Friday, April 27, 2012

US debt exceeds production

Well, not good news.

Apparently for the first quarter of 2012, US debt was greater than the nation's total output.

That's like, if you make $55,000 a year, but owe $60,000.

Neil Cavuto says, "We are officially Greece."

Probably, because there's few sign of anything good happening to spur the economy. I mean, if the economy began to grow, that would be immensely helpful. But the Comrade and his merry marxists in contress and infesting th executive branch are determined to keep their boots on our necks.

But let's spend some more on health care and student loans and all that kind of to get the Comrade re-elected? Huh? Buy off a few more voters?

This is really a disaster.

I gotta say, I'm starting to love Romney. I mean, honestly, someone who believes in America and capitalism. Starting to get like I died and went to heaven.

Hurry, November.

Save the Republic.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

EPA strategy revealed

Briefly -- I've got lots of work to do...

A 2010 video of some EPA bureaucrat turned up. Megyn Kelly ran with it on Fox.

The EPA guy apparently is talking to his foot soldiers or somebody. He said something to the effect:
It's like the Romans would go into these small villages in Turkey. They'd crucify the first five guys they came across. Afterwards, those small villages were easy to manage.
Do believe Jay Carnybarker has already sworn up and down that this is not the Comrade's belief See, Carneybarker says, you only have to listen to how much the Comrade loves us and wants to take care of us all...

Yeah, and I still say, don't listen to a damn thing the Comrade says. But watch what he -- and his expanded EPA -- actually does.

Is it fun being a Turkish villager?

Save the Republic.

President finds his true calling

Now I have that song, "On the Cover of Rolling Stone" running through my mind and can't get rid of it.

Perhaps the Comrade has found his true vocation, making a fool of himself for the too-young-to-drink/old-enough-to-vote crowd, who are too inexperienced to understand the consequences of what they do. They just haven't lived long enough, yet they have that sophormoric attitude,"Hey. I'm 18. I spent a whole weekend getting stoned and woke up in an alley missing my shoes and wallet. I know more about the world than you old fogies."

The Comrade is trying to buy them off with "free" college education. And when they can't find a job after they graduate -- if they do -- they can always join the throngs of OWies, camping out in front of a bank somewhere and taking up an in-depth study of the bongo -- or the bong.

The future sure looks bright for them.

Something from Mark Twain: "When I was 18, I was shocked at how little my father knew about the world. By the time I reached 21, I was amazed to see how much he'd learned."

Or maybe with his sppearance on/in Rolling Stone and on the Jimmy Fallon show, the Comrade is merely laying the groundwork for his next career, which will begin at the end of January, 2013.

Good luck with that.

Save the Republic.

Monday, April 23, 2012

President unable to connect the dots

Saw the Comrade with Elie Wiesel at the Holocaust Museum this morning. The Comrade gave a speech. Just a few notes on that.

Firat, he talks about hatred and persecution -- apparently referring to the Jews during the Holocaust. It doesn't seem to strike the Comrade that he uses the same tactics as Hitler's propaganda minister, Goebbels, as he [the Comrade] attacks the rich, or apparently anyone who makes a living and doesn't support marxism.

If you're at all familiar with Nazi propaganda, you kow that the Nazis blamed the runaway inflation and general economic failure on the Jews, who the Nazis claimed owned all the weath and were manipulating prices, trade, etc. The Comrade blames George Bush and Wall Street, and wants to punish anyone who makes a decent living for their success.

The Comrade also has announced that if he can't get any legislation through congress, he will continue to work around it, compelling his minions in the executive branch to enact his stupid and destructive policies without congressional review and approval. Hey, ya know what? Hitler had the SS -- Storm Troopers -- to take care of all that.

You can't shove stuff down peoples' throats, Comrade, and expect them to sit and take it. Your only other option to working with congress is to recruit your own little cadre of Storm Troopers. And apparently he did already try this, with Acorn. Remnants of Acorn live on under different names, and apparently still with federal funding. But the Comrade also has Trumpka and the unions -- UAW, SEIU, etc. etc. These thugs have proven that they aren't above violence.

Most recently, and rahter pathetically, the Comrade has trid to "organize" the useless, non-productive, and the homeless into some kind of political action arm -- the Occupy Wall Street types, the OWies.

