Commentary From The Precipice

2007-01-06T09:23:00.000-08:00

Peace through Submission

“A U.S. Border Patrol entry Identification Team site was overrun Wednesday night along Arizona's border with Mexico.”

“According to the Border Patrol, an unknown number of gunmen attacked the site in the state's West Desert Region around 11 p.m. The site is manned by National Guardsmen. Those guardsmen were forced to retreat.”

Here’s the article

Isn’t that great? The prosecution of our border patrol agents for enforcing our laws is finally having an effect. Our country has finally established zero tolerance for those who would try and keep people from invading our country.

Lets think about this in combination with the other messages we send.

Illegals will now get SS for the time they worked illegally under any new amnesty, which they are now virtually certain to get.

Here's the article.

We have established that we are unwilling to fight a war if our casualties go over 3,000 over three years (that’s 3 per day).

We have established that being a citizen of the United States is meaningless. Anyone who walks over our border has the same rights and privileges as a citizen, with none of the responsibilities. To be a citizen is to be a second-class citizen.

We have established, with the flying Imams, that there are many in our country that believe if you act like a terrorist, chant like a terrorist and curse America like a terrorist, you should still be allowed to board a plane.

It would be hard for the outside observer to conclude we have any interest at all in defending our country. We have established our policy as “Peace through weakness, Tolerance through defeat”.
So…. What now?

2007-01-05T17:08:00.000-08:00

Those Damn Polls

Huh – Now that’s really weird. According to a Rasmussen poll 43% of Americans have a favorable opinion of the new speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi. I found this kind of astonishing since I think most would agree the country is pretty evenly split Democrats and Republicans. Given that she has gotten press only slightly more favorable than I would expect the messiah would get on the second coming I would really expect close to 60% popularity for her.

But wait, look again, the same poll says she has a 39% unfavorable opinion among likely voters. That’s astonishingly high considering she has been in office a matter of hours. So what gives?

Well, frankly I think it’s a combination of two things: hard core right and left antagonism. Pelosi is a pretty far left gal and I think the far left that supported her is a little cranky they aren’t hearing that congress is cutting off funding for Iraq starting next week. The right is equally cranky because it is just a little hard to swallow all this “most ethical congress in the world” crap from her when we have guys like William “cold cash bill” Jefferson getting standing O’s from the congressional black caucus. Its pretty hard to claim you are running an ethical ship when you have guys openly taking $100k bribes as members of your party.

Oh well, lets look for more mirthful ninnydom in the Senate as well. With Bob Byrd as president pro tempore things should be fun. Nothing like having an ex KKK grand kleagle and Exalted Cyclops running things to get the yuks going. Ill start things off: Did you know a Kleagle was sort of like the head recruiter for the KKK? No? Well, how’s this for synchronicity, Kleagle sounds a heck of a lot like Kegal, which is the name of a vaginal exercise. EEEerie aint it?

One thing’s for sure, I have a feeling that Grand Cyclopes merit badge is pretty darn cool….. wonder if he’s got it framed somewhere…. Hey, maybe its on Ebay?

Oh man it’s going to be a fun two years. Pelosi’s shrill shreak “We want the troops out now, it’s a quagmire but we don’t have the guts to stand behind our words and cut off funding” Byrd in the background muttering “Yeah Nancy! Ya’ll give em hell, this is a frustrating arrogance of tarnation presidential abuse….. where’s mah damn sheet”

2006-12-22T14:38:00.000-08:00

Charges Dropped, Charges Brought

Well, at least that’s what I wish the headline read in the Duke rape case. It is outrageous that this woman can change her story yet again and still remain unscathed and anonymous. Now she isn’t sure a rape even really happened.

Why in the world are accusers of rape allowed to remain anonymous and those accused have their names plastered across the papers? Where do these men seek compensation for their lives being turned into a living hell and the financial burden this caused their families?

Will the woman who accused them in this scam undergo any sort of punishment? Shouldn’t there be some sort of penalty for accusing someone of rape, while hiding in the shadows, ruining lives with impunity while the story changes so many times it is now impossible to believe? What about the press? Shouldn’t they have some restraint in publishing the accused name while allowing the accuser to fire away at will with complete anonymity?

My choice would be what I understand they have in England. No publishing of either the victim or the accused names until a guilty verdict is rendered. With a law such as this not only would people have less incentive to falsely bring a rape allegation, but politically motivated prosecutors would be restrained.

Duke should reinstate these students immediately. As far as I am concerned the remainder of the tuition due for their education should be gratis as punishment for their precipitous suspension.
As for DA Mike Nifongs decision to pursue kidnapping and sex charges, nothing needs to be said. The man is a politically motivated flatworm and that is apparent to all at this point.

2006-12-22T08:32:00.000-08:00

The Jean and Kofi show:

It’s been a couple of weeks since Jean Kirkpatrick, former US ambassador to the UN died. She was perhaps the last of the true feminists and a woman I really admired. During her tenure at the UN, and in subsequent appearances and lectures I cant really ever think of her saying anything stunningly brilliant, or drenched in genius. No, what set her apart was the clarity with which she spoke. She had a way of riveting you to your seat because you knew she was going to say what everyone knew, but no one seemed to utter. She was “Miss No Bullshit, no I don’t want to feel your pain, no I don’t want to empathize with you”. Her coining of the phrase “blame America first” is especially apt today.

During the 1980’s the press had a cow over Regan’s statement about the Russians: “trust but verify”. When Kirkpatrick was asked about this her response perfect. She said we didn’t trust them because the Soviet government was evil and therefore would probably lie. We knew they were evil because they had a tendency to shoot people who tried to leave. I remember the open mouthed amazement anytime she would say something like this. I mean everyone knew it, but for some reason it was considered bad to say it. It might be true that no one person was responsible for the end of the Cold War. That attitude, that the Soviet government was evil and should be called such, was probably more responsible than anything else. Kirkpatrick had a major hand in fostering that way of thinking.

That said – let’s move on to Kofi and his gang at the UN, where Jean used to work. It looks as though we are pretty much done brushing the UN Oil for Food Scandal, largest financial scandal in world history, under the rug. But wait! There’s more! Now it turns out Kofi and his family have been getting subsidized housing intended for the working poor.

Is there no end? I think to truly understand the UN, you really have to live in New York for a while. Why anyone has any sort of investment in this group of thugs is beyond me. All it takes is a few one-hour walks around town in the East 50’s. All the diplomatic plate cars illegally parked make you aware of the idiocy. Only a fool would expect a body composed mostly of representatives from dictatorships to behave differently.

Kofi is merely a typical example of the corrupt UN. His presence or departure will mean nothing.

Kirkpatrick was an exceptional representative. Her departing is a loss for us all.

2006-12-06T07:56:00.000-08:00

The Land of Discrimination

Well, with “The Flying Imams” settlement check probably already in the mail we now have another horrible, incredible, I cant believe it would happen in this country, they are firing up the gas chambers right now incident.

Apparently a Muslim woman in Dearborn Michigan had her prayers interrupted at a local gym (click for scintillating story). When she went to the gym manager she was told, “You have to respect her (the patron) but she doesn’t have to respect your God” The complainant now feels humiliated and ashamed.

I can think of no valid reason why Muslims in this country should have to endure anything like what members of other religions have to put up with. Court ordered removal of every remotely tangential reference to Christianity of course breeds infinite respect for religion in the population at large.

Is it not outrageous that the American population doesn’t seem to comprehend that disrespect and removal of every aspect of one religion does not mean it is permissible to disrespect other religions?

How could decades of religious excision bring about such low regard for other religions? Astounding!

Message to Homeland Security – Set the guilt threat level to red.

2006-12-02T10:45:00.000-08:00

Did you hear the one about the six Imams who walk into a plane?

So much for the “poor me” routine from that road show rapidly becoming known as “The Traveling Imams”. These are the six clowns who got thrown off a US air jet a couple of weeks ago for suspicious activity.

Now everyone has been yammering about racism, and how horrible this is, and how intolerant we are as a country. What a load. From what we know, and by all reports Ive read, these guys did everything they could to try and look as suspicious as possible.

Now, I do not know if the police report of the incident is genuine, but it sure as hell looks real to me. Apparently these idiots were praying not once, but twice before boarding the plane as loudly and as conspicuously as possible. They also were together as a group before boarding, and split up as far as possible to unassigned seats upon boarding. They were also seen talking loudly about Saddam and US. When the boarding was called, they chanted Allah, Allah, Allah. In addition, the men had one bag between the six of them and half of them had one-way tickets. None were overweight, yet they asked for seat belt extensions.

Ok, got the picture? This is as textbook an example of shouting “fire” in a crowded theater as one can get.

What was the motive for these men doing this? I would say it was two fold. They wanted to play the race guilt game to get us to lower our security. We will do anything to accommodate our high population of ninnies who cower at the thought of offending any sort of victims group. They also probably wanted to set up a nice little out of court settlement. See how it works? These guys get our security dropped at the same time we are either buying them a new plasma, or funding another terror operation. Neat!

2006-11-24T17:28:00.000-08:00

Doh! Its Murtha all over again

Well thank God we once again are on the path towards yet another promise of “the most ethical government ever”.

Only in the parallel universe of the Washington press corps could a party get away with this crap and still be considering the likes of Alcee Hastings to head the House Intelligence committee.

Now while it is true a jury in the trial did not convict Hastings, a panel of judges recommended the House impeach him. A year later the Senate convicted him. Mr. Hastings was removed from the bench forthwith. Three years later he was elected to the House, which probably says a little something about the jury pool in that area.

Now I think Hastings is pretty unlikely to head the Intelligence committee, but let’s face it, this is a little ridiculous. How can he even be in the running? I mean isn’t this sort of like John Murtha all over again?

Message to Nancy – This one should be pretty basic but get it straight – you can’t run on and win an election by promising ethical government and then all of a sudden realize all your top guys have bribery convictions. Got it? That only works during the election when the press will cover for you.. They can keep it up for a few months, but not two years. Got it?

Who knows what will happen, I gave up trying to figure out this stuff a long time ago. This is the party that is so great on civil rights it even has an ex Klansman in it. Honor Diversity!

To have a guy as a contender to head intelligence when he probably couldn’t pass a background check for a library card is just hilarious.

2006-11-16T20:00:00.000-08:00

You may be a lover but you aint no dancer:

Ok – This is a rant – You got it – A RANT – my normally good diction is not something we will apprehend here and I don’t care. No one reads this blog anywhey so what does it matter? Can you tell my fuck is a hippie?

Ok – Here is the deal – Im a right wing guy in what people normally assume is a left wing world – that of assumed sexual promiscuity – parties attended are people beaten – sexual passion expressed not as:”I love you” but as “I want you”. Filth, supposedly on display, never quite manifested because of internal conflict. I feel your pain.

All right here we go, ready?

I was reading a blog. Oh heavens forbid a right wing blog, in some respects my blog mentor Danielisright.blogspot.com
.

He, and everyone commenting was on about something with trans gendered people using the women’s room and that leading to rape. I was slack jawed for a few moments. Then it hit me, you just don’t get it do you?
Now I am not talking about sex change here. I don’t really care about it. If you don’t get it too bad.

Here is the lowdown – everyone is tranz, if you are a real man you are tranz.

What the hell are you talking about Rupert, you are seriously messed up, I mean what in the world are you saying? Let me explain:

As a man, would you agree that being a proficient lover is important to you? I mean, if you are rich or really tough, that establishes masculinity but if you cant satisfy…. No more masculinity right?

What to do?

