« October 2008 | Main | December 2008 »

Scientists confirms WWII rumor.

Heres a riddle:

Hitler had only one.
Goering had two, but very small.
Himmler was somewhat similar.
And poor Goebbels had none at all.

What are we talking about? Click Here.

I cant help thinking that if his father had none that it would have saved us all a whole lot of bother.

Posted @ November 19, 2008 04:27 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Question of the Day - Lets talk bailouts

Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, California, West Virginia. These are all states in which Toyota manufactures cars in the United States.

And how are sales for Toyota this year? Down 23%. Toyota has already set up plans to cut production, which for everyone but GM/Ford/Chrysler is probably the first thing you would naturally do. Surely this slowdown at Toyota will impact the bottom line domestic US suppliers that have Toyota as a customer, right?

Question of the day: Given the information above, How willing would you be to giving Toyota some bailout money?

Here's a shocker for you, I'd be far more willing to give Toyota some money than I would to GM, and thats not just because I own a Toyota, its because I think they would invest the money better for a greater result for everyone involved. How do I know this for sure? Because they havent asked for it! And thats because they know the strings attached from Washington would keep them from ever being able to make enough money to pay back the loans. While GM has run to 'Big Mama Washington' for a big smothering hug, Toyota has concentrated on making products people want and when people dont want them, they stop making them.

Thats smart. That usually means its a good investment.

I'm not saying we should give Toyota money, I'm just saying that when people say "US Auto Manufacturing", I just dont know what that means. Is that the old companies in Detroit, or is that autos that are built in the US? Toyota is built here, Honda, Subaru, and Nissan, are they US Auto Manufacters? Why not? the CEO of Nissan isnt Japanese, he's Carlos Ghosn, a Brazilian Lebanese guy who used to work for a French Company. Technically, Nissan is half French now since the merger with Renault, yet no one thinks of Nissan as anything other than a Japanese company. This seems wrong to me.

When companies become multinational corporations which almost all of them are now, should we really refer to them after their originating country or does the ethnic background of the CEO matter? or is it what Stock Exchange they operate on that matters when we refer to a company by its 'country of origin'? In my view, GM is no more an 'American Company' than is Toyota. History says GM came from the United States, but it surely didn't stay there. If you were to give the GM shareholders a chance to vote on whether or not to continue US operations or just concentrate on China, and its my guess that most of their investors would just as soon jettison the US market in favor on China. Does that mean that GM would be a "Chinese company"? Just because a company has their headquarters is based here, doesnt really mean that much to me. Does anyone refer to Boeing as a 'Chicago company' just because they moved their HQ to Chicago from Seattle in a dispute of taxes? No. Boeing could move to Baja California, and it will still be thought of as "a Seattle company", but a sense of misplaced nostalgia for what it once was doesnt make it into one now.

A multinational company is just exactly that, so dont be so "unilateral" when you ask for taxpayer bailout money.

Summary: If GM wants more money then sell bonds and stock and maybe look into making a car that actually works after 5 years. Don't talk to congress or taxpayers because once you do, you will never get another buyer on the market again. People who say no one will buy a car from a bankrupt car company need to tell me why anyone would buy a car from a company so poorly run its only hope was to get money from Washington. I can respect bankruptcy as a business strategy because that is fundamentally what it is and what it is used for, but getting more goverment 'help' is almost always a really bad idea that never turns out well for the government, the taxpayers or the companies in trouble in the first place.

Posted @ November 19, 2008 01:47 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Copy Editor Humor

The punchline almost writes itself...

Posted @ November 19, 2008 09:01 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

How To Stop Piracy: A Primer

1. Stop paying ransom. If ships are captured, insurance and bond holders are to consider the ships sunk and the crew lost. International Banks that procure and trade in ransom funds shall be considered outlaw and their assets frozen. Countries that engage in Piracy shall be given the same consideration as those who harbor terrorists. IMF funds, international letters of credit and UN protection for nations that harbor pirates shall cease upon a UN determination of the support piracy. Nations that fail to secure their coastlines from piracy shall find their coastlines administered and controlled by the United Nations. This will mean that all customs and shipping for the offending country will be administered and controlled by the UN and order kept by the United States Navy and Coast Guard.

2. Kill the pirates. Sink their ships and boats, blockade their harbors. Take no prisoners. Ships at sea that are found without proper documentation and bills of lading and are found to have weapons and crews for the purposes of piracy shall be considered pirates by the Navy or Coast Guard that captures them and will be summarily executed. Hole their boats, destroy their piers and facilities. Leave no local support for people who commit piracy any more than you would for people who commit terrorism.

