I'm on Twitter! More Must Reads

    follow me on Twitter

    Wednesday, December 30, 2009

    The Problem with PresBO's Bomber Response

    Rob provides some perspective on Obama's timing on his public statement to W's on the Shoe Bomber. He has a point on the timing of publicly addressing it. (original Politico article).

    I have some further comments of my own (my own, not lifted directly from a sheep herding right-wing web site):

    I don't find the 72 hours a real problem. People who think the President ever stops working are idiots. I realize the "Bush took more vacations than anyone else, ever" meme is very popular with the Olbermann crowd, but, let's concede that the apparatus of government follows the President everywhere.

    I can't speak for Representatives Hoekstra and Pete "I love the cameras as much as Chuck Schumer" King, but, I don't see anything wrong with a press release stating that the President is being briefed regularly, etc., then sometime later the POTUS giving a short statement, as Obama did here.

    My problems with Obama's response to this are: 
    1. He was briefed at noon Hawaii time. That was 3 hours after the incident occurred. Why so long?
    2. The words themselves, and
    3. A little thing I didn't think about - the lack of a tie.  
    On the actual words, I found his "alleged" language and all the law enforcement crap to be emblematic of this administration and their approach to the GWOT. I wonder how long it will be until the DoJ files an Amicus brief with the bomber over the loss of his gonads due to the quick actions of that Dutch passenger? This administration treats these acts as law enforcement matters. Period. They are acts of War. This guy should have been taken into custody by the military, shipped to the closest military hospital, treated, and then interrogated, as he was being detained as an illegal combatant, destines for..........Gitmo. But, I digress.

    The lack of a tie was a conscious decision on someone's part. I guess the impression was meant to be sent that Obama was rushing away from his vacation to make this statement and we were supposed to be impressed by this (and by his quick return to the golf course). I didn't really pay it much attention at the time, but, I like my presidents to have ties on when addressing the nation, unless they are literally doing it from the golf course.  

    Would Ronald Reagan have addressed the nation without a tie? No.  

    In general on the terror war, Obama has a credibility gap, and appearing blase' or disinterested, does nothing to help that.

    Trotting his incompetent DHS Secretary (Janet Incompetano) out to say, in Animal House fashion, "All is well!" further lampoons this administration.

    You can opine about the good old Bush days all you want, but, guess what, you bought it, you own it now.

    What? Me Veto? Obama breaks yet another promise...

    Back in August, the Commander-in-chief told the VFW:

    "If a project doesn't support our troops, we will not fund it. If a system doesn't perform, we will terminate it. And if Congress sends me a defense bill loaded with that kind of pork, I will veto it."

    This week, the Earmarker-in-Chief decided to blow that popsicle stand and broke his promise as he signed into law the 2010 Defense Appropriations Bill .  The price tag: $636 billion of appropriations and $4.2 billion of pork.

    Worthwhile projects in the defense appropriation?
    • $5 million for a visitors center in San Francisco
    • $23 million for indigent health care in Hawaii
    • $18 million for the Edward Kennedy Policy Institute in Massachusetts
    • $1.6 million to computerize hospital records in Oakland
    • $47 million for anti-drug training centers around the country
    • $20 million for the World War II Museum in Louisiana
    • $3.9 million grant to develop an energy-efficient solar film for buildings
    • $800,000 for minority prostate cancer research
    • $3.6 million for marijuana eradication in Kentucky
    • $2.4 million for handicap access and a sprinkler system at a community club in New York
    While Mary "Name Your Price" Landrieu and John "Effing" Kerry boasted of their earmarks, Congress cut $300 million from a successful counterinsurgency program used by Army field commanders.

    Among actual military appropriations that the services did not ask for:
    • 2 destroyers the Navy doesn't want
    • 10 C-17's the Air Force doesn't need
    • Development of a new jet engine that no one cares about
    This is what "change" is all about.  Seems the usual business is what we're getting.

    Monday, December 28, 2009

    Krauthammer Rips Obama’s “Flaccid, Meaningless” Words On Iranian Freedom Protests (Video)

    From Gateway Pundit:
    Krauthammer Rips Obama’s “Flaccid, Meaningless” Words On Iranian Freedom Protests (Video):

    "This is a moment in history and he’s missing it.”

    On Special Report tonight Charles Krauthammer ripped President Obama for his “flaccid, meaningless” words on the Iranian freedom protests.

    Krauthammer: “The regime is weakening. This is a hinge in history. Everything in the region with change if the regime is changed. Obama ought to be strong out there in saying it’s an illigitimate government; we stand shoulder to shoulder with the people in the street. When he talks about diplomacy he should be urging our Western allies to that have relations to cut them off. He ought to be going into the UN every forum denouncing it. This is a moment in history and he’s missing it.“

    Another Black Conservative Bashes Moron Janet Napaolitano

    This guy is quickly turning into one of my favorite bloggers. From Another Black Conservative, Napolitano: “The system worked”. WTF?: "

    "For Napolitano stopping terrorism isn’t at Homeland Security issue, it is more a matter for criminal justice. Well, if that is the case what the hell do we need Homeland Security for? The FBI, CIA, local police and fire can do the job without her.

    "Early in this blog I labeled Napolitano a clown. Michelle Malkin and Pundit and Pundette appears to agree with me. Jonas Goldberg at the National Review is suggesting Napolitano be fired and I could not agree more."

    Thursday, December 24, 2009

    Merry Christmas!

    To both my readers (you know who you are!), I want to say Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

    I know 2009 has been a tough year for many, but, remember, we're Americans.

    Thanks for reading!


    Wednesday, December 23, 2009

    Economy Re-Tanking. Thanks Dems.

    Back on December 20th, a fellow sub-blogger posted about how the "recovery" is just around the corner and how the Right would ignore it.

    Among his proof, he cited:
    • Foreclosure filings falling 8% in Novermber
    • Slowing unemployment increases
    • GDP improvement
    • Narrowing Trade deficit
    • Stock market rising
    Just this week, we have these new numbers:
    • November new home sales sank an "unexpected" 11%.  Seems these days there's a lot of "unexpected" bad news in the Obamedia.  Existing homes sales were up, though. 
    • Even those foreclosure numbers were qualified.  Much credit was given to government programs that will eventually run out.  Still, not foreclosing is a good thing.
    • That "GDP" improvement was revised downward from the original 2.8% to 2.2%, with 1.45% of that attributable to Cash for Clunkers.  So, without the artificial CARS program, growth was 0.75%.  It's growth, but it's rotten growth..
    • Since that December 10th post, the latest jobs figure showed new jobless claims still growing faster than expected.
    • Not sure where Rob gets his trade deficit numbers.  In Q3, the US trade deficit rose by $16.2B.  Almost a 20% increase.That's actually taken as a good sign - that more Americans are buying foreign products.  It can also reflect fluctuations in the value of the dollar.  The dollar has generally been tanking for the last year. 
    • The stock market.  Hard to understand the market except in light of the fact that it precipitously crashed and is slowly getting back to its correct level.  I will also add that it was way overvalued at 14,000 and due a crash, so a recovery is not to be unexpected.  I would posit that there is relative safety in the established companies that are traded on the Dow and NASDAQ (to a lesser extent).  These companies will mostly benefit from the Fascist policies of the Obama administration, as opposed to small businesses, who will suffer and I think the market understands this.
    • Comsumer Sales - this is good news - consumer spending is up significantly.
    So, the economy is a mixed bag. The economy is also responsive to things other than fiscal policy.  So, it's not ALL about Obama, though he certainly has much influence, though barring absolute major policy initiatives (like health care and cofiscatory tax rates), there may not be that much he can do besides tinker.  it is a long held belief that the Fed via monetary policy, wields a much larger stick, and, of course, the participants in the economy asolutely determine its direction.

    Right now, we seem to be enjoying decent consumer spending, though not on the big ticket items (cars, homes) that are going to sustain any recovery.  Unemployment remains way too high with no real decreases in sight.  Deficits threaten to force the Fed to launch more money into the economy to increase the money supply and use inflation to pay off debt.  The massive regulation (at the least) or complete takeover (at the worst) of the 1/6 of the economy that is health care is not going to help, especially funded as it is by increased taxes and a reduction in doctor payments for Medicare patients (a reduction that will not happen, adding some $500B to the deficit over time.

