about this president, and only this president" that makes people oppose him?
I'll tell ya, Shirley. Only this president is a rigid marxist socialist. Only this president is a total ignoramus on the economy. Only this president blew $4 TRILLION in less than three years. And only this president still hopes to spend even more.
That's what makes him outstanding.
Monumental asshole. The likes of which we may never (hopefully) ever encounter again.
Save the Republic
Call me naive, I thought he might add something to the debt ceiling debate. But no, just the same old b.s. To wit:
- It's all Bush's fault
- Tax the rich
- I am blameless
- I am holding hostage Social Security checks
- If anyone comes up with a solution, it's due to my guidance.
So I guess the Comrade was out all day golfing or talking to those he hopes are ignorant and uninformed voters -- those who may vote for him, soon as they turn 18 and/or get their citizenship papers before the 2012 election -- and missed all the congressional activity.
So the Comrade demonstrated that he's a total buffoon. Useless and irrelevant. He's still voting "present." And he thinks that will get him elected.
What an amazing asshole. Really, it boggles the mind.
And who's that silly Jackson bitch from Texas? The one who was jabbering away on her cell phone when a constituent was trying to talk to her during a Town Hall meeting last year. Shirley Jackson or somethig like that. She made a speech last week asking, "What is it about this president, and only this president" that makes people oppose him?
I'll tell ya, Shirley. Only this president is a rigid marxist socialist. Only this president is a total ignoramus on the economy. Only this president blew $4 TRILLION in less than three years. And only this president still hopes to spend even more.
That's what makes him outstanding.
Monumental asshole. The likes of which we may never (hopefully) ever encounter again.
Save the Republic
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Rs & ds, compare & contrast
On "Fox News Sunday" today, Chris Wallace had Tim Geithner and John Boehner back-to-back. An interesting study in contrasts.
Geithner (who gave up on the closed fist, now pointing fingers aggressively) made a few points:
Then John Boehner came on, and before Chris Wallace even asked a question, Boehner noted, "I know the president is worried about the next election, but shouldn't we be worried about this country?"
Wallace asked about a proposed deal Boehner had with the Comrade last week, which included $800 billion in increased revenues for the government. Where would these additonal revenues come from?
And let's not overlook Senate Majority Whip Dickhead Durbin (d-IL), who had to stick in his two cents from Chicago -- not on the Sunday show, but in a brief clip. Dickhead wants us all to know that the Republicans are stubbornly standing in the way of more unbridled and irresponsible government spending that will turn the USA into a badly managed copy of Zimbabwe.
Yeah. We know. That's why we voted Tea Party last November and why we will vote that way again in 2012.
Thanks, Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor. If anyone suspected you were getting wobbly and losing a sense of commitment to supporting free market capitalism and individual liberty in the USA, maybe they'll think again.
Tried to email Boehner yesterday with my support -- the servers were tied up. So I guess I'm not the only person standing behind him. In fact, in polls over the last few weeks, anywhere between 60% to 70% of the US population wants to cut spending and doesn't want to increase the debt ceiling.
Save the Republic.
Geithner (who gave up on the closed fist, now pointing fingers aggressively) made a few points:
- The feds cut 80 million checks every month
- The economy is recovering despite the fact that unemployment has increased and only 18,000 new jobs were created in June.
- Anything that appears problematic in the economy is due to: George W. Bush, oil prices (and the Comrade has nothing to do with that?), the tsunami in Japan, and the weather.
- Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid recipients may be affected with default. "Nothing can be done about it." (Note the use of the passive voice, which means basically, "Hey, shit happens.")
Then John Boehner came on, and before Chris Wallace even asked a question, Boehner noted, "I know the president is worried about the next election, but shouldn't we be worried about this country?"
Wallace asked about a proposed deal Boehner had with the Comrade last week, which included $800 billion in increased revenues for the government. Where would these additonal revenues come from?
- A flatter and fairer tax structure
- Economic growth
- NOT an increase in taxes
- "I didn't come here to be a congressman. I didn't become Speaker because I wanted a big fancy job. I wanted to do something for the country."
- "If we do the right thing for the country, we won't have to worry about what happens in the next election."
And let's not overlook Senate Majority Whip Dickhead Durbin (d-IL), who had to stick in his two cents from Chicago -- not on the Sunday show, but in a brief clip. Dickhead wants us all to know that the Republicans are stubbornly standing in the way of more unbridled and irresponsible government spending that will turn the USA into a badly managed copy of Zimbabwe.
Yeah. We know. That's why we voted Tea Party last November and why we will vote that way again in 2012.
Thanks, Mr. Boehner and Mr. Cantor. If anyone suspected you were getting wobbly and losing a sense of commitment to supporting free market capitalism and individual liberty in the USA, maybe they'll think again.
Tried to email Boehner yesterday with my support -- the servers were tied up. So I guess I'm not the only person standing behind him. In fact, in polls over the last few weeks, anywhere between 60% to 70% of the US population wants to cut spending and doesn't want to increase the debt ceiling.
Save the Republic.
The "Peter Principle" at work in DC
I guess it was quite a while ago that a book called The Peter Principle was a major bestseller. It presented something that you can call an explanation for the breakdown of everything, including the fall of the Roman Empire, and it seems to be at work right now within the democrat party.
In a nutshell, the Peter Principle states that people will be promoted to one level ABOVE their competence. That is, suppose you're a terrific shipping clerk. So the shipping manager retires and you get promoted to his position. Where you're a toad out of water, have no idea what to do, and make a mess out of everything. So you don't get any further promotions and the shipping function goes down the tubes. Yet the guy who promoted you doesn't want to admit he made a mistake...
If I recall correctly, such a situation calls for "being kicked upstairs." That is, being moved out of an important job where you really have to produce something to some in-name-only post in the executive suite. Until you finally figure it out and, if you have any honor, voluntarily resign, red-faced and humble beneath your enthusiasm for your extended Florida vacation.
We have a president who's a great campaigner. Not only a great campaigner, but a great and far-thinking political strategist. He's really good at winning elections. Creating crises that he dumps in other peoples' laps, and then if a solution is forthcoming, scampers like a spoiled lap dog to the microphone to claim the credit. The only problem, he's entirely incompetent at governing. He's been promoted w-a-a-a-a-y beyond his level of competence. He doesn't know how to manage anything. He's incapable of making decisions. He doesn't know how to accept responsibility.
Could say something similar might apply to Harry Reid, but he's just such an all-around dolt and blockhead I can't imagine him succeeding at anything but the US Senate. I can't even imagine Harry Reid campaigning. I mean, he can't talk without mumbling and slurring. Apparently he hasn't even mastered the teleprompter, preferring to read jotted, incoherent gibberish from 3"x5" index cards cribbed in his sweaty palms. I really think he should be checked for Alzheimer's or possibly a stroke. I'm perfectly serious about that. He doesn't seem to be "all there."
Pazzo Pelosi is just a bubblehead. Daddy's little girl. Hey, you folks in Maryland, Daddy's long dead. You can stop paying tribute now, unless some kind of goon squad still survives and is holding your families hostage. Yeah, I am referring to Steny Hoyer and that painfully slick Von Holland dude. First among peers, Pazzo leads the pack of the entirely empty-headed. A plastic face and no brain. She must, however, throw terrific wine and cheese collectives for her San Francisco constituency, pretending to be Old Money from New England, laughing at un-funny "insider" jokes and oh so concerned about those unwashed masses. Try to stand next to the guy from Berkeley.