Did it ever occur to you to put yourself in the woman’s place? Im not talking about being aware of the vessel you are using. Oh such coarse terms but we all understand don’t we? I am talking about BEING HER while you are inside of her? If you were it would occur to you that your filthy desires are mirrored in an equally reprobate but distinctly different biological fashion. It is different, they are “the other”, but if you can become them, then you will be them and understand and thus fulfill. To what end this fulfillment is useful, god knows. But all men and no few women kill themselves in the endevour.

Got it? If you are male and cant merge into female then you will not know what she is feeling. See the tranz thing percolating here?

Oh sure, you can ask her of her desires, but when expressing concerns of the bedroom do you really believe you are getting an honest answer? Don’t be a fool. She will never tell you, no matter how much you love her or she you. She cant say and you cant hear, you have to see it. Can you say “RED”? Of course not, it is beyond description. No one understands “RED” who has not seen it. It is the same with “the other” you have to be it.

Step back – you may not be able to understand the whole Tranz thing – but surely you can understand the advantage of seeing things from the view of “the other” In sexual matters one would think this is obvious, if you cant get it you are either obtuse or a total fool. Don’t worry though because we are all fools in this, life’s primary impetus. The funny thing is we laugh at the salmon.

Rant Ends

EOF

Break Break

******************************************************************************

2006-11-08T08:50:00.000-08:00

Uggg

Ok, so far it looks like I was wrong on my prediction, at least with the house. I cannot believe we are going to have to be hearing from the likes of Pelosi for at least two years. Anyway, I am looking at it this way: look at what it took for the Dems to win. They had to gin up the Foley idiocy, they had to have the press so in the tank for them it was a little ridiculous and they had to have a vastly disproportionate number of contested Republican seats as compared to contested Democratic seats. I mean the Dems did win the house, got to give them that, but I just don’t see it as quite the full validation of their views as they might. The proof will be in the pudding though at this point. If the Democrats really beleave that their taking control of the house is an endorsement of their position on Iraq, then lets see them withdraw funding for the war immediately. They have been talking the talk long enough, and now they have the power to walk the walk. I doubt very much that will happen, I think frankly they don’t give a rip about the war and will simply use it as a way to beat up on Bush for two years in an attempt to get Hillary in in 2008.

Anyway, that’s my take on the whole thing. Call me a Kool Aid drinker if you will. Frankly right about now Id gladly have a glass.

2006-11-02T21:16:00.000-08:00

Deciphering Kerry

So what does the whole Kerry thing mean? Why is it so significant? Well, for one thing I don’t think anyone in the country believes he screwed up a joke. Why does it even matter though? It matters because for a lot of people it was a little sobering. It put things in perspective precisely because it was not at all out of character for John Kerry in particular and the Democrats in general. Remember, this is the guy who in testimony before a senate panel was willing to lie about his fellow soldiers, accuse them of torture, just to further his own political ends.

In his totally ham handed “I will not apologize” excuse, I think a lot of Americans really were slapped a little more back into sobriety. Lets face it, when Democrats are running for office, they have a long history of saying they love those who serve in uniform. Once in office it’s a different matter. This is the bunch that goes crazy over nonsense like Tail Hook. This is the party that cut defense budgets to the “non operational” level under Carter. Likewise they love the police when on the campaign trail, but the second it’s over its sit down time with the ACLU.
I think the American people saw that two-faced nature in Kerry’s remarks. He called everyone in the military uneducated and stupid, they know it and he knows it. What made for a double whammy was the usual media water carrying for the Democrats. Three weeks of Foley and this bunch buries the Kerry story in the newspapers. On TV they gave explanations for what Kerry supposedly was really trying to say. The kind of bias that we have seen in this election resonates with people. It was especially on display with the coverage of the Kerry insult. I don’t think either will help the Democrats for this little event woke up a few more people to reality. Like it or not we are in Iraq, do you really want guys like Kerry in charge?

2006-11-01T02:30:00.000-08:00

A Joke?

I guess everyone has heard the latest Kerry flap. I cant say it was a gaff because his words seemed very measured and paced, not a stumble.
But nothing beats the explanation. He botched a joke about George Bush? I mean, no way can what he said be taken as a botched Bush joke. He was clearly saying only stupid kids go into the military, the rest going on to college. What a total and complete moron. I mean does this guy know any military people? He went to Vietnam, yes, but that was really more of an 8-month photo op where he scammed some medals. Kerry has simply got to be the most politically tone deaf man in the world. Thanks John, from the right side of the aisle. I think you single handedly focused people a little more on issues rather than the Foley emails.

2006-10-25T01:24:00.000-07:00

Endorse Saxton?

Ok – Well I have waited a few days for The Oregonian to retract their endorsement of Saxton. Wow, I guess they really mean it. I think this means we don’t have to worry about global warming anymore now that hell has just frozen over.

2006-10-24T09:41:00.000-07:00

Lieberman at 17

Lets just get it straight for the record: I am going out on a limb now and saying I don’t think the Democrats will take control of congress in the upcoming elections. Why? Read on.

The last I heard, Joe Lieberman is up by 17 in Connecticut. This is really pretty astonishing. I seem to remember quite a bit of hubbub when his party leadership turned their back on him, supporting Lamont in the primary. When Lamont won that primary, there were endless sound bites about this really sending a message about the mood on the Iraq war.

Well what now? Obviously the only message that can be drawn here is that the Democratic leadership was way out of touch with their plan to “off” Lieberman.

What does this mean in the larger sense? Frankly I have said it all along. I don’t think there is any parallel whatsoever between now and 1994. The year the Republicans won control of the house and Senate for the first time in 40 years. I don’t think the Democrats will seize control of both houses. What were some of the differences between then and now?

1) One big issue had aroused a lot of Democrats and Republicans alike. That issue was the “Assault Weapons” ban. It passed by two votes in the house and only with major back room arm breaking. Bill Clinton himself has said that issue cost the Democrats congress.
2) The Republicans then had a far better wedge issue then than the Democrats do now. That issue was National Health care. The closest thing the Democrats have now is the Iraq war. With health care the Republicans could quite clearly take a stand, and they did, they clearly said they would vote against it if it ever came up. For all their posturing there isn’t that tone at all from the Democrats on the war. Precious few of them are willing to say they would cut off funding tomorrow. When a bill came up for that recently in the Senate I think it got one vote. However dissatisfied the American people are with the war, the Democrats don’t seem very willing to act on what they say. The so called “cut and run” strategy.
3) All the major News outlets are pretty much in consensus. The Democrats will seize control of the House and Senate come November. Nancy Pelosi is already considering her Presidential run. This is the exact opposite of 1994. Back then the only person I know of who called it right was Bob Novack on “The Capitol Gang”. Why does this mean anything? Well, the out of power party typically does well in mid terms because generally it is thought the base really shows up. I don’t think this is the case here. The base showed up for the Republicans because of ire at National Health care and the Assault Weapons ban.
So that’s my analysis. While I do think there is malaise about the Iraq war, I don’t think that translates into “the Democrats have a solution”. I don’t think the Democrats even believe it. If they did they would be running on the issues rather than Mark Foley, they wouldn’t need him. My guess is the Republicans will hold on to their majorities in both houses by a slim margin.

2006-10-13T22:49:00.000-07:00

Food Stamps in Four Hours

From the LA Times:

KMEX helps an effort to get Latino immigrants to apply for food stamps. An O.C. group takes it a step further and offers a class on how to do it.

This one just says it all. I couldn’t find a better primer on what’s wrong with our country. Some quotes:

“Advocates say immigrants, if here illegally, are also worried about being deported if they apply for food stamps.”

Well, right there you know they are talking about people who havnt been in this country too long. They still think logically, like “Gee, if I am here illegally, breaking the law, maybe it wouldn’t be too smart to try and get free stuff from all those chumps who are working”. Sadly, they will soon learn the idiocy of the American system and the abuse of the taxpayer, and profit from it!

“Other immigrants say they were simply embarrassed."The Mexican man is macho. He doesn't want to come to this country and beg," said Alfonso Chavez, the Community Action Partnership's outreach coordinator.”

God forbid we should maintain common decency, like its sort of crappy to come to a country and then go on the dole. “Hey, here I am, now I can rest and all you fools paying taxes, go out and work a little harder”

“In 2004, Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service and the Mexican Embassy agreed to jointly disseminate brochures and create the public service announcements.”

Thank you Ag department. We are so glad you are working to serve foreign nationals. Hey, if you get a chance, could you possibly spare some time to serve those who are actually paying for all this crap? I mean seriously, if you are giving away taxpayer money, is it really necessary to go and inform people “hey! Come over here to get the free crap all those idiots who pay taxes are giving you”.

2006-10-13T21:14:00.000-07:00

Its not hypocrisy

Can anyone imagine the furor that would be unleashed if a Republican group went around outing Democrats who were gay? Ones first impression might be there is nothing more definitive of hypocrisy than this, the lefts most recent action. However one would be wrong to think such a thing.

A look at past events:

Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas – Hill follows Thomas, her boss, from job to job and then low and behold, as soon as he is up for a Supreme Court position out come the horrible tales of sexual harassment, a hitherto unknown term. “Why he joked about a pubic hair on a Coke can, and recounted plots of porn movies……in the office!!!!!” Oh my God, how horrible we were all told. Joking about pubic hair? Porn movies? This will not do said groups like NOW, Emily’s list etc. “Women never lie about this sort of thing” we were all told.

William French Kennedy Smith and Uncle Ted Kennedy – A few years later, accused of rape by a woman after a night carousing at a bar. “Yes, this is a tragic event for the Kennedy’s. Rather than focus on this one event, “we should remember what the Kennedy’s have done to advance women’s rights,” said the same crowd. Obviously accusations of rape pale by comparison to accusations of follicle contamination of a carbonated beverage by the NOW crowds yardstick.

Of course then there was Bill Clinton. Numerous rape and harassment accusations were levied against him. None of these were any less credible than Anita Hill’s horrible and tragic tales. Again, the groups for women’s rights stood on principle and shut up. No protests, no marching with the accusers up the Capitol Hill steps. The women were all lying we were told.

And of course there was former Democratic congressman Gerry Studds – Actually had sex with a minor while in office. Was proud of it. Held up as a pioneer of gay rights until his retirement several terms later.

Yet in the end it really is not hypocrisy, for you see none of these groups care one whit about the constituencies they purport to represent, or abbreviate in their acronym. In fact they are quite true to their cause. For none have principle, charter or creed though they would like you to think they are stalwarts of such things. No, in the end what they are is quite clear. They are simply stooges, henchmen of standard partisan politics and nothing more. They dress themselves up in vestments of righteousness yet they care about nothing other than acquiring power. To win ultimate power they will sink to absolute depths. The only mystery here is how anyone can support this sort of thing and look at themselves in the mirror.

2006-10-03T17:50:00.000-07:00

Check the Hang Time

So now we have the latest in ludicrousness – calls for the Speaker of the House to resign over the Foley dirty email silliness. This gets into one of the things that really peeves me about media bias. I do believe the media does tend to report on virtually everything at one time or another, where the bias comes in is the hang time they give it.

Lets look at the record: Democratic Representative Gary Condit, accused of murdering Chandra Levi. If anyone had called for the house democratic leader to resign the press would have paid it no mind. Senate Majority Leader, Republican Trent Lott makes some silly comment at Strom Thurmands (former Dixiecrat who did at one point support segregation) retirement and he gets drummed out of his leadership position. Why? Because the press gave so much hang time to those calling for his ouster. Literally weeks after Lott is removed from the leadership Democratic Senator Chris Dodd speaking at an honorarium for Senator Robert Byrd (Democrat and former Klansman) says he believed in everything Byrd ever did and would have followed any lead he ever took. The press buries it on page nine and never reports on it again.

