Saberpoint

Out of Town - Blogging May Be Limited All Week

2012-01-31T19:51:00.000-08:00

I am working in Millbrae, a pretty little town near San Francisco, and spending the nights in a cheap motel in San Bruno. The motel has internet access but the signal is weak.

The pay isn't great, but it's a lot better than the tax agency. I have moved up from being paid peanuts to being paid walnuts. Still, I am helping a good friend and we are enjoying each other's company and the work. It's really nice to be productive.

I miss my wife, my dog and my cat.

Barack Obama's Brazen Dishonesty on What Caused the Recession

2012-01-29T09:00:00.000-08:00

In Barack Obama's recent "State of the Union" speech, he ruminated on what caused the mortgage crisis and the resulting recession. He knows what caused it: the Democratic Party and its support for subprime mortgages for poor people, mainly blacks. The federal government forced banks and mortgage companies to make very risky loans to people who had no income or low income and no way to repay the loans. This was the Democrats' cure for mortgage loan "red lining," the alleged practice in which blacks and other minorities were denied real estate loans based simply on their race.

However, "red-lining" was a myth. The people who were being denied loans were those with no credit and no way to repay. Nonetheless, what a wonderful opportunity for the Democrat Party to press its creds as the party who protects minorities from alleged "racism"!

Christopher Booker of the U.K. Telegraph summarizes Obama's conceit on the matter, quoting from his State of the Union speech:

“The house of cards collapsed,” he recalled. “We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn’t afford or understand them.” He excoriated the banks which had “made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money”, while “regulators looked the other way and didn’t have the authority to stop the bad behaviour”. This, said Obama, “was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work.”

Obama is the personification of Democrat dishonesty. They create a major recession through governmental malfeasance, then blame it on the victims of their own bad behavior, i.e. the banks and mortgage companies. Hence we have Obama promising to create a governmental "mortgage fraud" unit to investigate such matters. They ought to start with Obama himself. As Booker writes:

I recalled a piece I wrote in this column on January 29, 2009, just after Obama took office. It was headlined: “This is the sub-prime house that Barack Obama built”. As a rising young Chicago politician in 1995, no one campaigned more actively than Mr Obama for an amendment to the US Community Reinvestment Act, legally requiring banks to lend huge sums to millions of poor, mainly black Americans, guaranteed by the two giant mortgage associations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

It was this Act, above all, which let the US housing bubble blow up, far beyond the point where it was obvious that hundreds of thousands of homeowners would be likely to default. Yet, in 2005, no one more actively opposed moves to halt these reckless guarantees than Senator Obama, who received more donations from Fannie Mae than any other US politician (although Senator Hillary Clinton ran him close).

The recent outrage against Bank of America underscores the cynicism of the Democrats. Bank of America was forced to pay $335 million to settle the government's charges that its Countrywide lending unit engaged in "predatory lending" practices, i.e. convincing black borrowers to enter into real estate loans that they couldn't afford to repay. So Countrywide was forced to make bad loans to blacks by the federal government, and now is excoriated by that same federal government for doing what they were told. The Democrats create a mess, then require their victims to pay for it and take the blame. Disgusting.

Read Christopher Booker's article today, "How I Woke Up to the Untruths of Barack Obama."

My Favor Shifts to Gingrich Over Romney

2012-01-27T09:43:00.000-08:00

Neither Mitt Romney nor Newt Gingrich is the perfect candidate. The fight between the two has become vicious, self-destructive, personal and bitter. I have criticized Gingrich for attacking capitalism and distorting Romney's role at Bain Capital, and for making the campaign too personal.

However, Romney himself has a history of personal attacks and distortions against other Republican candidates. Lately, his attacks on Gingrich have become hysterical. This is a turn-off for sure, however, it was something one of Romney's aids said that really bothered me. The aid said that if Romney is elected, not all of Obamacare will be repealed. Put this together with past Romney public utterances (attacking conservatives, supporting liberals, proclaiming himself "progressive," supporting leftist policies, etc), and the inescapable conclusion is that Romney is far too liberal for me. Between him and Gingrich, my favor now returns to Gingrich.

Rick Santorum, my favorite of the three, did well in yesterday's Florida debates, and some say he was the winner of the debate. I hope Santorum is the nominee when all the primaries are finished. If not, then I will choose Gingrich over Romney.

Work Cures My Depression

2012-01-27T09:32:00.000-08:00

I have been working for a well-known, nationwide tax company (yes, that one). This is my second tax season with them. The pay is terrible -- minimum wage -- but I am not working there for the money. I am working there to increase my knowledge of individual income taxes and for the pleasure of doing something productive.

I like working with the clients, meeting the people, helping them to solve tax problems and to minimize their taxes and take advantage of deductions and credits that may be available to them. However, this week I was hired for the busy season by another CPA, a good friend with whom I worked as a corporate consultant for several years (making a bundle in the process). I will be working out of town on weekdays, but working at the tax agency on weekends. I will be quite busy through April of this year, and making some decent (though not great) money for a change. My friend, the other CPA, without an income for many months due to the recession, bought an audit practice near San Francisco so he would have an income again. He asked me to work for him through the busy season, and I agreed. The pay is a lot better than at the tax agency.

I have been largely without work for three years, all the years of the Obama Administration. Now Obama didn't cause this horrible recession, but his party did -- and Obama has done everything possible to prolong and deepen the recession, whether intentional or not. For three years my only activities have been blogging and band practice. The band practice came to an end in August when I told the band leader that his singing was simply awful. (This, only after months of subtle hints and tactful suggestions on singing lessons.) He did not appreciate my honesty at finally saying what everyone else knew.

In any case, I have been depressed since Obama came to power. Now I know what old people in old folks' homes feel like, unproductive, unneeded, unchallenged, with no purpose in life and nothing but death to look forward to. I spent a lot of the day feeling sleepy and took marathon naps throughout the week. No energy, no ambition. For some time, I have wished that the dark angel would tap me on the shoulder and get me out of a useless existence. This isn't surprising. I read that the suicide rate in places like Greece is soaring since the economy there crashed.

This past week, though, my friend asked me to work for him and I have been very popular with clients at the tax agency. Suddenly I am busy, needed, productive, and challenged. My sleepiness has disappeared and my depression is 90% gone. I have energy and, holy mackerel, my libido isn't as dead as I thought. It too is showing signs of life. I wouldn't have thought this turn-around in my mental attitude was possible. Work does this for a man. Work is life, purpose and meaning. It is, for me anyway, the greatest cure for depression.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer Slaps Obama on Tarmac! (Photoshop)

2012-01-26T11:18:00.000-08:00

There's a recent photo of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer confronting President Obama on an airport tarmac in Phoenix. The photo shows Brewer pointing a finger at Obama's face. Her mouth is open, suggesting she is really giving him a piece of her mind.I did a Photoshop, using the new Puppet Warp tool in Photoshop CS5, to make Brewer slap Obama right in the chops.

It's only a Photoshop, but I'd love to see her actually do it.

Nancy Pelosi Threatens to Unveil New Scandal for Newt Gingrich (Photoshop)

2012-01-25T11:34:00.000-08:00

Nancy Pelosi has stated that "Newt Gingrich will never be President -- there is something I know." What hidden scandal does Pelosi refer to? What horrible skeleton still hides in Newt's closet? The mind can't help but conjure up nightmares (like the one pictured below) as to what this new revelation will be. Was Newt in bed with the Democrats again? Say it ain't so, Newt, say it ain't so!

Hat tip: American Power

Ethics Charges Against Gingrich Were a Democrat Sham

2012-01-25T09:58:00.000-08:00

Back in 1994, the Democrats were very angry at Newt Gingrich for engineering the Republican take-down that year, resulting in large Republican majorities for the first time in many years. The Dems do what Dems do best, namely, dirty politics. A phone ethics charge was lodged against Gingrich, for which Gingrich was ultimately exonerated...but not before the Democrat media machine has broadcast the phony charges far and wide. The facts of Newt's exoneration were not so enthusiastically reported, often buried in the back pages of major newspapers.

Verum Serum has the story in detail here.

William L Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" Reissued

2012-01-23T11:11:00.000-08:00

William L. Shirer was an American journalist in Berlin from 1933 to 1941. He witnessed first hand the arise of Nazism in Germany and reported on it. The website Traces describes him this way:

One of the most recognized U.S. Americans to visit Nazi Germany, William Shirer perhaps shed more light on the events that led to Hitler’s ascendancy and German involvement in World War II than anyone else from the United States. Although closely watched in Germany, Shirer managed to convey much in his reporting by using subtle phrasing, suggestive tones of voice or U.S. slang unfamiliar to German censors trained only in formal British English. Having lived in Paris and familiar with Central Europe from his days with the Chicago Tribune, Shirer became one of the most respected U.S. journalists in wartime Europe.

Shirer later wrote a book, "Berlin Diary" in which he described prewar events in Germany and his visceral reations to them. Attending the Nuremberg rally (see above photo), Shirer described it this way:

Hitler shouted at them through the microphone, his words echoing across the hushed field from the loud-speakers. And there, in the flood-lit night, jammed together like sardines, in one mass formation, the little men of Germany who have made Nazism possible achieved the highest state of being the Germanic man knows: the shedding of their individual souls and minds—with the personal responsibilities and doubts and problems—until under the mystic lights and at the sound of the magic words of the Austrian they were merged completely in the Germanic herd.

Later, in 1960, he wrote his life's work, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich." This latter book is considered one of the most important histories of Nazi Germany, of what happened there and why. Smithsonian Magazine sets the stage:

Why had Germany, long one of the most ostensibly civilized, highly educated societies on earth, transformed itself into an instrument that turned a continent into a charnel house? Why had Germany delivered itself over to the raving exterminationist dictates of one man, the man Shirer refers to disdainfully as a “vagabond”? Why did the world allow a “tramp,” a Chaplinesque figure whose 1923 beer hall putsch was a comic fiasco, to become a genocidal Führer whose rule spanned a continent and threatened to last a thousand years?

Why? William Shirer offered a 1,250-page answer.

When I was a freshman in college in the early 1960's, "Rise and Fall" was highly touted by scholars and college professors, and was recommended reading. I took a look at it, decided it was way too thick to hold my attention, and quickly returned it to its shelf in the bookstore of San Jose City College.

Now, years later, I get to rectify my mistake. The book has been reissued, and I have purchased the Kindle edition of both "Rise and Fall" and "Berlin Diary" from Amazon.com, and plan to read both books, beginning with the latter. Why these books are important in the 21st century is explained in Smithsonian Magazine:

In Shirer one can see an evolution: If in Berlin Diary his emphasis on the Germanic character is visceral, in The Rise and Fall his critique is ideological. Other authors have sought to chronicle the war or to explain Hitler, but Shirer made it his mission to take on the entire might and scope of the Reich, the fusion of people and state that Hitler forged. In The Rise and Fall he searches for a deeper “why”: Was the Third Reich a unique, one-time phenomenon, or do humans possess some ever-present receptivity to the appeal of primal, herd-like hatred?

The herd-like instinct was clearly not a one-time phenomenon. We have seen it before Hitler (the Jacobins of the French Revolution) and we have seen it afterwards (in Mao's Red Guards of the Cultural Revolution, and even the current "Occupy Wall Street" goons who seem incapable of rational thought).

Group-think almost always leads to disaster, particularly in politics.

Barack Obama's New Job at Disneyworld (Photoshop)

2012-01-21T19:40:00.000-08:00

January 2013: Barack Obama finally gets a job he can handle.

Whatever Happened to "Little Green Footballs"? (Photoshop)

2012-01-21T18:55:00.000-08:00

Some say it has gone to the dogs.

Newt Scores Big In South Carolina

2012-01-21T18:50:00.000-08:00

Wow. Newt Gingrich, no matter what you might think of him otherwise, is a fighter. He was determined to stick it to Mitt Romney and did so in the South Carolina primary today.

Per Doug Ross Journal:

Yes, Mitt Romney lost by 31 points.
40% Gingrich
27% Romney
18% Santorum

The anti-establishment candidates -- Gingrich and Santorum -- literally crushed Mitt Romney 58 percent to 27 percent.

Don Surber has more details here.

What does this mean? It's hard to say at this point, but I suppose it means that Newt isn't through yet, and Mitt Romney may not be the inevitable nominee after all.

The race just got a lot more interesting.

The Essence of Islam Revealed (by Lawrence Auster)

2012-01-21T13:58:00.000-08:00

Lawrence Auster dissects leftist self-delusion by analyzing the many liberal excuses for Islamic violence. Here's one of his many essays on the subject that refute leftist apologia:

THE ESSENCE OF ISLAM REVEALED

In a letter to the Lansing State Journal published on July 5, 2006, a Muslim living in East Lansing, Michigan states in clear, matter-of-fact language what he and other Muslims believe,—that the penalty for converting from Islam to another religion is death—and why they believe it. It is not because they personally choose to believe it. It is not because they are personally “extreme” or “fanatical.” It not because they are “alienated” by the experience of living as Muslims in the West. It is not because they have been goaded into anger by anti-Muslim bigotry. It is not because they have been seduced into extremism by extremist imams or Wahhabi mosques. It is not because they are crushed by Arab despots. It is not because they lack democracy and freedom. It is not because they have an inferiority complex about Muslims’ having being “left behind” by Western progress since the seventeenth century. It is not because of Israel’s “oppression” of the Palestinians or American support for Israel. It not because of American involvement in the Mideast or the American occupation of Iraq. And it not because of inadequate Western aid efforts to poor Muslim countries. They believe what they believe because it is what Islam requires them to believe. Once we realize this simple fact, any question of “extreme” versus “moderate” Islam comes to an end. All Muslims by virtue of being Muslims are members of an extremist, totalitarian religion. From this it follows that no believing Muslims (outside small numbers for diplomacy, trade, etc.) should be allowed to live in non-Muslim countries, let alone in a country founded on religious freedom.

Some may call my conclusion extreme. I call it a no-brainer.

Here is the letter:

Islam or death

I read Le Roy Barnett’s letter (“Muslims, speak up,” June 26) about Muslims’ opinion on Abdul Rahman’s [the Afghani man who had to leave Afghanistan in fear for his life] conversion to Christianity.

Islam is not only a religion, it is a complete way of life. Islam guides Muslims from birth to grave. The Quran and prophet Muhammad’s words and practical application of Quran in life cannot be changed.

Islam is a guide for humanity, for all times, until the day of judgment. It is forbidden in Islam to convert to any other religion. The penalty is death. There is no disagreement about it.

Islam is being embraced by people of other faiths all the time. They should know they can embrace Islam, but cannot get out. This rule is not made by Muslims; it is the supreme law of God.

Please do not ask us Muslims to pick some rules and disregard other rules. Muslims are supposed to embrace Islam in its totality.

Nazra Quraishi
East Lansing

*********
Note, Auster has listed the various (and false) theories that explain away Islamic violence as caused by anything but Islam here:

Non-Islam Theories of Islamic Extremism

These are worth reading and consulting from time to time.

A River in Egypt: Denial Among the Apologists for Islam

2012-01-20T20:54:00.000-08:00

I have been having a debate with a dogmatic apologist for Islam, one D. Charles, who insists that Islam is no more violent than any other religion, and that Islamic terrorism is not supported by Islamic holy texts like the Koran or the Haddith. Charles has more excuses for Islam than Islam has severed heads...and that's a lot.

If you want to follow the arguments, see the comments section for this blog post.

Meanwhile, Lawrence Auster of View From the Right supports my position in his blog post here. Larry points out an even more extreme case of denial in one Karen Armstrong. He writes:

Inspired by the reflexive anti-American fallacies of Ron Paul and his intellectual mentor Robert Pape, the blogger Stogie has coined a term that I will need to add to my catalogue of non-Islam theories of Islamic extremism: the Blowback Theory of Islamic Extremism.

I see that some of Stogie's commenters [i.e. D. Charles] are still in Standard Denial Mode. Thus one argues that the Barbary pirates had nothing to do with Islam--they were merely pirates who happened to be Moslem, along with lots of non-Moslems in their ranks. Evidently the statement by Tripoli's ambassador in Britain to Adams and Jefferson in 1786, in which he justified the piracy on purely Islamic grounds of divinely mandated aggressive jihad against all non-Moslems, made no impression on this commenter.

Karen Armstrong has of course similarly argued that the vast Moslem conquests of the seventh century had nothing to do with Islam; the armies that swept across Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, and northern Africa and subjected them to Islamic rule were merely conquerors who happened to be Moslem. And then consider the fact that probably the majority of America's "intellectual" class follow Armstrong's ideas.

