Sunday, November 30, 2008

Cowards and Brutes: Sic Semper Evello Mortem Tyrranus

The Mumbai terrorists, not satisfied with just murdering there victims, tortured them as well.  I call for all free men to become aware of the enemy and take steps to protect themselves. When the devil comes in the night, he will meet a Lion that knows no mercy. Godspeed to Rabbi Gabriel Holtzberg and his wife Rivka. Props to Gateway Pundit. 

יִתְגַּדַּל וְיִתְקַדַּשׁ שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא.
בְּעָלְמָא דִּי בְרָא כִרְעוּתֵהּ
וְיַמְלִיךְ מַלְכוּתֵהּ
וְיַצְמַח פֻּרְקָנֵהּ וִיקָרֵב(קיץ)  
בְּחַיֵּיכוֹן וּבְיוֹמֵיכוֹן
וּבְחַיֵּי דְכָל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל
בַּעֲגָלָא וּבִזְמַן קָרִיב. וְאִמְרוּ 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

The Cacasotto Sfacime Award of the Month

The Cacasotto Sfacime of the Month Award goes to US Army deserter, André Shepherd. From the Libertarian Republican:

From Jawa:

(Frankfurt, Germany) A 31-year-old U.S. Army deserter, Andre Shepherd, has applied for asylum in Germany. According to Shepherd's lawyer, Reinhard Marx, "he does not want to take part in the American war in Iraq, a war that does not conform with international law and because he does not want to be implicated in war crimes."

The Apache helicopter mechanic from the 412th Aviation Support Battalion hopes to be granted asylum under a European Union directive that says the usual, "war is bad ... crimes against humanity ... blah,blah, blah." You know the drill.
And Eric, being a chopper mechanic isn't exactly front line duty. In fact, he's more of a REMF. What a Cacasotto.

The picture shown above is that of Adam Gadahn, AKA, Azzām al-Amrīki, another Cacasotto and Sfacime who lives amongst the AQ to plot destruction against us. During 2003, Adam was asked by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to participate in a suicide attack in Maryland, but Adam decided against it citing "he had recently married and his wife was pregnant." I guess 72 virgins just didn't do it for him. I wish him a very SOCOM Christmas. Props to Eric Dondero, LR. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Obama's Yentas

Obama's yenta's gather to discuss what's next. If these upper west-side haute couture elitists are his idea of brownshirts in waiting, all I have to say is huh? I can't believe we lost to these idiots. Props to Robert Stacy McCain for the video link. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Indian Cops did Nothing

Armed Mumbai police did nothing but cower. This does not bode well for the up and coming capitalist democracy. My peeps from New York City's Finest would have made these bastards room temperature. What a shame. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Gun Control in India

Could gun rights in India prevented the massacre? India has rather restrictive gun control, as does many socialized countries of the world, where some of the most heinous islamo-fascist terrorist attacks have occurred. Of course, the left wing socialist tree hugging soy swilling habitrail using weanies will want to pass more restrictive gun laws in India and elsewhere after this horrible act, in a continuing saga of doing the same thing but expecting different results. If one out of ten in that hotel had been armed, the results would have been different. Heck, if one in ten of the victims had been armed, many would still be alive. Thanks to John Lott for the video link. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Thursday, November 27, 2008

The Break Up: Just wishful thinking or possible reality?

Igor Panarin, doctor of political sciences, professor of the Diplomatic Academy Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russia, says that the United States will collapse and that it will break up into 6 geographic regions. Which one do you want to live in? It's probably exciting news for the secessionists out there. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Russia to Help Venezuela with Nuclear Energy: Another oil rich country needs nuclear power?

Yet another oil rich country need to develop nuclear energy? It would seem that Russia has a penchant for helping theocratic and federal republics that are ruled by petty dictators attain nuclear materials for the purpose other than nuclear energy. Make no mistake, Chavez wants to be the first big bang power in South America. I believe he will be making some rather stark moves in the next couple years to not only establish Venezuela as the military power in South America, but also form alliances to undermine the United States and with Russia and China's help. The cold war never ended, the Russians just took a nap. Now that they understand that having the energy resources to leverage their power outside their borders, they will use it. Central planning did no good as they had no real power outside their borders. Now they do and the game is on. I envision a future where the US will form a North American Union, with Mexico first, to create a larger economic (through energy) power base, and Canada will Follow. Russia and China will continue to form alliances with Central and South American countries to form an anti-american base.  If Brazil or Chile are co-opted, then this will be something to have more than a passing curiosity. It's going to be interesting in the next 20 years. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Cannoli Numero Uno: The Sweet Taste of Freedom

My friend Vince Cohen likes to call my writing style a cannoli. Perfectly self-contained and wherein lies the beginning, the middle and the end, of which covers everything it sets out to cover. So to that effect, I have decided to call the essays I write from henceforth Cannolis. Actually, the term cannoli is a plural in Italian, and if you need to know what a cannoli is, look here: I prefer sfoliatella, but then again I am Napolitano.