So now we have Nancy Pelosi (House Minority Democratic Leader) calling for Speaker of the House Hastert to resign. The press dutifully reports these serious and grave concerns. A more ridiculous proposition could not be found, and if Hastert were a Democrat it would be treated with that level of seriousness. To the press, Nancy Pelosi is the picture of reasoned and serious debate. It will be treated as a page one issue, worthy of consideration, and hopefully given enough hang time to have effect.

Bottom line – Foley wrote some dirty emails to a minor. That’s bad, his resignation is appropriate. Foley is clearly wrong and possibly evil, but in the end he did act with more honor than Condit, or Dodd or Democratic Rep. Gary Studds ( who actually had sex with a minor congressional pagee and refused to resign) ever did. He resigned immediatly

Just because his email writing was foul, that does not mean Nancy Pelosi should now be thought of as a serious individual. The press should give appropriate hang time to her concerns. It is unlikely that they will.

2006-09-08T08:55:00.000-07:00

The Mini Series From Hell

It has always been a little undeniable to me that the major networks do have a leftward tilt. That said, I would agree that every now and then they do seem to throw the right a bone. It appears that has happened with the up coming mini series “The Path to 9/11”.

The reaction to this has been pretty incredible. The Democrats are practically foaming at the mouth. The thing that is so amazing to me is how they have any basis for argument on this point. It is simply not arguable that the path to 9/11 was paved by us not responding to terrorist attacks. When Jimmy Carter hand wrote a letter to Ayatollah Khomeni pleading for the hostages realease, that started the modern era. We were perceived as weak. “America can do nothing” said Khomeni, and he was right.

It is also unarguable that our fate was sealed during the Clinton administration. Attacks accelerated and were responded to with a limper wrist than ever before. Indeed, our response was NOT to pursue aggressively, but to roll over and offer our throat, much as a dog does to submit to the dominant dog in the pack. This was the famous Jamie Gorelick memo*, and that sealed our fate. Not only would we not respond to terrorism, but also we would further our efforts to make it as difficult as possible to pursue them. It was the Clinton administration that used the law enforcement approach rather than the military one. It was the Clinton administration that then made legal pursuit almost impossible with the Gorelick memo. Most of this can be understood fairly easily. Few Americans would argue that the Clinton approach was at all effective in either catching terrorists or in dissuading them from their actions. Some would argue that the weakness of that approach encouraged more terrorism. With proactive steps such as the Gorelick memo, or the failure to take up offers from other countries to turn over bin Ladin the Clinton administration surely deserves some blame. They were concerned more with not rocking the boat and upsetting the economy. That shortsighted action compromised this nations security. That is something the American people do understand, as such it is an inseparable part of the Clinton administrations legacy.

* The Gorelick memo was revealed by then attorney general John Ashcroft during the 9/11. Jamie Gorelick, a member of the justice department during the Clinton administration, wrote it. Briefly, it is what established and codified they wall between various law enforcement agencies, preventing them from sharing information with each other. Nowhere was it shown definitively that this policy directly prevented us from thwarting the 9/11 attacks. However it is key to understanding the administrations mentality and law enforcement approach with regards to terrorism.

2006-07-24T18:09:00.000-07:00

What is it with Nobel Peace Prize Winners?

Anyone ever wonder if maybe the accolade one receives for winning the Peace Prize is a little much? I mean let’s face it, an awful lot of the people who win it seem to go off the deep end; rapidly becoming both more ridiculous and sanctimonious than Jerry Falwell.

Take the recent case of Betty Williams. She got the prize 30 years ago for organizing people to demand an end to the violence in Northern Ireland. Seems like a pretty nice goal.

Now lets take a look at her most recent statement at something called The Earth Dialogues Forum held in Australia.

All quotes are from The Australian web site:
“"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent," said Ms Williams, 64.
"Right now, I would love to kill George Bush." Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered. “
Great, another idiot who thinks if George Bush weren’t around then everything would be so perfect. How do these people let one person have so much control over their lives?
"We went to a hospital where there were 200 children; they were beautiful, all of them, but they had cancers that the doctors couldn't even recognize. From the first Gulf War, the mothers' wombs were infected.”
Wow! I had no idea one got cancer from an infection. Imagine the power of diagnosis here, not only can the exact cause of the cancer be found, but the exact moment: the first Gulf War. This is especially astounding given that Saddam used poison gas all over the place and was at that time developing chemical and biological weapons. Yet this woman can pinpoint the exact 110 hours (the length of the first Gulf War) during which the mother “caught cancer”. What does George Bush Two have to do with this? Who knows but lets kill him anyway I guess.
“ Wrapping up the three-day forum yesterday, delegates agreed to a 26-point action plan.
"There can be no sustainable peace while the majority of the world's population lives in poverty," they said. “
Yeah ok, I guess maybe that’s true, who knows. We seem to be pretty rich yet get blamed for starting all the wars. Anyway, so what? Nobody lives poverty. Hey, lets have a Global War on Poverty, kinda like LBJ announced 30 years ago. Oops, that’s right, that didn’t work out so well. Oh well, lets just issue a statement that we are against world poverty, that always helps a lot.
"There can be no sustainable peace if we fail to rise to the global challenge presented by climate change.
I don’t know, is this really true? Why? Are people going to get really hot and just start wars out of aggravation? Sort of like crazy road rage shootings that always seem to happen when cars stack up on the freeway in 100-degree heat? Hmmm, maybe they have something here.
"There can be no sustainable peace while military spending takes precedence over human development."
Ok – This one is flat out nuts. In the US we spend way more on human development than we do on military stuff. I mean add it up, Health and Human Services, Social Security, its way more. Try adding in what we spend on schools at the local and federal level and its like a zillion times what we spend on defense. Yet we are constantly blamed as being the most war like. Round numbers time – total Federal tax revenues are about two trillion dollars annually. Defense spending is about half a trillion annually. So even if we discount totally all non-federal spending on human social crap we are still at four to one. You want to try adding in what we all spend on schools and human services at the state and local level? Fuggetabout it. How can we then be blamed as being so warlike, which we always are, when we spend pretty much exactly as these people seem to want?
I don’t know, maybe I am jumping to conclusions. These people after all might in fact consider us the most peaceful nation in the world. We have been keeping the idiots in Europe from trying to kill each other for a good long time.
I wonder, since Betty Williams the Nobel Laureate is 64, that puts her birth date at 1942. I wonder how she would have felt if we had adopted the Neville Chamberlain/Joe Kennedy policy of non-violence toward Hitler? It sure would have been a lot easier than saving her country by entering the war in that year.
Source – The Australian - http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19902313-29677,00.html

2006-07-15T06:43:00.000-07:00

A Little Less Restraint Please

Let’s take a little step back and look at what’s been going on in Israel the past few years.

1) Israel agrees to the Oslo accords – Arafat gets something like 95% of the land area he wanted. What happens? The Palestinians go nuts and terrorism increases.
2) We in America then go nuts and Clinton sends over James Carville to get Netanyahu, of Likud, thrown out and Ehud Barak, a moderate, elected. The Likud party wasn’t restrained enough for us I guess.
3) More terrorism.
4) Ariel Sharon gets elected; this guy is the father of the settlement program on the West Bank and Gaza. Guess the Israelis got tired of the restraint thing.
5) Sharon feels a need to exercise some restraint so he goes and forcibly evicts his own people from Gaza at gunpoint. Dismantling the settlements he established. You want to talk about restraint?
6) The Palestinians are so happy. The land they have wanted ceded back to them for years is now theirs. They start setting up rockets on the border, just to celebrate.
7) The Palestinians show us a different kind of restraint by electing Hamas, a terror organization, to be their leaders.
8) This new kind of restraint works so well (face it, terrorism got them Gaza) then lets have more of it! So, now we have these jerks taking Israeli soldiers hostage in Gaza and Lebanon

Ok – so can we be done with all these idiots urging restraint and proportional response? That means you “every major European country” and also you, the utterly useless UN, and you, Condoleza Rice.
Restraint has never gotten anyone anywhere when someone has been dead set on their destruction. Can the actions outlined above be interpreted any other way? At this point I would think the only restraint to be urged should be for the rest of the world to stop urging restraint. I would simply say Israel has clearly had an act of war perpetrated upon it and its time to let them fight that war and win. Enough already with the restraint.

2006-07-03T18:33:00.000-07:00

Arrogance and Jimmy Carter – Truth Oracle

Recently I have been watching the flurry of news about the New York Times and several other papers revealing the tracking of banking information. I found the arrogance of the news papers absolutely astonishing. The Times admitted that not only could they find no evidence of abuse of the program, but also that it had actually been effective. Well, that’s just great. So what was the point in revealing it? Well, because there were “what if” concerns. In other words, this could be abused, so lets reveal it.

Well, that’s real genius reasoning as far as I am concerned and whenever the subject of genius comes up I tend to look to Jimmy Carter. Back in the Carter years we were constantly told of how he had the highest IQ of any president. If you are ever wondering what the correct moral or practical path is, for any given situation, ask yourself: What Would Jimmy Do? After making that determination, do exactly the opposite. You can then bask in the calm cool glow of knowing with virtual certainty you have done the right moral or practical thing.

As an example, lets just look at today’s column in the Washington Post by Mr. Carter. In it he bemoans that the US today has created 81% more secrets in 2005 than in 2000, citing as his source the “watchdog group” Openthegovernment.org. Obviously Mr. Carter tends to be the last to know about these things but I can only imagine how interesting it would be to inform him that we are currently engaged in a war, when we weren’t in 2000. Naturally one would expect more intelligence gathering during a war so hence more things classified as secrets.

He then goes on to cite how the great nations of South Africa and Jamaica are opening up their records to identify orphans, and bad land use planning. Gee, that’s really great. I suppose if one day the world starts depending upon Jamaica to be the policeman, instead of us, all that will have some meaning. Until then, so what?

Mr. Carter seems to pretty much want a world where nothing is hidden and everything is out in the open. That’s really a neat idea and it seems to be one the Times would endorse. Lets just get it out in the open and have no covert anything.

So, if you are wondering what to think of the Times revelations, or even what to think about Jimmy Carter, then consider this: there is a reason neither of the two are very good at helping the US win wars. Their unique abilities seem to lie in defeat. Jimmy Carter has relentlessly brought defeat through his arrogance. From North Korea, all the way back to Desert One. The Times is about to be a key player in whatever defeat we may suffer in our current engagement.

2006-06-18T02:11:00.000-07:00

The Eternal Plame; finally dimming.

So Karl Rove isn’t going to be indicted over the stupid Valerie Plame name leaking issue. The left is all in a tizzy because somehow they insist that this is a big deal and somehow put in danger the life of every CIA agent in the world.

Well – I've got some news for them. First of all, this was just about the biggest to do over nothing anyone could imagine. Want some bigger news? If you think more than 10% of the public even knows who Karl Rove is your crazy. Want to know the biggest news of all? If you think that anyone is going to believe for a minute that the left was interested in this case because Plame being outed as CIA supposedly put agents lives in jeopardy, your nuts! It was partisan idiocy from day one and anyone could see it, that is anyone who even knew who any of these people are. Those who did know the characters, knew that Plame, recommended her husband Joe Wilson to write a report on the so-called Niger Yellow cake connection. Plame had to know that her husband was totally unqualified for this job and brought a hardly impartial view to the issue. By his own admission Wilson is an avid liberal who wants Bush destroyed. By his own admission he did little but sit in the hotel lobby, drink tea and interview people. When that got to tough he simply made stuff up, as was shown later in his inconsistent (and that’s being charitable) congressional testimony.
So hopefully this idiocy is ending. Valerie Plames brief moment of fame will have ended and she will be remembered for her final actions and judgment. I doubt history will be kind if it remembers her at all. Her judgment was appalling. She sent someone to write a nonsense report in order that she could affect foreign policy. If anyone put lives at risk it was her, through that action. Thank god whatever bit of time all of us are forced to spend with her is coming to an end.

