Too Smart for His Own Good?

Three anonymous (probably Leftard) 'experts' subject President Obama to a thorough examination -- without meeting him -- and form the following diagnosis:he's a complex dude, and that's why we don't understand just how absolutely fucking incomprehensibly awesome he really is.

Let's get this out of the way: I like Barack Obama, The Man, not Barack Obama the Jumpshot-in-Chief. I think he is genuinely smart in that Ivory Tower, bookish sort of way which makes for interesting cocktail party conversation, but which usually doesn't work when applied to practical problems. I'd like to spend an afternoon with him over a couple of beers and a ballgame, or maybe an evening of poker, cigars and dirty jokes. Hell, he can fuck my sister, I admire him so much.

It takes a great man to be this utterly clueless and still get elected to the highest office in the land. I'd like to know his secrets to success.

But, there's something about Obama that just doesn't compute, and as we used to say in my old systems programming days, if it doesn't add up, then you've fucked up. There's something missing, a key variable, a lack of data, some error that must account for the gap between the Hope and Result.

So, I've done my own evaluation of Barack Obama -- debugging, as it were, the Man's code -- and since I'm not a psychiatrist, haven't read any of his three, five, seven, whatever, biographies, don't parse his speeches looking for flashes rhetorical brilliance, I don't faint at the mere sight of him, or read any of his policy papers, I figure this makes me just as qualified to evaluate the President from a distance and with no direct input as three so-called psychiatric experts who apparently are incapable of speaking in coherent sentences.

I don't believe that Barack Obama ever expected to win the election in 2008.

I believe this, without proof or first-hand evidence -- but that didn't stop Millbank's Experts, did it? -- that B.O. was just as convinced as every other Flapping Rectum in the summer of 2008 that Hillary Clinton had the democratic nomination all but stolen, and that his job in that case was to remind the Clinton Wing of the democratic party that the Moonbat Left was still there and had stuff to say (It may have been stupid stuff, but it still needed to be said), and they would not be silent while a candidate they saw as fundamentally the same as McCain took her premature victory lap and coasted into a uncontested November win.

Obama was probably content to play Clinton's Ralph Nader, and then try again another day.

But then the Economy hitthe skids. The Stock Market crashed. The Housing Market was imploding. The country was still embroiled in two wars that appeared to be becoming social laboratories and Straw Men for Left and Right to argue over rather than actually WIN. People began to worry, they began to panic, and when they examined their choices come November 2008, they found two people who were indistinguishable in their 'maintain the status quo' politicking, and some dude who gave good speech and managed to make 'more of the same' even more unappealing.

So, they voted for Barry. Whether this was the desperation of Hope, or the desire for Change, matters not: if Obama had one thing in his favor it was that he wasn't an aging Cold Warrior who couldn't stay on the same side of the political street for three minutes, or an opportunistic hellion in a Black Crusty Pantsuit who was going to have her Presidency run -- and probably ruined -- by her horndog husband. Obama was seen as alien to the viper pit of Washington politics that had caused the multiple messes we were in. That was enough for a good many folks.

So there he was, actually winning. The problem was, I think, that since he hadn't expected to win, he had no plan for what do next.

This became evident almost immediately with the Stimulus Plan. it wasn't an economic plan as much as it was a wish-list of ridiculous projects and pet peeves compiled by Congressional Democrats. The only thing "shovel ready" about that plan was The Plan Itself. It's not surprising that it failed because it wasn't really intended to do anything beyond ensuring that certain democratic (small 'd' intentional) party allies and constituencies were fully funded before the money well-and-truly ran out.

The next clue was ObamaCare. In the midst of an economic crisis, Obama puts forth a brand-spankin' new entitlement program, and then leaves the details to Congress again. He then spends 15 months -- the first third of his Presidency, in effect -- trying to sell a plan that he can't explain, can't describe the need for, and can't justify at a time when people are losing their jobs left and right. A year after it's been passed he still can't explain it, and the more we learn of it as the days unwind, the less we like it. Nancy Pelosi wasn't just being coy when she said "We have to pass it to find out what's in it"; none of the people who allegedly put it together even KNEW what they had wrought, and what they did know of it was sure to be political suicide (see 2010 midterms). That's why the thing was cobbled together in secrecy, funded up-front, and passed almost in the dead of night with the hope that it would eventually just be too complex -- and embeded -- to kill at a later date.

