Of course we're coming for your guns. Silly Citizen

In an astoundingly stupid move, Attorney General Holder announced the Obama Administrations decision to ban "Assault Rifles" as they did in 1994, and make this ban permanent. 

Seriously, with everyone complaining about the size, scope, and intrusions of the Federal Government, you want to go ahead and launch this today? With people boggled at the audacity of hopelessness in a proposed $1.15 Trillion deficit for the year 2010, you want to go after "Assault Rifles" today?

The Obama Administration is off the chain already. They're losing it already. Even Clinton waited until 1994 to go after guns, and spent two years trying to sell it to the American People. The fact that the hype was all lies, well that's another story right Socialist Libs?

Well, good news is the Republicans have a rallying cry to get the Conservatives and Gun Owners up in arms and out to the polls on election day in 2010. No more big government, no on the Assault Weapons Ban. Great news President Obama, you've given your opponents ammunition to oppose you. 

I think I'll add this to the list of change I can't believe in. 

Time for some truth about President Obama

Liberals live in what I like to describe as Fantasy Land. In Fantasy Land, you get equal outcome, regardless of effort or talent. This Fantasy Land is populated by people who think that Marx had it right on economic policy, that the value of a thing depended only on how many man hours went into it. The product was merely the sum of the labor put into it. 

President Obama lives in Fantasy Land. A recent commentator lives in Fantasy Land. 

Now, I've read the Obama Speech to Congress. I was right, I wasn't surprised by anything I found in there. I'm also not surprised that the legislation proposed is exactly what I expected, more big government spending, the New Raw Deal II. The original New Raw Deal being the FDR policy that extended the Depression for a full decade. 

So what does the world think of our New President? They love him. He's so charismatic. He's also living in Fantasy Land. 

In order to save our children from a future of debt, we will also end the tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. But let me perfectly clear, because I know you'll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime. In fact, the recovery plan provides a tax cut - that's right, a tax cut - for 95% of working families. And these checks are on the way.

But the Math doesn't seem to hold up. Economists warn that even taxing all earnings over $500,000 at a rate of 100% would produce less than 1/3 of the total Federal Budget. Now, what would be the outcome of such a tax increase? 

Let's take the recently panned private jet ownership shall we? Gulfsteam makes Personal and Corporate jets. They make very good ones. Arguably the best in the business. No one is going to buy a jet if they are earning a paltry $500,000 a year. That means hundreds of jobs at Gulfstream are lost. Gulfstream would not be alone. Many jobs producing luxury items would be lost, and servicing those items, like the Gulfstream jets mentioned above? Consider it about 5% of our well paid workforce, good jobs for people, lost. 

Liberals love to live in Fantasy Land, because they don't have to deal with reality. So I'm sitting back, and enjoying the march to Socialism, knowing that soon enough, the economy will collapse, as all Socialist economies must. The Soviet Union has demonstrated it, the British Economy demonstrated this undeniable fact. Yet, for some reason, it's the first answer we rush to when Washington is involved. Apparently, Liberals are in Denial. 

The Obama plan. Higher unemployment, turning a recession, into a Depression, and extending it for a decade or more. If that's not his plan description, it will certainly be the result. 

So this is the change we can believe in? Recycling the old ideas, and pretending that they're new, and they work, despite the fact that they've never, not once, worked in history. 

Democrats and Republicans are to blame, because they love to spend money. We need a new political party. The cheapskate party, the one that spends only when they must, and practices thrift in their lives, and their governing. 

Parental Rights versus Rights of the Child

A UN Treaty that President Clinton signed, but the Senate failed to Ratify languishes in limbo but is about to be resurrected by Senator Barbara Boxer. This document gives the Government absolute authority in raising your children. Of course, the Liberals in Government who love Government answers to problems, are in favor of this. 

The main reason to ratify this? Why Somalia and the United States are the only nations who haven't, and that's embarrassing. 

I must be old fashioned. I believe it's not only the Parents right, but the Parents duty to teach the children not only the difference between right and wrong, but the moral foundation that is the foundation of those ideas of right and wrong. This is one of many problems I have with experts in rearing children. Those experts confuse fuzzy headed wishful thinking with logical common sense truth. 

I have wondered for years how much truth there is to the idea that Psychology and Sociology exist to make the immoral normal. From my observations of the so called experts, I think there may be a bit more truth to that than I did before. The idea of this Treaty being given more than a cursory glance and then rejected out of hand is asinine.

The idea that President Clinton actually signed it is even more foolish, and the idea that President Obama would consider signing it, and there are actually supposedly wise people who want it signed demonstrates we are beyond the line de-marking the end of foolish, and living in stupidville. 

Liberals, answer me this. What good does this Treaty do? It gives a panel of UN "experts" sway over raising our children. It could make it a crime to communicate the morals and ideals you hold as sacred and absolute. 

Let's for example, consider this. You consider the consumption of meat to be immoral. You communicate this to your child. You convince your child that you are right, and the only moral answer is to become a Vegan. Some doctors agree that you are wrong, and the Government takes your children from you because the law says they must. The Government spends years telling the children that you are insane and dangerous to them. When you finally get to visit you child, they want nothing to do with an insane person like you. Impossible you say? 

Then show me a law that has never been abused. The AMT, or Alternative Minimum Tax for example. This tax was intended to target 155 households that paid little or no tax. An outrage according to the Liberals, that 155 households out of more than 200 Million people were using the tax laws the Government passed to pay little or no tax. We had to pass a law to punish those people who were playing by the rules. 