There have been a lot of discussions on blogs of late about the violence, anger and rudeness associated with the reaction to the marriage amendments that have passed in several states. These negative reactions have primarily and largely been from the homosexual community. Some believe this is necessary as the gay community is fomenting revolution and they may do so by any means necessary. Others take a more balanced and sane approach and realize that making enemies of their position is not the correct way to proceed.

On one side of the argument are religious fundamentalists. Included in this group, but not limited to are the Mormons and Evangelical Christians. Their position is that a marriage is between one man and one woman (at one time Mormons allowed one man and many women, but currently this is not the case). This position is consistent with Judaism and Christianity as it is related to scripture and doctrine. I think this position is fine from the standpoint that people have a right to their religious beliefs, even if it conflicts with what others believe, and as long it is not illegal.

On the other side of the argument we have the gay community and other liberal minded folks. Gays believe that marriage, as a legal instrument through the government, should be open to any two human beings. It would be my guess that some also believe it should be allowed in all churches and synagogues, but I do not know the full extent to of that. In an effort to promulgate equality, some states have legislated that gay marriage is legal. In other states, changes to marriage law if you will have been attained through the courts. The rub of late is that four states passed referenda that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I believe those states are California, Arizona, Michigan and Florida.

The reaction by the gay community has been dramatic and at times violent, intrusive, rude, disgusting and illegal. Going into houses of worship and throwing used condoms on parishioners, spray painting churches, engaging in sex acts in church bathrooms, and other disruptive acts during services is the wrong thing to do and it causes people that would otherwise support gay rights with marriage to the very least turn away in indifference. Some have told me it is a revolution that must be won by any means necessary. Some believe as I do, others have remained indifferent. So where’s the beef?

The problem is that we are dealing with two different authorities. One is common law and the other is religious law. Article I of the Bill Of Rights states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.  This portion of the first amendment affirms what it believed to be a natural right that people may believe and worship as they desire and just as important, the government shall not have an official religion. The reason for this is that at the time of the founding documents, England and other countries had official religions. In England, in order to hold certain positions in government or academia, a person had to be a member of the Church of England. In the case of the latest skirmish in regards to gay marriage, some of the religious folk have been accused of taking Church doctrine and law, and trying to create legislation based on it. I believe this is arguably true. Conversely, is it true that the gays are trying to change church doctrine? More accurately, it is seen that the gay agenda is trying to change the very moral fabric of society.

If gays were trying to change church law and doctrine, I would agree that is egregious in that using the current methods it would be an infringement of people’s religious freedoms and it would also be intolerant. Again, people have the right to believe as they wish. I am not so sure this is the case and if it is, they lost me here. On the other hand, I think they are correct in wanting equality in the eyes of the law. What religious fundamentalists seem to not realize is that in order to make a law that marriage is only between a man and a woman, I believe that the only way to do this legally, is to make homosexuality illegal. I cannot for the life of me see how this would be possible. In my opinion, gays are born that way. Just as a black person cannot change their skin color, a gay person cannot change their inborn sexuality. The rub with bible thumpers is that they believe that homosexuality is a choice. This has to be true for them because if they admitted that homosexuals were born that way it would imply, due to scripture and church doctrine, that god made a mistake. This is where I believe the conflict arises with them. God can’t make mistakes. As Obama said, that is above my pay grade. All I know or believe is that they were born the way they are, just as I was born the way I am. Was it a mistake? Ask god.

The only solution I see to this mess is a separation of church and state. The first assumption is that marriage is a religious concept. Only churches can marry and it is in the eyes of god. On the other hand, for marriages to be recognized by the state for legal purposes, there exists a legal standard in issuing of a license for that purpose. Only the state can regulate the legal aspects of a common law union. So, to this effect, the state should create or change marriage licenses to common law union licenses for everyone. This document establishes a legal relationship so as to settle estates, living wills, probate, etc. If the people who obtain a common law union license wish to have their marriage recognized in a religion, which is up to the religion to decide who may or may not be married in their church/synagogue. Through this separation, equality can exist within the natural rights of people.

“Jefferson believed that each individual has ‘certain inalienable rights.’ That is, these rights exist with or without government; man cannot create, take, or give them away. It is the right of ‘liberty’ on which Jefferson is most notable for expounding. He defines it by saying rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. It is not 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” Hence, for Jefferson, though government cannot create a right to liberty, it can indeed violate it. And the limit of an individual's rightful liberty is not what law says it is but is simply a matter of stopping short of prohibiting other individuals from having the same liberty. A proper government, for Jefferson, is one that not only prohibits individuals in society from infringing on the liberty of other individuals, but also restrains itself from diminishing individual liberty (Appleby and Ball, p224, 1999).