Such is the continuing power (I'm almost tempted to call it a supernatural power, though of the dark kind) of the modern West's suicidal denial of the truth about Islam.

But why the denial in the face of overwhelming evidence that Islam is a violent, aggressive form of tyranny, that it is so by its very nature? We have 14 centuries of Islamic history and aggression to draw from, the statements and bloody example of the "prophet" himself, the ongoing wars and terrorism in the world today, the statements of the terrorists, Imams and Islamic leaders, and of course, the Islamic holy texts themselves. Amidst the mounting death toll, it would seem sheer folly to disbelieve that Islam is inherently violent, intolerant, hateful and evil. In spite of this, D. Charles and other apologists continue to insist that Islam is benign. Who are we to believe, D. Charles and Karen Armstrong, or our own lying eyes?

I think there are some, mostly those on the left, who are unable to face the unpleasant reality of "the clash of civilizations," that our future is likely to be one of war for survival against a determined foe, or one of dhimmitude and darkness. So they go into denial. The worst of these deniers is the 9/11 "Truthers," who insist that the 9/11 attack on America was "an inside job," and not perpetrated by Muslims at all.

However, denial and wishful thinking will not alter basic reality, no matter how fervently the Islamic apologists wish it would.

Roosevelt University's Experiment in Stalinism: the Ordeal of Professor Robert Klein Engler

2012-01-19T10:45:00.000-08:00

From Kathy Shaidle today, there is news of a Stalinist Resurgence in both America and Canada.

The American resurgence features lefty Roosevelt University in Chicago. Perhaps Roosevelt is not a Marxist think-tank, but if it isn't, you could have fooled me. Roosevelt recently fired one of its professors, Robert Klein Engler, for telling a joke in class. The joke was relevant to the class discussion and was told to make a point. Here's the joke that ended Engler's employment (and possibly his entire career):

A group of sociologists did a poll in Arizona regarding the state’s new immigration law. Sixty percent said they were in favor, and 40 percent said, ‘No hablo Ingles.’

One student complained to the Roosevelt administrators, and Engler was formally accused of "harassment." The administrators of ~~Karl Marx~~ Roosevelt University informed Engler that he was being investigated for harassment, but never told him why or provided any facts to allow him to defend himself. He was then fired for refusing to cooperate with the investigation. Engler writes of his frustration with the unexplained charges and reason for his firing:

For months I practically begged Roosevelt University officials to provide me with at least some clue as to the nature of the “harassment complaint” lodged against me. I couldn’t imagine what it might be, but thought I at least had a right to know what someone was alleging.

But for months the University ignored my pleas.

On August 6, 2010, Mr. Maly notified me by e-mail that I was fired from the University. He claimed I wasn’t cooperating with an investigation. This was beyond absurd. For months the University stonewalled my attempts to learn even the most basic details of the allegation against me.

Engler then hired a lawyer and has filed suit against Roosevelt University. It was only then, two months later, that he learned the reason for the University's action against him. Professor Robert Engler has a blog here, giving the details of his experience.

Engler should discover the name of the student who filed the complaint and sue him too. Ruin the little stooge's life, as only a lawsuit can do. Accuse him of libel and a violation of Engler's "human rights." Make an example of him for the rest of the Marxist marinated puppets who pose as college students in America today. UPDATE: The student has identified herself. She is quoted in the Roosevelt Torch:

Cristina Solis, a student in the class, filed a written complaint with department chair Michael Maly after Engler told a joke in class that she found to be highly offensive. The joke pertained to non-English speakers in Arizona. Solis thinks that the professor's termination was fair, and says if she had known that the professor would be fired as a result of her complaint, it would not have affected her decision.

No doubt Solis treasures her power to end careers, tarnish reputations and ruin lives. Power can be so addictive and satisfying. She has leftism to thank for this, and the left's firm control of the university. Heady stuff, hey Cristina? I wonder how Solis would feel about becoming a defendant in a lawsuit for defamation? Let's hope she finds out.

Mark Steyn writes more about this Stalinist travesty here. He also discusses a similar travesty in Canada regarding a stand up comic, Guy Earle. Canada has taken a sharp turn towards totalitarianism in making free speech illegal in Canada -- illegal, that is, if it hurts the feelings or offends any member of a leftist-anointed, specially protected group -- like Muslims, gays, feminists, "transgendered" kooks and other assorted leftists. Canada's Stalinist law is onerous in that one's life can be ruined by an innocent remark, dragged through a special Canadian court, and heavily fined.

Guy Earle came under the authority of this kangaroo court when he was harrassed by a couple of drunken lesbians during a stand up comic routine at a club. Earle answered the drunks and, in the process, offended them. They filed charges, alleging "homophobic remarks" and now Earle's career has come to a halt. No one will hire him, fearing trouble by the Stalinist "Human Rights" Court of Canada. Earle feels that his life has been irreparably damaged and he awaits his trial in a state of deep depression. Steyn gives more details of this travesty at his website here.

The Left's control of the university in America, and of free speech in Canada, is a preview of what's to come in our federal government of the future. And it isn't pretty.

Hat tip: Five Feet of Fury

Muslim "Blowback"....in 1786? Muslim Violence Against the US is Not New

2012-01-18T08:39:00.000-08:00

Fighting the Barbary Pirates

A few posts back I wrote about the "blowback" theory of Muslim violence. Adherents to the theory believe that Muslim violence is not related to Islam, or its teachings, tenets or beliefs. They believe that Muslim violence against the west is merely a reaction to past American aggression, or "blowback." Both Ron Paul and one of his former advisors, Robert Pape, believe this theory. Pape wrote a book on how we can stop Islamic violence by not having any military presence or supporting any other country's presence in Islamic lands. The book is called "Cutting the Fuse."

I believe the "blowback" theory is bunk. While the presence of infidel soldiers in Islamic countries and the support of Western countries for the supposed "occupation" of Islamic lands (e.g., the very existence of Israel) may provide a further motive for jihad attacks, the fact is that the Koran commands aggressive war against infidels even in the complete absence of any infidel "aggression" against Muslims. Muslims attack us because of Islam, because they are commanded to do so by their prophet and holy book, the Koran. Our sin is merely that we are not Muslims, that we do not accept Muhammad as a valid prophet.

Muslim violence and aggression against the United States is not new. In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Muslim pirates were attacking our shipping, stealing cargoes and ships and enslaving our sailors. These were the infamous "Barbary Pirates," operating out of Tripoli (now Libya) and neighboring Islamic states.

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right wrote to me and supplied these facts: In 1786, John Adams and Jefferson, then our ambassadors to Britain and France, met the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, and asked him why his government was so hostile to the United States even though it had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Adja answered them (as they reported to the Continental Congress): "that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."

Doesn't sound much like "blowback" does it? There was then, as there is now, a religious reason for Muslim aggression. President Jefferson sent the navy and the marines to fight the (Muslim) Barbary Pirates in Tripoli in 1804, to stop them from attacking and pirating our commercial shipping. Our military response to Islamic states, then as now, results from Muslim aggression, terror and murder. The "blowback" theory is false.

President John Quincy Adams, who was President from 1825 to 1829 didn't believe in "blowback" either. He wrote this about Islam:

“…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”

President Adams also wrote this about Islamic violence and aggression:

"….Between these two religions [Islam and Christianity], thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet [Muhammad] shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”

Stogie Bans Leftist Troll, Newt Crushes Juan Williams

2012-01-17T19:09:00.000-08:00

My internet connection was down all day and just now came back up. So I didn't get to share by deep and sagacious opinions with the world.

Yesterday, I received a rather insulting comment from a leftist troll, who calls herself Ema Nymton (so cute, her blog name is "Not My Name" spelled backwards, which is sort of how she thinks...backwards). Ema never has a conversation or seriously considers facts that refute her leftwing views, or addresses counter arguments or engages anything resembling independent, rational thought. She is merely a string puppet for communism, and an endless source of leftwing bumper-sticker slogans, relying on the same tired (and previously refuted) sound bites, over and over again. I warned her not to use the term "Tea Bagger," yet she did so again, but that wasn't the worst of it. She insinuated I was a Nazi for opposing Islamic violence and extremism. So I banned her from further commenting on this blog.

If "Ema" shows up on your blog, don't bother trying to have a conversation with her. Her only purpose is to mouth memorized slogans and insult conservatives. Just delete her comments -- don't feed this obnoxious troll.

I was sorry to have missed Newt's home run at the South Carolina debate, wherein he crushed Juan Williams' asinine attempt to play the race card, obtaining a standing ovation in the process. Newt is smart, there is no doubt, and in this exchange he revealed what might have been had he more control over his passionate emotions. Rush was very pleased with Newt's performance. Read "Newt's Grand Slam" to get the details.

Meryl Streep Film of "The Iron Lady" Just Another Leftist Rewrite of History

2012-01-16T11:11:00.000-08:00

The new Meryl Streep film "The Iron Lady" is about the life and career of Margaret Thatcher, a popular conservative Prime Minister of Great Britain, a friend and colleague of President Ronald Reagan. The film, according to Norman Tebbit of the UK Telegraph, is another study in leftist propaganda and character assassination. Once again, Hollywood rewrites the past to achieve political goals in the present.

A few posts back, I wrote about "He Who Controls the Past, Controls the Future." It's a quote from George Orwell's famous novel "1984," in which a totalitarian state controls every thought and deed of its oppressed citizens. In that novel, the state is continually rewriting history to justify its policies in the here and now. Our state, the Federal government, doesn't do that, but they do have a propaganda agency that does it for them: Hollywood. One of the propaganda agency's chief pursuits is to create false but highly insulting impressions of conservatives and patriots who served their countries well, portraying them as ignorant, bigoted, paranoid, hysterical, small-minded and slightly mad. Certainly, the younger generation who never knew these people can take Hollywood's word for it and vote "progressive," thus avoiding such leaders in the future. And that, of course, is the goal.

Tebbit says this that the film is not of the lady he served as a cabinet minister, but a false film of an old lady suffering dementia. The film's theme of "the housewife who would have been in a tizzy if the potatoes had boiled dry, suddenly put in charge of the country, was pursued through a series of false flashback accounts of her time as Prime Minister." The film has a "slapdash indifference to historical accuracy" and also portrays Thatcher's husband in a false and insulting manner.

Thatcher is shown as "hysterical" in a segment where terrorists murder Airey Neave:

Then there is the blatant untruth of showing Margaret Thatcher dashing to the wreckage of Airey's car when he was murdered by Irish republican terrorists. She was not at Westminster at that time, but it suited the filmmakers to build a picture of a somewhat hysterical woman.

Tebbit sums it all up quite well:

Of those I have to say that had she behaved in real life as the film suggests I would not have supported her as I did in her election as leader of the Conservative Party, Leader of the Opposition and Prime Minister over a span of 15 years. Indeed, she would not have lasted 10 months as Prime Minister, let alone 10 years. Nor indeed would she have carried more votes at her third election victory after eight year as Prime Minister than at her first. By comparison Blair carried four million fewer.

And then there's this:

It would be wearisome to pick over the bones of this film at length. It will influence the way in which many who never knew her will see Margaret Thatcher [and that's the goal]. Perhaps, however, not in the way the makers intended. Many young people who do not remember her time as Prime Minister tell me that they were profoundly impressed by the power and vigour of the Thatcher of the film. What is more, it is not good news for the feminists that the first woman to lead a Western democracy should have been depicted as precisely the sort of nagging hectoring emotional creature that misogynists declare that women in charge are bound to be.

Read the whole thing here.

In Spite of US Air Support, Tebow Loses Battle (Photo)

2012-01-14T21:04:00.000-08:00

Lots of us were rooting for you Tim...see you next year!

Tim Tebow Runs Out of Miracles; Broncos Lose in 45 - 10 Blow Out

2012-01-14T20:40:00.000-08:00

The New England Patriots made the Denver Broncos look ridiculous in a 45 - 10 blowout, ending the season for the Broncos tonight. The Broncos' offensive line looked like wet tissue paper in front of a charging herd of buffaloes as the Patriots ran through them like they weren't even there.

Now I know why Tebow prays between plays. With such a porous line for protection, I'd be praying too.

Tom Brady is one hot quarterback, throwing six touchdowns in a post-season game to tie an NFL record. The Patriots looked so strong that I would bet on them to win the Super Bowl, if I were a betting man.

Good luck to Tim Tebow, who had a great first year in professional football. If he can persuade the Broncos owners to hire a front line, that team should do well in future games.

New England Patriots vs Denver Broncos: Rough Sledding for Tebow at the Half

2012-01-14T18:55:00.000-08:00

I'm watching the Patriots - Broncos NFL playoff game. At the half, the Patriots lead 35 to 7. Tom Brady, the Patriots' quarterback, seems to throw touchdown strikes at will. Clearly, the Patriots are the superior team. It would be a miracle for the Broncos to come back, and I fear Tim Tebow has exhausted his store of miracles for this season. Still, Tebow has had a great first year as a rookie quarterback in the National Football League.

On a more positive note, my favorite team, the San Francisco Forty-Niners beat the New Orleans Saints in a vigorous and rigorous close fight in San Francisco. The Saints were down 17 points early in the game, but took the lead twice and were ahead by three points with seconds left to play in the final quarter. The Niners, however, scored a 14 yard, passing play touchdown with seconds left to take the lead, winning the game by 36 to 32.

Italian Luxury Liner Founders Off Italy; Giuliano Mignini Blames Satanic Cult

2012-01-14T11:02:00.000-08:00

The Work of a Satanic Cult?

Satanic Cult Expert
Giuliano Mignini

The Italian cruise ship Costa Concordia scraped against rocks off the Italian coast and capsized after taking on water. There were 4,000 passengers on board. Several people are feared dead.

Famed Italian Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini immediately took a bus to the beach, where he declared the sinking to be the work of a Satanic Cult led by Mario Spezi and Amanda Knox. He then began indicting everyone within reach for the crime, including tourists, the homeless, dogs and cats. The offending rocks were too heavy to arrest, but were given a stern warning not to leave town.

Just kidding about that last paragraph. So far anyway.

Read about the tragedy here. No, the real story doesn't involve Mignini, thank goodness.

The Republicans' Circular Firing Squad

2012-01-14T10:45:00.000-08:00

Fred Barnes at the Weekly Standard believes that Gingrich and Perry have handed a pile of ammunition to Obama and the Democrats with their self-destructive Bain Capital propaganda. Barnes writes:

Republicans have reason to worry. Thanks to Gingrich and company, Democrats have been handed a gift that’s likely to keep on giving all year. Their attacks on Romney as a ruthless, uncaring businessman play into Obama’s reelection theme that the rich are the source of America’s economic trouble. Perry calls Romney a “vulture capitalist,” a tag certain to stick in the minds of voters.

Newt Gingrich had a bad reputation as a hot-head going into this campaign, and he has forever cemented himself to that reputation. One of the key tactics in Saul Alinksy's "Rule for Radicals" is to goad your enemy into irrational anger wherein he becomes self-destructive, thereby losing credibility and support. Apparently, Romney did that (probably unintentionally) in his negative ads about Newt. Newt couldn't contain his anger and reacted in a very public, very self-destructive manner. In the process, he has revealed himself as a pariah to the conservative movement and, in my opinion, should never again be considered a serious candidate for public office.

Anti-Romney Film "King of Bain" Cited as False and Vicious

2012-01-14T09:10:00.000-08:00

Newt Gingrich's nasty half-hour ad "The King of Bain" panning Romney is false, vicious and over the top. The Washington Post Fact-Checker agrees:

The 29-minute video “King of Bain” is such an over-the-top assault on former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney that it is hard to know where to begin. It uses evocative footage from distraught middle-class Americans who allege that Romney’s deal-making is responsible for their woes. It mixes images of closed factories and shuttered shops with video clips of Romney making him look foolish, vain or greedy. And it has a sneering voice-over that seeks to push every anti-Wall Street button possible.

The Fact-Checker then explains key facts in the video and why they are false, awarding this propaganda film "Four Pinocchios."

Read it all here.

