Clinton puffed on a marijuana joint but didn't inhale it!   That was foreshadowing of the confused "truth" as Bill would tell it over and over again in differing forums.   I did not have sexual relations with THAT woman, Ms. Lewinsky.   So on and so forth.   You had to analyze everything Clinton said because until you knew the assumptions he kept secret from us (what I did with Lewinsky does not fit my own definition of sex, how do you define "inhale"), you really didn't know if he was being honest with you or not.   Most times he was being dishonest and had a trump card in his vest with which he could avoid punishment - just like a little darling 5 year old boy always does.

So now we presumably want another 5 year old boy whose twisted words can never be called lies!?!   Now we want to deal with a little boy who denies having eaten the chocolates though he has the evidence clearly on his face and is standing next to the garbage receptacle with the heart shaped box sticking out of it?   His response to our inquiries is "I wanted fruit and we had none and those things smelled like they had fruit in them.   Are those what you mean by chocolates?"

Don't see how what I am describing is none other than Barack Obama?   Well consider that his first reaction to Rev. Wright's incendiary comments were called by the great man a "seemingly endless loop of sound bites" of just three comments he once made, taken out of context, which spewed forth after a difficult, segregated life of being the butt of racial prejudice.   Obama could not throw his pastor under the bus anymore than he could throw his white, racist grandmother there.   We need to get past this racial divide thing.   And the man is merely the head of the church where I found Jesus Christ, got married, and baptized my children.   Y'all know how that tune plays, doncha?

It turns out that Wright lived neither a difficult life nor one of segregation.   Turns out the man had a pretty solid education in a racially mixed setting.   Turns out Barack was better friends with Wright than he led us to believe.   Turns out Wright and his cohort of racists are the reason Barack stands before us as a US Senator running for the office of President.   He's not Barack's mere acquaintance.   He represents the world in which the great man was raised and educated.   He is the mere personification of the things Barack and his wife say to each other and their friends at the dinner table about "White America."

Then Obama heard his twenty years mentor exclaim for all to hear, those comments were not taken out of context.   I believe them.   They are the core of my beliefs.   Whites are devils on Earth and should be wiped out.   AIDS was invented by the lilly white US to punish blacks.   Louis Farrakhan is perhaps the greatest human being to ever grace the planet with his presence.   Jews suck!

So Obama says I didn't realize he was quite that luny.   Now I can throw him under the bus.   I want you to know that I categorically disagree with my spiritual mentor's heartfelt belief system.   I never inhaled what Rev. Wright spewed - I guess I wasn't listening when he said those things every Sunday for 20 years.   I did not have intimate intellectual relations with Wright's racist rant.

Labels: Barack Hussein Obama

There is an e-mail making the rounds which claims military deaths during Bush's presidency are less than they were under Bill Clinton.   The irony of our military experiencing more deaths during a period with no open conflicts than it has during the evil Bush years (with two somewhat major conflicts going on) is obvious.   The e-mail cites a report on the web site of the Federation of American Scientists.   That supposed report has evaporated and the page now forwards interested visitors to a page on Army Times which in turn debunks the mythical "factual report."   I took a look at the Army Times "correction" and found what was there to be at least as interesting as the original e-mail.

The Army Times article says, "There's just one problem: The figures listed in the email are wrong.   They vary markedly from the figures published in the cited CRS source document."   It then goes on to analyze the actual figures saying:

In reality, according to the CRS report, 7,500 service members died on active duty in the eight years from 1993 through 2000, compared to 8,792 in the six years from 2001 through 2006.

The Pentagon has not yet released data on total active-duty deaths for 2007, but 1,014 service members died in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that year, and more than 100 have died in the wars so far in 2008, pushing the known total under Bush to more than 9,900.

The report does not address the ratio of active-duty deaths to force size; the active-duty force shrank significantly during the drawdown of the 1990s, from more than 1.7 million in 1993 to about 1.3 million by the early years of this decade.