Now of course, tens of thousands of households are subject to the AMT, and this is one example. Giving power to Government is never a wise choice. Signing and ratifying this Treaty is such a colossally bad idea, it will probably happen in the next couple months. 

Obama's speech

I didn't post about it, because I didn't watch it. Nor did I watch Governor Jindal's response. Horrible of me? I don't think so. 

I expect more of the same from Washington. I'm still convinced that if we had elected John McCain we'd have pretty much the same policies we have now. That was his platform.

I've just about decided that there isn't a dimes worth of difference between the parties. The Democrats have become socialist, and the Republicans have become Democrats. The end of that road isn't even in doubt, it's socialism, and the only choice we're given is how fast we get there.

Sometime today, I may read President Obama's speech. I honestly don't think I'll be surprised at anything. The argument that his speech was to be Reaganesque turned me off long before the speech was given. Reagan was a conservative, who believed that people had the keys to greatness themselves. Obama is a Socialist who believes that Government holds the keys to the people's greatness. How do you claim one is like the other? 

Government in danger of falling in Mexico

Things are bad in Mexico, the drug cartels are really running the country. Kidnappings for ransom are on the rise. More than 700 in 2007, and while I don't have the numbers for 2008, they were on the rise in the early part of the year.

The Mayor of Juarez Mexico has moved his family to El Paso Texas, and is reported to be sleeping there. Imagine that if you will, your local Mayor is so threatened that he can't stay in town, and in fact, has to go to another country to sleep at night with a moderate amount of safety. 

The Governor of Chihuahua was attacked, but it's claimed that the attack on his convoy was a disagreement between his bodyguards and some random armed gunmen. 

First, that the Governor needs a Convoy to travel, a convoy of armed men to protect him is disturbing. Then to seriously claim that the attacks are merely the result of minor disagreements with random roving bands of men armed with automatic weapons. Hello? Does anyone but me find that a little thin? 

Then the Gang Violence is spilling over into the United States. I suppose this is a plus for the Open Boarders gang, but for the rest of us, it's proof positive that an open boarder is very dangerous for AMERICANS. 

The Homeland Security representative agreed that the Violence from the Drug Cartels continues to rise in the United States, and that is international in nature. Yet, for some reason no one says it's time to close the boarder with Mexico and seal it tight. 

The Government wanted a Virtual Fence. I wanted strands of Barbed Wire, Razor Wire, Minefields, and men in towers with Machine Guns. I wanted the DMZ from North Korea transported to the United States to protect our citizens. 

I also want ways to cross that boarder, legally. I want Ellis Island like processing stations where immigrants can be health screened and background checked and then welcomed to the United States as Resident Aliens on the path to Citizenship. 

In short, I want to protect the citizens of the United States, and the Government seems to want to protect the good working relationship we have with the Mexican Government. 

Here is the problem, the Government in Mexico, isn't really in charge. They are elected, but the Cartels are really running the show. It is as if Mexico embraced the hype of Chicago during Prohibition, and the gangs really are in charge. Would you want Al Capone to be the one calling the shots in your town? 

Reforming the Immigration Process to streamline and more readily welcome immigrants, coupled with closing the boarder is the only answer that could possibly work. Why aren't we doing it?

Conservative Truthers on Display.

Truthers, the often maligned, and properly maligned, group that claims that 9-11 was an inside job to help the Military Industrial Complex get another war going have found friends on the Right. These people believe that President Obama is not an American Citizen, and thus ineligible for the Presidency. 

This time, it's an Army Officer who is refusing to follow President Obama's orders because of the constitutional question. 

A U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq has called President Obama an "impostor" in a statement in which he affirmed plans to join as plaintiff in a challenge to Obama's eligibility to be commander in chief.

This Lieutenant, much like Lieutenant Watada, should spend more time learning his trade as an Officer. The Constitution, nor the Military Regulations, gives you the authority to question such things. 

First of all, President Obama is the President of the United States. End of discussion. The argument is silly beyond that. If as the proponents of this theory state, President Obama was not born in the United States, then it is still not relevant in my humble opinion. The laws in force at the time may indeed have said that his Mother was too young to transfer citizenship. However, the laws were asinine then, and have since been corrected. 

I railed against Lieutenant Watada because of one simple thing. It is his sworn duty to obey his orders, providing they are legal and lawful. Trying to find some asinine loophole is stupid. Illegal orders are usually pretty obvious, because soldiers are taught what is legal, and what isn't. Firing on a group of civilians is illegal. Firing on a group of people in civilian clothing with weapons who are making hostile moves towards you, including aiming and or firing at  you is absolutely legal. 

Lieutenant Easterling will be charged under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and found guilty, for making disloyal statements, and conduct unbecomming an Officer, and probably failure to obey the lawful orders of his commander in chief. He'll be discharged dishonorably, just as Lieutenant Watada is destined to be. 

The Watada case is currently in Legal Limbo, because the Federal Court has decided it has jurisdiction. It doesn't really. There is no grounds for the claim of the Federal Court. A mistrial is just that. Some violation of the rules has made it impossible for a jury to make a decision. The case is retried, and essentially the case is done over. 

That is normal, and no mistrial before has ever been ruled to be a double jeopardy violation. That comes from being found innocent, and then being retried for the same charges. Additionally, the Federal Court is not part of the appeals process in the Military. It goes from the Courts Martial, to the Commander, to the Court of Military Appeals, and then to the Supreme Court, and is judged not by Civilian Law, but by Military Regulations. 

