Thierry Legault - Transit of ISS and Atlantis in front of the Sun
Not much else to say, go look at the pics.
Not much else to say, go look at the pics.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Maureen Wants A Smackdown
Op-Ed Columnist - Cheney, Master of Pain - NYTimes.com
Being 6'4" and on upper side of 1/8th of a ton and at least in history capable of benching well over 300lbs, I always find it interesting when the gals think it is time to "get tough". There is ALWAYS "collateral damage", and there is ALWAYS the decent chance that there is someone tougher in the room. The most important point is to make the current aggressors believe that there are really much better ways to spend the next few minutes than taking a high risk of becoming permanently disabled, incarcerated or dead. Spending some time in football line or just "friendly" locker room fisticuffs tend to make the points at which the relatively larger sorts decide to "get busy" very rare. It keeps more beds free in the hospital and property intact.
Poor Maureen feels really bad that her girl Nancy hemmed and hawed and looked like a ditz on national TV, and Dick Cheney is still alive. My god, the horror of one of the political people you like being the subject of comedian fodder! There is something that has NEVER happened to any Republican politician!! Clearly somebody ought to be hung out to dry, so let's go dig into this at ALL COSTS!! Republicans have NEVER had to hold their fire at any sort of cheap shots at their folks!
So if Nancy has oversight RESPONSIBILITY and she didn't cover it, then what does that mean? Are women exempt from responsibility in general, or is it just Democrat women that Maureen likes? Does Maureen running around and cherry picking some other set of folks that think "torture" (even with a fuzzy caterpillar) is really horrible somehow absolve Queen Nancy from having to take that nasty RESPONSIBILITY when it could make a difference? Now both Nancy and Maureen are in that comfy Monday AM QB chair. It would be nice if at least Nancy figured out that being able to make the call on Monday AM really doesn't cut it.
A Republican caught in a similar firestorm would of course be forced to resign. Nancy will likely ride this out just fine and it will be "old news" before anyone knows it. OR, is it possible that the Democrats will be so stupid as to descend into a slugfest of political violence trying to FINALLY do the damage to the evil Bush - Cheney team even as their resident Stench-In-Chief BO is forced to realize that the costs of doing things the feminine "let's be nice" way costs soliders lives and in probably way too short a time thousands of civilian lives. He is backpedaling on point after point of Gitmo, Military Tribunals, even putting out more pictures of bad days past for no other reason that yesterday's witch hunts at the cost of today's young american lives. How many other Democrats signed off on what when? Are they ready to listen to Maureen and decide that the collateral damage is worth it?
Maureen wants to "bring it on". Time to bust the joint down. You go girl!
Being 6'4" and on upper side of 1/8th of a ton and at least in history capable of benching well over 300lbs, I always find it interesting when the gals think it is time to "get tough". There is ALWAYS "collateral damage", and there is ALWAYS the decent chance that there is someone tougher in the room. The most important point is to make the current aggressors believe that there are really much better ways to spend the next few minutes than taking a high risk of becoming permanently disabled, incarcerated or dead. Spending some time in football line or just "friendly" locker room fisticuffs tend to make the points at which the relatively larger sorts decide to "get busy" very rare. It keeps more beds free in the hospital and property intact.
Poor Maureen feels really bad that her girl Nancy hemmed and hawed and looked like a ditz on national TV, and Dick Cheney is still alive. My god, the horror of one of the political people you like being the subject of comedian fodder! There is something that has NEVER happened to any Republican politician!! Clearly somebody ought to be hung out to dry, so let's go dig into this at ALL COSTS!! Republicans have NEVER had to hold their fire at any sort of cheap shots at their folks!
So if Nancy has oversight RESPONSIBILITY and she didn't cover it, then what does that mean? Are women exempt from responsibility in general, or is it just Democrat women that Maureen likes? Does Maureen running around and cherry picking some other set of folks that think "torture" (even with a fuzzy caterpillar) is really horrible somehow absolve Queen Nancy from having to take that nasty RESPONSIBILITY when it could make a difference? Now both Nancy and Maureen are in that comfy Monday AM QB chair. It would be nice if at least Nancy figured out that being able to make the call on Monday AM really doesn't cut it.