3. Shipping companies shall hire armed guards and all cargo ships at sea shall carry them. Armed Guards will be managed and supported by the insurance companys that indemnify the ship and the cargo. Ships that do not carry armed guards shall not be insured. Uninsured shipping will not be allowed into any western world harbor.

4. Hire mercenaries to operate "Q" Ships. These ships will act as attractive targets and placed into areas where pirates are known to attack with frequency. When the "Q" ship is attacked, bring all guns to bear. When pirates are captured, offer cash rewards to the Q ship crews for information recovered on the ports of origination for the pirates.

5. Acts of piracy shall be met with summary execution of the pirates by whomever captures them within 24 hours of capture.

6. Nations that are without a Navy or Coast Guard can issue official papers marking hired individuals as "Privateers" on which they can act by authority of the government in the place of Coast Guard and Customs officials. Privateers must be registered with the United Nations and undergo inspection along with being subject to international laws.

7 Individuals who are found to working in concert with pirates, such as crew members who inform on cargo shipments and their availability shall be given the same treatment as that given to captured pirates.

8. In certain strategic world locations, ships will be convoyed to ensure greatest level of protection to shipping.

Posted @ November 18, 2008 07:20 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Movie Alert - Decision Against Time (1957)

Decision Against Time, a 1957 Ealing Studios film. I managed to catch this last night after recording it from TCM. This is a fantastic movie on many levels but it catches my attention for one reason. No, its not just because there are aircraft in the film (a criteria that I often use to evaluate movies) its because the movie shows life from a perspective that is not often seen in film or literature.

This movie shows life from the perspective of a man. Sound silly to say such a thing, but its true. Most film and literature talks about life from the perspective of a woman or a mother. Rarely is there any examples of the view of life from the eyes of a father or husband. This is one very good solid example of that perspective.

Jack Hawkins plays a test pilot of a struggling post-war aircraft company. Jack is also struggling to provide for his family and is not able to afford buying a new home for his wife. He goes to work and is informed by the company CEO that unless they can sell the aircraft that Jack is testing that they will all be out of work within a month.

Jack then takes the aircraft for a test flight with the potential new customer for the aircraft. Naturally, something goes wrong on the aircraft, a fire breaks out in one of the engines and Jack is forced to make some very tough decisions. Should he save himself and bail out with the rest of the crew? or should he stay with the aircraft which would cause him to lose his life but might possibly allow the company to discover the nature of the problem with the aircraft and manage to stay in business afterwards. While this ocdcurs in the air, on the ground, the factory workers for the doomed aircraft company gaze skyward knowing that their fate is tied to the decisions of this one man. They want him to live, but they also want to be employed and working. They realize that they cant have both. They ponder their own humanity as Jack circles the airfield, burning off fuel. News reporters on the scene are told that unless there is a crash there is no story and with no story they wont get paid. Should they hope for a crash just to make a few dollars? or hope for the life of the man in the aircraft.

There is also a debate among the factory workers about whether or not to tell Jacks wife about the pending disaster. Shouldnt we tell her? How does that Help? Maybe she can talk to Jack, talk some sense into him. Its into this environment on the ground that Jacks wife finds that she has to deal with the fact that Jack has taken this very large, life threatening risk with his life and their family security.

She simply doesnt understand why he would do such a thing. Is this a macho thing? Why would he do it? All the other Pilots say they would never take such a risk.

Suffice to say, Jack explains it to her. Its a riveting scene that explains to many people the decisions that men and husbands often face in their lives that other people, particulary wives, simply dont understand.

"Lawrence of Arabia" fans will enjoy the work of Jack Hawkins( Col. Allenby in Lawrence) in this film as well as the actor Howard Marion-Crawford, who plays the reporter in this movie. In Lawrence, he plays the role of the British Military Doctor introduced in the initial scenes of the movie as "an admirer of Col. Lawrence" saying that "he never met the great man personally". It's only later in the film do you see that he did meet Lawrence and slapped him to the ground when he sees the appaling conditions of the hospital that he takes over from Lawrence, not realizing that the man he had slapped to the ground was in fact the same man he to which he would later offer high praise on the steps of St. Pauls Cathedral.

Posted @ November 18, 2008 09:13 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Well, He did say "Country First", didnt he?

A 'Random Thought' just popped out of my head as I saw the headline of President-elect Obama is meeting with McCain.

Remember that I have already speculated that McCain wont run for another term as Senator of Arizona. In short, he's finished with elected office but that doesnt mean that I think he's done serving the country.