The next indication that Barack Obama wasn't prepared for this job was the enormous amount of time he spent complaining about having to do it. I was especially shocked to listen to President-Elect Obama take daily questions from the Press on this or that subject, and alternately expound a load of fertilizer where he thought it would do him good, and then gently remind the Press that he wasn't President yet when a question was inconvenient. Later, the criticism becomes too great and mean-spirited, everything was George Bush's fault, it's racism and he inherited every problem and they couldn't all be fixed overnight(this is true, but it's not as if he didn't know about the pile of horse dung that is Washington and American Politics; but he did, after all, lobby for the job and should have known), and this led to the next clue:

The amount of time Barack Obama has spent in the last two years NOT being President of the United States.He's on vacation every few weeks. He's delegated a shitload of authority and responsibility to 'czars' and 'Blue Ribbon Panels', he's taking "Date Nights" with the Missus, taking the kids to Hawaii, playing as much golf as possible. When catastrophe strikes, and the Gulf Coast is poisoned by a massive oil spill, Obama goes on vacation, but promises to file a lawsuit when he comes back. He starts a war by committee, so that England and France can fight Khadaffi to the last American on behalf of their oil supplies, and then tries to back away from ownership of it. This as American forces are already fighting on behalf of the  Europeans in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our foreign policy leadership has been turned over to the U.N., the Arab League, and the European Union.

But the Biggest Clue about about how clueless Barack Obama is in the selection of his advisers; he went back into the Clinton Administration to find a good number of them. Nothing says 'Change' like a return of the legions of Clinton Zombies who had served so well that Al Gore couldn't even win his OWN STATE in a time of peace and prosperity, and was reduced to trying to sue his way into the White House.

Leon Pannetta, Rahn Emannuel, Eric Holder, and if that's not frightening enough, there's a cavalcade of democratic party stars rumored to be waiting in the wings, whispering this or that piece of sage advice, or angling for jobs: Jimmy Carter, Jamie Gorelick, Donna Brazille, Joe "The Raging Dumbass" Biden. Some change.

Whatever economic plan Obama and his team managed to write on the back of a cocktail napkin and presented as a serious solution to our economic woes sounds as if it came right out of a Soviet Three Year Plan, one that college students are obliged to read about in their textbooks: massive government 'investment' in Green Energy -- an industry which has, to date, not delivered a single result to ever match it's claims -- a return of FDR's Public Works Programs, Nationalization of the Banks and selected (union-dominated) Industries on a scale, and in such brazen fashion, that it would have made the Nazis blush with envy.

Change? We're trying the same things that have been tried in various countries since the 1930's; they didn't work then, they sure as hell won't work now. We're being lectured to on Capitalism by the Chinese and Russians, for Christ's sake! I'm sure everyone in the White House has read Das Kapital, but has anyone there read The Wealth of Nations?

Don't even get me started on how it is that Candidate Obama and President Obama are polar opposites on Gitmo Detainees, The Surge, Raising Debt Ceilings, Bush Tax Cuts (he's now changed positions on these, by my count, three times), talking about ending two wars, but then starting a third, etc, etc. I guess it's easy to criticize when you're ignorant of reality than it is when you're in full possession of the facts -- or at least when you're trying to get someones job, only to find out it's not all it's cracked up to be. In the end, it looks as if you're making it up as you go along, flying by the seat of your pants, confused, uncertain, disinterested.


This guy always seems to be two or three steps behind the curve on everything. Everything comes as a surprise, every issue or crisis is one that is unforeseen, and is preceded or followed with the adjective 'unexpectedly!'. He doesn't know what to do about Egypt. He doesn't know what to do about Libya. He doesn't realize that governments don't run economies, businesses do. He doesn't know what to do about much of anything, and when he tries to explain what action he does/doesn't take, no one buys it. We see right through it all.

