Poems For Christmas And Our Fight

I have been really quiet lately and for that I am sorry.  I have been keeping tabs on everything but with work and some recent family type events I have just not had the time to devote like I have in the past to blogging.  I just wanted to share two poems with everyone.  On Christmas, our fight, and what we should be wishing for.  The first one I got in a Christmas card when I was probably about 17.  I have kept it all this time.  Perfect prayer…for Christmas or anytime. 

A COWBOY'S CHRISTMAS PRAYER
By S. Omar Barker (1894-1985)

 

I ain't much good at prayin', and You may not know me, Lord-
I ain't much seen in churches where they preach Thy Holy Word,
But you may have observed me out here on the lonely plains,
A-lookin' after cattle,’n feelin' thankful when it rains,
Admirin' Thy great handiwork; the miracle of grass,
Aware of Thy kind spirit and the way it comes to pass
That hired men on horseback and the livestock we tend
Can look up at the stars at night and know we've got a Friend.

So here's ol' Christmas comin' on, remindin' us again
Of Him whose coming brought Good Will into the hearts of men.
I ain't no preacher, Lord, but if You'll hear my prayer,
I'll ask as good as we have got for all men, everywhere.
Don't let no hearts be bitter, Lord.
Don't let no child be cold.
Make easy beds for them that's sick and them that's weak and old.
Let kindness bless the trail we ride, no matter what we're after,
And sorta keep us on Your side, in tears as well as laughter.

I've seen ol' cows a-starvin, and it ain't no happy sight:
Please don't leave no one hungry, Lord, on thy good Christmas night-
No man, no child, no woman, and no critter on four feet-
I'll aim to do my best to help You find 'em chuck to eat.

I'm just a sinful cowpoke, Lord; I ain't got no business prayin'-
But still I hope You'll catch a word or two of what I'm sayin':
We speak of Merry Christmas, Lord-I reckon you'll agree
There ain't no Merry Christmas for nobody that ain't free.
So one thing more I'll ask You, Lord: Just help us what you can
To save some seeds of freedom for the future sons of man.

-Amen

Stopping By The Woods on a Snowy Eve

Whose woods these are I think I know,

His house is in the village though ,

He will not see me stopping here,

To watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer,

To stop without a farmhouse near;

Between the forest and the lake,

The darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake,

To ask if there is some mistake;

The only other sound I hear ,

Is of easy wind and downy flake.

The woods are lovely dark and deep,

But I have promises to keep ;

And miles to go before I sleep,

And miles to go before I sleep.

-Robert Frost

 

That is just like us, we have miles to go before we sleep.  Have a good holiday, and get ready after the new year to keep the pressure on.

-DRB

Convict 8675309 reporting for flight

That is how I feel. I feel like a criminal for even attempting to fly the unfriendly skies this morning. I am leaving a small regional airport in the middle of an entire state of of Podunk towns and I get the millimeter -wave -booth -put -your -hands- on your- head- like -a -known convict- while -some booger- picking -morning -making 8.75 -an-hour -looks- at -your- fat naked- ass -treatment; Aka the naked body scanner. It is too effing early for this crap. Then because I am sure that I had a look of extreme rage and indignation on my face AND because the TSA guy who had just had me visually raped while wearing clothes said in my general direction "hold on a minute" and I looked at him. He has to get all pissy with me and ask "Is there a problem,sir?".

I said, "no" but what I wanted to say is "Hell yes there is a problem, but you are just doing your job"

There is absolutely a problem with this country, with homeland security, the TSA and air travel in general.

What we need is to a) have a certified traveler program and b) profile the living shit out of people. I am sorry if you are of middle eastern descent and have zero intention of body packing five pounds of dynamite up your ass. You look like the assholes who do. I don't, and I travel once a month for work. I am a fat white male who has never had more than a speeding ticket. Leave me and granny alone and pick on the guys who fit the profile it works, ask El Al.

-via my iPhone

Denis Leary on the Proposed Cigarette Labels – 18 years ago

as well as some bonus quotes from a movie that at the time seemed so incredibly over the top and now looks to be about 10 years down the road, except no one will be wealthy.

Denis Leary’s stand up routine “no cure for cancer” 1992:

“There's a guy- I don't know if you've heard about this guy, he's been on the news a lot lately. There's a guy- he's English, I don't think we should hold that against him, but apparently this is just his life's dream because he is going from country to country. He has a senate hearing in this country coming up in a couple of weeks. And this is what he wants to do. He wants to make the warnings on the [cigarette] packs BIGGER. Yeah! He wants the whole front of the pack to be the warning. Like the problem is we just haven't noticed yet. Right? Like he's going to get his way and all of the sudden smokers around the world are going to be going, "Yeah, Bill, I've got some cigarettes.. HOLY SHIT! These things are bad for you! Shit, I thought they were good for you! I thought they had Vitamin C in them and stuff!" You f***ing dolt! Doesn't matter how big the warnings are. You could have cigarettes that were called the warnings. You could have cigarettes that come in a black pack, with a skull and a cross bone on the front, called tumors and smokers would be lined up around the block going, "I can't wait to get my hands on these effing things! I bet you get a tumor as soon as you light up! Numm Numm Numm Numm Numm" Doesn't matter how big the warnings are or how much they cost. Keep raising the prices, we'll break into your houses to get the cigarettes, ok!? They're a drug, we're addicted, ok!? Numm Numm Numm Numm Numm *wheeze*”

And now, prophecy for our future (from Demolition Man- 1993):

For those of you who have not seen this movie, rent it. 

Edgar Friendly (Denis Leary, Libertarian who is forced to (literally) live underground due to his love of freedom) :

“According to Cocteau's  Obama’s plan, I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay, ?

I've seen the future. You know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin, sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing, "I'm an Oscar Meyer wiener." “We are the World” or “Give Peace a Chance”

All I wanna do is bury Cocteau Obama up to his neck in sh**, and let him think happy-happy thoughts forever.

I'm no leader. I do what I have to do--sometimes people come with me.

You live Up Top, you live Cocteau's Obama’s way: what he wants, when he wants, how he wants. Your other choice, come Down here, and maybe starve to death.”

-----

Lenina Huxley (Sandra Bullock, naive but tough police officer, is infatuated with the old days;meaning the 20th century)and John Spartan (Sylvester Stallone, recently re-animated tough guy cop from the 80’s) :

Lenina Huxley:“Anything not good for you is bad, hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, salt, contact sports, meat . . .”

John Spartan: “Are you sh**ing me?”

A computer: “John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the verbal morality statute.”

John Spartan: “What the Hell is that?”

A computer: “John Spartan, you are fined one credit . . .”

Lenina Huxley: “…Bad language, child play, gasoline, uneducational toys, and anything spicy. Abortion is also illegal. But, then again so is pregnancy, if you don't have a license.”

