If Congress authorizes B.O.'s billion-dollar climate change crapola fund, the Redcoats should be invited back to finish doing to Washington DC what they started in 1814.
If B.O. really cares about the drought-stricken California farmers, he would tell the EPA to screw the Delta Smelt (some of them are libertine Democrats and would try it) and give the farmers their irrigation back. Just like in Ethiopia, there's nothing like liberal policies to turn a farmer's paradise into a smoking desert. Your speeches won't help, Prez. Manure they already have.
Repeat after me, Tea Partiers:
John Boehner is not the enemy; he is an obstacle that can be moved. Barack Obama is the enemy, Harry Reid is the enemy, Nancy Pelosi is an enemy, Eric Holder is the enemy. We must make the Republicans allies or we will lose the future presently.
Moderate Republicans can be persuaded; Ronald Reagan did it. Nothing he did cannot be repeated if we learn from him. Persuasion works better than abuse. Abusing and demeaning Boehner while he was co-operating with us during the "shut-down" was a mistake. No-one will shake hands and become our allies while we are throwing bricks at them.
Nothing the moderates in the GOP want to do is nearly as stupid as carbon dioxide sequestration in air-tight containers in the soil, keeping the carbon dioxide from the plants that need it to grow. The Republican moderates do not wish to take over the health industry completely. They do not wish to destroy the coal industry and cripple American energy production. They do not want to destroy the California farming industry to protect a worthless five-inch fish. They do not want to force-feed student insufficient lunches that "taste like vomit". It is Democrats that want to do that.
Paul Ryan can be repaired. Harry Reid cannot.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Friday, February 7, 2014
Why I don't use the term "gay"
I've been twittering (?) for 6-8 weeks now. It's often fun, it gives you a chance to correspond with the rich and/or famous (Charlie Daniels is a very nice man), and sometimes sadly it's an interesting cross-section of Internet humanity. Recently I had an experience that reminded me of why I refuse to call homosexuals "gay".
I saw an exchange of tweets between +KillerBunnyFooFoo (one of my favorites) and a self-professed homosexual man. Unsurprisingly, if you know our Bunny, they had a disagreement. Instead of meeting her on the intellectual fields of battle, he made it clear that he wanted to call her ... the 4 letter c-word that is not in the vocabulary of decent people. Bunny responded that homosexual men have often called her that illogical, unspeakable word. Being in a cheerful humor that night, I chipped in with my doubts that a homosexual man would not recognize one of the items he had referred to if he saw one. (Actually, the fact that he called Bunny one is proof positive that he knows not of what he speaks.) Looking back, I should have taken the clod's handle off of my response. Another mistake, I guess.
Most people, when they have been called out for being obnoxious, will back out of trouble with as much good grace as they can muster. Not our zero, though. He wrote "Your picture is a good start."
Now, the picture I use for my Twitter account is of one of my heroes, Marshal Josef Pilsudski, the hero of the Second Polish Republic. In fact, it is this photo:
... and boy genius called this picture a good start at understanding what one of "those" looks like.
That's too often the case with outspoken homosexuals. They are reflexively and venomously hostile to anyone and everyone who declines to celebrate their sexual disorientation. I would refuse to use the term "gay" anyway, because it is a smoke-screen meant to deceive instead of an accuracy meant to describe. However, my resolution is made far easier by the nasty, brutish way that certain homosexuals allow their reflexive hate overwhelm their desire to be persuasive or even logical.
Theories abound as to why homosexuals are so hostile to everyone who doesn't condone their behavior. My personal theory is that deep down, instinctively and without any regard for their protestations to the contrary, they know that there is something deeply wrong with them, no matter what the culture tells them.
If they wantto be treated with compassion (and most of us do), they could try being civil. That might help.