Laughable, though, because the OWies are people who apparently can't or won't act to support even themselves. They've only served as litter and detritus on the public thoroughfares.

At the Holocaust Museum, the Comrade also spoke about his tireless efforts to do something about Iran and the fanatic muslim threat to Israel.

Well, the Comrade did what he could to support the "Arab Spring," a movement co-opted by the fantatic Muslim Brotherhood, and he handed the "Atomic Iran" issue over to the U.N. Yup, working tirelessly.

The amazing thing is that the Comrade is so blind and self-serving that he doesn't recognize that he's following the path of just about every other authoritarian dictator in human history.

Either he simply doesn't know any history, doesn't understand it, or is so power-hungry he just ignores it.

The Founding Fathers devised the US Constitution to stop people like the Comrade. So if the Comrade feels constrained by and in conflict with it -- that's a very useful hint that he's way over-reaching on his power trip.

Remember in November, and...

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Harry Reid = Horse's Rear

I don't mean to offend the many fine, upstanding equines in America, but Senate Majority Leader "Brain-dead" Harry Reid certainly is about as sharp and proactive as a horse's patootie, and produces just about the same thing.

The Senate hasn't produced a budget in the last three years. About the only times the Senate has been allowed to vote -- by its daunted leader, ol' Brain-dead -- it was only to reject the rather ridiculous efforts of the Comrade to formulate a budget. Apparently the Comrade's budgets stunk so bad, not even his fellow democrats would support them.

So now Brain-dead has determined that the Senate will fail to do its budget again this year. After all, 23 senators are up for re-election this November. Brain-dead doesn't want to compel them make any decisions that would jeopardize their shot at keeping their jobs.

Actually, I think most senators -- excluding Dick(head) Durbin, who fails to represent me in Illinois, and a few others, probably are capable of much more than they're doing. If they did any work, they might actually be able to get America going again. 'Course, they'd have to part ways with the Comrade's stupid policies, and ol' Brain-dead doesn't want to see that happen. It would be so embarrassing, wouldn't it?

Who elected Brain-dead to any position of responsiblity? Most particularly, in the Senate? Better question: what the hell does this blockhead do all day?

You know, U.S. Senators make about $180,000.00 a year. Plus they get tons of perks and a cornucopia of health insurance benefits and all that stuff.

For what? I mean, is anyone really interested in keeping these folks alive and healthy?

By contrast, the U.S. House of Representatives have been busy, busy, busy, conducting all kinds of hearings, devising pretty good legislation (in some cases) based on sound reasoning (in some cases) and demonstrating a sincere (if sometimes misguided) concern for the nation. The House has even managed to form coalitions "across the aisle" of both dems and Republicans -- sort of a miracle.

However, if the House passes something, it then must go through the Senate, and there any legislation suffers an untimely death -- Brain-dead won't allow anything to be heard or debated or considered in the Senate. Under guidance of Brain-dead Harry Reid, the Senate has become a legislative morgue. All those hopes and efforts from the House pigeonholed on ice in some dusty Senate shelf.

Apparently the Tea Party, and its many and varied parts, are focusing on congressional races in the upcoming election. Good idea. It's about time to sweep these blockheads out of office.

Save the Republic

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Federal government -- just enough rope?

A long, long time ago I knew a guy who had been relatively upstanding and respectable. He probably drank too much, but with his buds. He wasn't married. And the usual pattern is, once you get married and "settle down," you don't have to worry about developing liver cirrhosis any time soon.

One problem, of course, the guy never had "enough" money. He had a pretty good, technical job, and was pretty reliable about showing up sober and on time. But no one ever has "enough" money do they?

Then he inherited something like $80.000.00 from a relative he'd hardly known.

And this guy killed himself on drugs and alcohol in less than a year.

Money isn't always the answer, and if you're totally irresponsible with it, it can hurry your downfall -- big time.

Take the GSA -- U.S. Government Services Agency -- for example. The GSA finds and rents and supervises the maintenance of government-owned and rented facilities. They take care of buildings, are supposed to find space for employees, appropriate equipment and supplies, and stuff like that.

I happen to know that the IRS is going a bit screwy right now trying to find space for an influx of thousands of new agents who are supposed to persecute us all about our socialized medicine "taxes and/or penalties," whichever you prefer. IRS personnel are practically sitting on each others' laps, sharing workstations and computers... and where's the GSA?