Let me ask you, is now the time for McCain to become either Secretary of Defense or possibly the Secretary of State? Dont be so quick to dismiss it. If the President were to ask McCain to serve, I think he would take the job.

I dont think it will matter who is the President.

Posted @ November 17, 2008 09:17 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

I shouted out "Who killed the blogosphere" when after all it was you and me

Ah, It's first thing Monday morning and I'm already up one Stones reference. Let's see you top that Steve...

Nick Carr explains who it was who killed the blogosphere and most of you already know who it is. I know most of you are saying "Hey, I didnt even know it was sick!" but yeah, when you live in an era where everyone has a blog, then there is no blogosphere. See, while you were out working out linkage stats, someone came along and made the blogosphere irrelevant.

Good. Now we can all get back to talking about something besides politics on our fancy internet web page thingys.

Posted @ November 17, 2008 08:21 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Megan McArdle Explains it all for you

All the 'back and forth' that we had earlier this week had on this site over the bailout of GM can be distilled into short, sharp, clearly expressed genius from Megan McArdle.

My thoughts about her clarity on the subject? In a word - "Exactly".

Posted @ November 14, 2008 03:18 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

You know youre not supposed to take those ads seriously dont you?

I saw this ad on drudge a few minutes ago. You see these things all over the place and most of the time I dont notice them, but this one jumped out at me:

You know, I dont want to just right come out and say that I think that these people are lying about the weight loss this lady in the 'before' picture supposedly had under their plan, but I just dont think that the 'before and after' picture is the same person. I just have a hunch. I can't quite put my finger on why I feel this way, I just do.

Posted @ November 14, 2008 08:48 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

so what would it take to get me to bailout GM?

Ok, let's say we dont want to go to bankruptcy because that would poison the ability for GM to sell cars. Lets agree for the sake of argument that this is core of the case against GM using bankruptcy as a way to solve its problems. I dont agree, but let's do so for now so that I can illustrate a few things in the process.

The alternative to bankruptcy seems to be that we give GM more money, with fewer strings. This seems to be a genuinely bad idea.

Shareholders buy stock because they believe that the future price of the stock will increase. They believe this through a combination of their own prognostication methods and what is published for the shareholders by the company itself. Its in this way that a companys management is kept accountable. If they fail to meet their goals, the stock is sold ( sorry - dumped ) and a shareholder revolt occurs, resulting in the removal of the management team that failed to deliver. Thats how its supposed to work, and for the most part, it does.

So again the options on the table now are:

1) Bankruptcy.

or

2) To give GM management access to more money and undergo even less accountability than they currently receive from their large institutional investors.

So let's try a third option. Let's call it a "Reorganization" for the lack of a better word. It will work something like this:

A) Let's go ahead and give GM money for a "reorg" but in return, lets break the company up into smaller, more competitive units. In thend, there will be Three GM's, Let's say a separate company for Cars, Trucks and commercial vehicles and Defense. Since its not reasonable for GM to find a buyer for some of the more asinine and incompetant existing product lines, lets go ahead and fund the removal of these business units through a direct "buy out". For example, shut down Buick for lets say 20 billion. You name your business unit and we will agree to a fair price to help you (GM) shut it down. Sound fair?

B) Let's take the Pensions and bundle them into some sort of newly expanded Government Pension protection plan. Oh, and after this - NO MORE PENSION PLANS, its 401k, funded at 7%. Employees in GM/REORG manage their own retirement from here on out, no more of this "cradle to the grave" crap. Oh, and this applies to all employees, not just labor. Everyone sinks or everyone swims at GM/REORG.

C) Retiree Health Benefits. Ok, Let's get that off of GM's back and place the UAW retirees into Medicare. We fund Medicare for each of the GM Retirees added to the plan, thus ensuring that Medicare gets more money and the folks get some form of Health Care. But Frank, "Medicare sucks" you say. Well, ok, we can look at reform of Medicare at the same time makybe kill two birds with one stone. Oh, and dont lay any of that "This isnt what we agreed to in our contract with GM" because if you do that, we can just go ahead and go into bankruptcy and that pretty much puts the end to your contract, right? Consider yourself lucky that we are going this far.

D) Let's have a capital gains cut for any new investors of GM/REORG Stock. Investments in GM Reorg Stock that are kept over 10 years will be free of Capital Gains taxes, now how's that sound? That way the shareholders of GM/REORG can keep an eye on management for their investment and will have an interest in it doing well. Oh yeah, theres that whole, "Its not government money" thing, which naturally makes me happy.