A Republican caught in a similar firestorm would of course be forced to resign. Nancy will likely ride this out just fine and it will be "old news" before anyone knows it. OR, is it possible that the Democrats will be so stupid as to descend into a slugfest of political violence trying to FINALLY do the damage to the evil Bush - Cheney team even as their resident Stench-In-Chief BO is forced to realize that the costs of doing things the feminine "let's be nice" way costs soliders lives and in probably way too short a time thousands of civilian lives. He is backpedaling on point after point of Gitmo, Military Tribunals, even putting out more pictures of bad days past for no other reason that yesterday's witch hunts at the cost of today's young american lives. How many other Democrats signed off on what when? Are they ready to listen to Maureen and decide that the collateral damage is worth it?
Maureen wants to "bring it on". Time to bust the joint down. You go girl!
It's What You DON'T Print that Counts!!
Power Line - Killing A Story: How It's Done
The article is a bit long and detailed, but it is one of those cases where the media would like the obvious to stay hidden, so it has to be that way.
The bottom line is that ACORN is essentially just a wing of the Democrat party illegally drawing it's funds from federal funds, and the NY Times is just anther Democrat mouthpiece.
For anyone that pays much of any attention, this is all pretty obvious -- but for those that like to know the sordid detail, it is worth a read.
The article is a bit long and detailed, but it is one of those cases where the media would like the obvious to stay hidden, so it has to be that way.
The bottom line is that ACORN is essentially just a wing of the Democrat party illegally drawing it's funds from federal funds, and the NY Times is just anther Democrat mouthpiece.
For anyone that pays much of any attention, this is all pretty obvious -- but for those that like to know the sordid detail, it is worth a read.
How Did Hitler Happen?
19 arrested at Notre Dame protest against Obama - CNN.com
The linked article covers protesters being arrested for attempting to protest BO's commencement address at Notre Dame to be held today. The CNN headline is on some sort of "super marathon" being held in Nambia this weekend. This is the headline in a sidebar. If one takes the time to go read it, it one can discover that these potesters are pro-life and that even the Bishop that precides over Notre Dame will not be attending graduation because he disagrees with HONORING an opponent of church teaching at a Catholic school.
Think of the difference we saw when ANYONE was protesting Bush in ANY setting, foreign or domestic! Any tiny number of protesters were a headline, and their message was blared from the headlines. "100's Protest Bush War". "Not in Our Name! Protestors Say" ... etc, etc. But of course, the MSM agreed with the protestors, not the President, in this case the the agreement is reversed, so their is little concern even if the protesters are arrested.
I happen to be reading a book on "Understanding Hitler", and while it is a very academic book, one of the points it makes is that the idea that "It was just Hitler" that caused the Holocaust is certainly not the case. Rabid anti-semitism was well known in Germany, and indeed Henry Ford was a huge anti-Semite, and was much respected by Hitler.
The left loved to call Bush "Hitler". Am I calling BO "Hitler"? There are certainly more parallels to Hitler with BO than there were with Bush; the adoring crowds, the idea of BO as "saviour", "father figure", "diety", the BO "rainbow O" symbol, the press boot licking, etc, etc ... but no, it isn't "Hitler" that is the problem, it is FACISM! When the popular culture and media starts to push "unity" and even in minor ways, criminalize those that disagree, that is the road to Fascism. The left folks will say; "but protesters were arrested protesting against Bush as well"!
Very seldom were there arrests for "protest" (if at all) -- the anti-Bush folks tended to be blocking traffic, destroying property, in areas where people had to go through security to be at given that the President was going to be there (this proest was on Saturday, BO isn't there until today), etc. Whenever the protesters were NOT treated in the very best way possible, the charges were made against the Bush administration and local authorities that they were "suppressing free speech", "afraid to allow the message to get out", etc ... none of those charges are raised here.
So how did Hitler happen? Slowly ... "no crisis was wasted". Key groups were demonized and made to be scapegoats -- Jews, Communists, Gypsies, etc for Hitler; Business, Wall Street, the Rich, the Religious Right, etc for BO. All that was seen as good, or marketed by the Government controlled cabal of Business, Media, and "popular groups" (unions, ACORN, etc) was attributed to Hitler (BO) ... the bad was due to the evil scapegoats.
Can "it" happen here? Absolutely, most minds are so clouded they don't even know "right from left". It was known for thousands of years -- and it was known by our founders. Since the 30's, the Ameican brain is so scrambled that 90%+ of us no longer understand this simple fact.
RIGHT is liberty, freedom from state control -- the "far right" is ANARCHY!!!
LEFT is Tyranny, greater and greater state control -- the "far left" is TOTALITARIANISM!!!
