Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Gimme money.

Nikki Diaz, "Nikkies laugh and Nikkies cry" just like regular human beings. Yeah, and they have no loyalty toward their former country nor for their stolen country.  No sense of legal behavior. No loyalty to an employer who paid her well, no sense of honor.  Only a gimme attitude.

As long as she was getting what whe wanted and living here illegally with no one questioning it, she was happy with her wages. 

Along comes reality.  Now her illegality is exposed. 

Along come dishonest unions - hah, she has found someone as slimily dishonest as herself!  Throw the generous employer under the bus and gimme, gimme some free and easy money!

I wonder if her big, phony Nikki tears are flowing now - reportedly she got less than $6000 for her melodramatic act.  No doubt she was expecting enough to live the rest of her life without lifting a finger.  Big tears time.  But, hey, maybe she can put a gimme squeeze on Jerry Brown. 

Go for it Nikki.  You are way past a regular human being by now, anyway.  You've proven you are a sorry human being, a gimme.

Friday, November 19, 2010

TSA, Groping Toward Sexual Assault

TSA policies are making news lately.  On one side of the issue are those who want to feel safe whatever the cost to personal privacy; on the other are those who believe the government's hand deep in our pocket is enough and are saying no to putting their hands in our underwear.

I know I won't fly if I have to endure sexual abuse to be allowed on the plane.  And, yes, it does meet the criteria for sexual abuse.  Persons in authority without permission touching not just your person but your private areas and the victims feeling forced to submit to this behavior.  If it wasn't the government performing this disgraceful groping, it would be a prosecutable offense.

One thing I find interesting is that the Big Napo Capo "is considering" the objections of the Muslims (but not the objections of regular US citizens).  Amazing that the very people who should be watched more carefully get consideration.  When did the US citizen become the enemy in the US?  What the heck is wrong with the people running this show?

Another interesting detail is that they want to grope the pilots, as well.  What the heck?  If the pilots want to commit mayhem, they are steering a mega-ton weapon charged with aviation fuel.  Why would they carry any other?

And I also found interesting the photo of a TSA guy groping a male passenger (the one that has been aired often in the past two or three days) - does it seem to you that the groper is just enjoying it too much - looks like a smile on his face to me.  If I were that victim, I'd be likely to kick him in the teeth.

And the "enhanced" TSA techniques are't failsafe.  They do not detect whatever may be carried in body cavities -- so penetration is next.  Won't that be jolly?  A finger digging around and then you must sit on that sore area for your flight.  I can hear it now, "Well, if I feel safer and they use clean gloves, a little soreness is worth it."  Will they use KY jelly to "enhance" the experience?

I remember when the government in the role of Big Brother watching us was considered an imposition.  Now the government is playing the role of Great Fornicator - and although they've been doing that to us for a while, they are now "enhancing" it with actual touching - and actual penetration looms in the near future.

Meanwhile, the Big Napo Capo makes no effort to curtail the "penetration" of our southern border.  She still seems to feel a terrorist attack coming across that border is much preferable to an attack flying in over any border.  If she dies from a bomb that was carried through Mexico, will she be less dead than if she dies from a bomb flown in to the US?

Truly, it's not about security, it's all about submission to the government.  Where do you draw the line?

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Another Un-award in Fairy Tale Land

The New York Times (yes, even the left leaning Times!)  called the Chev Volt  “GM's electric lemon.”  It's that bad!

If you are not familiar with it, the Volt is Obama's little electric car experiment.  Only I fear it will not remain an experiment, but will be shoved down our throats like the Obama Unhealth Care bill. 

No transport, no health care, here we come third world - and get out of the way! We are barrelling down that road faster than a Volt's top speed.  In case of an accident, don't call your health care provider - you won't be covered unless you are in this country illegally.

Anyway, this little "car" has been named Motor Trend's Car of the Year. Now there's an award as meaningful as the Nobel Prize awarded for no accomplishment.  Or the Most Powerful Woman in the World Award awarded for no accomplishment. Spot a trend here?  Awards are handed out as easily as welfare in this entitlement age.  Nanny prizes in a Nanny state. Yah! 

But maybe the prize was in anticipation of job creation. Now, I expect the Volt will do for jobs as the Obama stimulus did for jobs.  Up in this north country, we need vehicles that will get us to work through drifts of snow and 40 below weather.  The volt, a tiny electric car will do that?  I think not.  So after not getting to work for a few days, your job will go where the millions of stimulus jobs went - one more job "created or saved" in the Obama world of fairy tales and tall tales.

Oh, and when you are stalled and freeze to death in the 40 below weather, why the Volt will get another prize -- for saving money under the Unhealth Care Law - you know, go directly home, bypass the death counseling, life lost but money saved.

OofDah!

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Krugman's New Take on Death Panels

Paul Krugman has steadfastedly opposed Sarah Palin's "death panel" statements, calling her a liar and mocking her for suggesting the Obama Care bill sets up what are essentially death panel committees to determine if a patient is worth the treatment he or she needs.

But that was before the bill was passed.  Now that it has been passed, Krugman apparently has "learned what is in it," as Pelosi said we would.  Now that it has been passed, Krugman seems to think it is okay to reveal the truth even if the truth verifies Sarah's assessment.

Krugman, who denied the death panel provision with vigor several times before the passage of the bill, now says death panels and a VAT tax are the only way to deal with the runaway spending of this administration.  He made no mention of reducing the spending as a more intelligent and humane method of dealing with the issue.

What does that mean?  If you aren't healthy enough to earn tons of money to spend on VAT-tax inflated prices of necessities, you will be encouraged to die without your needed medical treatment?  Yep.  Obama Care doesn't want to provide health insurance for the elderly or infirm (unless perhaps you are also an illegal resident of this country).

Now they are not only eager to spend other people's money, but also want to spend other people's lives?

Toto, we aren't in America anymore - in America we respect life.

OofDah!  Goodby Gandma, goodbye Gramps, you aren't worth medical treatment.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Murkowski and Alaska

Murkowski seems mighty sure of Alaska.  She's counting on all the votes for "write in" to be for her, as if none of those votes could be for any of the other over one hundred write-in candidates.  She may be right, but it seems a flagrant disregard for all the other write ins.  At the least, she could have suggested that the write ins should be counted before a win be counted.  But that would require a little humility.

But those votes will have to be verified, and Alaska may be, just may be, lucky enough that the win will go to Joe Miller, after all. 

It would be good.  We've had about all the arrogance in DC that we can take.

Weird, Weird California

Minnesota has again proved that it is one of the most weird states in the Union.  But it has not yet reached the level of California.

I mean, really, Jerry Brown?  Hey, Californians, wasn't he an ineffective governor way back when?  Isn't this rather like watching a movie over and over hoping the ending will get better?

And judging by his victory speech, he's not getting better with age. He now also has either lost his marbles or has drug-fried his brain.  Either way, he's more than odd, he's freaky. Weird, weird, weird.

California is going down the drain financially, and Californians hire Jerry Brown to lead them in that direction?  They had another choice - Meg Whitman, a proven effective business woman.  It's just possible she could have led them up and out of the mess they are in. 

And they choose MerryJerry?

But California is weird, it's a gimme state that will be lining up at the federal pig trough for a bail out - because with the people they elected, it will be their only means of survival.  They seem to think it will be that easy.

But they may not find it that easy.  The new Congress may not be inclined to toss money at every problem as the old Congress has been doing.  The new people seem very hot to change that method of doing business.

OofDah!  Maybe California will have to make a real effort on their own to cut spending and balance their budget.  Some may have to give up the dole, go to work, and support themselves.

At least, they didn't legalize the dooby that apparently is anesthetizing their brains.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

The Campaign is Over

I expect all of us will awake tomorrow and breathe a sigh of relief.  The incessant campaigning is over!

But think of this.  Those campaigns have been pumping millions into the US economy.  Tomorrow that, too, will be over.  Sobering thought, isn't it?

But never fear.  Our president is taking a trip projected to cost a couple hundred million per day.  Oh, yeah, that's right - he'll be spending that in India.

But cheer up.  The 2012 campaigns will begin soon - maybe tomorrow!

OofDah!

A Statement of Disgust

Election night and the citizens of this country have made a statement!  No doubt.  But will that statement be read correctly?  Will DC see that they must begin listening to the citizenry?  Will they practice a bit of humility and decide to change course?

Will the new people see this as what it obviously is - a rejection of DC corruption, arrogance, and elitism?  Or will they take it as a mandate and go on with business as usual?

This is an historic election.  Will we see an historic change of attitude in DC?  Will they now accept they work for us -- no matter how stupid they may think we are?

We the citizens of this country have spoken.

Meet Sanity at the Rally

This is just too funny! 

At the Rally to Restore Sanity, people were carrying signs declaring how smart they are.  That in itself is funny.  I'm surprised they didn't also carry signs declaring their unusual modesty. 

Enter a small group carrying a sign asking, "Obama a Keynesian?" and a man with a microphone.

The microphone man asks several people if they think Obama is a Keynesian.  The replies are downright hilarious. 