    Cap and tax is, fortunately, most likely dead, so that won't drag the economy down.  But, the EPA's decision to treat CO2 like a pollutant may do the same thing.

    So, the administration is taking bold steps. Bold steps to throttle a fragile economy.  People have a right to be scared and apprehensive, and until the people see the light at the end of the tunnel and are willing to become entrepreneurs again, the turnaround won't happen, or, we're in for another lost decade, just like the Japanese are suffering through.

    The answer is something completely different.

    Sunday, December 20, 2009

    Vietnam and their deal with the Russians...

    The Vietnamese, concerned about China's growing navy and amidst tensions over the Spratley and Paracel archipelego, have agreed with the Russians  (I think this is the best link for info I have found, despite the "Kilo" class submarine misidentified in their photos) to buy 6 Kilo class subs and some aircraft.

    What does this mean for us?

    As we cultivate our relationship with the Indians, and affirm it with the Japanese, we need to also be looking at other regional powers to counter the Chinese.

    Hopefully, the Obama administration has some adults in the State and Defense departments who can see past the fact that China is bankrolling the American Left's Spending Spree, and we will act with something other than complete deference and kow-towing to the Chinese.

    We shall see.

    Economic Growth under O: Will be Anemic, Weak, and Lame...

    Last week, some actual decent economic news came out and fellow sub-blogger, and resident O-apologist, Rob, put a short post out on how the Right would never give the Big O credit for anything.  

    Well, I don't really think O deserves any credit, since his policies are all geared towards achieving no actual economic growth, and are designed only to encourage more statism, but, I will give the American people some credit. I think it's worthy of a cross posting:

    There is no doubt that eventually, the American, and World economies, will recover. And these items are all good signs. Of course, last week's announcement of a greater than expected additional 475,000 new jobs lost, doesn't point to much of a jobs recovery. Furthermore, experience and History are not on Obama's side. Expect a very weak recovery, and unemployment may slide slowly back to 8-9%. I doubt we'll see much better than that. With the passage of health care "reform", and the eventual promised elimination of the top end of the Bush Tax Cuts, and should cap-and-tax pass, we will have plenty of new tax and fee burdens on the American economy. The business cycle is controlled by much more than the president's fiscal policies. The Fed is doing all it can to pump money into the economy (which will ultimately lead to inflationary pressures), while the President seems intent on taking it out again. That could be a vicious inflationary cycle. What the country needs, is a little less government, and a little more entrepreneurship. But, this administration has decided to side with corporatists and the big players in the corporate world, and small businesses be damned. So, while Obama himself and Pelosi and Reid certainly lean socialist, the actual governing model they follow is that of Mussolini's Italy.

    Saturday, December 19, 2009

    Steyn, Hoaxenhagen. Read...

    It is not possible to read a Mark Steyn column without a couple of gems that you should use on your own.  Today, my favorite Canadian riffs on the results of the Hoaxenhagen conference, and you should read the whole thing.


    • "The City of Copenhagen distributed cards to every hotel room showing a lady of the evening at a seedy street corner over the slogan 'BE SUSTAINABLE: Don’t Buy Sex.'  'Be sustainable'? Prostitution happens to be legal in Copenhagen, and the “sex workers” were understandably peeved at being lumped into the same category of planet-wreckers as Big Oil, car manufacturers, travel agents, and other notorious pariahs. So Big Sex decided they weren’t going to take it lying down"
    • "Even making allowances for the stupidity of youthful idealism, the protesters in the streets of Copenhagen seem especially obtuse. Far from sticking it to the Man, they’re cheerleading for the biggest Man of all: They’re supporting a new globalized feudalism in which Prince Charles, Prince Al, Prince Rajendra, and others 'very high up in climate change' jet around the world at public expense telling the rest of us we need to stay put."

    ESPN: No More Green Propoganda

    Joe the Plumber is against ESPN's "Green Games" and since he took the time to actually compose a post and give you something to do, I will pass it along in its entirety.  Let me note - I cancelled my subscription to Sports Illustrated when they ventured into the realm of "client science" and decided to basically take Al Gore down their throat.

    I probably can't live without ESPN, but, Rupert Murdoch, are you listening???

    Anyway, here's from "Our Country Deserves Better" and Joe the Plumber:

    Today ESPN broadcast the "Green Game" a college basketball game featuring two of the best men's college basketball teams:  Kansas and University of Michigan.
    Friends, the broadcast was shameful.  Throughout the entire game the announcers, ESPN crew and college officials were focused on trying to shove down the viewers throats the hoax of climate change, featuring propaganda footage and biased commentary from the sports announcers declaring the need for Americans to reduce carbon emissions or risk devastation to the environment.

    The broadcast took place the week that the Copenhagen Climate Summit is taking place - yet another propaganda-driven effort to impose socialistic government regulations and government-control on the economy (and on the actions of individuals) and using the hysteria of climate devastation as the means to advance their propaganda.

    We call on ESPN to issue an apology for neglecting their responsibilities as a sports broadcaster and instead entering the territory of advancing propaganda on supposed climate change and to never again broadcast a "Green Game" or any other similar propaganda.

    We need to speak out and have the voice of consumers who don't buy into this junk science to be heard.  We have obtained the email addresses of 3 of ESPN's highest ranking executives.  We need you to contact them ASAP and register your protest for their shameful climate-change propaganda:

    Vice president: rick.alessandri@espn.com
    Programming Senior VP: Len.Deluca@espn.com

    And next we need you to sign the petition protesting ESPN for engaging in climate change propaganda.  We also need you to send this link on to dozens of other friends to get them to sign and share it with others as well: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/shameonespn/

    Plugged in appliances draining energy...puhhhllleeeeze

    Forced to suffer through the end of the "Green Game" here on ESPN, I learned all about the need to keep my hair dryer unplugged to save a bunch of energy (please, a hair dryer?).  Who has these fancy hair dryers that are constantly draining power???  Seriously.

    For those of you who want to save a few bucks a year, feel free to go around disconnecting your VCR's, satellite receivers, cell phone chargers, whatever.  Better yet, switch all your outlets to make it easy for you.

    Want to really save some money, replace all your windows with modern double pane, gas-filled ones, and have some ridge vents installed on your roof.  If you want a really cheap way to save big bucks, buy a programmable thermostat for $25 and set it up to turn the heat down at night and when you're not at home.  Close your fireplace flue.

    Go around turning off appliances, if you want.  But, if you're doing that and $300/month of heat is going out your windows and roof, you're an idiot, and don't call yourself an environmentalist.  Call yourself cheap, because that's what you are.

    Anoither Victim of ClimateHoaxsters: Wikipedia

    Over on Heliogenic Climate Change, the authors reveal how the ClimateGate emails show that the fraudsters were also erasing the evidence of inconvenient truths about the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warming Period on Wikipedia.

    There's a reason your kids teachers warn against using Wikipedia as a source - but, I bet most of these teachers would approve in this case.

    Full text of the post below:

    Wikipedia is controlled by RealClimate: "'How Wikipedia’s green doctor rewrote 5,428 climate articles

    The Climategate Emails reveal something else, too: the enlistment of the most widely read source of information in the world — Wikipedia — in the wholesale rewriting of this history. ...

    One person in the nine-member Realclimate.org team — U.K. scientist and Green Party activist William Connolley — would take on particularly crucial duties.

    Connolley took control of all things climate in the most used information source the world has ever known – Wikipedia. Starting in February 2003, just when opposition to the claims of the band members were beginning to gel, Connolley set to work on the Wikipedia site. He rewrote Wikipedia’s articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, on global cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug.11, the Medieval Warm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the politics of global warming and on the scientists who were skeptical of the band. Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer, two of the world’s most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by others that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period.

    All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn’t like the subject of a certain article, he removed it — more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred — over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley’s global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia’s blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.

    The Medieval Warm Period disappeared, as did criticism of the global warming orthodoxy. With the release of the Climategate Emails, the disappearing trick has been exposed. The glorious Medieval Warm Period will remain in the history books, perhaps with an asterisk to describe how a band of zealots once tried to make it disappear.' 'Wikipedia’s climate doctor' prior posts here"

    Jay to ESPN: Shut up and call the games

    So, I flip over to ESPN to watch the Michigan-Kansas basketball game, and I find we're being lectured about the environment and all we need to do to protect it (I suppose this has a tie-in to the conference over in Copenhoaxen).