BOTH Communism and Fascism are ON THE LEFT ... as is Socialism. Our nation has been drifting left for 200 years, only the rate of drift (or fall) has varied -- we are FAR from Anarchy. There is essentially no danger on the right unless we would turn our direction and travel that way for a good long while. Our danger on the left, of falling into near total loss of individical freedom is severe and acute, and one could argue that we may already have fallen so far so American can no longer be recovered.
Our Founding Fathers wanted to create a "Center RIGHT Democracy" -- they considered the odds of a drift to Anarchy to be very low, where the odds of Government taking the rights of the individual States, Communities and individuals away was very high.
Our Founding Fathers were so very right!!!
The linked article covers protesters being arrested for attempting to protest BO's commencement address at Notre Dame to be held today. The CNN headline is on some sort of "super marathon" being held in Nambia this weekend. This is the headline in a sidebar. If one takes the time to go read it, it one can discover that these potesters are pro-life and that even the Bishop that precides over Notre Dame will not be attending graduation because he disagrees with HONORING an opponent of church teaching at a Catholic school.
Think of the difference we saw when ANYONE was protesting Bush in ANY setting, foreign or domestic! Any tiny number of protesters were a headline, and their message was blared from the headlines. "100's Protest Bush War". "Not in Our Name! Protestors Say" ... etc, etc. But of course, the MSM agreed with the protestors, not the President, in this case the the agreement is reversed, so their is little concern even if the protesters are arrested.
I happen to be reading a book on "Understanding Hitler", and while it is a very academic book, one of the points it makes is that the idea that "It was just Hitler" that caused the Holocaust is certainly not the case. Rabid anti-semitism was well known in Germany, and indeed Henry Ford was a huge anti-Semite, and was much respected by Hitler.
The left loved to call Bush "Hitler". Am I calling BO "Hitler"? There are certainly more parallels to Hitler with BO than there were with Bush; the adoring crowds, the idea of BO as "saviour", "father figure", "diety", the BO "rainbow O" symbol, the press boot licking, etc, etc ... but no, it isn't "Hitler" that is the problem, it is FACISM! When the popular culture and media starts to push "unity" and even in minor ways, criminalize those that disagree, that is the road to Fascism. The left folks will say; "but protesters were arrested protesting against Bush as well"!
Very seldom were there arrests for "protest" (if at all) -- the anti-Bush folks tended to be blocking traffic, destroying property, in areas where people had to go through security to be at given that the President was going to be there (this proest was on Saturday, BO isn't there until today), etc. Whenever the protesters were NOT treated in the very best way possible, the charges were made against the Bush administration and local authorities that they were "suppressing free speech", "afraid to allow the message to get out", etc ... none of those charges are raised here.
So how did Hitler happen? Slowly ... "no crisis was wasted". Key groups were demonized and made to be scapegoats -- Jews, Communists, Gypsies, etc for Hitler; Business, Wall Street, the Rich, the Religious Right, etc for BO. All that was seen as good, or marketed by the Government controlled cabal of Business, Media, and "popular groups" (unions, ACORN, etc) was attributed to Hitler (BO) ... the bad was due to the evil scapegoats.
Can "it" happen here? Absolutely, most minds are so clouded they don't even know "right from left". It was known for thousands of years -- and it was known by our founders. Since the 30's, the Ameican brain is so scrambled that 90%+ of us no longer understand this simple fact.
RIGHT is liberty, freedom from state control -- the "far right" is ANARCHY!!!
LEFT is Tyranny, greater and greater state control -- the "far left" is TOTALITARIANISM!!!
BOTH Communism and Fascism are ON THE LEFT ... as is Socialism. Our nation has been drifting left for 200 years, only the rate of drift (or fall) has varied -- we are FAR from Anarchy. There is essentially no danger on the right unless we would turn our direction and travel that way for a good long while. Our danger on the left, of falling into near total loss of individical freedom is severe and acute, and one could argue that we may already have fallen so far so American can no longer be recovered.
Our Founding Fathers wanted to create a "Center RIGHT Democracy" -- they considered the odds of a drift to Anarchy to be very low, where the odds of Government taking the rights of the individual States, Communities and individuals away was very high.
Our Founding Fathers were so very right!!!
Friday, May 15, 2009
BO Security at Expense of Liberty
In this world, ALL security is false, so trading our liberty for supposed BO securitity is a grevious mistake.
Our would-be soft despots are offering Americans money and the promise of security against economic distress. The vastly increased cost of government will nonetheless nearly leave half of households free from the burden of paying federal income tax and eligible for occasional rebates. As CNN reporter Susan oesgen said to a tea party protester, "Don't you realize that you're eligible for a $400 tax cut?"