(Don't get me wrong. I think anything that cripples or hinders the IRS is probably a good thing.)

However, apparently the GSA has been partying in Hawaii and Las Vegas and are nowhere to be found, as far as the IRS goes. Hey, look under the craps table, you might find a couple GSA critters, busted out and passed out from last night's festivities.

And now we have the Secret Service caught with a dozen prostitutes in Cartegena, Colombia. (Or, Co-lome-bya, as the Comrade says, in his very best Juan-Valdez-the-coffee-guy impersonation.)

I'm really pretty appalled. I believed the Secret Service was above reproach, definitely several notches above the FBI. But it seems the hotel housing a couple hundred SS agents and a few Marines was literally writhing with whores -- many of whom may be under-age, according to US standards.

That's really kind of sad. It also makes you wonder, what the hell is going on? If it was one or two guys, I could see it. But 11?

See, that $800 billion in stimulus went largely to the government -- state, federal, whatever. And apparently these people now have so much money they just don't know what to do with it anymore. So let's get a regiment of whores? Might be better for everyone if they simply invested it in the private sector -- or left it in the private sector to begin with.

And then we also enjoyed the spectacle of this Neely guy from the GSA, being questioned by Darryl Issa's House Oversight Committee, or whatever it is. He was asked, "What was your budget for the conference?" "Who authorized the expenses?" He pleaded the Fifth -- just like all those button-guys from the Mafia. Apparently a lot of Neely's superiors already have been fired. He hasn't been. He just got a $9,000.00 bonus. Maybe he made the best rap video for the Vegas bender? Why not just throw out his sorry ass and refuse the pension? You'd think "contempt of congress" would be reason for termination. I mean, what is he doing that benefits his employers -- the taxpayers?

So it seems that under the Comrade's policies, all these feds from all these agencies are just awash in tax dollars. And the Comrade doesn't seem to give a damn what they do with it. After all, it ain't his money. So they're hanging themselves. They apparently aren't skilled or experienced in handling this kind of dough, and it just overwhelms them, drives them to drink and buy young women.

Sort of Social Darwinism, you know. The morons and idiots drop first, cleansing the gene pool. The only trouble is, this is only after they've squandered the wealth of private citizens.

Save the Republic.

Good-bye Discovery -- end of expansion?

Well, today the space shuttle Discovery was retired, rode to Washington DC, and eventually the Smithsonian, on the back of a 747 or some kinda jumbo jet.

Sort of sad to see it go. It's the end of government-funded space exploration.

Must say, I'm not surprised the Comrade put an end to it. The so-called "Progressives" have always hated the space program. "How can you spend so much on that stuff when people are starving?" they asked.

Kind of like Queen Isabella telling Columbus, "Actually, the treasury would be better spent shoveling horse manure from our streets."

And the Comrade calls conservative "flat-earthers."

Some nerve, huh?

Save the Republic.

Monday, April 16, 2012

Is that guy supposed to be funny?

Bill Maher resurrected the slam against Ann Romney, saying she never got her "ass" out of the house, never had to answer to a boss, etc.

Aren't you still laughing over that one?

Maher also once called Sarah Palin a dumb c**t. And Sarah Palin got her ass out of the house every morning and ran the government of Alaska for a time, among other things.

Seems there's just no pleasing him. After all, he calls himself a comedian, so his insults and rather obtuse and blockheaded remarks are "allowed." That is, he's excused from being considered a loutish bore because he thinks he's funny.

But, hey! What about that crazy Bill Maher? He's such a dumb cock!

Aren't you laughing? Isn't that just hysterical?

Or does is it, instead, reflect an incapcity for rational -- or really any kind -- of intelligent thought? As well as demonstrating the lack of an imagination that would be required to construct a humorous comment?

No irony in Maher's comments. No unique perspective. Not even any surprise. No sense of the ridiculous. No slapstick. No puns or other wordplay, no wit or poignant insight couched in humor. In fact, no wit at all. Only name-calling and pandering to an audience who apparently only feels good about itself when it can humiliate and insult others.