Newt Gingrich Responds to "Kamikaze" Charge (Photoshop)

2012-01-13T11:54:00.000-08:00

North Korea Punishes Mourners Who Did a Poor Job of Faking Grief for Dead Leader

2012-01-12T12:06:00.000-08:00

Painted on Tears Won't Work

When Kim Jung Mentally Ill croaked a few weeks back, mourners lined a major thoroughfare in North Korea to witness Dear Leader's funeral procession. The mourners wailed, bawled and screeched, flailing their arms and moonwalking to showcase their deep grief for Kim Jung Mentally Ill. Okay, I was just kidding about the moonwalking; the rest is true though.

Many pundits, including me, noted the dry eyes of the mourners. In spite of their wild paroxysms of alleged grief, there were no tears. Now those insincere mourners may be in trouble. The North Korean government said it will arrest insincere mourners and send them to prison camps for at least six months. Now you know why those mourners went to such lengths to display their non-existent grief for Dear (Worthless) Leader. Some of them may be required to return their special Hollywood Oscars for bad acting.

ABC reports:

“authorities are handing down at least six months in a labor-training camp to anybody who didn’t participate in the organized gatherings during the mourning period, or who did participate but didn’t cry and didn’t seem genuine,” according to the Daily NK.

“The party conducted surveys to see who displayed the most grief, and made this an important criterion in assessing party members’ loyalty,” Yop wrote. “Patients who remained in hospitals and people who drank and made merry even after hearing news of their leader’s death were all singled out for punishment.”

Note to North Koreans: the next time a party official croaks, suppressing smiles and laughter is not enough. You must shed tears -- not tears of laughter, mind you, as this will not work. Painted tears, using body paints, will not work either. Take a tip from Glenn Beck and rub Vicks Vaporub in your eyes before the cameras focus on you. It will hurt a lot, but your eyes will stream tears, saving you from a labor camp. As for the wailing, crying and flailing, it is advisable to practice in front of a full-length mirror in order to perfect your performance.

And whatever you do, do not drink champagne in public, throw confetti, moonwalk or sing "Happy Days Are Here Again." The North Korean government considers these acts as evidence that your mourning is not sincere.

Newt Gingrich is Toast: Uses Far-Left Propaganda to Attack Romney

2012-01-12T11:20:00.000-08:00

Newt Gingrich is despicable, an unprincipled, failed politician whose latest desperation measures prove that he is no Republican and has lost all credibility as such. Gingrich has released a Michael Moore type video attacking Romney over Bain Capital -- a company hired by corporations to turn around or liquidate unprofitable operations. Yes, when you liquidate unprofitable companies, you have to lay people off. It is this "creative destruction" that frees capital and labor from unproductive pursuits and makes them available for better uses.

Rick Perry has joined Gingrich's anti-capitalist attacks on Romney, and Perry is all through too. The Other McCain has a post explaining Gingrich's errors, and also has embedded Gingrich's propaganda film against Romney. See it here. Stacy McCain wrote:

Newt Gingrich’s “super PAC” has unleashed its 27-minute documentary about Bain Capital, When Mitt Romney Came to Town, which a Daily Kos blogger calls a ”hit job” that ”you’d expect from a lefty operation.” It’s as if Newt hired Michael Moore. Avowed lefty Steve Benen calls it “devastating.”

Desperate to gain some traction in South Carolina, Rick Perry has joined in on this weird left-wing beatdown of Romney. The fact that the latest South Carolina poll shows him in sixth place — behind Jon Huntsman, in what was supposed to be Perry’s “firewall” state – perhaps explains Perry’s willingness to engage in an “Occupy”-style attack on free-market capitalism.

The only Republican candidate with any principles in this fight is Rick Santorum, who has distanced himself from Gingrich's destructive propaganda. I would gladly vote for Rick Santorum, but if Mitt Romney is the candidate selected, I will support him. I will never again support Newt Gingrich, and I originally preferred him to Romney (and said so).

Michelle Obama Corrects an Unfortunate Misimpression of "An Angry Black Woman" (Photoshop)

2012-01-12T10:27:00.000-08:00

Related Post with more images of angry black Michelle here.

Newt Gingrich's Nasty Temper Disqualifies Him as a Presidential Candidate

2012-01-11T09:40:00.000-08:00

Newt Gingrich is mightily pissed off. His star was rising in Iowa and he was the front runnner. Then Mitt Romney ran negative ads about Newt and the latter's poll numbers plunged. Now Newt wants revenge and has adopted the language of the left in pursuit of a scorched-earth policy against Romney. Howie Carr of the Boston Herald (hat tip VFR) has called Gingrich a "suicide bomber" and a "kamikaze." The description is apt: Gingrich wants to destroy his enemies even if he must destroy himself in the process. Carr writes:

When Newt got into the fight last year, many suspected he wasn’t really a serious candidate, that he was just trying to freshen up the aging Newt “brand,” to jack up his speaking fees. I guess not. The Club for Growth called his comments about Mitt “disgusting.” The only group that might want him as a speaker now is the Occupy Wall Street Alumni Association.

It is becoming clear that Gingrich cannot win the Republican nomination for president. But if he can't have it, nobody can. Rush believes that Gingrich is solely focused on revenge, and like an angry bull he doesn't care what damage he inflicts on capitalism or the Republican party. With Gingrich, it is now personal, and Romney must pay.

Read "Gingrich Goes Perot on Romney."

Newt has shown that it's all about him -- and that he doesn't have the thick skin or temperament it takes to be President of the United States.

Poll: Greatest Fear of Two-Thirds of Americans in 2012 is Obama's Re-Election

2012-01-10T11:22:00.000-08:00

From U.S. News, a poll that Obama won't like:

In our New Year's poll, when asked what news event they fear most about 2012, Americans by a margin of two-to-one said Obama's reelection. Only 16 percent said they fear the Democrat won't win a second term, while 33 percent said they fear four more years.

I hope the 2 to 1 figure is true, but the article refutes itself. First it says 2 of 3 Americans fear Obama's reelection, but only 33% (1 in 3) fear four more years. That doesn't make sense.

See the report here.

The next biggest worry is that we will have higher taxes. It would appear that almost any Republican can beat Barack Obama, but that is illusory. First, Obama has the backing of the mainstream press, who will propagandize in his favor. Second, the Republican candidates are wonderful at screwing up golden opportunities. As Rush pointed out today, Newt Gingrich's current attacks on Mitt Romney over Bain Capital sound like arguments from the left.

Paul and Pape's Fraudulent Argument: Islamic Violence Not Caused by Islam

2012-01-10T09:21:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul's belief is that murderous and genocidal actions by Muslims worldwide are the result of western actions, not the tenets of the Islamic faith. Ron Paul wrote:

Though it is hard for many to believe, honest studies show that the real motivation behind the Sept. 11 attacks and the vast majority of other instances of suicide terrorism is not that our enemies are bothered by our way of life. Neither is it our religion, or our wealth. Rather, it is primarily occupation. …

On this point, Ron Paul is full of it up to his ears. Joel Richardson of WND opines:

...despite the allure of Paul’s constitutional convictions, his perspectives on United States foreign policy, radical Islam and the nation of Israel are an absolute deal breaker. Paul’s emphatic trademark claim that the present rise of Islamic terrorism globally is the result of “blowback” from American actions abroad is nothing less than ridiculous and an absolute insult to my intelligence.

According to Paul, radical Muslims are not radical because they have drunk deeply from the trough of an expansionist, racist and murderous ideology, but rather because American actions abroad have brought about the natural response of resistance.

Richardson blames a Paul advisor, Robert Pape for this fraudulent argument. Pape claims in his book "Cutting the Fuse" that 95% of terrorist attacks worldwide were a response to foreign occupation. Richardson counters with his argument that Robert Pape is a pseudo-scholar whose claims have been refuted by other, real scholars. Further, Pape has been found conspiring with CAIR to promote his book and his arguments.

I think the best refutation of Paul and Pape's argument comes from Lawrence Auster of View From the Right. Auster writes:

I have written about Pape's fraudulent argument in the past. In December 2005, in a long discussion with a reader who was promoting Pape's ideas. I said:

Obviously, a Western presence in a Muslim country is going to exacerbate jihadist manifestations including suicide terrorism. That's why I'm against any involvement by us in the Muslim world and any efforts to reform it from within.

But when analysts detach from Islam phenomena that are obviously deeply tied to Islam, such as terrorism, we have a problem. This is what all the mainstream intellectuals do today. They say terrorism is due to some cultural or economic or political factor that is extrinsic to Islam, so if we just remove that extrinsic factor, the terrorism will stop. So if we assimilate the Muslims in Europe better, or if we stop "discriminating" against Muslims, or if we create a global Provider State to give Muslim countries food and schools and highways, or if we betray Israel to its mortal enemies, then terrorism will go away.

My point is that while we should not do unnecessary things that exacerbate jihadism, ultimately jihadism is an expression of Islam itself. As long as Islam exists, jihadism, along with the terrorism that Allah specifically orders in the Koran, will exist as well. Thus any writer who says that terrorism committed by Muslims is not connected with Islam is promoting a dangerous delusion. [Emphasis added].

My reading of Islamic literature and books on Islam revealed that, according to Muhammad, the only sure way for a Muslim to go to heaven is to die in jihad fighting against the infidel. Without this, a devout Muslim's chances of making it to heaven are only one in one thousand. Therefore, I believe that jihad against non-Muslims in Muslim countries is merely Muslims taking advantage of a religious opportunity: they can secure their place in heaven attacking "infidels," even when the infidels were sent to their country to protect it, as we did in Saudi Arabia after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait.

Islamic jihad is all about Islam and Muslim salvation; it is not Arabic nationalism. The problem, reduced to its essence, is Islam itself. Our best method of protecting ourselves from Islam is separation, i.e. stopping Islamic immigration into the west, developing energy independence, and ceasing the stupidity of "nation building" within the Islamic states.

Democrats Rooting for Romney as Easiest to Beat?

2012-01-09T11:25:00.000-08:00

Donna Brazile, a Democrat strategist, is rooting for Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination. Why? Because she thinks he will easiest for Obama to beat. Per Michael Walsh of the New York Post:

Lost in the weekend’s back-to-back debates in New Hampshire was this illuminating remark by Democratic strategist Donna Brazile after Saturday night’s soporific contest in Manchester: “Mitt Romney won tonight because no one touched him. And for Democrats, you know what? It was good news for us . . . because we believe that the weakest candidate is the candidate that the Republicans are not attacking. And that’s Mitt Romney.”

The remark drew guffaws from some of the other assembled party faithful and media commentators, but Brazile spoke the truth. Democrats do believe that Romney is eminently beatable, the perfect foil for President Obama, in fact.

George Stephanopolous responded, "Donna, you don't believe that!" Rush pointed out on his show today that Stephanopolous was essentially telling Brazile to shut up, lest she let the cat out of the bag.

The Dems think Mitt will be the easiest Republican to beat. I tend to agree.

Read Walsh's article here.

Tim Tebow Shines as Broncos Defeat Heavily Favored Steelers in Overtime

2012-01-09T06:33:00.000-08:00

Well that explains the huge hits on my blog yesterday.

Quarterback Tim Tebow led the Denver Broncos to a 29-23 overtime win against the Pittsburgh Steelers yesterday, throwing an 80 yard touchdown pass [video here] that won the game on the first play in overtime. The Denver Post reports:

The sellout crowd of 75,970 at Sports Authority Field at Mile High erupted in celebration. Witnesses said that in Denver neighborhoods, delirious people were screaming from their balconies. Patrons at Denver-area bars were heard chanting, "Te-bow! Te-bow!"

Tebowmania is once again inflated. It was the Broncos' first playoff victory in six years.

Well now, to all the suave liberal cool people who disdain Tebow's endzone prayer, I say "How do you like them apples?"

Read more about the victory here.

Face of the Sphinx - A Better Photoshop Reconstruction

2012-01-08T18:55:00.000-08:00

A few months back I attempted a Photoshop reconstruction of the Sphinx. It was mediocre. Too much painting and not terribly realistic. I now have Photoshop CS5, and it is a more powerful tool. So I tried it again and the results are much better. Here it is. (Note to all school students, feel free to use for homework assignments.)

The Sphinx is around 4,500 years old, and may be in danger of extinction due to the Islamic fanatics now ruling Egypt. It was Muslims who defaced the monument centuries ago, and there is talk now of blowing it up -- it is "pagan" and "idolatory" don't cha know.

I have often wondered what the Sphinx looked like 45 centuries back. Maybe it looked something like this.

Los Angeles Times Deems Photoshop of Michelle Obama "Racist" (Yawn)

2012-01-06T10:58:00.000-08:00

Big Journalism calls a biased, leftwing newspaper "the Incrediby Shrinking L.A. Times." One of their knee-jerk lefty columnists, Christopher Knight, disliked a satirical Photoshop of Michelle Obama as Marie Antoinette and called it....(wait for it)..."RACIST." Knight said that "the caricature of Obama as a profligate queen relies on the racist stereotype of an 'uppity Negro.' "

What a chicken-sh*t, cowardly argument. With such an interpretation, no criticism of any black person, no matter how legitimate, is allowed, because they will always be "racist," even though race is not an element, either express or implied, in that criticism.

The dishonesty of Knight's self-serving slander is obvious: to silence critics of Barack Obama and his wife by attaching a false stigma of bigotry to any criticism. It is insulting to blacks, as it clearly demonstrates Knight's belief that blacks are inferior, social invalids who cannot be held responsible for their deeds.

"Racism" is the left's lazy, adolescent name-calling when they have no legitimate arguments to present (which is often). The false charge has lost most of its stigma through over-use. The only revulsion this epithet should engender in the reading public is disgust...for the one making the charge.

A Student Who Obtained 0% On An Exam (Satire)

2012-01-06T09:32:00.000-08:00

Found on FaceBook:

STUDENT WHO OBTAINED 0% ON AN EXAM...........

I would have given him 100%

Q1. In which battle did Napoleon die?
* his last battle
Q2. Where was the Declaration of Independence signed?
* at the bottom of the page
Q3. River Ravi flows in which state?
* liquid
Q4. What is the main reason for divorce?
* marriage
Q5. What is the main reason for failure?
* exams
Q6. What can you never eat for breakfast?
* Lunch & dinner
Q7. What looks like half an apple?
* The other half
Q8. If you throw a red stone into the blue sea what it will become?
* It will simply become wet
Q9. How can a man go eight days without sleeping ?
* No problem, he sleeps at night.
Q10. How can you lift an elephant with one hand?
* You will never find an elephant that has only one hand..
Q11. If you had three apples and four oranges in one hand and four apples and three oranges in other hand, what would you have ?
* Very large hands
Q12. If it took eight men ten hours to build a wall, how long would it take four men to build it?
* No time at all, the wall is already built.
Q13. How can u drop a raw egg onto a concrete floor without cracking it?
* Any way you want, concrete floors are very hard to crack.

The Republican Field of Candidates: My Evaluation

2012-01-05T11:31:00.000-08:00

Almost no one I know is ecstatic about any of the Republican candidates for president. Here's what I think about them:
1. Mitt Romney: I see him as dangerous for conservatives because he has not governed as a conservative. My intuition tells me that Romney lacks the core beliefs of conservatives: smaller government, less regulations, lower taxes, cheap energy. I greatly fear that he would turn left once elected, "compromise" on key issues and provide a weak, watered-down approach to Obamacare, the national debt, federal spending and taxes. Still, he would be better than Obama. A fire hydrant would be better than Obama.

2. Newt Gingrich: I have the same concerns for Newt that I have for Romney. Like Romney, I fear that Newt lacks core beliefs, will accommodate any stupid idea or political fad that comes down the pike (like global warming, cap and trade) in order to augment his popular appeal. His campaign ads portraying him as Reagan's right-hand man and a strict conservative are ludicrous. Further, Newt is showing himself to be a hothead prone to emotional outbursts, i.e. thin-skinned and shooting himself in the foot. I doubt that he has the temperament to run a successful campaign if nominated. The leftwing mainstream press would play him like a fiddle. I could care less how many times he has been married, but ethics charges against him, fair or unfair, would be used against him to great advantage by the Democrats.

3. Rick Perry: Perry is ideologically acceptable and might make a good president. I think his stance on allowing the children of illegal aliens (in Texas) to pay in-state college tuition has been misunderstood and misconstrued by many conservatives. He thought that kids who were brought here by their parents through no fault of their own, and went to grade school and high school and essentially grew up here, should be allowed to pursue their college education. I would have voted the same way that Perry did. I think it is less likely than for Romney and Gingrich that he would turn left once elected. My major concerns about Perry have to do with his ability to debate and his way of presenting himself to the public. Could he win the election if nominated? I think so, though he will be portrayed as a tongue-tied fool by the mainstream media.