In other words, take the money and shut up. Which brings
to mind Tocqueville's warning: "Every measure which establishes legal charity on a permanent basis and gives to it an administrative form creates thereby a class unproductive and idle, living at the expense of the class which is industrious
and given to work."
The Nancy Crabwalk
Dana Milbank - Pelosi's Fancy Footwork About Waterboarding - washingtonpost.com
See, the MSM reported it! Now they can claim they are unbiased and ignore the story completely and talk about how the idiotic Republicans ought to get over it!
See, the MSM reported it! Now they can claim they are unbiased and ignore the story completely and talk about how the idiotic Republicans ought to get over it!
Pelosi, Thy Name is Slug
RealClearPolitics - Why Pelosi's Hypocrisy Matters
That we allow slime like Nancy to infest our Capitol is a big shining sign to N Korea, Iran, and every little piece of Al Quaeda camel dung in a cave somewhere to say "come and get us, we handed the keys to the no-ops." Sadly, when the domestic US terror victims start stacking up, Nancy the slug will be the first pointing a slimy antenna at others.
So what happened? The reason Pelosi raised no objection to waterboarding at the time, the reason the American people (who by 2004 knew what was going on) strongly re-elected the man who ordered these interrogations, is not because she and the rest of the American people suffered a years-long moral psychosis from which they have just now awoken. It is because at that time they were aware of the existing conditions -- our blindness to al-Qaeda's plans, the urgency of the threat, the magnitude of the suffering that might be caused by a second 9/11, the likelihood that the interrogation would extract intelligence that President Obama's own director of national intelligence now tells us was indeed "high-value information" -- and concluded that on balance it was a reasonable response to a terrible threat.And they were right.
You can believe that Pelosi and the whole American public underwent a radical transformation from moral normality to complicity with war criminality back to normality. Or you can believe that their personalities and moral compasses have remained steady throughout the years, but changes in circumstances (threat, knowledge, imminence) alter the moral calculus attached to any interrogation technique.Does anyone really doubt that the above is true? OF COURSE Queen Nancy signed up for "whatever it takes" to get the information that the nation so sorely needed as we were caught flat footed with our pants down on 9-11. The difference between a worm like Nancy and a real human being with a shred of character and a wisp of spine is that the humans admit that they "did what was necessary" and they sure as hell aren't going to go try to prosecute those that did what they approved!
You don't need a psychiatrist to tell you which of these theories is utterly fantastical.
That we allow slime like Nancy to infest our Capitol is a big shining sign to N Korea, Iran, and every little piece of Al Quaeda camel dung in a cave somewhere to say "come and get us, we handed the keys to the no-ops." Sadly, when the domestic US terror victims start stacking up, Nancy the slug will be the first pointing a slimy antenna at others.
Git mo BO
Obama to resurrect military commissions for terror suspects - CNN.com
Oh gee, BO is going to do military commissions just like Bush!!! ... only of course, his are "Mo betta", cuz they are "BOized", so I'm SURE the media is going to be much happier.
It also seems pretty clear that he has no agreed way to close Gitmo. Guess which US state is interested in having the "New Gitmo"? ... same state that wants the spent nuke fuel ... nada, none, ZIP!!! Now there is something shocking! There are really bad/dangerous people at Gitmo that we can't release, BO has promised that Gitmo is going to be closed, but he has no place to put those people.
Can't they just put a couple pens in the basement of the White House? How about Hollywood?? They were big on the "we hate Gitmo" bandwagon. I'm certain they would be more than willing to maybe have some of the worst offenders as "extended houseguests" ... I bet Alex Baldwin has extra space in his house!
Oh gee, BO is going to do military commissions just like Bush!!! ... only of course, his are "Mo betta", cuz they are "BOized", so I'm SURE the media is going to be much happier.
It also seems pretty clear that he has no agreed way to close Gitmo. Guess which US state is interested in having the "New Gitmo"? ... same state that wants the spent nuke fuel ... nada, none, ZIP!!! Now there is something shocking! There are really bad/dangerous people at Gitmo that we can't release, BO has promised that Gitmo is going to be closed, but he has no place to put those people.