Bill Maher is actually quite ugly, too, physically, and he gets uglier as he gets older, like the picture of Dorian Grey. He has no color at all anymore, looks like he's been dusted with flour. His nose gets bigger and more shapeless, tending to lend his face a striking resemblence to a manatee. At the same time, his body is deteriorating into the weak and insubstantial form of a small gray alien. And who is that bland librarian-looking person he hangs with? Sort a Tiny Fay wanna be? At least she wears the same kind of eyeglasses. Rather pathetic, no?

Maher uses his alleged "humor," it seems, to compensate for his quite obvious inadequacy as a human being. And like pornography, nothing he says has any redeeming social value.

A long time ago, he had a show called "Politically Incorrect." At the time, he claimed to be a libertarian. So I guess his producer couldn't find enough libertarian business people to buy enough ads to support him, or maybe he just wasn't such a knowledgable or convincing libertarian, didn't pass muster with the target audience. Who knows? Or cares, really.

Failing that, however, Maher has adopted the groveling and whiny politics of the left. The standards of the left in the arts are so low that Maher seems to have found a comfortable niche there. And even though the left is a bigger audience than libertarians, Maher still seems incapable of attracting a following larger than a small, select clique. Apparently he doesn't generate enough attention -- or advertisers -- to impress even the desperate programmers at MSNBC. Good heavens! More of a dud even than Keith Oberman?

Bill Maher is only insulting. Very limited market for that, but apparently you do get invited to the White House.

Isn't that funny? ROFL.

Save the Republic.

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Taking the capital out of capitalism

It's called "capitalism" for a reason. It operates on glorious excess -- profit.

See, that's when you have a little more than you need and you use that to expand your productivity.

"Capital" is the excess.

Like.... suppose you grow potatoes. You grow, say, 10 acres of potatoes. You keep the potatoes from five acres to feed yourself and family. You sell four acres worth to cover your operating expenses, pay your workers, etc. You keep one acre to use to seed the field next year.

That one acre is your profit. You avoid consuming it and protect it even if it means cutting back a little bit now.

Because that one acre is what you need to plant next year.

That's your future. That ensures that you have a future.

The Comrade first went after the banks -- but destroying the banks was a process already well underway. And Dudd-Fudd legislation didn't help. Those regulations were crafted by Thomas Dodd and Barney Frank, the two apparently most economically illiterate people to ever walk the halls of congress, and have only made it more impossible for banks to lend.

And it makes me laugh when people (mostly democrats and marxists) claim that it was "de-regulation" that caused the housing bubble, bank collapse, etc. The financial industry wasn't "de-regulated" at all. Regulations changed -- they were not eliminated -- and the changes apparently were destructive -- and no doubt done all for our own "good."

At any rate, so the Comrade first nationalized the banks and put them under an even bigger pile of suffocating regulations. And banks tradtionally been a primary source of capital for businesses and producers of all kinds in the US free enterprise system.

So they're been neutalized pretty much.

The disater in housing sucked any capital out of middle class individual would-be or wanna-be investors, or simply people who had a dream.

So what's left? Who has any seed corn -- or capital -- left to jumpstart this economy?

Well, some corporations and Wall Street investors.

How do you wrench the capital from their clammy hands?

TAX THE RICH.

And thus ensure that the USA, flat on its back, will never rise again. The class warfare aspect of "tax the rich" is just an added bonus -- gives the more ignorant and psychotically resentful among the population a reason to vote for socialism.

And the Comrade is plainly and insultingly full of shit with his feeble efforts to attach the names of Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Regan to any of his marxist nihilist schemes. It's just insulting.

Save the Republic.

Friday, April 13, 2012

Women's work... never done

Amazing. A woman named Hilary Rosen, who up until yesterday seemed to be BFFs with people at the White House -- she visited there 35 times, but Jay Carneybarker and other "official" mouthpieces now pretend they never heard of her -- at any rate. this Rosen person announced very smugly that Ann Romney couldn't be giving her husband very good advice on economic issues because Ann "never worked a day in her life."

Seems that Ms. Rosen has opted to pursue a career and leaves her own child-rearing responsibilities to a nanny or someone else. Or else she couldn't have made such a stupid remark.

I don't have kids. As a teenager I spent my summer vacations and most weekends babysitting, and figured there were a lot of other things I'd rather do. Raising kids is, well, too much work.