4. Rick Santorum: I believe that Rick Santorum has core beliefs and knows what he stands for, and in that regard, is less dangerous than Romney or Gingrich -- I doubt that he would surprise us, once elected, by turning left. He has caused some concerns with some of his statements about birth control, saying that states have the constitutional right to outlaw it, and voicing the Catholic Church's position on the matter as if it were a moral certainty applicable to everyone. Those statements will be used against him, even though they have little bearing, if any, on his performance as president. All candidates have vulnerabilities to Democrat attack, so that is not a deal-breaker with me. I like Santorum better than Romney or Gingrich, and about the same as Perry. However, Santorum has momentum whereas Perry seems to have lost his, and therefore Santorum may have a better chance at being nominated.

Conclusions: I am supporting Rick Santorum for the reasons stated above. For now. I reserve the right to change my mind.

Rick Perry Says "On to South Carolina!"

2012-01-04T12:00:00.000-08:00

Rick Perry may be imitating a toad going head to head with a Mack truck, but he is staying in the race. Perry came in fourth in Iowa with 10% of the vote, but vowed to continue, saying "Here we come South Carolina!!" He tweeted the photo herein, slightly Photoshopped by the Stogiemeister to make it more fake but accurate.

No crocodiles were harmed in the making of this graphic.

Romney Wins Iowa by Eight Votes Over Santorum

2012-01-04T09:47:00.000-08:00

Mitt Romney finally took the lead as the last votes were counted in Iowa. Romney beat Santorum by 30,015 to 30,007 -- winning by only eight votes!

Santorum has emerged as an ascending candidate and Romney is shown to be vulnerable.

Will this great showing for Santorum become a trend? In less than a week we'll find out. The New Hampshire primary is January 10. The even more important South Carolina primary is January 21.

I'm in for Rick Santorum. Michele Bachmann officially dropped out of the race today, and Rick Perry may do the same. Let's hope they throw their support to Santorum.

Update: Rick Perry has decided to stay in the race for the time being.

See Rick Santorum's After-Vote Speech here.

Santorum With Very Slim Lead Over Romney in Iowa

2012-01-03T22:12:00.000-08:00

Right now, Rick Santorum is leading Mitt Romney with 99% of the votes counted in Iowa, 29,944 to 29,926. Ron Paul is third with just over 26,000 votes. Newt Gingrich was fourth at 13%, Rick Perry fifth at 10% and Michele Bachmann sixth at 5%, and Jon Huntsman at 0.6% See statistics here.

Hmm, the boring Republican race just got interesting. Santorum's showing gives him additional credibility, more donations and momentum going into New Hampshire's primary on January 10.

Hope lives.

Rick Santorum and Russian Mountain Ranges

2012-01-03T18:09:00.000-08:00

Rick Santorum has risen in the polls lately and is giving hope that we may avoid the RINO establishment candidate, Mitt Romney. God, I hope so.

Romney excites me about as much as cold oatmeal. With lumps.

As far as this Iowa Caucuses thing goes, I'll be glad when it's over. What the heck are caucuses anyway? I thought they were a mountain range in Russia somewhere. I keep visualizing Iowans in big fur hats, downing shots of vodka, squat dancing on one leg, then the other, jumping up and shouting HEY every few seconds.

Didn't they ever hear about PRIMARIES in Iowa? This is all too confusing. Wake me when somebody wins.

Thoughts for the New Year 2012

2012-01-02T20:50:00.000-08:00

This new year opens my mind to new possibilities, in a way that 2009, 2010 and 2011 did not. The past three new years were all about Obama, socialism, economic depression and no hope for anything better. The Obama economy is akin to surviving a tornado: all you can do is hold on and wait for it to end.

Now there is the hope that 2012 will be the last year in office of a terrible president, and at long last we can begin to rebuild the economy.

Some personal resolutions for 2012:
1. To improve my health, attitude and energy level, though diet and exercise. Specifically, to drop 30 pounds.
2. To increase my earnings. In 2006, I earned $140,000 in W2 salary. I earned less than $3,000 in 2011. Realistically, I won't earn at my 2006 level anymore. I would, however, like to earn $35,000 in 2012, just to pay personal expenses, buy new high tech toys and items to support my music endeavors.
3. To continue learning Spanish. I want to be fluent in this language within two years. Specifically, to complete Spanish 1B and 2A in 2012 with an A grade in both.
4. To greatly increase my skill in playing double bass (also called upright or string bass), specifically, in jazz swing, jazz standards and mellow jazz. I want to learn/create bass lines for 50 standards from the Great American Songbook.
5. To become good enough at singing to contribute vocally in band performances. I am studying and practicing singing and have improved substantially since I began back in August.
6. To finally reach one million hits on this blog. I am now nearing 850,000 and expect to realize this goal by summer or before.

Happy New Year

2011-12-30T13:43:00.000-08:00

This may be my last post for 2011. I will be out of town until Tuesday and may not have internet access.

I am looking forward to 2012. With any luck, that will be the last year of the Obama presidency. Let's all work hard to support the Republican candidate, whoever he or she turns out to be. None of them are perfect, but as of this moment, I prefer Newt to Mitt.

So...have a safe and Happy New Year, and may 2012 bring us all greater opportunities and happiness.

The Obamagasm Award

2011-12-29T22:09:00.000-08:00

The Obamessiah

Media Research Center has announced the Obamagasm Award for 2011 goes to Stephen Marche of Esquire Magazine. Marche's paean to Barack Obama includes this:

...can we just take a month or two to contemplate him the way we might contemplate a painting by Vermeer or a guitar lick by the early-seventies Rolling Stones or a Peyton Manning pass or any other astounding, ecstatic human achievement? Because twenty years from now, we’re going to look back on this time as a glorious idyll in American politics, with a confident, intelligent, fascinating president riding the surge of his prodigious talents from triumph to triumph....

I would rewrite this essay a bit:

...can we just take a month or two to contemplate him the way we might contemplate a Flea Market painting of Elvis on black velvet, the early singing skills of Milli Vanilli, a Jamarcus Russell [intercepted] pass, or any other mundane, over-hyped, pie-in-the-sky mediocrity? Because twenty years from now, we're going to look back on this time as a raging insanity in American politics, with a conceited, naive and arrogant punk of a president, riding the surge of his own ignorance from one political disaster to the next...

Read the whole thing here, and then throw up. Hat tip: No Pasaran.

Why Islamophobia? Robert Spencer Answers Muslim Filmmaker

2011-12-29T21:18:00.000-08:00

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch was asked by a Muslim filmmaker for an interview. It seems one Dean Obeidallah is making a film about "Islamophobia," no doubt along the lines that fear of Islam is unfair, irrational and bigoted. "Islamophobia," of course, is an invented term used to shame critics into silence about the murderous, violent and intolerant nature of Islam.

Spencer asked Obeidallah to answer several questions as a prelude to an interview. Obeidallah did not answer them. The best of these is item number 1, in which Spencer asks:

True or false: No comedy show, no matter how clever or winning, is going to eradicate the suspicion that many Americans have of Muslims. This is because Americans are concerned about Islam not because of the work of greasy Islamophobes, but because of Naser Abdo, the would-be second Fort Hood jihad mass murderer; and Khalid Aldawsari, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Lubbock, Texas; and Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore; and Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland; and Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer; and Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer; and Naveed Haq, the jihad mass murderer at the Jewish Community Center in Seattle; and Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh, who hatched a jihad plot to blow up a Manhattan synagogue; and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber; and many others like them who have plotted and/or committed mass murder in the name of Islam and motivated by its texts and teachings -- all in the U.S. in the last couple of years.

And this doesn't even mention Major Nidal Hassan, who killed 13 people at Fort Hood in Texas a couple of years ago, acting on behalf of his religion -- Islam.

Read the whole thing here. By the way, I am currently reading Spencer's book "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran." It is an informative book on how the Koran was created and what it contains. You can read the Koran itself, but this is a difficult task, since the Koran is arranged in a chaotic, non-sequential manner, repeats itself many times, and often provides little or no context for its subject matter. (You must refer to the Hadith to obtain the context and supporting facts, and Spencer quotes from the Hadith when necessary to remove ambiguity.)

Special Academy Award Issued to North Korean Mourners for Great Acting

2011-12-29T12:32:00.000-08:00

"Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Hoo!" How was that?

Maggie over at Maggie's Notebook noticed something that I also noticed: the wailing, gesticulating mourners at Kim Jong Il's funeral were decidedly dry-eyed. With all that moaning, bawling and crying, there were no tears. The mourners, knowing what was good for them, put on quite an act for Dear Leader's funeral.

Just Out of Camera Range

We suspect that Hollywood will issue a special Oscar for these amazing put-ons. Acting!

Meanwhile, singing was heard throughout the land: "The Witch is dead, the Witch is dead, the wicked Witch is dead!" The Lollipop Guild is expected to make a public announcement shortly.

I Want to Make a YouTube Video

2011-12-29T10:44:00.000-08:00

Curmudgeon over at Political Clown Parade has made a video reflecting on the events of 2011. It's the first video she's made in quite some time, posted to her YouTube account "Definite Opinion." It's pretty good, view it here.

I like viewing her Photoshops and she's actually a pretty good writer when she has a mind to be -- and lately, she has a mind to be. She has sometimes made YouTube videos that are worthwhile to watch, and I am inspired to make some videos too. I know how to do it, that's not the hard part. The hard part is figuring out what I want to present, what images or video clips to include, what background music to use. I'll give it some thought. Suggestions are welcome.

As Kim Jung Mentally Il Is Laid To Rest...the Haunting Sound of "Taps," Played on a Kazoo

2011-12-28T18:58:00.000-08:00

Kim Jung Mentally Il has been laid to rest. The North Koreans are so poor that Il's casket was wheeled to the cemetery on a used skateboard...propelled along by the deft footwork of the New Dear Leader, Kim Jung Ungh!.

People were pointing out that the hearst was a 1976 Lincoln Continental, but that's not true. It was a blown up picture of a 1976 Lincoln Continental, taped on to the camera-view side of the skateboard. The photo was ordered from Office Max and flown in by carrier pigeon, which was promptly shot down by anti-aircraft fire and eaten.

However, it's true that North Korea has achieved much. They have arrived at that position in the world so fervently hoped for by our own Dear Leader, Kim Jung Barack Obama. No other country in the world feels inferior to North Korea, nor do they envy it's super-power status; and no one can claim that Evil Capitalists are exploiting the other 99% with products, services, technology, jobs or any kind of standard-of-living. As for #OccupyNorthKorea, the people there who are living in tents, squalor, filth and poverty are called "the upper class."

Kim Jung Mentally Il's funeral was ended with the plaintive sound of taps. Since the North Koreans can't afford a bugle, a lady with a kazoo was used instead.

Kim Jung Mentally Il's corpse was then taken to the processing plant where it was turned into Soylent Green.

Meanwhile, the North Korean military (which is everyone in the country, apparently) turned out to fake great expressions of grief, with loud wailing and bawling, but...no tears. I wonder how many were secretly thinking: Thank God the bastard's dead.

See for yourself:

Blog Whoring and Me-Too Blogging

2011-12-28T11:55:00.000-08:00

Dan Riehl has a worthwhile post this morning on "Iconoclastic Bloggers." He defines an iconoclast as a person who attacks settled beliefs or institutions. I like that.

I like even more what he said about blogger cliques and groups:

"Still, cliques and groups around certain larger blogs have grown up, along with the professional sites and aspects of it."

A light went on in my head. Dan had described a phenomenon that annoys the hell out of me, though I hadn't fully verbalized or defined it. Cliques! I have simply referred to the phenomenon as "Me-Too Blogging."

"Me-too" blogging is where one assumes a role in the king blogger's court and begs for links and attention and indulges in throw-me-a-bone bootlicking. "Me-too" bloggers are beholden to bigger bloggers for traffic they haven't actually earned, and so compromise their principles and honesty in order to retain their benefactor's good graces. Some people have called this "blog-whoring," and the description is apt. It means you must defend your benefactor, even when he or she is wrong or has done something unethical.

Also, Clique-Blogging is a form of group-think. Riehl also pointed out:

Group-think is the enemy of freedom and I detest it, in its various forms.

Me-Too Blogging is compromised blogging. Don't do it.

The Shallowness of Atheism

2011-12-27T09:28:00.000-08:00

I really don't care what anyone believes about God, as long as they believe it peacefully and do not attempt to impose their beliefs on me through coercive means. "Coercive means," for purposes of this discussion, include using Congress and the courts to subvert the First Amendment.

Atheists, however, are particularly annoying in their religious beliefs. Yes, atheism is a form of religion, as it is believed on faith -- a negative kind of faith, but faith nonetheless. To know whether God exists, one would have to be God himself. Man's comparatively minuscule intellect is insufficient to answer the question. Therefore, many of us believe, on faith, that there is a higher power and a higher purpose to our existence.

Atheists, on the other hand, insist that God does not exist, that God is a myth and religion a delusion. They are actually rather impatient, even intolerant with those who disagree. After all, the question is entirely clear to them, and they assume that their personal clarity on the issue should be shared by all. In this regard, they are no different from any fanatical sect who insists that theirs represents THE ONE TRUE RELIGION, that all other religions are doomed to fail and only they are possessed of God's grace, acceptance and enlightenment.

I recently saw a video by the atheist Pat Condell, whose anti-Islam rants I love, haughtily insist that "there is no God." He knows. His is "the one true religion."

Atheism is similar to color blindness, and atheists are like color-blind fanatics insisting that green, red, blue and yellow do not exist, and that those who see them are delusional. Atheists are entitled to their beliefs, but I wish they would stop wearing their religion on their sleeve and trying to push it off on everyone else.

Tim Tebow Terrorizes Secularists and Atheists

2011-12-27T08:50:00.000-08:00

As Timothy Gordon points out in American Thinker today, the left is becoming increasingly intolerant towards any public religious expression. For that reason, Tim Tebow, quarterback for the Denver Broncos, is becoming a hated figure. Tebow likes to silently pray in the end zone after touchdowns, by dropping to one knee and giving thanks. Gordon writes:

Tebow's straightforward and unapologetic Christianity has been received by NFL mensae magnae (contradiction in terms?) as a type of threat.

And what is the liberal/secularist plan? To eventually make religion disappear:

That is, when sec-progs start out declaring that they aim merely to set a plain whereupon all religions can fairly "coexist," they really contemplate an end-game where religions fade permanently out of view. Have a look at the emergent history of the jurisprudence: "No federal religion" became "no state religions"; this became "no government entanglement with religion"; this became "no governmental support for religion"; this became "no governmental mention of religion"; this led to the phase that the Tebow debacle currently evinces: "no popular mention of religion in any public sphere, including private affairs which get viewed on TV." One can easily imagine the last few steps in this phenomenology of disappearance.

I noticed this on Jay Leno last week, when Denver finally lost their second game of the season. When Leno announced the loss, his liberal Los Angeles audience broke into applause...not because they dislike the Broncos, but because they dislike practicing Christians.

Ron Paul's Extreme Isolationism Disqualifies Him To Be President

2011-12-26T21:06:00.000-08:00

Eric Dondero, a former Ron Paul staffer, has set the record straight on many facts about his former boss. Dondero, writing at Right Wing News, states the following are true:
1. Ron Paul is neither racist nor anti-Semitic. Further, he is not homophobic.
2. Ron Paul is a strong isolationist. He was vehemently opposed to any US military response to the 9/11 attack. He believes the United States should not have fought the Nazis in World War II.
3. Ron Paul dislikes Israel because of Paul's extreme isolationism, and our alliance with Israel prevents us from being more isolationist. (I am paraphrasing here.)
4. Ron Paul supports the so-called Palestinians and wants the entire state of Israel given over to them.

Dondero sums it up:

On one other matter, I’d like to express in the strongest terms possible, that the liberal media are focusing in on entirely the wrong aspects regarding controversies on Ron Paul.

It’s his foreign policy that’s the problem; not so much some stupid and whacky things on race and gays he may have said or written in the past.

Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist. He denies this charge vociferously. But I can tell you straight out, I had countless arguments/discussions with him over his personal views. For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that “saving the Jews,” was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just “blowback,” for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.

