Benefit to the Poor, Reagan vs BO

The poor: Reagan vs. Obama | TribLIVE:

Oh, but the GAP got worse under Reagan!! Indeed ... zero has the strange property of staying at zero, so when "the richest" get richer, it tends to increase the income gap. It is just that the poor did much much better under Reagan if one can tear their brain away from envy for a just a second.

The left is much more concerned about envy than results, so everyone being at zero would theoretically be fine with them -- it is "inequality' that bothers them. In a lefty NFL, all the games would be zero zero ties all the time.

Golly, I just can't wait until those Regressives get everything their way!

'via Blog this'

Benefit to the Poor, Reagan vs BO

The poor: Reagan vs. Obama | TribLIVE:

Oh, but the GAP got worse under Reagan!! Indeed ... zero has the strange property of staying at zero, so when "the richest" get richer, it tends to increase the income gap. It is just that the poor did much much better under Reagan if one can tear their brain away from envy for a just a second.

The left is much more concerned about envy than results, so everyone being at zero would theoretically be fine with them -- it is "inequality' that bothers them. In a lefty NFL, all the games would be zero zero ties all the time.

Golly, I just can't wait until those Regressives get everything their way!

'via Blog this'

TIME: America Weak and Waffling

Ace of Spades HQ:

Well, for the rest of the world at least. See how much attention our MSM thinks the man in the street pays to the news of the world? Sort of like when Arafat would say one thing in English and another in Arabic ... he assumed that the Western  MSM would never bother to xlate, since he told them what they wanted to hear.

Sure, it is hard to keep up, but Forrest Gump had it pretty right, "Stupid is as stupid does". We richly deserve what we are getting from BO.

'via Blog this'

Syria : Ever Hear of Vietnam?

James P. Rubin: With the Syria Crisis, America’s Role in the World Is Steadily Shrinking - Newsweek and The Daily Beast:

So NOT LOSING in Iraq due to the virtually single handed W "Surge" was what killed "liberal internationalism"?

Let's see, we lost over 50K troops in Vietnam and < 5K in Iraq ... I'm thinking that is a 10x ratio, and we exited Vietnam with our tails firmly between our legs, but exited Iraq under BO with at least a ton of our objectives accomplished -- where in Vietnam it was ZIP! If LBJ could have done as well in Vietnam as W did in Iraq, he would have been canonized as "the greatest since FDR".

There is "bias", then there is abject blindness of the sort that can't tell shit from shinola!

So after the MSM and the Democrats spend YEARS convincing themselves that Iraq is a "loss", and Vietnam never happened, they look around and wonder "where did American confidence and capability go?".

Our role is shrinking because we have completely lost touch with what it means to be "American" vs "Progressive" ... and in fact, "progressive" is REGRESSIVE, thus we shrink!

It was George W. Bush who set in motion the events that caused the American consensus on liberal internationalism to splinter and finally collapse. Although his goal of promoting democratic change echoed Kennedy, the methods and the incompetence were unique to his administration. In trying to pursue nation building in Afghanistan and Iraq with few international allies, and then failing so spectacularly, Bush shattered America’s confidence in its international leadership. It is worth recalling how tall America stood after the fall of the Taliban in 2001: our adversaries—North Korea, Iran, even China—feared not only our overwhelming military power, but also our skill at leading the world into action. Soon enough, however, that sense of American strength and leadership was gone.

So the problem in Syria is "Bush". Why did we ever bother to elect BO? Is he ever responsible for ANYTHING!!?

'via Blog this'

Colorado Stealth Gun Recall

Waking a Sleeping Giant in Colorado | National Review Online:

Expect this to get less coverage that an Aussie shot in the back and killed by bored black kids.

Big liberal districts, two state legislators (first in CO history) go down in a recall election because of getting overly aggressive on gun control.

As the Democrats say "voter suppression" ... ah yes, each Democrat victory is precious, real and laudable. Victories for Constitutional and Natural Rights are "suppression".

Even in a rapidly dying nation, there are still pockets of people that didn't get the complete Statist memo ...

'via Blog this'

Hurricane Meaning

Hurricane Humberto ruins shot at a 2013 record - CNN.com:

So we came within hours of breaking the "latest in the season for a hurricane since records were kept".  I looked that up ... 1851.

We can't say ANYTHING about "Climate" based on records since 1851 and a one year happening, so I won't. "Climate" happens over thousands and tens of thousands of years, as in glacial and inter-glacial periods that have been happening on 10-20Kish intervals for at least the entire Quaternary period of 2.5 million years that we are currently in the Holocene epoch of.

We certainly CAN however say that those that confidently predicted more hurricanes due to Global Warming, with the crescendo in that area being reached for Katrina in '05 have been proven completely and totally WRONG!

'via Blog this'

Supporting WWIII!

Heh: Kickstarting World War III: “Not Like Those Other Republican Wars” | Power Line:

Hey, a war for the 99%! Grass fed bomb and hybrid Prius Tanks! Really puts the "liberal" in "Neo-liberal" ... it's good because Obama is for this one!

Damned funny little video, perhaps America can come back some day from even Obama??

'via Blog this'

Worse Than "Jenjis Kahn?

"Flipper" in the past ... his pronunciation may be correct for all I know, but in America the harder "G" is usually the way it is heard.  So is Assad on the same level as Genghis Khan, and thus similar to US troops in Vietnam, or is he worse?

The World Is Going to End On ...

The Ice Is Cracking . . . Er | Power Line:

As late as '07 we were going to be "ice free by 2013" ... oops, the ice has ADVANCED since last year.