First, being a mom is a 24/7 job -- no days off unless you're hospitalized, and then only if your kids are too young to come during visiting hours. Second, with kids, you're responsible for eveything. It's not like getting up before they do to make sure they get to school, it's also imparting to them somehow that the world is an OK kind of place and they'll be all right there, even on their own. You have to be genuinely excited about the kids learning to read and write, ride a bike, etc. Make sure they don't store pizza under their beds for a snack later on. And educate them about how to deal with strangers, adult and juvenile, help them figure out how to spend their own lives, convince them that they can conquer the world, but not with a gun necessarily. And you can do as much damage to a kid as you can do good. And without really intending either outcome.

The emotional dimension is both exhilarating (I hear) and totally exhausting (I know.)

So then Hilary Rosen tried to walk back her comments -- since every other democrat on the planet now pretends they don't know her and promise to cross the street if they see her on the sidewalk. She was only pointing out that Ann Romney never faced the challenges of having to work and raise kids at the same time.

Something interesting here, too. If a mom has a husband who's employed -- and not necessarily making six figures -- it is sometimes better economics for the family if the mom does stay home with the kids. I know people who sat down and figured out the costs associated with a working couple. Count the cost of transportation, technology, the wardrobe, eating out (both during the day and with the family at night), and the cost of reliabile child care -- and it's sometimes cheaper for the mom to stay at home because it allows for a better-run and more cost-effective household. And on the personal side, it's usually better for the kids and for the family as a whole. Knowing Mom is home provides a very powerful sense of security and stability. 

And I'm not even confining this to moms. I knew a couple where the mom had a degree in electrical engineering, while the dad was a writer. The mom had the potential for a much higher regular income than the dad. They had four kids. The dad stayed at home -- worked pretty much part-time from a bedroom office -- and took care of the kids. No one ever accused him of "not working a day in his life."

Let's face it. Raising kids and running a house is work. And if you have a lot of money, it can be a lot more work. More social demands and responsibilities, a bigger house -- lots of contractors to deal with.

Look at it this way: which is easier to replace? A mom or a job?

Think about it.

Save the Republic.

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

White House hobby horse: "tax the rich"

Just heard on the news that the Comrade has now delivered 21 speeches in which he insists that we "tax the rich."

OK. Unemployment hasn't been below 8% since the Comrade took office. And it's actually about 14% if you count people who have just given up looking for a job.

The national debt is about $16 TRILLION dollars. A truly unimaginable sum.

Gasoline is still hovering about $4.00 a gallon -- not good for the economy on any level, and Comrade Butthead is sticking by his windmills and algae combo as the wave of the future.

The GSA, a government agency that actually is supposed to manage federal office space, properties, etc., has apparently been on some kind of drunken bender, spending close to $1 million for a party in Las Vegas for 300 employees -- and in another efficient activity, paid $330,000.00 to move a real estate agent from Denver to Hawaii. For what, I don't know. Seems they could have simply hired a real estate agent who already lived in Hawaii. The Denver agent then quit the GSA after being comfortably ensconced -- at taxpayer expense -- in the islands. What cost $330,000.00 to move? Did they move the agent's whole house or what?

George Zimmerman, who apparently was community-minded, supportive and helpful to neighbors of all colors, etc., shot and killed a kid who no longer seems to be a sweet and innocent as the press portrays. The local cops at first let Zimmerman off because he claimed self-defense. Now, after significant public pressure, and the New Black Panthers offering a bounty for him dead or alive -- the local authorities have now charged Zimmerman with 2nd-degree murder. However, no one but Zimmerman himself has complained about the Black Panthers putting a price on his head, which is illegal.

So in view of all this turmoil, fraud, and abuse of public authority of all kinds, the Comrade is most worried about rich people not being taxed enough.

I get the feeling the Comrade has taken himself out of the mainstream of the nation. I mean, who bloody cares about the rich?

The Comrade estimates that hiking the tax rate for the rich to 30% of thie income would raise $47 billion over ten years. That would fund the federal government for about six days.

But that's over 10 yesrs. The feds won't be collecting that for 10 years. Tax the rich more, you'll only collect the first year. After that, their funds will either all be in the Cayman Islands or buried in various tax shelters -- probably invested in other countries. The only result of will be that the funds will be withdrawn from the US economy. Period.