The first issue which strikes me from the foregoing is even with two conflicts ongoing and hundreds of thousands of fighting men and women in harms' way, the mortality ratio is very similar during the terms of the two presidents.   Yes, more were killed under Bush and each one is a tragedy.   But the difference during the "peace dividend" years and the period since we were attacked is not very large.

Any man's (or woman's) death diminishes me and you.   But let's be rational here.   The media, the peaceniks, and even the very liberals who voted to engage in the two actions in the Middle East have been screaming about how evil George Bush has been killing our sons and daughters en masse through his shameful invasion of a country run by a secularist dictator (not a religiously driven Islamic fundamentalist one).   Let's get a grip.   The mortality figures are not even close to any conflict this country has ever engaged in, let alone Vietnam or Korea.

These conflicts, together, are comparable only to ... The War of 1812!

The second observation is finally a recognition that our military was badly bruised under Clinton.   The "drawdown of the 1990s" occurred not after a major conflict but in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.   And it was a reduction of forces of almost 25% at a time during which we were in fact being attacked, such attacks becoming more and more frequent as the Clinton presidency wore on.

That was just the reduction in raw numbers of people.   It says nothing about the reduction in talent which was extremely significant.   Many career military people dropped out of the armed forces because they could see the writing on the wall.   We lost more than 25% of our braintrust during the Clinton years.

The reduction in raw numbers of people and talent isn't nearly comparable to the size of reduction in equipment, technology development, etc. we experienced under Clinton.   That was the bigger travesty.   The Clinton years left our military in shambles and totally reliant upon reserve forces, many of whom signed up just to get money for college since during those years college costs got really out of sight.

Do I need to remind anyone that the purpose of our military has never been to provide college scholarships for those whose parents are less wealthy and who otherwise do not qualify for aid given to underprivileged people?   The Clinton presidency gave us much, much more than don't ask, don't tell.   It gave us a smaller, largely demoralized, under-equipped military lacking in mid-level leadership.

I had an argument with a liberal from Minnesota a couple years back.   He was praising the brilliance of Clinton because he had "balanced the budget."   I said, "yes, he balanced the budget in terms of what gets reported out to the people but he very much did so ON THE BACKS OF THE MILITARY."   This guy disputed that.   He was wrong.   He used the old liberal standby debate winner by saying, "I've read a lot on the subject, have you."   I laughed in his face and said, "yes, you read a lot on the subject, a lot of BULLSHIT.   If you don't know or deny that Bill Clinton balanced the budget on the backs of our military, you REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HE DID."

You can't win this debate by using the talking points issued in the liberakl code of conduct field manual.   The facts are Clinton decimated the military in order to present cleaner books to Congress and the public.   He even called it "The Peace Dividend" and the Clinton-adoring, leftist mainstream media published it as fact.   Then things got complicated.

Turns out this "drawdown" wasn't such a great idea after all since it we were certainly NOT at peace.   Oh, Clinton only had to fire a few million dollar missiles here and there to remain in office and keep his Democrat party doing OK.   But the enemy was shooting real bullets back at us and planting bombs of every type in our bases, in boats aimed at our ships, etc., etc., and so forth.   We were at war but we didn't know we were at war.   We let our soldiers go out on furlow and retired our officer corps while the enemy was putting our CIVILIANS in its sights.   Some freakin' peace dividend!

So, that's my take on the bogus spam e-mail making the rounds and the correction.   We hacve a serious disagreement in this country between those who do not see the invasion of Afghanistan and the subsequent one of Iraq as the worst travesty foisted upon the American people and those who believe it is demonstrative of the "worst presidency in the history of the country."

I say history will be clear in its interpretations and judgments of the past and following 20 or 30 years.   Nobody alive today will view those interpretations and judgments.   They'll be published in the history books of students 100-150 years from now.   The whole period of 1960 - 2020 will be a relatively minor one in the history books of American school children, if there is still a United States of America in 2150.   They'll find this period somewhat boring.   They'll laugh at the primitive technology we lived with.   They'll study the slanted journalism of our times - no liberals not O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, but rather all the slanted media including 60 Minutes, NBC, CBS, New York Times, Washington Post, etc.