Can't they just put a couple pens in the basement of the White House? How about Hollywood?? They were big on the "we hate Gitmo" bandwagon. I'm certain they would be more than willing to maybe have some of the worst offenders as "extended houseguests" ... I bet Alex Baldwin has extra space in his house!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Pay and Performance
Pilots' low pay, long commutes probed in air crash - Yahoo! News
BO and the Fascists are hot on the trail of deciding what level of pay it is that everyone is worth. As near as I can understand their algorithm is that if you are smart enough to contribute to the Democratic party (Unions in general, Finance Industry, lawyers), then you deserve a high salary. Naturally, as with any good Democrat, this higher income will be "tax free" -- if you get in any trouble with the IRS, just contact BO, and he will appoint you to a cabinet position.
The old tired idea of "pay for performance", or "higher pay for higher capability / education / etc" has been replaced by "pay for votes", or as they like to say in Chicago, "pay to play". In a nation where only politics is important, why would people persist in some tired discredited capitalist ideas of income having something to do with some hard to compute concept called "value"?
Consider the difference between the pilots who crashed in Buffalo killing all aboard and "Sully" Sullenberger who dead sticked the Airbus into the Hudson for no loss of life. The horribly greedy Sully is reported to make about $140K a year, and moonlights as a consultant to make up for salary and pension losses down from at one time being able to focus on flying full time and make over $200K. Clearly, he erroneously believes that capability and experience are worthy of higher salaries, and he must think that he has some use for all those "riches". Why, if his wife works, he deserves to be punished with some BO tax increases for the "rich" just to show him how stupid it is to be making such "exorbitant sums"!!
The 49 year old captain on the Buffalo plane earned a way more respectable $55K a year, while his 24 year old co-pilot was earning a fairly spartan $24K and living with her folks because she couldn't afford a place of her own. Heil BO! Those are the kinds of "sustainable salaries" that Americans ought to be dreaming of!! The way I see it, "a pilot is a pilot", so what's the difference? I'm sure all those passengers aboard that Buffalo plane were much happier to have those low cost pilots right up to the point at which they had, shall we say, "higher considerations".
Put Sully behind those controls and they would have never been aware the plane had a pilot -- he would have never let his approach speed get low in the first place, absolutely nothing would have happened. But hey, salary is "immaterial" -- there is no difference in the kinds of people you attract with lower salaries than higher, other than the lower ones are BETTER PEOPLE!! -- many more of them vote Democrat, and that is all that counts!
Relative to wealth, two groups vote high percentage Democrat -- the really rich, because they can afford to, and the really poor (when they get out and vote) ... because they have given up hope. If you aren't really rich, it is a great time to pick up some hope for the next life, because your future in this one is a bit less bright than Colgan Air flight 3407 when the stick-shaker activated.
BO and the Fascists are hot on the trail of deciding what level of pay it is that everyone is worth. As near as I can understand their algorithm is that if you are smart enough to contribute to the Democratic party (Unions in general, Finance Industry, lawyers), then you deserve a high salary. Naturally, as with any good Democrat, this higher income will be "tax free" -- if you get in any trouble with the IRS, just contact BO, and he will appoint you to a cabinet position.
The old tired idea of "pay for performance", or "higher pay for higher capability / education / etc" has been replaced by "pay for votes", or as they like to say in Chicago, "pay to play". In a nation where only politics is important, why would people persist in some tired discredited capitalist ideas of income having something to do with some hard to compute concept called "value"?
Consider the difference between the pilots who crashed in Buffalo killing all aboard and "Sully" Sullenberger who dead sticked the Airbus into the Hudson for no loss of life. The horribly greedy Sully is reported to make about $140K a year, and moonlights as a consultant to make up for salary and pension losses down from at one time being able to focus on flying full time and make over $200K. Clearly, he erroneously believes that capability and experience are worthy of higher salaries, and he must think that he has some use for all those "riches". Why, if his wife works, he deserves to be punished with some BO tax increases for the "rich" just to show him how stupid it is to be making such "exorbitant sums"!!
The 49 year old captain on the Buffalo plane earned a way more respectable $55K a year, while his 24 year old co-pilot was earning a fairly spartan $24K and living with her folks because she couldn't afford a place of her own. Heil BO! Those are the kinds of "sustainable salaries" that Americans ought to be dreaming of!! The way I see it, "a pilot is a pilot", so what's the difference? I'm sure all those passengers aboard that Buffalo plane were much happier to have those low cost pilots right up to the point at which they had, shall we say, "higher considerations".
Put Sully behind those controls and they would have never been aware the plane had a pilot -- he would have never let his approach speed get low in the first place, absolutely nothing would have happened. But hey, salary is "immaterial" -- there is no difference in the kinds of people you attract with lower salaries than higher, other than the lower ones are BETTER PEOPLE!! -- many more of them vote Democrat, and that is all that counts!