2006-06-03T08:56:00.000-07:00

That Stupid Constitution

“All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” Article 1 Section 7, US Constitution.

What is the significance of this little quote? Well, it pretty much kills the Senate Immigration bill. That bill makes illegal immigrants pay three of their past five years back taxes, obviously a revenue raising measure. As an aside, I sure would like a sweet heart deal like that. What are the odds a US citizen could get away with just paying three of five years back taxes?

The Democrats response?

Well, Harry Reid thinks its simply a technical issue and can be ignored.
"If Republicans are serious about enacting comprehensive immigration reform, I've got a deal for them. All they have to do is nothing. Just let the House and Senate bills go to conference and let the conferees work their will."
Jim Manly, spokesman for Harry Reid

Wow – That’s quite a statement, ok, let’s just go ahead and ignore that silly little origination clause.

Well, who knows what will pop up next on this one. When it comes to Mexico and the left, I never look for consistency. Remember NAFTA a few years back? The left was against it. If you supported NAFTA you were against the American working man. Now? Well, I guess the working man has been thrown in the garbage and if you are against amnesty you are a racist.

Source - http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060602-121142-2773r.htm

2006-06-02T06:39:00.000-07:00

Ted Wants a Time Out

"Oregon should call a 'timeout' for three biennium’s to restore a budget severely hurt by recession."

Apparently, under Oregon’s kicker law, taxpayers are going to get back $175 for every $1000 in personal income taxes. In other words, that’s how much the state has overcharged taxpayers. Ted wants to just go ahead and keep it.

Geee, what a great idea! This is sort of the converse of if I had underpaid my taxes and wanted to keep the difference. I love it. Here’s an idea. How about I under pay my taxes by $175 per $1000 and just call a time out for six years. You know, just keep that difference every six years and build up a rainy day fund for myself.

Hey Ted you nitwit. Everyone gets hit by a recession. Not just the state and not just your stupid programs. Everyone would like a “time out” from paying bills. Most of us learn by our second or third trip to the lemonade stand that you don’t get a “time out” from paying for things.

2006-05-31T12:53:00.000-07:00

Going out on a limb

So it’s been a few days since the Senate Amnesty bill passed. All the Republicans are pretty depressed because they feel they got sold out. Sometimes though I think its good to stand back and realize that the vast majority of Americans do not follow news as closely as those of us in the blogosphere probably do. They don’t get hung up in the minutiae. Rather, what prevails is not the specifics but the overall buzz about a particular piece of legislation. A recent example of this would be the Dubae ports deal.

With that in mind, what is the overall buzz of the Senate passed legislation? To my mind, all anyone knows about it is it grants amnesty to illegals, and we have to consult with Mexico before we build a fence. That’s it. Do you think members of the house are getting a lot of phone calls supporting that? I sure don’t.

Lets look at the voting in the Senate. Who voted against the senate bill? Republicans and Democrats who are facing elections in November where there is some contest. Who voted for the bill? Republicans and Democrats who are either not up for election or who are in non-contested races. You think they don’t know where the American people stand? They sure as hell do and they are hoping you will either forget in four or six years, or reward them for a no vote in November. They voted accordingly and it is quite telling.

On this issue there is about as close to a national consensus as there can be on anything. Poll after poll says the same thing – No amnesty and increased border enforcement with a fence, more troops or whatever it takes. Who do they American people see as in support of this bill? They see huge groups of protestors, some carrying incredibly offensive signs reminiscent of a Klan rally. They perceive the protestors as all illegals and their government doing nothing to arrest them. Trust me, no American ponders the macro economic implications of such an arrest. All they think about is they have to obey the law, why don’t the illegals?

So, unlike others who are against an open borders anything goes policy, I am of good cheer. While I don’t support the Senate legislation, I am actually happy that what they passed was so extreme I don’t think anything can possibly be worked out in conference. At the end of the day I have a hard time seeing how this legislation passes the house at all.

2006-05-16T12:55:00.000-07:00

The Day After

No, Im not talking about the presidents sell out speech. I’m talking about the day after the expiration of the deadline to enroll in the new Medicare Prescription Drug Plan. At last, an end to those stupid cutesy commercials featuring grannies trading help for signing up for the program with each other over apple pie recipes.

Lets do the math:

Population of the United States: around 300 million

Cost of Granny’s new Medicare benefit: around $600 billion over 10 years.

Dividing out we get $2000 cost to every man woman and child over a ten year period.

So that’s what it is costing you. Every year everyone will pony up $200 so granny can get a discount on her pills.

Now of course the calculation isn’t really that simple but it does give one a scale of what’s involved. Not everyone pays taxes so the average bill per taxpayer will be quite a bit higher. And, as we all know, most of this cost will be put off through deficit spending. That means future generations, or our kids, will pay for it.

So what’s so bad about all this? Well, my problem with it is quite simple: its immoral. I think it is fundamentally wrong to tax those who have the least to bestow benefits on those who have the most. The over 65 year old age bracket is by far the wealthiest of any age group. Why the hell should those in less wealthy age groups pay to provide benefits for them? Why is Medicare not means tested? Why should someone who is working at a job with no health insurance, paying for it on their own, have to provide health benefits for some rich duffer playing golf? Don’t believe me on who’s got the money? Here are the links:

Who’s got the money, from page 20, courtesy of the Federal Reserve. Click Here.

By the way, look at the scale on the left. That’s a logarithmic scale, not a linear one. See how someone who is 40 has a net worth of around $50k but someone who is 60 has a net worth of $250k? The graph is striking as it is, without the logarithmic scale the disparity would be far more apparent.

How much Granny’s pills are going to cost you. Courtesy of the CBO. Click Here

“CBO currently estimates that net Medicare spending for the Part D program will total $593 billion over the 2004-2013 period.”

2006-05-16T08:36:00.000-07:00

Ok Ive Had It

From the presidents May 15, 2006 speech:

“There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation. That middle ground recognizes that there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record.”

Mr President, what the hell does this mean?
Look, lets face it, breaking the law by entering the country illegally isnt the biggest deal in the world. It simply isn’t on par with murder, rape and pillaging. But that doesn’t change the fact that there are lots of laws and regulations that Americans have to deal with every day: “Oooooo, look at this, you were off on your taxes by $40 last quarter, you owe us $40 + $70 penalty.” “Oh and look at this, you built a little deck without a permit, rip it out”. The fact is people are sick and tired of having the government nit pick every aspect of their business and property owning lives. They are tired of being the ones who contribute the most, get thanked the least, and only get more demands placed upon them by the law breakers and leaches of society. I think at this point I have pretty much had it with Bush. Presidents have to make a lot of tough decisions; this was not one of them. Amnesty has been tried in the past and it didn’t work. Deporting 12 million illegal aliens is impossible? Bullshit. By this logic any law with 12 million violators is unenforceable. If the president believes this then lets start dismantling the IRS immediately. The law is on the books, it’s a popular law. Enforce the law.

2006-05-14T19:22:00.000-07:00

Howard Dean? On The 700 Club?

Did I just wake up in a parallel universe? Last time I checked all the polls said Bush was in the tank and the Democrats were going to take the congress. If that’s true, what the hell is Howard Dean doing on the 700 Club? Isn’t showing even a picture of Pat Roberston to a democrat pretty much like spraying Linda Blair with holy water? I mean, if you’re sitting pretty, you don’t offend your base by appearing with Pat Robertson to try and sway a few Evangelicals.
Here’s the kicker though. Dean insisted on the program that his stance and that of his party is marriage is solely between a man and a woman. Hoooo boy, can you imagine the fireworks back home over that one? There’s really not a lot I can add to this one. I mean its so nutty it really speaks for itself. To read about it, click here.

2006-05-09T08:36:00.000-07:00

The perfect crime?

Ever really wonder about Ebay? They like to maintain an image as this crazy worldwide garage sale type of operation, people buying and selling stuff and generally having a great old time. Ever wonder about Pay Pal, Ebay’s credit card facilitator? Pay pal is the virtually exclusive form of payment on Ebay and they like to maintain an image as the company that allows every small seller to accept credit cards. They are nothing of the kind and I would advise everyone to be very leery of their business practices. I say this as someone who owns a mail order business that accepts credit cards. I know how an honest business operates; Pay Pal is not one of them.

So what is the perfect crime? Here is the set up:

A seller runs an auction on Ebay. The auction closes and the buyer pays the seller using Pay Pal. The buyer then waits and waits, the item is never going to arrive. After a few weeks the buyer files a dispute with Pay Pal saying they never received the item. Pay Pal then contacts the seller. The seller at this point ships either an empty box or a Dixie cup, whatever, thereby obtaining a UPS tracking number. The seller provides this to Pay Pal. Pay Pal then closes the case as the seller has provided proof that they have shipped the item.

Clinching the fraud:

After all this, Pay Pal contacts the buyer, closing the case and saying the only alternative the buyer has is to file a police report. Is this too good to be true? You bet it is, if you are the seller. You have totally dodged the normal credit card protections offered to every consumer. You now have Pay Pal acting as your shill. Now I was the buyer in the circumstance listed above and I contacted my credit card company. Thank god they were able to cancel the transaction. But what if I had allowed Pay Pal to withdraw money directly from my account? Pay Pal encourages you to register your bank account with them to become a “confirmed member”. The bottom line? Be very aware that when doing business with Pay Pal you are offered virtually none of the protections you would get if you used a credit card anywhere else. Pay Pal offers protection to the seller only, not the buyer. Lastly, never, ever register your bank account with Pay Pal, or use it to pay for a transaction.

2006-05-04T06:50:00.000-07:00

Moussaoui Wins

“America, you lost. I won.” Those were the words said by Zacarias Moussaoui after a jury rejected the government’s argument for the death penalty.

A terrorist never spoke truer words. When a man can stand up in court and openly admit that he was part of the greatest attack on American soil and a jury cannot sentence him to death we have reached the end. When a man can stand up in court and gleefully say he enjoys the suffering of the victim’s families and we think he still hasn’t done enough to deserve the death penalty, that says something. He did win. Whatever celebration Moussaoui is having, either in his jail cell, or in his mind, I hope he enjoys it. It is richly deserved and he has truly earned every right to celebrate. He made no apologies for his crimes or his hatred for Americans and their country. We thought that was ok and that he shouldn’t be sentenced to the ultimate penalty.

The same goes on in Iraq. The war isn’t over in an MTV minute. Pacification is taking years rather than weeks and the group of Americans who see some morality in defeat is rapidly expanding. Similarly, those who see no problem at all in the Middle East sinking into fascism are starting to become the majority.

So Moussaoui won, I raise my glass to him: “well done sir”.

Who knows for whom the death penalty should be reserved? Given our current performance I suppose it will be for all of us, for we have started down the road towards hanging ourselves.

2006-04-28T07:19:00.000-07:00

A Barrier? Are you kidding me?

This has got to be one of my favourite quotes of all time:

“This provision is misguided and will serve as a barrier to health care for otherwise eligible United States citizens,” said Gov. Chris Gregoire in the April 16th New York Times

What is the barrier of which the governor speaks? Why the new requirement that those seeking Medicaid benefits produce some sort of documentation to show proof of citizenship. The usual, and obviously logically contradictory statements that the new provision will result in little savings but possibly millions thrown out of the program have also been heard from those who support this kind of thinking.