Then we have Tim Geithner. Truth be told, I also have trouble with Turbo Tax. But then, no one in their wildest dreams would ever consider me for US Treasurer. One thing I really can't stand about Geithner is that he does that Clinton thing with his hand, waving his right hand around in a closed fist, thumb on top, like he's shaking up a bottle of Pepsi. I suppose Clinton does that because it's less rude than pointing. No idea why Geithner does it. Maybe in the same way that all the pols copied JFK's hair style for a couple decades, hoping the glamor would rub off. Geithner kinda reminds me of a hopelessly nerdly type. I was surprised to read somewhere that he's actually married. He probably relies on his wife to find them bridge partners and lets her do all the talking.
Author Mark Levin, who also has an excellent radio show, calls these people the president's "freak show." Yeah. "There! I said it!"
Not one among them worth "a pitcher full of warm spit," to borrow a term from a former vice president, Cactus Jack somebody.
And on the other side of the aisle? Well, there's the old, experienced honchos, and while I did kind of like Mitch McConnell for a time, I'm beginning to wonder about his competence after he suggested that congress, as a "fall-back position," simply abdicate its Constitutional power over the US budget. Yeah, what the hell, Mitch, just let the Comrade do whatever he wants, spend as much as he likes. McConnell would, thereby, remain blameless. And the country would go to hell in handbasket, but who gives a damn about that? I mean, is that even Constitutional? I mean, can congress actually transfer its power to another branch of government? What would Madison do?
I actually think the longer-serving or Old Guard Republicans are just as befuddled by the Tea Party folks as NBC and Slate "journalists" are. I mean, the Old Guard Republicans, like the dems, were pretty much used to behaving as though the Constitution was just a moderately amusing historical artifact, safely squirreled away in a vault in the Smithsonian. Now they're actually being called upon to read the damn thing and take it seriously. What the heck is going on here? Take away the earmarks and they're totally adrift. (Job description is actually IN the Constitution, people.)
Overall, I do believe the Comrade has promoted one more crisis than he can handle. He forgets, like all dictators, that ultimately it's the great mass of citizens that determine what kind of government they have. Or don't have. Which is exactly why marxism has never worked anywhere, ever. You can murder and incarcerate trouble-makers for a while, but eventually everyone just gets really sick of it. And it surely can't work in the USA. I mean most citizens look at what's going on in Washington and asking, "What the hell are they thinking?"
Know what an oxymoron is? It's a contradiction in terms. Liberals like to give as an example "military intelligence" In place of that, I'd like to suggest the example "government accountability."
We're going to need a whole big bunch of new candidates in 2012.
Save the Republic
In a nutshell, the Peter Principle states that people will be promoted to one level ABOVE their competence. That is, suppose you're a terrific shipping clerk. So the shipping manager retires and you get promoted to his position. Where you're a toad out of water, have no idea what to do, and make a mess out of everything. So you don't get any further promotions and the shipping function goes down the tubes. Yet the guy who promoted you doesn't want to admit he made a mistake...
If I recall correctly, such a situation calls for "being kicked upstairs." That is, being moved out of an important job where you really have to produce something to some in-name-only post in the executive suite. Until you finally figure it out and, if you have any honor, voluntarily resign, red-faced and humble beneath your enthusiasm for your extended Florida vacation.
We have a president who's a great campaigner. Not only a great campaigner, but a great and far-thinking political strategist. He's really good at winning elections. Creating crises that he dumps in other peoples' laps, and then if a solution is forthcoming, scampers like a spoiled lap dog to the microphone to claim the credit. The only problem, he's entirely incompetent at governing. He's been promoted w-a-a-a-a-y beyond his level of competence. He doesn't know how to manage anything. He's incapable of making decisions. He doesn't know how to accept responsibility.
Could say something similar might apply to Harry Reid, but he's just such an all-around dolt and blockhead I can't imagine him succeeding at anything but the US Senate. I can't even imagine Harry Reid campaigning. I mean, he can't talk without mumbling and slurring. Apparently he hasn't even mastered the teleprompter, preferring to read jotted, incoherent gibberish from 3"x5" index cards cribbed in his sweaty palms. I really think he should be checked for Alzheimer's or possibly a stroke. I'm perfectly serious about that. He doesn't seem to be "all there."
Pazzo Pelosi is just a bubblehead. Daddy's little girl. Hey, you folks in Maryland, Daddy's long dead. You can stop paying tribute now, unless some kind of goon squad still survives and is holding your families hostage. Yeah, I am referring to Steny Hoyer and that painfully slick Von Holland dude. First among peers, Pazzo leads the pack of the entirely empty-headed. A plastic face and no brain. She must, however, throw terrific wine and cheese collectives for her San Francisco constituency, pretending to be Old Money from New England, laughing at un-funny "insider" jokes and oh so concerned about those unwashed masses. Try to stand next to the guy from Berkeley.
Then we have Tim Geithner. Truth be told, I also have trouble with Turbo Tax. But then, no one in their wildest dreams would ever consider me for US Treasurer. One thing I really can't stand about Geithner is that he does that Clinton thing with his hand, waving his right hand around in a closed fist, thumb on top, like he's shaking up a bottle of Pepsi. I suppose Clinton does that because it's less rude than pointing. No idea why Geithner does it. Maybe in the same way that all the pols copied JFK's hair style for a couple decades, hoping the glamor would rub off. Geithner kinda reminds me of a hopelessly nerdly type. I was surprised to read somewhere that he's actually married. He probably relies on his wife to find them bridge partners and lets her do all the talking.
Author Mark Levin, who also has an excellent radio show, calls these people the president's "freak show." Yeah. "There! I said it!"
Not one among them worth "a pitcher full of warm spit," to borrow a term from a former vice president, Cactus Jack somebody.
And on the other side of the aisle? Well, there's the old, experienced honchos, and while I did kind of like Mitch McConnell for a time, I'm beginning to wonder about his competence after he suggested that congress, as a "fall-back position," simply abdicate its Constitutional power over the US budget. Yeah, what the hell, Mitch, just let the Comrade do whatever he wants, spend as much as he likes. McConnell would, thereby, remain blameless. And the country would go to hell in handbasket, but who gives a damn about that? I mean, is that even Constitutional? I mean, can congress actually transfer its power to another branch of government? What would Madison do?
I actually think the longer-serving or Old Guard Republicans are just as befuddled by the Tea Party folks as NBC and Slate "journalists" are. I mean, the Old Guard Republicans, like the dems, were pretty much used to behaving as though the Constitution was just a moderately amusing historical artifact, safely squirreled away in a vault in the Smithsonian. Now they're actually being called upon to read the damn thing and take it seriously. What the heck is going on here? Take away the earmarks and they're totally adrift. (Job description is actually IN the Constitution, people.)
Overall, I do believe the Comrade has promoted one more crisis than he can handle. He forgets, like all dictators, that ultimately it's the great mass of citizens that determine what kind of government they have. Or don't have. Which is exactly why marxism has never worked anywhere, ever. You can murder and incarcerate trouble-makers for a while, but eventually everyone just gets really sick of it. And it surely can't work in the USA. I mean most citizens look at what's going on in Washington and asking, "What the hell are they thinking?"
Know what an oxymoron is? It's a contradiction in terms. Liberals like to give as an example "military intelligence" In place of that, I'd like to suggest the example "government accountability."
We're going to need a whole big bunch of new candidates in 2012.
Save the Republic
Friday, July 22, 2011
Comrade Osama "big daddy" gettin' things done. Yeah, right.
The Comrade, economic terrorist, is on TV right now, talking about how hard he's tried to get an agreement on the debt ceiling. But, sigh.... congress just can't agree.
What a #$%^&*()_ fool. Honestly.
HE'S THE ONE WHO WON'T AGREE TO ANYTHING. HIS IDEA OF "BALANCED" MEANS, "GIVE ME EVERYTHING I WANT!"
