Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Somehow, our current administration's secretary of finance doesn't seem to think that Moody's actually will reduce our national credit rating, regardless of how much we owe. The man who couldn't figure out TurboTax obviously doesn't understand how the credit/debt system works, any more than he does the tax system.
What it will more likely accomplish is to drive out the productive citizens and leave the leeches.
Donkey Detonated on Gaza Border.
According to the story, a group of Islamotards loaded a whole lot of dynamite onto a donkey cart, and blew it up at the border. I guess they were trying a low-tech version of a car bomb that didn't work--the only casualty was the donkey.
My husband snarked that the donkey ought to get 72 donkey virgins. I don't know whether that would be donkey heaven though--I think the donkey would prefer endless pasture with clover and alfalfa, and maybe a small family herd to keep it company.
Leave your descriptions in the comments if the idea made you laugh.
The mixed feelings come from the fact that someone, likely in the White House, leaked the memo to the press, and it was announced to the world, including the people the ops are set up to take out, in the New York Times. And that puts our ops teams in danger.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
All hope is not yet lost, however: the treaty still has to be ratified by congress. And, given the trends in the nation pushing toward nation-wide "shall-issue" concealed carry laws, and the expansion of the Castle Doctrine laws amongst the states, it might not be ratified.
If the filthy bastards sitting in congress continue in their trend of not listening to the people that hired them, I'll be willing to bet that each and every one of them would be replaced, and every bit of legislation that the creeps have passed limiting our freedom would likely be repealed.
Honestly, I don't want to see this come down to the wire. I hope it's not ratified. I wouldn't want to bet that the resolution wouldn't be preceded by another bloodbath like in the 1860's.
And focus on the clerics.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
I don't think they've really thought this out. How many children's lives would this new legislation save? How many lives in that one state are ruined annually, and what effect would this new legislation have?
In other words, what is the dollar amount that each child's life and emotional/mental health worth?
Apparently, not that much in California.
People simply are too careless with their progeny. My other half and I check the fittings on our son's crib every time we put him in or take him out of it. There's nothing stopping other parents from doing the same.
Like this little boy, born with a lymphatic system deformity in the left side of his face. He's coming to the U.S. to get the treatment that will change his life and leave him...normal. Why here? Because Canadian doctors aren't capable of the same quality of care as American doctors, nor are the hospitals capable of an equal quality of care, after socialized medicine being in place for so long.
Key quote: "Doctors in Canada were unable to perform the surgery to remove the growth due to the complexity of the procedure..."
This is where we're headed. But where will we go to get the complex procedures done, once we've sunk to the same level of quality as every other country with socialized medicine?
That vision has been viciously perverted by the dynasties in power in Washington, D.C. And not only has that vision been perverted, but betrayed.
Need proof? Take a look at Arizona: they passed a law recently that basically says the same as national immigration law (which has been ignored by the transnational progressivist nobility), and has the gall to state publicly that they will enforce it. And ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) now says they won't process any illegals turned over to them by Arizona.
Arizona's law specifically forbids Arizona law enforcement from racially profiling to catch criminal aliens (even though upwards of 95% of all criminal aliens in Arizona are Mexican). The new law specifically states that cops can only ask about immigration status if they're interviewing someone who's committed any other crime. Arizona's law targets the criminals themselves less than it does those who enable said criminals to work and live in a place where they're trespassing: those who hire criminal aliens, and those who rent to them.
Yet ICE is refusing to process any criminals Arizona turns over to them caught under this new law.
And one immediate effect is that the criminals that Arizona catches committing other crimes will be released. Like this guy, who raped a woman in Seattle. He was caught and deported back to Mexico nine times. Essentially, ICE is saying that thieves, rapists, murderers, and other criminals who happen to be in this country illegally, won't be processed and deported if they're turned in by Arizona. This is a direct contravention of the Rule of Law.
What this means is that the Rule of Law that protects us from tyrannical rulers has been subverted and betrayed--it no longer applies to a certain class of people who became criminals as soon as they crossed our border. And since it no longer applies to Mexicans, the rest of us are no longer protected by it.