Relative to wealth, two groups vote high percentage Democrat -- the really rich, because they can afford to, and the really poor (when they get out and vote) ... because they have given up hope. If you aren't really rich, it is a great time to pick up some hope for the next life, because your future in this one is a bit less bright than Colgan Air flight 3407 when the stick-shaker activated.
Deer In Waterboard Headlights?
Pelosi accuses CIA of misleading her on use of waterboarding - CNN.com
Gee Nancy, rule number 1 of holes -- when you are in one, stop digging. So you are going to accuse the CIA, the OBAMA CIA of of lying? Isn't that taking on pretty big quarry?
Well, BO shows no qualms about throwing folks under the bus, and I'm sure there is room under there for Nancy as well. Gee, that would be an awful shame.
Gee Nancy, rule number 1 of holes -- when you are in one, stop digging. So you are going to accuse the CIA, the OBAMA CIA of of lying? Isn't that taking on pretty big quarry?
Well, BO shows no qualms about throwing folks under the bus, and I'm sure there is room under there for Nancy as well. Gee, that would be an awful shame.
BO Cares for Troops?
Obama's latest effort to conceal evidence of Bush era crimes - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com
BO has a solid track record of flip flopping every which way, and the new photos are no exception. Will he flip again? Only the pollsters know for sure I imagine. There is a relatively interesting aspect to this though.
While it is hard to understand what BO might actually believe (if anything), there is an outside chance here that he realizes that these photos can do nothing positive for the US efforts in the former WoT, now "Overseas Contingency Action". It seems that he MUST realize that at some level, because were he not to, there is very little reason for this flip -- he had previously declared that he would "release it all".
While I fully expect that the MSM and his lefty buddies will convince him that the opportunity to throw some more dirt on the horrible Bush-Cheney administration is WAY worth how many American lives it costs (hell, most of the soldiers vote Republican anyway!), the fact that he apparently had at least a short term neural firing that led to the thought "Gee, OTHER than making my lefty buddies happy, what possible good could releasing a new bunch of shocking photos that the perps have been prosecuted for do?".
One would like to think that even a failed community organizer, were he to have a few more of those thoughts, and eventually develop some sort of character beyond "poll says" MIGHT have some minimal prospect for leadership.
As I often say, I'm the eternal optimist ... most likely this tiny spark of sense will be as short lived as the idea that there was no need to go back and prosecute people over the enhanced interrogation method memos.
BO has a solid track record of flip flopping every which way, and the new photos are no exception. Will he flip again? Only the pollsters know for sure I imagine. There is a relatively interesting aspect to this though.
While it is hard to understand what BO might actually believe (if anything), there is an outside chance here that he realizes that these photos can do nothing positive for the US efforts in the former WoT, now "Overseas Contingency Action". It seems that he MUST realize that at some level, because were he not to, there is very little reason for this flip -- he had previously declared that he would "release it all".
While I fully expect that the MSM and his lefty buddies will convince him that the opportunity to throw some more dirt on the horrible Bush-Cheney administration is WAY worth how many American lives it costs (hell, most of the soldiers vote Republican anyway!), the fact that he apparently had at least a short term neural firing that led to the thought "Gee, OTHER than making my lefty buddies happy, what possible good could releasing a new bunch of shocking photos that the perps have been prosecuted for do?".
One would like to think that even a failed community organizer, were he to have a few more of those thoughts, and eventually develop some sort of character beyond "poll says" MIGHT have some minimal prospect for leadership.
As I often say, I'm the eternal optimist ... most likely this tiny spark of sense will be as short lived as the idea that there was no need to go back and prosecute people over the enhanced interrogation method memos.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Enterprise Destroyed By Death Star
Very disappointing explosion -- I'd think the antimatter annihilation would result in at least 1/4 the planet being destroyed. Also ... aside from the somewhat odd parking place for a starship, one would have thought there would have been at least a momentary "shield bubble" before they were overwhelmed.
So would there actually be any negotiation between BO and Darth? or would they pretty much be "on the same team"?
BO Stinkin So Bad CBS Notices
Chrysler Bankruptcy Exposes Dirty Politics - CBS News
WOW, Dan Rather would have a cat. The loyal lefty memo forgers are willing to point out that BO is illegally paying off folks that supported his campaign. I'm not talking about "illegal" because this simple "pay for play" as politicians tend to do constantly, but because the Sr Creditors had a CONTRACT -- and they were NOT "speculators" any more than any other investor, and far less than most. In fact ANY stock holder is FAR more a "speculator" (as if that was a bad thing) than ANY bondholder.