The stupid blockhead just now asked of Republicans, "Can they say yes to anything?"
The Republicans have put forward at least three budget proposals, any of which would fix the problem.
IT'S COMRADE OSAMA AND THE CLOWSN IN THE SENATE WHO SAY NO -- WHO WON'T EVEN CONSIDER ANY OF THESE PROPOSALS.
But you can count on economic terrorist Comrade Osama to try to spin this so he:
1. Remains blamess
2. Can still turn the USA in a dictatorial direction.
What a nasty shit. Really. He creates crisis after crisis after crisis and blames it all on other people. And he just said further, "Congress will just have to give me the power to raise the debt ceiling."
Clear now -- the MF'er wants to be king, dictator-in-chief of the USA. To hell with the republic.
He's not even a fool. He's evil. It's very clear now.
Save the Republic.
What a #$%^&*()_ fool. Honestly.
HE'S THE ONE WHO WON'T AGREE TO ANYTHING. HIS IDEA OF "BALANCED" MEANS, "GIVE ME EVERYTHING I WANT!"
The stupid blockhead just now asked of Republicans, "Can they say yes to anything?"
The Republicans have put forward at least three budget proposals, any of which would fix the problem.
IT'S COMRADE OSAMA AND THE CLOWSN IN THE SENATE WHO SAY NO -- WHO WON'T EVEN CONSIDER ANY OF THESE PROPOSALS.
But you can count on economic terrorist Comrade Osama to try to spin this so he:
1. Remains blamess
2. Can still turn the USA in a dictatorial direction.
What a nasty shit. Really. He creates crisis after crisis after crisis and blames it all on other people. And he just said further, "Congress will just have to give me the power to raise the debt ceiling."
Clear now -- the MF'er wants to be king, dictator-in-chief of the USA. To hell with the republic.
He's not even a fool. He's evil. It's very clear now.
Save the Republic.
Harry Reid a dead weight on the nation
This will be short.
Well, the "Cut, Cap, and Balance" proposal is dead in the U.S. Senate. The legislation, passed by the House, would cut spending, cap future spending, and launch a Constitutional amendment -- which would need to be approved by the states -- to compel the federal government to control itself.
So, it went to the Senate. It was actually introduced on the floor.
Then Harry Reid tabled it.
OK, blockhead, where's YOUR plan? $14.3 TRILLION on 23-red? (He is from Nevada.)
I'm pretty sure Reid has Old-timer's disease. Maybe somebody better check this our for the sake of the nation.
Save the Republic.
Well, the "Cut, Cap, and Balance" proposal is dead in the U.S. Senate. The legislation, passed by the House, would cut spending, cap future spending, and launch a Constitutional amendment -- which would need to be approved by the states -- to compel the federal government to control itself.
So, it went to the Senate. It was actually introduced on the floor.
Then Harry Reid tabled it.
OK, blockhead, where's YOUR plan? $14.3 TRILLION on 23-red? (He is from Nevada.)
I'm pretty sure Reid has Old-timer's disease. Maybe somebody better check this our for the sake of the nation.
Save the Republic.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
R.I.P. to the Space Program
Having been pretty comfortable and having been stone dead broke, I've realized there's two ways you can look at things. Basically, you can look up or down, grow or contract, create or consume. This is the fundamental difference between optimists and pessimists and between capitalists and socialists.
I grew up with the space program. I remember being in school when John Glenn was first launched into earth orbit. In school, they rolled in closed-circuit TVs so we could watch. This was history.
And now it is history.
I always despised the arguments that went: People are starving in America and we're putting men on the moon?
And that's the crux of the whole thing. When you're hungry or broke, you can pull yourself in, minimze your footprint, make yourself as tiny as possible and just barely survive, fingers crossed that something or someone will rescue you. No hope, no future, just crawl along.
Or, you can take all you've got and "invest" it in some way that expands your opportunities. In the US 150 years ago, people packed everything they had into the farm wagon and headed West. Or take your last $50 to buy a lawn mower to start a business, or bake cookies for sale, or take out an ad to promote whatever talents and skills you have. It ain't much, but at least you're moving forward and things will get better. At the very least, you're creating and employing opportunity.
You could say that the Comrade was following this last course when he begged and borrowed $800 BILLION in 2009 and "invested" it in pork barrel projects. The only thing is, he took that $800 BILLION from the profit of productive people and now they're stuck with having to pay it off, with interest. And... guess what? It did not inspire any growth. It wasn't intended to generate profit, so it was only "consumed" and not "employed." It was wasted. Nothin' left now but the deficit.
Adding insult to injury, the Comrade has laid on the regulations -- especially when he couldn't get a less ideologic -- or should we say more realistic -- congress to hog-tie business the way he wanted it to.
Let's see, the Comrade wiped out something like $500 million a year in lease royalties and eliminated abut 20,000 jobs with the shut down of Gulf oil production. There's a good idea. Not to mention what the impact has been on fuel supplies and prices.
Anybody buying those toy electric cars from Government Motors? Though I did hear today that Chrysler has paid back its bail-out money. Maybe... who knows? Those guys know how to cook the books.
Just waiting to see what the results will be from the government's fiddling even more with the financial industry with its massive new bureau and thousands of new regulations being implemented to "fix" the financial markets.
Like Fannie and Freddie fixed the housing market?
Like the Comrade fixed energy independence?
You just try baking cookies in your kitchen and selling them somewhere. No. FDA will be on your ass, probably local meddlers as well. You make $10 cutting a lawn, and about half should go to taxes -- unless you pull a Geithner and just opt out of the IRS system.
The thing is, the Comrade's socialist policies and marxist ideology is downward-looking. It all requires that we consumer less, spend less, build less, invest less, grow less, because we are forced, by law, to give more to government incompetence and boondoggles. Whatever "excess" or profits anyone might manage to squirrel away for their their own growth is seized by the IRS and thrown into the hole of public consumption -- socialized medicine, rail systems no one wants, compensating unions for the pensions they won't have because their leadership spent all their dues taking democrats to dinner.
And the result is subsistence -- you pull in, stop spending, stop growing, start looking at the ground instead of looking up into the unknown and reaching for it. You won't spend. You have no faith in the future, or no foreseeable future at all.
That's why they call it "depression."
So it's really only fitting that the Space Program ended. For one thing, the Comrade and those who voted for him aren't worthy of it.
But on the other hand, I've heard NASA had degenerated into some huge bureaucratic morass. And a couple private companies are continuing space research on a for-profit basis. So we do have hope for this and it will have a future.
Save the Republic.
I grew up with the space program. I remember being in school when John Glenn was first launched into earth orbit. In school, they rolled in closed-circuit TVs so we could watch. This was history.
And now it is history.
I always despised the arguments that went: People are starving in America and we're putting men on the moon?
And that's the crux of the whole thing. When you're hungry or broke, you can pull yourself in, minimze your footprint, make yourself as tiny as possible and just barely survive, fingers crossed that something or someone will rescue you. No hope, no future, just crawl along.
Or, you can take all you've got and "invest" it in some way that expands your opportunities. In the US 150 years ago, people packed everything they had into the farm wagon and headed West. Or take your last $50 to buy a lawn mower to start a business, or bake cookies for sale, or take out an ad to promote whatever talents and skills you have. It ain't much, but at least you're moving forward and things will get better. At the very least, you're creating and employing opportunity.
You could say that the Comrade was following this last course when he begged and borrowed $800 BILLION in 2009 and "invested" it in pork barrel projects. The only thing is, he took that $800 BILLION from the profit of productive people and now they're stuck with having to pay it off, with interest. And... guess what? It did not inspire any growth. It wasn't intended to generate profit, so it was only "consumed" and not "employed." It was wasted. Nothin' left now but the deficit.