And I don't understand what this all about. I mean, does the Comrade think that most citizens just sit up all night stewing about those rich people? I mean, does he believe we're all just seething with envy and resentment? Like, we don't have anything else to think about?

It stinks rather like class warfare, doesn't it? The only problem is, nobody really gives a damn. And those who do are those who want to one day be rich themselves.

The Comrade is irrelevant. Look at it this way, if he disappeared tomorrow, would anyone miss him?

Actually, I think Biden might leave a bigger footprint. And at least Biden's funny; every time he opens his mouth, he sticks his foot in it.

Hurry November. Know what I mean?

Save the Republic.

Monday, April 9, 2012

Social Darwinism vs. historical determinism

See, the Comrade thinks if he tosses around some multisyllabic words he picked up at Harvard, that no one will know what he's talking about. He often disguises his marxist agenda by couching it in vocabularly words that have a positive sound -- or describes it in ways that make it sound initimidating and inevitable. Marx himself did the same thing.

The other day the Comrade said we have a clear choice between "social Darwinism" and something else -- which is basically marxist communism, but I think he described it as "lilies that bloom year 'round" or something like that.

But, ooh kids, "social Darwinism." That sounds nasty, huh? It's basically survival of the fittest. And being that Darwin's theory of evolution is based on the premise that those who survive are those who are best suited to thrive in their environments, there's really no way we can get away from social Darwinism, is there?

I mean, even if the Comrade could construct "an economy built to last," apparently a communist one since that seems to be what he's going for, the people who will thrive in that kind of an environment will be the ones who learn how to manipulate that system most effectively. And what would that require? Hmmm, let's see.
  • Self-inficted wounds that allow you to collect disability?
  • A lot of brown-nosing of "the powers that be," who, by the way, control every aspect of the economy?
  • Failure/refusal to do anything for your own self, proving that you are the most incompetent and therefore have the greatest "need?"
  • Getting a job with a union or for the feds?
  • Winning the loltery

I can't think of any other way to thrive in the kind of world the Comrade is "fundamentally transforming" this nation into.

Because apparently, under the Comrade's diktats, anyone who actually produces something or provides a service for pay and hopes to keep their profits is an evil "fat cat" stealing the "wealth" from those who sit on their butts and do nothing. (Or not "nothing." It seems OK by the Comrade to recruit them to go terrorize bankers every now and then.)

"Historical determinism" means basically that history, or human experience, moves inevitably toward a single outcome. That is, history sort of moves by itself, and we're all caught up in the wave. Nothing we can do about it. It's not our fault.

Does this explain the White House's "it's not my fault" attitude regarding its own failures?

Anyway, marxism teaches historical determinism. According to Marx, all human experience on the planet is controlled by "dialectics," a concept actually developed by a guy named Hegel, whose work is pretty much unintelligible. This is how dialectics works: You say "yes." Which triggers me saying "no." We have a fight. This happens over and over again. And that is what moves history.

Marx believed he could look into a crystal ball and see where all these dialectic "swings of the pendulum" from yes to no to conflict would end up. According to Marx, the bougeois said "yes." The working class said "no." The classes would be in continual conflict that would result in revolution and the overthrow of the bourgeois class. When the workers eventually -- and inevitably -- take over, Marx happily predicted that the result would be a communist utopia.

Ever since, marxists like the Comrade have done everything they could to foster and encourage class warfare to trigger the revolution and bring on utopia.

Do you believe this? Is that how history works?

I watched a TV show over the weekend that claimed that people like Da Vinci, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, Steve Jobs, too, I guess, were probably people who had had some kind of communication with extraterrestrial aliens. After all, there are two years of Da Vinci's life that are not accounted for. The aliens gave him and the others lots of smarts and insight so that these individuals could do and make things that would redirect history.

To me, the alien theory makes about as much sense as Marx's dialectics.

And maybe extraterrestrials would be easier to live with than IRS agents and/or other federal bureaucrats. At least the aliens are supposed to be intelligent.

Save the Republic.

The future of energy

Neil Cavuto is one of my favorite TV news people. On one show last week, he ran a brief clip of Senator Dick(head) Durbin, (d-IL), telling people that all the tornados and similar bad weather lately should spur us all to buy Chevy Volts. Because all the tornados, etc., are due to us burning fossil fuels, you see.