Dondero confirms what I have written in previous posts: Ron Paul is not a racist and the charges of "racism" are just unethical propaganda by some on the right. Ron Paul is, however, an enemy of Israel and an extreme isolationist. I fear that his isolationism would provide no deterrence whatsoever to the radical Muslims who would attack us. If Ron Paul were president, Iran would feel quite safe in launching a nuclear attack on Israel. For these reasons, I could never vote for Ron Paul, nor would I recommend him to anyone.

Hat tip: Pirate's Cove

There is Absolutely Nothing Good About Islam. Nothing.

2011-12-26T20:41:00.000-08:00

Bare Naked Islam reports that the new radicals governing Egypt want to destroy the pyramids. That's because the pyramids represent an ancient religion and is not Islamic.

The New York Daily News reports that Muslim terrorists in Nigeria bombed a number of Christian churches on Christmas day, killing several dozen Christians:

For the second Christmas in a row, Islamic group Boko Haram, which aims to install Sharia law in Africa’s most populous nation, orchestrated fatal attacks.

Bare Naked Islam has more on the story here.

Meanwhile, a hateful and crazy female Muslim was shot dead by police in Marietta, Georgia. Jihad Watch has the story of Jameela Barnette, who regularly sent hate mail to various bloggers, like this (from Jihad Watch):

ALLAH is the greatest, ALLAH is ALIVE, but the christian's god is only a partially eaten, jew corpse. ALLAHU AKBAR you rabid, jew-eating, racist, christian MOTHA F U C K A S of extremely low intelligence. I will be sure to tell your hostile jinn aka jew masters what loyal and obedient slaves you christians are. Enjoy your brief and evil life of fairy tales and hokum your evil jew masters have created for you, because the Hell-fire is your final destination. Muslims should kill you corpse-eating, blood-drinking, christian savages and send you to your partially-eaten, jew corpse you call god.

Apparently, Jameela summoned the police herself by activating a "panic alarm" in her apartment complex. When the police arrived, however, she answered the door with a knife in one hand and a pistol in the other, and began slashing one of the officers with the knife. He promptly shot her dead. I volunteered over at Blazing Cat Fur to play taps for Jameela...on a kazoo.

I hate Islam. It is completely evil, anti-human, savage and insane. Just like the bearded faker who invented the "religion."

I ordered Robert Spencer's book "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran." I know what's in the Koran, but it will be interesting and entertaining to see what Spencer has to say about it. The Koran itself is rather mundane and boring.

The Morning After the Night Before: the Dull Day After Christmas

2011-12-26T12:07:00.000-08:00

Last night we were eating, drinking and making merry. The morning after is so much less fun. December 26 is the day you begin to realize that the Grinch had a point.

There's that sink piled high with dirty dishes. Then there's all those torn Christmas wrappings and boxes scattered around the living room. My head doesn't feel quite right. Will you turn off that Christmas tree? The garishly bright lights are giving me a headache. Where in hell is the aspirin?

I have lots of chores that I could do, but I don't want to do any. Lots of resolutions to make for New Year's, but they can wait.

The good news is that they aren't showing continual reruns of "A Christmas Story" any more.

Yep, it's true: December 26 is not my most favorite day of the year.

Burp. Oh God, I think I have acid indigestion.

Merry Christmas to All!

2011-12-24T10:13:00.000-08:00

It's Christmas Eve, so no more serious blogging until Monday.

I had a nasty cold all week, and finally it is has subsided enough to call myself "well." So now I can go Christmas shopping!

I guess I shouldn't complain -- there have been many Christmases where I didn't start shopping until Christmas Eve. I'm a man -- I hate shopping!!

So time to hit the shower, then the stores.

Merry Christmas to all!

Lez Be In Love: Social Progress in the Navy

2011-12-23T13:21:00.000-08:00

There was a news story out this week about the wonderful results of allowing openly gay people into the military. The AP had a nice photo shoot of a female sailor returning to base in Virginia, being greeted by her lover and passionately kissed on the dock. This is a picture seen through the decades as our fighting sailors return home from the sea. Except this time both the sailor and the spouse are women.

What wonderful social progress! Now what was formerly considered unnatural and unfruitful can be displayed in the news, celebrated as enlightenment, featured and feted! Two beautiful women will not add their DNA to the gene pool, or enjoy old-fashioned marriages to men, or become mothers. Yes indeed, this is something to celebrate! No need to bake cookies for the kiddies or drive the kids to soccer practice...because there are none!

One can only wonder how much more social progress we ~~can stand~~ will see in the next twenty years...perhaps the sailor returning from the sea will share a passionate kiss with her spouse...a cow!! Twenty years after that, who knows? Perhaps the spouse will be a carrot....or even a banana.

You got a problem with that? BIGOT!

Jazz For Cows (Video)

2011-12-23T10:24:00.000-08:00

These Dixieland Jazz musicians show up in a cow pasture and serenade a herd of cows. The cows' ears go up and they all turn towards the band and slowly advance forward in a line. The cows are curious and even seem to like it.Now if cows can learn to love jazz, can progressives learn common sense? Nah, I'm afraid that's stretching credulity to the breaking point.

A Democrat Poem From 1949, Still So Relevant For Today

2011-12-23T09:54:00.000-08:00

A couple of weeks ago, Always on Watch posted the scan from a newspaper in 1949. The paper carried a poem, "Ode to the Welfare State." I loved the poem, and transcribed into a Word document; but I didn't want to steal AOW's thunder so I didn't run it right away.The graphic of the newspaper is below, followed by my transcription, to enable other bloggers easier ways to run it, copy it or email it.

ODE TO THE WELFARE STATE
Rep Clarence J. Brown, R-Ohio, 1949
A poem put into the Congressional Record

Democratic Dialogue

Father must I go to work?
No my lucky son,
We’re living now on Easy Street
On dough from Washington.

We’ve left it up to Uncle Sam
So don’t get exercised.
Nobody has to give a damn –
We’ve all been subsidized.

But if Sam treats us all so well
And feeds us milk and honey,
Please daddy, tell me what the hell
He’s going to use for money.

Don’t worry Bub, there’s not a hitch
In this here noble plan –
He simply soaks the filthy rich
And helps the common man.

But father, won’t there come a time
When they run out of cash
And we have left them not a dime
When things will go to smash?

My faith in you is shrinking, son,
You nosy little brat;
You do too much thinking, son,
To be a Democrat.

GQ's Comic Strip Lamentation for Osama Bin Laden

2011-12-22T12:47:00.000-08:00

Kindly Grandpa Figure Offed by
Fanatical Christian Right Wingers

The online version of Gentleman's Quarterly has published a "web comic" about the termination of Osama Bin Laden by Navy Seals in May of this year. They asked some well-known comic book artists to illustrate the mission that killed Bin Laden.

The artwork is well done, but carries a leftist bias (most comic book artists nowadays are progressives on steroids). Osama Bin Laden, the murderer of 3,000 people on 9/11/2001, is displayed as a tired, wise old man, a rather sympathetic figure:

Five years -- six? Caged in these rooms and NOW FINALLY--the end sounds close and far at the same time -- the walls around him complicate things --

The web comic ends with Osama taking a bullet to the head, with the blazing legend "FOR GOD AND COUNTRY".

The cynical legend is subtly sarcastic and reflects leftist biases against both "God and Country." Only Christian religious fanatics and wildly patriotic jingoists machine gun kindly, tired and wise old men. (Yes, his tired eyes seem to silently and sadly lament the strife and violence -- oh, why can't this be a better world? Why can't we all just get along? Why does it always have to end this way? Aren't we supposed to be better than this?)

The answer to kindly grandpa's silent questions is simple. It is because dangerous and slightly mad rightwingers believe that killing is the ultimate expression of religious ecstasy and love of country. Never mind the murdered Americans and billions of dollars of damage to the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Let's just focus on the kindly old man with his lovable grandpa-like beard and his tired eyes. Let us not dwell on his crime. He was merely a victim of American religious fanaticism and mindless patriotism. Every college sophomore knows that these two evils account for all the violence and hatred in the world. Hey, that 9/11 thing was just an excuse...or an inside job used to justify the murder of non-Christians.

For God and country my ass. For justice. Thank God the S.O.B. is dead. I only regret that it took ten years to find him.

Read it here.

Hat tip: Infidel Bloggers Alliance

Can You Pass The National History Test?

2011-12-22T00:14:00.000-08:00

I stumbled on this page at "Good Education" online magazine (it appears to be quite liberal-biased). However, they say this about American kids' proficiency in U.S. History:

When it comes to history, are you smarter than a fourth grader? The just-released results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress U.S. History 2010 Report Card show that of 30,000 students tested in 2010, only 20 percent of fourth graders, 17 percent of eighth graders, and 12 percent of seniors are proficient in American history. Federal officials celebrated a slight increase in scores for eighth graders since 2006, and scores for all grade levels are higher than they were in 1994, but only 2 percent of 12th graders correctly answered a question about Brown v. Board of Education, and only 9 percent of fourth graders could identify a photograph of Abraham Lincoln and give two reasons why he's important.

They then give five questions each from the 4th, 8th and 12th grade tests. I scored 100% on all of them, but then again, I graduated from the 12th grade some time ago so I should know these things.

Test yourself! Answer the questions here.

Solving the Problems of Race in America

2011-12-21T10:51:00.000-08:00

Following the brouhaha over Ron Paul's old newsletters, I want to clarify my position on some points and make some tentative suggestions for improving racial disparities in America.

1. Races do vary in many ways. Some of us are better at higher math, some of us are better at sinking three-pointers outside the line. There is no harm or foul in acknowledging these differences, as long as we understand these are tendencies, not universal laws. Everyone is an individual and should be judged by his own abilities and attitudes. Everyone should be allowed to pursue his goals and achieve as much as his talents and ambition will allow. On the other hand, no one should be given a free pass or supplied with a standing excuse for destructive behavior.

2. IQ is an important factor in higher SAT scores and academic achievement. Research shows that blacks, as a group, have the lowest average IQ of all racial groups: 85, compared to 95 for hispanics, 100 for whites and 105 for Asians. This, more than any other factor, explains the failure of blacks to achieve SAT scores as high as whites or Asians. It explains the lack of blacks in higher math, physics and other demanding disciplines. It is no one's fault, it just is. However, some pertinent observations:

By acknowledging this reality, I take no joy or pleasure in it, nor do I wish to use it as an excuse to bring back segregation or to assign an inferior citizenship status to blacks or anyone else, or to engender hostility towards blacks or anyone else.
I WISH this IQ business weren't true. I WISH blacks could enjoy the same level of achievement, productivity, success, prosperity and happiness as any other racial group. I would be DELIGHTED if someone could find a solution to the problem by sometime tomorrow. However, reality is something of an ass, as it doesn't care a damn about my preferences...or yours. It just keeps on being reality. It's a lot like the IRS, if you want to know the truth.
I do not believe that DENIAL will have any bearing on the problem of IQ disparities by race. I do believe that honest discussion could lead to possible solutions. Is there any way to improve the IQ of blacks? If not, is there any way to work around the problem, by offering trade school education to those for whom college is not an option? How high an IQ is needed for (1) graduating high school, (2) graduating college, (3) becoming a doctor, lawyer, accountant, computer programmer, auto mechanic, fry cook, musician, etc? The idea is to find the optimum training and employment that will maximize an individual's earning potential and give him or her the best chance for a successful life. The forceful introduction of individuals into careers for which they are not suited (i.e., affirmative action, racial norming, racial quotas) harms both the unqualified (by setting them up for failure) as well as the qualified persons forcibly replaced (by denying them opportunity).
Another training point would be to (1) recognize potential trouble before it happens and (2) take steps to prevent it. Things to avoid: drugs, drop-outs, gangs, crime and unwed pregnancy, resisting sudden impulses that lead to trouble. How people fall into these traps, how to plan your life to avoid them.
I believe that we should acknowledge black dysfunction, e.g. fatherless households, illegitimacy, school drop-outs, unemployment, alcoholism and drug use, crime and in general, a really bad attitude. Next, we should find ways to alleviate this dysfunction, possibly by (1) the shame factor, assigning blame where it belongs, on blacks themselves, for making bad life choices, (2) providing some kind of training or schools that teach civilizational skills, e.g. working cooperatively with others, social skills such as manners, personal space, tact; employment skills such as arriving at work on time, getting out of bed when you'd rather not (per Woody Allen's dictum that "85% of success in life is in just showing up.") Also, we should stress the importance of delayed gratification, the necessity of patience and persistence while learning the skills one needs to achieve a better life. What we should NOT do is provide blacks with the ready-made excuse of "white racism" as the source of their problems, since that excuse is neither true nor useful in solving the problem.

Those are my thoughts on the thorny problem of racial stress in America.

Update: Ron Paul's assertion that "blacks perpetrate crime all out of proportion to their numbers" has again been proven true. Heather McDonald, writing in the New York Post three days ago, in an article called "The Real Outrage," noted:

Nearly every day, the police experience a reality that is kept assiduously out of public awareness: the overwhelming disproportion in crime. In 2009, for example, blacks, who are 23 percent of the city’s population, committed 80 percent of all shootings, according to reports filed by the victims and witnesses. Whites, who are 35 percent of the population, committed 1.4 percent of all shootings.

It is time to openly discuss the problem of black crime and to seek solutions. Self-censorship accomplishes nothing. It is time to tell the truth.

Update: Lawrence Auster of View From the Right discussed IQ and cultural influences back in 2008. That article has a lot of bearing on my post above. Auster points out a highly pertinent interview with Arthur Jensen, who discussed intelligence testing in a two-part interview in American Renaissance in 1992, here and here.

Stogie the Grinch

2011-12-20T20:52:00.000-08:00

Ugh, I used to stay away from topics like racial reality and American history. It is too easy to offend friends and give ammunition to the enemy. However, I have decided that a relentless pursuit of truth is my highest priority, and let the chips fall where they may.

Nevertheless, I don't enjoy being so brutal, so if my last couple of posts offended anyone, then I do regret that. I apologize, not for telling the truth, but for telling it with so little tact.

On a more positive note, I added a deer and a log cabin to my Christmas blog banner. Am I sensitive or what?

"He Who Controls the Past, Controls the Future": Reconsidering Bill Whittle

2011-12-20T12:05:00.000-08:00

There is a tendency among modern-day politicians to misuse and misinterpret history in order to advance modern political positions. This isn't a good idea, no matter how worthy the position. As historian Arthur M. Schlesinger told us in his book "The Disuniting of America," history is too often used as a weapon. Using history as a weapon generally means misrepresenting history to justify modern day partisan politics.

This was the meaning of Orwell's "1984" slogan, "He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future." If you control the interpretation of history, you can create heroes and villains and justify all sorts of political positions in the here and now.

Bill Whittle demonstrates this tendency (probably without realizing that he is doing so) in his recent Pajamas TV video "A Voter's Guide to Republicans." Whittle begins with a worthy objective, to disprove leftist claims that we Republicans are motivated by hate, are fascist and racist. However, he uses false history to support the moral purity of the Republican Party.

Bill Whittle is a conservative writer and commenter extraordinaire. I generally enjoy his expository writing and commentary on Pajamas TV. However, when it comes to Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War and the early Republican Party, he is not to be trusted. Whittle's false history in favor of Republicans claims that the early Republican Party of 1860 was anti-racist and committed to freeing the slaves. It was neither.

The early Republican Party was dead-set against allowing slavery into the territories, those areas that had not yet become states of the union. However, it wasn't a Republican belief in racial equality or modern-day morality that formed the basis of their anti-slavery sentiment. The early Republicans hated blacks and didn't want them polluting the racial purity of these new territories. Also, they understandably didn't want to compete with slave labor. One of the first Republican Party platforms identified the Republicans as "the White People's Party." The new territories were to be set aside for the benefit of the white race. Early Republicans were hardly the great moral crusaders of the 19th century. They were pretty much like most other white people of the time period: highly prejudiced against blacks. In this they were no better or no worse than mainstream America of the 1860's.

Now let me be clear: when discussing the Republican Party of the 21st century, Bill Whittle is absolutely correct: we are neither "racist" nor fascist nor motivated by hate. However, how we got to this point has little to do with Abraham Lincoln or the Republican Party of 1860.

The truth need not be defended by falsehood. As the late Vaclav Havel once said, "Lying can never save us from another lie."