One lady makes such an, ah, fool of herself going ballistic and yelling, "He was born in Hawaii. He's given you proof. What more do you people want?"  Others are calmer but claim that most of us are from other places, like Italy, for instance.

If you want a good laugh, here is the link to the video:  http://michellemalkin.com/2010/11/01/time-to-play/

Enjoy!!

Monday, November 1, 2010

Take his job! I demand it!

The Lisa Murkowski campaign is acting an awful lot like a group that supports the government arm reaching into lives of individuals.  She got a fellow fired from his radio job.  She claims to be a Republican, a conservative.  Hmmm.

The radio person had encouraged people to become write-in candidates to obfuscate Lisa's write-in campaign. She had to go with a write-in because she was rejected by the voters in the primaries and was late in deciding to run anyway.  A poor loser. 

I'm not sure of the legalities, but encouraging write-in candidates was certainly not as manipulative as outright lies against opponents.  And outright lies are disseminated every day by so-called news outlets. And no one takes away the jobs of the liars. 

So what have we here?  I know I wouldn't vote for Lisa simply because a poor loser who demands taking a job from an opponent is not my kind of candidate.  I don't want someone like that governing me, thank you.

Sarah Palin, An Influencial Woman

This morning I was thinking about what Sarah Palin means to this country and its politics in general and to women in particular.

Currently, Sarah does not hold an office but is a very influential woman, perhaps the most influential woman in US politics.  Like all active conservative women, she's been painted as a nutjob, ignorant, or just downright dangerous, but she perseveres and draws huge crowds who see the real woman, the intelligent woman who honestly believes our country can rise above dirty politics to be something better.

Her respect for women's abilities and for the power of their common sense has inspired so many women - some to aggressively seek office or aspire to a higher office than previously considered and some just to take a deeper interest in how they vote and what they vote for.  Women, young and old, are awakening to the importance of the female vote, the influence women can have on the direction this country takes - Mama Grizzlies and Gramma Grizzlies anxious to protect the young and the kind of country the young will inherit.

Why has she been so influential?  I think one reason is she has shown women that political involvement does not have to be limited to stodgy, corrupt old men worried only about their personal fortunes and shrill, unattractive women screaming about their right to kill babies. 

She has shown that attractive women with conscience and common sense can influence politics and attempt to clean up the corruption - try to raise the political machinations up from the mire.  This country deserves common sense in DC.  We should not have to be ashamed of the way Washington is run.

Sarah has validated conservative women in politics.  Like Sarah, they can get out of the kitchen and withstand the heat generated by their opinion that common sense, not corruption, should rule.

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Vote on Tuesday

Are you voting on Tuesday? 

Have you truly considered your vote or are you supporting the same party you always have - even the same party your parents always did?  Or are you voting for the party your teachers and professors told you to support?  Or the party that you researched fifteen years ago and deemed good.

Your party has changed.  How do I know?  Because both parties have evolved over the years.  Your parents' party is no longer your parents' party.  Find out who is running it and what they stand for.

This is America.  Every voter is responsible for considering the pros and cons of each candidate.  Voting for a party is no longer acceptable.

My brother summed it up a while back.  He said, "I did not leave the party; they left me."

Be sure you know who and what you are voting for.  Make sure the policies the candidate supports are the policies you want to support. 

Our country is about to collapse under the weight of our debts and our policies.  Vote for the people you think will work for our survival.   All else is relatively unimportant. 

OofDah!  Make the right choices for our country.   My grandchildren are depending on you. 

Arizonians Quaking in Their Shoes?

Apparently the administration is sending Department of Justice (DOJ) personnel to "observe" at the polls in Arizona. 

Considering:
  1. the behavior of this administration in regard to Arizona's state laws,
  2. the administration's and the DOJ's attitude toward enforcing the federal laws applicable to the border, 
  3. the administration's concession of a US zone along the border to the illegals and drug cartels
  4. the DOJ's decision to let off the billy-club-wielding, threatening gangsters at the 2008 polls,
one has to wonder on which side of the law the DOJ people will be they get to Arizona.

As President Reagan said, some of the most frightening words in the English language are, "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."

OofDah!  That, I'm thinking, would be true in Spades in Arizona.  And they are accustomed to living next door to the drug thugs! 

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Rally for Sanity Another Alice Moment

Another Alice moment.  The Rally to Restore Sanity.  A sign.  "I Support the Rally to Restore Sanity.  NAMBLA."

Hint MBL is for Man-Boy Love.  That's not my idea of sanity.  Not with boys in my family!

Another sign.  "I masturbate to Christine O'Donnell."  Held by some mother's daughter.  I'm sure she's proud of her sweet girl! 

I wonder, is the girl doing it to O'Donnell?  I mean is she offering it up as a gift?  Or does she mean "I masturbate, too, Christine."  I'm sure her English teacher is also proud of this literate girl.

Oh, yeah.  Sanity!   This rally was all about sanity!

Alice, are you down here in this rabbit hole?  Or are you inside the looking glass?

O'Donnell Guilty!

O'Donnell has been outed by a nasty kiss-and-tell story!  Yes, the New Jersey candidate has been indicted by an anonymous tattle-tale - a real sex scandal!

According to reports this damaging bit of smut relates details of a one-night stand --- but there is no intercourse involved!  How damning is that?!

And what kind of guy brags about a night for which he cannot claim a notch on his bedpost?!

Weirder and weirder - I feel like Alice in wonderland.

Friday, October 29, 2010

Terror and the Methodist Ladies Aid

Suddenly several suspicious packages seem to be floating around the world.  I don't want to trivialize the threat, but I heard on TV that authorities were profiling packages to help to identify any other threats.  Is that allowed?  Hasn't profiling, no matter how effective, no matter what the threat, been cast out of the law's toolbox?

Maybe they've thrown that limitation to the winds?  Maybe they'll no longer be watching members of the Methodist Ladies Aid in connection with terrorism originating in Yemen?

OofDah!  Maybe they acquired some sense??

Thursday, October 28, 2010

The "View" from here is less than generous

I woke up this morning thinking about Joy Behar of The View.  Strange.  I never watch The View and my familiarity with it is confined to the coverage it gets on other programs. 

Sidenote: have you noticed how much the industry reports on itself lately?  We have become such a society of spectators that the programs people watch are increasingly part of the programs they watch!  Almost incestuous, wouldn't you say?

Back to the View and Joy Behar.  That woman seems very offensive.  Why would any woman speak of another woman in such terms?  She seems like a totally classless human being who should not be on national TV because of her ignorance and coarseness.  That kind of behavior belongs on the waterfronts of the 1940s.

Her victim, on the other hand, retaliated in a very classy way.  Flowers with a polite put down note.  How . . . well, how very classy! Not to mention effective.

You know, it has been reported that about 98% of blacks vote in a block for their own color.  I don't approve of voting on the basis of color or gender, but why don't women stick together a little more?  Just be a little more accepting of one another. Instead they are knifing one another in the back like thugs on (again) a 1940s waterfront.

I think it interesting that women who call themselves liberal, the meaning of which is open-minded, generous, and not prejudiced, exhibit the exact opposite traits. 

For one example, they believe in abortion for any reason, for any woman. Free choice, they say. I do not intend to debate the issue here but merely to point out that these self-defined open-minded, generous women, singularly are NOT open-minded and generous if any woman dares to choose differently from what they would.  Sarah Palin has been severely castigated for choosing to deliver a specially challenged baby, and Bristol Palin has received the same treatment for delivering a baby out of wedlock.  No, the "liberal" women absolutely do NOT believe in free choice.

And if those choosing differently from the generous liberals should happen to express their "Views" or be successful (even at dancing), the liberal knives are brandished threateningly.

Run the gamut of their beliefs and you will find the same lack of generosity and open-mindedness on most of the issues.  Not only unaccepting of other "Views," but downright mean and personally offensive. 

It seems in this election cycle that liberal women are extremely nasty toward conservative women.  It seems they cannot disagree without extreme personal attacks, branding their opponents with personally offensive remarks, names, and descriptions. 

What is the problem with them?  It's almost as though they are ashamed of or guilty for their own choices so NEED 100% compliance to justify them.  Just one woman deviating from their path is a challenge to their equanimity?

OofDah!   If they're that unsure of their choices perhaps they should revisit their convictions.  And perhaps choose a more generous "View."

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Accusations "ist" going too far!

Motherhood used to be sancrosanct, now in the heat of the election, apparently it is sexist.

The TV was on, but I was busy and only peripherally heard the story.  I do not know the names of the people in the debate nor do I know where it took place, but apparently a woman cited her motherhood as part of her experience.  This was pounced upon as sexist! 

In the past, women were encouraged to cite their experience as mothers and homemakers when applying for a job.  After all, successfully handling a household and children requires great management skills, not to mention great patience.  Both of those attributes would be helpful in a political poisition, so I can see the sense in citing those skills in a political debate.

The detractors said men would not use fatherhood in a political debate.  Perhaps not, but few are actually deeply involved in the day-to-day management of their households and their children. 

I am so sick of EVERYTHING being labeled sexist, racist, or otherist.  I prefer hearing about motherhood as opposed to the "ist" labels. 

OofDah! Vote for anyone who refrained from "ist" accusations!