The previous paragraph is how I see liberty and freedom on this earth and in the universe. If we could all live by this, which is an extension of Christ’s commandments, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, we all would be better off. What prevents this, in my opinion, is that people want power. In an ideal state of liberty and freedom, no one, including the government, has more power than any other individual or entity. Human beings, due to their survival instincts, look for an advantage. Part of an advantage is to look for power over others. Be that as it may, the quest for power relegates the desire for equality to second place. I think this is something that some wish not to admit. Take this particular issue, if my solution was implemented, which I believe offers the greatest chance at justice and equality, I would bet that neither side would be satisfied because equality is not the ultimate goal of either side. It is the promulgation of their respective agendas and the power that would be gained by the hegemony thereof that may be the true goal. If this is the case, then a pox on both your houses.

The latest war on liberties demonstrates the quest for power. The Mormons and other religious groups use the government to promulgate their religious views in law. The gay community is infringing on people’s individual right to practice religion when they perpetrate acts in religious places and moreover, expose people that contribute as individuals to campaigns that promulgate religious views. In as much as the courts may strike down the referenda, a person’s individual right to practice religion and participate peacefully in a political process should not be violated by anyone. What baffles me about the rude and unlawful behavior is that in every case that I recall, the courts have struck down such referenda. My question is, why the militant behavior? Considering gays account for less than 10% of the population, it’s a literal fight that can’t be won by those means, and I would suggest it won’t end well in the end. My advice would be to use the courts to seek justice in this case, and the legislature if necessary, but above all, the rights of people on both sides of the issue must be respected if we are to have equality and justice. My favorite civil rights advocate is Frederick Douglass. While Mr. Douglass said “Power concedes nothing without demand. It never has and never will. Show me the exact amount of wrong and injustices that are visited upon a person and I will show you the exact amount of words endured by these people.” Demand does not equal unlawful, disgusting or rude acts. While I believe there are instances where people may act in kind, or in effect to defend oneself, this is not one of them.

Thank you for reading this blog.


Appleby and Ball (1999) Letter to Isaac H. Tiffany, April 4, 1819 from Thomas Jefferson

Drunk Judge Uses the N Word

A Connecticut Judge, E. Curtissa R. Cofield, 59, who is also black, also referred to state police Sgt. Dwight Washington as "N Washington". Cofield was arrested by Sgt. Washington last month for drunken driving, and during her arrest hurled racial epithets and told them she was a state judge. We thought Mel Gibson was out of line, and this certainly goes beyond the pale as well. What's next?

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Vote in Venezuela

"Venezuelans voted to choose state governors and mayors Sunday in elections that could either hand President Hugo Chavez his second straight electoral setback or give his leftist government a new mandate." Bet on Chavez to maintain every advantage. Chavez has too much riding on this and I am sure he sees himself as the premiere leader in South America. It will be interesting with the alliances being developed with Russia and China how this pans out. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Russian Navy in Carribean

This news post from today:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Sunday that Russian warships will soon reach his country's Caribbean coast for joint naval exercises.

It's the first time the Russian navy has been in the Caribbean since the Cold War and exercises will begin December 1. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Obama Goes for the Cadillac

This is a picture of the new presidential limo being tested at the GM proving grounds. With nice features such as 5" of ballistic lexan, cell phone jamming, and a Duramax marine grade diesel make this car a veritable tank, and it should be, although I bet it disappoints some of the greenies out there who were hoping for an armored up Prius. If it can't take multiple hits at any angle from a Browning .50, it won't do and who cares if it is green. Seems like a good choice to me, and I wouldn't my driving it too. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Thursday, November 20, 2008

The New World's Order?

Medvedev is taking a week long trip to Latin america and this includes stops to Venezuela and Cuba. One has to wonder about the latest communist visits to the New World. Is it an effort to undermine the United States both politically and economically or is it just good business and international relations? It is not above the communists to play tit for tat, regarding our support for Taiwan, Tibet, Georgia, and former Eastern Block countries. Look for Hu and Medvedev, who is just the more pleasant veneer for for Vlad the Impaler to encroach on our hemisphere, challenging the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt Corollary. With Obama as president, they probably see an pening for such action, which would have been ill advised while GW was in office. It's going to get interesting. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

A Bible Thumping

Things have gotten out of hand. I need to remind people of Thomas Jefferson's definition of rights. Jefferson believed that each individual has certain "inalienable rights." That is, these rights exist with or without government; man cannot create, take, or give them away. It is the right of "liberty" on which Jefferson is most notable for expounding. He defines it by saying "rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. he did not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." Therefore, for Jefferson, though government cannot create a right to liberty, it can indeed violate it. And the limit of an individual's rightful liberty is not what law says it is but is simply a matter of stopping short of prohibiting other individuals from having the same liberty. A proper government, for Jefferson, is one that not only prohibits individuals in society from infringing on the liberty of other individuals, but also restrains itself from diminishing individual liberty.