Vote them all out. Fire every individual working for every government bureau. Dismantle all government bureaus not listed in the U.S. Constitution. We need to start from scratch.
That said, I cannot blame him and his administration for keeping Congress in the dark, where intelligence reports are concerned. I wouldn't trust them not to do to any president, whether they like him or not, what they did with the intelligence reports President Bush shared with them. Especially not since Dear Leader is about to lose his supermajority in both houses of congress.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
And, when I said it'll be a while, I meant it. We're going to have to rebuild our savings account after self-paying for prenatal care, the delivery (hopefully in December) and the hospital stay.
I hope it's still legal by the time we can afford it.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the normal Americans--and the cross was promptly stolen.
Now, when this happened, my first reaction was that the bed-wetters did it, and that they did it to declare that only the memorial itself--the one that was stolen--counted under the Supreme Court decision, and that any replacement wouldn't be allowed to stand. And, as it turns out, I was right.
Friday, May 21, 2010
And when we investigate soldiers responsible for carrying out military objectives of murder, we do nothing but cripple the rest of our troops, and set them up to become nothing more than live targets for the enemy.
We really need an administration that loves the country it governs, loves the troops, hates our enemies, and has the balls to do what needs to be done (both overseas and enforcing our borders) to protect our country.
Barring that, we need to bring all of our troops home. From everywhere. They need time to rest and resupply before the rest of the world attacks us to bring us down to Europe's level.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Turns out there was both more to the story, and that the cop's story was completely false. Turns out that there was a reality show filming that particular SWAT team, and the film crew's work caught the cop's lie: there was a flash-bang thrown through the window, immediately followed by a shot fired through the door from the porch.
A&E needs to not turn all copies of the footage over to the PD in question, even if it's subpoenaed. In fact, Detroit's PD shouldn't be involved in the investigation at all, other than as the parties under investigation.
We don't need Rambo shooting little girls, even in drug-ridden slum cities.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Amy Schmalbach answered the door, saw the badge, and thought she'd be safe. Then she noticed that the worker looked a little familiar. After he left, she realized where she'd seen him: in her state's sex offender registry. She probably was safe, but if her children were girls, she just gave him the info he needed to go after them.
One commenter mentioned that they thought he was entitled to a job, because everybody's got to eat, right? In my opinion, those that target children for sex attacks not only don't deserve a job, but don't deserve freedom, and honestly don't even have a right to keep breathing.
Good for him. I hope he keeps his job.
They're about to learn a really harsh lesson about human nature. The more upscale the location in the larger cities, the more likely they are to have people making excuses not to pay anything, and they're going to fold. Oh, it'll likely float along for a couple of months from the novelty, but if goods and services are offered with payment optional, people will begin taking the option to pay nothing.
I have great faith in individuals. People, on the other hand, suck.
There are things that should be kept behind a closed bedroom door (or on camera in a porn studio), no matter what team one happens to swing for.
Talk about someone who's earned the title of nigger! He stole money from a wheelchair-bound woman's luggage! Dude! Your job is not a limbo contest!
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Although, I do have a theory about why there hasn't been a press conference with the TOTUS taking questions through the spoiled idiot child reading it: the people who put the turtle on the post want him to stay quiet to try to avoid revealing that he didn't get up there by himself. I mean, everybody knows it didn't, but there seems to be a bit of a conspiracy of silence.
After mandatory Medicaid comes into full effect, I foresee a whole lot of doctors retiring, and many of the rest will accept cash only.
I respect those who served. I accept that there were "conscientious objectors" that got deferments or ran away to Canada. I may think they're cowardly wastes of space, but at least they didn't do a Jane Fonda.
Those who lied about serving? Those assmunches I do count as low as the traitorous whore that did a photo op with the Viet Cong.