-----

Simon Phoenix (Wesley Snipes, evil 20th century killer recently escaped from prison to run rampant in wimpy progressive dystopia):

“I'm sorry to say that the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself--run by a bunch of robed sissies.”

“You can't take away people's right to be assholes”

Indeed

-Kook

Joplin Mo Smoking Ban

Joplin council to revisit smoking ban » Local News » The Joplin Globe, Joplin, MO By Debby Woodin Globe Staff Writer The Joplin Globe

JOPLIN, Mo. — More work will be done today by the Joplin City Council in considering whether a public smoking ban will be imposed and, if so, how wide-ranging it will be.
…The council last Monday rejected the measure after hearing two hours of testimony.
Proposed by a local coalition called Smoke-Free Joplin, the original ordinance would prohibit smoking in any public place or workplace, including outdoor restaurant or bar patios. It also would bar smoking within 20 feet of a door.

What I want to know is why do these anti-smoking crusaders hate kids?  Didn’t we just raise taxes on cigarettes to help fund education?  If so, discouraging smoking will lower education funding and cause illiteracy and drop out rates to run out of control, right?

If you love children, you should encourage people to smoke, by that logic, not discourage it.

Do it for the children…

This is all anti-capitalist.  If you are offended by the smoking of a cigarette in an establishment you no one forces you to go there.  Stay home, or get your order to go.  For those who talk about the perils of being employed in an establishment that allows smoking, Missouri is a right to work state, meaning no one forces you to work for that establishment or as a cook or waitstaff either.  If as a business owner your business suffers from offering a smoking section, it should be up to you whether or not you make a decision to change that fact, and everyone else can vote with their patronage.

This is all about restaurants.  Many in Joplin are already all no-smoking.  Others still ahve a smoking section.  No one smokes in stores or gas stations. There is simply no reason to have another senseless rule that someone will have to enforce

...besides our children’s futures are counting on Cigarette sales…

-KOOK

Obama: Egocentric Ideologue, Proof From His Words

From a story in the WaPo by Dana Milbank: Obama is sad but not sorry about the election results

You can read the whole thing from the link above, I just want to point out a few key points.

The president, facing the media in the East Room the day after what he called his "shellacking" at the polls, admitted it had been a "long night." He confessed that it "feels bad." He acknowledged "sadness" that so many friends and allies had lost their seats.

But what he would not acknowledge is that his policies had in any way contributed to the shellacking and sadness.

Many have said Obama will moderate, or “pivot” due to the election.  He will not, he is incapable of it.  When asked if this election was a rejection of his agenda, he justified it as just being a result of not enough “progress” …whew… He still feels he was right in all of his decisions.  We don’t dislike his policies, you see, we just are dissatisfied with his outcomes.  It is not the policies we hate, I am sure, it is probably our lack of understanding as simpleton citizens.

Secondly, many obamabots believe he is a pragmatist, he is not, and his own words prove it.

No matter how many ways reporters phrased the question, the answer was the same. CNN's ED Henry suggested there may be "a majority of Americans who think your polices are taking us in reverse," and asked: "You just reject that idea altogether that your policies could be going in reverse?"

"Yes," Obama said sharply.

As the questions kept coming toward the end he said something else that proves he is locked dead onto target and there will be no moderation, no capitulation, and no compromise (not that I want to compromise with the communists)

He declined to rule out an effort by the EPA to regulate carbon emissions. He vowed to push back against Republican efforts to cut spending on education, research and infrastructure, reminding his audience that "we already had a big deficit that I inherited."

On a slightly different note:

Obama ultimately absolved himself of even the communications mistakes he acknowledged. "You know, a couple of great communicators, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, were standing at this podium two years into their presidency getting very similar questions, because, you know, the economy wasn't working the way it needed to be," he said.

I would just like to interject here that when the economy was going bad for both Reagan and Clinton, what got it turned around was lowering taxes and helping businesses, not raising them and bashing business on the head at every opportunity.

Thirdly, Obama says things that are quite alarming when viewed through the lens of history.  His devotion to ‘action’ and ‘doing what is regrettable, but necessary’ are they types of phrases and justifications that dictators use, and have used throughout history.

He said "everybody in the White House understood" that his efforts to rescue the economy might be portrayed as government intrusions into the private sector, but "we thought it was necessary."

His closest admission to a failure of substance was that he failed in his pledge to "change how business is done in Washington." He explained: "We were in such a hurry to get things done that we didn't change how things got done."

But the Piece De Resistance was the last two lines of the story:

Obama's conclusion: "Getting out of here" -- the White House -- "is good for me."

On that, at least, he'll probably get Republican support.

For my part, we could vote on that right NOW.

-KOOK

Finally!,

and Hopefully, the Grown-Ups are back in Washington.  Now it is time for them to get to work.  This is the elephants last dance, if they rise to the occasion and listen to the people and do what they have been sent to do…this should be interesting indeed.  If they get power drunk and think this is a mandate to do all of their pet projects they have sat on for a decade then we will see another violent swing. 

Watching the house the last two years has been like being tied to a chair during a drunken frat party on acid and speed using all our stolen credit cards for the strippers and blow.

Our nation is more and more polarized all the time, but I do still believe that the rabid communists are a minority.  The fact that we are ever more divided does concern me.  It seems as though we are being distilled into more and more pure elements of our ideology.  There is a literal wide no man’s land in the middle now.    Which from the perspective of a constitutional libertarian is a good thing for our side.  I suspect that from a far left moonbat standpoint they like it too.  The loser though is probably our nation as a whole.  It seems we are now drawing the battle lines more clearly than ever before and we may be locked into a battle to the death.  Obviously if the Republicans do not hold up their end of the bargain now, they are done; and it seems last night was a clear repudiation of the Liberal Agenda.  Then again, the 2008 was a clear repudiation of what had become the Republican agenda.  Does this indicate a clear shift to the conservative side, or just a general dissatisfaction in general?

We want our cake and to eat it too, do we not?  I know I for one would love to see entitlements nearly completely eliminated, but even I would not be in for the legitimate suffering, and certain social upheaval that it would cause.  The Other side feels as thought the Democrats have not done enough moving left.  Which is simply incredible to me… mind blowing really. 

We seem to me to be like a car on ice, the wobbles start small and through several over-corrections one way and then the other, the swings get larger and more uncontrolled until finally there is a crash.

But our problems right now are less philosophical and more realistic; we have to stop the bleeding.  We have to put our finances back in order.  My rudimentary political strategizing tells me that the best thing this house could do would be to pass a balanced budget, undo the worst of the damage, and wait until 2012 blaming Reid and Obama all the while.  That will allow a further takeover in 2012 and possibly allow us to repeal decades worth of bad ideas.  I fear that if the Republicans move too far too fast they will just cause  a strong swing the other way and allow Reid and Obama to take the upper hand.  We have them down, they are up against the fence and we need to keep whaling away at them until they are knocked out and the Referee has to pull us off of them.