E) Legislative Knot Cutting. Let's take a wholesale look at removing the barriers that keep GM/Ford/Chrysler from being competitive in the world marketplace and lets remove those barriers, ( costs nothing to do and keeps the legislature busy in the mean time, its a win-win). But Frank, wont that make the UAW mad? Look, if the UAW wants more "Auto Workers" in its union, they need to start figuring out how to make more "Autos" in the USA, its a symbiotic relationship between host and parasite and it never foes the parasite any good to kill the host.

That process starts here. Yes, UAW rank and file, you might have to move around a bit, but in the end there might just be more of you, which is good for you, good for me and dare I say it, good for the UAW and GM. PLEASE NOTE: I DID NOT SAY RAISE TRADE BARRIERS TO KEEP OUT JAPANESE CARS FROM THE US MARKET. What I said was, remove the barriers from GM that keep it from competiting on the world market.

Weird? Out of the box? Sure. Would it work? Well, Yes, I think most of these would work and more to the point they would work far better than just giving the current management team access to more cash to keep making the same mistakes they have always made. It would also make the US car industry more competitive and it would remove the knife from the US taxpayers next marked with the words "too big to fail". In my way of thinking, any company that says that they are too big to fail is an immediate candidate for being broken up as part of the agreement to a bailout. Sorry kids, you cant have it both ways.

So yeah, I can see helping GM, but I just dont think giving them a firehose of money to drink from is going to help them with the problems that they have. They need to be reorganized, so let's go do that.

Posted @ November 13, 2008 03:51 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

It just gives me the willies

There is nothing in the world that gives me the creeps more than when Conservatives use the word "fair".

Unless of course, when they use it more than once to make the same point.

Posted @ November 13, 2008 08:39 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

HMS Cumberland: 1 Somali Pirate Dhow - 0

Here's a Somali Pirate Dhow:

Wow. I havent seen anything as fearsome on the high seas since Gilligan shipped out with the Skipper for a three hour cruise.

And heres the HMS Cumberland:

And how did it all turn out? Well, for the Pirates, it didnt end like it does in the movies.
Snip:

"Pirates caught redhanded by one of Her Majesty’s warships after trying to hijack a cargo ship off Somalia made the grave mistake of opening fire on two Royal Navy assault craft packed with commandos armed with machineguns and SA80 rifles.

In the ensuing gunfight, two Somali pirates in a Yemeni-registered fishing dhow were killed, and a third pirate, believed to be a Yemeni, suffered injuries and subsequently died. It was the first time the Royal Navy had been engaged in a fatal shoot-out on the high seas in living memory."

You know, I've been on the "Pirates" ride at Disneyland more times than I can remember, but I would gladly go back every day if they added that little bit of action to the display. Hmmm, maybe if they rename it "Limeys of The Somali Coast"?

That aught to pack 'em in...

Posted @ November 12, 2008 03:14 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Question of the Day - Consumer Behavior

Let me get this straight:

- You won't but GM/Ford/Chrysler stock?
- You won't buy their cars?

But you want to see "The Government" give a big pile of your tax dollars to them?

Question of the Day:

A) Does it ever occur to you that when you are taxed, when the government confiscates your money that you earned for whatever you did to convert your own labor into cash, that this is where its going?

B) Oh, so you dont get taxed? Does it occur to you that what ever tax money there is that is confiscated from other people, that isnt going to fill potholes but instead to make cars that no one wants, built by a company that no one wants to own stock in?

Extra Credit: If Taxpayers are having their taxes used to fund corporate bailouts, then shouldnt taxpayers get stock certificates in the companies they bailed out? If I buy savings bonds, I get something I can redeem later, why not do something similar with the business bailouts?

Posted @ November 11, 2008 12:04 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

What is this I see?

The Brownshirts - 1933

The Brownshirts - 2008

Ah, the new age is here and examples of love and tolerance can be seen everywhere for all to see, like these:

300 protest outside Mormon Church, CHP closes Highway 13 ramps.

Prop 8 Protestors Spray Graffitti on Mormon Church in Orangevale.

Prop. 8 protesters target Mormon temple in Westwood

Mormon Missionaries Attacked By Mob, Stabbed.

76-year-old man and 77-year-old wife were physically assaulted by Prop 8 supporter.

Vandals attack homes owned by Prop 8 supporters.