Who gets to vote

The craziness of politicians really comes to fore during an election year. 

In their boundless generousity, some pols extend a friendly welcome to all who will vote for their side, whatever the risks.  Their minions register anyone, felon or not, citizen or not, alive or not.  And the politicians stand behind those registrations - as long as they vote their way.

You see, there is no such thing as dishonesty or cheating in an election year.  Remember 2008?  Dishonesty or lying -- except in their own case -- then it was called it political expediency.

Unfortunately, in this great country founded on Christian principles, those principles of honesty have been shunned - even to the point of denying our heritage.  Shed the heritage, embrace lying and dishonesty, great idea!

So we have to guard against the practice of allowing absolutely everyone to vote, qualified or not, dead or alive.

Meanwhile, others are trying to give the vote to aliens, people who live here but have no interest in applying for citizenship and have no plan to give up their foreign citizenship, people whose allegiance is NOT to the United States.  Mexico and many of our illegal Mexican visitors openly advocate "taking back" our southern states; Arab terrorist supporters openly support the destruction of our country though they live here.  Many people who live here hate us and our country.

Should we let them vote to use our tax money to accomplish their aims? Let them vote to extend our welfare supports to millions in other countries?  Let them destroy this country?

Does no one see the danger in allowing these people a vote? 

OofDah!  Dead voters may be better than foreign voters.  Either may take us to hell.

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Superman

Our very own super hero!  An American super hero!  Will he get his own comic book?

Who is it?  Well, it is the unassuming Harry Reid! 

He shyly told us himself, "I saved the world!"

Good thing he told us, else we'd never know.  Even after being fed the information, we're still having difficulty seeing it.

Anyone have any names for this latter day hero?  Superman is already taken.  Super Hare? Super Pol?

And what's his kryptonite? Truth?

Friday, October 22, 2010

Outcome Based Compensation

I'm not directly involved in teaching policies, but some of my friends are teachers, so I've been peripherally involved.  An interesting discussion is "outcome-based" teaching.  At first glance, this seems like a good idea.  Why shouldn't teachers' salaries be based on outcomes?  After all, their job is totally about pounding some facts into the kids' heads -- isn't it?

Now those questions lead to other questions like, "Are facts the most important things the kids learn?  Or is it important that they learn to think critically and how do you outcome test that?  Do we want kids to spout government-issued facts or do we want them to know how to dig up the evidence, evaluate it, and decide for themselves what the facts are? How do you outcome test that?"  Or how about this: "Should the kids be taught to be solid, upstanding adults with a work ethic and a sense of competition and a respect for innovation (the old-fashioned American individualist)?  And how do you outcome test that"

Then there are the questions of how a teacher can get better outcomes on government tests thereby earning more.  I'd say that if they can pick and choose their students, they can earn a raise.  Don't necessarily choose the thinkers and innovators, just choose those who've proven in the past they can memorize the official facts about things.  The good little robots.

Given choices, who will teach the average children?  Who will teach the special needs children?  And who will teach the real thinkers and innovators who may disparage the official facts?

But for the most part, teachers cannot pick and choose their students - at least not blatantly. At least, not yet.  So all the kids will at least have a classroom and a teacher.

Outcome-based medical care has also been proposed, and for all anyone knows, is already mandated in the monstrous healthcare bill.  Probably no one has read and interpreted the entire thing yet, so we still don't know what is in it.

But here's the thing: outcome-based health care is even more questionable than outcome-based teaching.  One big problem is that doctors can pick and choose who they will treat, and if their salaries are based on outcomes, why would they choose to treat difficult cases?  Who will take care of those people whose outcomes are questionable?

We all know of someone whose severe condition was considered fatal and who miraculously pulled through by the grace of God and the hands of a competent physician who was focused on helping, not worried about outcome figures that would be reported to the government.  Will people like this get care under an outcome-based system?

One of the great concerns regarding the health bill is rationing of care.  This bill dumps everyone, citizen or alien, legal or illegal into the health care pot.  If doctors can't possibly take all the patients who apply to them, why not take the sure-to-have-a-good-outcome patients?  They'll get paid for those.

But what happens to the questionable-outcome patients?

Will there be facilities where they can await their outcome without the attention of a physician?  Will they at least get comfort-aid?  Or will the outcome be hastened to save money?

OofDah! What kind of country have we become?

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Catholics will be amazed to learn

O'Donnell had a boyfriend in high school who was into withcraft, so she explored it a bit back then.  Now, the opposing party says she is a witch. 

Paul may have been involved in a college prank involving AquaBuddha, whatever the heck that is.  Now, the opposing party says he is an AquaBuddhist.

When I was in high school, I visited the local Catholic Church several times with my friends, and I've gotta tell you the local Catholic Church is going to be amazed to learn I am a Catholic! 

But I must be 'cause that's how it works . . .

Unless of course you are Obama and sat in front of a ranting, radical, unAmerican "pastor" for twenty of your adult years.  Then you didn't know what was going on, did not hear a thing, and are not a radical.

Or unless you are Obama and attended a Madrassa for most of your formative years.  Then none of the brain washing touched you, and you are not a Muslim.

But in a matter of weeks the rest of us are utterly taken in.  OffDah!

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Worth Anything?

Forbes Magazine named Michelle Obama the “most powerful woman in the world.” Huh?  She's the president's wife.  Shouldn't the title go to a woman who is powerful on her own? 

Can you picture Forbes giving a title of Most Powerful Man of the World to a U.S. First Dude who has no power on his own - just shares his wife's power?  I don't think so.

What a slap in the face to women who have power because of their own efforts!  What a slap in the face to all women.

This is on a par with giving Barrack a Nobel Prize.  For what? Being elected the President of the United States? Someone does that every four years, for crying out loud! 

Nothing means anything anymore because people play politics with awards that should be important. 

It is like passing everyone through high school, whether or not they accomplished anything or whether or not they can read -- and sometimes whether or not they bothered to attend.  That is why the value of a high school diploma has deteriorated. 

It means nothing, same as titles that are given out without merit.

OofDah!

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Let the World In and Let Them Rule

For the first time ever, has our own government invited other countries into our courts?  Are they so wrong in their action against Arizona they can't stand on their own in the courtroom?  The unprecedented address of our congress by Mexico wasn't enough, but now eleven South American countries - Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Peru - are asked into our courtroom?

Could this be the beginning of fundamental changes in this country? Is a taste of the One World Order this administration has been espousing?

Isn't it strange that these eleven countries are not welcoming border jumpers in their countries, but they want to sit in our courtrooms and tell us we MUST make their criminal and undesirable border jumpers welcome - never mind the little mistakes of gun running, drug dealing, and human trafficking. And, oh, but welcome isn't even enough.  No, we must feed them, house them, and provide them with free medical care.  And more!  We should give them citizenship without question.

Under a One World Order, countries that hate our life style will be imposing their ways upon us. Countries that hate our prosperity will demand that we feed, house, and care for their citizens.  Other countries will impose their idea of justice on us - which may not allow us to speak freely, eat foods they do not approve of, or keep the money we earn.

Do we really want to live under a World Order?  We are now struggling with idle people demanding a portion of our income. Taxes high? Well, of course.  They have to be.

But under One World order, other countries, even (or maybe especially) those that hate us, will be demanding a portion from the US.  Taxes high?  Oh, yeah, they'll be even higher.  Welcome to poverty. 

OofDah!  As I've said before, sharing the wealth is a misnomer - a more descriptive name is sharing the poverty.

Nuclear Terrorism

Contrary to their assurances, Iran is already threatening us with nuclear weapons.  If our administration doesn't do SOMETHING about this rogue country, we'll soon be dealing with nuclear terrorism.

Reaching out a hand in friendship or appeasement is just dumb when dealing with people who will reach for that hand and detonate a suicide bomb in your face. 

OofDah!  Either this administration is gutless or just brainless.  Take care of the problem now!

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

O'Donnell - Two Opposite Extremes?

How can Christine O'Donnell be dangerous because she is too religious and at the same time be dangerous because she is a witch?  Interesting.  A religious witch. Really?

Does it seem Coons, the bearded Marxist, is flailing blindly at the pinata from all directions?

OofDah!  Politics!

Federal Land and the Illegal Alien

The federal government is making more grabs for western land.  Why?  They own huge portions of the west already, which is a detriment to the states, since the feds pay no taxes to the state as citizen land owners would do. (If you follow the link, the map may open very large but should adjust if you wait a bit.)

The Feds can't take care of their present holdings, so why grab for more?  They should be trying to increase the federal coffers, so why not sell off some of their holdings?  But instead they grab for more.  Surreptitiously.  And as is the habit with this administration, making an end run around Congress. 

Allow millions of illegals to jump the border while grabbing millions of acres of land?  Are the two connected?  Where will the illegals live?  Is the administration planning to cede the federal lands to Mexico?

That would be a quick way to make Mexican illegals legal, but will American citizens then be deported?  We know Mexico does not suffer illegals as they insist we should.

Sound a bit far-fetched?  Maybe.