The die is case, this is a battle for the soul and the future of our nation, we cannot take prisoners.  Democrats are petty and pretty much evil, and proving that in typical fashion, Nasty Botoxi cannot even be gracious in her resounding defeat.  Good riddance.

-KOOK

Missouri 2010 Election Guide and Ballot Measures

It seems as though it is nearly impossible to find out what is going to be on the ballot and who is running and what the ballot measures mean and how a like minded individual might want to vote.  I am very much in favor of secret ballots but I am also bold enough to tell everyone how I voted; or plan to vote.
In Short, here is my plan: Amendment 1 – Yes; Amendment 2 – Yes; Prop A – Yes; Prop B – NO.  Senate: Blunt; House- erg.  Billy long is a weasel and Eckersley is a Democrat.  Make up your own mind on that one. Auditor – Tom Schweich
Missouri has on senate seat open due to the retirement of Christopher “Kit” Bond.  The other one will not come up for grabs until 2012 at which time if there is any justice in the world Claire McCaskill will be voted out so loudly she will fear to come outside her big house ever again.  The choice this year is between Roy Blunt and Robin Carnahan.  Using my tried and true rule of thumbs 1A and 1B (1A- vote Republican if at all possible; 1B- Never vote with anyone attached to the names Carnahan or McCaskill) I will be voting for Roy Blunt. A Carnahan should not be elected to walk your dog.
My district’s house seat is CD7 and the race is between Billy Long and Scott Eckersley. Billy Long is a weasel.  I do not like the man’s personality, and I think he is of dubious character.  I think he tries to pull off the ‘aw shucks’ country boy persona, but I believe he is more of a Vegas high roller.  I know for a fact that he was being texted his answers at one of the candidate forums during the primary. We could have certainly done better by nominating virtually any other candidate in the republican primary.  Scott Eckersley talks a good game, he tries to sound conservative, but he is on the Democratic ticket.  I know a lot of Republicans plan to back Eckersley.  I am not sure I can do that, but I honestly may try.  I really believe Billy Long is Wrong for Missouri – I am just not sure Eckersley is right.
We also have a vote for State Auditor which is between Charles W. Baum,(L), Susan Montee (D) and Tom Schweich, (R). Rule 1A – Vote Republican.  I will vote for Tom Schweich.
Constitutional Amendment 1 – VOTE YES.  A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to require that assessors in charter counties be elected.  This proposal will affect St. Louis County and any country that adopts a charter form of government.  I am always for direct elections; that is the only method to assure any kind of accountability.
Constitutional Amendment 2 VOTE YES
A yes vote on this one will amend the constitution to exempt former POWs homes from being assessed Property Taxes.  POWs are one of the very few groups that I am fully in favor of giving entitlements to.
Constitutional Amendment 3 VOTE YES. 
A yes vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to prevent the state, counties, and other local political entities from imposing any new tax, including sales tax, on the sale or transfer of homes or real estate.
Preventing Governments from levying new taxes?- Hells Yes I am for that.
Prop A – Vote YES
Let the voters decide if cities in Missouri should be allowed to tax the earnings of people who work in certain cities but live outside those cities.  This is a city earnings tax.  The key here is if you pay city earnings taxes you get a deduction on your state taxes.  Eliminating the city earnings taxes would increase the amount of money flowing into state accounts.    Kind of a tricky issue.  People who work in KC but live in the ‘burbs may have to pay city earnings taxes now to fund things in the city.  This may come at the expense of state projects that would benefit their town.  I can see both sides of this a bit, but again, always in favor of letting voters decide.
Prop B VOTE NO
This is all dressed up as “end puppy mills”, which is a nebulous term at best.  But the meat of the language will do very little of what it intends, in fact in some way it will lessen the regulations.  This is purely an attempt to get animal rights legislation started and would be used as a springboard to go after other animal breeders and producers next, to the detriment of agribusiness and our state economy.  VOTE NO to this BS.

	Republican	Democrat
CD1	Robyn Hamilton	Lacy Clay*
CD2	Todd Akin*	Arthur Lieber
CD3	Ed Martin	Russ Carnahan*
CD4	Vicky Hartzler	Ike Skelton*
CD5	Jacob Turk	Emanuel Cleaver II*
CD6	Sam Graves*	Clint Hylton
CD7	Billy Long	Scott Eckersley
CD8	Jo Ann Emerson*	Tommy Sowers
CD9	Blaine Luetkemeyer

Not sure about CD4 or CD7 but everywhere else, Vote Republican.
*Incumbent

-KOOK

Weimar Republic 2.0: The Obama Version. The Rentenmark, Glenn Beck, and The Future.

  This is a repost of a post I wrote almost exactly a year ago.  Glenn brought this up again a day or so ago, and I agree that this is all very likely.   Here is what he said on his radio show:

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/46725/ 

“PAT: And they seem to be setting up exactly what happened in the Weimar Republic to finally turn that situation around.

GLENN: Yes.

PAT: And that's after the hyperinflation, what saved Germany? They valued land. They went to a land standard and that's what -- they burned the rest of the money and they based it all on land and what is the Federal Government doing here now? But taking over all our property.

GLENN: They're taking the property. They're --

PAT: 98% of all new mortgages.

GLENN: They've got all -- 98% of all new mortgages are underwritten by the Federal Government. You will become a renter to the Federal Government. If there's any way you can pay off your house, you should pay off your house. And I know people will say that's nuts, but I'm telling you, you've got to own things, because that is what they did in Weimar. They just took it. I don't know if you're going to be able to keep it. We've never been in this situation before. Very few countries have and none of them have come out the other side. That's how dire this situation is.”

 Who Owns The Land in the United States, what is the Rentenmark?