Adding insult to injury, the Comrade has laid on the regulations -- especially when he couldn't get a less ideologic -- or should we say more realistic -- congress to hog-tie business the way he wanted it to.
Let's see, the Comrade wiped out something like $500 million a year in lease royalties and eliminated abut 20,000 jobs with the shut down of Gulf oil production. There's a good idea. Not to mention what the impact has been on fuel supplies and prices.
Anybody buying those toy electric cars from Government Motors? Though I did hear today that Chrysler has paid back its bail-out money. Maybe... who knows? Those guys know how to cook the books.
Just waiting to see what the results will be from the government's fiddling even more with the financial industry with its massive new bureau and thousands of new regulations being implemented to "fix" the financial markets.
Like Fannie and Freddie fixed the housing market?
Like the Comrade fixed energy independence?
You just try baking cookies in your kitchen and selling them somewhere. No. FDA will be on your ass, probably local meddlers as well. You make $10 cutting a lawn, and about half should go to taxes -- unless you pull a Geithner and just opt out of the IRS system.
The thing is, the Comrade's socialist policies and marxist ideology is downward-looking. It all requires that we consumer less, spend less, build less, invest less, grow less, because we are forced, by law, to give more to government incompetence and boondoggles. Whatever "excess" or profits anyone might manage to squirrel away for their their own growth is seized by the IRS and thrown into the hole of public consumption -- socialized medicine, rail systems no one wants, compensating unions for the pensions they won't have because their leadership spent all their dues taking democrats to dinner.
And the result is subsistence -- you pull in, stop spending, stop growing, start looking at the ground instead of looking up into the unknown and reaching for it. You won't spend. You have no faith in the future, or no foreseeable future at all.
That's why they call it "depression."
So it's really only fitting that the Space Program ended. For one thing, the Comrade and those who voted for him aren't worthy of it.
But on the other hand, I've heard NASA had degenerated into some huge bureaucratic morass. And a couple private companies are continuing space research on a for-profit basis. So we do have hope for this and it will have a future.
Save the Republic.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Soulmates: Casey & the Comrade
Had an extended power outage due to some kind of storm called a "deroche," as oppsed to "Derocher," which was a different Chicago phenomenon. Anyway, it was a very powerful straight-line wind that knocked down trees and power lines. No electricity for a week. So I got a little taste of what life will be like when the EPA gets done with us.
So listened to my Walkman, which is the only device I had that was working, and listened to quite a few news and talk shows -- all of them about 1.) Casey Anthony and; 2.) the debt ceiling stand-off. Two issues that really have a lot in common.
First of all, consider Casey Anthony, the young unmarried mother in Florida who apparently killed her little girl somehow and got away with it. Casey was 19 years old when she got pregnant. She never told anyone she was pregnant. When she was seven months pregnant, a relative asked if Casey was pregnant. Casey's mother, Cindy, supposedly a nurse, said, "No. She's just retaining water." Lots and lots of water. Then later, "No, not pregnant. She has a tumor." Casey herself wouldn't admit to being pregnant.
Imagine her surprise, then, when Caylee was born. Or maybe the family just found the little girl under a cabbage leaf. Who knows? Casey doesn't seem to know who the father is. Of course, no baby, no father, either, right?
So maybe in Casey's own befuddled imagination, when her baby, Caylee, at three years old, disappeared, Casey perhaps believed she was merely awakening from some kind of disturbing dream. "Oh, Caylee's gone? Well, she was never really here in the first place."
So naturally, Casey didn't report the baby missing for more than a month. Then she told police investigators several pointless lies about the baby's whereabouts. Pointless lies because the police, of course, checked them out. I mean, did Casey really think people would accept her fairy tales above the facts of reality?
Starting to see what makes Casey so much like the Comrade? Two peas in a pod, no? Narcissists in arms, strewing lies as they go like rose petals.
Actually, it seems Casey drove the baby's body, wrapped in duct tape and several garbage bags -- around in the back of her car for a couple days under the Florida summer sun, until the scent of decaying flesh became overwhelming. Then Casey dumped the body in a swamp, where it was not discovered for another five months or so -- by that time nothing more than skeletal remains.
To date, no one knows exactly how Caylee died, although the coroner noted wryly, "Usually when we see duct tape and garbage bags, it's not a natural death."
But, according to Casey, she had nothing to do with this. It was someone else's fault. In fact, Casey several times made up people to hold responsible for the baby's disappearance, like "Zanny the Nanny," who Casey said held her down and kidnapped Baby Caylee. There was no Zanny the Nanny, unless, as one investigator hired by the Anthony family suggested, Zanny the Nany was Casey-speak for "Xanny-the-nanny." Like, Xanex is a tranquillizer that Casey may/may not have used more than once to shut the kid up so Casey could party unhampered by any adult responsibilities.
Casey lied to everyone about graduating from high school -- right up to Commencement, no one knew she'd flunked out. She did have a job for a short time, until she just stopped showing up when she was pregnant. Apparently she never officially resigned, though her employer took her off the payroll.
Three years after she left her job, she told the police that she still had that job, even brought them to the job site, where she finally admitted, "I really don't work here anymore."
But surrounded by press during the six months of her baby's disappearance, Casey did consider maybe going on the Howard Stern radio show, and pondered that maybe Howard would ask about her boobs. She does like being in the spotlight. And apparently all she has going for her is her boobs. She certainly doesn't seem to have much inside her head.
So what has this got to do with the debt ceiling thing?
We hear from the Comrade and the merry marxists that they never had anything to do with the national debt and/or deficit. The democrats were apparently all helping elderly people cross busy streets when the Evil George W (twirling his mustachios) went on some mad rampage and busted the economy.
The democrats are blameless. Like Casey Anthony.
Now the dems want to tax the rich to make up a 44% shortfall between national income and national outgo. This amounts to trillions of dollars.
Tell me, does any private, tax-paying citizen in the USA, including Bill Gates and George Soros, actually have even ONE lousy little trillion dollars? So if you take ALL their money, it wouldn't make much of a dent in the national debt. What it will accomplish -- what it has acoomplished so far at corporations like GE -- is to send US industry and capital overseas. Somehow this doesn't look to me like a useful way to raise revenue the same way something like, I don't know, "growing the economy" might raise revenue. But that's just my own opinion.
In fact, the whole "tax the rich" suggestion is entirely irrelevant to the debt ceiling problem. It's the Comrade telling lies and leading people on a time-wasting and non-productive goose chase. Like Casey and the police. The Comrade clinging to his fondest delusion -- that of class warfare.
Hey, fool, where you from? We've never had class warfare in America. Rather, we've done everything possible to ensure the fluidity and accessibility of all people to all classes -- and people can and have moved up the ladder of success as well as down. Believe me. I've seen social classes "on the hoof" in Europe, and we don't have them here. Not even union bosses qualify, not even "fat cats." I mean, the executives at Enron were prosecuted, weren't they? Bernie Madoff is in Attica or someplace, isn't he? If these fat cats constituted a "class," their conduct would not be questioned.
But now the democrats somehow feel it's entirely the responsibility of the Republicans to bail out their debt-riddled asses. The Republicans have come up with several plans -- all rejected by the democrats, and one or two rejected even by Republicans.
And the truth is, the USA can meet its debt obligations to bondholders and pay off Social Security and other "essential" obligations -- but to do so would require cutting things like grants for studying shrimp on treadmills -- deemed "essential" by the Comrade and pals -- or the useless and destructive EPA, which the Comrade uses to convey his diktats when he can't get the legislation he wants from congress.