The Courts Martial of Lieutenant Watada will pick up, and he'll be found guilty. The Courts Martial of Lieutenant Easterling will start before long, and he'll be found guilty. The basic facts are not in dispute, and that means that the Officers in Question did knowingly violate the Military Regulations. 

People, let this nonsense go. We have a ton of issues that really deserve our attention. We have issues that go beyond our political parties, and we're left squabbling about nonsense while the real damage is done to our nation. 

English meet French below the waves.

In an oops of epic proportions, a French Ballistic Nuclear Missile Submarine collided with a British Ballistic Nuclear Missile Submarine. Yes, you read that right. Two nuclear powered submarines carrying Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles collided in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. 

Now, I would normally chuckle and shake my head at this and then move along, however the comments from the Sun's Defense Editor made me hesitate and reconsider my planned inaction regarding this story. 

MyView

By TOM NEWTON DUNN

Defence Editor

CRASHING a sub into one belonging to an ally is embarrassing enough at any time — but this couldn’t have come at a worse moment for Britain.

There are already tensions between us and the US over the Government’s failure to give our Forces what they need to win in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Those blunders have left President Barack Obama wondering how special his relationship with Britain really is.

Now a pile-up with the French makes it look like we were playing amateur night in mid-Atlantic. We simply cannot afford any more damage to our Forces’ reputation.

Tom, forgive me, but do you have any idea what you are talking about? The submarines in question are the very epitome of silence. They are so quiet that listening for them has been likened to trying to find a lightbulb by sound underwater. That's because we don't use active sonar, that's the classic ping sound that the world war II movies have trained us all to believe is standard practice on submarines. It isn't. The reason is that like a cop with a flashlight, he can see a way, but we can see him a hell of a lot farther off and avoid him. 

The Boomers as they are called are literally designed and built to be utterly silent, because their mission is strategic deterrence, and God Forbid, delayed launch of Nuclear Weapons. 

If they were easy to find, then they wouldn't deter anyone from attacking us would they? No, not when a third of your nuclear capability can be destroyed by any old dolt with a fishing boat and a miracle ear. 

Now, a wannabe statistician in the comments of the story said that he considered it highly unlikely that two Submarines would be in the exact same place at the exact same time. Improbable, doesn't mean impossible. If a thing can happen, it will eventually. It need not be given some hidden sinister motive to be real. It was an accident, and they will happen from time to time. 

The nature of international relations are such that we must have a big stick ready to smack people with to protect ourselves. Sad but true, and I don't see it changing anytime soon. 

These are strategic as opposed to tactical assets. Now, if you must have it explained to you the difference, then I will try. Tactical is a short term gain, like sinking an enemy warship that is threatening your fleet. The tactical advantage is shifted by that action. Strategic is larger, more lasting importance. Bombing the repair facilities that are required to fix your enemies fleet. If you can't fix your ships, then your fleet ceases to be effective rather quickly. Boomers are strategic, in other words, they are meant to do long lasting damage to an enemy, not tactical, as in tracking and shadowing other submarines. 

It was an accident, that's all. Thank God no one was hurt. They happen, life is risky, and service is even more risky. That is sort of the point you know, to have people who think your nation is so awesome that they are willing to risk life and limb to protect it. 

The purpose of a Military is not bragging rights, the purpose is to defend your nation. This accident won't make me think any less of the British Navy. Nor will it make me think that they are less than competent. Accidents happen, and we should learn from them, and try and figure out how to avoid them in the future.

I salute the British Navy, you have long held my respect. 

Paul Krugman: It's all the Republicans Fault.

Certainly, that's been the subject of nearly every Paul Krugman piece ever written. If only the Republicans would just shrivel up and die, we could move this nation into the waiting arms of properly planned socialism and be done with this fantasy of capitalistic individualism. 

Liberals like Paul Krugman like to believe that a Centrally Planned economy works. Despite the long and demonstrable evidence to the contrary, the Liberals insist it will work, this time. After all, Marx said that all value is derived from the worker. 

Paul Krugman is really upset right now. Because the spending bill known as Porkulus isn't big enough. We don't know what would be good enough for Mr. Krugman, I shudder to think that nearly $800 Billion isn't enough wasteful spending for him. 

He is very upset indeed, because the Republicans didn't play along and slobber over the collection of special interest pork and vote for it like they were supposed to. Seriously, despite the win, Krugman wanted the same thing that President Obama wanted, which was the ability to blame the Republicans for voting for it when the mid-term elections come up, and the economy is still in the toilet. 

For while Obama got more or less what he asked for, he almost certainly didn't ask for enough. We're probably facing the worst slump since the Great Depression. The Congressional Budget Office, not usually given to hyperbole, predicts that over the next three years there will be a $2.9 trillion gap between what the economy could produce and what it will actually produce. And $800 billion, while it sounds like a lot of money, isn't nearly enough to bridge that chasm.

Officially, the administration insists that the plan is adequate to the economy's need. But few economists agree. And it's widely believed that political considerations led to a plan that was weaker and contains more tax cuts than it should have - that Obama compromised in advance in the hope of gaining broad bipartisan support. We've just seen how well that worked.

Yeah, it's just not big enough right Paul? Sorry, have you heard that the national debt is now larger than the total amount of money that will be earned by every single person on earth this year? Let me go ahead and publish your response to that. Just scare mongering from the vast right wing hate machine.

