Archive for October, 2010

National Security

October 29, 2010

Some suspicious packages were discovered on some airplanes today. They were sent to the USA from Yemen and were discovered overseas. Read more about that here. My beef is not with the enemies who would attempt to attack us because that is to be expected from the losers out there. The problem is that there are those among us who would not only allow such a thing but thrill to it. Chairman Zero sounded almost jovial and I think he was holding back a smile. See that here. By the way, what the heck was that flag behind him?

Apparently both packages were being sent to synagogues in Chicago. A lot of questions come to mind here. For one, was this a “dry run” or a test? And was it a shadow of things to come? Are there more out there that we just haven’t found? Did Chairman Zero really care if they found their destination or not?  In addition there were some other things that went on, one of which was a passenger jet from Emirates Airlines that was escorted by fighters to JFK Airport and searched. A package was found there as well. Here’s a good question, how did anything get passed the eagle eyes on security where that one came from? I’m sure they searched ALL the priests and old ladies that got on.

CBC and the rest of the world are doing a fine job spinning this (see that here) so I won’t report, my object is simply to point out stupidity where it exists and shine a light on it. Kind of like your hunting guide for stupidity. Now air traffic security is rife with stupidity so I thought I’d take this opportunity to throw a few stones. One obvious problem is that, like in the rest of this country, the libs have attempted to disarm the good people leaving only the bad armed. This has been done quite effectively in air travel. It’s so bad that only the extremely committed can deal with the type of weapons that can be smuggled on a plane now.

In typical lib fashion Chairman Zero has vowed that he is going to “continue to pursue additional protective measures for as long as it takes to ensure the safety and security of our citizens.” Can you say losing more of your freedoms? This is just the kind of thing he has been looking for, the “disaster” that he can use to issue more decrees. And every time they pull this crap people eat it up. “For the children” is usually the BS reason, so they trot out some soccer moms to emphasize their point. (Expletive deleted) they make me sick. Can you say sell your soul for safety?

You see here is the way it’s going to play out. Rather than go back to the days of sanity we are going to continue to spiral into the pit of stupidity where only the criminals are armed and have rights. But Zero and his ilk have no true concern for criminals they are merely a pawn in their game of enslaving Americans. To paraphrase Reagan this is the last stronghold on earth. These communists will do whatever it takes to put an end to this stronghold. They are astutely aware that they must disarm the citizens before that can happen. If I didn’t know better I’d say Zero had these packages shipped himself to create this atmosphere (Oh wait. I don’t know better.). Vote carefully, you might get what you wish for. How’s that hope and change working for you right now? Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Advertisements

Tobacco

October 28, 2010

Today I read yet another unfounded attack on tobacco. Third-hand-smoke. I say unfounded because I still haven’t seen the report on first-hand-smoke. But third-hand-smoke? Really? Allegedly it’s residue that settles on your clothes and hair and… whatever. Here is a nice little story about it and here is another. Now my question is, if tobacco is so bad, why not outlaw it? Is this an attack on Native Americans who have been known to use tobacco in their religious ceremonies or what? Again, just outlaw it.

That’s right, if this stuff is like lead or asbestos or something just…outlaw… it. Is there a problem with that logic? Apparently there is. Taxes. The libs need the taxes from smokers to support their obamacare scam, they just don’t want smokers to enjoy their smoking. I’m just sick of this, they bring their stinking dog into Lowes and then bitch because someone smells like smoke? Or they come in reeking of three dollar a gallon ode d’ toilet bitching about third hand smoke. And my personal favorite the seventy-year-old filthy hippie stinking to high heaven of filthy hippie bitching about the guy smoking in the designated smoking area out front. Usually it’s the x-smokers who bitch the loudest.

Basically you don’t get through life unscathed, something is going to kill you, and for a lot of you bitching libs I will be that something. I remember in the winter a white/gray film would form on the TV screen. You had to wipe it off every day at least once. One day I realized it was salt. They use salt to keep the ice down on the roads in the northern climates and it was drying out and going airborne. Think that was good for me and my family? Should I sue the county and/or the salt miners?

Now they are considering legalizing dope in the land of fruits and nuts (California). It’s my understanding that you can’t even smoke there. If you smoke dope how’s that going to work? Will there be designated smoking areas? Can you smoke it in your car? Can you smoke it in your house? What about the kids? Spouse? Pets? Third hand smoke? If you smoke in the car will you be too high to drive? Will dope smokers be treated like tobacco smokers? Does anybody really care what they do in California anymore? All I know is that the feds have threatened them if they do it so now they have all my support. That sounds like an Amendment Ten issue to me.