Too smart for his own good? A complex thinker? Not by half. Barack Obama would have made a good insurance salesman. There's no shame in that; the world needs insurance salesmen. But a deep thinker? a Complex personality? A mathematician's ability to juggle variables in his head? On what fucking planet?

What Barack Obama is -- to use a poker analogy --  is a guy who's had his bluff called when he's short-stacked, and has but one option left: to go All In; he talked the talk, so the American people gave him an opportunity to walk the walk, and then it became apparent that Obama WAS, indeed, nothing but talk, and even then, he was given the benefit of the doubt seeing as how he was walking into a gigantic mess; maybe,some hoped, he would grow into the job?

No such luck. If anything, Barack Obama has shrunk while in the job, which is a pity almost beyond words. It was a task that he was not prepared for. Attempts to spin Obama's deer-in-the-headlights performance by resort to the well-worn political columnist's trick of "he's too smart for most people to understand", "he's too complex", "it's bad communications", "he's a deep thinker" are outright distortions of the truth, and that a newspaper columnist should have the audacity to promote such distortions as serious reportage/editorial is an absolute outrage.
Before firing Dana Millbank, his bosses should kick his ass for being a dipshit.

Dana Millbank's job is to present the facts; not trot out the shop-worn "He's too smart for us" bullshit in an attempt to explain away or paper over what is, already, a failed Presidency. We've been there and done that with other political figures; Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter, for example, and it wasn't true then, either. What makes anyone think the third time's a charm?

IowaHawk is God...

If you're STILL not reading IowaHawk regularly, then you, Sir or Madame, are a dipshit. One that should be taken out and sterilized with the rustiest of farm implements, so that you may not pollute the gene pool with future generations of little dipshits. Who will grow up into big dipshits, who will vote democratic and believe in Global Warming, and all that rot, and continue the cycle of dipshits who don't read IowaHawk.

Just read the damned thing!

So, you've lost your election...

Conspiracy Theory is History For Stupid People, Part II..

The democrats (small 'd' intentional) are casting about for someone to blame for the incredible pasting they took last Election Day, and for the falling popularity numbers of the their Savior, Barack Obama.

Since reason, logic and truth are tools never to be found in the good libtards toolbox, every failure of the progressive agenda, and all attached to it, simply must be the result of a conspiracy by the forces of reactionary conservatism. Conspiracies woven from whole cloth always answer all the questions swirling about liberal failures, and spare libtard the pain of having to ask the questions.

People hate ObamaCare? Must be because republicans talked badly about it.

Barack Obama is about as popular as tuberculosis? Must be the racism on Talk Radio.

Democrats lost the House of Representatives and damn-near lost the Senate? Must be because all those bitter clingers and Teabaggers fixed the election, suppressing minority voters and taking scads of foreign money to defeat good democrats who had only the best interests of the United States in their hearts.

There's apparently a secret hideout where all these conservatives, Tea Partiers, Godbots and Closet Klansmen get together, far from prying eyes, and plot the demise of the democratic republic. There, in smokey back rooms, the Chamber of Commerce, Tea Party, Republican Party (and probably the Knights Templar) all get together to plot and scheme, and then they unleash their dastardly super-secret plan to crush the poor and true-hearted.

Of course, none of this actually ever happens. Dimwitted democrats just think it does -- they simply have to -- because the truth (they suck, their ideas suck harder, and their President swallows) is too difficult a concept to fathom, and too painful to admit.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

James Carville is a Moron...

And ugly as hell.

Only a moron could say these things, and only bigger morons could take him seriously.

Get this through your thick skulls, Democrats: you lost because your ideas stink on ice, and the people you elect to advance them are deeply flawed, mentally-constipated mouthbreathers who haven't figured out that the 1960's finally ended.

With Luck, We Won't Be Seeing THIS Anymore...

Mercy, Please!

Watching Obama's speech. First thing that struck me was that for the first time in two years, SOMETHING wasn't George W. Bush's fault. Obama came out and said those words which must have hurt more than a double root canal without anesthetic, executed via the rectum:

"I take responsibility..."