Back in 2006 I wrote about how far off the very confident post Katrina predictions on how OBVIOUS it was that there would be more "Superstorms" like Katrina than ever before due to Global Warming, and how Katrina was kind of W's "just desserts", since he was somewhat of a "denier".

Katrina was PROOF of Global Warming ... but wait, if there are LESS storms, what is that "proof" of??

The mark of science is CORRECT and REPEATABLE predictions. So far the warmist predictors are no more successful than the religious "the world is going to end on ..." guys.

'via Blog this'

Canadian Perspective on Collapse of US

Collapse of American Influence Recalls Dis-Integration of Soviet Union, Fall of France - The New York Sun

Good to hear what our formerly more "progressive" neighbors to the north think about us.

Back when W was in office, the opinion of anybody else in the world with a negative view of W or US policy was very important to be shared widely and prominently! Wonder whatever happened to that attitude?

I fear he is WAY too optimistic about how easily this might be "fixed". I sincerely doubt that BO and the warmist fanatics will allow the US to become energy independent, and even if we did, two elections of BO are proof positive that our problems are much deeper than that.

'via Blog this'

Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics

Police: Missouri man secretly exposed partner, maybe 300 more, to HIV - CNN.com:

Or COYOTE, which was a legalize prostitution group back when things were really just starting to roll on the "let's just throw God out and have fun ... especially with sex". A short perusal of this article reminds us of just how well that works.

Oh, but there have been problems with Catholic Priests, so religion is no answer. Right.

Brilliant logic ... there are still problems with infections caught in hospitals, so why don't we just throw out the whole ridiculous sterile protocol stuff? It definitely doesn't stop all infections!

Ah, the wise ways of man left to his own very limited devices.

I'm always mystified why the "progressives" believe that sex, drugs, abortion and the related "marriage" now, need to be "completely free choices", but soft drink containers, wages, work rules, seat belts, having more money than they think proper, how much water your toilet uses when it flushes and pretty much any other detail of life needs to be controlled to within a gnat's eyelash.

'via Blog this'

Putin Declares the Obvious

Putin: John Kerry Is A “Liar” | Power Line:

I remember the MSM glee when some schmuck threw a shoe at W. I imagine that they would want nuclear retaliation were the same to happen to BO. Oh for just a tiny hint of balance.

So Putin knows that Kerry is a liar and is willing to say it? Good, gives me more confidence at least some world leaders still have a handle on reality!

'via Blog this'

More Cowbell

Krugman: Obamanomics “an Astonishing, Horrifying Failure” | Power Line:

So even Krugman now things BOnomics is a failure. Not that one should put any stock in what someone that blasts deficits under one administration and then constantly harps that they are "too low" under another.

Still, it seems that at least we have a reasonable consensus that BOnomics sucks!

'via Blog this'

The Winter Soldier Gets Heated Up

HURT: Tales of atrocities, as told by John Kerry - Washington Times:

Mr "I was for the war before I was against it", once the gung ho tough guy with THREE (count them) Purple Hearts (all without so much as a DAY of hospitalization!), has taken a "firm" position on chem weapons in Syria!

Kerry, "firm position" !!!??? ... oxymoron? I sure think so!

This guy is all out for John Kerry ... which is better than his boss who is out to destroy the "colonial powers", but still not what one would call "leadership".

'via Blog this'

The BO Bad Example on Syria

Opinion: How not to run a foreign policy - Elliott Abrams - POLITICO.com:

Watching BO is often like watching Barney Fife on the old Andy Griffith show. Downright painful. BO finally makes Carter look good, and he is the actual embodiment of what the left fantasized W to be. (except their imagination wasn't as bad as BO turned out to be),

He attacked Libya without so much as a whisper of "I need Congressional approval". So what the heck happened now? Andy take the bullet out of his gun?

Thinking people that care about America, a declining minority as evidenced by the last two presidential elections, are left in a real dilemma.

This article argues that Syria has to be struck for their use of chemical weapons. Is that a principle? Saddam used them multiple times, taking out whole villages of Kurds and also against Iranian soldiers. Do we value Syrian lives more than Iraqi or Iranian?

The assumption that Saddam had chemical weapons since he had used them was enough to get Kerry, Hillary, Joe B and many others to vote for boots on the ground military action with W in the WH. Do we need to find chem weapons this time to validate a strike? Would it be "a lie" if we didn't find them?

My guess is that what we MAY do with a strike is inhibit Assad's ability to deliver further chem weapons against his own people. Will it inhibit Assad's ability to deliver chem weapons to Hezbollah, which has 5K troops fighting with Assad?  Seems very doubtful.

What happened to the theory that "attacking Iraq makes us LESS safe"? Does attacking Syria have any effect on our security? Good, bad, indifferent? The evidence would seem to be that attacking Iraq did not make us at least MEASURABLY "less safe", but that was a real removal action, not cruise missiles at a few select targets.

 Is the BO encouraged attack on Syria intended to simply "police the world"? Use chem weapons NOW (post Saddam) and the US will unilaterally attack you? Does that work as an inhibitor?

Does that make us safer, less safe, or don't we care since our newfound "chemical morality" trumps issues of national interest?

But all these considerations are largely moot. BO certainly has the right to attack Syria as commander in chief. He himself affirmed the right in Libya. So what REALLY is a vote against his request? Or for it for that matter? It is some sort of Mime or Kabuki dance with potentially grave foreign policy repercussions.

It breaks new ground on amatuer, incompetent, incoherent foreign policy. It proves that the BO is the baddest example we have for a "president" to date. Not that I actually believe he cares. My belief is that he told us in "Dreams from my Father" that he is there to destroy the US as we know it, and again, he is doing one hell of a job!


'via Blog this'