I could go on for days with more examples of the peace, love and tolerance that flows from the new leaders of world 'love and tolerance'. How ironic that those who calmly lecture the rest of us for the acceptance of alternate lifestyles can so quickly revert to animalistic and decidedly undemocratic behavior in blatant attempt to bully their neighbors into submission and to attack their beliefs with violence. If this had been any other sort of sign you can imagine, whos intent it was to intimidate the people within the house for their beliefs, the reaction would have been quite different. Condemnation, arrest, disgust would be the reaction of the public at large, and it would be the correct reaction by all. And yet, because its directed towards Mormon, its met with titters and laughter by the at large public.

Somehow I feel like I've seen this show before and I didnt much like it last time.

No one should be made to live in fear. It does not change anything at all in the argument to change the sign from the word "BIGOT" to something else. Spend a few minutes yourself and replace the word "BIGOT" with any noun you wish to choose; try out a few 'colorful' ones just for fun. You see, The effect is the same. The righteousness of your argument does not undo the damage done to the the induvidual its being used against. Once called a "Bigot" there is no undoing it. You are, simply because someone else chooses to make you one.

That they would do this to a person at all is beyond disgust to me, but that they decide to take up this horror on this, the 170th anniversary of the issuance of the Mormon Extermination Order by the Govenor of Missouri and the 70th anniversary of Kristalnacht in Nazi Germany is a reminder of how thin the tissue is that holds our collective memory and its resulting morality together and how once its torn, there is no length that the minority will go to impress its will on the majority through acts of quiet terror.

This is a small warning to all of us who see it for what it is. If this sort of strong arm bullying of Mormons is allowed to go on as acceptable behaviour by society as a whole, if we allow people to fear for their lives and their property by quietly accepting this sort of terror as normal, If the targeting of individuals for expressing their votes is to be met with political terrorism, if people will start to fear for their jobs and their property because they speak their minds, then which of us will dare express ourselves when the firehose of leftwing 'thug politics' is turned on us?

The message here should be clear. This isnt about Mormons, Mormonism or their belief system, so dont start arguing theology with me as a way to justify the crimes of the left towards Mormons. Its about Democracy and your right to even have a voice at all. The Mormons are a minority in all but a few places in the world. Yet, they are an organization with billions of dollars and millions of members in their church and at their disposal.

If the thugs can take the right to vote from the Mormons through acts of brutality and everyone else turns a blind eye to it while its done, because, you know, "its just the Mormons", how long do you think you can stand up to them?

Be warned. Those who think I'm overreacting need to simply tell me how far should I let this sort of thuggery go on before I should get upset? Should I wait until Mormons are regularly kept from possible employment in certain companies and industries? Should I wait till playwrights are praised for their anti-mormon writings? Should I wait till Mormons are always portrayed in a negative light in film and literature? Should I wait until pre employment background checks reveal your political support and thus your religion to your employer? Should I wait until people and property are attacked and brought to public ridicule for their beliefs?

Oh. Most of those things have already happened, and not just back in 1933. Its happening now. Pehaps its too late already, eh?

So,how far? and for how long? You come tell me, oh lovers of "peace and tolerance", and when you do I've got some books I want you to read.

Posted @ November 09, 2008 01:58 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

P.J. O'Rourke Explains it all for you

In a piece titled "We Blew It" P.J. has met the enemy of conservativism, and turns out the enemy is us:

Snip:

"In how many ways did we fail conservatism? And who can count that high? Take just one example of our unconserved tendency to poke our noses into other people's business: abortion. Democracy--be it howsoever conservative--is a manifestation of the will of the people. We may argue with the people as a man may argue with his wife, but in the end we must submit to the fact of being married. Get a pro-life friend drunk to the truth-telling stage and ask him what happens if his 14-year-old gets knocked up. What if it's rape? Some people truly have the courage of their convictions. I don't know if I'm one of them. I might kill the baby.I will kill the boy.

The real message of the conservative pro-life position is that we're in favor of living. We consider people--with a few obvious exceptions--to be assets. Liberals consider people to be nuisances. People are always needing more government resources to feed, house, and clothe them and to pick up the trash around their FEMA trailers and to make sure their self-esteem is high enough to join community organizers lobbying for more government resources

End Snip.

In one single article, P.J. manages to distill the essential arguments into two basic pages of text. That's not half bad for a former National Lampoon writer.

P.J. is far more down in the dumps about our future as a country than I am. I'm still in a pretty good mood about our future and our chance to change things for the better, but then again I dont have Hemorrhoid Cancer like he does.

Posted @ November 09, 2008 01:32 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Question of the day - GM or Not GM

Question of the day -

"So why can't GM be allowed to go into bankruptcy?"