But think about this, many in the administration want to bestow citizenship on millions of illegals who hate this country.  Millions of Mexican illegals think the southwest of US belongs to Mexico.  And when they become citizens, will they vote for ceding the southwest to Mexico?  Will they vote to extend all their US entitlements to all of expanded Mexico?

OofDah!

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Pleas in a pod.

Insanity is a plea.  Here are two pleas in a pod.

Florida's Alan Grayson is a complete and total idiot, making Florida a laughing stock of the nation.

He is so unbalanced that if he followed me on Twitter, I'd carry a firearm and call 911.

But don't worry Florida.  You'll not be alone as long as Minnesota has Frankin, the freak of fake elections. 

Unfortunately most of their colleagues are just as deranged; it just isn't so blatantly obvious.

OofDah!

Saturday, October 2, 2010

What is a Fair Trade

Should the government give you money?  Take care of you?  Provide for your needs?  Give you a car?  Keep you safe? Pay for your health care?  What would you give in return?

I've been thinking about a blog I participated in a year or two ago.  It was set up to facilitate quick give and take, more like an open conversation.  It was interesting, but I didn't like the name-calling and the nastiness that resulted. I enjoy discussing the issues, but the name-calling, not so much . Anyway, you get the idea of the informal format.

I've been thinking about one particular give and take on that site.

A person posted a comment that I surely thought must have been ill-considered and replied, "You just said you would be happy to give up your freedom for ten dollars.  You could not mean that."

The answer, "Sure, wouldn't you?"

So what's your price?  What would you take to give up your freedom?

The War Against Business

Is class warfare on the rise in the US?  It would seem so.  Many people denigrate business owners.  Rarely a day goes by without someone disparaging business. It is the new fad. Somehow business people have become the scapegoats, the bogeymen.

Trouble is, the critics often are people who have been told to hate businesses and business owners.  Many know nothing about business, and instead of thinking about it and reasoning out a stance, they just hate businesses and business owners, because it is easier to do as told.

The truth is, just as in any sector, there are those business people who abuse their positions, but the majority are only concerned about making a living and gaining enough profits to retrieve their investment, hold onto and improve their businesses, and pay enough dividends to encourage investors to help with expansions, which create more jobs.  Yes, along the way, they provide jobs for people. JOBS. You know the activities that allow other people to feed their families, too.  Profit is a good thing, not a dirty word.

What's very interesting is that some of the people who are encouraging other people to hate the dreaded businesses are the Union Big Bosses.  You know, the people of the AFL-CIO, SEIU, and other alphabet labor organizations.  Maybe they do it to draw attention away from their bad behavior. 

These organizations produce nothing, but collect dues from workers, make huge amounts of money feeding off the worker, then use millions to line their own pockets and other millions to support candidates that the worker may not wish to support. Is your Union pension fully vested?  Or have the Union Bosses squandered it into deficit?  How many of the Union Bosses make more than the CEOs they denigrate?

True, unions do things for the worker, sometimes even good things, but is encouraging them to demand so much in pay and benefits that the paying entity goes broke and can no longer hire anyone doing the worker a favor?  Wouldn't it be better to work with the paying entity ensuring that the worker gets FAIR pay and benefits, while leaving enough so the business can continue to provide jobs?

But it seems what the HATERS want is to suck the businesses dry.  Then blame the business owners or managers for the failure and the loss of jobs.

OofDah!  Businesses can't win.  Hated if they make a profit, hated if they don't.

Friday, October 1, 2010

Californians - Split Personalities

California is at it again!

The Cals are for illegals, they are for hiring them. they are for paying them well.

BUT

Not if Meg Whitman does it! 

Reminds me of Cals pushing for a morality law regarding no cursing in public, but also supporting weenie waggers in public parks.

Reminds me of Cals backing anti-smoking laws, but also supporting legalizing marijuana.  (I still want to know what the heck they plan to do with the doobie, certainly can't be planning on smoking it!)

OofDah!  California - a nut house full of schizophrenics.

Chicago Thuggery

Emmanuel's exit from DC was marked with references to his temper and his vulgar language, essentially a bow to his Chicago-thug behavior.  In addition, reportedly Rahm Emmanuel was presented with a dead fish. 

This was met with laughs.  Is it funny that the dignity of the White House has been replaced by Chicago Thuggery?  Isn't this the same bully behavior we're so concerned about when we see it displayed in young people?

Do we have trickle down bullying?

OofDah!  We need grown-ups in the White House!

Thursday, September 30, 2010

Keynes - Who Cares?

The economic policies of the present administration have been referred to as Keynesian Economics.  I know too little about Keynes and about economics to sort out details to determine if the current policies are totally in line with Keynes' theories.

However, Keynes was in favor of big government spending, and that seems in line with what has been practiced by BO and buddies.  They say this policy will improve our economy.

"But," we ask, "What about the payback?  What about the debt our children and grandchildren will inherit?"

Seems there were similar concerns in Keynes time.  Reportedly, he was asked about the effects of the policy in the long run, to which he replied, "None of us lives forever."

A pretty flippant reply.  Not as bad as, "Who cares about our children and grandchildren as long as we have what we want?"  But same meaning, same very selfish and uncaring attitude.

Certainly today we're spending our children's and grandchildren's future, but our economy is not thriving.  All that debt for our grandchildren and nothing to show for it.

Well, BO and buddies, got any Keyesian cracks for this situation?

Saturday, September 25, 2010

Former President Carter

Former President Carter says his actions as Ex-president are superior to those of the other Ex-presidents.  Someone please lock up or at least gag the man.  He is diminishing the office of ex-president!

Whether it is impending dementia or just old age crankiness, gagging him would be doing him a favor.

Guilt and Worse

Bad behavior precipitates a vague guilt on its own, but apparently many feel that the Christian religion, just by existing, causes the guilt, even if the sinner doesn't believe in it.  The attacks of conscience are behind the anti-Christian movement. 

Separation of state and church, which is not of the constitution but from a later date, does not mean eradication of history, eradication of Christian symbols in our government buildings, or eradication of Christianity itself.  But some people willfully distort the meaning  to justify their anti-Christian mission.

Now, interestingly, the same persons interested in eradicating Christianity are bleating about freedom of religion, but not of course, in regard to the Christianity they want to eradicate.  No, this is in defence of a religion that believes in forcing their idea of law onto the state.  No separation of state and church for them.

I'm all for freedom of religion, but it does not justify everything. 

If a new religion sprang up that believed you would go to heaven if you killed a neighbor and you were that neighbor, would you be crying freedom of religion?  If that new religion believed in slavery, would you condone it because of freedom of religion?  If that religion believed in castrating their children and eliminating all homosexuals, would you defend that as freedom of religion?  If that religion harbored violence and destruction within its ranks, would you defend that in the name of freedom of religion?

Shari'a law will do more than just instill the guilt that so enrages the anti-Christian.  Women are castrated and forced into life under a burka, which is merely a symbol of their slavery status.  Homosexuals are not only unacceptable clergy, but punished.  No more bikinis and no more gays.

"Death to the Infidel" is more than a battle cry; it is a belief.  Who is the infidel?  Not just the woman or the homosexual or the civilian lawbreaker.  Oh, no, it is the non-believer neighbor. 

"Thou shalt not kill" seems like a better idea.

The Christian church may resist the gay clergy and look askance at the outrageous sinner, but when is the last time they castrated a woman and put her under a burka?  When is the last time they physically punished a gay?  When is the last time they stoned anyone? 

OofDah!

All Are Created Equal?

I've been thinking about the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights and thinking in particular about the "created equal" clause.  It seems it is often misinterpreted, or intentionally misused to push a political agenda.

Of course, looking at the clause in terms of created with equal physical or mental capability, handsomeness or ugliness, or birth into a family of means or not - well, then, it makes no sense.  But is that what the founding fathers meant? No.

Or does it mean the government should play "Robbing Hood" and take from the working and give to the idle?  No.

Does it mean the government should seize all jobs and all property and hand back equality -  equal food, equal clothing, equal housing, equal possessions? No.

So what did they mean?

They were talking about equality under the law.  You know, justice is blind, the theme the founders and early statesmen promoted.  Whether nobility or common man, rich or poor, handsome or ugly, physically weak or strong, or mentally astute or handicapped, everyone would be equally protected under the law.

Inequality under the law was one of the reasons the early citizens of this country fled England and came to the New World.

Equality under the law meant that government officials, teenage stars, and football celebrities should receive the same kinds of protection and punishment as everyone else. 

Sadly, this does not seem to be happening. Lately, justice seems to have lost its blinders, noticing some are stars or celebrities, noticing some are rich and influential, and noticing some are politically connected to the "correct" views. 

Justice is not only determining type of punishment, but even guilt or innocence, based on the the very factors to which it should be blind.

OOFDAH!

Friday, September 24, 2010

Stephen Colbert Testifies to Congress

So they ask a clown to testify before Congress.  Appropriate.  Congress is a joke.

What would a sissy like Colbert know about illegal aliens?  He spent a day with them and found it grueling work?  Means nothing.  Soft, non-working Colbert would find any "real" job grueling, including office work, teaching, and flipping burgers. 