Maybe its time I go and sit down with some of these people and explain things to them. A barrier? Excuse me but when has having to produce a birth certificate or a passport been considered an barrier? And when was the last time government was ever concerned about barriers? That’s what government does; it’s pretty much its sole purpose. Lets try some of this “Ooooo its too hard for me” barrier thinking in some common every day situations:

1) Gee, you know, having to get this building permit is a real barrier to me renovating my home.
2) You know, having to produce a document, called a check, every quarter and having to file long a tedious quarterly tax forms is a real barrier to me feeding and housing myself.
3) You know its sort of a barrier to my business to have to comply with all sorts of regulations and state and federal filings. Is there a way I could just not do that?
4) Wow, its kind of a barrier to have to produce a document called a drivers license so I can drive and go to work. Could we get rid of that?

Ok – Get the picture? All of us have barriers put in our life by government. The difference is, for most of us we surmount these barriers and get nothing. Taxes, permits all sorts of crap. Medicaid recipients, on the other hand, surmount this barrier and get to steal from all the rest of society in the form of health benefits we pay for, and they don’t. So here’s the bottom line.

If you are real old and somehow don’t have a birth certificate because of your birth circumstances, get one. If you have reached 80 and never had to produce it, consider yourself blessed that it’s taken this long, get one. Frame it and hang it on the wall. Consider it your membership card to the real world.
Yep, it really sucks. But hey, look at the bright side; you could be like the rest of us who struggle every day to get our paper work right with the government. The difference is, we get to pay and you reap the rewards. So there you go Sunshine, take some solace in that.

2006-04-12T00:23:00.000-07:00

Who are you?

So who are you people, you farmers, who feel you are entitled to hire illegal aliens? Who are you that can brazenly say your business is so special that the laws regarding hiring and wages should be suspended for you? Who are you that feel you are so essential that laws shouldn’t be enforced, exceptions made just for you? Who are you that insists that the rest of society be burdened with the huge costs of illegal aliens so you can hire cheaply. Who are you with all the subsidies that pay you not to grow, with all the tax deferments and exemptions that no other business has in any way remotely close to yours, who are you that you still want more, workers than you can take advantage of because they have broken the law so you can pay them less. Who are you and how dare you.

2006-04-03T22:38:00.000-07:00

Cynthia McKinney … God bless her.

I think that no matter what happens, Cynthia McKinney will always be my favourite congressperson. She never fails to entertain, always taking the low road and generally being an example for us all. No matter how stupid any one of us may feel at any given time, we can always look to Cynthia for inspiration. No matter how racist anyone of us may be, there is always the possibility that we could get elected to congress. After all, if Cynthia could, why cant anyone? Who else could run through a Capitol Police checkpoint, slug the guy and then claim it was all racism the next day? Who else could loose a congressional race, blame it all on “the Jews” and still have a viable political future. Who else would illegally pay Isaac Hayes (formerly the godfather of soul, writer of the Shaft theme and now the currently retired voice of “chef” on Southpark) with taxpayer funds to come dedicate a new office in Atlanta? No matter what you may think of her, the woman is as entertaining as hell and probably one of the few that I actually feel earns her pay for the joy and laughter she provides us all.

2006-03-21T06:54:00.000-08:00

What if they gave a protest and no one came?

Been following the world wide huge Global anti Iraq war protests? Well, if you missed that then maybe you noticed MSM, ever hopeful that they can create another Vietnam, fretting over the low turnout. “How can this be? We know the entire country has turned against Bush. His popularity is lower than Nixon’s was during the height of Watergate.” Well, maybe the media will have to learn to live with what should have been apparent to everyone: doing skewed polls as propaganda to sway public opinion is one thing, but if you start believing them yourself I think that qualifies as some sort of mental pathology.

In my own little corner of the world I live quite close to one of the standard hive minded hate zones of the left – Eugene Oregon. I drove by one of the protests yesterday and it would be hard to find a group less inclined towards cogent discussion yet constantly seeking to be taken seriously. Sometimes when I see these people I just want to stop my car, get out, and just walk up to one of them and hug them. “You are really trying so hard aren’t you? Please, you are embarrassing yourself and you don’t know it. Can I take at least one of you on a field trip to a kindergarten class?”

I really honestly feel this way. I feel that these people are so hate filled and frustrated simply because they do not have the verbal and logic skills to persuade people of their position. They get angrier and angrier because their reasoning skills and logic mean they will never be taken seriously. This inability to communicate leads to frustration and then hate. They need to step outside their hive mind peer group and see how others see them, that’s why my field trip to the kindergarten class.

What would be learned? Well first of all I think these people would observe that simply calling someone dumb or stupid doesn’t really advance your position. I saw plenty of variations of the “Bush is stupid” placards at the protests around the world. How stuck in the hive mind does one have to be to think this is effective? Do these Al Gore voters (remember him? He’s the guy who hired Naomi Wolf to help him learn to be more of an alpha male when he was VP) really think this is reasonable? The “I don’t like them, their dumb” argument is often used in kindergarten class, with the result of being sent to the corner by the teacher. It is equally effective in persuading the rest of us.

Second – learn that you can’t be running around playing and having fun, but then when the teacher walks in claim you were doing your studying (yes, I went to a tough Kindergarten). Likewise, you cant be having a protest, claiming you are fed up with the war, indignant about it, and are taking a principled stand, and then have everyone show up in wacky sunglasses and whooping it up and generally having a party. Try and at least look serious and understand that a lot of people are inclined to be against you because they have to go to work while you seem to have time on your hands for this sort of thing. Whooping it up and looking more like a party than a serious activity never convinced anyone. If your outraged, then show outrage, but do so with more reason and less dope smoking. Maybe watch the “I have a dream” speech. That was an effective protest. Did those people look like they were partying? Do you see how they were taken seriously?
Anyway, I really do hope that somewhere in the bee hive colony that constitutes this group there is a little drone working away busily on some educational materials for the rest of the hive minded. I don’t care if they agree or disagree with me; I just wish that somehow they could learn the reasoning skills that would lead them to be less frustrated and thus less angry and hateful. Hate is not dissent. Ok print the bumper sticker, slap it on, Im done.

2005-12-19T23:20:00.000-08:00

Rama is the Reason for the Season

Hey guess what? Jesus and his mom in all likelihood weren’t Hindu! Surprised? Well, guess how surprised a lot of Hindu’s were to find that the Royal Post had issued a stamp with what appears to be a Hindu Mary and Joseph. In Mary's arms appears to be a little tyke that I guess would be Jesus. Now the weird thing is that this stamp is actually a representation of an historical painting from around 1620. Now, who the hell knows what was going through some guys head in 1620. I don’t know, maybe he had a bunch of extra paint around and had to use it up? Maybe he finished the painting and someone came in and goofed on him? Maybe he was trying to multi culture it up because he had a show in Eugene, Oregon? One thing is for sure though; this is one funny ass stamp. What in the world were they thinking? Please another heapin helpin of multi-culturalism to assuage my Christmas guilt.

read more here

2005-12-17T09:06:00.000-08:00

A Classy Action Suit

Well lookie lookie, who is about to get their head handed to them? Why its the California legislature. This is one of the few times I really do love lawyers. It seems some are bringing a class action suite against California for providing “in state” tuition to illegal aliens but charging ”out of state” tuition to people who lived, well, out of state. Read it here.

Have you ever wondered about the logic of giving tuition breaks to people who break the law, illegal aliens, and then complaining that your government doesn’t have enough money because of what? Too many illegal aliens. Can you imagine the kind of brain it takes to think it’s a good idea to give in state tuition to illegal but deny it to out of state citizens? I don’t know about the rest of you but I find this attitude absolutely repellent.

Now I know that most out there, myself included, generally do not expect the University of California University system to be a source of much common sense. But check this out. Apparently they knew that this policy was in violation of federal law and refused to implement it unless the legislature specifically legislated that they would not be on the hook for future lawsuits. The legislature then gave them this immunity. What a bunch of nitwits. Stay on top of this one because, hopefully, it will turn out right a break the back of these idiots. Burn Hollywood Burn!

2005-12-08T06:51:00.000-08:00

Judgment at Gilligans Island

Is anyone out there following the Saddam trial? You would think after years of being on Bush the originals case for not getting Saddam and then being on Bush the sequels case for pursuing him, there would be interest in the trial. There isn’t though and for some reason its been tweaking me. Sure MSM has lead with it for the last few days, but it’s always in this sort of sideshow carnival like atmosphere. “Saddam started a rant in court today”, “Saddam insist he will not be tried in a court with no authority”, yadda yadda, yadda. Any coverage seems to linger on these aspects for 90% of the duration with short shrift later being given to some sort of testimony regarding torture. “I watched as he put my son through a meat grinder” is heard in a heavy accent, through an interpreter, without any commentary.

Does it occur to anyone in the press that Saddam is on trial for crimes against humanity? The torture stuff is sort of relevant here. Shouldn’t the torture bits be highlighted a little rather than trying to make Saddam out as some sort of hapless buffoon? Has there ever been a despot hauled in front of a war crimes court that DIDN’T say they felt the court was invalid? Look, this man is not some sort of transplanted Alan Hale skipper from Gilligans Island. This man is a killer of the worst order. I am beginning to resent this attitude that we went to war only to remove a silly fool.

2005-12-05T22:45:00.000-08:00

The Nobel Peace Prize - How Great an Honour

Ahh, the brilliance of the Nobel Peace prize committee. Who else but a nobel laureate could conjure up the reasoning that yes, it looks like Iran is a few months away from an atomic bomb, but negotiation is the way to solve this, not attack by Israel. In case you missed it none other than Muhammad ElBaradei spoke those words, you remember him right? That's it, you got it, him and all his buddies at the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) won the prize for all their great work in stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. Well, negotiations sure worked well in North Korea.

So what’s the right course of action? Well, I guess we can only assume that the Iranians are doing all that uranium enrichments because they are interested in alternative fuels. I mean oil is running out. Oh yeah, that’s right, I forgot, THEY MAKE 4 MILLION BARRELS OF OIL A DAY. That’s right. I looked it up. Do you know how many gallons in a barrel? It’s a lot. 4 million barrels of oil is like a gazillion gallons of gas. Every day. You know that hydrogen car fuel cell thing? Where your car is going to run on water? That’s more expensive for them. Water is more than oil over there. That’s how oil much they make. So how incredibly stupid do you have to be to think that they are enriching uranium other than to make a nuclear bomb? Well I guess Nobel Laureate stupid. Nobel prize winning Jimmy Carter stupid. That’s how stupid you have to be.

Gosh Opie, I wonder what they are going to do with the bomb? Well, lets think on that one a while. I mean there sure are a lot of real nice appetizer things at these UN cogitation sessions, so no need to come to a hasty conclusion. Ummmm, hey, I got it.. They probably don’t have cable TV in Iran and Ill bet its real boring so maybe they are going to use it for a real neat Fourth of July fireworks display? I mean that’s a few months away; maybe they will have it ready by then? Oh wait; they don’t have that holiday over there, they do Passover or something else instead I think. Hmmmm, Well, they did just elect a president who said that his number one goal was to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Maybe nuclear weapons would be good for that? Gee, I don’t know, ya think?

Boy, well that sure sounds real bad. I think Muhammad ElBaradei is right. The Israelis should just go talk to the Iranians and make nice nice. Then the Iranians will see that everything is just all sweet and peachy and that “Kill The Jews” was just something that looked good on a bumper sticker. Then I guess the Iranians will all of a sudden just flush all that investment in underground nuclear facilities down the toilet. Yep, just get rid of all of it and turn it into parking garages and strip malls because Muhammad ElBaradei went over there and talked to them. Everything will be all gumdrop land.