The rest of the Speech makes it perfectly clear that he still believes that we're all clueless dolts who were just too darned impatient for our good, and then followed up with a rambling diatribe about"Energy Policy", never once mentioning the words "Drill". Whatever else might happen, Obama is not going to give up on Cap and Trade. Someone still hasn't learned their lesson, methinks.

The rest of the speech went something like this:

"Blah, blah, blah...blah,blabbity-bloobity, blah blah, blah..."

Even the customary Washington Press Corps Q&A was boring, and indicative that no one who should knows just what the fuck happened to Obama last night. Including him.

All I could hear during this hour-plus gabfest was that Obama still doesn't get it, and that he's probably set to dig his heels in deeper. Get your popcorn ready; this one's gonna be good.

Election 2010: Some Thoughts...

I still have to think some more about the implications of the"historic" Republican "victory" in yesterday's mid-term elections, so I'm going to put down some general observations right now, and then come back to the subject later this afternoon (after I watch Obama's Plea for Mercy speech this afternoon).

The Good:
* Alan Grayson, a thoroughly despicable waste of gametes, lost his Congressional seat in Florida. If there was anything that stood out from yesterday's results as the both the Best Thing That Could Happen and the Least Surprising Thing That Could Happen, this was it. This was perhaps the craziest fucker in the House of Representatives, and his loss represents about a 90% return to sanity in government. Good luck in your new job, Mr. Grayson, just remember the proper phrase is "would you like fries with that, Sir?". And smile when you say it.

* In my local election, Michael Grimm beat that malevolent leprechaun, Mike McMahon, and four other Republicans from New York are headed to Congress, allowing the NY Congressional delegation to at least be able to boast "We suck far less than we did yesterday...", Charles Schumer will not become Senate Majority Leader (since Dingy Harry survived), and I would dearly love to have been a fly on the wall when Schumer -- always one to count chickens before they hatch -- had to call off the mega-Press Conference and Fireworks Show that he'd scheduled to announce that he'd be vying for that position.

* Russ Feingold, the other half of the Greatest Assault on Free Speech in American History (Campaign Finance Reform) is now gone. Good riddance, and it was long overdue. Unfortunately, your partner in crime, John McCain, is still with us, which can only mean that the choice in Arizona must have been along the lines of "Would you rather: a) Fuck your mother, or b) Blow Your Father?" in that Senatorial contest.

The Bad:
* Harry Reid survived? How the hell did this happen? Either the people of Nevada are that fucking stupid, or Sharon Angle was the worst possible candidate. I'll have to think about that one.

* Christine O'Donnell loses. This is bad because we need some more hot chicks in Congress. If that election in Delaware taught you anything it is this: even in a day-and-age when people are unemployed, the national debt spirals out of control, the country is engaged in two wars, the Federal Government has nationalized the banks, heavy industry, insurance companies and is on the precipice of nationalizing our health care, you can STILL count on legions of people being stupid enough to be swayed by accusations that your opponent dabbles in Witchcraft. Things have not changed much since 17th Century New England, have they? I wonder; if someone took a test, would Delaware still be the dumbest -- and most irrelevant --state in the union?

* John Boehner crying. That is an image that I cannot scrub off my mind with a Brillo pad.

On MSNBC's Election Coverage (I flipped between Fox and (P)MSNBC all night):

* Keith Olbermann added a new dimension to his on-air persona; Keefy usually has a puss screwed on that is reminiscent of a man who is sitting upon his vibrator while having gallons of lemon juice poured into an open wound. Last night, he added a new face: he looked like he wanted to spit, but didn't because we all know he swallows. Keith took every opportunity to deviate from the fake "Objective Newsman" routine to scatter what passes for commentary on MSNBC with unflattering references to everyone he apparently doesn't like. Especially Christine O'Donnell and Sharon Angle. He was an ungracious douche, but what else could we expect from someone who probably still sleeps with his own parents, and likes having small rodents jammed in his bum?