He makes jokes about his inability to do manual labor. He suggests manual labor is okay for Manuel, but not for whites.  What rot! If anyone else intimated that, the press would fall over themselves calling, "Racist!"

It seems Colbert and friends think the only reason for illegal Mexicans to be in this country is that employers can pay them very little.  Of course, they ignore the reality that taxpayers get to supplement those wages with "free" social benefits. 

Who is actually benefitting?  Why, the employer, of course.  We taxpayers are subsidizing his business so he can pay lower wages and gain higher profits.  Meanwhile, citizens who would be willing to work for decent wages get shafted. 

Enforce the laws, prosecute illegal entry and make the employers pay decent wages. Both LEGAL Mexicans and whites will be better off. 

OofDah!  This issue is NOT funny and even Congress should realize it!

Fat Cats

DC denizens surely have been howling a lot over the "fat cat" Wall Streeters.  Too much skimming off the top and too many big bonuses, they assert.

Who is "they."  Well, it seems "they" are politcos whose net worth grows faster than that of skimmers and big bonus guys. 

Now, I know the politcos get outrageous salaries but from whence cometh all that wealth?  "They" do not get paid enough to multiply their net worth to that extent - you know, by millions each year.  That is, unless they are taking bribes and pay-offs, essentially selling their votes. 

OofDah!  At least the "fat cat Wall Streeters" pay out dividends occasionally;  "fat cat politicos" merely take money and cheat America.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Dog Catcher

Apparently the main-stream media is demanding that O'Donnell (Delaware candidate) produce every document down to birth, kindergarten, and all. 

I'm thinking, if a professed non-Democratic candidate ran for dog catcher in Dinkytown, the press would demand documentation down to birth, kindergarten, and all.

Yet Obama has not released his full medical records, nor his college transcripts, nor any of his undergraduate work.  His dissertation at Columbia has mysteriously disappeared! Many of the records of his Illinois state representative term have mysteriously disappeared! And where are the articles written for the Law School paper? Have they mysteriously disappeared or they on lock-down with his transcripts?

OofDah! The dog catcher might win the election but would never be allowed to serve a term under those circumstances.

Since BO reputedly is soooo intellectual, don't you wonder why his college stuff is locked down tight or lost? What's to hide?

Also, do you wonder why the IMPARTIAL press demands documentation from only one party.

And, do you wonder why the press makes a big deal of inexperience only if candidates are not from that one party?

News service or propaganda press?

We Don't Need the Jobs

In the wake of the BP oil spill, the administration shut down much of the American-associated oil drilling in the Gulf, in the face of court disapproval.  The move also shut down thousands of jobs, both direct oil rig employment and ancilliary jobs.

Think it is all about environmental concerns?  Apparently not.

The US is subsidizing both Brazilian and Mexican drilling in the Gulf to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars.

Are we sacrificing US jobs so Brazil and Mexico can have them?  

OofDah!

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Questions About Insured Children

How long are children, well, children? 

Obama Care says they are children to the age of 26 and covered by their parents' insurance.  I have questions.

When my son marries, is his wife covered under my policy or is my son covered by her parents' policy?  When the grandchildren come along, which policy covers them?

When I go on Medicare, does it cover my 24-year-old son, his wife, and his children?

Sunday, September 19, 2010

What Does Delaware Mean?

Delaware has set the Republican Party on its ear. Many of the high profile Repubs are moaning and twisting in the wind, complaining bitterly and publicly. Seems they were generally accepting of the winning Tea Party primary choices until Delaware.

In Delaware the Repub Party dug in its heels over Mike Castle, a nominee the Tea Party didn't like. So the Tea Party determinedly backed their choice, Christine O'Donnell, and guess what? The Tea Party choice won the Republican primary! Now she will go up against the Democratic choice in November.

The Repub Party's major complaint seems to be that Castle would have had a better chance of winning in November and moaning that O'Donnell has little or no chance. Truly, O'Donnell would be a hard sell in any case, but with her own Party carrying on like that, they are setting her up for failure.

This is not a pretty picture of the Republican Party powers-that-be. They seem more concerned about winning seats than they are concerned about seating people who are the voters' choice. And many American voters are tired of the parties strong-arming THEIR choices on them (and they have been); the voters want choices, real choices.

Castle is a candidate who's voting record seems quite in line with the Democratic Party, so why would the Repub Party want to seat someone who most likely will vote with the Dems? What good would it be to have a majority in name, but a minority in votes? Of course, no one should be expected to vote the party line every time, but on the major issues, major party stances, none of the promised changes could be accomplished without the votes.

I think this incident should make all voters look at the party shenanigans on both sides with a jaundiced eye. No wonder voters are organizing outside the party boundaries.

I'm thinking maybe the Tea Party Movement is only the first grassroots party. I'm thinking people with opposing views may want choices, too.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Will the Antichrist be Female?

In Louisville where Sarah Palin spoke at a rally, a sign carried by a person involved in higher education declared the Bible didn't say the antichrist is a man, then went on to ask "Is she the one?"

Something new to ponder. Not whether Palin is the antichrist, but whether the antichrist could be female. I'll admit such a thought had never before entered my mind, not that I ponder the antichrist regularly. But, still . . .

In the video clip I saw, a reporter asked the aforementioned pillar of higher education if she thought Palin was the antichrist. "Could be," says she (Doris Beeler).

"Why do you think that," asks the reporter.

"Well, she came here and she has all this power and she has a lot of followers," was the edifying answer.

Judging on that basis, it would seem contenders for the role of antichrist are more numerous than there are grains of sand on a beach. Let's see, Barrack Obama, Glenn Beck, Lady Gaga, Perris Hilton . . . Oh, wait they have followers but did they come to Louisville?

Why would a trip to Louisville be requisite for an antichrist contender? Because Doris Beeler made it requisite and Doris Beeler knows*.

OofDah!

*Does Doris really know? In 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, the antichrist is described as the "man of sin," or "son of perdition." In this version, the antichrist is described in male terms, however translations could be in error.

The description also includes deceiver (a word used elsewhere in the Bible to describe the antichrist). "Let no one deceive you by any means; for that day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."

He is also described as a world leader - and he will rule the world for 42 months.

I can find no reference to Louisville in the Bible. But as I said, translations could be in error.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Global Climate Disruption?

What is it with DC? Everything has a cute little name, new or revised.

I remember when I was young and recently married. It was common to ask a couple what they did last night. When they'd answer "played Scrabble" or "watched TV" or whatever, we'd say, "Yeah, everyone has their own cute little name for it." Wink, wink. Well, you had to be there, I guess.

So we no longer have terrorism but man-made disasters. Remember that one? Or how about overseas contingency operations instead of war against terror?

But here's the funniest one so far - we no longer have global warming. No, instead we have global climate disruption. Well, hey, what better way to counter the public's growing skepticism of the global warming in the wake of scientists admitting to doctoring the data?

What does climate disruption mean, anyway? Isn't that just weather and isn't weather something we've had since the beginning of time? Ah, Silly Wabbit, but it's not about weather; it's about tax.

This whole climate thing is all about forcing an energy tax on us (Cap and Tax). Will the C&T tax change the weather? Nope.

We had an ice age; it was disrupted; now we don't have an ice age. Would taxing energy have changed that weather pattern? Nope.

But the energy tax could make us a lot colder when energy prices go through the roof. See, the fair weather politicians are thinking the peons can forego energy use (just turn off the Air Conditioner); they forget some of us peons live in colder climes where turning off the heat means death.

But don't worry. I'm sure they'll invent a cute little name for freezing to death.

Nanny and the Force

"If I were not in politics I'd probably be in business. I love the markets. I watched them since I was a teenager. I'm fascinated by it and it's a force, it's a force in our economy," Speaker Pelosi told CNBC.

Right-o Nanny-Panny! I can see it now - signing contracts to see what is in them, throwing money at every problem that comes down the pike, and crying when people use "language" to contradict your behavioral edicts. You'd be a great businesswoman.

You think the markets are a force in our economy? Whoa, what tremendous intellectual power! What laser-keen insight!

All I can say is may the Force be with you as you transition from poly-ticks to busy-ness. May you fly away with the speed of light. Into the dark. Away from DC. Gone.

Bye, Nanny-Panny.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Barred for name-calling?

A young British citizen emails the POTUS. He calls him a prick. Uncouth? Yes. Poor behavior? Yes. A dangerous assassin? No, just a kid.

But the kid is now barred from the US for life. Make sense? No. It is just a stupid slang word.

Our country does not bar people who danced in the streets in celebration of the destruction of the Twin Towers and the deaths of thousands of US citizens. Our country does not even TRY to control the influx of people coming across the southern border with death to our children strapped on their backs in the form of drugs. Our country is not interested in apprehending border-jumping murderers who kill ranchers. Our country has not even reprimanded a preacher for calling down the damnation of God on its citizens, and that was REAL cursing.

But our country bars a British teener for calling the POTUS a prick by remote electronic communications?

The kid says he doesn't care if he is barred from entering the country, but reportedly his parents are not happy about it.

Not to worry. Just go to Mexico, call down the wrath of God on the US, strap on a pack of drugs and an assault rifle, or come to our shores preaching jihad (peaceful jihad, you understand, they don't want to kill you; they just want to control you and the law and the country and shut down your place of worship) and you'll be welcomed to this country.