    Apparently, this is ESPN's "green" game.  Other than the on-air moralizing (announcers arriving in hybrids, they probably turned the temperature in the stadium down to 68, etc), there doesn't appear to be much on ESPN's web site, other than to call this "The Green Game."

    My advice to ESPN - shut up and call the game.

    Because of this, I won't be watching some game I really don't care about anyway.  It's Antiques Roadshow for me, baby!

    Saturday, December 12, 2009

    Legacy Media deserves no viewers...or CBS News still sucks...

    Granted, Saturday is probably the day the least people watch any form of network news, but, after the Army/Navy game (won by Navy 17-3!!), I lingered on CBS News for a while, and in only 10 short minutes, CBS had shown two "stories" on issues where they decided to slant the coverage as far Left as possible.

    In the wake of the capture of 5 Muslim-American students seeking to join jihadists in Pakistan, the first, they lamented the fact that terrorism is becoming increasingly an "American" problem (i.e. Muslims in American are being radicalized).  While CBS mentioned the mosques in Virginia that these students and Fort Hood scumbag Islamofascist Nidal Hassan frequented, they then used the Council on Islamic/American Relations (CAIR) as their source for a bunch of hooey about increased attacks on Muslims in the States, and on increased discrimination against Muslims worldwide.  CBS News then went on to portray CAIR as some kind of moderate organization, mentioning in passing the accusations that it is a front group for Islamoterrorists, bent on the destruction of the United States from within.

    I guess as these news organizations sink to nothingness, they don't care if they take the rest of the country with  them when we're all practicing Sharia law.

    In the second story, CBS blatantly focused on the "protestors" at the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, or, the Big Lie Show.  I thought they might focus on those protesting the use of faked data and intimidation tactics by scientists to support Anthropogenic (Man-caused) Global Warming (AGW), but, nooooooooooooooooooooo, they chose instead to waste air time on those protesting to get an agreement ("any agreement") on climate change.

    I guess if Bishop Desmund ("Don't Mess With My") Tutu is there, it must be a cause celebre amongst the network's Saturday news teams.

    With reports like these, on two issues where one means the death of Western Civilization through violent jihad, and the other means the death of Western Civilization through the slow bleeding of our economies, CBS comes down firmly on the side of the Leftists.

    Do you people need anything more to convince you that the Legacy Media cares not about this country????



    From Erick Erickson at Redstate (and lately on TV). This is critically important and you need to pass to your GOP senators, that we expect a fight. Republished in its entirety.

    Fight.: "

    “If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”— Winston Church

    The Founding Fathers created a Republic, but 60 Senators are poised to take it away. With the pending disaster of the passage in the Senate of a bill nationalizing one sixth of the U.S. economy and our entire healthcare system at a cost of over $2.5 trillion, we are faced with a crucial question: are the Republican senators using every means at their disposal to stop this looming, tyrannical abuse of power? Unfortunately, the answer appears to be “no.”

    The Senate, unlike the House of Representatives, has parliamentary rules and procedures that give the minority the ability to stall legislation. In fact, unlike the House, the minority have the ability to virtually paralyze the Senate. Doing so is not something we would want or expect for every bad bill that comes through Congress, but the proposed healthcare legislation is probably the worst piece of legislation ever considered by the United States Congress. It is the most intrusive, most damaging, most costly, most dangerous bill to the economic and personal freedom and liberty of individual Americans that Congress has ever considered. If there is any bill that deserves being stopped by shutting down the Senate, it is this one.

    There are a whole series of parliamentary maneuvers that could be used by Republican senators to stop this bill. There is a hard backstop to the current process (Christmas). The Republicans’ goal should be to prevent Reid from passing the bill before that time. If he goes past Christmas and is forced to adjourn or recess, the momentum will shift in favor of those opposing the bill.

    How could this be done?

    To start with, they should stop constantly agreeing to “unanimous consent” requests from the Democrats. Senate Republicans, to date, have allowed Democrats, by unanimous consent, to process 10 amendments. The amendments that have been accepted – Democrat amendments – did not make the over 2000-page atrocity any better. The Republican strategy of trying to pass their own “message” amendments carries no message unless you consider “no strategy to kill the bill” a message. There are no amendments that could possibly make this bill a palatable piece of legislation – and any amendments the Republicans get passed that supposedly make the bill “better” may just make it easier for the Democrats to get final passage. If the Republicans want the news media to cover what they are doing to educate the American people even further about the atrociousness of this bill, they have to create drama on the floor of the Senate. And the only way to do that is through an all-out fight with no holds barred. They need to look like Braveheart, fighting to the end to save freedom. Because, in fact, it is our very freedom and liberty that is at stake.

    The most powerful words in the Senate are “I object.” Senate Republicans should have been shouting those two words on the Senate floor early and often from the moment this bill was considered, instead of the complete silence we have heard – other than to constantly agree to conduct business through unanimous consent. Here are just a few ways those words can (and should) be used in a very effective way:

    The rules of the Senate require that a quorum be present to transact business. A quorum is 51 Senators. In most instances, outside of roll call votes, there are no more than 4 Senators on the Senate floor. If a Republican Senator suggested the absence of a quorum, Democrats could not transact business on the bill. It is a common courtesy to allow the quorum call to be dispensed with, without requiring 51 members to show up on the Senate floor (to get 51 Senators to appear without a roll call vote is very time consuming). When the Democrats ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with, the Republican should immediately shout “I object.”

    In 1988, when the Democrats were attempting to pass campaign finance reform, and Republicans refused to help them make a quorum, it took 53 hours for the quorum call to be dispensed with. If at any moment at least 50 Democrats are not on the floor, a Republican Senator could again suggest the absence of a quorum and start the process over again, causing huge delays in the legislative process being able to move forward.

    No amendment can automatically or without substantial delay receive a roll call vote without every member of the Senate agreeing. Again, the Senate generally operates on collegial courtesy, but a $2.5 trillion courtesy is too much. Once an amendment is pending, it only takes one Senator to step in front of this freight train. If a Senator objects to ending debate on the amendment or having the amendment set aside, the majority must file cloture on the amendment. First cloture has to ripen and it cannot ripen until the next day’s session of the Senate, so that kills a day of the majority’s time. Assuming 60 Senators vote in favor of ending debate, the Senate is then required to spend 30 hours of its session time before voting on final passage for the amendment. Suffice it to say, if the Republicans had continuously objected from the start, the ten amendments they allowed the majority to process would have taken more days than Harry Reid has on the Senate calendar.

    Senators have an obligation to protect the Constitution and the budget and points of order can be raised on both. Many constitutional scholars have pointed out that numerous bill provisions, particularly the individual mandate, are unconstitutional. Under the Senate’s rules, constitutional points of order are debatable. The Republicans should be constantly bringing up constitutional points of order, one after another, on every questionable provision. Reid would presumably be forced to file cloture on the points of order and another three days could be burned up on each one.

    The healthcare bill violates § 425(a)(2) of the Budget Act, which prohibits consideration of any legislation that contains an unfunded intergovernmental mandate in excess of $69 million per year. If the point of order is raised and sustained, a simple majority may vote to waive the point of order. But the waiver is debatable and thus would presumably require 60 votes to cloture the motion to waive. This would require them to produce 60 votes at a time when they do not have their deal wrapped up yet, once again burning up three days.

    On every vote, including on constantly raised points of order, the Republicans should be objecting that the vote total is incomplete – the Democratic Chair will rule that it is complete and the Republicans then appeal and once again force a vote, delaying the process again and again.

    The Republicans should be offering one amendment after another on all of their favorite issues such as guns, abortion, elimination of the death tax, ending the TARP program, and gay marriage in the District of Columbia. Nothing connotes trench warfare like non-germane amendments on hot-button social issues. When you look back at all of the great filibusters of past decades, they almost always involved non-germane, explosive amendments on contentious social and other issues. Republicans should be offering hundreds of such amendments on every topic and using the rules to force votes on every single one. And the Republicans should be forcing the reading of the bill and every single amendment, not consenting to waiving that requirement.