Let's face it, the Comrade won't cut. He's just postponing the impending disaster until he's certain it will be an irredeemable disaster, the last nail in the coffin of free market capitalism. Like, he proposed cutting $4 TRILLION over the next 10 years or so -- but refuses to say exactly what he'll cut. Certainly not his "Beast" limo and million-dollar vacations. Certainly not Obamacare -- socialized medicine -- which will surely bankrup the nation completely.
I suspect one day in mid-September, someone will get a nasty whiff of the rotting corpse of the US economy in the luggage compartment of Air Force One. But will the Comrade be held accountable for it? Surely not. They "meant well," which in their particular ethical fantasyland is the equivalent of producing positive results.
The Comrade lives in some adolescent dream world like Casey Anthony. The way the Comrade sees it, the Republicans will somehow fix everything for him so he'll get re-elected -- or at least he'll be able to blame the Republicans if the economy continues to fail. And perhaps in his second term, he'll be crowned King of the World. Kind of like Casey fantasizing about Howard Stern teasing her about her boobs.
I suppose it could happen, I mean the Republicans hammering out a solution that would get the Comrade re-elected. After all, wasn't it Newt Gingrich and the Republican majority in the 1990s that got Can't-keep-it-zipped Bill Clinton re-elected? Left on his own gluttonous and self-destructive course, Clinton would have bankrupted the USA even while the Comrade was still voting "present" in the Illinois State Assembly.
I mean, Casey Anthony was acquitted and is now free to begin a career in the porn industry, which I understand has extended her several lucrative offers. I'm sure lots of perverts would pay to see her boobs. And her tattoo.
Similarly, I'm sure the Comrade will be able to scounge up some votes from unemployed union members in 2012. But acquitted? I mean, re-elected? I doubt it.
American citizens know better than that.
Save the Republic.
So listened to my Walkman, which is the only device I had that was working, and listened to quite a few news and talk shows -- all of them about 1.) Casey Anthony and; 2.) the debt ceiling stand-off. Two issues that really have a lot in common.
First of all, consider Casey Anthony, the young unmarried mother in Florida who apparently killed her little girl somehow and got away with it. Casey was 19 years old when she got pregnant. She never told anyone she was pregnant. When she was seven months pregnant, a relative asked if Casey was pregnant. Casey's mother, Cindy, supposedly a nurse, said, "No. She's just retaining water." Lots and lots of water. Then later, "No, not pregnant. She has a tumor." Casey herself wouldn't admit to being pregnant.
Imagine her surprise, then, when Caylee was born. Or maybe the family just found the little girl under a cabbage leaf. Who knows? Casey doesn't seem to know who the father is. Of course, no baby, no father, either, right?
So maybe in Casey's own befuddled imagination, when her baby, Caylee, at three years old, disappeared, Casey perhaps believed she was merely awakening from some kind of disturbing dream. "Oh, Caylee's gone? Well, she was never really here in the first place."
So naturally, Casey didn't report the baby missing for more than a month. Then she told police investigators several pointless lies about the baby's whereabouts. Pointless lies because the police, of course, checked them out. I mean, did Casey really think people would accept her fairy tales above the facts of reality?
Starting to see what makes Casey so much like the Comrade? Two peas in a pod, no? Narcissists in arms, strewing lies as they go like rose petals.
Actually, it seems Casey drove the baby's body, wrapped in duct tape and several garbage bags -- around in the back of her car for a couple days under the Florida summer sun, until the scent of decaying flesh became overwhelming. Then Casey dumped the body in a swamp, where it was not discovered for another five months or so -- by that time nothing more than skeletal remains.
To date, no one knows exactly how Caylee died, although the coroner noted wryly, "Usually when we see duct tape and garbage bags, it's not a natural death."
But, according to Casey, she had nothing to do with this. It was someone else's fault. In fact, Casey several times made up people to hold responsible for the baby's disappearance, like "Zanny the Nanny," who Casey said held her down and kidnapped Baby Caylee. There was no Zanny the Nanny, unless, as one investigator hired by the Anthony family suggested, Zanny the Nany was Casey-speak for "Xanny-the-nanny." Like, Xanex is a tranquillizer that Casey may/may not have used more than once to shut the kid up so Casey could party unhampered by any adult responsibilities.
Casey lied to everyone about graduating from high school -- right up to Commencement, no one knew she'd flunked out. She did have a job for a short time, until she just stopped showing up when she was pregnant. Apparently she never officially resigned, though her employer took her off the payroll.
Three years after she left her job, she told the police that she still had that job, even brought them to the job site, where she finally admitted, "I really don't work here anymore."
But surrounded by press during the six months of her baby's disappearance, Casey did consider maybe going on the Howard Stern radio show, and pondered that maybe Howard would ask about her boobs. She does like being in the spotlight. And apparently all she has going for her is her boobs. She certainly doesn't seem to have much inside her head.
So what has this got to do with the debt ceiling thing?
We hear from the Comrade and the merry marxists that they never had anything to do with the national debt and/or deficit. The democrats were apparently all helping elderly people cross busy streets when the Evil George W (twirling his mustachios) went on some mad rampage and busted the economy.
The democrats are blameless. Like Casey Anthony.
Now the dems want to tax the rich to make up a 44% shortfall between national income and national outgo. This amounts to trillions of dollars.
Tell me, does any private, tax-paying citizen in the USA, including Bill Gates and George Soros, actually have even ONE lousy little trillion dollars? So if you take ALL their money, it wouldn't make much of a dent in the national debt. What it will accomplish -- what it has acoomplished so far at corporations like GE -- is to send US industry and capital overseas. Somehow this doesn't look to me like a useful way to raise revenue the same way something like, I don't know, "growing the economy" might raise revenue. But that's just my own opinion.
In fact, the whole "tax the rich" suggestion is entirely irrelevant to the debt ceiling problem. It's the Comrade telling lies and leading people on a time-wasting and non-productive goose chase. Like Casey and the police. The Comrade clinging to his fondest delusion -- that of class warfare.
Hey, fool, where you from? We've never had class warfare in America. Rather, we've done everything possible to ensure the fluidity and accessibility of all people to all classes -- and people can and have moved up the ladder of success as well as down. Believe me. I've seen social classes "on the hoof" in Europe, and we don't have them here. Not even union bosses qualify, not even "fat cats." I mean, the executives at Enron were prosecuted, weren't they? Bernie Madoff is in Attica or someplace, isn't he? If these fat cats constituted a "class," their conduct would not be questioned.
But now the democrats somehow feel it's entirely the responsibility of the Republicans to bail out their debt-riddled asses. The Republicans have come up with several plans -- all rejected by the democrats, and one or two rejected even by Republicans.
And the truth is, the USA can meet its debt obligations to bondholders and pay off Social Security and other "essential" obligations -- but to do so would require cutting things like grants for studying shrimp on treadmills -- deemed "essential" by the Comrade and pals -- or the useless and destructive EPA, which the Comrade uses to convey his diktats when he can't get the legislation he wants from congress.
Let's face it, the Comrade won't cut. He's just postponing the impending disaster until he's certain it will be an irredeemable disaster, the last nail in the coffin of free market capitalism. Like, he proposed cutting $4 TRILLION over the next 10 years or so -- but refuses to say exactly what he'll cut. Certainly not his "Beast" limo and million-dollar vacations. Certainly not Obamacare -- socialized medicine -- which will surely bankrup the nation completely.
I suspect one day in mid-September, someone will get a nasty whiff of the rotting corpse of the US economy in the luggage compartment of Air Force One. But will the Comrade be held accountable for it? Surely not. They "meant well," which in their particular ethical fantasyland is the equivalent of producing positive results.