* Rachel Maddow is a (insert word that rhymes with "hunt", and which will get you slapped in polite company). I realize that Rachel's job is to represent the "Butch Pseudo-Intellectual Lesbian" point of view on all things political, but I do recall a time when one could -- if they stretched the meaning of the word generously -- consider her to have been "fair".

* Chris Matthews had the look of a man who had just been buggered by a rabid, three-dicked grizzly bear (or maybe it was just a Momma Grizzly with a strap-on?) without lube, and no complimentary reach-around.

* Eugene Robinson is obviously disappointed that the program of Reparations by Another Name started by Resident Barack Obama now seems set to to come to an end, and that he'll have to Resort to Plan B in order to explain this defeat. Expect Gene to start cranking out columns and whining on MSNBC that Obama's failures are all the result of a vast conspiracy in which White Conservatives somehow managed to get a (half-)black man elected for the purposes of ensuring that no other black man, ever, gets elected President of the United States again. Should have asked for cash up front, Gene, instead of taking Obama's I.O.U.

* Ed Schultz is still the biggest, dumbest, most insufferable asshole on cable television,and he's even worse when his Red Comrades go down in fiery defeat. Somewhere, I'm hoping there's a guy with an elephant gun and tranquilizer darts, ready to do the country an enormous service and hunt Ed down, so that he may be returned to the Special-Needs Rhino Preserve from whence he came.

Miscellaneous:
* The notion that "Republicans must now show that they can govern" was floated about 73 times amongst the talking heads. First of all, the Republicans won the House of Representatives; democrats still control the Senate and the Presidency. The question is not "Can Republicans Govern?", but more "Why Haven't Democrats?", as they still hold 2/3 of the visible aspects of government. Had they not been pre-occupied by turning the United States into Greece -- only with turtle tunnels -- they might have actually accomplished something worth bragging about.

* On the notion that Republicans must now "reach across the isle in a spirit of non-partisanship". First of all, when a republican asks for "non-partisan"anything, he's basically asking "Hey, would you sign onto this crap so that when it fails I have some political cover?", and when a democrat calls for "Non-partisanship" it either means "I still get what I want, I just won't demonize you in public as badly as I would have", or it's a cry for mercy. Stuff "bi-partisanship" because it's the most misused word in American politics. The American People yesterday said "No" to taxes, "No" to nationalized healthcare, "No" to big government, "No" to policies that will strangle economic growth, "no" to bills that Congress can't be bothered to read before forcing them through in an unconstitutional fashion in the dead of night.

I rather doubt the democrats are in any mood to co-operate with anyone on dismantling or reversing anything they believe they've accomplished in the last two years. It's all they have to hang their hats on for 2012, after all. The only "bi-partisan" anything you'll get is where republicans in the House and Senate are able to force their democratic counterparts to swallow the bitter dregs of defeat in order to stave off defeat in 2012, and beyond. Only vulnerable democrats will play along, and when the numbers of those start to dwindle (never underestimate the power of a republican Congress to shoot itself in the foot) as we near 2012, expect to see the partisan bickering return with an even-greater fury.

* On the Notion That Obama's Speech today will Prove Once-and-For-All Whether he's a Pragmatist or an Ideologue: Were you not paying attention these last two years? Were you living under a rock? Atop a Himalayan peak where electricity and cable aren't available? Obama is an ideologue, and anything he has to say today will be simply be a regurgitation of his usual passive-aggressive ideological style ("While I look forward to working with Speaker Boehner, I will not abandon the Values and Principles that we have fought so hard to promote..."). I expect Obama will run through two teleprompters during this speech....and still say nothing.

* The most intriguing aspect of this election: Almost every candidate that Obama personally campaigned for lost. This comes a week after Al'Qaeda tried their little mail-bomb stunt. Let's see if Usama Bin Hidin' takes this clear indication of Obama's political weakness to cook something up, especially with Odouchebag scheduled to be out of the country this week (the one place where he can do the least amount of continuing damage). If I were Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton this week, I'd make sure that wherever it is that the Secret Service hides me, that refuge has plenty of reinforced concrete and is heavily-guarded.