I saw an exchange of tweets between +KillerBunnyFooFoo (one of my favorites) and a self-professed homosexual man. Unsurprisingly, if you know our Bunny, they had a disagreement. Instead of meeting her on the intellectual fields of battle, he made it clear that he wanted to call her ... the 4 letter c-word that is not in the vocabulary of decent people. Bunny responded that homosexual men have often called her that illogical, unspeakable word. Being in a cheerful humor that night, I chipped in with my doubts that a homosexual man would not recognize one of the items he had referred to if he saw one. (Actually, the fact that he called Bunny one is proof positive that he knows not of what he speaks.) Looking back, I should have taken the clod's handle off of my response. Another mistake, I guess.
Most people, when they have been called out for being obnoxious, will back out of trouble with as much good grace as they can muster. Not our zero, though. He wrote "Your picture is a good start."
Now, the picture I use for my Twitter account is of one of my heroes, Marshal Josef Pilsudski, the hero of the Second Polish Republic. In fact, it is this photo:
... and boy genius called this picture a good start at understanding what one of "those" looks like.
That's too often the case with outspoken homosexuals. They are reflexively and venomously hostile to anyone and everyone who declines to celebrate their sexual disorientation. I would refuse to use the term "gay" anyway, because it is a smoke-screen meant to deceive instead of an accuracy meant to describe. However, my resolution is made far easier by the nasty, brutish way that certain homosexuals allow their reflexive hate overwhelm their desire to be persuasive or even logical.
Theories abound as to why homosexuals are so hostile to everyone who doesn't condone their behavior. My personal theory is that deep down, instinctively and without any regard for their protestations to the contrary, they know that there is something deeply wrong with them, no matter what the culture tells them.
If they wantto be treated with compassion (and most of us do), they could try being civil. That might help.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Thoughts on Burt Prelutsky's February 5 blog posting
One reason I read every Burt Prelutsky blog posting is that he writes so many things that are fun to respond to. Not that I disagree -- far from it. You want to add detail and answer Burt's questions for him. It's like when I correspond with my friend Tony the Libertarian. It's about 15% debate and 85% sharing of information. (When we get together in person it's debate, information, and beer.)
For example, Burt wrote:
"Recently, Robert Gates garnered a great deal of attention for writing a book in which he took Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, to task. Once you got past the totally insincere compliments he apparently felt obliged to pay the first two, he basically made a case that none of them was to be trusted. Inasmuch as I had already come to that conclusion without his prompting, my question is why he didn t resign when he first discovered the truth about them."
The answer is that Robert Gates is old Beltway Bob, the man who just wants to be important among the government elites. He would run a department for any President - George Bush or Barack Obama, George Washington or Bill Clinton, George Patton or George McClellan. I always imagine him standing on a Washington DC street corner holding a sign "Will run government department for stature".
Then there was
" In the case of (NJ Governor Chris) Christie, it shouldn t have taken the bridge scandal to open the eyes of those morons who decided he should be our answer to Hillary in 2016. It s one thing for a guy who comes off like a thug to be the governor of New Jersey, and quite another to have his rump perched in the Oval Office."
I hope that Christie learned the lesson of the media laser beam focussed on him these last few weeks. When a Republican like Christie or John McCain spends too much time in the media spotlight, it's not because the media loves them for themselves, or because they're a "new kind of Republican". It's because the media is using them to divide and damage the GOP. When given an opportunity to destroy their "favorite Republican", however, the searchlight is intensified into a laser beam, and the basking becomes the burning.
Burt finished with this:
"Speaking of schools, the Civil Rights office in the Department of Education thinks it s because of racism that black and Hispanic students are suspended or kicked out of schools for disciplinary infractions far more often than white kids.
Just curious, but has it occurred to these bureaucratic pinheads that the lack of discipline might somehow be the result of illegitimacy rates that show that 72.3% of black kids are being raised by unmarried women, 53.3% of Hispanic kids and only 29.1% of white kids?
I grant that 29.1% is nothing to brag about. That is until you compare it to what s going on in the minority communities, where the overwhelming majority of males have gone AWOL, leaving it up to all those terrible white bigots to support their women and children.