    Some might argue that Republicans should not look “obstructionist.” But they are wrong – the vast majority of Americans don’t like this bill and don’t want it to pass. The Tea Party movement was the upheaval of millions of ordinary Americans who are scared and angry about the out-of-control growth of the federal government, federal spending, and the national debt. They want to see the Republicans obstructing passage of this bill and if they think the Republicans are not fighting with every tool they have at their disposal, then any advantage that the Republicans think they will get in next year’s elections from such a bill being passed will evaporate. Conservatives will mount challenges to what they see as weak Republicans, just like what happened in New York’s special congressional race, helping Democrats eek out wins. And other conservative will stay home (like they did in 2008) rather than support GOP incumbents who did not fight.

    The view coming out of the Senate of the Republicans has the appearance of business-as-usual – colloquies, speeches, and unanimous consent agreements. It does not convey the sense of urgency that should come with an issue of this magnitude and it does not provide any assurance to the public, including most especially the conservative base that is the heart of the Republican Party, that Republican Senators are willing to do everything it takes to stop this bill. If they don’t starting acting forcefully quickly and immediately, not only will they allow the country’s future to be unalterably damaged, they will be hastening the end to their own careers in the elections coming down the road faster than they can imagine.

    Finally, I often hear that Senators express frustration when we dare to tell them how to fight, and that their frequent refrain is “we just don’t understand how the Senate works.” Actually some of us understand better than they do how it should work (whether they agree with every particular parliamentary tactic described), and the current frustration they feel with us will be nothing like what they may feel if they don’t stop this bill at all costs and act to preserve our Republic.

    “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

    — Benjamin Franklin


    Wednesday, December 9, 2009

    Russian Bulava SLBM: Epic Fail

    The Russians just can't seem to get their latest SLBM, the Bulava missile, right.  Another failed launch today, as seen from Norway, it spirals out of control before being destroyed in the atmosphere.

    Sunday, December 6, 2009

    Bam's Afghan Adventure

    This week Obama walked into "enemy territory" (or, at least that's how "thrill up my leg" Chris Matthews described the United States Military Academy) and delivered a speech that was neither inspiring, decisive, nor terribly thoughtful.

    If you want insightful commentary on Bam's speech, read either Charles Krauthammer's take on it, or Mark Steyn's.

    If you want something a little more amatuerish and about as will thought out as the Obama administration policy on Afghanistan, keep reading me!

    Bam has decided to send 30,000 more US troops to Afghanistan.  At the same time, NATO allies have agreed to send an additional 7,000.  Together, this gets us pretty close to the 40,000 that Obama's hand-picked leader, General Stanley McChrystal, had asked for to carry out the counterinsurgency strategy that the administration had settled on in May 2009.

    The real problem, from my perspective, with O's speech, is the continued politicization of the war that was the candidate's "necessary war."  As Steyn points out in his column, Obama invokes Afghanistan as the central battleground of the War on Terror (well, he doesn't use those EXACT words) for the entire WORLD.

    Yet, he gives a timeline of 18 months to start a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.


    This is the central front of the most important war of the world, and we are going to leave in 18 months because....well, because Obama's left-wing nutroots demand some timeline to end all wars, and this is what Obama has chosen to give them.  As Steyn points, out, "Hey, Taliban, just hold on for 19 months, and all is well!"  I agree, if I was an Afghan strongman, I'd be working my best deal with the Taliban, rather than supporting an American initiative against them, when I knew the Americans would be departing in 18 months, leaving me and the Taliban (still) behind.

    We will not successfully carry out a counterinsurgency operation without winning over the people who control security in every part of Afghanistan.  Just as in Iraq, the success of a COIN strategy rests with winning over the local population, and yes, the tribal (and often militia) leaders who control those parts of the country.  It is only with our backing, and the sure knowledge that we will be there to provide security for those same people against the Taliban, that we will win them over to our side.

    A timeline is the worst possible thing Obama could have done, yet he did it.  A sop to his political left-wing (as if there could be a wing left of Obama).  He further mixed domestic concerns into his speech.  He can't make a speech without tying it somehow to his aggressive domestic agenda.  At least now, we won't have to hear Democrats complaining how much the War costs and how it's bankrupting the country, since they're doing a fine job of that with their out of control money and power grabs.

    So, we on the right know that Obama has likely cynically given this promise to his Left.  He weaselly says the withdrawal will "begin" in 18 months.  Those on the right expect that in 18 months, he'll be reneging on that promise, should conditions require more troops, or the same strength.  In the winter of 2011, as the 2012 campaign is gearing up, does Obama want to be remembered as the President who lost Afghanistan?

    We don't think so.  But, what if Obama faces a primary challenge from his left in 2012?  A Kucinich (laughable) or perhaps a Feingold (more credible to me)?  In that case, he might feel compelled to make good in some substantive way on his promise.  And, that could lead to disaster in Afghanistan.

    I think, though, that it's more likely that Obama, in late 2011, will be facing a primary challenge from his right. As the economy continues to struggle (we're already in the midst of one of the weakest recession recoveries in recorded American history), I think the odds of a Hillary Clinton resignation and subsequent attempt to unseat Obama becomes more and more likely.  Especially if the GOP fails to bring forward a credible candidate, or, if the GOP candidate appears to be a far right conservative (Palin).  In this scenario, Hillary will see herself as not just the savior of the Democratic party, but of the country as well, and she may have a case.  If Bam's approval ratings continue to sink into Bush territory, even his uninidicted co-conspirators in the Legacy Media will leave him, and will relish the opportunity to be the ones to resurrect Hillary.

    Possible?  I make it up, you vet it.

    Sunday, November 29, 2009

    Ditherer No More… President Moves Swiftly to Investigate Party Crashers

    Via Gateway Pundit:

    Ditherer No More… President Moves Swiftly to Investigate Party Crashers: "

    President Obama jumps into action– Orders full review of party crashers who made him look stupid.

    Jules Crittenden has the scoop:

    Decisive presidential action as O leaps into action, orders a full review of how the reality TV crashers managed to take over his party, make him look silly… We haven’t seen this kind of into-the-breach rapid response since Obama accused Sgt. Crowley of “acting stupidly.” No, make that since Obama called for the Beer Summit after he accused Sgt. Crowley of “acting stupidly.” No pussyfooting around, he wants action. It’s impressive. Very decisive. Very presidential-like.* No messing around with, “I’ll review it when I feel like it. After I review the review. No wait, I want a full review of the review of the review.” I’d call this a pretty positive development.

    More here.

    Friday, November 27, 2009

    Michael Moriarty speaks out against Law & Order; for Beck, Palin, Red Eye

    Michael Moriarty, formerly on Law & Order, was interviewed by Alicia Colon for The Irish Examiner(You can read the full piece here.)

    Mr. Moriarty, who now lives in Canada, has a lot to say about how f'd up the US has become.

    Alicia Colon (AC): If you were still with L&O would you have objected to the season opener trashing the Bush administration over torture? What is your opinion on Gitmo?

    Michael Moriarty (MM): From your description of the L & O program which I DIDN’T see, it sounds typically classic NBC. A Variety magazine article years ago described NBC as the most obedient network to governmental demands. It is now embarrassingly sycophantic. I’m not a fan of either of the Bush Presidents … but this judicial assault upon Guantanamo in a time of war that is still going on is approaching treason. Leave the suspects in Gitmo until the Islamic extremists cease and desist. Welcoming them into our country is suicidal … but then so is the entire Progressive Program for a New World Order. …

    AC: Do you think that your pro-life position on abortion makes it more difficult to find work in Hollywood?
    MM: Obviously yes … so I’m completely retired.

    AC: What made you want to run for president last year? What made you drop out?
    MM: The same passionately common sense that drives Glenn Beck is what drove me to run for President. To inject a little OBVIOUS common sense into a profoundly corrupted, two-party system. If you knew how hard that is you would admire Beck's strength even more than you might now. The title of his new book, ARGUING WITH IDIOTS, is immensely exhausting, particularly for an old man like me.
    I dropped out of the 2008 election in order to recommend another candidate, Mr. Fred Thompson, also an alumnus of Law and Order. Sarah Palin was then barely a political reality. However, when she hooked up with McCain I supported the Republican ticket entirely because of her.