Village Voice Expresses Sarcasm Against the Stogiemeister...Without Rebutting Him of Course

2011-12-20T10:05:00.000-08:00

The leftwing rag, the Village Voice, has jumped into the Ron Paul fight, quoting rightwing sources that both attack and defend Ron Paul. Here's what they said about me:

Paul had his defenders. SaberPoint didn't see what was so racist about the racist comments in the Paul newsletters. "Paul stated that young black purse snatchers are unlikely to be caught because of their swiftness of foot," said SaberPoint. "However, Paul is right, black men do run faster than men of other races. This is a biological fact. It is the reason why blacks make up a disproportionate number of men in professional sports like basketball or football." (Now we're beginning to understand why Bell Curve fan Andrew Sullivan endorsed Paul.)

The Village Voice misrepresents my position, of course. First off, I have never endorsed Ron Paul. Secondly, I argued that if unpleasant facts about race are true, then they cannot be "racist." Racism implies an irrational prejudice, and fear of black crime and violence is hardly irrational -- just as Ron Paul pointed out. Dinesh D'Souza in his 1995 book "The End of Racism" calls this fear "rational discrimination." D'Souza's book is also my source for the reality of other racial differences, like black mens' ability to run faster than those of other races.

Here is my comment and response to Village Voice (will they let my comments stand?):

Ah, the liberal position, so clearly explained herein, is that reality is racist, and therefore to be repudiated. Yes, I wrote that black men (in general) run faster than white people. However, they aren't good swimmers as their bones are too heavy. Remember a few years ago when our all-black Olympics track relay team beat Canada's all-black track relay team for the gold? Probably just a coincidence that the team didn't have any whites...or hispanics...or Asians. Don't blame me, blame God...or nature.

As far as the Bell Curve is concerned, it also told the unpopular truth: that the average IQ among the black race is 85, the lowest of any racial group. If the "Village Voice" wants to disprove this, please do so and publish your results so we can all be enlightened. It shouldn't be difficult; just test for IQ among a statistical sample of blacks vs whites vs Asians vs hispanics and record and summarize the results. Will you do it? No, because outside of using race as a political cudgel, you know damn well that the Bell Curve is correct.

I don't take any joy or satisfaction in these grim facts, but no good will come from lying about them....as you do.

Kim Jong Il Kicks Bucket

2011-12-19T12:32:00.000-08:00

The Glorious Leader of the world's most insane state, North Korea, has croaked, as in "kicked the bucket," cashed in his chips, assumed room temperature, bit the dust, bought the farm, fell off his perch, handed in his dinner pail and went west.

And with all that exertion, it's no wonder. The man's dead. Kaput. Past his expiration date. Food for worms. Through. Finished. Washed up.

Now the only question is, will Kim Jong Il Jr. be just as nuts as dad?

"Saturday Night Live" Bravely Satirizes Muhammad's Most Ardent Follower!

2011-12-18T20:10:00.000-08:00

Kathy Shaidle of "Five Feet of Fury" writes that 'Saturday Night Live’ (SNL) bravely makes fun of Mohammed and his most devout followers. Then she says, "Naw, just kidding." SNL was not making fun of Islam or Muhammad. SNL was, once again, making fun of Christianity and one of its ardent followers, Tim Tebow.

In SNL's skit, Jesus appears in the Denver Broncos' locker room to confront religious quarterback Tim Tebow. Jesus tells Tim Tebow to "take it down a notch," and not to get in "everyone's face" about his religion. "Jesus" rolls his eyes at key moments to express his disgust for Tebow. Apparently, Christianity is such a dumb religion that not even Jesus likes it.

Liberals always have a huge chip on their shoulder when it comes to Christianity. Any Christian religious observance just pisses them off to no end.

Kathy's ironic observation gave me an idea: why not Photoshop the Saturday Night Live episode as if it were criticizing Islam and depicting Muhammad instead? Voila, herein was born the Photoshop inspired by Kathy Shaidle. It features "Jesus" reborn as Muhammad, with turban, and Tim Tebow as the ardently religious Muslim, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a leader of Iran. Ahmadinejad is so ardent in his faith that he wants to "wipe Israel off the map" as a show of devotion, and fervently believes that the "Mahdi," or 12th Imam, will soon emerge from a well to lead the faithful.

Muhammad appears in Ahmadinejad's locker room to tell him to "take it down a notch." A wise decision, since Muslims are more "in your face" about their religion than anyone else. Yes, no doubt the SNL Muhammad rolled his eyes at key moments to express his disgust with the faith, made snarky comments while the audience roared with laughter, and oozed with the cool cynicism that liberals seem to love.

Way to go, SNL, you big, brave proponents of cool.

Greeaaaat! I Have a Cold.

2011-12-18T18:24:00.000-08:00

Nuts. I went into the office yesterday to study updates on taxes. While there, I caught a cold, probably from one of the other accountants. I always think I am going to escape, but I never do.

Lawrence Auster Rebutted "Racism" Charges Against Ron Paul in 2007

2011-12-17T09:03:00.000-08:00

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right considered and rebutted racism charges against Ron Paul in May of 2007. Note, Auster does not support Ron Paul politically. He, like I, simply resent conservatives resorting to leftist arguments to attack another conservative.

Auster wrote:

Now, let's list Bernstein's [Alan Bernstein of the Houston Chronicle] verbatim quotes and partial quotes of Paul purportedly showing that Paul is racist:

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action..."
"Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered 'as decent people.' Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested..."
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal..."
"Paul also wrote that although 'we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.'"
"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."

Now let's list Bernstein's quotes of Paul purportedly showing that Paul is an anti-Semite:

"Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, 'By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government' and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism."

Auster's rebuttal of these charges can be read here. Basically, he says, like I did, that Paul's comments are either true or are not unreasonable, and those who think they are "racist" have adopted the P.C. straitjacket of allowable thought and speech.

I am not planning to vote for Ron Paul, but his above comments have no bearing whatever on my decision.

"Racism" Charges Against Ron Paul Appear Exaggerated at Best

2011-12-16T13:05:00.000-08:00

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right often points out how mainstream "conservatives" often adopt leftist arguments and positions on the subject of race. These conservatives have swallowed the progressive Kool-Aid, and rush to display themselves as greatly enlightened anti-racists. They pose and posture just like liberals do, acting out a script that says "Look at me, I am so tolerant and enlightened!"

Conservative Networks appears to represent such types. No one is allowed to discuss aspects of black people because such topics are strictly verboten. Conservative Networks has published a bunch of links to Ron Paul's old newsletters, describing them as "Racist Newsletter Links." I clicked on several of them and didn't find anything that I considered especially offensive. Indeed, a lot of the links don't discuss race at all. One link merely described how militant gays invaded a Catholic church to disrupt services and insult Catholicism. I have copied and pasted their links below; feel free to peruse them.

So far, the only "offensive" remarks that have been attributed to Ron Paul are these:
1. Only about 5% of blacks vote sensibly in any election. Yes, that's about the percentage who vote Republican, so it appears Paul's statement is true.

2. Statistics infer that about 95% of black men in the Washington, DC area are either criminal or partially criminal. I agree that this statement is stupid. It is too vague and unsupported to be credible and appears highly exaggerated. However, statistics do show that almost 40% of young black men are, or have been, in the justice system. The truth is outrageous enough without exaggerating it.

3. The "swiftness" of young black men: Paul stated that young black purse snatchers are unlikely to be caught because of their swiftness of foot. However, Paul is right, black men do run faster than men of other races. This is a biological fact. It is the reason why blacks make up a disproportionate number of men in professional sports like basketball or football. It is the reason why the top track stars are generally black. The statement that "white men can't jump" is a true comparison of white basketball players vs black ones. So why is the truth offensive? What am I missing here?

4. Blacks commit crime in a higher proportion to their numbers in society. Again, a true statement. As I pointed out in my last post, making this observation without offering possible solutions is unwise from a political point of view. Some have pointed out that Paul's comment seems designed to pander to prejudice against blacks. Maybe so. But that prejudice is fed by black behavior more than any other factor. Paul's statement was tactless, but how can the truth be "racist"?

Anyone who reads this blog knows that I am not a supporter of Ron Paul. Paul is a paleolibertarian, and as such, holds foreign policy views that seem similar to those on the far left. For that reason, I cannot support him as a candidate. However, truth is truth and fair is fair. Ron Paul's views on race are often tactless and unhelpful, but not necessarily wrong.

Links to Ron Paul's old Newsletters, copied and pasted from Conservative Networks:

Link Link

Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link

Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link

Link Link Link Link

White Pride World Wide: Ron Paul and the Politics of White Power

2011-12-16T09:57:00.000-08:00

As Ron Paul moves up in the polls, conservatives are vetting him and saying that Paul has a dark past and a shaky present.

Apparently, in the 1980's and 1990's, Paul either authored, or allowed others to author, newsletter articles in his name, expressing hostility to non-white people. Hot Air has the story here.

Hot Air quotes Ron Paul complaining that only about 5% of blacks vote right. The quote ends with this:

Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

Hot Air doesn't explain why this quote is erroneous but, liberal-like, simply put it out there as if the wrongfulness or immorality of the quote is obvious for all to see.

But the quote isn't wrong. Blacks do indeed vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and 95% sounds about right. Also, black crime is indeed "out of proportion to their numbers." Read any FBI report of nationwide crime statistics based on race.

What is wrong with the quote is that it does not even hint at a solution to the problem of black crime. Its only purpose seems to be engendering hostility towards the black race. Now, if Paul were arguing that public disclosure of black crime would help suppress black crime, through the shame factor, that would put the statistics into a better context. Or if he were advocating an honest discussion on race for the purpose of solving related problems -- that would make his comments helpful instead of provocative. An honest discussion of race is what we need, not a P.C. ain't-it-awful approach like that of Hot Air.

Hot Air also vettes Ron Paul's stand on Israel:

Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, “By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government” and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.

On this point, I agree with Hot Air that the comment is over the top. I doubt that it is even true (that Israel is the most powerful lobby in Washington). In any case, Congress should support Israel. Israel is a force for good in the world. However, although I disagree with the comment, I don't find it to be a campaign-ending outrage.

Hot Air makes some solid points against Paul by pointing to his friendly relations with Stormfront, a Neo-Nazi organization. Stormfront's motto is "White Pride World Wide." Oh yes, I am so proud of my epidermis. When I die, I intend to have myself skinned and my white hide tacked to the wall for others to admire. Or, as an old Aussie song goes:

Tan me hide, when I'm dead, Fred

Tan me hide when I'm dead.

So we tanned his hide when he died, Clyde,

and that's it hanging on the shed.

Now I am not ashamed of being white, not one bit. Europeans and their descendants have done much to advance civilization and knowledge. I will truck no racism against white people, nor give credence to anti-white sentiments from other epidermal persuasions.

However, the white supremacists seem to think, quite wrongly, that if you are of a different race than I am, then we must be enemies, that different races must hate each other due to some inherent tribal instinct. Oh horse radish. Such a philosophy can produce nothing good.

So, in conclusion, Ron Paul isn't completely wrong about black crime and discussing it isn't immoral, though it may be politically disadvantageous. Society is not yet ready to discuss race, no matter how badly we need this discussion. I do believe that Paul is somewhat anti-semitic, a trait of the paleoconservative movement of which he is a part. That in itself would be enough for me to pass him by.

More troubling is Ron Paul's association with conspiracy nutcases like Alex Jones, who isn't merely a 911 "Truther" on steroids. Jones is nuts and belongs in a rubber room.

Ron Paul could never be elected president with his associations. Let's not even go there.

Should the GOP Candidate be Mitt Romney?

2011-12-15T11:17:00.000-08:00

Newt Gingrich's poll numbers are descending as other Republicans attack him. The attacks are not without merit, as explained by the Washington Times. Newt has a lot of baggage, and it will be used against him should he become the candidate. Gingrich is very polarizing, apparently. Ann Coulter explains why Newt is a bad idea for our standard bearer.

The Washington Times argues that Mitt Romney is the best choice of the Republican candidates. They say that Romney has the best chance of winning.

I am not wildly enthusiastic about either Gingrich or Romney, but I will vote for whoever the GOP candidate is.

I would vote for a fire hydrant over Barack Obama.

Is Mormonism a Cult? Well, Yes, But So What?

2011-12-14T13:03:00.000-08:00

Joseph Smith

I read in the news that Newt Gingrich fired a campaign staffer for saying that "Mormonism is a cult."

That was an impolitic thing to say, for sure. Mormons tend to be good Americans and are a conservative lot, as a whole.

But is it true?

Yes, it's true. The Mormon religion has very little resemblance to traditional Christianity. It was started by one Joseph Smith in the 19th century. Smith was just one of many false prophets to invent their own religion for power, wealth and booty. (Girl booty, I mean.) The falsity of this man and the incredibly stupid fairy tale he devised should be obvious to anyone with a brain. Basically, Jesus appeared in America after his stint in the Holy Land, and did something with the two different races on this continent, one being the American Indian and the other a race of Roman-like characters who were wiped out by the former.

Smith, like Muhammad, was advised of this alternative religion by the appearance of an angel. The Angel Moroni (Italian for "morons") appeared to Smith, whereas the Angel Gabriel (Arabic for "What a Schmuck") appeared to Muhammad. Apparently, neither of these famous prophets noticed that the angels had hoofs for feet and a tail.

Mormons are nice people, but their religious beliefs seem incredibly stupid to me. Why is there no archaeological evidence that the Roman-type race ever existed? It is an obvious fairly tale that strains credulity to the breaking point. But so what?

As Thomas Jefferson once noted, the fact that other men have a different religion than I, or no religion at all, doesn't harm me. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. So Mormons, have your fun, believe your beliefs -- it's no skin off my nose. Since Mormons aren't practicing jihad or blowing up trains or sawing off heads, I don't mind. What I like about Mormons is their strong family values and community and cultural ties, which however they were instituted, are a very good thing. In spite of their dubious origins, I have a lot of respect for the people of this faith.

Mormons' punishment for following the faker Smith will be incredulous laughter when they get to heaven. Peter will welcome them at the Pearly Gate with tears running down his cheeks from mirth as he chokes out, between guffaws, "What on earth were you thinking?" But he will let them in.

I'm not sure what God will do with Joseph Smith, however. Maybe reincarnate him as a toad. On the other hand, Smith might win the all-time Tall-Tales or Whopper contest.

Motivations Behind Liberal Beliefs

2011-12-14T12:45:00.000-08:00

Some recent nasty encounters with liberals makes me want to list the reasons behind liberal beliefs. So here goes a list, subject to revision:

1. Liberals believe that reality can be altered by simple denial. If we all believe, say, that Islam is a peaceful religion, then by God, Islam is a peaceful religion. You must ignore widespread Islamic violence, aggression and mass murder, or explain it away, or seek to establish "moral equivalence." So Muslims just blew up New York? Hey, the ancient Israelites did some pretty nasty things 4,000 years ago, and the Christians had the Spanish Inquisition. How these factoids are to protect us from terrorism in the here and now isn't clear.

2. Related point to number 1 above: liberals believe that all people, everywhere and in every epoch of history, used the same paradigms, believed the same things, held the same values and are almost identical to modern liberals in thought, behavior and outlook. The fact that mass murder could be highly desirable to a different culture is just unacceptable. So they mentally screen it out.

More along these lines later.

Studying for Spanish Final

2011-12-14T12:08:00.000-08:00

Posting will be light if at all today and tomorrow.

I am studying for my Spanish final. It will be all about the past tense, or preterit form of verbs.

Preterit verbs follow consistent patterns in regular verbs, but there are many exceptions for irregular verbs.

So here I am, trying to sort it all out.

Barack Obama as "The Grinch" (Photoshop)

2011-12-11T21:20:00.000-08:00

The man who stole Christmas...for many.

Newt Gingrich Tells the Truth About the So-Called "Palestinians"

2011-12-11T13:25:00.000-08:00

In last night's debate, Newt Gingrich stated that the "Palestinians" are "an invented people," that they have no history or tradition. He also stated that the "peace process" in the Middle East is a farce.

He was right on both counts.

The "Palestinians" are Muslims whose religion commands them to hate and kill Jews; their bigotry is ordained by their false prophet, Muhammad, and his ventriloquist dummy, Allah (or is it the other way around?). Seems Muhammad was annoyed when the Jews refused to believe the ventriloquist dummy's insistence that Muhammad was the new prophet to whom obeisance was due. Muhammad then closed his act by having the dummy shout "Kill Jews wherever you find them!" The ancient Bedouins, believed the dummy was real, since ventriloquism was still pretty new in the 7th century. In any case, they still follow his dictates to this day.