OofDah! Will the insanity never cease?

Monday, September 13, 2010

Who Dat?

"Easygoing and well liked, with a perpetual tan, a low golf handicap and an ever-present cigarette between his fingers" -- of whom are we speaking here?

The president? It sure enough sounds like him, but wrong.

Would you believe the president's newest whipping boy? What's his name again? Oh, yeah, John Boehner (pronounced BAYner). Who's that again? Chances are you didn't know much about him until the president began pulling his name out of the hat to heap criticism upon his head. By now, though, at minimum you probably know he's the House Minority Leader and likely you know a great deal more.

When the president pulls out a name and repeats it six or seven times in one appearance, people sit up and take notice. When he mentions that same name in nearly every subsequent appearance, people begin to ask, "Who dat?" Reporters begin to check him out, interview him, and photograph him.

Soon he is a household name. Voila! Leader Boehner becomes a political hot button. People begin to wonder if he'll run for president in 2012.

Seems he won't need a campaign team or an ad campaign to introduce him to the people. He's had a presidential introduction; he's been flung into the face of the nation. It's as though the president is saying, "You people WILL get to know Mr. Boehner."

You think the president wanted to help him out? Because, well, you know . . .

Maybe there is a sense of brotherhood or kinship since they are both "easygoing and well liked, with a perpetual tan, a low golf handicap and an ever-present cigarette between his fingers."

One problem - one of the tanned, chain-smoking golfers is a Democrat, the other a Repulican.

OofDah!

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Not too big to be busted?

Today Bernacke announced that financial institutions "too big to fail" are dangerous to our economy so the feds will destroy them -- huh?

OffDah! When are mouths too big to open?

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Mirror, mirror, who's the greatest . . .

In my opinion, Glenn Beck is one of the three great orators of our time. The other two are Sarah Palin and Barrack Obama. The trio runs a close race in the speechifying game, and it is difficult to know who is best, but if pressed, I'd have to admit I think Glenn edges the other two out.

When Glenn makes an historical presentation, and I'm hanging on the edge of the chair, well, that's amazing! I don't like history. But Glenn teaching about our founding fathers, the constitution, and the birth of our country is fascinating.

Many people seem to agree with me. Did you see the crowd at the Reflecting Pool? Why did all those people come? To hear a great orator? Yes, I think so. But more, to hear a great orator say good things about our great country and its people.

We as a nation, have been starved for praise of our country. We're tired of hearing nothing but negatives from without and from within. We need to remind ourselves of all the good we've done as a nation and as a people, and we need to hear it from ourselves.

Other countries dump vitriol on us even though we've died for them while defending and saving them from the likes of Hitler; they criticize us for being wealthy while we give them billions in aid; they accuse us of violations of civil rights while they live here illegally (for which they would receive cruel punishment in other countries).

Some of our own politicians level similar accusations and apologize for us around the world; some of our own citizens dredge up past sins and throw them like acid into the faces of people with no discernible connection; some say we do not hand enough to the irresponsible though they live better than many of the taxpayers supporting them. We are tired of the "elite ruling class" telling us we are a bad country and a bad people; we're tired of all the stirring in the pot to cause divisions for political gain.

Yes, the crowds came to hear a great orator, but more, they came to hear what he had to say. They reached out to Beck as if reaching for a cool drink after a desert trek. Main Stream America was thirsting for spiritualism without an agenda, for unification without accusations, for love for all and appreciation of all. They were thirsting to hear that Americans, though not perfect, are capable of greatness and have achieved greatness of country, of purpose, of love and acceptance. And that they can improve upon this greatness.

They want unification, not divisiveness; love, not hate; one human race, not racism.

Yes, Glenn Beck, the great orator, is leading us back to love and high principles, back to God and Country, back to our greater selves.

Politicians should hearken to the message. Positivity, not negativity will gain America's attention.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Paper or Plastic?

Remember back when environmentalists cried, "Save the trees! Save the trees! Use plastic." Remember how they clamored for the stores to offer a choice - plastic or paper?

Back then, I had a stock answer for paper or plastic. "I'll take paper, please. I think plastic is worse for the environment." And sometimes I had to justify that opinion to teenage bagboys!

But eventually the choice disappeared and stores just went to plastic, because it was easier to bend to the demands of the environmentalists.

Now, in California, the environmentalists want to take away the plastic. They call them urban tumbleweeds! They say they do not break down readily in waste sites. Imagine that! It took this long for the environmentalists to figure out they were wrong!

I don't feel animosity toward environmentalists in general; I, too, am concerned about the environment. But I don't like environuts who think they have the only answers and insist everyone follow their commands. I don't like pushy environuts who adopt weakly-backed theories or "adjust" scientific data to justify their junk theories and force them down our throats.

I hope, but don't expect, that this paper-plastic about-face will show them they aren't always right. I hope, but don't expect, they'll take time to think about their agenda.

A few years ago (about ten or fifteen), they were warning of an impending ice age, now the issue is global warming. A few years ago, fluorocarbons were responsible for damaging the ozone layer, now it's carbon dioxide. Now the geniuses who backed all of the foregoing fads, are trying to force "going green" at the expense of jobs, higher taxes, higher prices, and perhaps even the destruction of this country given the fiscal shape it is in.

All I ask is a little thinking, a little sense. The paper-or-plastic error isn't nationally disastrous, but some of the environut agenda could be.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Nebulous Promises

We don't hear much about hope and change these days. We only hear about Bush - pathetic excuses, like, "everything is Bush's fault." Or this interesting one: "Bush did it so its okay that I do it." Huh? I thought you guys hated EVERYTHING Bush did.

But what happened to the hope and change people voted for? First those are awfully nebulous promises to vote for. Did anyone ever explain what hope and change meant? No? I didn't think so.

Using meaningless but heart-grabbing phrases is a ploy. Non-thinking people sieze them, embue them with meanings they want to hear, and vote for them. It's easier than ferreting out the facts.

You think that isn't a fair assessment? Then please define the hope and change promises. And then show me it means the same to everyone who voted for it; show me that's what the candidate meant.

There is a lot of disappointment in the air lately, and we hear little about Hope and Change. Why? Probably because everyone's bubble dream, everyone's interpretation of hope and change, has burst. But who can say any promises were broken? We don't even know what we were promised!

The candidate was like the infamous bills recently signed into law. Vote for it and then find out what it means.

OofDah! Next time, let's find out what the promises are before we vote.

Redemption/Salvation

After realizing that numerous times in several different speeches and in many venues our president has suggested our individual salvation depends on "collective redemption" or "collective salvation," I began pondering the meaning, the validity, and source of the idea. This is not a Christian tenet. No, Christianity believes our salvation is individual, depending only on the individual and their acceptance of Christ. Collectivism is not a part of it.

So where did this idea of collective redemption originate? Well, it was used by Sun Myung Moon. (Remember the Moonies cult, circa 1997?) Also, it's something like the "social justice" from Marx. Or like Third Way Socialism as promoted by Hitler. In fact Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao all felt their subjects clinging to their faith was a roadblock to their agendas. Collective salvation is Marxism falsely using the Bible as its authority. Also, using faith to involve Believers in politics and bend them to an agenda is an idea espoused by Saul Alinsky

This idea may have made inroads in Europe, but when Obama attempts to pull the American faithful into this collective redemption idea, tries to involve them in class struggles, he finds that they cling more stubbornly to their faith than Europeans do.

Does Obama take faith seriously? From his own words: "We need to take faith seriously not simply to block the religious right but to engage all persons of faith in the larger project of American Renewal." -- Barak Obama in the Audacity of Hope, page 216.

Sounds like that tidbit is more about politics than about faith.

We are offered redemption through politics; we are justified through a just society. Redemption through politics, salvation through Obama?

Come unto me?

OofDah.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Steven Slater

Steven Slater, the frustrated Jet Blue Airlines steward, threw a tantrum. He'd had it with crabby, nasty, rude customers. They cussed and swore at him and walloped him on the head with a carry-on, intentionally or accidently who knows, but apparently as a result of anger.

I've had to deal with such frustration on the job. It is not easy to take. People can be so rude and nasty! I've actually asked for time off (right now!) to deal with it. But if you are in the air, where do you go to chill? You can't even step outside. I definitely sympathize with him.

The angry tirade over the sound system? A reprimand. A suspension. I'd agree with that.

Deploying the escape chute? That was over-the-top. He had worked around airlines long enough to know that deploying the chute could have injured people had they been in it's path. That, I think, deserves a stronger reaction than a suspension. And though no one was injured, I'd even agree with firing.

But, glory, state officials are after him. The Feds want at him. He'd attract less official rabid furosity if he were a true bomb-attempting Islamic terrorist. They'd immediately lean over backward to give him every citizen right, deserved or not. Kid glove treatment. Velvet blanket wrap.

Hmmm. Are the authorities so frustrated with having their hands tied that they go over the top when there is no racial, religious, or other barrier?