In a perfect world, it would kill his political career. In ours? Dhimmicites still support him. It's not surprising, really. If you look at it, we've had Bill "I ran away to Canada" Clinton (don't get me wrong, I do like the guy), John "Fuck the soldiers" Kerry, and John "Marines are murder machines" Murtha (RIP) lionized by the Dhimmicrites. I guess Mr. Dick "I lied about my deferments" Blumenthal would fit right in.
Bad for the growers, great for the customers. Actually, not that bad for the growers, in the long run.
Let me explain: the quoted price of a pound of pot ($5,000) is artificially inflated to cover the risk involved for the grower and the seller--if they're caught and convicted, they go to jail.
When marijuana is legalized, the risk goes away. Prices will fall to more reasonable levels. I understand how that can worry the growers, but it just goes to prove that they're either smoking their product (and profits), or haven't had enough education to understand supply and demand: as the price goes down, demand goes up. As the product is decriminalized, those who wanted to try it, but didn't want to break the law are going to start trying it, pushing demand up further.
In the end, the pot growers are likely going to see far higher income, despite lower profit margin, because of much higher volume sold.
From the news story:
Parkerson, 28, was arrested Wednesday night after he allegedly sneaked into the screened patio of a home, carrying a video camera, police said.
The homeowner's wife saw him and yelled for her husband, Pembroke Pines firefighter Ireneusz Fajkis, according to the police report.
Fajkis chased Parkerson onto his front lawn and tackled him to the ground, according to the police report.
Parkerson, of Coral Springs, was taken to Coral Springs Medical Center, where he talked to a nurse treating his wounds.
"I picked the wrong house," he reportedly said, "because a UFC [mixed martial arts] fighter lived there and beat me up."
Actually, dude, not only did you pick the wrong house, you picked the wrong hobby.
Monday, May 17, 2010
He may well be right, but I don't think it was the oil company's greed, necessarily, at fault. More likely his party's greed for campaign contributions from British Petroleum caused the Obama administration to rubber stamp the rig that caused the spill.
Men are more sentimental than women. It blurs their thinking.—Robert Heinlein, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long.
Men tend to be fairly straightforward, with at least a basic sense of honor. Not every man has the same sense of honor, but whatever morality they play by does tend to guide their behavior, and make them somewhat predictable. They tend to have at least a few rules in an unspoken code of conduct. They tend to try to play within the rules of whatever field they try to accomplish things in. They tend to believe that others will play by the same set of rules that guide their own behavior.
Women, on the other hand, don’t tend to play by any set “rules,” whether spoken or unspoken. As a sex, women tend to be backstabbing, conniving, vicious harpies. They tend to be manipulative, and willing to do anything to get their way.
Nowhere do we see this as clearly as in the recent mandatory Medicaid debates: sure, Obama and his camp did things the Chicago way (as in, “I’m gonna make you an offer you can’t refuse,”), but he followed Chicago rules in the game. He did a lot of back-room deals with money. He did a fair few threats.
He played by a certain set of rules—Chicago mob-style rules, but rules, nonetheless—to accomplish what he wanted to do. And he made compromises to get what he wanted the most.
Nancy Pelosi, on the other hand engaged in a win-at-any-cost campaign that’s currently having repercussions on those she forced into voting her way. She doesn’t look likely to lose her seat, but many of those she coerced, blackmailed, browbeat, and/or guilt tripped do look likely to lose theirs. Even some in the Senate that looked like sure-things for re-election are finding that they’re vulnerable.
She doesn’t care. She didn’t play by any given set of rules, but she got the job done to get the president’s plans the votes they needed to pass.
I hate to say it, and it’s going to sound sexist, but this is just the way women work. Men really have no defense against it, mostly because they don’t understand the way women’s minds work, biologically.
I think Kipling said it best:
She is wedded to convictions -- in default of grosser ties
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies! --
He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.
Unprovoked and awful charges -- even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons -- even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish -- like the Jesuit with the squaw!