Those that forget President Jefferson's instructions are doomed to be tyrants or subject to tyrants. Sic semper evello mortem Tyrannis.

Leaders Lead, Bosses Drive: All he wanted was a cup of joe

This dog looks smarter than it's owner, and he probably is. 

Thank you for reading this blog.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

As Rome Burns...The Iranians Stockpile More

As Bush and Paulson play their fiddles on the back porch of the White House and Obama prepares for his grand entrance, Iran continues its nuclear proliferation.  Israel claims they are ready to deal with it. Article.

Thank you for reading this blog.

The Making of Obama?

And I thought it was NLP? I guess I was wrong. Article.

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Apocalypse Now?

A fairly blunt, direct and honest analysis by the Cardinal. what do you think Fr. Vince?

Thank you for reading this blog. 

China's Good Will Tour Continues in Cuba

China continues their latin american good will tour bringing with them 4.5 tons of humanitarian aid for victims of three hurricanes that battered Cuba in the past year. The aid totaled 2.5 million dollars. How parsimonious and niggardly of the Chinese. I would have thought that with all the tchotchkes we buy from Walmart et al, you'd think they could spring for a few pennies more. The Castroistas aren't easy, but they are cheap. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

India Gets It

When it comes to the pirates, India gets it. The INS Tabar sunk the pirate "mother ship" in the Gulf of Aden. Go India. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

...To the Shores of Tripoli...

The Saudi oil tanker Sirius Star was captured by Somali pirates off the coast of Kenya. It seems the pirates are asking $10,000,000 ransom for the ship that is carrying $100 million in oil. Pirates are nothing new in this world, and I am not talking about black beard or pirates of the Caribbean (or Penzance for that matter). The United States fought two wars, the First Barbary Pirate War or the Tripolitan War, from 1801-1805 and the Second Barbary War in 1815. The countries that promulgated piracy at the time were Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Tripoli (for those not familiar with that name might know it better a Libya). At the time, the Pasha of Tripoli demanded a ransom from Jefferson in the sum of $225,000. This may not seem like much, but considering the total treasury had $10,000,000, it was quite a chunk. Some may ask why? Barbary pirates were nothing new, but they were kept in check by the Knights Of Malta. What happened was that Napoleon seized Malta in 1798 and this created a power vacuum in the mediterranean. Without the Knights Of Malta, the pirates went on a spree. The first Barbary War was the first international engagement of the US Marines. The US Navy and the Marines kicked ass, killing and wounding 2000 pirates, while suffering fewer than 100 casualties, and capturing Tripoli. 

Today we find ourselves in a similar place with Somali pirates. International forces seem to be unwilling to go after them, even in this latest fiasco with the Saudi tanker. The Saudis must want it that way, but paying ransom is never a good thing, or as James Madison put it, peace is preferred to war, and war is preferred to paying tribute. The problem is that with paying tribute to anyone is that the criminals will have you over a saddle like Marcellus Wallace with the orange ball in his mouth. No fun at all. Better to fight than switch, but I digress. The right answer here is a couple seal teams on the tanker and it's all over but the crying. In the long run, naval ships from various countries need to patrol these areas terminate the pirates with extreme prejudice, setting the tone for what is inevitable. We'll have to see what happens. The last time we got involved with Somalia, President Clinton showed a lack of nerve and fortitude, folding like a cheap camera. This sets a bad example for the men. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Monday, November 17, 2008

Guess Who is the Unemployed Politician?

Robert gates? Who the hell is Robert Gates?

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Guess Who is the Unemployed CEO?

I guess passing up Microsoft's offer had its consequences. Do you think there will be a deal now?

Thank you for reading this blog. 

China Continues Inroads

China continues inroads into central america with the latest free trade talks with Costa Rica. President Hu met with Costa Rican president Oscar Arias. The price of such a meeting was Costa Rica giving up trade ties to Taiwan. President Hu headed for Cuba, it's communist ally in the region,  after the trip to Costa Rica. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Is this Fear Mongering or Just the Facts?