Apparently Mr Slater has become an over-night American Idol. People are sympathizing with him, even donating to his cause, I understand. Why? Well, though he's not grotesque, he isn't a particularly handsome man.

No, I believe it is the old-fashioned American tendency to cheer for the underdog. We can sympathize with his plight. Many of us are probably using an old-fashioned phrase in our minds when we think of Mr Slater. You know the one: there, but for the grace of God, go I.

OofDah!

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Ground-Zero Mosque, a bridge

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf says he is a "bridge builder." He says the purpose of the proposed mosque near Ground Zero is outreach to the people of the United States.

Confidence in his sincerity erodes, however, when we learn he refuses to declare Hamas a terrorist group, and after nine-one-one, he suggested that the United States was complicit in the attack!

Ground Zero is freedom ground, sacred ground sanctified with American blood and tears. It is an emotionally charged area. And they want to erect a monument to a belief system that is in direct conflict with our national love of individual freedom - a monument to oppression and disregard of girls and women, a monument to disregard for human life, a monument to belief in theocracy, a monument to the belief system that gave birth to the attack of nine-one-one.

This is a slap in the face of America. If Rauf isn't intentionally administering this slap, he is clueless, not very bright. A much smarter move would be to offer to build it fifteen blocks away in the interest of showing understanding and furthering friendly relations.

Whatever the case, if he builds a Ground Zero mosque, Imam "Bridge-builder" Rauf is building the ultimate bridge to nowhere. Relations will deteriorate.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Extra-legal?

Do we have a group of extra-legals in this country? By extra-legal I mean people who consider themselves above the law, people who do not think they need to follow the laws, who think they can do nothing for which the law should reprimand them.

For instance, can some people caught doing something that would be wrong for a normal citizen immediately cry, "Racism," to indicate they are not subject to the normal rules of behavior and certainly not to US law, to indicate if they are caught they are in fact victims?

And will that magic word, racism, succeed in drawing a shimmering cape around the poor maligned person? Will it magically qualify otherwise unqualified people for free education, jobs for which they are not qualified, and taxpayer-paid goods and services? Will it magically protect them and make them innocent even if they are undocumented, have lied, raped or stolen, or have engaged in congressional misbehavior? Yeah, sometimes it seems to.

Wow! It is much more magical than the magic word I was taught. Remember "please?" Remember how that magic word was drilled into you by your parents? And how it sometimes got you a candy bar?

Well, it seems that the "racist" word is being drilled into the extra-legals by preachers, legislators, and all sorts of authority figures. Why? It doesn't seem to be making the extra-legals happy. In fact, they are very unhappy. Along with that word, they are being taught that they are "special." They are unhappy because they expect too much for no effort on their part.

They are so unhappy that they disrespect the American flag, try to change America into the sad country they came from, or blow up in rage and shoot people because someone didn't react properly to his totally innocent acquisition of free beer.

So who is benefiting? The preachers? The legislators? Hmm . . . let's try the old rule - follow the money. Who are the millionaires in this picture?

Usually not the extra-legals, I think.

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Big Bad Max

Is anyone surprised that Maxine Waters has thrown out that ragged, old race card?

Apparently, entitlements now include multimillion dollar shady deals and conflicts of interest.

OofDah!

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Millions on monkeys?

Today another stimulus program was revealed. This one was truly stimulating - at least to the poor monkeys who were drugged up. Yep, drugged up some poor monkeys to study their behavior. Did it with thousands of stimulus dollars.

What the heck would be the benefit of studying high monkeys?

OH, wait, I get it! It will help us understand those out-of-control idiots in DC!

OofDah! This is probably the most worth-while project in the entire stimulus package. But will my grandchildren think we are spending their money wisely or throwing it away on monkey business?

Answering a Ranting Letter to the Editor

If you wish your writing and opinions to be taken seriously, perhaps you should lay off the slurs and try to find some facts to back up your rants. Since many tea party activists are older females, a class who has endured bias for eons, calling them bags wins you no friends among any group of women. As unacceptable as racial slurs, gender slurs reveal ignorance and woeful lack of respect for women.

You suggest tea-partiers are radical, “burning witches at the stake and imprisoning Mandela”, or ignorant, “parroting patriotism.” Witches? Isn't that what your "bag" label is implying? Conjures a picture of women in black throwing themselves onto a fire. Funny but not very effective.

The tea party stands for smaller government and greater individual freedom, the constitution, and less spending to reduce federal indebtedness to foreign countries. That is hardly radical and certainly not unpatriotic.

It seems you are saying that because they don’t always support politicians calling themselves Democrats, Tea Partiers have no respect for Democracy. What? Everyone knows that Democracy and Democrats are not one and the same.

Anyway, the tea party doesn’t necessarily support Republicans either; they’re looking for candidates of any party who will stand for smaller government, the constitution, and less spending. Admittedly most who are in support of those values are Republican, but not always.

You suggest that this country’s financial problems, endless wars, and even oil spills are the fault of tea party supporters, but what are the facts?

The financial mess is the result of poor governmental decisions made by both parties in Congress, under both majorities.

The endless wars also have come and gone while both parties held Congressional majorities. Do you even know which party was in charge in Congress when these endless wars were decided upon and funded? Or do you think the President declares and funds wars all by himself?

The oil spill in the gulf was the result of deep water drilling. Who refused to allow land drilling and shallow water drilling? Not the tea partiers.

Many tea party supporters are in favor of increasing US drilling and decreasing dependence on foreign oil. What does anti-drilling solve? Are you only worried about the environment here in the US? Is it okay to place the environmental risks elsewhere on the planet? How hypocritical would that be?

Perhaps we should take the risks out of the ocean and put them on dry land where spills may be less likely to get out of hand, but is the US too special to take its share of the risk? The gulf oil spill was a disastrous accident, but it could have been somewhat mitigated by prompt acceptance of the aid offered by other countries. Contaminated sea water could have been avoided by on-land drilling.

You further suggest that tea-partiers harbor irrational fears of other races. Controlling illegal immigration is about terrorists and armed drug dealers – they, too, may be God’s children as you say, but with guns and drugs they kill ranchers and children and should not be welcomed with open borders. Unchecked borders make about as much sense as discontinuing airport screening.

Drugs and violence notwithstanding, our southern border states are staggering under the millions of illegals who come here to utilize taxpayer-paid services. Controlling the influx, as do other countries and even the Vatican (who probably are aware these are also God’s children), is only a sensible thing to do.

The tea-partiers are main-stream Americans and their concerns do deserve attention, not out-of-hand condemnation. After all, are not the "bags" also God's children?

Turn on the lights in your attic. Give me not rants, give me facts.

In the interest of full disclosure: I vote the issues so have voted for candidates of both major parties. I have never attended a tea party rally.

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Democratic: Liberal, Socialist, or Progressive?

Have you noticed how many of the politicians of the Democratic party are calling themselves progressive or liberal, but rarely Democratic?

The party has changed over the years. Several years ago I heard friends and relatives explain their change from card-carrying Democrat to Independent with, "I haven't left the Democratic Party; it has left me."

They went on to explain how radical some in the party were becoming and choices in beliefs did not seem welcome. They said members were expected to tow the radical line - no choices. The Democratic Party had been the DFL - Democratic Farm Labor. Farm was left at the roadside. Labor began to mean the "fat cat" union leaders with lots of money to donate to the party. The actual laborer? Also left by the wayside.

And the Democrat part? Well, that changed, too. Some Democratic politicians have begun calling themselves liberals instead of Democrats and others call themselves progressives. It is as though they are distancing themselves from the Democratic label.

So what do these labels mean? Liberals? Well, they are more socially liberal than the old Democratic party. One bench mark is abortion. Did the Democratic party of the last generatiuon support abortion? I don't think so. At least they didn't talk about it. If they had, not one Catholic would have joined the party. And certainly they did not espouse support for parital birth abortion - condoning killing a child as long as the head is still within the protection of the birth canal. Nope, the former generation would not have agreed to that!

The idea of one of our major political parties being taken over by progressives scares me even more. Progressive is NOT the same as Democratic nor is it the same as liberal. Progressive is out and out socialism, well, Marxism, and is simply a term they use because they know most Americans object strenuously to socialism and probably more strenuously to Marxism. They think most Americans will not realize what progressive means and intends to do.

Progressives wish to dismantle the United States - FUNDAMENTALLY change this country. They wish to absorb everything into the federal government and redistribute it equally among all. Well, redistribute what remains after the "fat cats" of government take theirs. They wish to plan everything for you and the country - bringing equality to all, their idea of equality.

This, of course, can only be accomplished by taking away all of your choices, because you need to be satisfied with exactly what everyone else has. You work much harder than your neighbor? Too bad. You deserve nothing more than they.

And, of course, American goods and foods will be shared with all the third world. Want to guess how much will be left to redistribute among those who produce it through the sweat of their brows?

Freedom of choice? No, no, freedom from choice!

OofDah! Bring back the Democratic Party. I'm downright nostalgic for it!

Substitutes

Sometimes substitutes can be good. For instance an artificial sweetener for real sugar -- if you are diabetic. Otherwise not so much.