Read the whole article, here are a few quotes. The very idea that someone at CBS would know about the Federalist Papers and ideas like "contracts" and "rule of law" is enough to make one wonder if reform of even the dregs isn't possible once a vermin like Gunga Dan has vacated!
WOW, Dan Rather would have a cat. The loyal lefty memo forgers are willing to point out that BO is illegally paying off folks that supported his campaign. I'm not talking about "illegal" because this simple "pay for play" as politicians tend to do constantly, but because the Sr Creditors had a CONTRACT -- and they were NOT "speculators" any more than any other investor, and far less than most. In fact ANY stock holder is FAR more a "speculator" (as if that was a bad thing) than ANY bondholder.
Read the whole article, here are a few quotes. The very idea that someone at CBS would know about the Federalist Papers and ideas like "contracts" and "rule of law" is enough to make one wonder if reform of even the dregs isn't possible once a vermin like Gunga Dan has vacated!
Rep. John Dingell, a Michigan Democrat, sent reporters a statement calling the creditors "vultures" and "rouge hedge funds." Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm piled on, taking aim during her radio address at a "few greedy hedge funds that didn't care how much pain the company's failure would have inflicted on families and communities everywhere."
It must be a coincidence that the United Auto Workers has handed $25.4 million to federal politicians over the last two decades, with 99 percent of that cash going to Democrats. And that Mr. Obama's final campaign stop on Election Day was a UAW phone bank.
"I represent one less investor today than I represented yesterday," Lauria said on a Detroit radio show. "One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That's how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence." Lauria said that his clients were willing to compromise on 50 cents on the dollar, but the government offered them only 29 cents.
In the Federalist Papers in 1788, James Madison wrote that "laws impairing the obligation of contracts are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation." Unfortunately, Washington politicians seem to pay little attention to history, morality, or the rule of law.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Forget Reagan?
Should the GOP Forget Reagan? - WSJ.com
Reagan NEVER said "trust in me", or "trust in government" -- he said "trust in America -- that shining city on the hill". "Trust in God". "Trust in the PEOPLE of America". The very same "We The People" of the Preamble to the Constitution.
"We The People" have horribly lost our way, and the idea that we would make the memory of Ronald Reagan into some totem or litmus test for leaders of the future is just one more sign of how lost we really are.
I have a picture of Reagan up in my office at work. I viewed my trip to Reagan Library as something like "going to Mecca". I love Reagan. I say that people that still believe in America -- be they Republican, Libertarian, apolitical, or "confused" need to "forget Reagan". Why? Primarily because it was never about "Reagan" -- it was about basic principles. "Work, save and invest" are good. Believe in something that transcends yourself and even America (hopefully God), and always believe in the exceptionalism of America and the majesty of her founding Constitution, are also important. Being responsible, prudent, reasonable, focused on truth, focused on reality and in the ultimate sense optimistic even though these days are dark and look to be going to get a lot darker.The answer to that historic question is an apt subject this week as the GOP, looking for a path from the wilderness, says farewell at National Cathedral tomorrow to Jack Kemp, who remained a Reaganite to the end.
Jack Kemp, anyone who spent time around him will tell you, stayed on message. That message, like Reagan's, had a number of parts, but it is not possible to even guess how many times Jack Kemp summarized his explanations of that message in three words: "Work, save and invest." Republicans should think hard about building a governing philosophy on the foundation of those three words, ideas that most voters understand.
Reagan NEVER said "trust in me", or "trust in government" -- he said "trust in America -- that shining city on the hill". "Trust in God". "Trust in the PEOPLE of America". The very same "We The People" of the Preamble to the Constitution.
"We The People" have horribly lost our way, and the idea that we would make the memory of Ronald Reagan into some totem or litmus test for leaders of the future is just one more sign of how lost we really are.
The American Nightmare
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090525/greider
I suggest holding one's nose, having a very stiff drink handy and being ready to get up and go for a walk a couple times during reading this -- if you have a brain. If you don't, then you are going to LOVE IT!!
Here is Greider's view of "the new American Dream".
Current people's "common moral verities have been trashed" -- by I guess, someone looking for greater returns. Apparently, Greider and the people he normally talks to are "victims" -- this horrible current overzealous and overly productive wealth system just "pushes them around". Somehow the fact that others have "money and things" somehow "prevents" them from living the life they would like without the dreaded "money and things"? Is there potentially just a bit of plain old envy here trying to make sure that once the folks that Greider thinks have "too much" have been swatted down to size, then "somehow" the world will just be "better".