The United States Government owns 30% of all land in the United States right off of the top (see map).  But more than that, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac own half of all outstanding mortgage debt or about $6 Trillion worth.  Harder to get a handle one is how much of the still remaining mortgage debt is owned by banks that by virtue of receiving TARP money are run by the Government.  If the bank that you owe your mortgage payment to is run by the government then your mortgage is basically government owned.   The States also own land, one of the guvernator’s ideas in Caulifornya was to sell State parks to the Fed.  As State budgets get worse there may be more who start to think that is a good idea. I think it would be safe to say that very near 50% of land in this nation is owned by the Feral Government. So? In 1914 Germany abandoned Gold as the backing for their currency (we did it in steps finally abandoning it completely in the seventies) and began printing money based on “Trust” in the Federal Government (like the dollar) this was called the Papeiermark.    After WWI Germany was forced to pay reparations to the rest of Europe.  To pay their debt they printed money…well like we are.  This caused inflation to be so horribly bad… well here was the joke: “Grandma put her money in her grocery basket to go to the store, a mugger stole the basket and left the money.”   Soon this currency was totally worthless (this is what happens when you put your trust in the government). Along came Hjalmar Schacht.  He was basically the Hank Paulson/Tim Geithner  of Germany.  What the Germans did to get their currency under control was to create a new currency, the Rentenmark.  The new Rentenmark currency was based on Real Estate.  Horace Schacht mortgaged all the land owned by Germany and created money with the mortgaged land. He sold the German land.  He mortgaged the house.  He sold the farm.  My personal opinion of Schacht was that he did what he felt he had to do given the situation he was placed in.  It did work, but at what price? So…Germany owned a lot of foreign countries a lot of money…and they printed money as fast as they could…to pay their debt…causing their money to be worthless…so then…because they already owned a lot of the land in the country…they mortgaged all the land they owned…and made new money. Hey wait a minute… we are printing money fast enough to make ink worth more than oil…and we owe foreign countries a lot of money…and our country owns nearly half of land and homes in the country… hmmm Beck mentioned this whole scenario on his show one day a month or so ago and I have read up on it since then. My previous theory was that he would run our debt up so much we would go into a world bankruptcy court and and as a condition of accepting a world currency and losing stature in the world our debt would be written off. Obama would sell a Global Currency and Global Government to the American people by saying that we are so screwed we HAVE to accept the global currency, .  But this is even more plausible. Using this idea it also begins to make sense why we have laws preventing oil drilling even though there is a lot of oil left in our country we are just sitting on.  Ditto for coal mining, and many other resources.  IT MAKES THE LAND WORTH MORE. It has to be something similar to this, because no group of even marginally sane individuals could spend the kind of money they are spending without any thought to what will happen. Not that our politicians are sane. So what is the worst that could happen.  Zimbabwe could happen that is what.  All of the information is readily available so here is what happened in a nutshell. In the 80’s and 90’s despite droughts Zimbabwe had a decent economy.  It was largely agricultural but the country also had large mineral deposits which were lucrative.  They had adequate electricity and transportation was good.  Then the new ruler of the country decided to “spread the wealth around” and take all the land from the producers and give it to local “oppressed” people and the agricultural output fell over 50%. To help the problem the Government created they began to regulate, well, everything. As a result “Atlas Shrugged”  Now they have to buy electricity because they cannot fix their equipment.  Foreign investment is gone.  Interest rates are well north of 200% (fantastic but true) and unemployment is around 80%.  It is the Obama model.  It is the change I believe they believe in.

-Kook

Cognitive Dissonance

I thought I better post something before everyone started thinking I was taken by the black helicopters and the X ray vans (sad we know for sure one of them exists) but I havent been abducted yet.

So the other day I was watching the new show on Discovery called Swamp People, where people who look a lot like some of my family, friends, and neighbors are chronicled as they hunt gators in the swamps of Lou'sanna.

One of the people I was watching TV with said, "It is surprising that the Animal rights folks and other Liberal Whackos let them put this on TV since they are actually killing alligaotrs" Without missing a beat another person in the room said, "well you know it is because Alligators are not cute. A besides they are far from endangered."

So a third person speaks up and says, "I had never thought about the cute facotr before, but you are right."

Finally I joined the conversation and said, "well proving the exception to the rule, Babies are cute, and if they were doing a show on aborting babies the liberals would think that was great empowering educational television."

Which kind of got me a lot of looks from around the room. But it is TRUE. Just this week a lot of you probably saw that crazy old bat in England saying on the BBC that she would smother her child if it was disabled. If only someone had smothered her.

Picture that for a second though...not the aborting of babies...but lets say the aborting of Panda bears. I want to see a show where a bunch of people sneak into a zoo and abort a panda bear. Why the outrage from PETA would be deafening. There would be boycotts and lawsuits, and save the Panda's concerts everywhere. That idiot from U2 would get up at an awards show and say something stupid. There would be black and white ribbons worn on liberal lapels everywhere. For what? According to them a lump of cells.

Maybe we could get a show demonstrating partial birth abortions to fur seals? Why not, they are ok for a woman to do in a lot of people's minds.

Disturbing mental images aren't they? These are the people we are dealing with... People who think it is ok to kill a baby human but will chain themselves to a tree to keep it from being cut down. Or will boycott a KFC for the treatment of chickens. Or will put commercials on TV showing them blowing up adolescent kids who do not believe in global warming but would have you thrown in jail for chaining your dog in your yard.

That is cognitive dissonance.

Peace Doesn't Keep Itself

From the Heritage Foundation’s Morning Bell

Saw this today and thought it was particularly brilliant…thought I would share with those who may not be signed up to receive the Morning Bell.

Yesterday afternoon, President Barack Obama told his Economic Recovery Advisory Board: "I realize that we are facing an untenable fiscal situation. What I won't do is cut back on investments like education." Meanwhile what our Commander in Chief is very willing to cut is defense. In Bob Woodard's new book Obama's War , the President is reported telling Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: "I am not spending a trillion dollars" on war costs. And he told Vice President Joe Biden exactly why: "I can't lose the whole Democratic Party."
Since 1960, federal spending on education has tripled while test scores have remained flat. Meanwhile, even after factoring the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan, our nation will only spend 4.9% of GDP on defense this year compared to a post-Word War II average of 6.5%. Education is arguably a local responsibility that should be controlled at the local level with as little federal interference as possible. And even if you think federal spending on education is necessary, it is not mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, and the Department of Education did not even exist until President Jimmy Carter invented it. But the phrase "provide for the common defense" is right there in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution.
An explosion in domestic spending, particularly from entitlement programs--Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid--is the true source of our nation's "untenable fiscal situation," not defense.  Furthermore, our nation's continued economic prosperity is entirely dependent on a peaceful world. With this in mind, American Enterprise Institute (AEI) President Arthur Brooks, the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) Director William Kristol, and The Heritage Foundation President Ed Feulner wrote in yesterday's Wall Street Journal:

[M]ilitary spending is not a net drain on our economy. It is unrealistic to imagine a return to long-term prosperity if we face instability around the globe because of a hollowed-out U.S. military lacking the size and strength to defend American interests around the world.
Global prosperity requires commerce and trade, and this requires peace. But the peace does not keep itself. The Global Trends 2025 report, which reflects the consensus of the U.S. intelligence community, anticipates the rise of new powers—some hostile—and projects a demand for continued American military power. Meanwhile we face many non-state threats such as terrorism, and piracy in sea lanes around the world. Strength, not weakness, brings the true peace dividend in a global economy.