    AC: What is your assessment of the Obama administration?
    MM: Beyond a disaster!! In light of what Obama swore to at the inauguration - "to uphold the Constitution of the United States" - it's a grotesque charade, a lie, a black comedy of immensely ominous implications for individual freedom in the world. Obviously Obama will be obliged to claim that at the inauguration the Chief Justice was putting words in his mouth! He never had any real obligation to uphold the silly principles contained in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!
    All the President's so-called plans and achievements are as forbidding as Chamberlain's concessions at Munich.
    But, as we "Drunks" say, "Let go, let God!"

    AC: What do you think of Glenn Beck? Have you seen RedEye? What do you think of the grassroots tea parties?
    MM: Glenn Beck? A Godsend to America!! The Tea Parties? Long overdue! Red Eye? Very New York! Very Manhattan “Chic”! Very welcome because of its point of view: looking down on those East Coast Progressives who look down on us!!

    Thursday, November 26, 2009

    Name Change for Sleepy-Eyed Whiners. YOU decide.

    I initially started this as a reply to an ongoing feud between myself and someone calling himself "el.sid" who disapproves and thinks Sleepy-eyed Whiners is a pejorative.
    The comments are scattered all over the place, but the latest is in this thread.

    El.sid, first, the correct link to the story for those who want to read it. At least we have established that you think some self-deprecating humor, in the form of this blog's name, is somehow disrespectful to the submarine force, or shows a lack of respect from the author (me) or others for the dangers that lurk for submariners. The genesis of this was a shipmate, who, in response to the CO's assertion that we were all "steely-eyed killers" correctly pointed out that we would more accurately be described as "sleepy-eyed whiners," since that is what most of the 19-24 year old crew was. Knowing something about sailors and soldiers and airmen (not so sure about Marines), my feeling is that most of us, especially in that age group, are more about the whining than the killing. I think that's more of an American trait. Look, we like to complain about things, but, when the chips are down, we will get the job done. See the beautiful dichotomy in that? I do. I think it's great. To help you out, check out this from the Onion News Network, as they try to bring the reality of war to a generation raised on Halo:

    Those of us who spend some time here in the sublogoshere do it out of our tremendous respect for the men we served with and seek to take the silent service out of the dark, silent world it was in for much of the Cold War (and earlier). You haven't spent much time on MY blog, or on those linked to the right, if you think ANY of these people (most of them retired, but a few still surreptitiously blogging on active duty) do this out of anything other than a love and respect for what they did, and for what good, intelligent, and dedicated men still do today.

    You, my friend, have way missed the boat on that. You know, for a brief moment, I thought I'd poll this community, and see if others feel as you do, and I'd change the name if the consensus was it was disrepectful. I might still do that, if enough active sub bloggers felt that way. But, my argument remains the same. Submariners tend to be a cynical and humorous group (you, excepted). Like any group of men living in close quarters for long periods of time, at great danger to themselves (for us, it is the ever present crushing sea depths, not to mention the possibility of an actual enemy attack) they look for outlets to relieve the stress of those dangers that lurk. Every guy I worked with knew that just outside a thin strip of HY80 stood sea pressures that would quickly kill. We joked about Steinke Hoods (I think those are all gone now, replaced by an ascent system that could actually work) and how those were developed so we could assure our families there was some way we could survive an accident. Every man on my boat (and every other sub I've had the pleasure to ride, visit, or talk to friends and colleagues about) knew and understood well the dangers we faced and the importance of each man doing his job in saving the ship. I served with a Chief who survived the Bonefish fire. His tale of horror is honestly something every submariner should have to hear over and over and over. Believe me, they would approach every fire drill in a different way hearing his words.

    We're not like the surface navy, where there are damage controlmen etc, etc. On a submarine, each man could find himself "in charge" in some space with flooding, fire, or whatever other casualty you can name. The point is, el.sid, that even in the most dangerous situations, where instant death lurks constantly, you can not expect people with an ounce of humanity, to constantly be on edge, waiting for the proverbial next shoe to drop. People need and crave outlets, and they use humor to ease their fears and other emotions.

    I had no doubt that, if the time came, the absolute whiniest guy on the boat (hey, maybe that was me) would jump instantly into action in the event of a casualty and do his duty, and there would not be one word of complaint. You see, that's the beauty of the silent service, and military life in general. The ability to look around you, to laugh at the crazy bureaucracy that surrounds, the silly rules, the (seemingly) constant drills, the people who are wound perhaps one turn too tight; and yet, still know, that in a time of crisis, every one of those guys, from the one who created the stupidest rule to the one who bitched loudest about it, would, when called, rise instantly, head to his station, and do whatever was necessary and use his training and skills, to save the ship, your life, and his own. I am sorry you're offended by the title. Maybe guys don't complain anymore. Maybe the Navy has become such a utopia that they feel no need. I can't believe guys at sea for long periods of time are all rah-rah all the time. I find that impossible to believe, in fact.

    I will extend my offer. If the joke goes too far, and if enough sub bloggers who I respect (and that would be nearly all of them), side with you and tell me so, I'll consider changing it.
    How's that for a compromise?

    Wednesday, November 25, 2009

    Places to be thankful for...

    As an amateur historian (meaning I like and study history), I thought I'd share a few places that I have been that I think every American should visit to truly understand this country, and the sacrifice of the men who made this country great on this Thanksgiving holiday.  I'll close with a few places I'd like to visit and then open it to anyone to share their places to visit ideas.

    1. Gettysburg - Every American should be required to visit the battlefield at Gettysburg.  Walk the fields.  See the views from Big and Little Round Top.  Walk up to that big tree where Pickett's Charge was turned back (especially moving for someone who's heritage was on the losing side) and ponder the fate of a nation was sealed that day.  Do as I did as a kid and memorize Lincoln's short Gettysburg Address and you will be forever moved.   I first went as a 12 year old kid.  I've been back twice since as an adult, and the place never fails to make me cry like a baby.
    2. Pearl Harbor - While this one is tougher to get to for everybody, it is a must see place.  If you're military, take the Navy's private tour (vice the Park Service's, h/t Blunoz).  At a time when the free world's fate hung in the balance, this vicious attack spurred our country into action.  Freedom was saved and events that wouldn't work themselves out for another 50 years (the Cold War) were set into motion.  The Arizona memorial, like Gettysburg, is another cry your eyes out site.  It's especially difficult these days knowing how many WW2 vets we're losing every day.  These guys are national treasures.
    3. Independence Hall - The place where our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution would be forged and signed is another must see for Americans to truly get a feel for the debates and discussions that framed our country.
    4. Washington DC monuments, Capital Building and the White House - If a visit, taken within a historical frame of mind, to our nation's capital, doesn't move you to patriotic thoughts, you're not an American.  Among the memorials you must put on your list (but may be tempted to miss) - the Iwo Jima memorial, Arlington Cemetary, the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial and close-by Korean War memorial.  Walk the halls of Congress and make an effort to visit what is your house after all.
    5. The Alamo - The first four are required, this one is interesting, and demonstrates what freedom loving men are capable of achieving against long odds.  The Alamo was a loss for the Texans, but, it provided time for Sam Houston to achieve victory and has given us legends (true and untrue) that persist to this day.  
    6. Civil War/Revolutionary War Battlefields - if you live on the East Coast, you can probably, wherever you are, get to one of these in an hour's drive.  Make it a point today to commit to a visit, learn the history and take your kids.  Pack a picnic lunch.  Talk about it.
    Places I need to visit:
    1. Ground Zero - I put this in the Pearl Harbor/Gettysburg vein.  It is above all others.  I haven't been to New York in years (obviously), but this is a trip I am remiss in making.  
    2. Normandy Beach and the Cemeteries at Normandy - another one in this class of must see's.  
    3. Iwo Jima - made more famous by recent books (The excellent Flags of our Fathers) and movies, it is a place I would like to see before I die.
    Any recommendations of yours are encouraged and requested.  And, if you've been to any of these, what were your thoughts and emotions?

    Tuesday, November 24, 2009

    El Sid Stops by for a Visit. Chiefs everywhere embarrassed. I report. You decide.

    A very nice gentleman, going by the moniker el.sid2001 has made a few passing visits to Sleepyeyedwhiners.

    Since he is of such keen insight and high intellect, I thought my readers (well, both of you, if we include el.sid), might benefit from his highly honed psychological analysis.