But I expect it s too much to ask that people who are being paid to spot civil rights infractions ever bother looking into the actual source of the problem. After all, as the schools, the media and left-wing politicians keep insisting, members of minority groups must never be held responsible for their problems.
Besides, it s so much easier and a lot more fun to simply holler Racism! in a crowded theater."
To this I just shout "Amen!!"
To Fox News: Put this man on the air! The world has seen enogh of Karl Rove!
To everyone else: Subscribe to Burt Prelutsky's newsletter. It's a good source of information and a great source of fun, and don't we need THAT in Obamamerica?
For example, Burt wrote:
"Recently, Robert Gates garnered a great deal of attention for writing a book in which he took Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, to task. Once you got past the totally insincere compliments he apparently felt obliged to pay the first two, he basically made a case that none of them was to be trusted. Inasmuch as I had already come to that conclusion without his prompting, my question is why he didn t resign when he first discovered the truth about them."
The answer is that Robert Gates is old Beltway Bob, the man who just wants to be important among the government elites. He would run a department for any President - George Bush or Barack Obama, George Washington or Bill Clinton, George Patton or George McClellan. I always imagine him standing on a Washington DC street corner holding a sign "Will run government department for stature".
Then there was
" In the case of (NJ Governor Chris) Christie, it shouldn t have taken the bridge scandal to open the eyes of those morons who decided he should be our answer to Hillary in 2016. It s one thing for a guy who comes off like a thug to be the governor of New Jersey, and quite another to have his rump perched in the Oval Office."
I hope that Christie learned the lesson of the media laser beam focussed on him these last few weeks. When a Republican like Christie or John McCain spends too much time in the media spotlight, it's not because the media loves them for themselves, or because they're a "new kind of Republican". It's because the media is using them to divide and damage the GOP. When given an opportunity to destroy their "favorite Republican", however, the searchlight is intensified into a laser beam, and the basking becomes the burning.
Burt finished with this:
"Speaking of schools, the Civil Rights office in the Department of Education thinks it s because of racism that black and Hispanic students are suspended or kicked out of schools for disciplinary infractions far more often than white kids.
Just curious, but has it occurred to these bureaucratic pinheads that the lack of discipline might somehow be the result of illegitimacy rates that show that 72.3% of black kids are being raised by unmarried women, 53.3% of Hispanic kids and only 29.1% of white kids?
I grant that 29.1% is nothing to brag about. That is until you compare it to what s going on in the minority communities, where the overwhelming majority of males have gone AWOL, leaving it up to all those terrible white bigots to support their women and children.
But I expect it s too much to ask that people who are being paid to spot civil rights infractions ever bother looking into the actual source of the problem. After all, as the schools, the media and left-wing politicians keep insisting, members of minority groups must never be held responsible for their problems.
Besides, it s so much easier and a lot more fun to simply holler Racism! in a crowded theater."
To this I just shout "Amen!!"
To Fox News: Put this man on the air! The world has seen enogh of Karl Rove!
To everyone else: Subscribe to Burt Prelutsky's newsletter. It's a good source of information and a great source of fun, and don't we need THAT in Obamamerica?
Monday, February 3, 2014
Simple Truths for Complex Times
Just a few points and reminders:
Making law by executive order is unconstitutional, and therefore illegal. the states and the people are under no obligation to obey illegal laws, whether they be imposed by the power-mad President B.O. or by power-mad regulators. Encourage your state and local governments to decline to obey illegal enactments like the EPA's anti-scientific CO2 standards.
There is nothing in the Constitution that allows one federal judge the power to nullify the votes of millions of citizens who have expressed themselves by ballot and referendum. When a federal judge attempts to overrule a state law on anything - ANYTHING - that is not spelled out in the Constitution as a federal judicial power, the states should (politely, if possible; otherwise if necessary) tell the black-robed buttinski "Thanks for your opinion, but since you're not in our chain of command, we shall go forward as our citizens have determined to."