Because of this, the "Palestinians" have only one goal, and that is the destruction of the State of Israel and the removal of all Jews from the area (preferably through mass murder). Any negotiations with these vermin will produce nothing of value. They see the negotiations and the "peace process" as mere stratagems, pretenses for obtaining their real goal, the death of Israel. There is no possibility that the negotiations can ever lead anywhere, or can ever produce peace in the Middle East. They are a complete waste of time, except to provide yet another photo op and sound bite for American presidents in search of "legacies" or re-election.

Gingrich's strong support of Israel expiates many of his sins. I will vote for this man.

Disgusting: Iran's Capture of a High-Tech Drone

2011-12-11T13:14:00.000-08:00

I am so disgusted with Obama. One of our high-tech, stealth drones was somehow captured by Iran, apparently in one piece and good working order. Obama could have either sent in commandos to retrieve the drone, or could have had them destroy it to keep it out of enemy hands. But he did nothing.

Iran is expected to sell the drone to Russia or China so they can reverse engineer the drone and one of our strategic advantages will be lost to our potential enemies.

What I want to know is this: why aren't such devices equipped with a self-destruct charge that could be triggered remotely? Then we could destroy captured drones without having to put our commandos in harm's way.

"Five Feet of Fury" Has a Newly Tweaked Blog Banner

2011-12-11T10:15:00.000-08:00

I often tweak photos in Photoshop just to learn some new tricks and techniques. A week or so ago, I noticed that Kathy Shaidle's blog banner didn't look quite right. The chrome-like lettering on the car grille didn't have the right perspective. It should appear to conform to the angle of the grille and appeared to be just hanging there. So I fixed it, using a better and bolder font and sent her my suggested correction. She finally swapped it out for the old one and now it looks better.

See for yourself: Original on top, my amended version on the bottom:

The Republican Debate in Des Moines, Iowa

2011-12-11T09:21:00.000-08:00

Last night I watched the Republican debate in Des Moines, Iowa. It was only the second time I watched one of these debates. This was the 12th debate. It was eye-opening in many ways.

Here are my impressions:
1. Newt Gingrich is a powerful debater and speaker and would destroy Obama in any debate. He looked and sounded very presidential. This guy could dispute the law of gravity and make a compelling case for it. He did a good job of explaining his prior involvement in controversial issues. His belief in man-made global warming is of continuing concern to me, but of the bunch, I would give him the highest marks. I like him better than Romney. His credibility with me: up a lot.

2. Mitt Romney is also a good speaker and debater and justified Massachusetts' socialized health care experiment as within the purview of the 10th Amendment, i.e. powers retained by the states. On this he is absolutely correct. Socialized medicine is a bad idea, but if any state wants to enact bad ideas (like this and gay marriage), they have a Constitutional right to do so. (The federal government, he stressed, has no Constitutional right to impose socialized health care on the states. Right again.) Further, the people of Massachusetts wanted socialized medicine by a margin of 3 to 1. Romney had little choice or power to resist the popular will. His credibility with me: up somewhat.

3. Rick Perry wasn't scintillating, but showed none of the mental confusion described for prior debates. He seemed reasonably presidential, but did not excite me with the possibilities. My impression of him: up very slightly, but based only on the fact that he didn't fall on his face.

4. Rick Santorum didn't say much that I remember. He said his venture into politics was inspired by listening to tapes of Newt Gingrich speeches. He would make a good VP pick. His credibility with me is about the same as before the debate: a good guy, but far from convincing that he is ready for the top spot.

5. Ron Paul continues to be the kindly grandfather of the Republican Party; you love him even though you think he's getting a bit senile or going batty in his senior years. He continued to insist that the USA withdraw from the world and stop being "the world's policeman." He is partially right. We had no business in Libya and our "nation building" in Iraq and Afghanistan was a fool's errand. No more of that expensive foolishness. His credibility with me is unchanged, and I still don't want him to be the Republican candidate.

6. Michele Bachmann was a disappointment. She relied on cheap pot-shots, slogans and sound bites to argue that she is the only "consistent conservative" and therefore worthy of the top spot. She made the debate into a struggle for "one upmanship," did not show any real insight into the major issues. Her credibility with me is down.

Based on this one debate, I would say the ticket should be Newt Gingrich/Rick Santorum as the president/vice president ticket for 2012.

And if that doesn't work, vote "anyone but Obama" and you won't go far wrong.

Did Hollywood Shooter Shout "Alihu Akbar"? Did Lincoln Free the Slaves?

2011-12-10T11:01:00.000-08:00

Self-delusion takes many forms, and Americans are hardly immune to replacing reality with myths and fantasies.

Yesterday, some schmuck in Hollywood walked down the street firing random shots from a handgun, wounding one person. The police arrived on the scene and promptly shot him dead. (Thank God for the police, who always man the skirmish line between civilization and chaos.)

Now some people are saying the 26 year old man, one Tyler Brehm, was shouting the Muslim war cry "Alihu Akbar" as he fired the shots. If true, none of the mainstream media are reporting this aspect of the incident. We have all noted how the MSM filters the news, deliberately omitting facts that could have a bearing on public opinion and the safety of the American people. Never mentioning the Muslim connection to crimes is at the top of their list. Many reports still refuse to mention Major Nidal Hassan's radical Muslim ties in the Fort Hood shooting and massacre. They refer to it as "workplace violence" instead of what it was, Islamic violence based on religious beliefs in jihad. It was Hassan's belief in Islam that compelled him to commit mass murder.

I don't know if Tyler Brehm was a Muslim or not. He could very well have been nuts, acting out a scenario he learned from somewhere (probably not the MSM). However, this latest incident proves that many Americans have an irrational belief in reality-alteration: if you refuse to admit unpleasant truths, well then they just aren't true after all. Islam isn't violent unless we SAY Islam is violent, external reality notwithstanding.

Conservatives, as a whole, aren't any better than liberals in this regard. This was made clear this week when Zo of Zo-Nation, of Pajamas Media, called for the permanent furling of the Confederate flag. Such foolish comments always set off a round of nasty debates on the Civil War: who was right? What was the reason for the war? The short and sweet answer is that the South was right and the North completely, irrefutably and indelibly wrong.

Many conservatives continue to insist that Abraham Lincoln was the second coming, a great prophet of racial equality, human rights and enlightenment, who had no choice but to fight the Civil War in order to free the slaves, because he was just so darned moral and righteous. He wasn't. What he was, was a ruthless politician who hated blacks and loved high taxes and a strong central government. His rule was a reign of terror. The mass death and destruction didn't bother him. He was concerned with the larger questions, like, "Let the South secede? Who will pay my tariff?"

Lincoln is a historic fraud whose statue in Washington D.C. should be jackhammered into rubble and thrown into the Potomac. He was the antithesis of everything that conservatives are supposed to believe in, and there's the rub. We love limited government, the rule of law and the Constitution, yet we worship a man who was the exact opposite of our ideal.

Lately I have been arguing with "conservatives" over at YouTube over Zo's unfortunate claim that it is "time to furl the Confederate flag." Needless to say, I weighed in, dispelling the Northern myth with facts, only to receive in return some rather vicious, insulting and hateful responses. "Conservatives," like liberals, get mightily pissed when their shining myths are replaced with the cold and sober truth. Will that make me shut up? Not on your life.

Facts About the U.S.S. Arizona and the Attack on Pearl Harbor -- Inside the Wreck (Facts, Photos, Videos)

2011-12-08T13:10:00.000-08:00

The Arizona Underway

I saw an interesting documentary on the History Channel last night. It was about the days following December 7, 1941; what FDR thought and did, how he dealt with Congress, how he wrote his simple but inspiring speech delivered to the American people a few days later.

Many ships were damaged or sunk during the Japanese air raid, but only the Arizona and the Utah were put permanently out of action. The wrecks of both remain sunken at Pearl Harbor.

The Arizona was launched in 1915 and commissioned in 1916, though she saw no action during the First World War. Between the wars she was used mainly for training and was berthed in California. During the 1930s, the ship was modernized. In April 1940 the ship was ordered to Hawaii to act as a deterrent for Japanese aggression, a plan which regrettably failed.

During the Japanese attack of December 7, 1941, the Arizona was sunk by a Japanese bomb that penetrated the forward deck, possibly through an open hatch. The bomb ignited ammunition magazines in the forward deck, causing a huge explosion that rapidly sunk the ship, killing 1,177 officers and sailors. Due to the dangers of recovering bodies from the ship, the dead were left within and the Arizona became their tomb.

The USS Arizona After Modernization
in 1935

The mangled superstructure of the ship towered above the surface of the water for many months, until it was removed for spare parts and salvage. In 1962, the Arizona Memorial was built over the Arizona's sunken hull in Pearl Harbor, with a marble wall with the names of the Arizona dead inscribed thereon. I have been to that wall and it is a touching and sobering sight.

No one is allowed to dive on the Arizona except those authorized by the U.S. Navy or U.S. Park Service. No one is allowed to retrieve artifacts from the wreck, as it is an official military grave. The Park Service has filmed inside the wreck to learn how to preserve and protect the integrity of the site. Below is a video taken of scenes inside the wreck. It shows a telephone on a desk, desks with lamps, a closet with hangers and Navy pants hanging from one; a bathroom with a cup on a sink with a tube of toothpaste in it. Other divers have reported seeing other artifacts on the deck: a cooking pot, a desk fan, bottles of aftershave, a medicine case containing a razor, disposable blades, and a shot glass. In one film (see list below) I saw a Coca Cola bottle with the top broken off.

Strange to see all the detritus of human life as it was in 1941, suggestive of the lives so suddenly taken.

Other photos worth your time:
Raw footage of another dive to the deck of the Arizona, showing artifacts on the deck.
US Military History Files - Many Pearl Harbor photos rarely seen by the public.
The Memorial Wall in the Arizona Memorial.
Another Photo of the Memorial Wall.
History of the USS Arizona
Photo of wrecked Arizona (after all fires extinguished), its superstructure extending from surface of the water
A series of photos of December 7, 1941, including battleship row and Japanese planes

70 Years After Pearl Harbor (Rare Color Video of the Attack)

2011-12-07T18:09:00.000-08:00

Seventy years have passed since the Japanese military attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. December 7, 1941 was, as President Roosevelt described it, a date that will live in infamy.

Seventy years. A lifetime ago.The ship still sits on the bottom of the channel there, sunk by Japanese bombs all those years ago. The bones of most of its dead are still inside the ship.I recently saw a television show that showed a submersible robot sent into the wreck to film inside the ship. There was a closet with its door open, and inside hung three or four Navy officer's jackets, still on their hangers. They looked imminently wearable. Strange that they had survived the conflagration and seven decades under water.God bless the men and women who died in the attack, both military and civilian. May we never forget.

Merry Christmas from Bogie and Missy! (Warning: Sickeningly Cute Pets Photoshop)

2011-12-05T14:31:00.000-08:00

Wake us when the eggnog's ready...

This is a Photoshop of my two pets. The original picture of them relaxing on a pillow on the sofa is real, but I changed the pillow color from blue to beige, Photoshopped a couple of Santa hats onto them and added the fireplace as a background.

Need a holiday Photoshop? Email me the picture you want and how you want it changed (in general, no need to be overly specific). I can put your blog or website message in it too, all for a small contribution to this blog (say, $25).

You can also take the graphic to Target or any department store that handles pictures and use it to make your family Christmas cards. (I can duplicate the image with the name of your family for no extra charge.)

Herman Cain Quits Presidential Race

2011-12-04T12:58:00.000-08:00

Not surprisingly, Cain quit the presidential race yesterday, stating that he was "suspending his campaign." He pointed to the cloud hanging over him from sexual misconduct allegations, as well as his inability to raise enough money to be competitive.

The Democrat media found a weak spot and exploited it for all it was worth, and succeeded in removing Cain from the race. They hanged him, but he provided the rope.

Note how the biased mainstream media operates in the realm of politics. They search earnestly for any kind of scandal or pseudo-scandal that they can exploit against Republican candidates but are generally silent and protective of Democrat candidates. Bill Clinton was a horn-dog on steroids, but his encyclopedic sexual peccadilloes were ignored by the mainstream press. Obama's radical and dope connections have also been ignored by the media.

A scandal is only a scandal if it is reported in the press, over and over again. A scandal is not a scandal if no one ever speaks or writes about it.

So who is the Tea Party pick for president now? Or does it matter? It appears we will be stuck with an establishment, big-government Republican, either Mitt (Socialized Medicine) Romney or Newt (Global Warming) Gingrich.

Obama's War on Private Enterprise

2011-12-03T10:39:00.000-08:00

If you have a business, do you expand, offer new product lines, hire more people?

It largely depends on whether the economy is growing or shrinking, whether the president and his cabinet believe in free enterprise or see it as an enemy to be defeated. If the latter, businesses will hold off on expansion until conditions are more favorable.

Barack Obama is seen more and more as a president who hates private enterprise, sees the profit motive as evil and business as something to thwart. Ed Lasky, writing in the American Thinker today, quotes Obama's line from "Dreams From My Father": that while he was employed in the private sector, Obama felt like he was "a spy behind enemy lines."

This kind of insane thinking is common on the left. Business is the enemy. So those who want consumer goods, e.g. appliances, homes, cars, clothes, food, furniture etc are forced to deal with this "enemy." Well the enemy is definitely in retreat, General Obama. Business is producing a lot less of these goodies nowadays, because people can't afford them as easily as they used to. When business is the enemy there are no jobs.

Lasky explains why.

Spicing Up a Boring Week With Freddy Fender!

2011-12-01T08:26:00.000-08:00

I'm bored. The mysterious explosions at Iranian nuclear facilities were fun, but I need something more. Aha! Then I thought of Freddy Fender.

Freddy sang "Tex-Mex" style and one of his songs that I love is "Rancho Grande." I always loved it but didn't understand a single word; now I am taking Spanish and have the highest grade in the class (I got 100% right on my last midterm). Now I understand the words to "Rancho Grande." Here's Freddy singing it live, followed by "Before the Next Teardrop Falls." (Freddy was born in Texas and was a U.S. Marine, but valued his Mexican heritage mucho.)

"Rancho Grande" is a traditional Ranchero song, very popular in Mexico, and often performed by Mariachi bands. Freddy, however, altered the song with a new verse of his own making:

Cuando se muere mi suegra,
Que la entieren boca abajo,
Que si quiere salirse,
Que se vaya más abajo

It translates: When my mother-in-law dies, let them bury her upside down, so if she wants to get out, she'll just go further down.

Nasty! I liked my mother-in-law, but I guess Freddy didn't like his.

So Long, Herman Cain, It Was Great Knowing You

2011-11-30T07:32:00.000-08:00

He's Done: Cain Waves Bye-Bye

This week a woman in Atlanta, one Ginger White, stated that she had a "casual affair" with Herman Cain over a twelve to thirteen year period. Whereas Cain's former accusers were neither specific nor particularly credible, White's accusations appear believable.

The mounting impression is that Herman Cain is a horn-dog along the lines of Bill Clinton. As such, he carries a lot of baggage into the race for president and this latest revelation undoubtedly terminates his chance to become president of the United States.

I have vigorously defended Cain in previous posts, but will defend him no longer. I don't particularly care about his private sex life, but many other voters will care, and will pass him by. So for that reason, I say, "So long, Herman, it was nice knowin' ya."

Now if there are any other Randy Roaming Republicans out there who want to run for office, I have one word of advice: Don't. Don't waste our time. Stay home and rent "Debby Does Dallas" and leave us the hell alone.

Are the Libertarians Right About Abraham Lincoln?

2011-11-29T13:58:00.000-08:00

Lincoln Prepares for Office

Libertarians like Ron Paul believe that Abraham Lincoln (believed by many to be our greatest president) was actually our most despotic, our greatest shredder of the Constitution. A few days ago, one of the writers at Powerline asked, somewhat humorously, if Ron Paul thought Lincoln was such a Constitution shredder, why did Paul belong to the party of Lincoln?

Powerline's question was stupid and it irked me. Paul is a Republican because it is the lesser of two evils. No doubt Paul feels he can find more allies for common cause in the Republican Party than he ever could in the Democratic. What other choice does he have? I assume Powerline is aware that the current Republican Party is not invading sovereign states, shutting down newspapers, arresting entire state legislatures, deporting federal congressmen who disagree, suspending habeas corpus, imprisoning thousands without charges or trial, and attempting to arrest the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for ruling against them.