One of the biggest disagreements that Conservatives have had is the lack of fiscal responsibility that the Republicans have made their own during their time in charge. Of course, the Democrats are bound and determined to show the Republicans how to really print money, wholesale. 

Paul, where does all this money come from? Why is it you Liberals never understand something so basic. You can't spend something you don't have. Money does not grow on trees, and the fact that it's printed on paper doesn't prove that is false. Just because we can move it across the internet, doesn't mean that it is all created by Al Gore. 

Money is earned, by the sweat and labor of the people. It should be collected by the Government regretfully, and spent most cautiously. We shouldn't chide Government for not spending enough, when they already have more debt than there is money on earth. 

Federal Deficit exceeds world Gross Domestic Product

Yes, you read that right. The total Deficit of the Federal Government now exceeds the entire earned money of every single person in the world. Hello? Who is dumb enough to extend credit to us when we already owe more money than has ever been made by the entire world? 

OK, you've followed the link, and you've read the article. You now understand that if the Government used the same accounting rules and regulations that every company in the nation has to use, they would be locked up for life. However the old joke seems to apply. It's my ball, my bat, and my rules. At least, that seems to be what Washington DC is telling us. 

So how do we get out of this? I don't think we can. I think, like Rome, the Weimar Republic, even the Soviet Union, we may be beyond rescue.

When a person spends more than they earn, they are called irresponsible. When a corporation does it, it's called the same thing. The end result is Bankruptcy for the entities involved. When a nation does it, it's called creative accounting. You can't just print and spend money, history clearly shows what happens. The term, economic collapse comes to mind. 

So what should we be doing right now? Funding ACORN and pushing Abortions of course, the Liberal idea of Stimulus. 

You can call it creative, but I think I know what History will call it. At least, I know what History called the previous examples of this kind of behavior. 

Sen. Gregg out?

I just heard this. Story goes that Senator Gregg told the press before the White House. I'd guess that he is a little upset.


-- Post From My iPhone

Tennessee Republicans throw Speaker out of the Party

In what can only be called an awesome move, the Republican Party of Tennessee has tossed the Speaker of the Tennessee house of Representatives out of the party.

I say this is awesome, because when you are betrayed by someone, you're supposed to cut ties with them. NOTE TO NATIONAL REPUBLICAN PARTY on this one. 

To say that I think this should be encouraged, and embraced by the Republican party at large, is like saying that the sea is wet. Electoral success, the topic of my last couple posts, and many before it, are historically demonstrable. When you talk to people, all over the nation, they remember things. The Republican Revolution of 1994 for example. It was supposed to be the death of business as usual. It wasn't a death of business as usual after all, it was merely a minor heart attack, that was easily treated by the inside the beltway people to return business as usual to life, stronger than ever.

Kent Williams, the speaker of the Tennessee house, has learned that some people are actually asinine enough not to recognize exceptional political maneuvering. He was brilliant, and I sincerely hope, voted out of office for his tricky little play. He got what he wanted, the speakers podium. The Democrats got what they wanted, a puppet to jerk the strings of, and several committee chairmanships. The Republicans? Oh well, they can just suck it. 

Kent, I hope you kept that Resume' handy. I think you're going to need it. 

It tuns out I was rather timely.

Yesterday, I blogged about the needs of the Republican Party to first find their core principals, since they seem to have none, and second, to embrace the brilliance and historically effective conservative principals. I lamented the moves of the party to Socialist Lite. 

I hadn't read too much news yesterday. I was working all weekend, and first thing Monday Morning, I listened to a bit of local radio, but otherwise was actively engaged in a time consuming project after I got off of work in the morning. I finally got to bed after a rather long day, or night, and when I woke, was depressed to find that the Republicans were going to give this stimulus package legs enough to pass the Senate. So my post was made in response to the actions of the Republicans, more than the opinions of other pundits. 

So late last night, I finally got around to glancing at Rush's website, after ordering more canned food to help get my family through the pending bi-partisan depression that we're facing, and what do I see, but a link to a smarmy little formerly powerful staffer to those who actually won elections who is sneeringly demanding that Rush, as the leader of the Republican Party according to the press, give his plan to help the party gain in the polls and at election time. 

Gee. That would appear to be a no brainer for most of us. First, embrace the Conservative values, but to an inside the beltway cocktail circuit dolt who is desperately trying to be liked, that probably seems too complex. 

Back to our Smarmy little genius. John Feehery is a former Washington Staffer who worked for the Republican Leadership from the 90's. He was there in Washington when the Contract with America, an often blogged topic here, helped the Republicans gain the majority. He was there when the Republicans continued elective and legislative success by embracing conservative principals, and actually governed by those principals. 

Now, the obvious question is what in the world can you do when a genius like this, who saw the success of conservative principals in action now wonders what we can do to get the Republican party back into power. OK, so you now tell us that either you have no clue what you saw, or you refuse to believe that the people actually put the Republicans in the majority. 

Part of the reason George W. Bush won in 2000 was the success of the Republican Party to exercise fiscal discipline during the 1990's. Part of the reason was that the predicted results of the Republicans, for example, Welfare Reform, actually came out right and dandy on the nose. Yet John the joke wonders what we can do to bring the party back into power. 