The thing is, that only makes sense if you are an absolute moron or a Nobel laureate. Please excuse the redundancy. After something like two years of negotiations, the Europeans got nowhere with Iran. Iran told them to go fuck themselves and unless you’re a Nobel laureate you probably already know why: because they want to destroy Israel and kill Jews. They said that’s what they want to do. They are enriching uranium and giving everyone a big "up yours!". Add it up; I know most of you out there can do it in your head. For you stupid idiotic inane dumb ass stupidest stupid head Nobel laureates, here is a calculator.

2005-11-23T17:12:00.000-08:00

Perpetual Motion

Over the last few days I’ve been thinking a little about perpetual motion. Not in the regular mechanical sense, but in the endless loop sense. As an example: making toast.

Toast is never a task I have handled well. If I put the toast in the toaster, I have two choices. Walk away, trusting that the toaster will pop the toast up at the proper time, or stay and watch and pop it up manually, because I don’t trust the toaster. If I walk away and the toast doesn’t pop up at the right time, I feel like and idiot for being suckered again by the evil toaster. The house also fills with smoke and for the next couple of days everyone who comes over asks about the smell. “Burn some toast?” Yeah, right, thanks a lot. If I take the other course, stay and watch, I feel equally stupid. Is this all my time is good for, watching toast? Why do I even have a toaster if I cant trust it? I try staring into it to make sure the toast doesn’t burn. After a few moments though, the orange light seems to be burning my retina. If I look away I see spots. So then I have to stand there and look occasionally at the toaster, playing coy with it. Im not really noticing you, you’re not going to burn my toast, I am master of my bread crisping domain and no toaster is going to enslave me. Ill show it who’s boss. Boy do I feel like an idiot standing there trying to ignore my toaster because of my insecurities about it. Anyway, it goes round and round like this. Should I stay and watch and feel stupid or walk away and get suckered, again feeling stupid. Perpetual motion. Recursive idiocy. In general I try and not make toast.

Lots of similar situations come up like this in life. My current favorite these days is watching someone argue for affirmative action but insist that it is not racist in nature, or argue for an event that allows only female participation but insist it is not sexist. There is something about watching someone try and say it is ok for them to discriminate, but not for others, because others are racist or sexist and they are not and that no, two wrongs don’t make a right, but yes, its ok to do it because they aren’t racist or sexist even though they like to participate in racist or sexist events. I have no idea why but watching the verbal tongue twisting trying to justify it is always fascinating to me, just as I am sure watching me make toast might be fascinating to them.

Recently Hawaii has been in the news with regard to this. There are all sorts of separatist actions going on over there, from high schools to bills in congress that would essentially let native Hawaiians secede in situ .

Having just spent some time in Hawaii, I got to sit in on a particularly good example of this perpetual motion sort of thing. Two liberals and a conservative were in a discussion regarding Hawaii’s Kamehameha Schools. These were established as part of a trust created by Princess Bernice Pauahi in her will. The schools are funded through this trust and apparently receive no federal funds. There is a common conception out there that the will only set up the schools so as to only allow full blooded Hawaiians to attend. This is actually not the case, but more on this later. All of this is now subject to a lawsuit. The liberals in this discussion were arguing that the schools should be allowed to keep the policy of admitting only Hawaiians. Obviously the admission policy is racist by definition but it was ok with them to have racist policies so long as those policy benefit a group who is perceived to have suffered in the past. I was fascinated watching the evasiveness at even use of the word racist. Clearly the policy is, and if one really had belief that it was logically or morally supportable then I don’t really see why one would object to the term. The twisting and turning trying to defend why it is ok for them to be racist but not others is what fascinates me. Eventually I couldn’t take it any more and pointed out to them that it really was irrelevant whether the school took public money or not (there seemed to be the perception that if one did not accept taxpayer funds, any policy was permissible). The fact is that by any reasonable definition the schools are a public accommodation. As such, the admissions policy would probably not hold up since the race of the students could hardly be argued as essential to the schools function. This is why groups like the Eagles Lodge have recently had to begin admission of women. It is why most private men’s clubs were shut down in New York City in the 70’s. It is why the Boy Scouts are under pressure to admit gay scout leaders. The fact is, rightly or wrongly, you cant set that kind of thing up in today’s day and age. This got some acknowledgment from the parties involved, but still somehow they maintained that the admission policy should stand and wasn’t racist. Perpetual motion. I didn’t have the heart to point out to them that the will that established the schools in fact did not say only full-blooded Hawaiians should be admitted. Here is where you can read the will, check article 13. The fact is this policy is a creation of the administrators of the school, by perverting a clause in a will. Is this yet another case of best intentions gone awry? Is it racism? The reader can decide, but given the incessant use of the best intentions excuse, combined with the overblown and often hate filled rhetoric of those to be excused, it wears a little thin at least to these ears. To be sure, if this harms one, it is no laughing matter, however, it is hard to deny the allure watching or starting the endless recursion of the faulty logic loop of the racists, who aren’t racists, except when its ok to be racists, then its not really racist. You get the point.

I do think that whatever the intentions of various policies like these, they tend to do little but lead to increasing balkanization of the country. Can anyone say that trying to acknowledge and accentuate every single cultural difference between groups unifies the country more than the melting pot approach of years past? Can any group with some egregious wrong in their past, recent or otherwise, be entitled to act in a racist manner because of this wrong? If so, then sign me up. I want my blanket excuse from ever being accused of racism. Not only that, I want anything I do that has even the slightest tinge of racism to be lauded as a noble effort, an attempt at righting past wrongs, done with the best of intentions, gimme gimme gimme. My grievance? Im of Scotch/Irish ancestry, just as wronged as everyone else yet without the advocacy. Reparations? How about paying me a percentage of all the sales of kilts every nitwit is wearing these days. Yeah, rock and roll might have started with blues, and Elvis might have ripped off singing black, but those plaid couches? Those are mine baby and I want my cut.

Want to try it on your own? Here are some self evident bones to throw out, believe it or not some find these statements very controversial. They will start a recursion 90% of the time.

“I think Condoleza Rice is an amazing individual”

“Im not sure George Bush is a racist, he seems to have had a lot of black people in his administration in way less token positions than Clinton”

“If minorities cant be racist because they do not have the power to inflict it on others, then doesn’t it follow that the Congressional Black Caucus could be more racist than the KKK because they clearly have more power?"

“Hey, why do people of Spanish ancestry get any breaks, weren’t they kind of the largest slave holders of anyone? And weren’t they the ones who kind of screwed up a whole bunch of crap down south with that Cortez guy?”

“Ok blacks get screwed, its way harder to make it if your black, the whole slavery thing was real bad. Ill bet its even bad even if you just came here from Africa. Yep, way harder if your black. That’s a given. So, if I just came over from Sudan, where the whole slavery thing is still going on, it would be harder for me, being black. But should I still get a break?”

“If Im from Hawaii, I got a shady deal on the whole state hood thing. Should I get a break because I was wronged or should I not get a break because learning 26 letters is way easier than all those damn Japanese characters, which Id probably be using if those guys with the letters hadn’t been there in the 1940's?”

“Im Scotch/Irish, how come no one aint giving me nothing? I mean we got starved out of our land, then came here and got starved as indentured servants. No shortage of us living in virtual slavery way back when. Even when we weren’t starving, we were eating potatoes. It’s a damn root for God sakes, and those were the good times. Where’s my special parking space at the mall?”

2005-10-11T08:10:00.000-07:00

Coitus On Sale! 20% OFF

It’s beginning to seem like I timed my FBI porn blog pretty well. Just the next day the Oregon Supreme Court hands down its ruling on the live sex shows issue. I had been planning to hold off on it but when O’Reilly devoted a whole show to it yesterday, I knew I had to jump in. I liked that O’Reilly seemed upset with the ruling, but did have in Judge Napolitano, his sometimes stand in, who agreed with the ruling. Napolitano did make one major error however. His position was that you could not outright ban this sort of thing, but that zoning as to place and access at the local level could restrict it. With regard to Oregon, this is not true, local zoning of this sort of thing is not permitted as I understand it and a ballot measure to allow such restrictions was recently defeated.

Here’s the part of this entire thing that cranks me: the inability of those who dislike such things to pin down a reason for disallowing them. I think there is a little bit of a misunderstanding; you can’t ban a business because you find it annoying. There are plenty of businesses that I find far more annoying than sex clubs. I would hate to have a muffler shop open next-door, too noisy. A tattoo parlor would be bad, it would probably lower my property value every bit as much as a strip club. How about a retirement community? I sure wouldn’t like that. With its ugly track housing with no hope of the owners doing improvements, depressed property values are assured.

What about some other arguments? Moral decay? Hard to take this one seriously when every kid seems to be playing video games featuring mass murder and torture. It encourages lack of respect for women? Seems good on its face but isn’t it disrespectful to say that women are too stupid to make there own decisions about being strippers? Are we going to start banning clothing as well? I’ve seen plenty of it ( t shirts that say “daddy’s girl” clearly intended for the 13 and 14 year old set) doesn’t that encourage disrespect for women? Do these clubs create a dangerous and crime ridden environment around them? Actually the local newspapers around here did check on that and found that it was quite the contrary, regular bars had far greater instances of police calls than strip clubs. “Well I just don’t want my kids seeing that”. Good, throw a blindfold on them. Take a detour. What the hell is there to see anyway? Usually these clubs have featureless fronts with a line drawing sign that’s pretty much the same as the chrome nude women on trucker mud flaps. Besides, I don’t want my kids seeing a slaughterhouse, drunks emerging from a bar, or poor people lined up at the plasma clinic because donating blood is how they make money for drugs. That doesn’t mean I get to ban slaughterhouses, bars, or blood clinics. It might mean I can zone them in a reasonable manner, but that’s all. The problem is that zoning laws have been abused so much in the past with respect to adult businesses. Reasonable adult business zoning, to me, sounds about as sure a promise as “reasonable” gun laws. Sorry if I don’t trust you.

When I was a kid I lived in Manhattan. Working class Italians and artists populated Greenwich Village at that time. I lived in a brownstone that opened onto a common courtyard where I would run around and play with the other kids. Mostly I would spend time thinking about Donna Spadanicci because she went to Catholic school, had that hot uniform and was a few years older than me. Eventually the owner sold the courtyard and an Armenian restaurant opened. Lust for Donna and childhood frolicking was rapidly replaced by odd kitchen smells and the occasional rat infestation. It totally depressed me but in the end that’s life. You have to put up with other people, even if they are doing something obnoxious but legal. If you don’t like it, the first move should not be to make it illegal. You might find very quickly that things you like are obnoxious and quickly ruled illegal as well.

2005-10-08T07:56:00.000-07:00

Braveheart Again?

Remember the movie Braveheart? Although historical, it really is a conservative parable for our times. I think conservatives often see themselves as fighting for a righteous cause, against huge odds, getting so close and then having victory snatched away at the last moment by deceit, treachery or just plane bad judgment.

Ive finally realized that’s how I feel about the Miers pick. It is the Braveheart scenario, and we have been down this road before. Conservatives will never forgive Bush 1 for the Souter nomination. A chance to gain a majority was totally squandered because the president frankly didn’t give a damn. Now, 15 years later, conservative s are worried that we are in a replay of that moment. Victory lost through folly in a moment when the left would have surely charged forward.