The Comrade lives in some adolescent dream world like Casey Anthony. The way the Comrade sees it, the Republicans will somehow fix everything for him so he'll get re-elected -- or at least he'll be able to blame the Republicans if the economy continues to fail. And perhaps in his second term, he'll be crowned King of the World. Kind of like Casey fantasizing about Howard Stern teasing her about her boobs.
I suppose it could happen, I mean the Republicans hammering out a solution that would get the Comrade re-elected. After all, wasn't it Newt Gingrich and the Republican majority in the 1990s that got Can't-keep-it-zipped Bill Clinton re-elected? Left on his own gluttonous and self-destructive course, Clinton would have bankrupted the USA even while the Comrade was still voting "present" in the Illinois State Assembly.
I mean, Casey Anthony was acquitted and is now free to begin a career in the porn industry, which I understand has extended her several lucrative offers. I'm sure lots of perverts would pay to see her boobs. And her tattoo.
Similarly, I'm sure the Comrade will be able to scounge up some votes from unemployed union members in 2012. But acquitted? I mean, re-elected? I doubt it.
American citizens know better than that.
Save the Republic.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Presidential approval hits new low
Some interesting poll results from Rasmussen Reports on Sunday. Rasmussen has a daily (I believe) "Presidential Tracking Poll," and the numbers for Sunday, July 10, hit the lowest they've ever been. For example:
On Saturday, Boehner walked out of a meeting at the White House, reportedly in the belief that it's useless to whip a dead horse (the Comrade and merry marxists). They supposedly had a big meeting on Sunday as well, which lasted a little over one hour, just long enough to schedule another meeting for Monday. And the Republicans didn't change their position or talk to the press.
The whole problem is the debt ceiling, dontcha know. Apparently the USA is going to run out of money on August 2, and we have something like a $29 BILLION interest payment due that day. Yet the government can't borrow any more money unless and until Congress authorizes it.
So Congress, in effect, is cutting up the Comrade's credit card. Or trying to.
The Comrade whines that babies will die and youth will not be educated if he can't borrow any more money. And though the plan he favors supposedly cuts $4 TRILLION -- I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. It's scheduled to unfold over a decade, and by that time, no one will even remember this whole debacle, and the socialist-leaning in DC will be running up even bigger debt. Like socialized medicine is rearing its ugly head just a couple years down the road -- after the Comrade leaves office, and probably the country, too, if he wants to get health care.
Meanwhile, the cartoon (networks, Huffington Post, et. al.) media paints Boehner, McConnell and Eric Cantor -- who are all particpating in the so-called "high-level" talks, as being overly influenced by "extreme rightists," that is, the Tea Party. In other words, the great mass of people who elected them.
And the Comrade is threatening to shut down the National Weather Bureau and default on Social Security payments if the Republicans don't let him raise taxes. Or maybe fall on the floor, kicking and holding his breath until he turns blue. That will show us!
Go ahead, Comrade, but I suggest you station some Marines around the White House. As I said, you ain't fooling nobody, dude. We're on to you. He says he's going for a "balanced" approach. But we all know where his head is at. To him, "balance" is him sitting on the high end of the teeter-totter. But the rest of us are holding him up from the other end... he forgets that part.
So I started out with Rasmussen, and I'll end with a quote from his book, In Search of Self-Governance. He notes, "The gap between Americans who want to govern themselves and politicians who want to rule over them may be as big today as the gap between the colonies and England during the 18th century." And: "The American people don't want to be governed from the left, the right, or the center. They want to govern themselves."
Stand pat, Boehner, McConnell, and Cantor.
Save the Republic.
- 21% Strongly Approve of the Comrade
- 40% Strongly Disapprove of the Comrade
- 72% Favor Free Market economics over whatever it is the Comrade is pushing
- 55% Believe spending cuts will help the economy
- 54% Believe tax increases will hurt the economy
On Saturday, Boehner walked out of a meeting at the White House, reportedly in the belief that it's useless to whip a dead horse (the Comrade and merry marxists). They supposedly had a big meeting on Sunday as well, which lasted a little over one hour, just long enough to schedule another meeting for Monday. And the Republicans didn't change their position or talk to the press.
The whole problem is the debt ceiling, dontcha know. Apparently the USA is going to run out of money on August 2, and we have something like a $29 BILLION interest payment due that day. Yet the government can't borrow any more money unless and until Congress authorizes it.
So Congress, in effect, is cutting up the Comrade's credit card. Or trying to.
The Comrade whines that babies will die and youth will not be educated if he can't borrow any more money. And though the plan he favors supposedly cuts $4 TRILLION -- I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. It's scheduled to unfold over a decade, and by that time, no one will even remember this whole debacle, and the socialist-leaning in DC will be running up even bigger debt. Like socialized medicine is rearing its ugly head just a couple years down the road -- after the Comrade leaves office, and probably the country, too, if he wants to get health care.
Meanwhile, the cartoon (networks, Huffington Post, et. al.) media paints Boehner, McConnell and Eric Cantor -- who are all particpating in the so-called "high-level" talks, as being overly influenced by "extreme rightists," that is, the Tea Party. In other words, the great mass of people who elected them.
And the Comrade is threatening to shut down the National Weather Bureau and default on Social Security payments if the Republicans don't let him raise taxes. Or maybe fall on the floor, kicking and holding his breath until he turns blue. That will show us!
Go ahead, Comrade, but I suggest you station some Marines around the White House. As I said, you ain't fooling nobody, dude. We're on to you. He says he's going for a "balanced" approach. But we all know where his head is at. To him, "balance" is him sitting on the high end of the teeter-totter. But the rest of us are holding him up from the other end... he forgets that part.
So I started out with Rasmussen, and I'll end with a quote from his book, In Search of Self-Governance. He notes, "The gap between Americans who want to govern themselves and politicians who want to rule over them may be as big today as the gap between the colonies and England during the 18th century." And: "The American people don't want to be governed from the left, the right, or the center. They want to govern themselves."
Stand pat, Boehner, McConnell, and Cantor.
Save the Republic.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Tax the rich? I get it now
I've been having a hard time understanding the Comrade's "Tax the rich" mantra. Why? Why tax the rich? If you took away all the money the rich have, it wouldn't cover the national debt. Does the Comrade just have this knee-jerk, superstitious marxist hatred for the rich? Why is he so heavily on the rich?
Well I think I just figured it out. And stupid me, it's so bloody obvious: taxing the rich cripples the free market economy by limiting how much the rich have to invest in private enterprise. And you know what? It's exactly this point that explains the dems' insistance on "Tax the rich."
You see, many of the rich are pretty astute business people. They create wealth. They create jobs. They look for promising investments. They operate beyond the control of the feds. They aren't dependent on food stamps, social security or welfare checks.
And so far, the Comrade's socialist projects haven't attracted many dollars from the rich. Apparently they don't see much hope for electric cars and windmills, socialized medicine or anything like that. They aren't willing to bust open their wallets and buy into an economy that's headed in the wrong direction. I mean, why throw good money after bad? The "bad" being what the rich have lost so far when the stock market tanks, when GM busts out, when solar power is not much more than a toy only the EPA could love.
So tax the rich, right? A tax is a law that takes your money. No matter how you dress it up -- calling it a "fair share" or "civic duty" or any of that crap, a tax is a seizure of your private property.
So if the rich won't play socialist football with the Comrade, he tries to marshall his forces -- including congress -- against them to march in and simply sezie their wealth.
Then he take the money -- and anything else they might produce in the future -- and pours it into unionizing the free labor force, into more and more regulations against domestic energy production, into stamping out private health insurance and all of the other stupid shit social engineering projects the Comrade has launched.
All the resources of the rich become part of the federal government's power base. It's a tool for more central control, for a centrally-controlled economy. After all, that's worked so well in Europe, hasn't it?