My question to you is this fear mongering to get a bailout or is GM just presenting the facts (because they want a loan)? The answer is both, and of course they are resorting to fear, but they are probably presenting some salient facts. The problem is that GM and other auto manufacturers are not dealing with the drain on them: The unions. The unions are willing to drive the automakers over a cliff, even if they all lost their jobs just because they are bullies and ignoramuses. Unions are just as complicit in this fiasco as the management of automakers are. If unions are not willing to help with this with concessions, GM will have to file chapter 11 and if they survive chapter 11, they will need (read that should) to move manufacturing overseas. No matter what, there will be massive downsizing in the auto industry in the months to come. You have to wonder what could kick start the industry, as people aren't spending money on new cars? Think 1938-39. Even if GM gets bailed out, survival is going to be tough. Tough for Chrysler and Ford too. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

The Current State of Things: At the crossroads

Right now we stand at a crossroads. We've elected our president, albeit the first black president in our history. It is not because he is black, but rather the perception of his values, political and social beliefs that have given cue to other leaders in the world to advance their positions that may be counter to our positions and benefit. 

Our enemies and competitors see this as an opportunity to test Obama and promulgate their agenda. Look at China and Russia who are making alliances with despots in our own hemisphere. These alliances are being formed to undermine America's position in the world. When you see and read about how happy foreign leaders are that Obama is elected and how good it is that America can restore it's image, I have to ask, what is their real perception of our president? 

Obama has stated as much that he wants to improve our image. A little of this is good, most of it seems politically motivated as if we need the approval of other nations to exist. The problem with politicians is that they are too concerned with what others think of them, and they wish to have everyone like them. This is faulty thinking that will get an executive in trouble quickly. Congressmen and senators are particularly at fault here as they do not have to make decisions for a country, organization, or state. Their positions involves wheeling, dealing and behind the scenes arm twisting and glad handing. While presidents can be involved in this, ultimately, they make or execute decisions they are responsible for that will make someone unhappy.

So if Hamas, Iran, Russia and China seem happy that Obama is elected and look forward to dealing with him, I have to say I look at it with a bit of skepticism. Even Chavez and Castro seem to be ebullient at his winning the election. I have to be suspicious when traditional enemies are happy with certain electoral results. They obviously see it as a weakness they can exploit. 

As someone that did not support Obama in the election, one might say I want him to fail, particularly in regards to this. I would tell them absolutely not. This mentality has been the mantra of the democrat party for the last six plus years. They have shown that they would want us to lose the war in Iraq in order to gain political advantage. They are hardly the loyal opposition and as far as I am concerned, frauds because of it, and un-American. To that extent, where I believe America's interests in the world should be protected, and promoted, I will be behind a President Obama. If I disagree with him or his policies, there will be no mistaking it, but I will not cheer a position on that is against the United States which would cause us to lose in some way. 

So which way do we go? My hope is that Obama, seeing the same challenges President Bush did, will stay the course where things are working and not try to reinvent the wheel. Where new territory is crossed, particularly with those that want to see us fail, and/or be less than number one, I hope President Obama make the right choices that keep us safe, secure, and still number one. I hope he does not take on the role of Neville Chamberlain or a Jimmy Carter, who are both losers in my opinion. It would be a nice feeling if everybody likes you, but it's naive and unattainable. I hope Obama follows Bill Cosby's advice in life: "I don't know how to succeed, but I do know how to fail; by trying to please everyone". Amen Bill, Amen, and whatever happens next, this will set the tone for the next 100 years. I hope Obama leads well, and makes the right decisions, rather than trying to make decisions right. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Religious Harmony? Don't quit your day job

The high priests of the technorati have started a movement called The Charter for Compassion project at Karen Armstrong, a religious scholar, was granted a "Wish" this year at the Technology, Entertainment and Design (TED) conference in California. TEDizens such as Sergey Brin and Larry Page (along with Forest Whittaker, Cameron Diaz, other celebs and technorati) wish to unite religions whose common theme is the golden rule, or "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". What makes this interesting is that Armstrong, an apologist for Islam, is behind this. "The chief task of our time is to build a global society where people of all persuasions can live together in peace and harmony," Armstrong said. So far, I do not see evidence that Islam promulgates the golden rule. They do promulgate jizya, dhimmi, and pahlavi. In fact, in some Muslim countries, non-believers have inferior rights and have to pay tribute in greater proportion than believers. In some places like Afghanistan, muslims that convert to christianity are sentenced to death. Creating this project does nothing positive as one, it dilutes the message and meaning that is unique to each religion, and two, islam has to come out of the 12th century at best mindset it finds itself. This project will not change that. Armstrong should go to the House of Saud and the Ayatollahs of Iran if she wants change, but even she knows she would be stoned to death if she spoke the truth there. 