Cavuto was totally ticked off. He didn't joke, as he usually does. He just said something to the effect that Durbin's comment was probably one of the stupidest things he'd ever heard, and he wondered how blockheads like Durbin get elected. A question not far from my own mind.

Hey, Neil, Durbin's from Illinois, like Saul Alinsky, Ram Emanual, David Axelrod, Richard Speck and the Comrade. 'Nuff said?

Honestly, I'll take this one step further and ask: Why is wind and solar power -- and shall we add algae? -- supposed to be the wave of the future?

Why? Because Al Gore said so. Al Gore said lots and lots of things that are similar loads of crap. Since that British "scientist" admitted that his dog ate the documentation behind his gloomy-crytal-ball-future-climate-computer-model, there's absolutely nothing to back up claims that 1.) "global warming" or "climate change" are driven by human action, and; 2.) that "global warming" or "climate change" even exists. Period.

The weather changes all the time. Does climate? Well, the earth has entertained a couple ice ages and stuff like that. But if anything like that is happening now, it isn't reflected in the hard data collected around the world over the last couple of decades. There's been periods of goofy weather. Climate remains about the same.

The most recent geological surveys show that the earth -- and particularly North America -- has vast untapped resouces of oil and natural gas, both fossil fuels, as well as coal. Matter of fact, if you take a spin down the Pennsylvania Turnpike in western Pennsylvania, you seem to be driving between cliffs of coal, which are covered over with a kind of chicken wire to prevent it raining down on your head. The air even smells like a coal bin. Drive through Kentucky and parts of Tennessee, you'll see huge coal ledges outcropping from the soil along every hillside.

But solar and wind represent the future of energy?

In what universe?

Just the contrary, due to their unreliability and inefficiency, wind and solar were long ago replaced by fossil fuels whenever and wherever that was possible.

And as far as electric cars go (or actually don't go), if they run on electricity, in the USA they're coal-powered, aren't they to a very large extent? Until the geniuses at GM figure out some wind turbine beany type of arrangement, or solar panels, that can be fixed to the roof and geared somehow to run reliably to provide power for long distance transportation.

Wind and solar don't work very well. They chew up the landscape. They're ugly and often dangerous. They're inefficient and way to expensive compared to fossil fuels.

But the Comrade's vision of the future seems to be not much more than a kind of blown out, bomb-damaged kind of version of some ancient past. Either that or I suppose we could construct new homes and commercial buildings at least partly underground, which in most of the USA, remains a pretty constant 54 degrees or so. And hey, if we lived underground, we could probably dig and burn as much coal as we like and the feds will never know.

Sound like a plan?

Save the Republic.

Thursday, April 5, 2012

Close, but no coronation

Well, I had a few details wrong in the last blog, though the main points were all correct.

It was three judges in Texas who asked Eric Holder to explain the policy of the executive branch regarding the judicial -- asking for a 3-page response outlining exactly why it is that the judicial branch can and has struck down legislation that violates the strictures of the Constitution.

FYI, the three branches of government, Congress, the Supremes, and the White House, have equal authority. None of them rules the other, though they each have the power to undo what the other does. The framers set up the government this way so that it would likely destroy itself long before it destroyed the nation as a whole -- and WE, THE PEOPLE, would have time to make a few of our own corrections before the situation got too desperate.

Apparently Holder complied with the Texans' demands -- I mean you can buy academic papers about this online -- admitting that the Comrade was simply strutting his marxist stuff and pretending to be a dictator for the benefit of a bunch of editors and publishers from the AP wire.

Curiously enough, the Comrade himself made a feeble effort to take back his attack on the Supreme Court. Unusual for him to admit to any errors in judgment. Apparently his ego can't stand to be corrected.

Showed his hand, huh? His blind ambition for absolute power and and his contempt for the United States showing through.

He's wise to wait until if and when he wins a second term to put that kind of stuff on display. Then, at least in his own mind, he can do whatever he damn pleases with the nation because he won't have to pay any attention to voters at all. Not lilke he  has so far.

On Fox yesterday, Judge Napolitano noted that the Comrade is moving dangerously close to seizing dictatorial power. Like... hmmm... Napolean, Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Chavez.