…And She knows, because She warns him, and Her instincts never fail,That the Female of Her Species is more deadly than the Male.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
I think the tone of the article is slightly suspicious. It may just be my own biases, but the negative way the article discusses homeschooling, and the positive references to the strict regulations some states have put onto homeschoolers (i.e., parents being forced to register what curriculum they use for each homeschooled child) makes me suspicious of the whole article.
I doubt that homeschooling has had as much of an upswing as the article says (most parents are too busy working two to three jobs trying to keep up with the Joneses, or are too lazy to do what's best for their kids), and admit fully that they probably have a point. However, I do know that homeschooling has become far more popular, mostly because of how absolutely awful public schools have become, both academically and administratively. I would believe a 10% or even a 15% uptick in homeschooling elementary and middle school age kids. I am, however, with the authors of the aricle in doubting a full 24% upswing, especially when you consider that there are a lot of high schoolers figured in, and "More than 22,620 Texas secondary students who stopped showing up for class in 2008 were excluded from the state's dropout statistics because administrators said they were being home-schooled."
After all, this school doesn't understand the definition of the word "volunteer." How are they supposed to teach the children under their care?
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
That's fine. I get that. But I think they're being incredibly short-sighted in the way they're going about it.
What they don't seem to understand is that, once they've armed the Islamofacists in Iran and Syria with nuclear weapons, we may be target number one, but they're target number two.
Monday, May 10, 2010
But the fact that some seasonal landscaping workers choose to stay home and collect a check from the state, rather than work outside for a full week and spend money for gas, taxes and other expenses, raises questions about whether extended unemployment benefits give the jobless an incentive to avoid work.Well, DUH! If money's coming in while they sit on their a$$es, then why should they break their backs doing landscaping work full time? Especially if the money's not too different.
The average landscape worker earns about $12 per hour, according to the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth. A full-time landscaping employee would make $225 more a week working than from an unemployment check of $255.
But after federal and state taxes are deducted, a full-time landscaper would earn $350 a week, or $95 more than a jobless check. The gap could narrow further for those who worked at other higher-paying seasonal jobs, such as construction or roofing, which would result in a larger benefits check.
Should that happen, we'll have the revolution that the Marxists want: nobody working, and everybody sucking on the government teat.
The only census worker we've seen only wanted to ask if we knew if a couple of houses in our neighborhood were inhabited, and didn't ask us to even open the storm door.
Good enough. Because I find that my decision was the correct one.
A group of thugs impersonated census workers to break into a Texas home and kill one of the inhabitants. They spent two hours rifling the house, before driving away unmolested.
Another incident, this time with a real census worker, saw the man breaking into the home of a disabled woman to beat and rape her. He'd used his work with the census to choose his victim.
I don't know what's worse, the idea that Dear Leader was planning to turn the census over to ACORN, or knowing that these bastards weren't ACORN workers/volunteers.
I will say this: home alone or not, I never am out of reach of a pistol.
Why does that bother me? Because it would bother any sane person that wasn't pro-corruption, and heavy-handed, violent corruption, at that.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
"The Soviet Union was a very complicated state and if we speak honestly the regime that was built in the Soviet Union... cannot be called anything other than totalitarian. ...Unfortunately, this was a regime where elementary rights and freedoms were suppressed."I'd give him a lot more credit, were it not that under his and his puppet master's leadership, Russia was heading directly down the same path. As it is, I suspect it's far more likely that Russia's current totalitarian leaders are trying to direct the world's attention away from what they're doing now.
The "Reverend" Al Sharpton probably thinks that "Harrison Bergeron" is a utopia. I cannot imagine how he thinks "social justice" is achievable when the government is used to smash everyone down to the same terrible standard of living.
True social justice is when everyone has the same chance to make something of themselves. It's up to the individual how much work to put into it. Equality of opportunity is not illustrated by perfectly equal results.
Al Sharpton's definition of social justice is my definition of theft and tyranny.
Ann Arbor, Michigan: home of the school whose principal created a race-based club. No, the club wasn't for exclusively white kids, nor did it include all minorities. The club was for black students, and only black students.