    El.sid first replied to my post in response to a troll who decided to call all Southerners "dumb" and proceeded to write a comment so filled with grammatical errors and logic missteps that it screamed out for rebuttal.  Apparently, irony being lost on el.sid, he replied with this:

    "I have to tell you, somebody who spent 20 years in the Navy being Trident Tuff that has a blog called Sleepy Eyed Whiners of the Deep must be deeply disgruntled. Your profile says nothing of your Navy achievements, so I am guessing you retired as a 1st. However, from your anal attacks on grammer, I might even venture a guess as an officer, but not a very good one. I bet you critiqued the hell out of some fitreps though. I think you are an officer because of the way you have to feel superior to other people and the only way you can manage is with the grammer. If you are not an officer or a 1st, then I would like to call you Brother, but I can't because my first impression of you is an E7. Maybe I am wrong. I found this blog while doing research and probably won't be back. I had to create a gmail account to post this, and quite frankly, I don't even remember the password. I too, am Trident Tuff, but Pac Tuff. I have inserted several grammatical errors throughout this post. See if you can find them all. Dive, Dive."

    My reply:
    El Sid,

    Greetings to you and thanks for stopping by! Sorry you wasted your time here on this screed.
    I won't waste time on "intentional" grammatical errors. Especially if you won't be back to grade my grading.
    But, what are you, because we know you're not a 1st class, nor an officer, and maybe not an E7 (is that one of the errors you inserted?)?
    Feel free NOT to answer, as I am NOT that interested.

    I decided to add another challenge:
    Final comment to you El Sid - there is one picture on this blog where you could discern what boat(s) I served on. The fact that you think it was a Trident makes me wonder what 20 years you served and your knowledge of your own boat's class.

    Thanks for your service, but I see no need for you to denigrate mine or anyone else's for that matter.

    For some reason my gmail account didn't alert me to el.sid's reply to my reply, but I find it priceless and an advertisement for why submariners should get out more:

    "Well, Jay, I just had to come back and see how you would react and it fits. I now know you are not a Chief because you would have gotten my quip about being an E7 an my screen name should have clued in as well. The pic of the floating palace looks like a Boomer to me. I can't make out the name, but I can see where the BST goes on the port side and it looks like Kbay to me. Fast boats don't have a BST. Fast boats also ride high in the water at the bow and do not slope down like that. That is a Trident. So good try in trying to make me look like an idiot to your few followers in hopes that I would not be back, but you are quickly digging a hole for yourself. You state yourself that you are a former Boomer sailor in your profile. Fast boat guys would never abmit to being a Boomer Fag. I should have read it better last night, but your 20 years includes the reserve. I took as you did 20 years and retired, then transferred to the reserves. I can see now that is not the case. How many years did you do active? What boats have you been on? How long did it take to get your fish? What is a crank? What does being posted mean? Prove me wrong. Did you get sub disqualled cause you can't hack it? What rate were you? Nuc drop? MT? Not MT if your a SSN guy. You put the Jay in Joke. I am not sure what following you have on here, but I feel sorry for these people. I am a proud Trident Chief who has been in for only 10 years. I live, breath, eat, and sleep the Submarine way of life. If you were in my division you would get all the crap jobs because you are a S-bag. A wrinkle-neck."

    el.sid did rise to the boat picking challenge, though I don't know who he got to tell him:
    "I just realized what boat that is on your page. It is the USS Simon Bolivar SSBN-641. For your followers that don't know, SSBN refers to a Nuclear Powered Ballistic Missile Submarine. I thought it looked smaller thank an Ohio Class and that is because it is a Ben Franklin Class. You are becoming more of a joke every second."

    Not sure how the old 641 makes me MORE of a joke to el.sid than I already am.  I always thought those Trident guys were pretty wimpy, I mean, we did our own maintenance and didn't have to pay civilian contractors to fix anything.  Hell, we could even repair stuff at sea.  But, I'll wear el.sid's joke like a badge of honor. How many other guys can say they sat in the same radio room and opened the same safes as Johnny Walker (a Chief you can be proud of, el.sid) - that's quite a feather in my cap.  How many guys have that legacy? 

    Still got the port wrong (but, you're "Pac Tuff" so no expectation there).

    Anyway last night el.sid returned, and here was his comment:

    "el sid here j. did you quit on me? I figured you would have something else to say. I told a fellow submariner about you and your blog, we had quite a good laugh at your expense. A lot of people on board did (JAY: Are you not on a submarine now?  I mean, wouldn't everyone on board be a "fellow submariner?"). He pointed out that only 6 or 7 people respond to your posts. (he gives me too much credit). Another shipmate of mine also had a question: What exactly do you do with submarines in the reserve in Atlanta? Do you drive down to Kbay or up to VA? Just a thought. You also never answered me about what rate you were. We are all very curious. I told you I wouldn't remember my email password. I dont even recall the login name. I didnt take you for a quitter. How many cans can you put in the TDU? Remember j, pride runs deep. How deep is yours. Did your bubblehead become a skimmer?"

    I like this last comment from him.  I can just see el.sid and a few of his pals in the Chief's quarters, or maybe they're huddled around el.sid's PC in the off-crew office, checking out this blog.  All with these burning questions.  Funny stuff.

    Could you, instead of having all your pals comment through you, use their own computers and drive my traffic numbers up?  Help a shipmate out.

    Prediction: el.sid does not do well when women are detailed to his submarine.

    For the other 5 people who are reading what do you make of el.sid? 

    Monday, November 23, 2009

    Andrew Sullivan: Basically an Internet Troll

    Ann Althouse is taking on (sort of) Andrew Sullivan and his crusade against Sarah Palin.

    I know Sullivan won't respond to me, but Ann is on to something with dear old Andy.  Palin's finger is actually NOT on the nuclear button, and while Andy may think he's performing some important civic duty proving Sarah Palin is "clinically delusional," perhaps he could spend a little bit more time examining the "writings" of Barack Obama:

    "It's only fair. Andrew Sullivan, what if, with the same intensity and standards you've aimed at Palin, you went through the things Barack Obama has said and written?"

    Ann kills Andy.

    Sarah Palin blasted by Rick Moron (oops, Moran)

    Smitty over at The Other McCain, pens, I hope to be as smart as Rick Moran someday:

    It includes such priceless gems as:

    "Why are you such an apologist for what would likely be a full-on tyranny, had it greater competence?"

    Original Rick Moran post here.

    You know what, even certain (elistist) elements of the GOP do not get Palin and why she has mass appeal.  If there is going to be a 3rd party movement in this country (Libertarians, Conservatives, are you listening??), it is going to include Sarah Palin.  If there is going to be a GOP rebirth, it is going to include Palin.

    Better get used to it.

    Saturday, November 21, 2009

    Google Reader and other Google rants

    If this post doesn't reveal me as a screaming capitalist pig consumer, nothing ever will.

    I have some good things and some bad things to say about Google today.  First, the bad.

    I have used Google search since before it was cool (was it ever thus?).  It returned great results and the site was easy to use, uncluttered and not a sop to commercial interests.  Google remains a great place to find information, unless someone has paid to get their results at the top of certain searches.  I have noticed more and more lately that Google is clearly now using their place in the search market, and maybe it's because so many others are gaming the system (but, I bet it's Google), to place paid results at the top of searches.  I don't blame Google for trying to make money, I celebrate it, but, admit it.  Honestly, this is one reason why I have started using Microsoft's Bing much more for web research.

    2nd complaint.  Ok, Google likes to claim their motto is "Do No Evil" or some such claptrap.  Throw away the fact that they support every Liberal cause imaginable (thus, perpetrating great evil on all of us), but, they want to use that influence to force telecommunications companies to give Google's content a free ride over infrastructure paid for by Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, Comcast, etc.  And, Google wants to do this at the point of a government gun (this is a little thing called Net Neutrality - I suggest you google it using some non-Google search engine).  Hey, Google, go build your own damn infrastructure and stop giving your money to Democrats!

    3rd complaint.  Gmail.  Since I use Yahoo mail mostly, and when home, I have my gmail and yahoo mail delivered to Outlook, I don't see the rottenness of gmail except when I travel, and maybe it's because it is a secondary account for me (as opposed to yahoo).  But, Google could learn something from Yahoo in terms of user interface.  I just find gmail's crappy.  Sorry.