But the Obama administration is simply not doing enough to ensure that our strength is preserved. We now have the smallest Navy we have ever had since 1916 and the oldest Air Force in recorded history. Heritage Foundation Research Fellow for National Security Studies Mackenzie Eaglen writes: "Between 2010 and 2015, total defense spending is set to fall from 4.9 percent to 3.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), even though the nation has assigned more missions to the military over the past two decades."
Cutting defense spending is not the answer to our economic woes. After years of presidents taking "peace dividends," by starving the Pentagon while drastically increasing spending in other areas, we are needlessly hollowing out our armed forces. When troops go to battle in the future, they will lack resources, and suffer unnecessary failures and our national security will be compromised. Like the looming Obama tax hikes, liberals would like to pin this problem on the Tea Parties, arguing that they are the ones arguing for spending cuts, which liberals say should include defense. For one, that presumes all Tea Partiers are alike, rather than a mix of conservatives and libertarians with differing views. But more importantly, it ignores that many in the conservative movement understand that a strong and modern defense system should not be sacrificed for the unhelpful pork and government largesse typical of recent Congresses. These Tea Partiers, which would include champions such as former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), embrace President Reagan's motto of "peace through strength."
Sacrificing our nation's defenses at the expense of the entitlement state will neither lower our deficits nor protect our citizens. It appears to be the policy of this White House that Washington should no longer be a leader in the world, but instead should be content with managing America’s decline in a "post-American" world. This is not acceptable. Congress must better strengthen our nation by reforming entitlement spending while funding the people and platforms necessary for a balanced defense.

-KOOK

I WILL NEVER FORGET

-via my iPhone

I am staying out of the Koran Burning/Ground Zero Mosque Nonsense Debate

I am trying to stay out of this Koran burning nonsense.  But the angle I would take if I was to get involved is that the whole thing proves something important about Islamic fundamentalists.  They burn our flag all day every day and we do absolutely nothing.  IF they were to start burning Bibles, Baptists would not hijack an airliner and crash it into a big mosque in Tehran, but talk about burning their BOOK, and they start talking about KILLING people and rioting in the streets.

I think that shows what a religion of peace they are…

On another note.  The Koran burning folks have a RIGHT to do what they are doing, Just like the Ground Zero Mosque folks have a RIGHT to buy a building and make it a mosque…but BOTH are in very poor taste.

And yet, that is the beauty of our country… you have the right to make complete jackasses out of yourself as long as you do not break the law…and neither of these groups is doing that.

There.  There is my obligatory ground zero mosque and koran book burning post.

Liberal Elitist Condescension and Shame

It is a puzzling mindset to me, one that I can only theorize on, not one that I claim to completely understand.  I suspect it arises out of the same mindset that compels some members of the glitterati to collect children from other places akin to beanie babies, instead of adopting the some of the many needy children in this country.  As if it is somewhat more noble to adopt a poor hungry mistreated kid from some faraway land than it is to help the one down the street.  See on the face of it, they are doing it to help the less fortunate; while in reality they are doing it for their self aggrandizement and to stoke the flames of their own ego and self importance.

Take pretty much any Liberal agenda item and that is what it boils down to.  Specifically “Tolerance”, which in their meaning of the word is different than the Constitutionalists view.  Their view of it misses half of the meaning.  In my view Tolerance involves reciprocity.  I tolerate your love of Korean Rap, and (this is key) you tolerate my disdain for it.    Better yet, I tolerate your vegan cruelty free lifestyle, as long as you tolerate my bloodthirsty carnivorous predatory meat eating lifestyle.  See there is a balance.  Tolerance is not, “We tolerate your religious beliefs and try to appease you, all the while you go ahead and keep trying to kill us.”

In the Victorian age, at the height of the British Empire you could read books and hear of the gentry class talk of the “noble savages” in Africa, New Guinea,  and other places.  The view was that “these people, God Bless their heathen souls, just didn’t know any better,” and maybe they didn’t dress appropriately, or perhaps they ate one another, and… “it was all quite shocking… but that was nature and…look at them…”

I think a lot of the current mindset towards “multiculturalism” and “Tolerance” has to do with that same mindset.  One the one hand many of the lefty hand wringers  are ashamed and feel guilty for being among other things, White, but more importantly, American… and by extension, Rich.  They are ashamed at our successes  as a nation.  Balancing that shame, is massive amounts of condescension clothed in a thin layer of “tolerance”.  We are expected to ‘tolerate’ a muslim way of life, but we are to have no expectation of them to ‘tolerate’ our continued existence. The reason why is that these liberal goofballs view them as the old English gentlemen viewed those ‘noble savages’.   “Algore bless them, they can’t help themselves, we have to help them.”  It all stems from an inner arrogance.

That is why they take such a conciliatory tone when speaking to, or about, one of the many groups they like to place people in.  First and foremost these people are always more enlightened than the rest of us.  With this great enlightened knowledge comes an awesome responsibility to convert anyone and everyone they encounter.  Now this does not include the ‘noble savage’, they are not the object of the change, because they just do not know better, they are not yet civilized.  The object of this conversion is all of the other people of their society.

This is why the left will defend Islam, but will try to drive out Christianity anywhere it finds it.  Well that, and the fact that Islam provides a mechanism to control people and Christianity lays the foundation for all Liberty. See all of us in the USA should be more enlightened and realize Christianity is a backwards belief, but these third-worlders in Afghanistan don’t know any better, ‘why they are hardly any smarter than someone from the Flyover country…’ and so ‘algore bless them, they just don’t know any better’

Need some proof?  Who is always encouraged to ‘reach out’?  Are illegal immigrants encouraged to ‘reach out’ to Citizens to understand why it is we feel that a general urination on our laws irritates us?  Are radical muslims charged with ‘reaching out’ to all of us who have never harmed one hair of their beards to seek understanding with us and to quit trying to kill us?  When was the last time Vegans were encouraged to ‘reach out’ and try to seek an understanding of why I think cows are delicious?  They aren’t…because they are ‘enlightened’. 

To sum it up, to be a member in good standing with the Liberal Moonbat Left you have to be convinced of your own enlightenment, you must feel ashamed at your successes and those of your fellow citizenry, you must feel superior towards all those who are like you, but refuse the enlightened way; you need to have a lot of pity for those around the world who are different than you, but mask your pity in a veil of concern and caring, …you need to make yourself feel better with your attempts to help those ‘noble savages’ and above all, be Smug about it.

Living Peacefully With Islam

"We, the German Führer …, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today … We regard the agreement signed last night …as symbolic of the desire…never to go to war with one another again. … and we are determined to … remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.”  – Neville Chamberlain several months prior to the beginning of WWII

Appeasement can absolutely work; you can get along with anyone and live in peace and harmony with them as long as you do not care about right and wrong, and do not mind being subjugated. Our Western puritan sensibilities say that two rational groups of people can meet and agree on things in a civilized manner; but you cannot deal rationally with an irrational person or group.

To be totally fair, not all, or even most, or even a majority of the followers of the religion and polity of Islam are AK waving-wild eyed-bomb throwers; the problem is the moderate rational, peace loving, moderate Muslims ARE NOT IN CONTROL. There were many Germans who did not participate or condone, and in fact condemned the actions of Hitler; there were multiple assassination attempts made by those in the German military, but those were not the voices in control of Germany at the time.