Of course, if any president were doing this today he would be run out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered and speedily impeached. However, when you are a martyr from assassination and live safely in the distant past, one is more likely to discount your crimes and even celebrate them and hold them up as an example of heroic behavior.

Most people are just unaware of Lincoln's actual legacy. He has been beatified, apotheosized, his face made into an icon and submerged into our consciences from kindergarten on. His stern visage is displayed along side that of Washington, is carved on Mt. Rushmore and printed on the five dollar bill.  His mythology has been made into an unquestioned article of faith, and anyone who questions it guilty of apostasy. He was the Great Emancipator, the rail-splitter, the young man who studied law by his fireplace in a log cabin, using charcoal sticks to write his lessons on the back of a shovel. A shovel, it seems, is exactly what is needed to shed a more accurate light on this man's career and character.

In any case, I responded to Powerline's really dumb question by informing them that Lincoln's crimes against the Constitution were well known and easily listed, and I listed some of them as proof. This brought some angry responses from some of the Powerline readers, one of whom was really vicious. People who revere Abraham Lincoln do not like having holes poked in their fantasies, and it showed. I am neither a libertarian nor a supporter of Ron Paul (I have attacked him far more in this blog than I have supported him, and you can look it up). However, I am a Confederate descendant, and when it was your ancestors that bore the brunt of this president's total war against states and civilians, you tend not to be so mesmerized by the man's shining myth.

I started looking for material on Lincoln, and found a similar thread at Free Republic, where the pro-Lincoln commenters were even more vicious than those at Powerline. (I was banned from Free Republic several years ago for defending the South.)

Well my search for material on Lincoln's crimes yielded fruit, and at some time in the future I will list those crimes and why they are important to acknowledge in the here and now. In short, Lincoln assumed the role of a dictator during the Civil War and swept away all Constitutional safeguards in pursuit of empire. He did not save the Union, he destroyed it, replacing it with something else, a consolidated republic wherein the individual (and formerly sovereign) states are little more than postal zones.

I don't agree with the libertarians much at all when it comes to foreign policy, but when it comes to Abraham Lincoln, they got it right. The man was a disaster.

Here is one of my resources; an online book you can read for free. It's called "America's Caesar," by Greg Loren Durand. Read it at this link.

"Occupy" Thugs Attack San Diego Wall-Mart

2011-11-27T08:41:00.000-08:00

On Black Friday a bunch of "Occupy" leftists attacked a Wall-Mart store in San Diego. They filled up 75 shopping carts full of store items, then got in line to the cash register. Their leader, the first in line, then broadcast socialist propaganda to the rest of the shoppers, stating how bad a corporation Wall-Mart is for offering goods at low and affordable prices. Apparently, to the Occupy movement, poor people having any kind of Christmas is just unacceptable.

The Occupy scum then left the 75 filled shopping carts in the checkout line and left the store, leaving it to the Wall-Mart staff to restock the shelves.

Of course, the Occupy slime aren't really attacking Wall-Mart for low prices, or for "harming the environment," or for paying lower wages or benefits to workers. They are attacking Wall-Mart because it represents free enterprise and capitalism.

The real goal of the "Occupy" movement is to increase governmental control of the economy, en route to their eventual goal of ending private ownership of the means of production -- a long time, long-term Marxist goal.

Read the article here.

Lady GaGa sings "White Christmas" and Does an Amazing Job

2011-11-26T09:00:00.000-08:00

I don't know what's up with the very weird (but nice) Lady GaGa. Lately she's been singing "American Songbook" old standards with Tony Bennett and also as a soloist. In this clip she sings the great old song "White Christmas," backed up by a traditional jazz ensemble, complete with string bass! If she keeps this up I will become an official fan.

video platform video management video solutions video player

Happy Thanksgiving

2011-11-24T00:01:00.000-08:00

Getting Ready for Thanksgiving: Home Made Tamales

2011-11-23T20:19:00.000-08:00

Tamales

Wifey is making tamales from scratch. Well, except for the masa, which she bought freshly ground from a bakery. Masa is like corn meal, only much finer. It is corn dough. It's the coating around the meat in tamales.

I have loved tamales since I was a small child. I was fascinated by the funny paper wrappings around them and wondered how they made it. Years later I realized that the funny paper was really the sheaves from corn husks.

Wifey is making regular meat tamales, but also sweet tamales, with raisins and pineapple and brown sugar. When she isn't looking I swipe a spoonful of the mixed sweet masa and eat it raw. Yum!

She's also making a third kind of tamale, cheese tamales, with Monterey Jack cheese and mild Jalapenos (big Mexican peppers).

We will take a load of these tamales to the family Thanksgiving dinner in San Jose tomorrow. They should be a big hit!

The Real Meaning of Thanksgiving: the Triumph of Capitalism Over Communism

2011-11-23T08:29:00.000-08:00

Always on Watch referred me to this excellent essay by the American Institute of Economic Research. It's titled The Real Meaning of Thanksgiving: the Triumph of Capitalism Over Communism.

This essay recounts the collectivist experiment of the first American colonists and how it failed, leading to starvation and death among the English Puritans who came to Plymouth Rock in 1620. After a couple of winters of want and privation, the colonists changed the system to one of self-interest: each family was allowed to grow and keep its own crops. The result was prosperity and plenty. The reason is simple: people will work very hard for the benefit of themselves and their families, but not for a collective in which the lazy and unproductive are given equal rewards with the industrious:

The Plymouth Colony experienced a great bounty of food. Private ownership meant that there was now a close link between work and reward. Industry became the order of the day as the men and women in each family went to the fields on their separate private farms. When the harvest time came, not only did many families produce enough for their own needs, but they had surpluses that they could freely exchange with their neighbors for mutual benefit and improvement.

These simple truths are well established, and are the reason why the "Occupy" movement will fail: it is a movement of the lazy, spoiled and selfish, insisting that the world owes them a living and that it is the duty of their fellow citizens to provide it.

Read the entire essay here.

48 Years and Counting

2011-11-22T08:28:00.000-08:00

Today forty-eight years have passed since Lee Harvey Oswald murdered President Kennedy in Dallas. Funny how time flies.

Of course, a massive conspiracy killed Kennedy. Just ask any campus radical or your local paranoid. They know. A conspiracy of the federal government, the CIA, the Mafia, the Dallas Police and some guy watching the parade from under an umbrella.

This massive conspiracy just goes to show how amazingly competent the government is. Not only can it bring hundreds (if not thousands) of public officials together to commit treason and murder, it can foresee every contingency and hide all of the facts, perpetrators and accomplices for 48 years. Yep, the federal government is that good. How else could they fake the moon landings, assassinate Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, then carry out the false flag operation in New York on 9/11/2001? Even now, the government is watching us through our computers, pulling strings, manipulating every factoid and daily occurrence from the fender bender on the corner to the latest war in the Middle East. These guys would make the super-government in "1984" look like rank amateurs. Now you know why the post office is so coldly efficient.

Of course I am being sarcastic. I have always believed that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy, and that he acted alone. The Warren Commission had it right all along. And I will keep saying that as long as my checks from the CIA keep coming...or until I suddenly disappear one day after the black helicopters come for me....

Will Obama be the Democratic Candidate in 2012? How Could Things Get Any Worse for Him?

2011-11-21T11:42:00.000-08:00

Barack Obama's incompetence and lack of suitability for the presidency is becoming increasingly obvious even to Democrats. This week Chris Matthews of "tingles up my leg" fame announced his profound disappointment with the Being of Light. Always on Watch has more details and a video here.

What was obvious to conservatives prior to the 2008 election is now becoming obvious to Obama-believers: the man is an empty suit. It is scary to see how easily a majority of American voters can be taken in by a slick media campaign and self-delude to such an extent. Obama was, as I said in an earlier post, a Rorschach Ink Blot, an unknown symbol onto which the dreamers could project their personal fantasies and believe that he was the second coming, the "one we have all been waiting for," a man who must be all-wise, all-knowing and all-good. After all, he had such a nice, razor-sharp crease in his pants-leg, a sure sign of a new King Arthur pulling Excalibur from the stone.

The news for King Arthur II only gets worse. Major Bloomberg of New York is blasting Obama for the failure of the "Super Committee," calling it "a disaster." Bloomberg said:

"I just think that the failure of the supercommittee to come to an agreement is a damning indictment of Washington's ability to govern this country," the mayor said during a press conference announcing a supermarket opening on Staten Island.

A New Hampshire poll shows Romney defeating Obama by 10 percentage points:

Obama trails Republican Mitt Romney among likely general election voters in the state by 10 percentage points in a hypothetical contest amid voter discontent with the president’s job performance and the economy, according to a Bloomberg News poll conducted Nov. 10-11. Obama carried New Hampshire by 54 percent to 45 percent in 2008.

Independent voters in the state, the site of the nation’s first presidential primary, have swung even more strongly against Obama. Romney would win independents there by 15 percentage points, the poll shows.

Obama has been a “lackluster” president with “no steady plan to create jobs,” says poll respondent Karl Swanson, 61, a marketing consultant and political independent who lives in Rye.

The question now in my mind is this: will Barack Obama step down and allow another Democrat to run for president in 2012? Personally, I doubt it. I don't think Obama is that unselfish.

"No Sheeples Here" Alive and Well and Living at "Political Clown Parade"

2011-11-19T20:14:00.000-08:00

There was a lot of fanfare and hoopla when Carol and "No Sheeples Here" suddenly disappeared from the blogosphere last June 24. I wondered why someone so enthused about blogging and Photoshop would disappear so quickly without much of an explanation.

Apparently, Carol didn't disappear, she just changed her online indentity. She is now blogging under the pseudonym "Curmudgeon" at her new blog, "Political Clown Parade." "Curmudgeon" responded to inquiries about Carol's whereabouts here, making it clear that she is indeed Carol from No Sheeples Here.

The theme and layout of this new blog is very much like the old "No Sheeples Here" blog.

The first entry in this new blog is June 24, 2011, so apparently Carol just continued blogging under a different identity with no layoff at all.

What gives, Carol?

Update: I notice a number of Carol's old blogger friends linking to her and leaving comments while pretending not to know who she is. Her number one supporter seems to (still) be Smitty of the Other McCain. Weird goings-on here.

Medal of Honor Recipients in Arlington National Cemetery

2011-11-18T22:32:00.000-08:00

I wandered onto a page listing all of the Medal of Honor recipients who are buried in Arlington Cemetery. I selected several names at random just to read about the man behind the name. The result was several inspiring stories of valor and bravery, of soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen. One was a captain in the horse cavalry who fought Indians in Arizona. Another was a marine who served in China during the Boxer Rebellion in 1900. A soldier earned his medal in 1918, in World War I in France, and a sailor saved lives in Korea in 1951. Of course, there were some stories from World War II as well.

There was only one name in the Z section, that of Lt. Colonel James Zeamer Jr., of the United States Army Air Corps (the service that predated the Air Force). Zeamer won the Medal of Honor fighting off Japanese fighters from a bomber near New Guinea in 1943. One of his crewmen, one Joseph R. Sarnoski, also won the Medal of Honor in the same plane in the same fight. Sarnoski shot down several Japanese planes, but was mortally wounded in the fight. Knocked down by an explosive shell, he crawled back to his machine gun and continued firing until death overtook him. He died at his station.

Sarnoski was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, was buried in New Guinea, his remains later relocated to the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, in Hawaii. Read all about this brave American here.

Lt. Colonel Zeamer survived World War II and died in March 2007 at the age of 88, his interment being in Arlington Cemetery.

If you want inspiration by great Americans, do visit this site and read several obituaries at random. You will meet great men from other times and be inspired.

Paul Ryan: Making Sense on the Economy and Why OWS is Wrong

2011-11-18T09:04:00.000-08:00

Rep. Paul Ryan

Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin shares some economic wisdom in an interview with the American Enterprise Institute. He explains well why "wealth redistribution" only makes people poorer, destroys opportunity and increases misery.

His solution to poverty and unemployment:

...our answer is upward mobility — not begrudging people who become successful, but making it easier for people to find success, to bring those rungs of the economic ladder within reach of people who’ve never scaled it before. Grow the pie versus redistribute slices of a shrinking pie. That’s what our society has always prided itself on. That’s the American system we’ve had. … It would be a shame to get rid of it and transform it into a social democracy model like you have in Europe, which simply means bitter austerity and shared misery.

On why redistribution is not the answer to poverty:

I’m just saying look at the complete picture. And the complete picture is that our transfer programs should be aimed at the people who need them, not people who don’t. Our tax system should not have as its primary, guiding principle redistribution. It should have growth as its primary principle so you can accelerate mobility. When you have a tax system aimed at redistribution and narrowing disparities, you end up slowing down growth and slowing down mobility.

On government "fixing" income disparity:

As a person in government, I don’t see it as my job to try and micromanage the outcome of people’s lives. I see it as trying to advance the premise of equality of opportunity and getting people as much opportunity to improve themselves as possible. … The whole premise of this argument is wrong. The economy is not a zero-sum system. One man’s gain does not necessarily come at another man’s loss. … Wealth is created. Steve Jobs started Apple in his garage not by taking from somebody else but by creating and inventing something. Wealth and growth are organic and don’t necessarily come from somebody else’s loss.

On Barack Obama's "class warfare" strategy for reelection:

There’s far more anxiety in society because the economy is so bad. … It’s easier to find a scapegoat than address the root causes of these problems. But obviously [President Barack Obama] is banking his reelection on this tact. … He doesn’t have a good record to run on. The results are abysmal. He’s clearly not going to triangulate like Bill Clinton because … he’s far more ideological than Bill Clinton was. … So all he’s got left is to take all the anxiety that is building in America and try and tap into it and channel it toward class resentment. These are powerful emotions — fear, envy, anxiety, resentment — very powerful emotions but dark emotions. They are extremely divisive. But it seems to me that’s the plan.

Ryan imparts a lot of insight and wisdom. Read the whole interview here.

Thanksgiving With Stogie: The Turkey's Ready and the Table is Set! (Photoshop)

2011-11-17T21:15:00.000-08:00

I just created a Thanksgiving motif for a blogger friend and will do the same for others for a small donation. Here's the one I created for myself, a little early, but what the heck. The Turkey's ready! Let's give thanks and partake. All images were taken off the web and combined to make the graphic below, including the Victorian wainscoting and wall paper and the red mahogany table. I created the nifty old-fashioned needle point with a free font I got off the web. Am I cool or what?

The Kitty Cat Chorus: How Do These Kids Sing This Without Cracking Up? (Video)

2011-11-16T17:19:00.001-08:00

The Three Tenors Sing "Cielito Lindo" (My Favorite Spanish Song)

2011-11-14T19:11:00.000-08:00

I'm taking my first semester of Spanish at the local community college here in Hollister, and enjoying it very much. Learning a foreign language has always been easy to me for some reason, and I am getting a solid A in the class. (That's me in the sombrero - it's a Photoshop.) I know we as conservatives often attach negative feelings to many things Spanish, Mexican or Hispanic, because of the influx of illegal immigrants, the gangs and the drugs. However, Hispanic culture is often rich and beautiful and we should not be blind to those qualities.

A song I have loved since childhood is the Spanish song from Mexico, "Cielito Lindo." Per Wikipedia,

"Cielito lindo" is a popular Ranchera song from Mexico, written in 1882 by Quirino Mendoza y Cortés (c. 1859–1957).[1] It is roughly translated as "Lovely Sweet One". Although the word "cielo" means sky or heaven, it is also a term of endearment comparable to sweetheart or honey. "Cielito" can thus be translated as "sweetie"; "lindo" means cute, lovely or pretty. Sometimes the song is known by words from the refrain, "Canta y no llores". ["sing and don't cry"]

Commonly played by mariachi bands, it has been recorded by many artists in the original Spanish or in English and other languages using the melody of the song. In recent decades it has come to be widely known as a theme song for Mexicans, particularly at international events, like the FIFA World Cup.

When I was a kid I didn't know the words so would just sing, "Ay, ay, ay, ay! Oh my sombrero!" That's all I knew and it was wrong. The refrain is quite famous. It goes:

Ay, ay, ay, ay,
Canta y no llores, [Sing and don't cry]
Porque cantando se alegran, [Because singing gladdens,]
Cielito lindo, los corazones. [My dear, our hearts.]

The full words and translation of this great song can be found here.

Finally, here singing a shortened version of the song are the "Three Tenors" [the Spanish singers Plácido Domingo and José Carreras and the Italian singer Luciano Pavarotti]:

A longer version, with a lovely children's choir, can be viewed here.