Here’s the thing, libs would let you continue to have relations with children if it would give them more revenue. They really don’t care what you do just so they can control how, when, where, how much and any other variable they can think of and then tax you accordingly as they see fit. It’s not the actual smoke that bothers them, it’s you enjoying the smoke that they can’t stand. You need to be taxed until it hurts. Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Staffers

October 27, 2010

Limbaugh was all over Republican Mitch McConnell for lining up staffers for the new tea party movement Republicans that will be coming into DC soon. I must applaud Limbaugh because he actually gets it. These candidates are where they are because they will be bringing their own staffers from home. New blood. New ideas. New ways of doing things. That’s why they were elected. Any one of them that would roll into DC and start running his business as usual will be soundly rejected by his constituents if not outright recalled.

To say that the elected congresscritters are the entire problem is naive. They are the outward face of the problem but the reason things keep going the way they are going is because these “staffers” never leave, they just move on to the next mooch in a long line of losers. These “staffers” are the root of the problem. As new people get elected they may not know how the system works (which is a good thing) and an experienced staffer can get things done for them. But that comes at a cost.

You see, the tea party movement has no address. It has no leader. It has no members. It has no party. It is an idea whose time has come. Some of the Republicans elected will be followers of the tea party movement and some will not. Some of the Democrats, Libertarians, and Independents may even be tea party movement followers. But the idea here is to get rid of the old “business as usual” crowd. There’s no room for that kind of BS anymore. These people have to be sent packing if we are to save the Republic. Honestly I wish they could be sent to prison but I’ll take what I can get and the staffers are a bigger part of the problem that anything else.

As you may have noticed the alphabets (CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc, etc) are doing their level best to discredit the tea party movement. The problem is that you can’t really discredit anyone for an idea. The alphabets are the big losers in this election, as they see it, and that would explain the mindless thrashing about like the terminator in T2 when it was melting. Blindly trying everything in its arsenal to avoid the inevitable. And, like the machine, the alphabets only need a reprogramming to become useful to society again. There is really no need to destroy them if they can learn who really serves who here.

So, if you elected one of those shiny new congresscritters be sure and keep your eye on it to see how it is going to act. If you see it taking a whole entourage to DC don’t despair. That’s probably a good thing. But should they pack up and list their house with the local real estate sales agent, you might want to get out your recall papers just in case. Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Traffic Calming

October 26, 2010

Here is a term I hope you’re not familiar with. If you are, my condolences. In this piece I would simply like to explain the theory of traffic calming, as it was explained to me. Then point out some of the more obvious flaws, as experienced by me. You see, I am one of the poor bast…ah… individuals saddled with dealing with this gay…ah…liberal idea. You might want to mentally prepare yourself for what you are about to hear. I know when I first found out about it I tried to jam a pencil in my ear so as to not feel the pain so much.

Anyway, here is the liberal theory of traffic calming. As you are driving down the road in an urban area where there are about ten times as many traffic lights as there needs to be, instead of timing the lights so that if you observe the posted speed limit you will be rewarded by hitting almost all the lights green, the libs, in their infinite wisdom, have decreed that the lights should be set in such a way so that no matter what you do you will be stopped by almost every one, thus calming the traffic. That, my befuddled friends, is the theory of traffic calming.

I know what you’re thinking. I thought the same thing when I first heard it. But the fact remains that this IS coming to an area near you unless you put a stop to it right now. Anyway, back to the story, here are some of the main problems I have found with it that you may feel free to use in your argument with the powers that attempt to bring this to you.

The first and most obvious problem is that people are continuously running red lights. They are either confused as to why they can’t “time” them correctly or they are just sick and tired of spending seven hours a week sitting at a red light. This, in itself, brings its own problems, but the fact is that once people get fed up with this retarded practice they simply begin to find ways around it. The funny thing is that nobody seems to understand the concept of voting out the stupid bas… “officials” that brought it to them.

Now, the plot thickens. In an effort to curb the red light running the same giant brains who brought you traffic calming now present the red light camera. Here’s a great product for big brother types all over the world. We attach a camera to the traffic light and when it turns red it takes several pictures in quick succession and any offenders are sent a copy of the picture and a ticket. Sounds great, huh? Well here’s the fly in the ointment.