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed.

Anyone who votes for the Comrade in November very likely has masochistic tendencies or suffers from Stockholm Syndrome. That's pretty clear.

Save the Republic.

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

White House assaults the Supreme Court

Let me tell you, the Comrade puts Hitler to shame in terms of sheer audacity, as well as powerlust.

That's not name-calling or exaggeration. Goebbels, one of Hitler's peeps, crafted what's called "Big Lie" propaganda -- something the Comrade practices routinely. The Comrade has invented a new twist on it -- tell some monumental Big Lie, or launch some huge assault on the nation, then accuse your opponents of exactly the same thing.

For example, apparently the Comrade observed the rather pathetic showing the pro-socialist attorney put forth in the Supreme Court to attempt to defend socialized medicine. It was sort of like, "Well, some people like socialized medicine." And let me have another sip of water.

You know, as anyone who even had a slight brush with law school knows, or even people who just occasionally watch "Law & Order" or TruTV (formerly Court TV), when you argue a case, you have to introduce some sort of structured and credible logic into your statements.

There is no logic in the socialized medicine bill, hence, no argument to support it. Just an over-priced guy standing there with egg all over his face. He must get paid an awful lot to play whipping boy for the White House marxists.

Realizing that socialized medicine is unconstitutional and actually totally destructive to the United States government, the Comrade has made a move that I first laughed at. I mean, I thought the TV news guy was joking. But no, it's true. Jay Carneybarker confirms it.

The Comrade wants a statement from Eric Holder (there's a crack attorney, or an attorney so addle-brained you suspect he's on crack) about whether or not the "unelected" Supreme Court can strike down a law that was passed by a "majority."

I still have coffee shooting out my nose. But the thing is -- this is serious. I mean, the Comrade really did this. It's really stunning. It makes the Reichstag fire look bumbling and crude.

And Comrade Butthead supposedly taught consitutional law? No doubt he worked at one of those schools that sends out email blasts about "earning your degree in six weeks." I hope his one-time students are demanding a refund.

Apparently the Comrade has never read the U.S. Constitution. Supreme Court judges are not elected. Hey, 'Rad, remember -- you even got to appoint a few yourself. Or did you get in the head with a golf ball and it just all left your mind?

Then he's also claiming that the Supreme Court can't strike down legislation. Well, so he doesn't know any American history, either. But we already knew that. Seems to me that it's the JOB of the Supreme Court to strike down legislation -- or even crazy-ass schemes hatched in the White House -- that violates the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND -- THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

The Supremes aren't "making new law" as the term "judicial activism" suggests. That might apply if they actually went through the socialized medicine bill and determined what parts of it should stand -- if they rewrote the bill, in other words. And the judges don't seem inclined to do that.

And Congress can change the Constitution -- there's a procedure for that -- which was in no way part of the sausage-making process that produced the socialized medicine bill.

Yeah -- this is the straw that broke the camel's back... that the socialized medicine bill was passed by a "democratic majority."

Only democrats voted for it, and only after Pelosi, Reid, and Max Baucus bought off congressional whore Mary Landrieu ("It wasn't $100 billion, it was $500 billion she crowed loudly on the floor of the Senate, with bed-hair, and sucking on a post-coitus cigarette), and bribing and extorting people from Nebraska (Cornhusker kickback) and Florida to get their votes. God only knows what they did to Joe Lieberman -- that was behind closed doors. We can only imagine. Apparently he's not going to run again.

This is a "democratic" process? Only if you accept mafia tactics as legitimate persuasive tools. And perhaps people do, in Iran or Venezuela, but it doesn't work well in the United States.

WHAT A CROCK OF B.S. THIS IS. And it just stinks of utter desperation. Did the Comrade really believe the USA was ripe for his marxist takeover? Poor fool.

But go ahead, Comrade -- take on the Supreme Court. He's all kinda broody and hurt that they don't love him the way Tatiana Ali and Hugo Chavez do. That's very cute. What next? Get your ragtail OWies out there to stink up the Mall and insult us all by claiming to "represent" us? Put on some kind of show that convinces no one but Chris Mathews and the other lamebrains at MSNBC?

Go ahead. You'e only assuring a monumental landslide for Republicans in November.

And I just can't wait.

Save the Republic.