And so was the field trip to see a black rocket scientist.
Seems to me that the nigger* son of a bitch is trying to turn all of the black kids under his authority into niggers.
*As Old Cat Man says, "Black people aren't born niggers--they earn the title.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Two of her family are dead: the ex-girlfriend and her brother. Her mother and father were critically wounded. The gunman was shot by a police officer with an AR-15 when he aimed his "AR-47" at the officer.
(First of all, I didn't know there was such a thing as an "AR-47." Second, what I saw in the picture was an AK-47, with a California-legal thumb hole stock, and an illegal 30 round magazine. The editors really need to proofread more carefully. And maybe know what they're talking about so they don't make such embarrassing mistakes.)
The two that are dead might not be were the gun control laws--which are only affect those who obey the laws in the first place--so stringent.
And then we're truly fucked.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
In fact, it makes far too much sense for Dear Leader to have delayed reaction to the oil spill so that he could frame crippling our economy by refusing any more drilling as trying to save the ecosystem.
Except for one tiny detail: I don't think he's mentally capable of it. Maybe the ones that put the turtle on the post are, but I don't know that they've thought that far.
Sorry, exploding luggage in an airport doesn't strike me as a nonevent. It strikes me as another failed terror attempt, or at the very least a test. And calling it a "nonevent" strikes me as someone trying to cover just how bad a job airport security is doing.
We are so fucked.
When are we, as a nation, going to wise up and refuse en mass to tolerate the government's refusal to allow us to defend ourselves? When are we going to stop respecting the laws banning guns from certain areas, which does nothing but make us vulnerable?
I've said it before: only those who are law-abiding already are made vulnerable. Those who have harmful intent are going to ignore the "gun-free zone" rules as applied to themselves.
Or, no. Those with criminal intent choose to make their attacks in "gun-free zones" because they know their intended victims don't have the capability of fighting back.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Okay, I'm done with the sarcasm, now.
Monday, May 3, 2010
The only other thing I could think of was "Huh. No wonder child predators are increasing in number." And that's just not funny.
Yes, it was wrong. It was a violation of their civil rights--at least, it was for those who'd either been born here or gained citizenship.
It was also necessary, since enough were either spying or otherwise aiding an enemy during a time of war that it was difficult to pick out who wasn't.
I'm beginning to wonder if it's not time to do that with Muslims. I mean, how many sleepers are there in the U.S.? We don't know. We don't know where they are. We don't know what they have access to.
We do know that they want to hurt us. We also know that they see it as fully religiously justified. We know that almost all terrorist attacks within the last fifteen years or so have been related to Islam.
And we know that car bombs are a particularly favorite tactic. And we know that the Taliban has claimed credit.
It's a bit of a stickier situation--we don't have an officially declared war, they're a religious group not a group of immigrants from a single nation, and many Muslims are born U.S. citizens, and converted later. It may be necessary, regardless, to protect their physical safety.
I get the feeling that, if more of these attacks happen, and the public perceives that the current administration is not only not doing enough but hampering efforts to curb RIF terrorist attacks, we're going to see a lot of people arming up to play Cowboys and Hajjis.
Because Christianity deems a great many things wrong that are accepted as commonplace behaviors in the modern world. Things like coveting anything that is thy neighbor's to the point that, if you can't have it (or something like it) you either get the government to steal his wealth to redistribute it to those who didn't earn it, or destroy it. Or sleeping around outside of marriage. Or blaspheming (which I define as doing evil in the name of your so-called "good" deity).
Or acting on homosexual urges.
Over in Britain, a Baptist preacher was arrested for discussing what the bible defines as sinful. They can't do that over here, yet, and it's thanks to that first amendment. The Brits have nothing like that protecting their God-given rights.
Really? I suppose the same goes for teaching kids about safe sex.
It doesn't? We have to understand that kids will get curious about sex, and it's the schools' and parents' responsibility to teach kids to be safe around sex? Then, what's the difference between that and teaching children about being safe around guns?
I sense an ideological disconnect, here.