The operation and upkeep of the cameras is too much like work for the local municipalities that would subject their peasants… uh.. I mean citizens to such abuse. So, in their infinite wisdom they have farmed it out to a company for a percentage of the income. Simple enough, eh? Not so. Apparently these cameras were not generating enough cabbage to make it worth the while of the company so it sped up the time between when the light turns yellow and when it turns red. Presto, instant increased revenue. Are you beginning to get the picture? Apparently there is a law that says you have to have so much time between yellow and red and some drivers have gone out and timed these lights and won their case in court (for what that’s worth). Anyway, I just thought I’d give you a heads up on this latest and greatest. Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Anchors And The Fourteenth

October 25, 2010

So, does the Fourteenth Amendment grant these anchor babies citizenship? Check back here and see. As you can see it seems to be legal. Or is it? The quote is, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Does this really say that you can come here illegally and have a child and that child will be a citizen of the United States? Are you seeing all that in there?

Here are some interesting thoughts. The part about all persons born or naturalized sounds more like a requirement than a loop-hole. Is an infant a citizen? Do you have to be able to understand what you are doing to be a citizen? Is an eight-year-old a citizen or do you have to be eighteen? Don’t citizens get called for jury duty? They don’t “reside” here, do they? They’re “on the lam” for crying out loud. If your parents are criminally in the country does that disqualify you for the citizenship? How about that part that says, “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”? What do you think that means? What are your thoughts on this? I think the gubmint knows all this and has corrupted it to suit their purpose.

Here’s an idea. Let’s just say, for the sake of this conversation, that we accept these infants as citizens. Where’s the part that says their whole family can stay? If we were to say that the infant is a citizen and can stay why should we let the criminal parent or parents stay? That don’t even sound like a good idea. I think if we are going to allow the infant to stay we should have it adopted by a good family and raised by them rather than allow the criminals to stay and raise it as a criminal. Is this fair?

What’s that you say? Separating the child from its parents is wrong? How is it wrong? They are here illegally. We just shouldn’t separate the poor parents from their children even though they have done wrong? Then you’re saying we either have to let all the people with children out of prison or put all their kids in there with them, right? Oh. That’s different? How so? Those people are criminals. The “illegal” part of illegal alien makes them criminals. Who knows who they killed to get this far.

Here’s a thought. What’s the number of good parent types in this country who can’t find a child to adopt? How can you deny them this chance? If you’ve got people like those Hollyweed clowns running over to Africa to get children there certainly must be a shortage here. The thing is even if this stance were adopted they would still come here and gladly leave their baby because the life the child would have would be so much better than the life it would have where they came from. I say this with certainty because if it were not true, why would they come here. Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Campaign Finance

October 22, 2010

All over the liberal media they are shouting the warning that people are donating too much to the effort to bring sanity back to politics. Here we see a story where a homebuilder from Texas seems to have given $7 million to a conservative group. Sounds committed to me. But they see it as a serious threat. I’ve been admonished that it’s not about us against them and we need to work together here. BS. It IS us against them. They suck and they are sucking the life out of this country so we can be just like France. See their communist success here.

Here we see that George Soros, the communist guy who attempts to drive countries into bankruptcy and then capitalize on it, gave only $1 million to his favorite liberal cause, Media Matters (yeah, you won’t be finding a link to that crap from this page, but the ny times will gladly take you there). Why no alarm about this? By the way, have you stopped patronizing ABC, CBS, CNN, and NBC yet or are you comfortable with state-run media telling you what to think (read that communist propaganda)?

Here’s a funny thing. It seems that “non-profits” can get away with just about anything because they are “non-profits”. However if you talk to a liberal you’ll find that everyone they know who works for a “non-profit” is quite well to do. Why do you suppose that is? This is the kind of misleading BS I have had enough of. I never donate to ANYTHING with “non-profit” or “not for profit” attached to its name because I know that’s just another name for communist.

You see this is how the liberals (communists, Soros) get funded. They always give it a noble name and attach non-profit to it. Check out Media Matters and see just what kind of agenda Soros is supporting. Also there was a lot of flap about the GOP getting funding from foreign sources via the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber of Commerce? Really? That’s where the communists are hitting us now. Again, I’m tired of it. Soros IS a foreigner. That is just plain illegal. Not undocumented, illegal.

I am just a little guy giving a little warning. This is the way we are going to take this country back from the brink of communism. We MUST hit them in the pocketbook and we MUST fatten our wallets. I have stopped buying from anything I can attach liberal to. I have thought about opening a “non-profit” for the advancement of caucasian people. I have thought about opening a “non-profit” for the protection of legally abused fathers. I have thought about opening a ” non-profit” for people whose Second Amendment rights have been infringed upon (that would be everybody in the country that wants to sign up). Hey, some bodies got to start saying things like this. Do you realize how offensive it was to people the first time they started trying to collect money for unwed mothers? Almost seems sacrilegious to say it in this fashion now doesn’t it? That’s what the libs have been working my whole life for and it makes me sick. Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Is NPR Racist

October 21, 2010

Apparently National Public Radio (NPR) is racist. It appears that they fired reporter Juan Williams last night because he’s black. No other reason can be found for Williams dismissal. Had it been FOX News you know darn well that’s how the headlines would have read. Now here is a truly liberal conundrum, how delightful. I just wish there were something I could say or do to make it worse, and you can bet I will try, now here’s the layout. A liberal institution from hades (NPR) has a black reporter with a hispanic name (Juan Williams) who has dared to speak evil of the beloved mooslims. I am rolling on the ground with laughter holding my aching stomach just thinking about this.