Seems to me that United Airlines and half a dozen other companies I can name have gone into bankruptcy without also going out of buisness. GM goes into bankruptcy it gets relief on some of its debt but gets "reorganized" which can't be a bad thing if you ask me.

Might it have a little something to do with the juicy union contracts that would become toast in bankruptcy court and thus the political drive to "do something"?

Having GM shed a dozen asinine contracts and unjustifiably expensive health and benefit plans would seem to me to be a good thing for everyone. I dont have a problem giving GM money, but like any investor I want to see the business plan that goes with it before the dollars cross my desk. So far the business plan seems to be to keep doing the same moronic things they have been doing only on a whole new class of investors dollars. Since when did working at GM become an entitlement?

Any Thoughts?

UPDATE:

Welcome Instapundit-eers, Vodka-teers, and the good folks from Powerline.

One other note: most of you seem to have missed the rather obvious connection between government intervention and poorly performing companies. There are lots of arguments about why GM must be bailed out by the US Taxpayer, but no one ever recognizes tht by doing so they ensure that GM becomes more deficient and incapable of competing in the marketplace. If the can't fail now, what makes you think they will be allowed to fail after sucking down a trillions of your tax dollars?

For Example:

We've all seen kids who still live at home when they are 30. The kid of kid whos parents give them an ample allowance and expect next to nothing of them in return. Thats GM in a nutshell. The 'Kato Kaelin' of manufacturing. Now, rather than go to college, or get a job, the no good layabout is about to invite his friends Ford and the Dodge Brothers over to watch a 'Twilight Zone Marathon' on the SciFi channel while they chug a few brewskis.

UPDATE II: The concensus amoungst the commentariat is that "no one would buy a car from a bankroupt company". Perhaps, but why would anyone buy a car from a car company that requires a bailout from the government? We bailed out Chrysler, and where are they today?

Fundamentally, the question to ask is how does the bailout make GM a better company? It doesnt and in my opinion, it can only do harm. You dont think so? Ask the workers at British Leyland.

If its really "for the workers" then give the money to the workers directly. For all the billions they want to pour into GM to 'save jobs for the workers', you could pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to each worker and tell them to go directly to retirement.

Workers dont want work, they want the money they get in exchange for working, or in som cases, pretending to work.

Posted @ November 08, 2008 01:06 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (36) | TrackBack (0)

Strategery

At this time, I wish to point out something that many people on the Republican side have yet to recognize and it needs to be said early and often lest we fall into a very serious mistake.

Pay attention folks - President Obama is off-limits. He is not the new 'Bill Clinton'. Unlike Bill Clinton or George Bush he isnt just the president, he's a symbol. Attacking Obama like he was the new Clinton will have the same effect as attacking Ronald Reagan, his supporters wont be swayed and you will look small as a result.

'President Obama' is a symbol of the country, he's like a walking flag. However, this can work out to our advantage and here's why - Here's a riddle: What has two heads, no brain and an approval rating of 9%?

Answer: The Democratic Congress.

Thats where you will find a target rich environment on which to launch your opposition. If you run on a ticket of change, you have to deliver and the change you bring had better be demonstrably better than what people expected. Chances are extremely likely that they have significantly overpromised and are likely to underdeliver on those promises before the next election. Republicans should exploit this to the highest degree.

Short version: Ignore Obama, concentrate on the Democratic Congress. Separate the two wherever and whenever possible.

Let me also bring the following list into the game:

Christopher Dodd of Connecticut
Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas
Barbara Boxer of California
Ken Salazar of Colorado
Daniel Inouye of Hawaii
Evan Bayh of Indiana
Barbara Mikulski of Maryland
Harry Reid of Nevada
Chuck Schumer of New York
Byron Dorgan of North Dakota
Ron Wyden of Oregon
Patrick Leahy of Vermont
Patty Murray of Washington
Russ Feingold of Wisconsin

Is the Senate Majority leader ever vulnerable? Go ask Tom Daschle.
There are targets on this list that we need to get to work on right now.

UPDATE: Oh, forgot to mention that Bob Byrd has stepped aside from his chairman seat. He's 91. Oh, and he's from West Virginia. Let's see, how did West Virginia vote this time? Red State with an Open Senate Seat. Go For It...

UPDATE II: Betcha McCain doesnt run in 2010. I dont think he will resign, so theres a bit of work to be done there. And I betcha neither does Lieberman, so theres some work to to there too. And I'll bet Ah-nold runs in 2010 for Boxers Seat, and wins!