But substitutes for some things just don't cut it - and are way too ubiquitous. Here are a few very common substitutions you should abolish from your life:

Volume for talent - many current bands turn up the volume, hoping you won't notice their lack of talent and risking a resulting generation of hearing-impaired young people.

Crude and potty words for funny - isn't it amazing how many people will laugh at crudity and toddler potty words? It is scary to think people find humor in this childishness. Where are the adults?

Volubility for wisdom - some think if they talk on and on using impressive words, however out of place they may be, they will con you into believing they are wise. Unfortunately this does work on half the population.

Fairy tales for history - unfortunately this works because many of the recipients of this substitution are people who want to believe things like there was no holocaust or my people played an important role in world advancement. Others, unfortunately, are students.

Sincerity for truth - so many liars spew forth with such convincing feigned sincerity, telling you what you wish was true, that you no longer know what to believe.

Talent, wisdom, humor, history, truth -- none of these have good substitutes.

OofDah! You'll have to dig for it, demand it, track it down, but do try to find the real thing. It's worth it.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Illegal Aliens Screwing Us?

An illegal alien in Minnesota (illegal in that he had committed a crime of identy theft as well as being undocumented), got a tax-dollar paid surgically implanted inflatable penis pump. Yes, you and I paid for it!

Scott County (Shakopee) Attorney Pat Ciliberto, who is not sympathetic to this use of medical assistance said, "I don't know how many illegal aliens are getting emergency medical assistance for such a procedure."

EMERGENCY? Perhaps I am naive, but I cannot imagine any circumstance where the inablity to achieve an erection would be an emergency warranting the use of thousands of taxpayers' dollars.

He was in such a hurry to screw the citizens, the tax payers, of America? It was an emergency? And which social service person saw this emergency and approved the expenditure? Please stand up to recieve our thanks. But could you explain why an alien criminal should get tax dollars for a frivolous procedure. Do you consider the inability to gain an erection a life or death situation?

So, folks, do you feel screwed? OofDah! You should, as should every taxpayer.

Ten Years for Lynn Stewart

Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, convicted 1993 World Trade Center bomber, illegally sent messages to his terrorist buddies via his attorney. For illegally passing these messages along, the lawyer, Lynn Stewart, was sentenced, in 2006, to 28 months in prison, at which she scoffed. No longer scoffing, Stewart recently was given an additional 10 years in appeals court.

I applaud the decision. The United States MUST be tough on terrorism, especially within the US. Twenty-eight months is not tough enough.

Which brings us to the question of the Gitmo terrorists. Is the Department of Justice planning to bring the Twin Towers terrorists to trial or will they get the dreaded treatment of the New Black Panthers?

Where DOES the DOJ stand on terrorism?

New Black Panthers - dismissed with a wink and a nod.

Twin tower terrorists - delay, change of venue, dealy, defer, delay.

So, polling place terrorism resulting in the death of fair American elections is proven not to be not important to them.

I hope the Twin Tower terrorism resulting in the death of many Americans proves to be important to them.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Do we have a border?

WHY are the administration and the Homeland Security Department turning a blind eye to the southern border? If we don't have a tight border to the south, why waste money on the north border and the air borders?

If radical Islam terrorists (or whatever the appropriate euphemism for this week) come by plane, are they more dangerous than if they walk across the southern border packing bombs on donkeys? No? Then why spend all that money on xray machines and other safeguards on the airlines and refuse to enforce the laws at the southern border?

Won't a bomb arriving by foot or jeep or mule blow up American property and lives just as easily as one arriving by air? Do you care how the bomb exploding in your face arrived in the US? Or would you rather the deadly thing had never made it into this country? Tough choices?

Using rights as an excuse is idiotic. Since when do non-citizens have the right to waltz in to our country without a visa or being checked for drugs, bombs, or other smuggled items. Especially when -- seemingly -- the rights of the non-citizens trumps the safety of our country.

OofDah! It is difficult to see any sense in the Fed's Mexican policy, isn't it? I don't know, but I suspect someone has sold us out and we are but a suburb of Mexico and BO is vice dictator under Cordoza. Next week will we be allowed into Mexico without carrying papers?

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Bush did it

Remember when Bush was president? Remember how the liberals found EVERYTHING that Bush did horrifyingly bad?

Yeah? So how ironic is it that they now use "Bush did it" to excuse Obama's every move? Do they even see how dumb that is?

My mother is very wise. When I was a kid and wanted to do something, I tried "Everybody else is doing it." Her answer? If everyone was pooping their pants, would you do it?

Even at six I learned to stand on my own decisions, not what someone else did. When will the liberals learn that?

Franken, fraud, felons

The following is written by a follower of this blog. Thank you to the author, Gary Udstrand http://www.twigsandtracks.com/ . (Gary's blog is not political commentary; it is a photography blog.)

This theft of votes is being reported both online and on air by FOX. I'm not sure if the US Pravda media is reporting it.



Well, it is official. Franken and his gang of felons stole the election, best part? The State and Federal authorities has so far stonewalled any attempts to get them to act on the findings. I heard an interview on a local radio station between Chris Baker and J. Christian Adams (the Dept. of Justice attorney who quit so he could testify about the Black Panther voter intimidation case).


In the interview he talked about the fact that Minnesota's elections were determined by illegal votes and fraud and that the Justice department knew that and had irrefutable evidence to the fact. I don't care if you are Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, a Constiutionalist... whatever. Without voting integrity we are no different than the third world countries that we see on the nightly news.


This administration and its cohorts are the MOST CORRUPT administration to ever occupy the White House. I used to believe that it was sheer incompetence. No longer, I think it is clear that they are out to destroy our system of government. The elections can not come soon enough.


It seems this administration is anti-America. I've suggested before that the incompetence cannot be simply that - they just cannot be this incompetent without trying. But overlooking election cheating is the end of the most basic Amercan right -upon which all other rights are based.

Without the right of fair elections NO MATTER WHO WINS THE CHALLENGED ELECTION, NO MATTER WHICH PARTY'S MAJORITY IS AFFECTED all of our rights are lost.

By the way, is anyone surprised that seemingly all the felons voted for Franken?

OofDah!

Friday, July 9, 2010

Arizona

What's with the administration suing the state of Arizona? They say they are worried about Arizona usurping federal powers. I don't get it. Why should they worry about powers they refuse to shoulder?

The Feds don't enforce the laws, but they are jealous of Arizona enforcing it? How dumb is that?

So this leads to more questions - what does the administration gain from allowing illegals to run wild across the border?

Could they want the drug war to cross over? Could they want discord between U.S. citizens and aliens? Why?

Could they want an excuse to declare martial law? Why? How does this tie into their agenda?

More dictatorial powers? Suspended elections?

OofDah!

Keep the trailer; give me my liberty

Michelle Malkin says an 82-year-old homeowner in Colorado is accused of attempted murder, in the first degree, for shooting at two thieves.

The homeowner says he fired two shots at two thieves who tried to run him down while they tried to steal his trailer.

The poor homeowner now faces twelve, yes TWELVE, felony counts and could be in prison for the remainder of his life -- all for attempting to defend his property and life.

The thieves, Torres and Cardano, believed to be illegal aliens, have previous police records. One admitted the theft, but they are not being charged - not for anything!

Apparently being a legal citizen and a victim of crimes by an alien automatically make you guilty, while being an illegal alien is an excuse for any misbehavior.

Still, isn't it great that the homeowner apparently got to keep the trailer?

Find columnist Michelle Malkin at --- http:\\michellemalkin.com

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Do we really need airline security?

Why is our country spending millions on air security and also invading air travelers' privacy with xray-type machines? Why not just let anyone fly in over our borders? We could save a lot of money. And why are we enforcing the Canadian border with enthusiasm? If we pull the border guards from there, we could save additional millions.

If we allow people to flow over the Mexican border unchecked, what's the point of enforcing our other borders? Are terrorists coming over the southern border less dangerous? Could it be that if Islamic extremists filter through Mexico, we can automatically assume the Mexicans' loving and peaceful attitude toward us will render terrorists peaceful, loving immigants, too?

And what's the deal with accusations of racism against Mexicans? Seems to me the Mexicans have been coming in ILLEGALLY with little enforcement of the laws (getting a free ride) while all other borders are tightening. Doesn't this make a case for racism against Canadians and fly-ins? Do we catch and release other illegals, even when they are obviously law breakers above and beyond the original sin of entering illegally? Nope. Only Mexicans get that break. Seems to me Mexicans are victims of favoritism, not racism.

OofDah! Let's be fair and unbiased. Let's tighten the southern border to compare with the northern and fly-in borders. And while we're at it, let's treat Mexican law-breakers like we do other illegals - with no favoritism for brown skin and Latino accents.

"Crazed Sex Poodle"

What kind of description is "crazed sex poodle?" It conjures up some very disturbing mind pictures. Did he cling to her leg, like a poorly-behaved little dog? Eew!

Although calling an expensive message therapist to his hotel room late in the evening doesn't seem innocent, I have serious doubts as to the veracity of the accusation because of the woman's description of the incident. I mean, where's the puke, the vomit?

OofDah! Wouldn't any self-respecting woman reflexively throw up if Al Gore's tongue was down her throat?