Well apparently NPR has started damage control already by claiming that Mr. Williams is “mentally challenged”. If you want mentally challenged let’s look at Garrison Keillor, but I digress. A spokesman for NPR (I know it was a woman but sometimes I can’t help myself.) said that they received 378 e-mails expressing frustrations and complaints about Mr. Williams in 2008. I’m guessing that was either one dude mailing over and over every day and twice on holidays or every single one of NPR’s listeners sending an e-mail. Either way who cares? I have more complaints than that. If you would like to see a lib-friendly article about this check here.

OK. So I was walking down the street and these two black guys dressed like gang members started following me and I got a little nervous. Is that a racist statement? To paraphrase, Mr. Williams said he gets a little nervous when he gets on a plane with people in mooslim garb. Now come on, what’s the foul here? What’s the termination offence? You know though who really cares. Apparently Mr. Williams has a gig over at FOX and if he continues to speak the truth he may actually have a future in broadcasting. I wonder if he realizes that this could be his finest hour? I guess not he has already gone on and spewed some feces about how the tea party is racist in a vain attempt to garner favor with his old cronies at NPR. You can see that at the end of the article here.

Now the latest definition (as it seems to change weekly if not daily) is that you must have some sort of power to be a racist (WTF?). Now my Merriam-Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1977, defines racism as a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

I suggest we put a stop to this right now and move ahead secure in the knowledge that we are different. Every one of us, for one reason or another. And we all bring something to the table. These “race pedlers” out here, the Jackson’s and the Sharpton’s are doing no one any favors. As near as I can figure they have done as much to keep people under the shadow of racism as any kkk or arien nation. As Rodney said, “Can’t we all just get along?” Until next time, screw environmentalists.

Don’t Ask

October 20, 2010

Here we go again, let’s spend a pile of tax dollars on some obscure minority in a vain liberal attempt to bring them into the mainstream of society. Don’t ask, don’t tell. What, exactly, does that mean? Apparently we have been placating the homos for quite some time now with this policy. I have never given it much thought because I didn’t care one way or the other. It was my understanding that if you were having “relations” with your fellow soldier, be they same-sex or not, you were through. Out. Discharged. You can imagine my horror when I found that we were making special exceptions for the homos.

Now the majority of my life I had the same policy towards this as I did towards all of politics. Don’t know, don’t care. But as I learned in regards to other issues, what you don’t know can cost you plenty, and so was the case here. As with all of the liberal agenda the thinking(?) is the more money we throw at a physical impossibility, the better our chances of moving the mountain. Darn! How come I didn’t see this coming? Anyway, now I have to make a stand because it’s more of a problem than I originally thought.

Now I have always thought that homosexuals needed some kind of help. I can’t say where the  help should come from because I have not, and will not, study the situation long enough to form that opinion. Most likely a religious leader and/or a mental health specialist would be involved and I feel that we are doing no one a service by indulging this behavior. But that is not the point I want to make.

The point is that just like when some idiot jock goes off the deep end and eats a bunch of steroids, beats his significant other, or organizes dog fights, we end up footing some outrageous bill for their shenanigans. I say BS! I’m tired of always paying when the jerks act a fool. They are not entertaining and I don’t want to hear about it. What I want is for it to come to a screeching halt. Now.

If you think I am just spewing crap here why don’t you go ahead and start running a tab now and let me know the final tally when all this is over. If ever. Then you and your liberal friends can go ahead and pay for it. We have ample laws in place to stop this right now and I say we go ahead and call, write and e-mail our congresscritters and turn up the heat to put an end to the stupid right now. Go here to contact your Senator and go here to contact your Representative. They are fast learning what will be expected of them after election day and just how fast they can be back at their old job vacuuming ash trays at the car wash so feel free to let them know you are tired of business as usual. Until next time, screw environmentalists.

No PhD

October 19, 2010

I have a grave admission to make. I have no PhD. Honest. Yeah, I just thought I’d put that out there in case you were a liberal looking to discredit me for my lack of forthcoming in this matter. The thing is I never got around to getting it (for what that lame excuse is worth). But in my defence I’m not named as the lead author of some fabricated paper designed to help defraud half the population of the world, you know what I mean? Unlike this guy Laurens Bouwer who is listed as the lead author on an IPCC assessment report to help forward the global warming scam. Read that here.