So according to Greider, we are rich enough and there are no threats of scarcity or deprivation -- "plenty has been achieved", and apparently, it would be impossible to kill the goose that layed this golden egg. My thought on that is; Great, so now you can go forth and live the minimalist life you desire -- live long and avoid prospering. Nobody is stopping you. Oh, wait, that doesn't seem to be it:
The article drones on ... "Social Corporations" ... where that nasty idea of "profit" is far down the list of priorities. Ah yes, how much better life could be if we didn't need to produce something that someone else was pay more than it cost to make if for!! It is true that wiping out competition might help there -- if there is no competition, products can be pretty bad and still purchased, but even then, there is a limit.
One might imagine that thinking like this in a major US magazine, and a guy in the White House that would nearly certainly agree with much of it would be a fantasy ... but alas, it is an actual "waking nightmare".
I suggest holding one's nose, having a very stiff drink handy and being ready to get up and go for a walk a couple times during reading this -- if you have a brain. If you don't, then you are going to LOVE IT!!
Here is Greider's view of "the new American Dream".
Here is the grand vision I suggest Americans can pursue: the right of all citizens to larger lives. Not to get richer than the next guy or necessarily to accumulate more and more stuff but the right to live life more fully and engage more expansively the elemental possibilities of human existence. That is the essence of what so many now seem to yearn for in their lives. People--even successful and affluent people--are frustrated because the intangible dimensions of life have been held back or displaced in large and small ways, pushed aside by the economic system's relentless demands to maximize yields of profit and wealth. Our common moral verities have been trashed in the name of greater returns. The softer aspects of mortal experience are diminished because life itself is not tabulated in the economic system's accounting.Let me try to parse that "big idea". There is some "right to live large lives"-- but competition and money aren't part of that. Can somebody explain to me why people today don't have a right to live whatever life they want that doesn't include "money and things"?
Current people's "common moral verities have been trashed" -- by I guess, someone looking for greater returns. Apparently, Greider and the people he normally talks to are "victims" -- this horrible current overzealous and overly productive wealth system just "pushes them around". Somehow the fact that others have "money and things" somehow "prevents" them from living the life they would like without the dreaded "money and things"? Is there potentially just a bit of plain old envy here trying to make sure that once the folks that Greider thinks have "too much" have been swatted down to size, then "somehow" the world will just be "better".
What's needed in American life is a redefinition of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Given the nation's great wealth, the ancient threats of scarcity and deprivation have been eliminated. Yet people remain yoked to economic demands despite wanting something more from life--freedom to explore the mysteries and bring forth all that is within them. Collectively, Americans need to take a deep breath and reconsider what it means to be rich.
So according to Greider, we are rich enough and there are no threats of scarcity or deprivation -- "plenty has been achieved", and apparently, it would be impossible to kill the goose that layed this golden egg. My thought on that is; Great, so now you can go forth and live the minimalist life you desire -- live long and avoid prospering. Nobody is stopping you. Oh, wait, that doesn't seem to be it:
Guaranteed public jobs paying more than the minimum wage would permanently and automatically stabilize the economy, swelling the ranks of public workers in recessions and shrinking them when private jobs become more abundant. Instead of punishing the working poor most severely in downturns, as the system does now, the government would redistribute the costs of recession so that all taxpayers would share the burden as a public obligation.Ah, we need a "gaurenteed public job at more than minium wage" -- uh, so that will sort of make "minimum wage" meaningless won't it? Seems that I may as well take that guarenteed public job that I can't be fired from and just show up and drink coffee with the other guaranteed job public workers until I get my check. It will be fun to chat about the private fools working their butts off to pay the taxes so that I can be as indolent as my heart desires. Oh, wait, how likely is it that "all taxpayers will share the burden as a public obligation"? Think they might not like me sitting there doing zip getting "more than minium wage" while all their dining and retail establishments raise prices and close down because of the high cost of labor?
The article drones on ... "Social Corporations" ... where that nasty idea of "profit" is far down the list of priorities. Ah yes, how much better life could be if we didn't need to produce something that someone else was pay more than it cost to make if for!! It is true that wiping out competition might help there -- if there is no competition, products can be pretty bad and still purchased, but even then, there is a limit.
One might imagine that thinking like this in a major US magazine, and a guy in the White House that would nearly certainly agree with much of it would be a fantasy ... but alas, it is an actual "waking nightmare".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)