    What do I like about Google?
    Google search is still the best for finding images and searches about music.  If anyone knows a better music search tool, do let me know.  I mean for finding obscure artists information, song names from lyrics, etc.

    Reader.  I have tried many RSS readers, and while I really prefer the RSS reader in Internet Explorer, the fact that it is PC-specific is maddening.  That's why I prefer Google Reader, which follows you everywhere, as an RSS reader should.  I can't understand how a company that makes such a good, easy-to-use tool as Google Reader can make such a crappy tool as Gmail.  I don't get it.

    Blogger.  Best purchase ever by Google, but, I haven't tried any others, so I don't speak from real experience here.

    Chrome.  Ok, best browser ever.  Best.  If you don't use Chrome, you ain't really using the Internet.

    Speaking of reader - you all should use it.Notice the "Shared Items" widget at the top right of this blog?  I can just click "Share" on anything I find of interest in my RSS feeds and boom, it makes it right over here.  You should CHECK THIS SITE DAILY and see what I'm reading.  I mean it.  YOU SHOULD ALL VISIT THIS SITE DAILY, AND STOP JUST READING THE EMAIL FEED YOU GET.



    Sarah Palin Vindication Tour

    Unless you have been sitting under a rock this week, you may have noticed that Sarah Palin has a book, Going Rogue, out this week, and has been pretty much everywhere promoting it.

    She did Oprah, Hannity, The Today Show, O'Reilly.  About the only place we haven't seen Sarah this week is MSNBC.  I guess that will be saved for her presidency.

    I admit, I don't know what to make of Sarah Palin these days.  There's a lot to like.  She's been a successful governor, she says all the right conservative things, she is willing to tweak the Republican establishment (see NY-23), and she makes the right people very angry - feminists, leftists, the Legacy Media, Keith Olbermann, she has the Obama Political Arm going after her; plus, she is an attractive woman and you can't discount that fact.

    So, what do I want Sarah to do before I can wholeheartedly get behind her for 2012?

    First, I have to admit, there is something about the way she speaks, and people have told me it's a Midwestern thing and isn't unusual.  Maybe that is part of the appeal and shouldn't be messed with.  I've listened alot this week, and she is much, much, much better than she was generally in the campaign.  I still chuckle because the way she says things just seems like she's often looking for the right words and sometimes will semi-misuse a phrase or use a phraseology that just doesn't quite fit.  But, when she's done, her point always comes across.  Someone tell me that's a good thing and is actually part of her appeal?  Does anyone know what I mean and can explain it better?  If so, please reply.

    Now, the other thing that I like about her is that she has the atheist Sally Quinn (the ultimate DC insider for the elitist party crowd - you know, the kind who sip their champagne and look down at the hoi polloi) lecturing us on Palin's Faith.

    Now, I don't know about you, but, I always find it amusing how athesists and agnostics purport to know how Christians should act.  I just love it when a Sally Quinn or Christopher Hitchens lays into Christians and starts with the hypocrite and the "Jesus wouldn't do that" nonsense.

    I just have to shake my head, because, they just don't get the core of Christianity, especially as practiced by most Americans.  They really don't.  These people need our prayers, and it was especially painful this week seeing Bill O'Reilly take poor old dumb Sally Quinn to the woodshed on this.

    Read a couple of other posts about this, then watch the O'Reilly video:

    O'Reilly v. Quinn, watch this:

    BTW - is Sally Quinn getting a kickback from Rick Warren?

    Sally Quinn - Just Shut Up.

    Saturday, November 14, 2009

    Barack. Hussein. Obama. Worst. President. Ever. (and most dangerous?)

    Readers know I am no fan of the socialist, perhaps Marxist, President Barack H. Obama.

    But, previous to this week, I thought he was just a committed socialist and lightweight intellectual, who was in over his head and advised by a bunch of Chicago thugs.  THAT, I figured we could endure, as our worst enemy in this 4 year lurch to the Left would be the administration's incompetence.  Figuring that we lived through Jimmy Carter (and he delivered us Ronald Reagan), I imagined we could pretty much endure anything (we also survived the Andrew Johnson presidency) in this great nation of ours.

    That was until the events of the last week.

    Leading up to Fort Hood, we have Obama "dithering" to use the phrase of the moment, on whether to listen to his Obama-appointed Commander in Afghanistan,General Stanley McChrystal, and supply him with the troops he requested to carry out the mission (counterinsurgency) that this administration chose as the best path in the Spring.  Get that - BHO's appointed guy, BHO's chosen strategy?  Now he needs to think some more about it, since the stark reality of executing that strategy might not be particularly appealing to Obama's core constituency (the Moveon.org Left).  And this group has the nerve to lecture anyone about "political posturing."

    The Fort Hood shooting is the first successful act of terrorism (Islamic or otherwise) to occur on our soil since 9/11.  Comparing BHO's response to this to GWB's response to 9/11 is a night and day difference.  BHO gave us this response (re-read my post of last Friday) and continues to exhort this nation not to jump to any conclusions, or for Congress to investigate, until the Army has completed its investigation.  Please, Mr. President, call this out (as you like to say) for what it is.  Single gunman, conspiracy, whatever, it is an attack on American servicemen and women, on Americam soil, by an Islamofascist, in the name of Islam, justified by  Imam's and Islamic religious leaders who are not THAT far out of the mainstream of Islamic thought.  IT IS TERRORISM, AND IT HAPPENED ON YOUR WATCH, AND YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE ULTIMATELY FOR IT.  ADMIT IT AND DEAL WITH IT.

    In the week that followed Fort Hood, while the president continues to "dither" on Afghanistan, and refuses to call Fort Hood what it was, he and his crooked Attorney General, Eric "I Let Mark Rich, the FALN, and other criminals, thugs, and murderers go" Holder, determined that bringing Khalid Sheik Muhammad (KSM, the mastermind of 9/11) and the other 9/11 conspirators to civilian criminal trial in New York City, vice a military tribunal in Gitmo, was the way this heinous terrorist and illegal combatant would be tried.  With the full force and faith if the US Constitution and the best lawyers money can buy.  Yet, Holder virtually guaranteed a conviction, basically saying, we are going to put NYC at risk, give these idiots a period of time where they can have a soapbox to rail against the West, all for what, a sham conviction that leads to life in prison?

    What Holder and Obama are doing here is, in my opinion, a disastrous policy that borders on treasonous and makes Obama the Worst. President. Ever.

    Read what some others think:

    House Health Care Bill - how bad policy is made

    The House of Representatives gave us a textbook example of why elected representatives should not be allowed to make laws.

    In order to pass this crap legislation this weekend, under cover of darkness without the 72 hours of "transparency" promised by Speaker Pelosi (as if anyone believes her promises), the Democrat leadership had to buy off a variety of interest groups, chief among them:

    • The AMA - who got a promise not to enforce previous years plans to reduce payments to doctors under Medicare.  This was desired by the AMA's board, even as doctors oppose the plan.
    • AARP - the Liberal AARP, desirous to regain it's near monopoly on Medi-Gap coverage, got the Dems to eviscerate Medicare Advantage, a popular, cost-effective, and free-market program that, unfortunately for seniors, took market away from AARP.
    • Insurers - ok, for those who think insurers are losers, in this plan, they are BIG winners.  If you're an enemy of insurers, guess what - you lost.  The industry gets 30M new customers, guaranteed to purchase more insurance than they need (by the Feds mandating minimum procedural coverages), and, enforced at the tip of a sword by your federal government.  Name any other private (now semi-private) industry that can count on the Feds to force consumers to buy their products?  Think insurers are worried about having to cover pre-existing conditions? Ha!  Joke's on you, Comrade.
      Those pre-existing conditions make insurance more expensive, as those with them are more expensive to insure.  So, the insurance companies get those new customers, they get them buy plans with coverage they don't need, and won't use, and to pay more for it.  The already insured will see their costs go up as well.  This has only 2 outcomes.  Neither is pretty.  Either the market collapses due to excessive costs and insurers go out of business because they can't get the government to approve higher rates, and the default becomes the "government option," or, the government, unwilling to go the "government option" route, approves those higher rates.
      It really doesn't matter at that point whether you're insured by the government plan, or a "private" insurer.  You're going to be paying more, and certainly getting less.
    Other likely winners:
    • Unions.  Unions will end up with some kind of opt-out exclusion, or their "cadillac" plans will be exempted (probably through some collectively-bargained benefits loophole).
    • Federal Employees - will certainly NOT be covered under the plan, and this will include Congress.
    • Everyone else.