No John, the first question is not how do you get the power. The first question is what do you do with it when you get it? Simply grabbing power for the sake of grabbing it is not a good enough reason to go after it. Going for it because you think the other side is going to be worse than you would be, not a great reason either. Then we're left with two choices. Both bad, and if you give me two bad choices, I'm not going to participate. 

John, the reason the Republicans are in trouble now, is they threw those principals that we all supported out the window in favor of moderate populist ideals. So John, what did embracing the moderate ideals get us? Oh yeah. Republicans get not one bit of input in the House of Representatives. I'm sure that is going to be a big Re-election help for Republicans in the house. We now have a Senate that is spending trillions of dollars more stupidly than can easily be believed. Yeah, that's a real close thing to what the people want.

Educate the people John. Tell them what you believe, and why. Don't just kiss their butts and grudgingly decide after you can't get your way, as John McCain did, pretend to understand what they are saying. If you have no firmly held beliefs, if you have no core principals, than you shouldn't be in power in the first place. Simply running as Democrat Lite didn't work out all that well did it. Because the people were left with the impression that the Republicans didn't know what the hell they stood for, and if you don't know, and can't communicate to us, what you believe, why should we vote for you?

I'm watching one of the two political parties in my nation, the one that for the most part represented my beliefs at one time, dying from success poisoning. They were successful, and we found out that they didn't know how to win. They didn't know that we actually expected them to govern as they had been for years during the Clinton era. They didn't understand that the election and campaign rhetoric wasn't just empty words to us, the people. They are our core beliefs, and our beloved principals. 

We aren't conservative because it's popular, we're conservative because we truly believe in the conservative ideals. It's a shame we don't have politicians, or even pundits in Washington who understand that.

John, I'm not angry at you. I'm not going to be sarcastic as I say this. I honestly feel sorry for you, and for our country. Because now it is apparent that no one inside the beltway honestly believed the principals outlined in the Contract with America. When you were helping our Representatives push Conservative legislative policies through President Clinton, and having successes, you weren't doing it because you believed it was true, and correct. You were doing it to obstruct and counter the President. 

I'm not angry John, I'm disgusted. If I was a member of the Republican Party, I would resign that membership. I'll make a prediction for you John, I bet that the Republicans lose seats in the House and Senate this next election. The reason isn't because they aren't embracing the single women voters. The reason is they don't have anything to point to that they can say "I believe in this with all my heart" and actually mean it. 

Time for a little Reality Check

Many people think I'm Republican. To those who believe so, I'm sorry but you're terribly wrong. I am not a Republican, I'm a Conservative. I've mentioned Democrats I could, and did, support over the years. One of those most often mentioned, Zell Miller, the former Senator, and former Governor of Georgia. 

If I was a Republican now, I would seriously consider leaving the party until such time as they figure out what the hell they intend to stand for. Since I'm not a Republican, I'm not going to leave the party, I'm not in it. 

The Republican Party is attempting to make themselves more "Populist" as they thrash about striving for an image, or something they can point to as their own. Populist doesn't mean right, nor wise. It means popular with the majority. Here is the problem with that, the obvious problem if you understand my meaning, what if the populist idea is absolutely wrong, morally, and ethically wrong? Do you stand for the idea anyway? If you're a Republican, apparently you do. 

Global Warming is nearly debunked. Seven times as many scientists are speaking out against it, as are speaking out for it. More and more scientists are coming out to say that the hysterical nonsense is just hype and the proposed solutions are not only ineffective against the claimed Global Warming threat, but disastrous to our economy and individual liberties. 

So the Republicans are staunchly opposed to this right? Not even close. The cocktail circuit populist idea is that Global Warming is real, and only Neanderthals would dare to suggest that it isn't. 

The arguments against Illegal Immigration are too numerous to list here, but allow me to highlight one I've covered in detail before, public health. The number of diseases that exist around the world, and are essentially eradicated, that means wiped out, here are too numerous to list. The principals behind Ellis Island were that we needed to make sure that our immigrant population was not bringing into our nation, at the risk of our citizens, a disease that could, and would, kill thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands. 

So now we don't mind the risk to hundreds of thousands of our citizens? Instead we decide that if we demand health screenings, we're evil and racist? 

Republicans should be shouting this from the rooftops, using pictures of people who are bleeding out of their eyes to show the population what risks from uncontrolled immigration could lead to. No, that would be wrong, it wouldn't be populist. 

I could go on and on and on. I've covered how the Republicans gained power over the years, by embracing the Conservative message, and taking that message, and educating the population, to the historically effective principals. Now, it's too hard. We have more communication mediums available than anyone in history. With radio, TV, and the Internet, education of the population should be an easy task. Yet, we watch the Republicans embrace the false god of Populist, and the historically demonstrative idiocy of liberal/socialist thought. 

If you wonder why I'm not a Republican, then just watch the Republicans in action. They are busy making the party Socialist, light. The Republicans are fools, and the leadership of the party should be crowned the king of fools. You can't out liberal a Democrat, and any Republican worth the name should know that instinctively. It's a shame that they don't. 

The President as an Editorial Writer?

President Obama has written an Opinion/Editorial piece in the Washington Post. Seriously, I didn't believe it at first either when I read the headline at Hot Air. President Obama did write it at the Washington Post though. He has even scheduled a prime time press conference to try and reach more people.