Posted @ November 07, 2008 09:18 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Channeling my inner Emma Goldman

Dear Little-Boys-and-Girls-formerly-of-the-McCain-Campaign-who-now-find-yourselves-unemployed-and-now-thanks-to-your-antics-are-very-possibly-unemployable.

Ahem.

I just want to give you something to think about as you go about making Sarah Palin into a scapegoat for your failures:

"If you dont have room for Govenor Sarah Palin in your party, then you dont have room in your party for me"**

You ever look at the Reagan/Mondale electoral map of 1984? You folks wanna see that map reversed, with the next Republican getting his home state and nothing else? Then keep talkin' trash about the one thing in your campaign that actually worked - Sarah Palin. You jackasses think that Govenor Palin was all about "getting the PUMA's", well it wasnt. It was about getting the Republican base behind McCain. If Sarah Palin had been at the top of this ticket, I dare say we would have done better and I say this as someone who likes McCain. If Sarah Palin had not been on the ticket, just exactly who do you think would have showed up for McCain? If Sarah Palin was so bad, then why did McCain take her everywhere? Well thats easy because everywhere she went, thousands of people showed up. That didnt happen with McCain, unless of course, people heard that Sarah Palin was going to be there with him.

Now clear out your desk, turn in your keys and go back to getting your masters degrees in Poli-Sci at some Ivy League sausage grinder.

**: Emma Goldman - A left wing agitator from the last century who once said "If I cant dance, I dont want to be in your revolution".

UPDATE: Simple, direct and to the point. It expresses my feelings exactly. .

Posted @ November 06, 2008 02:19 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Back to basics

I'll have more to say on this later, but for right now, let's try to distill our core arguments in small, bite-sized sentences that people of all education levels can understand.

Here's my first take:

"Its Your Money".

It's not "government money" its not "fairness" to have someone else decide to take it away from you, it is simply your money. You should be left to spend it in any fashion you see fit for whatever reasons you wish.

This is the essence of the concept of "pursuit of happiness" which as I understand it, is a phrase that can be found in some obscure written documents that date from the formation of the country. "Fairness" can be best defined as those policies that result in you keeping more of your own money for you to spend as you see fit.

There is nothing fair to be found in simple confiscation.

Posted @ November 06, 2008 11:11 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Im Chris from Shamwow!

Hey Chris, I'd check your ratings on your current gig before you sign on for a bigger mission. MSNBC could make more money with your timeslot by just giving it to "vince from shamwow".

Posted @ November 06, 2008 10:55 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Channelling my inner Mencken

Just repeating over here something that I just said over at Steves Place:

Channelling my 'inner Mencken' this morning, I found myself saying:

“A new President has been elected. Well that aught to teach him…”

The Office of the Presidency is a cruel inhumane joke that we invented to trap our most agressive alpha males. They get attracted to the scent of power, and the find themselves trapped in the steel jaws of a governmental system thats designed on purpose to not work.

That's why everyone comes into the office of the President loks like a bright shiny penny and leaves the office looking like a bag of freshly hammered dog crap.

I almost feel sorry for him. Almost.

Oh, and my mood today? I'm actually feeling pretty good! I'll tell you why later...

Posted @ November 05, 2008 10:33 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Congratulations President Obama

No sour grapes here. I think it was good race by all parties. I doesnt look to me like its going to be a landslide, but it doesnt have to be. I think McCain has made a solid run against overwhelming odds. I see no shame in that, he was not "Dole 2.0". I think we need to recognize that Barack Obama is the President. I would hope that at some point he thanks the one man who most made it possible:

George W. Bush.

By effectively managing the 'war on terror' to the point that it no longer exists as a factor in elections, it was President Bush who provided the conditions that lead to the rise of Barack Obama. The last time we saw something like this was when George H.W. Bush finished the cold war and was thanked for his efforts by the electorate by being instantly replaced by Gov. Bill Clinton, all for the crime of not knowing what a checkout scanner was. Barack Obama survived the primaries and this election because the electorate doesnt see warfare as a likely possibility in the next 4 years. That can only be because the last eight years were successful and one man - literally one man, and thats because of his leadership in the face of horrible advice and military intelligence data, used his character to do the right thing to defend this country. He should be thanked for that effort and I hope in his graciousness of victory, the new President takes the time to thank him for that.

As I said earlier, if Barack Obama can run the country as well as he ran his campaign, we all should do very well.

Let us all hope and pray for the new President in the execution of his duties. Oh, and here's to the end of 'Bush Derangement Syndrome'. And kids, let's not go and replace it with Obama-mania, one way or the other,ok? He's a man, no more, no less. I hope he remembers that fact as well as you.