Our problem as a nation is that we see the Religion of Islam as separate from the countries that it RULES.  Islam is both a religion and a political force.  It is a spiritual philosophy and a political one.  It goes against virtually everything this country stands for.  Womens Rights, Equal rights, tolerance, & freedom of worship. More incredibly we have the liberal left championing a religion (which has to be a first all by itself) that is opposed to almost all of its’ own aims.  Islam is against womyn’s rights; homosexuality, abortion, birth control, and separation of church and state.  Yet, the liberal hand wringers have tied themselves down with political correctness and support the appeasement of Islam in ways that are completely counter to its usual aims.  We say Men and Women are equal, and in some liberal schools this has been taken to the extreme of co-ed bathrooms, yet the left champions Muslim attempts to segregate students based on gender in education.  The liberal left endorses the idea that we should not be uptight with the overt sexualization our children to the point that pedophiles feel safe in some of our states because of lenient courts/ and is in step with the Islamic notion of wearing a full veil and making accommodations to sports uniforms for modesty sake.  It is to the point that in some cases when a Muslim woman comes up dead the news won’t report on it out of respect of the Muslim tradition of honor killing.

I do not have a problem with a woman feeling she has to wear a veil; I do have a problem with Muslims changing my way of life.  I do have a problem with allowing them to kill their wives and rape their daughters and not be punished for it.  I do have a problem with the notion that on the site of our nations second most deadly foreign attack we are seriously debating allowing the building of a place of worship to honor the ideology that caused the deaths of over 3000 of our fellow citizens.

And so in a very real sense we must come to grips with the truth; a Religion is at war with our way of life.  In our history we have fought nations; meaning we have fought adherents to a political movement tied principally to land claimed by that polity.  But Islam stretches across lines on a map, because it is a set of ideas.  And it is at war with us and has been for a very long time.  We have only very reluctantly fought against it and never had the stomach for outright war with it, because it does not have a regular army and does not play by Geneva convention rules.  I suspect another reason is our continual and persistent view that it is ONLY a religion and of our long held principle of freedom of religion.  To go to war against a religion goes against our very nature.

I do not want to go to war with all adherents of Islam; in fact I advocate annihilation only of those who wish to kill me for my beliefs.  But I am strong in that opinion; because they will not stop, because they cannot be dealt with rationally.  They cannot be dealt with rationally because they do not share much, if any, of our worldview. In a time when Obama is riding high because of the renewed peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel, we should remember our own history, but we are not taught of the Barbary wars, which created the US Marines, coined the term leatherneck, and led to the marine hymn line “…to the shores of Tripoli”.   More on that later…

The only way for us to live peaceably with Islam is for either a) the true moderate Muslims to repudiate all policies of aggression towards ‘infidels’ and remove the radicals from power, which is highly unlikely since war with infidels is called for in the Quran and they believe that it is infallible; or b) we remove their will and ability to hurt us through the only thing the whackos understand…violence.

For the proof they are at war with us, click here all but a handful are by radical adherents to Islam.

-KOOK

-who can tell me the significance of the first picture in the post and why it is bookended with the picture of the towers?

Western Hero on Glenn Beck’s Rally

Glenn Beck's Rally by Western Hero

It is a sad commentary on our public education system when a media personality has caused more people to read The US Constitution and the writings of the founders than has all of the primary and secondary teachers combined
I don't get a chance to see Glenn Beck's TV show, and I only catch snippets of his radio show on the way home from work, but I admire him.  I admire him for pulling himself out of a self-made gutter of materialism and alcoholism.  Not only did he come back from the brink, he leveraged his talents to become a multi-millionaire who stands atop a multimedia empire. 
I admire his ability to educate with humor.  What other media personality could hold an audience larger than all of MSNBC and CNN combined while talking about Woodrow Wilson, early 20th Century Progressivism, and the most obscure founding fathers?  Beck is a life-long learner, an everyman delving into history and philosophy.  He is an example for all of us.  
I didn't watch the rally, but I did wade into the poisonous stream of vile liberal invective that reached its high-water mark sometime after the rally.  I won't even honor any of it by echoing the lefty lunacy.
We are no longer a nation of laws

A liberal defending big government and bashing Beck maintained noisily that we are a nation of laws.  I responded that actually, no, we are not a nation of laws. At least not anymore.  When our government passes laws that favor certain groups (sugar farmers, for instance), and creates literally tons of laws per year that they themselves admit they have not read, and when they selectively enforce others, or refuse to enforce them (immigration), then they have made a mockery of the very concept of the rule of law.
We are a decadent nation ruled by the capricious whims of a political oligarchy grown fat upon corporate contributions. But that's OK with the left as long as the oligarchy favors them and their causes. That is what separates left from right today, and it will be the death of progressive democrats:  The right has turned a critical eye upon it's own politicians while the left childishly refuses to do the same.

...And I love how Glenn sends the left into bug-eyed apoplexy on a daily basis.  It's fun to watch.
Here's what I think about the rally, which drew "hundreds of thousands" according to McClatchy News Service:
We need government, and we need it to perform its constitutional duties efficiently and effectively.  We must also never lose our self-sufficiency. Katrina was a tragedy. People just sitting there as a hurricane hits them while school buses sit underwater.  Did government benumb them into inaction?
Government has its place, but so does freedom and liberty of each person to rule their own lives and make their own decisions.

Washington, We have an Imbalance
We have an imbalance between personal liberty and government power. That is what Glen Beck is (comically? cynically? self-servingly? genuinely? sincerely?) pointing to.
Too many look to government for too much. Meanwhile, over-reliance on government has caused our self-sufficiency to atrophy, like a muscle that goes unused.
It's about damning the DC-NY crony capitalist connection. It's a shout out to the politicians that the times they are a changin' (Apologies to Bob Dylan). We don't believe their crap anymore.
Statism is so Yesterday...
Have the republicans screwed us over? Of course they have. So have the democrats, who are just as deep in the crony capitalist sewer as the GOP.
Our nation is too big and too diverse for outmoded one-size-fits-all solutions.  We don't want to destroy the federal government, we want to restrict it to its constitutional duties so neither left nor right can hijack its coercive power for their own narrow financial and political interests.
The only solution is to take it away from Washington and hand it back to the states and the people. If we screw it up there, then it's our own damned fault

-Silverfiddle

Glenn Beck Lying about Potential Attendance

“GLENN: From Washington D.C., 25 hours away now from Restoring Honor, what a wild 24 hours this has been since last we met. Things here in Washington are getting quite bizarre and quite intense, and intense in a good way, bizarre in a just, I don't even know how to explain it. Just a, it's weird. History is going to be made this weekend in Washington. We've been telling you that we don't know how many people are coming. We have built it and I think the area that we have JumboTrons and sound in is, if it fills in, is between 450,000 and 500,000, and we you know, we've been expecting, I don't even know, maybe 100,000. We said when we first started if we could get, you know, 100,000, that would be great. Who knows. Maybe we get 25,000. But the press has gone from it's only going to be a handful of people to 100,000 earlier this week, and the press here in Washington, I don't know if you are seeing it in outside of Washington, but the press here in Washington is now predicting a crowd of possibly 500,000 people. So you can put that into perspective, the largest gathering on the mall of all time was 700, outside of Obama, 700?”