School kids in 2150 will have a sentence or two in their testbooks (something which will be on the test!) describing how the media openly attacked Bush and propped up Democrats by distorting the facts, to the detriment of the country.   They'll read how Clinton drew down the military while we were under attack.   They'll read that the Bush presidency was not nearly as bad as the media made it out to be.   They'll read how the Clinton presidency was not nearly as good as the media made it out to be.   They'll read how the candidacy iof inexperienced Obama was not nearly what the media made it out to be.   They'll be encouraged to critically question media reports about the current President, a Republican woman, part black, part white, part hispanic who was born into relative poverty and pulled herself up to prominence without any governmental assistance.

What the kids of 2150 won't learn about is how bad of an idea it was to invade Afghanistan or Iraq, or about how many people GW Bush killed, because 100-150 years from now, it won't look that way.

Labels: media bias

Mrs. Obama said, in an interview on the liberal TV show "Today" on liberal TV station NBC, "We hear time and time again voters are tired of this ... they don't want to hear about this division, they want to know what are we going to do to move beyond these issues ... and what made me feel proud of Barack in this situation is that he is trying to move us as a nation beyond these conversations that divide."   That was in reference to racist, anti-American remarks her pastor made recently (no not just snippets fr4om decades ago) (no, not just her husband's pastor, her pastor as well).

Barack chimed in as well, "When the first snippets came out, I thought it was important to give him the benefit of the doubt because if I had wanted to be politically expedient I would have distanced myself and denounced him right away, right?"

Right Obama, you could have easily distanced yourself from Wright's comments but you chose not to.   That's because you didn't immediately recognize the furor they would have created.   And that's because you are used to hearing these things - you have heard them your entire life.   You have heard the old folks say these ridiculous things.   You have heard your mentors say these things.   You have heard your friends say these things.   You have heard your spouse say these things.   You believe at least a piece of them because you are a racist who was raised within the fabric of a racist society, black American society.

Now just who exactkly is getting tired?   I'm not tired of hearing these things.   Perhaps Mr. and Mrs. Obama are tired of hearing them.   They better get untired because they have not yet begun to hear them.   This is just getting started.   Mr. Obama, do you really believe you can just make this go away?   Your opposition isn't tired.   We've been resting.   We're not even slightly drowsy.   This is the dawn of what will come, not the late evening.   Let the party begin!

Labels: 2008 presidential election, Barack Hussein Obama

Joe Andrew, Democratic National Committee chairman under President Bill Clinton has come out in favor of Barack Obama.   he's telling Indiana voters to support Barack in the primary election, Tuesday.   Andrew noted that he was "impressed with Obama's handling of the controversy surrounding his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright."   I couldn't agree more.   This impressed the heck out of me.   I'm looking forward to more of this.   Go Obama, go.   The nomination belongs to you.   You've earned it.   There is nothing I'd rather see after the convention than the name, Obama, running for President.

Labels: 2008 presidential election, Operation Chaos

Say no to taxation without representation.

Say no to the Global Poverty Act.

Say no to Obama.

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has sponsored a bill in the Senate which has been reported out of committee to be considered by the US Senate.   This bill is known as the "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433) and its purpose on the surface seems nice and well intentioned.   the idea is the US would act to help alleviate global poverty.   That's nice and well intentioned but I thought the US already did regularly act to alleviate global poverty through the billions in aid already offered out of the American taxpayer's purse.   This act would have us do more.   The jist of the act requires the US to "commit to spend 0.7 percent of our Gross Domestic Product" for more handouts.   The current effect would have us sp[end billions more than we currently do.   We cannot afford this sort of legislation and we cannot tolerate anyone who would be President who would sponsor such a bill.   we already do plenty.   This is an absurdity.

Labels: 2008 presidential election

Want to get sick?   Consider the following reported by USA Today:

Governments added 76,800 jobs in the first three months of 2008.

Private companies collectively shed 286,000 workers over the same period.

Is it not obvious that there is something seriously wrong with our system?   Is it not obvious that politicians are controlling our economy specifically for the purpose of creating partronage jobs so they can solidify their strangehold on government?   The Soviet Union was not defeated by the United States.   We have merely become them.