The problem I have is the arrogance of these multi-million and billionaires who seem to think that because they have money and influence, that somehow their vision must be promulgated so as to change the world. Brin and Page, by the grace of god, might be working in Burger King today if it were not for the search engine that is ubiquitous today. Like actors and other celebrities, keep your kumbaya socialist dogma to yourselves and concentrate on what you do well, and leave the rest of us alone. Of course they cannot, as evidences with Lord Philips and the other idiots in Britain giving the OK for Sharia law in British society. God bless Pat Condell. I don't agree with everything he stands for, but he has a classical liberal streak not seen since Thomas Paine, another great brit. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Airforce One

From the crew that brought you "The Day After Obama Gets Elected", now presents Air Force One.  Props to Snoop Dog and Howard Stern as usual.  This is totally outrageous, and sometimes it's better to laugh than cry. If you look close enough, I bet you'd see Bush, Rove and Cheney on Texas Air. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Guess Who is the Unemployed Politician?

May be Michael will join forces with that other vampire, Bella Pelosi? Highly unlikely, but I am sure he'll find a night job somewhere, may be at a hedge fund or some law firm as a sinecurist. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Friday, November 14, 2008

Obama Questionaire

Here is a link to the Obama Questionaire. It would take me a week to fill it out, only to find out I am unacceptable to The One. You'll find some of the questions interesting and revealing, particularly about guns. Besides, he couldn't pay me enough. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 


It's been a long time since I had Idiot of the Week, and I had nominated Gordon Brown last week for his stunning proposal of a global society. He is of course, an idiot. Now on to another idiot, or should I say idiots. Mexico City is giving out Viagra to men over 70 years of age in an effort to improve quality of life? Really? Who are these men going to enjoy their better quality of life with? Most women lose interest at that advanced age, and giving a 70+ year old man Viagra is like putting a supercharger on a high mileage engine with low oil pressure. Something's going to blow and it's not the hooker going down on the old man! May be they want to lower their healthcare costs by promulgating heart attacks or may be they like Hombres Verdes running around saying estoy falto! I'll pass on that visual. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Forgive Me Father, For I have Sinned...

The Rev. Jay Scott Newman, a South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil." He sent out a letter to parishioners that they need to do penance for the vote before they can receive communion.

Being RC, I can say the Reverend is within his right to say what he did and while any church is not supposed to endorse a particular candidate, it is perfectly fine to stress the importance of voting for someone whose beliefs and action reflect church teachings and values. On the other hand, I will advise the dear Father with the words of George Carlin: I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it. And so it goes Reverend Newman.

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Guess Who is the Unemployed Politician?

This progenitor of TARP and an all around machiavellian sfacime will find himself unemployed soon enough. I am sure his tin cup wall street cronies will find him a cushy job at some hedge fund sure enough, but to see him go is a reward enough. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Something is Happening; A take on current events by Pamela Geller

Pam said it better than I could:

From Pam Geller, Atlas Shrugs

"Something of Historic Proportion is Happening"

I am a student of history. Professionally. I have written 15 books in six languages, and have studied it all my life. I think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten - fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learn just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has “loaned” two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the 700B we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of “we the people,” who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is medicare and our entire government, our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about)–the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x ten. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin’s pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more imporant.)

Mr. Obama’s winning platform can be boiled down to one word: change.


I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning.

And I thought I would never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930s. In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they did know was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his “brown shirts” would bully them into submission. And then, he was duly elected to office, a full-throttled economic crisis at hand [the Great Depression]. Slowly but surely he seized the controls of government power, department by department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the world.

He did it with a compliant media–did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and . . . change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

(Look it up if you think I am exaggerating.)

Read your history books. Many people objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though.

Don’t forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six years–a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency–it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me.

Some people scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. Perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe–and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am.

Pamela Geller

Thanks and props to Pam for such cogent words. 

Thank you for reading this blog.

Palin is hated because...

Dennis is in rare form on The O'Reilly Factor, a must see. I couldn't agree with him more on just about everything, and he is certainly more gracious about Obama than most on the right. Can you imagine Miller unplugged? As far as Barney Frank goes, O'Reilly should watch himself.

Thank you for reading this blog.


Obama must have looked through Broun's underwear drawer as we now have apostasy from the Georgia republican. Is free speech dead?

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Guess Who is the Unemployed Politician?

Condi joins her boss as an unemployed politician. What will she do? Teach Russian? Teach Piano? I am sure Obama will have a job for her at the white house as a cleaning lady or may be the ladies room attendant. Things are looking rosy already. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Your honor or your life

I was thinking about one of my favorite movies today, Braveheart, and for whatever reason I recalled a line by Ian Bannen playing the character of Robert the Bruce Sr. The quote was, "All men betray. All lose heart." Nothing is as sad as when as a child, your best friend chooses someone else over you and that betrayal is a foreshadowing of what life is about. What Robert the Bruce Sr was telling his son was that ultimately, it's every man for himself in this life, no matter the political system, religion, national identity, or race. It's a hard pill to swallow as in our hearts, we would like to believe otherwise.