Is that sense of betrayal by Bush 1, and the sensitivity to the Braveheart syndrome over blown? I don’t think so. Conservatives feel that they must constantly fight for their beliefs in a way I don’t think even they, or certainly liberals really appreciate. There is not a single situation, political discussion, current event or issue where the default conservative position is not one of badness, with the liberal default being one of goodness. On race, the environment, the economy, the conservative is used to having to first establish his bona fides, that he really doesn’t have nefarious ends, that yes, he cares about black people or whatever. It is almost pro forma that the conservative must first establish reasonableness and logic before others will listen. Liberals don’t have this burden. On any issue it is to be presumed that they are good hearted, that of course they care about the environment more, of course they care about black people, don’t be silly. They are not in the same kind of constant battle. That’s why I think what we are feeling now is unique to the right. We have fought, victory is close and now…. What?

This is why I find myself so frustrated with Bushs pick. Why am I in this battle? Why do I try and fight for my issues? Why go through the battle of establishing the logic of my position, try an advance my cause in whatever small way I can? Why do this when I have a day job and the man who has this as his profession cannot nominate from a position of strength?

Clearly I hope that Miers turns out to be a good pick. One difference between her and Souter is that she is known personally to Bush where as Souter was not. Regardless, even if she is a good pick and will advance the cause of freedom, I don’t think it does anything but embolden the enemy. When Clinton nominated Ruth Ginsburg, an ACLU lawyer, the republicans rolled over and didn’t challenge her nomination. The president should get his pick provided she is qualified, they said, and they were right. It gained the republicans nothing, no credibility for being fair, no treatment in return from the left. It was weakness and they only attacked more. That was then, this is now. Things are different. The New York Times has a credibility rating close to that of The National Enquirer. The press has nowhere near the power to throw chaff for the left that it once did. It would be nice if the man on deck could see what is apparent to those of us looking out our oar holes.

2005-09-28T12:01:00.000-07:00

Its a Black Thing

Ok so now that the Katrina thing is winding down, at least as a political football, lets add up the scorecard:

1) Somewhere around 850 dead the last time I checked. That’s about the same number that died (750) in the Chicago heat wave during the Clinton presidency. All Clinton would have had to do was deliver bottled water. All Bush would have had to do was violate the law (posse comitatus) and federalize the National Guard so that they could somehow stop a hurricane I guess with a really, really big umbrella.
2) Self described “black leaders” rushed in, not to give any sort of aid, but to racialize the situation. In the midst of a tragedy, their effort was not to help people but to pit them against each other. I am quite sure most people’s reaction to their charge of racism in the prevention/relief effort was one of puzzlement. Somehow buffoons like Charlie Rangle, Al Sharpton and Randall Robinson still get airtime though. The latter even went so far as to say that blacks had sunk into cannibalism after four days. Somehow this was all whiteys fault, in particular George Bush’s.
3) Mayor Nagin of New Orleans did nothing. School buses were not sent out to get people as called for in the emergency plan that was already in place. His excuse? Its hard to get people to drive the buses when a hurricane is coming. Hey mayor, here’s a tip, the next time this happens call the same people who were driving those buses on election night. Ok, incompetent black mayor = racist white president. Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
4) Governor Blanco needed a day to “think about it” when Bush asked her to please federalize the National Guard. Obviously pure racism. Clearly Bush was using his super extreme Haliburton ESP powers to psych out the governor and confuse her so she would make incompetent decisions so Bush could kill black people. That’s why he appoints competent black people to very high positions like secretary of state or national security advisor, because he hates them so much. That’s the difference between Bush and Clinton. Clinton did the right thing, never appointed blacks to high positions and spent less on the New Orleans levees than Bush. That’s why Clinton is the first black president and Bush is a racist. If this makes sense to you then you have mastered what Orwell referred to as doublethink, rationalizing two totally contradictory thoughts in your head, you would also probably qualify as a Democratic Party leader.
5) The news media made up events wholesale. Every major media outlet reported on the shootings in the Super Dome, the rape of babies etc. Turns out it was all made up. Some have charged racism here. That we would not have been so quick to believe those stories had it been white people. There might be some truth to that but the real point is: THE MEDIA MADE UP NEWS. That’s the story. Eye on the ball time here. After Rathergate and all the other crap it really is getting to the point where MSM really should have zero credibility. At this point should the New York Times or ABC news reporting something really have any more value than “it must be true, the guy at the corner store said it”? Why this convoluted effort to twist the medias motivations into some sort of national racism issue, when it is patently obvious that the news was hyped to both sell papers and to make Bush look bad. Did we see bodies being pulled from buildings during the Chicago heat wave? Of course not, Clinton was president.
6) Global warming caused the hurricane. Bush is particularly responsible because he did not sign the Kyoto protocol according to one of the Kennedy idiots. Deep breath time, there really are people out there who are so self centered that they actually believe this. In their minds, history begins with them. The world has never seen it unless they have. Of course they have no concept that disastrous hurricanes have been fairly regular periodic events throughout history.

So lets analyze all this from the lefts point of view and assess the score. Bush engineered the hurricane to kill black people through global warming. The incompetent leadership at the local level bears no responsibility for the response. The media made up a bunch of stories to destroy Bush and gets off with no recriminations. Black leaders through their hat in to stir up as much hatred as possible, anything to score political points. Bush is the bad guy?

2005-09-21T08:00:00.000-07:00

What’s it all about? Al-bie?

This might be a hard one for some to read. I know its not exactly a popular topic. What’s really been irking me lately though is the latest off course veering of the Bush administration. Namely, going hog wild over porn, or so it seems.

In the interest of full disclosure I should probably mention that am I involved in the adult industry. I sell adult products, not videos, oriented towards the SM market, through my web site. As the principle photographer, in the eyes of some I might be a pornographer. I am also probably the biggest Bush supporter out there.

Attorney General Albert Gonzales seems to be trying to put together an enforcement unit within the FBI to prosecute pornography distributors. Not child porn or anything like that, but simply regular old porn, specifically porn with Sado-masochistic themes. Now obviously I have a vested interest in this matter but to me this waste of resources is astounding.

With a backdrop of no end in site to the war on terror, a war me must win, can we afford this use of FBI agents time? Somehow we have no resources to pursue something the country is virtually united on as a major problem: illegal immigration. No will to follow up on things like the Able Danger revelations, or put any serious dent in drug trafficking. However we do have resources to put together a squad to make sure no one sees an image of large breasted women wearing handcuffs or cracking whips. It is one of the Attorney Generals “top priorities” quotes the Washington Post. We somehow have money to prosecute obscenity, something that for most people is hard to even define let alone say exactly when it becomes criminal.

Now I know some of you might not like porn. I know how annoying it is to get constant Spam about Debbie’s teen fantasies and the like. I get them to and they are certainly annoying. However I do feel that the excuse of “Im worried about my children, I don’t want them seeing that crap on the Internet and whoa is me they know so much more about computers than I do” is wearing a little thin. Frankly I think if you provide your child with a computer it is up to you to supervise your child. If you cant figure out how to check the “no adult content” box in your Norton Internet security, then don’t let them have a computer. If you are not up to the task of figuring out this stuff then you have no business getting your kids a computer. If they need it for school and you cant take five minutes, or half a day, to understand how to turn on the parental lock, then that is a case of laziness and nothing more.
I know more than a few people wished that pornography were banished from the planet. That it didn’t exist. That it’s a vice or degrading or whatever. That’s fine. However you don’t have a right to not be offended. I can promise you, I am every bit as offended by people who come to my door or accost me on the street and insist that I am somehow morally deficient because I do not subscribe to whatever religious sect strikes their fancy. That doesn’t mean that I try and ban religion. It doesn’t mean that I am allowed to run around saying anyone who is involved with religion is trying pervert my kids. It means it is another obnoxious aspect of life and I have to deal with it. It’s the same thing with porn. There is a reason why virtually every hotel out there now features it on pay per view: a sizable proportion of adults like it from time to time. There is also a reason why you teach your kids that they are not allowed to call down to the front desk and order a movie or two. Most people accept that responsibility and don’t freak out that there is a TV in the room capable of showing naked people doing it. Same thing with your computer. Figure out the child lock and use it. It’s your responsibility. It is not societies responsibility to move everything down to the level of a child.

2005-09-03T10:52:00.000-07:00

New Orleans - The Scum also Rises

Once again I am amazed at how low some people will go. I think I am at the point where, for me, the term civil rights leader is starting to mean a self-indulgent charlatan who somehow has obtained a pass from the media to say the most outrageous, disgusting and reprehensible things.

I am speaking, of course, of something that I am quite sure had never even entered the thoughts of the vast majority of Americans out there: the idea that somehow New Orleans got short changed on assistance with the hurricane because the majority of its citizens are black. When I first heard this theory myself I was flabbergasted. It had never dawned on me that anyone could possibly make this into a racial issue. I forget, however, that I don’t think like those people, the professionally indignant class, and the race baiters. I don’t make a living out of spewing the vilest racist garbage and somehow building myself up in the process. The latest purveyor of this idiocy is Randall Robinson. You can read his words here on the link below they are outrageous:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randall-robinson/new-orleans_b_6643.html

There was a time in this country when use of the word “nigger” was somewhat commonplace. We are now in a time where not only is it considered virtually unmentionable, but the vast majority of people dismiss anyone who uses it out of hand. I am quite sure some of you were even surprised to see I typed it out rather than writing “the n word”. I would like to get to this point with people like Randall Robinson. There is no one in the KKK who has a regular column in a major newspaper that I am aware of. Society has said, thanks, but no thanks, we really would prefer not to hear from you. I wish we could get to the same point with people like Randall Robinson. His actions are vile. He seeks self-aggrandizement through righteous indignation. Piety. He sees racism in everything and feels superior to others because he can point it out. He doesn’t care if he has to demean his entire country in the process; all is to be sacrificed so that he can feel righteous. It is pathetic. Mr. Robinson is not a leader of any kind. He is someone who somehow has gotten through life without recognizing that righteous indignation is one of the few emotions that never lets you down. You can always call it forth. It will always make you feel better in your own mind because you are more pure, more just. Somehow, most of us recognize this trap by the time we leave our mid twenties. That tearing down other people to make one feel good is wrong. That all that moral virtue we had was an illusion; it was piety, not purity. It was arrogance mistaken as wisdom. Sadly, Mr. Randall is far beyond his twenties and still has not learned this. Maybe it is time for those of us who have to say to him and others like him “Please sir, go away. You aren’t virtuous you are inane. Find another way to feel superior, but don’t disparage me or my country to do so”.

In my fondest dream all the race baiters are self-exiled to a small island because no one will listen to their droning anymore. There they sit, cheating each other at cards and vying for whom among them is the most virtuous. Their incessant muttering, as they shuffle the deck, about who did them wrong annoying each other to the point where their faces screw up, year after year getting more distorted. Then they can sit and look at each other and see how ugly they truly are on that little island, removed from all of us.

2005-08-25T18:11:00.000-07:00

Bible Thumpers and Rush's Kitty

So this afternoon I was driving around in my car wondering how much gas would cost the next time I went to the pump and I veered once again into day dreaming about the religious left. This thought was prompted by yet another hurricane setting its sites on the Florida coast. To be specific it seemed to be headed straight toward Rush Limbaugh’s house wherein, according to Rush, he was huddling down with his kitten to ride out the storm. Apparently the kitty doesn’t travel well and Rush couldn’t bear to abandon it. This picture struck me as somewhat hilarious but also made me wonder a little. Where is the religious left? Hurricanes are hitting Florida, as they do every year, but there is none of the usual global warming cacophony. I’m resentful; usually these nitwits can be counted on, with their dire predictions etc. every year around this time. They come as regularly as, well, hurricane season. It’s the one pick me up in an otherwise dull month for me. Its hot, business is always slows this time of year, and the dogs incessant flea scratching drives me crazy. The one thing I have to look forward to is the global warming zealots and their holier than thou attitude.