Labels: Socialism

Did I hear that correctly?   All the leftist media types claim that Obama has escaped the Rev. Wright thing unscathed?   They believe this will blow over?


Baahaahaahaahaahaahaahaahaa

Labels: 2008 presidential election

It's over.   Let's face it.   Perhaps the fat lady has not yet sung.   Perhaps Obama will hang on for several more weeks, even months.   But let's face it, he should drop out of the race right now.   He can't survive this.   Nobody can.

America just cannot elect a President who is associated with the sort of blatant racial hatred Obama's closest mentors, advisors, friends continue to exhibit.   Not even liberals have arrived at the degree of self-loathing that will permit them to elect a man who sat there in the pew quietly listening while the minister spoke of such absurdities as AIDS is a conspiracy committed by whites against blacks.   No white voter who isn't looking to enter purgatory can possibly vote for a man whose mentor gleefully exclaims "NO, NO, NO, God DAMN America."

Don't believe it is over?   Well, consider that this hasn't even gotten going yet.   Conservatives have not yet begun to dig hard for clips of other things Rev. Wright has said in the past.   You have to know this stuff is out there and hasn't yet surfaced.   Most likely the clips have already been found but they are being held in somebody's lock box just waiting for the Democrats to nominate Obama.   And even if there are no more clips of the good Rev. screaming about supposed injustice, that Pearl Harbor was payback for white slave traders or maybe the Hiroshima bomb was dropped to kill a black radical, there will be other "issues" with other Obama friends and supporters.   These people weren't too lazy to scrub over their footprints, they really believe this stuff.   Or if they don't, they say these things to steam up the masses.   But there's more stuff waiting in the wings.   And this hasn't even gotten started yet.   It isn't going to get any better.

By By, 'bama.   Hillary is running for President.

Labels: 2008 presidential election

I admit to being a double secret agent of Operation Chaos ("OC").   My status is so secret that nobody within the operation knows of me.   I have no "handler."   My name appears on no official, classified or otherwise, OC documents.

I thought OC would be a pleasant diversion as compared to actually paying attention to the media during this election season.   It makes me puke when I listen to the MSM's doting upon and reverance for some guy whose only credentials are a Harvard degree, an in with the Illinois Democrat machine, and the right color skin to continue this ridiculous charade of political correctness the liberals have foisted upon us.

OC has already accomplished its mission though clandestine operations will continue until the overall goal has been accomplished.   But I have to admit that the media's coverage of Chaos is surprising me.   There are 1,618 hits for "Operation Chaos" on Google News and several hundred thousand of them on the web generally.   Liberal journalists are up in arms over the very idea of OC.   This is good stuff.   The more they freak out about this, the further the word will spread and the greater amount of chaos which will be generated.

I am signing on only to congratulate all fellow members of OC and to remind them that they must continue and redouble their efforts.   We have already accomplished much but there is more we can accomplish.   Keep the two Democrat fighters in there, throwing punches at each other.   Recruit others to help in the fight.   Don't get tired.   We are wearing out the enemy.   We are making them spend their money on an internal struggle.   Keep up the pressure.   There's no way this can backfire.

Labels: 2008 presidential election, Rush Limbaugh

I don't know how you feel but I can no longer listen to anything Newt Gingrich has to say.   I was asleep at the switch when he converted over to the church of the anthropogenically induced warming globe.   A few months ago, I read of his conversion.   The other day I saw him and Pelosi on a commercial about it.   I used to think the man intelligent and now I know he is nothing but a politician, though not apparently running for anything for quite some time.   His one decision has made everything he has to say automatically invalid.

Just had to get that off my chest.