But see, the Comrade's got to get the rich to play. And they won't. So tax them. Threaten them with fines and incarceration if they won't play.
How vile and disgusting is this idiot in the White House? How dictatorial and authoritarian. How did this monster ever get elected?
Well, we've only got another couple years to try to tolerate this crap and boot this creep out of office.
In the meanwhile it's very important to NOT tax the rich. Not as part of a compromise on the debt ceiling or anything like that. DO NOT LET THIS SON OF A BITCH CONSOLIDATE ANY MORE POWER IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. It's very, very serious threat to individual liberty.
Save the Republic.
Well I think I just figured it out. And stupid me, it's so bloody obvious: taxing the rich cripples the free market economy by limiting how much the rich have to invest in private enterprise. And you know what? It's exactly this point that explains the dems' insistance on "Tax the rich."
You see, many of the rich are pretty astute business people. They create wealth. They create jobs. They look for promising investments. They operate beyond the control of the feds. They aren't dependent on food stamps, social security or welfare checks.
And so far, the Comrade's socialist projects haven't attracted many dollars from the rich. Apparently they don't see much hope for electric cars and windmills, socialized medicine or anything like that. They aren't willing to bust open their wallets and buy into an economy that's headed in the wrong direction. I mean, why throw good money after bad? The "bad" being what the rich have lost so far when the stock market tanks, when GM busts out, when solar power is not much more than a toy only the EPA could love.
So tax the rich, right? A tax is a law that takes your money. No matter how you dress it up -- calling it a "fair share" or "civic duty" or any of that crap, a tax is a seizure of your private property.
So if the rich won't play socialist football with the Comrade, he tries to marshall his forces -- including congress -- against them to march in and simply sezie their wealth.
Then he take the money -- and anything else they might produce in the future -- and pours it into unionizing the free labor force, into more and more regulations against domestic energy production, into stamping out private health insurance and all of the other stupid shit social engineering projects the Comrade has launched.
All the resources of the rich become part of the federal government's power base. It's a tool for more central control, for a centrally-controlled economy. After all, that's worked so well in Europe, hasn't it?
But see, the Comrade's got to get the rich to play. And they won't. So tax them. Threaten them with fines and incarceration if they won't play.
How vile and disgusting is this idiot in the White House? How dictatorial and authoritarian. How did this monster ever get elected?
Well, we've only got another couple years to try to tolerate this crap and boot this creep out of office.
In the meanwhile it's very important to NOT tax the rich. Not as part of a compromise on the debt ceiling or anything like that. DO NOT LET THIS SON OF A BITCH CONSOLIDATE ANY MORE POWER IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. It's very, very serious threat to individual liberty.
Save the Republic.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Save $8B worth of ugly economic fat - eliminate the US EPA
Well, the EPA is still at it, sitting up all night dreaming up ways to destroy human life in the United States. I was just at its Web site, looking to see what its total budget is. And I gotta say -- they're coming down real hard on American Indians with a bunch of proposed programs to further harrass and interfere with their lives. Don't know why. Maybe the EPA is hoping to exhume and mummify the Indian in that one commercial, where a tear very slowly rolled down his face. Iron Eyes Cody? He seemed so noble, didn't he?
But no... more likely the EPA just wants all Americans to live in hogans made from tree bark, burn buffalo chips for fuel, and eat whatever roots we can find in the wild... along with the semi-rotted carcasses of animals we don't kill and just trip over in the ancient forests.
Sound like a plan? Apparently it makes a whole lot of sense to the tree-huggers at the EPA. The EPA continues to "crack down" on coal production. FYI, 47% of all electricity in the USA is generated by coal. So make it expensive and/or unavailable -- like Gulf or ANWR oil -- and you can collapse the US economy even before Comrade Osama is kicked out of office next year.
Simultaneously, the Comrade is doing closed door deals with congressional leaders from both sides of the aisle to try to find some kind of "compromise" on the debt ceiling. Why closed door? Does Comrade Osama think that we, the American public, will not find out what kind of slimy dirty deals he's cutting? We live with this b.s. every day, dudes. No secrets. We pay for all your crap, remember? We get the bill. And we're beginning to review pretty closely, too.
Whatever happened to democracy in America? Huh, Comrade? Think we don't notice? Think you're somehow smarter than us? You're dealing with a very wily population -- wily, shrewd, innovative, very cunning. You can't out-fox us. You know the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." We're on to you now.
After the last two hell years, there is not one damn thing you can do to get yourself re-elected. No one with any braims listens to the networks anymore.
But back to the debt celing thing, appropos of the US EPA.
Let's face it. The EPA has outlived its usefulness. For one thing, the USA is pretty vast, and the geography, economies, social organization varies widely across the country. It isn't really possible to devise regulations that are useful and appropriate for the whole nation. As demonstrated by the EPA's shortsighted and destructuve policies to date.
Far as I know, every state has an EPA. Let the states take care of their own smog, logging, and strip mining issues. The feds have no useful role to play and apparently they don't really bother about getting any real information about what they're doing. They have some utopian view where we're all standing on a hilltop, holding hands and kowtowing to owls and such.
And I did find out about the EPA's budget -- or at least as much of it as they're willing to report. It was $10.3 billion in 2010, and they requested $8.7 billion for this year. And only God knows what they actually spent.
So let's elminate the EPA. If they're bullying Indians now, obviously they've exhausted their interest in clean air and water -- and clean air and water is better handled locally, anyway. And if we get rid of the EPA, think of it -- maybe we could actually resume domestic production of the fuel we need to run the USA -- use our own resources instead of fiddling with the messy politics of the Middle East and Central America and wasting mucho bucks to terrorize 6th graders with doomsday scenarios about the fate of "endangered" insects.
So... save at least $8 billion and free up our own natural resouces... all in one little move... shutting down the EPA.
Simple. And it will have much more positive impacts than taxing the jet fuel used in private planes used by millionaires. By the way, Comrade, did you run that one by Pazzo Pelosi?
Save the Republic.
But no... more likely the EPA just wants all Americans to live in hogans made from tree bark, burn buffalo chips for fuel, and eat whatever roots we can find in the wild... along with the semi-rotted carcasses of animals we don't kill and just trip over in the ancient forests.
Sound like a plan? Apparently it makes a whole lot of sense to the tree-huggers at the EPA. The EPA continues to "crack down" on coal production. FYI, 47% of all electricity in the USA is generated by coal. So make it expensive and/or unavailable -- like Gulf or ANWR oil -- and you can collapse the US economy even before Comrade Osama is kicked out of office next year.
Simultaneously, the Comrade is doing closed door deals with congressional leaders from both sides of the aisle to try to find some kind of "compromise" on the debt ceiling. Why closed door? Does Comrade Osama think that we, the American public, will not find out what kind of slimy dirty deals he's cutting? We live with this b.s. every day, dudes. No secrets. We pay for all your crap, remember? We get the bill. And we're beginning to review pretty closely, too.
Whatever happened to democracy in America? Huh, Comrade? Think we don't notice? Think you're somehow smarter than us? You're dealing with a very wily population -- wily, shrewd, innovative, very cunning. You can't out-fox us. You know the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." We're on to you now.
After the last two hell years, there is not one damn thing you can do to get yourself re-elected. No one with any braims listens to the networks anymore.
But back to the debt celing thing, appropos of the US EPA.
Let's face it. The EPA has outlived its usefulness. For one thing, the USA is pretty vast, and the geography, economies, social organization varies widely across the country. It isn't really possible to devise regulations that are useful and appropriate for the whole nation. As demonstrated by the EPA's shortsighted and destructuve policies to date.