Are you kidding me? The President has access to the Press at any time of the day or night. He has a Press Pool that follows him around all day, should he leave the Oval Office. At any moment, he could ask for a particular Reporter to be brought to the Oval Office. He could and does have access to any number of Television shows, where he's interviewed. Yet, that isn't enough, now he wants to write Editorials to try and gin up some support for the Porkulus bill that is losing support at a remarkable rate? The scare tactics are failing and the President is imploding right before our eyes. 

The President's poll numbers are falling like the proverbial rocks, and now, a majority of the people think the country is on the wrong track. So the President demonstrates leadership by writing an Opinion piece for the Washington Post? 

Desperation has his the White House, and President Obama is apparently not yet up to being the President. The Press is turning on him, because his administration hasn't looked like they thought it would, it looks like he's still in perpetual campaign mode, and his Opinion piece reeks of it. 

Every day, our economy gets sicker -- and the time for a remedy that puts Americans back to work, jump-starts our economy and invests in lasting growth is now.

Now is the time to protect health insurance for the more than 8 million Americans at risk of losing their coverage and to computerize the health-care records of every American within five years, saving billions of dollars and countless lives in the process.

Now is the time to save billions by making 2 million homes and 75 percent of federal buildings more energy-efficient, and to double our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy within three years.

Now is the time to give our children every advantage they need to compete by upgrading 10,000 schools with state-of-the-art classrooms, libraries and labs; by training our teachers in math and science; and by bringing the dream of a college education within reach for millions of Americans.

And now is the time to create the jobs that remake America for the 21st century by rebuilding aging roads, bridges and levees; designing a smart electrical grid; and connecting every corner of the country to the information superhighway.

The only thing missing here is the promise of a chicken in every pot. Of course, the Vegetarian Commando's of the far left would probably protest in front of the White House if he did, so never mind. 

It's astounding isn't it friends? 

Comparisons have begun, Obama is Carter II

I was widely lamented in my assertions that Obama was to be the next Jimmy Carter, the one term President widely believed to be the worst of the 20th Century, and there is some pretty stiff competition for that I might add. 

Now though, the comparisons have begun, and what do you know, others are starting to see the similarity that I noticed months ago. 

The fact is that Barack Obama, while trying to meet a dire economic crisis, has fallen straight into the trap that led Jimmy Carter to defeat in his bid for reelection. Obama has sought to promise and do too much in too short a period of time in a city where Congress, federal departments and agencies, and bureaucrats can and will eat a new president alive.

James Fallows, a former Carter speechwriter, wrote a May 1979 piece in The Atlantic in which he reflected on the first years of the Carter presidency. He noted that Carter promised during his first "fireside chat" that he would present the nation with a comprehensive plan to deal with energy independence "within 90 days." Fallows goes on to note that Carter later came to understand that strict deadlines could be destructive "in that they might force him to go ahead with half-baked ideas."

Mr. President, I hope you don't take this personally sir, but you did this to yourself. Liberalism never makes things better, and in embracing the Liberal beliefs and power structure, you have in fact, doomed yourself to a one term Presidency and a serious contender for Worst President. 

The only difference between you and Jimmy Carter so far, is at least Carter had the good grace to turn the heat down in the White House, and put a sweater on, while he told the rest of us we'd have to suffer though this energy and economic turmoil. Carter may have been a left wing kook liberal, but at least he wasn't a hypocrite. 

Wall Street responds to Obama plan.

President Obama has decided arbitrarily that if a company gets a Bailout from the Feds, that the executive pay must be limited to $500,000. To some people, that sounds darned fair right? 

Here be the rub. The best know how good they are, and what they are worth. Take a Hollywood star for example. Do you think that Christian Bale would agree to do a movie if all he would be paid is $500,000? The obvious answer, no. So you find another actor right? Even if that actor doesn't do as good a job, and even if the movie doesn't do as well because of it right? 

That is the problem. Let's say that you are an executive who has just finished turning a company around, and making it profitable. You're interested in another challenge, and you're currently earning $25 Million a year. Bank of America comes to you and asks if you'd be interested in helping them get turned around and back to profitable. You say sure, you'd be interested. B of A is a bigger company, and you know that the pay would be equally larger. Then you find out your pay is limited by Congress to half a million, or 1/50th of what you are making right now. Do you take the job? Obvious answer, not no, but hell no. 

So who do they get to run these companies? Obviously they're not going to get the best and the brightest. Obviously they're not going to get those that are only considered good, they're making more than a million a year right now. 

Capitalism means you get what you can make. You take what the market will pay. If you're worth a million dollars to one company, how big of a dolt do you have to be to take a fifty percent pay cut? Why should they? Not patriotism certainly. Aren't they helping the economy just as much by staying where they are, and keeping the company they currently run profitable and keeping the people there employed? 

So why would President Obama decide on this arbitrary number if he is really determined to save the private economy? Obvious answer, he isn't determined to save the corporations as private entities. He is obviously taking this action to make sure that no one would touch the jobs, no one who would have a chance of saving the companies. 

In other words, the only reason I can see for taking this action is to make the jobs of leading those companies as unattractive as possible for the best Executives in the world. Huge risk, and a tremendous amount of work, for a small percentage of the pay they are currently getting? There is a old saying, about things being more trouble than they are worth. 

So if we can't get the best and brightest for the jobs, what will happen? The companies won't get turned around, they won't get salvaged, and they won't become profitable. They will become Federally owned, socialized companies, run by Congress and political appointees. In other words, Bank of America is about to become the next Fannie Mae, where appointee's who are in good with the Political Party in power get the jobs, instead of the most qualified and best suited for the job. 