Labels: Newt Gingrich

Obama's minister, the Rev. Jeremiah, says "criticism surrounding his fiery sermons is an attack on the black church."   Black Church?   Which black church is that?   I'm sorry but I'm looking right here at the bible and I am having difficulty finding references to races and / or any mention of separate but equal churches for those whose skin color is darker or lighter.   In fact, I cannot find any reference to a "black church" anywhere in the bible or any other religious writings for that matter.   I was actually unaware of a specifically black church, one which is 100% black and excludes whites.   What is the denomination?   Are all black christians members of that church?   Are they prhibited from attending services at all the other "non-black churches?"   If there is only one black church, that explains why Obama stayed there.   He had no choice.   If you're black, presumably you go to the black church or none at all.   I believe there are well over 100,000 Christian denominations.   Yet I cannot find a single one which is overtly exclusively black.   Maybe someone could help me out on this?   Barack, could you please explain it to me.

Labels: Barack Hussein Obama

This really gets under my skin.   Whenever someone sticks (should I say clings) to his guns (and presumably religion), the media labels him or her a "polarizing figure."   When a liberal holds tight to his or her liberal political philosophy, they are called visionary, free thinkers, etc.   This phenomenon is very similar to the media's tendency to label conservatives as incapable of compromise while claiming that liberals are peacemakers, coalition builders, etc.   The truth is liberals invoke a strategy of constantly seeking give from conservatives while never actually engaging in the practice themselves.   The media paints almost every conservative as a "polarizing figure."   For example, 60 Minutes' Lesley Stahl interviewed U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and brought up the subject of Scalia's originalism.   CBS News describes the exchange and labels Scalia "a polarizing figure who invites protesters and picketers."   Stahl says, "I'm surprised at how many people really, really hate you.   These are some things we've been told: 'He's evil.'   'He's a Neanderthal.'   'He's going to drag us back to 1789.'   They're threatened by what you represent and what you believe in."

Liberals are fond of calling any strong conservative a whole host of silly names.   They think "polarizing figure" will make anyone who pretends to be intelligent dislike the guy right out of the box.   Conservatives are always accused of not being forward thinkers while liberals are embraced as dragging us reluctantly into the future.   When is this garbage going to stop?   When are they going to listen to the sound of us changing the channel?   When are we going to see some reasonable balance in the media?   We got rid of story fabricator, Dan Rather.   Now we need the rest of the liberals, like Stahl, to pass on into retirement.

Labels: media bias

Prepare yourself for the insults to come.   Snobby liberal elites everywhere are going to analyze this and say the cause is that we stupid clingers to guns and religion have suffered a dip in our intelligence.   The ever so intelligent New York Times is in big trouble.   Fewer and fewer people are reading it.   According to one online news source, the Times' circulation dropped steeply over the past year.   "The New York Times lost more than 150,000 copies on Sunday. Circulation on that day fell a whopping 9.2% to 1,476,400. The paper's daily circulation declined 3.8% to 1,077,256."   The Times is not the only liberal rag to drop precipitously.   "At the Washington Post, daily circulation decreased 3.5% to 673,180 and Sunday dropped 4.3% to 890,163."   The high brow crowd will undoubtedly blame it on a dumbing down of the general population.   It's OK for them to think and say that.   We know the truth.   You can't rely on the slanted pages of the Times or Post to give you news unless that news is very favorable to Democrats and liberals.   We're tired of it.   We won't pay for it anymore.

Labels: Media

The Wall Street Journal says "yes"...

"Load up the pantry," says Manu Daftary, one of Wall Street's top investors and the manager of the Quaker Strategic Growth mutual fund. "I think prices are going higher. People are too complacent. They think it isn't going to happen here. But I don't know how the food companies can absorb higher costs." (Full disclosure: I am an investor in Quaker Strategic)

Nice.

Stockpiling food is going to create the gas lines and shortages we had in the 1970s. It's just going to make prices go up, and make folks punch each other in the face over that box of Lucky Charms.

Meanwhile, it'll make investors like Manu Daftary more wealthy.

Labels: Food Shortage

At the risk of boring you again, I'll play who said this one more time and call it quits for the week.   Who said the following:

"there is no proof global warming is caused by humans"

"There isn't enough potential for wind, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal or other renewable energy sources"

"the only alternative to nuclear power for producing continuous energy at the levels needed is natural gas"

The answer is Dr. Patrick Moore, founder of Greenpeace.