I don’t know why Mr Beck lies about how many people will be in Washington DC, for his little event; when me and AD33 and my li’l cousin went there on 9-12 last year there was the three of us, two cabbies, a homeless person and a bunch of people from the local Klavern and that was it.  There were like 50 people in all of Washington, DC.  Well not counting the 1.2 Million people there for the Black Family Reunion or something. It was a ghost town I tell you.

You know the News is going to report that there was Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, a couple other crazy right wingers, a bunch of redneck racist and 100,000 cardboard cutouts of spectators.  Then they will say that the 100,000 number is an estimate and all they can confirm is 3 people were there.

Crap, Fox even reported it as less than 100K on 9-12.  Seriously, why bother.

-KOOK

The Power Of Incentive

Humans do everything we do because of some motivation.  There is always a perceived incentive to our actions.  Be it direct or indirect or tangible or intangible, we do things because of incentive and motivation.
The Government is completely incapable of creating anything.  They can no more create demand than they can create gold from lead.  They are capable of motivating people to take action, and they can create powerful incentive; but they cannot create demand for a product or service.
Let me explain my meaning. If you were beginning to ponder buying a new vehicle, if it had already been on your mind, or if your present vehicle was of a certain age and the government declared that all people who were going to trade in a car would get extra cash back on the purchase of a new car; that could incentivize or motivate you to action.  But if you had just purchased a car, or if you were dead set against buying a new car, then that announcement would not create that demand for you to take action.  The demand has to be there first.  The numbers prove this out with Cash for Clunkers as well as the home buyer credit that just happened.  Those people were already in the market, or leaning towards making a purchase.  The Government only pushed them to take action on a decision they were already contemplating.  The news just came out that new home sales and new car sales are both down from prior months and the yearly expectation is no better than last year, in fact it looks a little worse.
To put it another way; would you rather sell one hot dog a day for thirty days, or sell 30 hot dogs in one day and none for remaining 29 days?   The net result is the same, sure the one day profits look great on the one day, but the long term outlook is identical. How about if you spent a thousand times as much money to sell the thirty hot dogs one day as it would have cost to sell one a day for thirty?  This is what we are now seeing in the economy, except the government spent a great deal of taxpayer (that is, “our”) money to incentivize sales that were likely to happen anyway.  The true net cost per auto sold is much greater.
This is because the Government cannot create anything; all they did was incentivize a temporary shift in resources.  They influenced the “When” not the “If” ; they BOUGHT themselves some time.
-KOOK

Musings on Human Nature and Meddling.

I have been back from Hawaii a little over a week now. Catching up with work and home has kept me busy, but there were a few lessons to be learned, or at least things to mentally process. The greatest thing about Western Culture has to be our wanderlust. The only peoples on the planet that migrated further than the descendents of the Roman empire and Sons and Daughters of Scotland have to be the Polynesians. The Romans went forth in search of riches and glory. The Scots migrated due to the desire to be left alone, and the Polynesians did it for room to live…but under it all in all three cases must have been a desire to see what else was out there. As for Western Culture as the Europeans moved Westward they always seemed to want to remake the world in their image. They had a definite view of what “civilization” was. Great meddlers we all are. I am not commenting on the justness of the situation or whether it is a positive or a negative. I am just stating a fact. 200 years ago Hawaiians lived in huts on the beach, fished all day and did whatever native people do.

*disclaimer – the following is just my perception from a week on the island…people who have lived there or have more insight please chime in*




How did Hawaii make me think about this? We were on Oahu. Honolulu may be the most touristy place I have ever been. They do not have a manufacturing economy. The sugar cane and pineapple growing is in decline due to production costs. Leaving Tourism as the main industry, followed by the Military . Because of its’ beauty there are also a lot of movies and TV shows filmed there. This, as well as old Sugar and Pineapple money fuels the wealthy part of the island.

From Waikiki go northeast and you see very nice homes that would not look out of place near Malibu, or Miami, and with real estate prices the way they are this is the Beverly Hills of Hawaii. Just down the street from our Hotel was any store you could see on Rodeo Drive. These people have some amazing Ocean Views and great beaches.

Continue past the ritzy neighborhoods up to the north shore and you see much more lower-middle class housing. One night while we were just driving around seeing the sights we got all the way up on the north end of the island, because we were searching for the highly rated shrimp truck/shrimp shack food.


At the time I thought that the areas we were driving through were not unlike some Indian Reservations I have seen. A day or so later while on an official sight seeing tour our tour guide confirmed that this was basically what we had seen.

At some point in the past, right after statehood presumably, the US government and the government of Hawaii made a deal for natives to homestead certain Hawaiian lands for a dollar a year lease. Then they could build whatever home they could afford to build on that land and it was theirs for a dollar a year. There were schools built and other services to manage the homesteading. These were not shantytowns, but some looked more like Tijuana than San Diego… Of course, we being, Mid-Westerners in the proud Puritan and Pilgrim traditions had all kinds of discussions on the state of affairs that this treatment brought. Our last day in Hawaii we decided to road trip up the northwest shore. The is an area that looks very very much like San Bernadino county CA, or parts of Phoenix, AZ. Housing, landscape, etc. I got the impression this was where the upper middle class lived. Past that up the coast (up just before the road actually stops) between the road and the beach we came across a huge Shantytown area.


Tents, Shacks, old Cars and boats, fences made from pallets, junk, you name it.


But as evidenced by the young boy getting a haircut in the front “yard”, some had electricity. We saw water tanks on trailers and things of that nature.


But they had great ocean views. Now, I do not know if living in this manner was a choice for these people, one assumes it was not as much of a choice as a condition, but when others of my group saw this they were highly offended.




“They should do Something” And that is how it starts. who "they" and "do" what exactly? Sure maybe some of those folks are down on their luck, lost the big condo and bought a tent or slept in their car, but the age of many of the domiciles of this settlement lead me in a little different path.
Some are probably young folks who are “beach bums”, some may be old folks who don’t have anyone to take care of them, some may be more like our usual homeless here on the mainland, but those were evident too in the Honolulu. Remember, anyone of Native heritage can have a house lot for a dollar a year on the Res. But then they have to give up their view and their beach. My main point to the rest of the group, was ITS AN ISLAND, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THESE PEOPLE? JUST MOVE THEM? This was how many of these peoples’ ancestors lived, potentially right on that beach. For all we knew this was their ancestral land, maybe that was the site of their great grandparents village? I don’t mean that in any pejorative way. Perhaps it was a choice, after all living in a small cabin on the one of the greatest coastlines in the world for basically free has to be pretty sweet. There were quite a few serviceable looking cars in evidence and electricity, as mentioned.