    But, hey, we'll have universal health care.

    Saturday, November 7, 2009

    Paul Johnson is the best coach in Georgia. Period. (And other College FB thoughts).


    In case you missed it, Georgia Tech defeated Wake Forest in overtime today 30-27.

    Besides the usual amount of ground yardage (~450), Tech struggled to score and Wake did a good job making sure Tech was always starting on the Tech side of the field.  Despite a fairly rotten performance from the pass defense (typical), Tech managed a 24-24 tie after holding Wake to zero points for nearly 25 minutes of the 2nd half.  CPJ went for it on 4th down 4 times during the game, and you can usually count on Tech making it about 75% of the time.  Today, they were 0 for 4 in regulation.

    Did that deter CPJ, after Wake had scored first with a field goal in the first overtime, from going for it again on 4th and 1 at the Wake 4 yard line, when he could have kicked a chip shot field goal and tied it back up and played a 2nd OT?

    Of course not, because Paul Johnson has balls of steel and figured “If we can’t get half a yard, we don’t deserve to win.”  Mark Bradley reports.

    So, on 4th and 1, stud QB Josh Nesbitt sneaked the 1 yard, and scored on the subsequent play, giving Tech the win, and securing our 7th straight.  With losses by one-loss teams Oregon and LSU ahead of us, and Penn State behind, and Iowa losing, Tech is sure to move up in the BCS rankings (though I doubt we get further than 7th).

    In ACC play tonight, Clemson and FSU are fighting for FSU's final chance to sneak back into the Atlantic Division race, while Clemson can keep pace with Boston College in their Atlantic Division race (they're tied, but Clemson holds the tie-breaker over BC).  With a loss, BC holds their destiny in their hands, and I'd much rather play BC in the ACC Championship Game, since it would be nice to play someone different, and Clemson is playing well right now and they are better than their record indicates, and, they would like to avenge their loss to us about 2 months ago now.

    So, go 'Noles!

    In other college football thoughts:

    • Navy beat Notre Dame (again!), 23-21 (and it wasn't THAT close).  GO Navy!  Got to love that high school offense these schools play...
    • I have been impressed by the use of instant replay in college football this season.  Most of the time, it vindicates the referees and shows how often they get the calls right.  I also think the college game (as opposed to the pro game), where the calls are not reviewed subject to a coach's challenge, but, whenever the officials think necessary, is better. The officials all seem to have taken the approach that they can make the call that will lead to a replay, then, if they are wrong, the replay official will set it straight.  Like I said, they are usually getting them right.  Sometimes, rather than make a quick call, you can tell they are spending some time processing what they have just seen, make a call, then let the replay official sort it out.  I know it disrupts the flow of the game, but, now that we're used to it, I think it works.  
    Anyway, FSU is now up 17-14.  Ugh.  

    Friday, November 6, 2009

    Religon of Peace Strikes Again

    Yesterday, the Religion of Peace demonstrated, via its agent, Nidal Malik Hasan, that it is willing to murder more Americans on American soil to achieve their goal of a global caliphate and make sure all you Liberal womyn are wearing burkhas and educated in dark closets.

    Of less outrage to me, is President Obama's "statement" on this yesterday.  He was at some conference on some government-run something or other and I guess decided, 2 minutes into his obviously prepared (and prompted?) remarks to make a statement about the Fort Hood act of war.

    I mean come on, you're the President!  What would it have hurt to make the short statement at the beginning, when you came out, then go into your prepared love speech to whatever interest group is sucking up to you today?

    See the video, it's 2 minutes into it, and his "shout out" (I really could do without my President "shouting out.") to the Indian Medal Of Honor winner is not even right, the guy won the Medal of Freedom (from BHO, no less).  All they show, of course, on the Legacy Media, is the clip starting with the Fort Hood statement, doing, as usual, their best to make this guy look like he really gives a crap about the United States of America.  Hey, why not just issue an apology right there, Obama?  Add an admonishment to not hold this against those Islamofascists who just want to practice their religion in peace (or, er, amongst pieces of chopped up bodies   of Infidels).  I wonder, if Nadal Malik Hasan were a pro-life nutcase who walked into an abortion mill and started targeting doctors and nurses, we'd know all about his religion, his church, his pastor's teachings, and George W. Bush would be crucified along with him for creating the culture of death.

    Where do Muslims stand on abortion?  Because, if we can start everyone of these newscasts with Anti-abortion, Islamofascists Abdullah Abdullah Muhammad Rosannah Dannah, then maybe we can get the Legacy Media and Leftists to agree to fight these bastards wherever they roam.  

    Anyway, here is the Apologizer-in-Chief's statement, IN ITS ENTIRETY AND IN CONTEXT.  You go Chief Joe!

    I mean really?

    Moonbattery (caution, comments section is very anti-Obama) has other thoughts as well, all poignant and relevant.  The more I see of BHO, the more I am convinced of his detachment from any sort of reality, and the utter incompetence of this man.

    How do you Statists feel knowing that Rham Emanuel is running the White House while Nancy Pelosi plays shadow PM while Harry Reid plays Court Jester (or, is that Uncle Fester?).

    Tuesday, November 3, 2009

    Updated: Conservatism: Reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated

    Tonight's election results return Virginia firmly to its red state status.  The three highest state offices have been won by Republicans, and, not just won, but in decisive fashion.

    In New Jersey, the Republican candidate stands a real chance of winning in the most blue of blue states.

    In the NY-23 Congressional district, a Democrat posing as a Republican was forced to quit the race and the likely victor in a traditional Republican (not conservative) district will be the Conservative Party candidate.
    UPDATE: Not.  Hoffman couldn't overcome the odds and the D candidate and now interim Congressman eked out a close victory.  Can't win them all.  Still a win for conservatives in sending a message to the GOP to not nominate Democrats.

    We can already divine the winners and losers tonight:


    • Tea Partiers - forcing Dede Scozzfava out of the NY-23 race, and the election of Doug Hoffman is the largest victory for this grassroots movement opposing intrusive government and high taxes.
    • Sarah Palin - Sorry all you haters out there.  Palin was quick to jump on the Hoffman train, and may have been the force that pushed Dede out.
    • Rush Limbaugh - like Sarah Palin, Rush has provided the spark behind the anti-big government movement
    • New Jerseyites - if Christie wins, they get a chance (a chance) to reclaim their state and remove the onerous policies of John Corzine. 
    • Barack Obama - if Corzine pulls out a victory in NJ, Obama will claim victory.  It will be pyrrhic.  He's the big loser tonight, regardless.  Swings in Virginia and NJ are from 10-25 points against Obama.  This is coming largely from INDEPENDENT voters, not Republicans.  In NJ, CNN's exit polls show the 28% of NJ independents voting 58% to 31% for Christie.  In Virginia, independents went for McDonnell at a 65% clip.  The bloom is off the Obama rose.
    • Blue Dog Democrats - they will be losers if they don't correctly interpret the results of these races.  People are sick and tired of the endless expansion of government.  They didn't like it when Bush did it, they expected Obama to reverse that course (all hopey and changey), and the especially don't like the bait and switch they were handed in the last 9 months.
    • Health Care Reform - Big loser.
    • New Jerseyites - If Corzine wins, they get to spend another few years with the most incompetent governor in the nation.  
    So, we'll wait and see what happens with the NJ and NY-23 races.

    If Dems can steal these elections, they will.

    Friday, October 30, 2009

    Some Aviation News

    I enjoy flying.  I probably don't do it enough to truly detest all the crap that we put up with before getting on planes.

    But, here are some pilots you might want to avoid...

    Remember David Carroll, he was the singer who flew United, then they broke his guitar and he made a You Tube video out of his song about it?  Well, now United lost his luggage again. You'd think United would have some sort of special handling flag for him...

    He still has his video...

    Air France took delivery of their first A380.  Even in AF's classic colors, it looks ugly.

    If you like videos of ugly planes....