Why are these people so entertaining to me? I think it’s the absolute disconnect from circumspection while at the same time insisting that they are the true people of science and reason. Generally these people tend to come from the secular progressive side of the tracks. I have met none who have ever struck me as hard-core bible thumpers but when I explain to them that in my eyes they are exactly that they become very puzzled. The bible thumper stands on a corner and says with absolute conviction in his heart that if you don’t accept Jesus, you are going to hell. What about some kid in Mongolia? Still going to hell if they never heard of Jesus? Yep, going to hell! Obviously this is ludicrous and it is nothing but self indulgent for one to think they are qualified to make such a proclamation. The bible thumper will say it is not he who is making the decision, but God, through his words in the bible. Have you ever met one of these guys? Have you ever met a single one who ever struck you as having studied ancient Greek or Aramaic? Neither have I, yet they feel it is fully within their power to interpret a translation of the bible (which is an accounting by mortal man of Gods word, its real third hand by the time you get to the Random House paper back edition most of these guys have). In fact nine times out of ten the kind of person making these pronouncements is not interested in saving anyone at all. He is interested in making himself feel good, powerful, in the know with a hot line straight to the almighty.

To me it’s the same thing with the Global warming fanatics. I’ve asked them, repeatedly, do you really honestly and truly think it is that odd that hurricanes are hitting Florida this time of year? Do you really feel it’s getting hotter every year? The scientists who predict global warming say its something like 1 degree in 100 years, you cant feel that. Are you sure that the reason for the warming is anthropogenic (man made)? Oh yes they will say, all the top scientists say that. Have you read any of the studies? No, they will say. Yet they still have the smugness and arrogance of the bible thumper. Their hotline may be to somewhere other than the Christian god but they are expert on the eschaton nonetheless.

OK – So let me get this straight. Even if one accepts that global warming is taking place, to prove it is anthropogenic is a huge leap. You want an entire reordering of society for something that may very well be a natural phenomenon. You make fun of anyone who thinks it might be a little premature to cripple our economy based on your reasoning. You call me stupid or crazy, yet you have not even read any of the studies. Now, given that the bible thumper has quite probably read some sort of translation of the bible, and you mock him, why should I not mock you? Does your bible consist of evening news sound bites and anecdotal evidence? Why should I trust you when in the 70’s the same people were crazed about global cooling? Why do so many who believe this stuff seem to live in NYC, San Francisco and LA.? Wouldn’t they be moving to higher ground if they really believed it? What foolishness. At least the millennium crazies ( remember when all the computer clocks somehow weren’t going to switch over from 1999 to 2000? Wasn’t that the last time we were all going to die?) acted on their convictions. I tangentially know a few who did build bomb shelters. I’d make fun of them to but they tend to still have the guns stock piled. Anyway, if I hear “the overwhelming scientific consensus is” one more time, when it is manifestly untrue I think I will puke. Now I’m gonna get a little kitty and see if I can go hang out with rush.

OK – You made it to the bottom of this; here is a really cool link:

2005-08-20T11:10:00.000-07:00

Up Yours

The following story to me pretty much signals the total 180-degree shift from the original purpose of government. The tone of this post lurches into the maniacal, but I think if you read the new story in the provided link you will understand why.

To sum up, a bunch of guys had a ranch on the Texas border. They have some group that is interested in stopping illegal immigration. They apprehend two illegals crossing a ranch near them. They detain them for an hour or so then send the illegals on their way with milk and cookies. The illegals then claim that one of them was pistol-whipped and they suffered emotional trauma from the ordeal. They sued, with the help of the Southern Poverty Law Center and won. The illegals now own the ranch. The jury deadlocked on the pistol whipping, all parties agreed on the milk and cookies, one of the ranch guys was convicted of being an ex convict in possession of a fire arm. The judgement, in the end giving the illegals the ranch, was to settle the civil case arising from the emotional trauma. Read the whole story here

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0819ariz-immig-abuse19.html

At this point there can be little doubt. Government, state wide and federally now exists to serve those it used to protect us from. It extorts massive sums in the form of taxes and fees from the productive and transfers them to those who prey upon them. Homeless can squat anywhere and armies of advocates line up to secure land for them while building permits for those who follow the rules are expensive if ever granted at all. You work for hours every day just to provide the basic necessities yet those who decided to party and become drug addicts are given taxi cab rides to get their methadone at tax payer expense. Prisons are built and then mothballed up in Portland, police announce they will no longer even investigate burglaries in Springfield due to lack of funds. All this while state and county agencies have limitless funds for diversity specialists and endless bike path projects. I could go on but everyone knows it all to clear by now. Who the hell is this government serving? Why do we let it go on? Have the shrill race baiters and members of the professionally indignant class become so effective that everyone is scared to speak? I’m not.

Damn you for taking food from my children’s mouths to give to a drug addict for cab fare. If you cant afford cab far for treatment then you should die.

Screw you and your damn bike path. Police, fire, schools. That’s the priority. Get it? You want these damn things? Pay for it, the income tax form states the minimum amount to pay, you can always send in more and the government will accept it. Just don’t rope me in with you “Id be willing to pay more taxes if it meant better social services BS”. Go ahead, pay more.

Up yours with this concept that anyone who strolls over the border, squats and has a baby just gave birth to a US citizen. The 14th amendment was about slaves, making sure they had rights as citizens, not so that anyone who aims carefully and shoots a baby out and lands it six inches over the border had an “in” to the United States. This interpretation, like other Supreme Court decisions, can be overturned.

I’m so damn sorry you were one of those fooling around in high school and didn’t learn anything. Gee, I guess now you want a “do over” and go back for endless retraining at my expense. So I get it, I just worked real hard. I didn’t go to all the parties. I paid off loans for years for college. I risked everything to start two businesses. And now its up to me to feel real guilty because you wanted to go to parties, do drugs and generally hang out and have a good time. And now somehow your one of the ”disenfranchised”. Well that’s too bad Sunshine. I’m not here to pick up after you; I’m not even here to figure out a solution for you. You figure it out, and if you cant, then you will die. Gee I’m so damn heartless, funny, that’s what happens to you after years of no one feeling terribly sorry or apologetic for taking half of everything I make in taxes to pay for this crap.

2005-08-18T18:33:00.000-07:00

So What’s UP in Gaza?

I’m trying to piece this together: A success for the US in Iraq is still very much a toss up. Iran is still pursuing atomic weapons and last time I checked no one in the mid east popped up recently and tried to make nice nice with Israel. Why then, did Ariel Sharon, the inventor of the settlement program, do an about face and start the pullout from Gaza? It makes no sense. Do Hamas all of a sudden seem more reasonable? Yesterday, when the withdrawal started Hamas announced that this was proof that their violent tactics worked. They vowed to continue them now in the West Bank. This sort of statement from them is not exactly unexpected, but why total capitulation by Israel with this kind of thing being said? I have my suspicions and before I voice them I would like to make clear: they are entirely my own and based purely on conjecture. To me it is the only logical thing that makes sense.

I think that behind closed doors the Israelis are pissed off. The Europeans are handling the Iranian situation. Everyone knows how they dealt with Saddam under the Oil for Food program. These guys would sell out their own mother for a buck. Along with that the Israelis are scared to death public opinion here will result in a pull out from Iraq. What happens then? The Iranians, who are funding most of the terrorists in Iraq, will walk right in. Iran will then have a real nice nuclear program with more than enough oil revenue to fund it. George Bush is hoping for a win in Iraq but, after the WMD fiasco, knows he can’t go in and start bombing Iran. Nothing short of an Iranian nuke test above New York City would satisfy the doe eyed good vibes crowd in the US now. The Israelis want to start cleaning house now, before it’s too late and the US pulls out of Iraq or Iran pops up with a nuke. Bush is holding them back because he knows if the Israelis start action now, all hell will break loose. It will be seen as a heavy Western/Israeli hand in the region and world opinion would be less than helpful. We would face a more suspicious public in Iraq; we would be seen much more as agents of Israel than we are even now. I think Bush has made a bargain with Sharon - Make one last full-fledged attempt to deal with the Palestinians. Give them everything they want so that no one can deny that you gave peace every chance. If they still will not give up terrorism, then all bets are off, do what you want.

It’s a pretty scary scenario, but the only one that I can see as possible. Why are the Israelis trying to acquire so many bunker buster bombs if not to deal with the Iran threat? Surely they wouldn’t be stocking up on arms if they truly saw capitulation as the road to peace? They sure aren’t much use against a guy wearing dynamite in the town square. I think the Israelis are relying on the Palestinians to uphold the PLO motto one last time - “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity”.

2005-08-15T20:54:00.000-07:00

We miss you Karl Rove

I never thought Id long to see that name in the news again. After what seemed to be an interminable period over what has to be the biggest non-story of my life, the Valerie Plame name leakage incident, I now long for those days. Recent events down in Crawford have made that story seem positively news worthy. Who the hell is this woman whoring her son’s death for a second sit down with the president? If you look closely you will see clear as day. Its none other than Linette ( aka Squeaky ) Fromm, of Manson family fame. The resemblance is incredible although I would have to tilt the scales in Squeakys direction in any evaluation of sanity. Anyway back to dear Karl. What the hell was that all about? Democrats were apoplectic about this breech of security for releasing some desk jockeys name. Did this even pass the laugh test for anyone? Are these the same people who never raised an eyebrow when Sandy Berger (Clintons national security advisor) was caught red handed sneaking top secret documents out of the National Archives in his socks? The central question remains not who leaked Valerie Plames name, no one gives a rip about who the hell she is. Equally dull is the attempt at being the Christ like sacrificial lamb by the reporter who went to jail rather than reveal her source. The big question is, why did the CIA need to get someone from the State Department, Plames husband Joe Wilson, to go and investigate whether Saddam Hussein had sought uranium in Niger. Isn’t that basically at the core of what the CIA does? Wouldn’t it be job one at the CIA to have people who went around checking to see if the lunatics of the world were buying Uranium? I guess that question will never be answered and all we have now is a bunch of sun addled kooks camped outside of the Crawford ranch to watch. It’s going to be a long August.

2005-08-15T20:32:00.000-07:00

Smokers – S.O.S. ( Saviors of Society )

Once again it looks as though some Oregonians are set to start stealing from others through government sanction to reinforce their piety. I am talking about yet another cigarette tax increase to fund the Oregon Health Plan. The caring pious ones will get to feel good about themselves, providing those always essential government services, without it costing them a penny. Don’t these people increasingly sound to you like that obnoxious kid in third grade who was always going to “tell the teacher on you”?

Has anyone really thought about all those cigarette tax increases? Sure it’s easy to hate smokers. It’s in fashion. Always cloaked in the self-righteousness attitude that somehow their behavior costs society millions and endangers everyone around them. But has anyone really thought through the tax angle on this hatred?

As taxpayers, most of us pay Medicare and Medicaid taxes. These are the programs that some how got ripped off by those evil smokers through their supposedly higher medical needs. Yet a few years back there was the settlement with Big Tobacco. This settlement was in the billions of dollars and states reaped a windfall. Supposedly this was to pay the governments back for health care claims they would not have had absent cigarette smoking. Whether these were past costs being recouped or future costs to be incurred was never made clear. All that was clear was that Big Tobacco was hated and they were going to fork over the money come hell or high water. Well, the money is being paid, in installments to be sure, but paid nonetheless.
The big problem with this whole thing is government never pays for anything, taxpayers do. If the settlement money was to pay for past expenses incurred by the health care system, then aren’t the taxpayers due a refund? They paid for all that care initially, now the government has supposedly recouped that loss. Where’s my check? On the other hand, if the settlement was to pay for future health care costs, then isn’t a reduction in Medicare and Medicaid premiums i.e. taxes in order? Don’t hold your breath, especially if you smoke.