What “Something” should be done? Make them move to government housing? Make them move to the Reservation? You going to ship them to the mainland to add to our indigent population? It. Is. An. Island.

Let me ask you this, who are they hurting, other than our more wealthy sensibilities. Are they unhappy? I don’t know, I didn’t poll them; I just drove by in my rental minivan. But there were wind chimes and rock marked walkways…it was home to at least some of them…and think of the view…



But no, Google “Hawaii Homeless” and this area pops right up “Waianae Coast”. You learn many do have jobs, and some lost homes, rent skyrocketed from $300 a month for an apartment to over $1000. Some want to move, some don’t, some like the beach and the views. Of course, the Government has gotten involved and is trying to move them to rent assisted housing, converted warehouses, shelters, trying to change eviction laws, doing what NY did; the article I read was from 2006. 4 years later…I can tell you firsthand…not much has has changed.

And they still have great weather and a million dollar view, ostensibly living similarly but better than the Hawaiian natives did long ago.



-via my iPhone

New LCR Daily Caller Piece: Of smurf and swine: James Cameron....

Image: James Cameron


by the Left Coast Rebel

This morning I wrapped up a Daily Caller piece that I had been working on since last night. It parallels my previous Daily Caller piece on effective global warming rebuttal and works in various angles on leftist James Cameron as well.

Here's an excerpt:

“Avatar” is returning to theaters — this time in an even lengthier form — but the movie’s creator seems intent on once again mocking the very people that have made his success possible.

“Titanic” film director James Cameron quickly went for the oft-traversed intellectual low road of ad hominem attacks, recently attacking skeptics of global warming as those of piggish DNA.

“I think they’re swine,” said Cameron to the American Renewable Energy Day Summit in Aspen Sunday night. Laughingly, Cameron piggishly proclaimed “swine” just moments after receiving eco-ovations from the environmental Aspen crowd.

Why? He had praised a documentary that extolled the evils of a proposed hydropower project in Brazil that would ostensibly “displace a large tribal community,” therefore violating even more sacred limousine liberal codes: group identity and the hatred of capitalism.

Hydropower is “clean” by most mainstream standards, so go figure....

What do you think? Read the article here at the Daily Caller and please pass it along to various social media outlets.

Marco Rubio: American Exceptionalism

by the Left Coast Rebel

Recent polling has showed that the Florida senate run between 'independent' progressive Charlie Crist and Tea Party favorite Marco Rubio to be a dead heat.

What do you do?

Nary a teleprompter in sight, Marco Rubio delivered a stirring speech at a campaign stop on Friday centered on American exceptionalism:



I got shafted here in California as my candidate -- Chuck DeVore -- went down in flames in the primary process.

But residents of the sunshine state have a choice.

Marco Rubio would certainly get my vote, would he yours?

Move along Charlie Crist - there is butt-floss in your future and it can all be yours:

Hat tip Moonbattery, via Florida Independent, go to MarcoRubio.com here, cross posted to LCR.

Obama is a Muslim? I Thought he was an......

by the Left Coast Rebel

.....industrial-kitchen sized 'waffler', (that) attracts more flies than roadkill on a hot summer day in southern Texas, sends rats scurrying, suffers from lower back muscular dystrophy is insecure, is fair game for a boardwalk fair game, is transparently non-transparent, ACORN-associating, adolescent, piggy-bank-breaking, a socialist duck quacking,Manchurian Candidating, a Clunker salesman, stock market contrarion, Marxist officiating, Boy Scout boo eliciting (and "The View" showing), contract law defacating, Obamanation mantra chanting, free-speech gestapo-creating, corruptrocratting, Dear Leader faith-inducing, incompetent, (un) checking and (un) balancing, a liar, hostile to entrepreneurs and capitalism, arrogant, is loathe of criticism, un-stimulating, success measured in Waterlooing an entire nation, considers Manhattan a playground for Air Force One photo-ops, believes in 16,500 IRS jobs 'job creation', a Chicago thug, created creepy media adulation (and cult-producing), Asset nationalizing, Czar-appointing, post-America scheming, dishonest, aloof, considers you and I 'numbers to be crunched', middle-tax-increasing, hostile to American ideals, beer-summitting (and "acting stupidly"), hypocritical community agitating, half brother sex-assailing, a South America-wannabe that gives 'bro-shakes' to South American dictators that imprison dissidents, cigarette smoking, terrible at golfing, a poor speller, determiner of money making, Democrat-voter-hatching, cardigan sweater reduxing, traffic-inducing, dangerous to schoolchildren, dangerously out of touch with the American people, has produced jobs for billboard workers (but not the rest of us), Robin Hood in Scrooge's clothing, a joke on Google, ....

And they say George W. Bush was a bad president? The links above are just a smidgen of the last year and a half. I didn't even scratch the surface of Obamanations.

Why the hell should it come as a surprise to anyone as well that almost 20% of Americans think Obama is a Muslim?

Updated: Readers/bloggers - leave updates in the comments here and I will add them to the Obamanation list....

Updated x2: Obama's way of selling the mosque, socialism, bankruptcy, to a nation that wants none of it or him:

Hat-tip Temple of Mut.

Keeping with Last Night's Post

Looks like my hunch was right. Awoke to this headline. Weekly Jobless Claims Post Surprise Jump, Hit 500,000

Come on, Republicans, no more "all mosque, all the time". It is time to go for the jugular on the economics front.

Obama: Recession Recovery to Take a Few More Years

On the perpetual campaign trail in Washington, today, Obama stated that wary, financially strapped Americans were going to have to wait a few years for economic recovery.

Wow. Did I hear that right? A few years? What happened to the summer of recovery? The green shoots that surely must be full grown trees by now? Has Obama jumped the shark here? I will be the first to admit Americans have short memories but I am guessing most are going to remember that they have been out of work for two years, when the strip malls in their communities were not boarded up and when they could afford the little luxuries that they once too for granted. Just a hunch.

Assuming this is not Obama's "Fonzi moment", why would he say this? What does he know about the economy that we do not know? Perhaps the next job numbers can not be massaged and we are going to breech the 10% unemployment mark? That would be a huge psychological blow to the American people. It would also be an albatross around the necks of Democrats heading into the midterm elections.

July unemployment was at 9.5%, almost a full 4% higher than July 2008. The Labor Department reported first time claims for unemployment benefits jumped to 479,000 last week from 460,000 a week earlier. The median duration of unemployment has jumped to 26 weeks and is growing. This is already the longest recession since the depression.

Obama concluded his appearance accusing the Republican party of offering cynicism and fear. So, projecting another few years of downward economics and declining standard of living is pushing optimism? It may be, because this country will not recover under the Obama administration. It may not survive a second term.

Totus(x2) Hits the Gulf

Doesn't everyone pack a couple of teleprompters for an overnight vacation? Notice the maritime props for the special effects.