Looking back I’m somewhat glad I don’t have a doctorate. Why, you ask? Well let me tell you. As a doctor of medicine I would be an asset to the world but many other doctorates don’t seem to really be worth all they’re cracked up to be. I just feel that there is a limit to how much someone should really study about some things before they start contributing back to society.

As an example I was reading somewhere about this guy who had a doctorate in geology. What for? You see, this is a red flag for me. This tells me that this guy has been sucking on the gubmint grant teet too long. Can you say milking it? This is when we start to get junk science like global warming, global cooling and climate change.

Can I just say here that “climate change’ is like “daytime lightness” or “nighttime darkness”. Did you really expect something else. And people like Leonardo DiCaprio (don’t know if I spelled it right and don’t know if he really believes, he’s just nice to pick on. must be that “king of the world” thing) run around saying, “Oh no! The climate is changing!” (read that in your best chicken little voice).

Just for grins let’s look at a few of the PhD’s available. A quick search online revealed that I could get a PhD in telecommunications. Again, what for? Would you feel better with a doctor working on your TV? I could also get one for human resources. I can hear myself now, “Yes. I have a PhD in human resources.” (Some body out there is cursing me right now, I can feel it. But hey, you did the time, not me). How about a DBA? That would be a doctor of business administration. How about a PhD in industrial and organizational phycology? What does that mean? Anybody? Anybody? Go to the University of Phoenix and type this in for a real treat.

Anyway, back to my point. When you study one thing for any length of time you tend to become, shall we say, jaded, and perhaps a little obsessed. This will result in work like the “hockey stick graph“. When you first start altering your data it looks real funky but after a few tweaks you don’t really notice anymore. Then when someone points out your egregious attempt at deception you are blind to it and try to continue the lie. This, in itself, is not what really alarms me though, what really sends me is that so many Leonardos are out there to follow the lie. Why is that? Until next time, screw environmentalists.

15% Ethanol

October 18, 2010

I have been hearing mixed reports on this story. First it was mandated that the gas companies were to start selling this. Then it was just a suggestion. Now it has been approved that they MAY do it. But allegedly not everybody is going to do it. WHAT? It’s like that old sit-com from the seventies, Soap. I feel like I should be asking, “Confused?” Isn’t this always the way with these liberal fix-all ideas. They make it so sketchy that nobody has a chance to fight it until it’s all over and it has been shoved down your throat (obamacare). You know, a we’ve got to pass it so we can see what’s in it, kind of thing? This didn’t even get that dog-and-pony show. It was just a decree from the omnipotent EPA. I’m sick of this. Again, what part of the Constitution gave them this power?

Well, again, I warned you, it’s another one that’s rising from the dead. This stuff is pure garbage. There’s just no other way to describe it. It really accomplishes nothing that it was intended to. It does, however, drive up the price of corn food products like tortillas so maybe some illegals will be inspired to leave our fair country. It drives up the carbon footprint of the vehicle burning it. And it has not decreased our dependency on foreign oil. Now don’t that just beat all?

What really flames me is that NASCAR has almost immediately bought into this. Yup, Dale Junior and Jimmie Johnson will be burning this crap. What is it with these people? Don’t they know where their bread is buttered? Read about that here. I can tell you from personal experience, it eats anything rubber in its way. Fuel lines, carburetor floats and gaskets, mechanical fuel pump diaphragms, all toast. Yeah, they say it’s ok for 2007 and newer vehicles. That lets 80% of my fleet out. It’s not so much the fact that it will be offered that gets me as the fact that it seems to become the only thing available after the short introductory period. Two gas stations in my rural county offered fuel without ethanol until one of them was forced to go out of the petroleum transfer business because they couldn’t afford to pull their tanks every five years and look at them. So long mom and pop. I did have a discussion with the guy that owned this station one day and for some reason he loved Chairman Zero. Wonder how that hope and change is working for him now?

After reviewing everything I could find on this edict (see more here) I think I know why people like NASCAR would even consider such a thing. If you’ll look at the last line of the NASCAR article you’ll see it, cleverly secreted, in an article about racing, there it is, “taxpayer-funded subsidizing”. Nice huh? We get to pay for yet another worthless, hair-brained, hippie cluster. Hey, even if you don’t like NASCAR get ready to foot their fuel bill. I hope all the Volkswagen microbus drivers out there will be enjoying that. Until next time, screw environmentalists.