Who are the true believers? Ingrained in most men is a sense of honor. I think most of us feel bad when we betray, and at times it can cut the perpetrator almost as deep as the victim. Yet, in politics in life as well as in government, many will trade such temporal notions such as honor for the short way around the barn. Niccolò would have been proud. Where is the disconnect? There is none for many of us. Just an inconsistent application of principles due to competitive forces in our lives. There are those that have no honor, no sense of shame, of propriety or self perception. They ride high on a mixture of conceit, and arrogance that is fueled by their incompetence, insecurities, and desire to succeed. They have been chosen, but do not wish to be found out for what they are. Deace would call them groupies, or possibly gangsters in training.

Still, those words haunt me like when I was told there is no Santa Claus. Part of being a crusader is that it requires a belief and a consistency in principles that is above and beyond what most would call normal. I think at least some of us want to believe that others believe as we do, but in the end, looking at it rationally, we are all independent operators. So does this mean we should let go of the concept of honor? To grab our socks because others with small minds demand it? Not many years ago, I learned you cannot eat principles. By the same token, it is impossible to live with yourself if you violate or allow the violation of your own sense of dignity, honor and pride. While as men we may betray each other, never betray yourself, never lose heart.

Thank you for reading this blog.

Guess Who is the Unemployed Politician?

Much to many people's joy, this politician will be out of a job none too soon. I haven't been a Cheney supporter, but I can't understand the vitriol. Clinton has far more dead bodies in his wake than Cheney. Then again, politics is what it is. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Quid Pro Quo

Pelosi and Company are going out on a spending spree, bailing out banks and now the automakers. I have one question: What will the price of this be? Obeisance, complicity, or indifference? What will Ostalin and his cohorts want in return? A good question. Anyone want to take a stab at it before I do?

Thank you for reading this blog.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Armistice Day

There are three British WW I veterans left out of millions. Today marks the 90th anniversary of the signing of the treaty that ended WW I at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month of 1918. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Monday, November 10, 2008

Obama a Marxist? Really?

From Representative Broun of Georgia:
"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism...Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military...That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did...When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist...Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force...We can't be lulled into complacency...You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential."

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Reagan On Individualism

How different and antithetical from the president elect. It also shows how the republican party has had only pretenders since. 

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Sunday, November 09, 2008

Obama and Brown: Globalism on the rise?

It has been reported that Gordon Brown suggests that it is time for a global society. This is not far out of line with what Obama believes and coupled with what has been projected in Obama using executive powers coupled with a democrat congress, could a lesser United States be in the making amongst a global context? Obama's beliefs are antithetical to the traditional definition of American Exceptionalism. Is this the beginning of something good or bad? You tell me.

Thank you for reading this blog. 

Saturday, November 08, 2008

Palin Denounces Critics

I almost forgot she existed. It must be nice to be home, eh Sarah? I think we'll be hearing more from here in the next 4 years. Don't you?

Thank you for reading this blog.

Obama and the Second Amendment: No you can't

The NRA has posted the proposed changes in government's position on guns and gun rights. During the campaign, Obama facilely agreed that people have a right to bear arms. I guess it changed after he got elected. 

"Yes We Can . . . Ban Guns"--Obama Announces Gun Ban Agenda Before The Final Vote Count Is In
Friday, November 07, 2008

Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign slogan, "the audacity of hope," should have instead been "the audacity of deceit." After months of telling the American people that he supports the Second Amendment, and only hours after being declared the president-elect, the Obama transition team website announced an agenda taken straight from the anti-gun lobby--four initiatives designed to ban guns and drive law-abiding firearm manufacturers and dealers out of business: 

"Making the expired federal assault weapons ban permanent." Perhaps no other firearm issue has been more dishonestly portrayed by gun prohibitionists. Notwithstanding their predictions that the ban's expiration in 2004 would bring about the end of civilization, for the last four years the nation's murder rate has been lower than anytime since the mid-1960s. Studies for Congress, the Congressional Research Service, the National Institute of Justice, the National Academy of Sciences, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found no evidence that gun prohibition or gun control reduces crime. Guns that were affected by the ban are used in only a tiny fraction of violent crime-about 35 times as many people are murdered without any sort of firearm (knives, bare hands, etc.), as with "assault weapons." Obama says that "assault weapons" are machine guns that "belong on foreign battlefields," but that is a lie; the guns are only semi-automatic, and they are not used by a military force anywhere on the planet. 