Far as I know, every state has an EPA. Let the states take care of their own smog, logging, and strip mining issues. The feds have no useful role to play and apparently they don't really bother about getting any real information about what they're doing. They have some utopian view where we're all standing on a hilltop, holding hands and kowtowing to owls and such.
And I did find out about the EPA's budget -- or at least as much of it as they're willing to report. It was $10.3 billion in 2010, and they requested $8.7 billion for this year. And only God knows what they actually spent.
So let's elminate the EPA. If they're bullying Indians now, obviously they've exhausted their interest in clean air and water -- and clean air and water is better handled locally, anyway. And if we get rid of the EPA, think of it -- maybe we could actually resume domestic production of the fuel we need to run the USA -- use our own resources instead of fiddling with the messy politics of the Middle East and Central America and wasting mucho bucks to terrorize 6th graders with doomsday scenarios about the fate of "endangered" insects.
So... save at least $8 billion and free up our own natural resouces... all in one little move... shutting down the EPA.
Simple. And it will have much more positive impacts than taxing the jet fuel used in private planes used by millionaires. By the way, Comrade, did you run that one by Pazzo Pelosi?
Save the Republic.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Utopia is not an option
Going back to Aristotle and Plato, there are basically two ways to look at philosophy. And yeah, philosophy is a bore, right? Except that human beings run on philosophy, whether we each are aware of it or not. Your philosophy determines what decisions you make. It's pretty basic and pretty simple.
So let's start with Plato and the Allegory of the Cave. Basically, Plato painted this picture of a bunch of people sitting around doing shadow puppets on a cave wall. You know, a light casting shadows of the shapes you make on the wall. Plato said these vague shadows were kind of what humankind could grasp of "perfection." Perfection itself was from heaven or Mt. Olympus or someplace and being human, we could never completely perceive it or understand it. We could only kind of grope around in the semi-dark and hope to approximate perfection with our little shadow puppets.
Aristotle didn't have much patience for all that nonsense. He said look at reality as your base and draw your ideas and abstractions from that. Basically he invented science. I don't know what you might consider to be Aristotle's concept of "perfection." Maybe something that worked the way it was supposed to. I mean, every flower is perfect, isn't it?
So from these very different kinds of foundations, two different kinds of philosophies have grown. Most people I know believe in an odd mixture of both.
The difference is the material and the spiritual, the secular and the sacred, etc.
So we end up with some philosophers contriving these very elaborate mental structures and visions of a perfect (Utopian) society and all.
And then we have real life.
You can identify a Utopian society very easily. They are usually predicated by, "If everyone would just... be a little less selfish... take care of their kids... buy electric cars... join a labor union... give up ice cream," and so on.
You know what? Not everyone is going to do it. So if you insist on implementing any type of Utopian society -- like a marxist or communist society -- you quickly learn that it's necessary to "break eggs to make an omelet," Josef Stalin's poignant observation. He never hesitated to break as many eggs as he himself, with his vision of Utopia, believed was necessary. This was millions of "eggs," all the dissenters and suspected dissenters that he could round up and either murder or send to Siberia.
Then you have governments built on the idea of, "Just exactly what is absolutely smallest bit of government control we need to do to get along peacefully without getting in each other's way?" This is based on the notion that you will never get complete agreement or conformity on anything. That different people will value different things and make different choices. So the question becomes not how to get everyone to be the same, but how to support everyone's efforts to be individual.
Which do you prefer?
The Comrade follows the Platonian model. He knows what's right and good for everyone. He has this certain vision of perfection and he's going to tax us all up the wazoo -- or worse -- until we bend to his will.
Or we can vote him out of office and go back to being free under the U.S. Consititution -- the one document in human history that embodies the human race's best effort to all get along without getting in each other's way.
Enough for now.
Save the Republic.
So let's start with Plato and the Allegory of the Cave. Basically, Plato painted this picture of a bunch of people sitting around doing shadow puppets on a cave wall. You know, a light casting shadows of the shapes you make on the wall. Plato said these vague shadows were kind of what humankind could grasp of "perfection." Perfection itself was from heaven or Mt. Olympus or someplace and being human, we could never completely perceive it or understand it. We could only kind of grope around in the semi-dark and hope to approximate perfection with our little shadow puppets.
Aristotle didn't have much patience for all that nonsense. He said look at reality as your base and draw your ideas and abstractions from that. Basically he invented science. I don't know what you might consider to be Aristotle's concept of "perfection." Maybe something that worked the way it was supposed to. I mean, every flower is perfect, isn't it?
So from these very different kinds of foundations, two different kinds of philosophies have grown. Most people I know believe in an odd mixture of both.
The difference is the material and the spiritual, the secular and the sacred, etc.
So we end up with some philosophers contriving these very elaborate mental structures and visions of a perfect (Utopian) society and all.
And then we have real life.
You can identify a Utopian society very easily. They are usually predicated by, "If everyone would just... be a little less selfish... take care of their kids... buy electric cars... join a labor union... give up ice cream," and so on.
You know what? Not everyone is going to do it. So if you insist on implementing any type of Utopian society -- like a marxist or communist society -- you quickly learn that it's necessary to "break eggs to make an omelet," Josef Stalin's poignant observation. He never hesitated to break as many eggs as he himself, with his vision of Utopia, believed was necessary. This was millions of "eggs," all the dissenters and suspected dissenters that he could round up and either murder or send to Siberia.
Then you have governments built on the idea of, "Just exactly what is absolutely smallest bit of government control we need to do to get along peacefully without getting in each other's way?" This is based on the notion that you will never get complete agreement or conformity on anything. That different people will value different things and make different choices. So the question becomes not how to get everyone to be the same, but how to support everyone's efforts to be individual.
Which do you prefer?
The Comrade follows the Platonian model. He knows what's right and good for everyone. He has this certain vision of perfection and he's going to tax us all up the wazoo -- or worse -- until we bend to his will.
Or we can vote him out of office and go back to being free under the U.S. Consititution -- the one document in human history that embodies the human race's best effort to all get along without getting in each other's way.
Enough for now.
Save the Republic.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Job Creation: Capitalism vs. Socialism
Apparently some statistics at the Comrade's recovery.com Web site that says of the "millions" of jobs "saved or created" via the stimulus package, each of them cost something like $278,000.00.
But you can bet that none of those jobs paid that much. And how many of those jobs are ongoing, actual positions that last longer six months or a year or so?
See in the private sector under capitalism or free enterprise, a business owner creates a job if and when that new position will actually generate more revenue. You hire another sales person, another production person, another administrative staff to support efficiency. You "make money" off that added job.
In the government sector under socialism, you appropriate funds from someone who earned it and give that money to someone else, whether they bring in additional revenue or not.
And stimulus didn't work? Stimulus has actually dumped the US economy into the toilet?
Are you surprised?
All for now.
Save the Republic.
But you can bet that none of those jobs paid that much. And how many of those jobs are ongoing, actual positions that last longer six months or a year or so?
See in the private sector under capitalism or free enterprise, a business owner creates a job if and when that new position will actually generate more revenue. You hire another sales person, another production person, another administrative staff to support efficiency. You "make money" off that added job.
In the government sector under socialism, you appropriate funds from someone who earned it and give that money to someone else, whether they bring in additional revenue or not.
And stimulus didn't work? Stimulus has actually dumped the US economy into the toilet?
Are you surprised?
All for now.
Save the Republic.
Monday, July 4, 2011
"Hope and change" or ...
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet.
Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging.
And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation?
There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace! Peace! But there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
~ Patrick Henry
Save the Republic
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet.
Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging.
And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation?
There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free -- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending -- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.
Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace! Peace! But there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
~ Patrick Henry
Save the Republic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)