There will be plenty of time later for "whats next" but let's all take a moment and recognize what happened here tonight. I'm 47, just like the new President and I have to say that weve seen alot happen in our lifetimes. When I was a kid back in the 1960's, it was a big deal when a black person had their own prime time TV show where they werent playing a maid or a clown of some sort. It was a big deal when a black man was promoted to be on the Thunderbirds Air Demonstration Team, it was a big deal when a black man became an Astronaut. In my lifetime, it was once a scandal for black men to marry white women and in some places it was outright illegal. All of that happened in our lifetime and I'm glad its no longer weird or odd to see black folks do any damn thing they want to for no other reason than they can and marry whomever they please. I no longer live in an age where its assumed that they arent up for the job just because of the color of their skin.

And now we have a President with the name Barack Obama who's father was from Kenya.

Is this a great country or what?

And all you anti-american europeans who cant wait to find something to hate about America and Americans, I have just one question for you:

"Where's all your black candidates, hmmmm?"

You folks in the UK can come talk to me about "racist Americans" when you get a Prime Minister whos something more than opaque.

Posted @ November 04, 2008 06:27 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

caught in passing

Hallway conversation...

She: "You dont really think that McCain will win Pennsylvania do you?"

Me: "No, but I'll bet Palin does"

Heh.

Posted @ November 04, 2008 12:09 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

my only prediction for the day, and its a sad one

I was really hoping against hope that we would see a clear result today.

That hope has now been dashed:

"Denver Election Commission spokesman Alton Dillard says the "days of having your close to final results by 10 p.m. are over." He says officials have tried to make it clear from early on that workers will still be counting ballots into Wednesday, and that still holds true."

So its time to explode a myth. Mail in ballots are not counted until after the election polls have closed. Most elections, the mail in ballots arent even counted and one of the two candidates has to sue the election board to get a count. However, due to the closeness of this election, they will almost certainly have to count them to get a result. Sadly,that will take time. more time than they can get in a single day. This is not limited to Colorado, any state with large amounts of mail in voting will suffer from this phenomenon.

The good news is that this is yet another sign that its a close election. The bad news is that we gotta put up with this crap for a few more days.

Posted @ November 04, 2008 10:04 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1)

Hawaii Good Luck Symbol makes a sudden comeback

Obama expresses his true feelings.

Look you hatemongers, thats not a "middle finger", thats a Hawaiian "Good Luck" symbol. Obamas from Hawaii, he wants to be your friend, thats all it is. Just relax, ok? You haters out there really need to get a life...

Heck, here's a picture of some good old Navy guys giving the same symbol:

and wouldnt you know that it was published in Time Magazine in 1968, so how could it be so rude as you think it is? See, Its "Good Old Navy" guys, just like John McCain is a good old Navy Guy, and they are giving what you think is an insult to their gracious hosts, the Peoples Democratic Republic of Korea. Now who would give an insult to their hosts? I mean what kind of people do you think good old Navy guys are anyway? Its a friendly gesture ok? Look, here's another picture of the same crew:

Just look at their faces, do you see any angry haters in there? No no I dont either.

If you are being critical of Barack Obama for using this symbol of friendship then you are being critical of the crew of the USS Pueblo and you know what that makes you, right? That's right, youre unpatriotic. So, you just watch yourself, OK comrade?

Posted @ November 03, 2008 01:19 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

An obscure movie reference which serves as my light for the day

Steve McQueen - The Great Escape

Camp Commander: (To Steve)Cooler. 14 days.
Steve: Walking away, turns and says - "Oh, ah, you'll still be here when I get out, right?
Camp Commander: Cooler. 30 Days.
Steve: Turns, walks towards the cooler. Head held high. smirks and shakes head.

That's precisely how I feel today.

I'm feeling pretty positive today and upbeat. I spend most of the day hummming the Lee Greenwood song "I'm proud to be an American", which honestly if there was any justice in the world would be the national anthem. I feel good, I'm walking with my head held high.

I'm so sorry to tell you this, you leftists out there, but if my party doesnt win, it wont mean that people like me will suddenly "shut up and go away". We might have to go to "the cooler" for a little while, but all you leftists will still be here when we get out. You are not going anywhere anytime soon.

The things I believe in might be beaten in this election, and in a way that means I will be beaten, but I wont be defeated. Its going to take something a little more powerful than what you guys have to do that.

I dont have a McCain sign in front of my house but I do have an American Flag, just so you know whos side I'm on.

I dare you to come take it down.

...-

Posted @ November 03, 2008 11:24 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)