Liberals, give them a chance, and they'll screw it up. 

Another bad day for President Obama.

The economy continues as President Obama and the Democratic Parties Quagmire today, as the stock market tumbled again into new record low territory.

President Obama, continuing to demonstrate that he has no clue how the economy works, again spared no effort in damaging the faith of the American People and the world in the economic future. 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republicans tried to push back against the ballooning size of President Barack Obama's economic recovery plan Wednesday, even as he warned that the financial crisis will turn into "a catastrophe" if the bill isn't passed quickly.

A catastrophe? Well, if you listen to this quote from Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi on the dangers of the economy, he may be right.

Yes friends, 500 Million jobs each month are lost. That means this month you'll have to lose a job and a half to keep on track for that five hundred million. 

If anyone in Washington has a clue, it's not the elected officials, that becomes more apparent with each passing day. In the meantime, President Obama continues to push the porkulus bill through Congress. We can't wait for a good bill, or a piece of legislation that might actually work. We have to throw money at the problem, and thankfully, Washington has a long history of throwing money at problems and never solving them. 

Desperation strikes old left wing guard in Media

Newspapers, which have for the last several decades gone downhill, both financially and regarding quality, are desperate. They know that a Federal, or State bailout isn't going to happen. The people didn't like it when we bailed out the Automakers, they're starting to turn on the Porkulus Bill, and the News industry knows they won't support a News corp bailout.

So now, the Newspapers are desperate enough, and they hope the people are dumb enough, to ask for an anti-trust exemption from Washington. In other words, the Newspapers want to become the Robber Barons of yesteryear. 

In an online exchange with his paper's readers this week, New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller pointed out that "there is a diminishing supply of quality journalism, and a growing demand. By quality journalism, I mean the kind that involves experienced reporters going places, bearing witness, digging into records, developing sources, checking and double-checking, backed by editors who try to enforce high standards. I mean journalism that, however imperfect, labors hard to be trustworthy, to supply you with the information you need to be an engaged citizen. The supply of this kind of journalism is declining because it is hard, expensive, sometimes dangerous work." 

Keller said the best evidence of the soaring demand is that websites that do "dependable" reporting are winning readers; he noted that the New York Times' website gets nearly 20 million unique monthly visitors. "The law of supply and demand," he said, "suggests that the market will find a way to make the demand pay for the supply."

But the problem isn't supply and demand, you charge for the paper, and could charge for the online content. The problem came when you tried it, twice now, and a vast majority of the people refused to pay to read. Then your monthly visitors, which interestingly enough is less than Rush Limbaugh reaches in a week, and when you consider that in a week, Drudge Report has another twenty five million hits, you have to realize that your loyal readership, is about nil. 

Since the Newspapers won't change to embrace a journalistic style that is desired by the marketplace, fair and ballanced reporting, then the mainstream media is going to fall by the wayside, victims of their own inability to evolve in the changing marketplace. Like other extinct species of history, Reporter Liberalallis will one day be found only in History texts. 

President Obama, foreign problems abound

During the campaign, we were told how loved that the US would be if only we elected President Obama. We were told that once we had elected President Obama, that the world had indeed turned a corner, and we were loved once again. 

Two short and error filled weeks later, and we see that many in the world were celebrating when the American Public elected President Obama, celebrating because they felt we had selected a neophyte, an inexperienced dolt, to lead and represent us. 

The reason I say that is pretty obvious, let's review the news from the last day, that is 24 hours, shall we?

Afghanistan. Our supply routes into this region are now severed. The Russians using diplomacy and favorable trade deals just cut our airbase and route into Afghanistan via Kyrgyzstan. Additionally, the truck route in from Pakistan is also sliced. 

The stimulus plan, which was nothing more than a political payoff to the left wing nutso supporters anyway, is now threatening to start a trade war. The efforts to jump start the unions again via "buy American" provisions in the Stimulus are roundly denounced by Europe as a violation of trade agreements. So Europe is losing their love too?

India is denouncing the American efforts in the region. They even said that the attempt to return things to a Clinton type of policy showed that the Americans were badly misinformed on the situation in the region. 

North Korea showing a great sense of timing, has decided to test a new missile which should be capable of hitting the West Coast of the United States.

Iran has launched a home grown missile and satellite into orbit. This isn't an economic threat, but is a clear demonstration that Iran now possesses the basics required for an intercontinental ballistic missile, most probably topped with their own Nuclear Weapons, that Obama is sure they'll never use.

In a final insult, Paris rejected an Obama style stimulus package. Even the socialist French who quake at the show of any manliness, know that spending packages don't do anything to end an economic downturn. It's astounding really. 

LYON: Prime Minister François Fillon on Monday rejected demands that the French government seek to stimulate consumer spending, rather than follow his plan to stimulate corporate and infrastructure investment, to lift France out of its economic slump.

"It would be irresponsible to chose another policy, which would increase our country's indebtedness without having more infrastructure and increased competitiveness in the end," Fillon said in a speech in Lyon.

What do you do when the French understand the stupidity of the Porkulus Stimulus bill and the American elected officials don't? 

It kind of boggles the imagination doesn't it? 

President Obama, I'm afraid that Hope and Change isn't going to be enough. I'm afraid instead of the washed up already disgraced liberals you've hired. I think that perhaps you should try and round up some Conservatives who are at least capable of understanding the things that you and your advisors don't. The world doesn't love us after all. 