As Alan Caruba never tires of reminding us, carbon dioxide (usually deceptively referred to as carbon) is not a pollutant. It is, in fact, the second most important gas to life on Earth. It's plant oxygen. Anyone who tells you by any communications medium that CO2 is a danger to the planet is a charlatan or a simpleton, and should be treated accordingly.
On a less serious subject, isn't it high time the NFL dropped its silly Roman-numeraling of the Super Bowls? If they refuse, I think we should petition to have the next game played in Iowa and dubbed Super Bowl EIEIO.
The already infamous New Jersey lane closures on the George Washington Bridge going into Manhattan was scarcely the worst example of political retribution in the last five years. I remember the wildfires in Texas which threatened to burn down a large area of wooded land and make homeless many, many more people than were inconvenienced on the GW Bridge. (Also, you might consider which would upset you more -- getting stuck in a traffic jam or having your home burn down.) It became plain that the reason that B.O. refused to designate the wildfire areas as disaster areas was because Texas's Republican governor, Rick Perry, had criticised and challenged (albeit briefly) the great Bolshevik Barry. Knowing what we now know of the petty vindictiveness of the current President, I wouldn't be surprised to discover that B.O. let the homes burn to punish Texans for clinging to their guns, religion, and governor.
The notorious Hillary Rodham Clinton once scandalously said to General David Petraeus that accepting his testimony on the "Surge" in Iraq (which succeeded brilliantly) required "a willing suspension of disbelief". Accepting Hillary Clinton's testimony on any subject requires "a willing suspension of disbelief."
Making law by executive order is unconstitutional, and therefore illegal. the states and the people are under no obligation to obey illegal laws, whether they be imposed by the power-mad President B.O. or by power-mad regulators. Encourage your state and local governments to decline to obey illegal enactments like the EPA's anti-scientific CO2 standards.
There is nothing in the Constitution that allows one federal judge the power to nullify the votes of millions of citizens who have expressed themselves by ballot and referendum. When a federal judge attempts to overrule a state law on anything - ANYTHING - that is not spelled out in the Constitution as a federal judicial power, the states should (politely, if possible; otherwise if necessary) tell the black-robed buttinski "Thanks for your opinion, but since you're not in our chain of command, we shall go forward as our citizens have determined to."
As Alan Caruba never tires of reminding us, carbon dioxide (usually deceptively referred to as carbon) is not a pollutant. It is, in fact, the second most important gas to life on Earth. It's plant oxygen. Anyone who tells you by any communications medium that CO2 is a danger to the planet is a charlatan or a simpleton, and should be treated accordingly.
On a less serious subject, isn't it high time the NFL dropped its silly Roman-numeraling of the Super Bowls? If they refuse, I think we should petition to have the next game played in Iowa and dubbed Super Bowl EIEIO.
The already infamous New Jersey lane closures on the George Washington Bridge going into Manhattan was scarcely the worst example of political retribution in the last five years. I remember the wildfires in Texas which threatened to burn down a large area of wooded land and make homeless many, many more people than were inconvenienced on the GW Bridge. (Also, you might consider which would upset you more -- getting stuck in a traffic jam or having your home burn down.) It became plain that the reason that B.O. refused to designate the wildfire areas as disaster areas was because Texas's Republican governor, Rick Perry, had criticised and challenged (albeit briefly) the great Bolshevik Barry. Knowing what we now know of the petty vindictiveness of the current President, I wouldn't be surprised to discover that B.O. let the homes burn to punish Texans for clinging to their guns, religion, and governor.
The notorious Hillary Rodham Clinton once scandalously said to General David Petraeus that accepting his testimony on the "Surge" in Iraq (which succeeded brilliantly) required "a willing suspension of disbelief". Accepting Hillary Clinton's testimony on any subject requires "a willing suspension of disbelief."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)