"Repeal the Tiahrt Amendment." The amendment--endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police--prohibits the release of federal firearm tracing information to anyone other than a law enforcement agency conducting a bona fide criminal investigation. Anti-gun activists oppose the restriction, because it prevents them from obtaining tracing information and using it in frivolous lawsuits against law-abiding firearm manufacturers. Their lawsuits seek to obtain huge financial judgments against firearm manufacturers when a criminal uses a gun to inflict harm, even though the manufacturers have complied with all applicable laws. 

"Closing the gun show loophole." There is no "loophole." Under federal law, a firearm dealer must conduct a background check on anyone to whom he sells a gun, regardless of where the sale takes place. A person who is not a dealer may sell a gun from his personal collection without conducting a check. Gun prohibitionists claim that many criminals obtain guns from gun shows, though the most recent federal survey of convicted felons put the figure at only 0.7 percent. They also claim that non-dealers should be required to conduct checks when selling guns at shows, but the legislation they support goes far beyond imposing that lone requirement. In fact, anti-gun members of Congress voted against that limited measure, holding out for a broader bill intended to drive shows out of business. 

"Making guns in this country childproof." "Childproof" is a codeword for a variety of schemes designed to prevent the sale of firearms by imposing impossible or highly expensive design requirements, such as biometric shooter-identification systems. While no one opposes keeping children safe, the fact is thataccidental firearm-related deaths among children have decreased 86 percent since 1975, even as the numbers of children and guns have risen dramatically. Today, the chances of a child being killed in a firearm accident are less than one in a million.

Friday, November 07, 2008

Tin Cup America

I think some may have entirely missed the point of this election. The reasons for Obama's win, other than the repudiation of the Bush administration, what could have changed? I will speculate that enough of the young people in this country that have come of age since 2004 have been enculturated in the tin cup co-dependent socialist democracy and they now represent a larger constituency on the left. As much as young people are hip, internet and tech savvy, they are also pretty ignorant of history, philosophy, and lack the moral compass of generations before them. 

In the big picture, look at it like this: In my parents generation, if you weren't out of the house by the time you were 18, and married, you were looked at as somewhat defective. People got on with their lives early, were responsible, and expected that of themselves and others. Their education, while basic by today's standards, was thorough, and they could read, write, and do arithmetic when they graduated high school. Todays youth, whether they need to or not, got to college to somehow get the education they did not get in high school and delay the onset of responsibility. 

Is it so odd anymore to see people living at with their parents even until 30? The result of this is that there is a delay in becoming an adult and when this immaturity is coupled with a poor and/or lopsided education, you have a recipe that produces people that believe they are entitled to a lifestyle that is inconsistent with being a responsible adult. In the old days they would call this codling by an over protective mother. The end result is a society that believes the world owes them something. 

Vince Cohen, an expert on social issues, say that all of this is the result of the feminization of society. When people are over-nurtured, it delays the onset of responsibility. When you consider socialism, the very idea of Nanny-Statism, at least to me, is puerile in nature. Who as an adult wants to be treated as child? Children are taken care of by Nannies, or Parents. Adults are not. 

For some reason, that infantile mentality that the government should take care of every need and even some wants has drifted over from Europe to the United States. The trade off is that when you agree to be "taken care of", the locus of control shifts, you have abdicated your responsibilities and now there are strings attached. You have traded independence for security and made yourself a slave to the wishes, desires and demands of others. When you were a child, right or wrong, irrespective of the consequences, could you do and go as you please? No, of course not, you lived under your parent's roof and you had to obey their rules. 

Part of the American experience is that at one time, we were the embodiment of the rugged individual. Forged by personal responsibility and the freedom that is its reward, respect for the rights of others, and the learning from our mistakes. Somewhere, sometime, in the last 40 years, we have become enculturated and educated in such a way that we are not the same people anymore, not as a whole. It seems that with every election, the rugged individuals are pushed back, smaller in numbers, in defeat. In the current election cycle, Obama has shown that he is the conduit for the socialist programming started by the 60's radicals, and it is their last chance to poison the punch. The consequences of this are that socialism will overtake capitalism as the form of government in this country and probably everywhere else, eventually. 

You may say, what is so bad with that? I can tell you that philosophically, socialism exists as a way to bring the very lowest in society up at the expense of those further up the economic chain. It's always been about the guaranteed outcomes for the lowest common denominator. You aim low and you hit low. True free market capitalism is about a playing field were everyone gets to play, but outcomes are not guaranteed. There will be a pile of bodies sometimes, but overall, everyone not only gets to play, but most get better at it and the rewards are very high. While not always fair, you are not penalized for being responsible, successful and daring. The reward is that at the end of the day, there are no regrets, as you can call your shots. Are you up for the game? It seems many people today are not. It is a road less traveled anymore. 

Thank You for reading this blog. 

You also might like:

Related Posts with Thumbnails