I also could mention his domestic/political problems. Falling support for the Porkulus bill. The withdrawal of more Democratic Party names from various positions because they don't bother to pay taxes. I could go on and on and on domestically as well.

I predicted that we needed another Jimmy Carter, before we could get another Ronald Reagan. It would appear that we have our next Jimmy Carter, now, do we look for a Ronald Reagan? Or do we try and find another Moderate like the Washington elites believe we should?

Truthers get TV show.

Truthers, the nuts that I have often maligned on this blog, are back. Like a rash, they won't stay away, despite the cure being the facts. 

In today's report on the Truthers, we're going to the Television Channel known as FX for a story on an actor who is also a nut. I know, what are the odds right? The show is Rescue Me. 

A coming episode of the acclaimed FX drama “Rescue Me” will tackle what may sound like a far-fetched plot line: that the attacks of Sept. 11 were an “inside job.” The actor who espouses the theories on camera, it turns out, also subscribes to them in real life.

In the episode, Mr. Sunjata’s character delivers a two-minute monologue for a French journalist describing a “neoconservative government effort” to control the world’s oil, drastically increase military spending and “change the definition of pre-emptive attack.” To put it into action, he continues, “what you need is a new Pearl Harbor. That’s what they said they needed.”

A two minute monologue on the grand neo-conservative plan. OK. Sunjata, here is the deal. Let's for the sake of argument say that the attacks on 9-11 were an inside job. I'm going to imagine that little old me, a no n college educated insider is in the meeting. 

I'm sitting in a dark conference room. We're discussing the way to attack our nation. It's a political exercise, and we're working towards our political goals, of maximum control. It's a neo-conservative plan run by two oil men. Two oil men who know that we have oil here in the US, and that we aren't allowed to drill for it. Two oil men who know that the companies they used to run, and are still stockholders in would benefit from new refineries, we haven't built any since the 1970's. 

These two oilmen know that there isn't a group that could effectively block legislation allowing such things if a major refinery was attacked. Thus harming our nation short term, by attacking it's true lifeblood, oil and gasoline. Increasing the profits of the oil companies and allowing these oil men to not only launch their war against brown people,(the way the Liberals see everyone is color first after all) but also allowing them to destroy all environmentalist wacko objections to drilling and refinery construction with new legislation putting this vital national interest as part of a national security reformation bill. 

To be smart, they would also push for energy independence, after all, unlike Al Gore, Bush had put green technologies into his house at Crawford Texas. They would toss the solar and wind people a bone to be sure. 

So instead of attacking the World Trade Center, a target that is less important than it would appear from a strategic standpoint, or perhaps in addition to it. They would attack a major refinery in either Louisiana or Texas. This would put the economic pinch on everyone, and make everyone angry every time they tried to fill up their cars. It's brilliant, and I'm just a lowly rural American in Georgia and I saw it instantly?

Sunjata, or perhaps I should call him Nutjoba, are you really dumb enough to believe that crap? You truthers, you need a life, seriously. Nutjoba, I could come up with a better conspiracy in five minutes that would accomplish all the goals supposedly lain at the feet of the Machiavellian Rove and company after years. I did Demolitions in the Army. I blew things up. I've used about every type of explosive in one form or another. It wasn't a demolition job. 

The target is all wrong for anyone who truly understands what makes the economy really work. It's not Wall Street, but oil street that keeps this economy moving every day. The selection of targets was done by people who truly do not understand how the nation works. Instead of the Pentagon, anyone with a modicum of knowledge on how things really work here would have selected another target. 

Perhaps Fort Meade. The home of the NSA and all their evil activities? Perhaps the CIA headquarters, or better yet, The USAMRID facility. Where literally hundreds of extremely virulent strains of disease and plague are stored and studied. If that facility was breached, and the virus's like Ebola released into the air, the fear and terror would be greater than it was. As would be the anger of the people. The President could claim it was an attack of a Special Nature, qualified by the use of Biological Warfare elements in the attack. Thus allowing this trigger happy cowboy to use Nukes at will. 

The conspiracy theory fails dramatically. Partially because the supposed goals for the Neo-Con's are better served by other targets, practically any other target. 

Nutjoba, I won't threaten to boycott your show, because I already never watch it. I'd never heard of it until this news story. I rarely watch TV. Only occasionally watching the Discovery, History, or Animal channel, in addition to Fox News of course. Entertainment TV is not very entertaining to me. I'd rather watch something that I can learn from, instead of something I can go numb watching. In the mean time, I'd suggest you take that overly developed sense of Cynicism, and reign it in with a dose of common sense. Apply Occam's razor to the problem, and you'll find your nutjob conspiracy theories fall by the wayside rather quickly. 

For the rest of you Truthers, move out of your Parent's basement, get a job, get a life. 

Mount Redoubt

Reports are now coming in that Mount Redoubt, the Volcano in Alaska is very near to erupting. Our only hope is that it does so quickly. That may sound just awful, but there is a very good reason.

The Glacier on the north side of the Mountain is melting. Now those of us with a modicum of common sense would say that it's painfully obvious that the magma, liquid hot rock, is causing it.

However as we all know, Liberals have not one shred of common sense. At any moment, Al Gore desperate for something to point at to shore up the dwindling numbers of those who believe in Man Made Global Warming is liable to show up and swear that he predicted that Global Warming would cause this Glacier to melt.

We all know poor Al Gore is close to the breaking point. How much more setback can he be expected to endure?


-- Post From My iPhone