Today Is Election Day...

I see today's voting as more of an exercise in survival than I do as exercising my "Right to Be Heard". I would blog a lot of stuff about today's events, but frankly, I'm bored with it. if it wasn't for the fact that I want to work, that I don't want to be passed over for a transplant operation in favor of an illegal immigrant pre-op transsexual with no insurance, and am sick and tired of seeing Barack Obama on television, I don't think I could muster the ambition to leave my chair today.

It's not so much about "Transforming America" anymore as much as it is restoring some semblance of sanity to an insane situation. I don't expect the republicans (small 'r' intentional) to be any different from the democrats (small 'd' intentional), except that their policies will probably put more cash in my pocket with which to live a little more comfortably while our society circles the bowl.

Because, let's face it, republicans may be 'chastened' after losing Congress in 2006, and after running the worst bunch of mental deficients in 2008, but I have every confidence that after a decent period of being seen as "conservative" (and NOT in the Bible-thumping-flannel-shirt-wearing-tobacco-chewing-cousin-banging sense with which that word has become associated), they will do what human nature dictates they must, revert to form, and quickly re-establish the political spoils system they use to enrich themselves.

I will go to the booth and pull the lever for every 'R' on the ballot, if only because the alternative is worse. I'd rather have AIDS, Ebola, and Scrofula simultaneously than to live yet one more day under the Pelosi-Reid-President Marriot-Suites regime. It was only the most extreme sense of desperation which caused 52% of the brain-dead doofuses in this country to produce that Triumvirate of Trash in the first place, and it will now be a deeper sense of desperation that causes a seismic shift in the opposite direction today; the fundamental problems which underlay American society and politics will not be solved with a republican "sweep" today.

That "Change You Can Believe In" will merely get a start with a republican victory; until the illegal immigrants are shipped back in chains, the Muslims are utterly defeated, the Poor-with-Cable-TV-and-Cellphones are separated from the government teat, and American business is prevented from making outrageous profits at the expense of it's fellow citizens, no REAL change will come about.

That sort of change doesn't happen with a single election. That sort of change comes about when citizens are made aware of the consequences that come with NOT making sure it's 'political leadership' does the right thing.

Change does, indeed, come to America today, but it entails more than just kicking one party out in favor of another. In most cases, swapping democrats for republicans is sort of like making a choice between passing a bowling ball or opening an umbrella up your ass; neither is particularly attractive, but there isn't another choice available. The REAL change today should be a renewed spirit of civic awareness, a sense that We The People are really in charge, and that we have to be much more vigilant than we have been in the past, and that now, we expect results instead of rhetoric.

Anyways, I'm off to vote. I will be back later, to say a few words about Chris Matthew's expected apoplexy and the hernia Keith Olbermann will get in trying to spin the expected democratic bloodbath away...

The End of Camelot?

The Last Kennedy may lose.

Dare we hope? Dare we dream? I might consider praying it if could make it so.

The "Kennedy mystique" has long outlived it's usefulness, and has done little more than to ensure that successive generations of slimy little retards with big teeth and a predilection for substance abuse and adultery had jobs bought for them that they were eminently unqualified for. If it wasn't for the fact that JFK was an icon to millions of brain-dead, drug-taking, hippies (in much the same way that FDR became an icon to their parents, an apparent savior who's only real talents were for telling people what they wanted to hear) the legend of John Fitzgerald Kennedy would have died in that limo in Dallas with him.

Here's the (very short) list of JFK's "accomplishments":

* Had several books written for him, which he simply signed his name to.
* Getting his PT Boat cut in half by a Japanese destroyer.
* Using his would-be Nazi-collaborator Daddy's Prohibition-fueled fortune to buy himself a career in politics.
* Marrying a smokin' hawt babe.
* Bringing the world the brink of nuclear annihilation.
* Chickening out at the Bay of Pigs.
* Vietnam
* Getting shot in the head.

JFK, all things considered, was a 1960's version of John McCain...only with charm and a ventilated braincase.

Why he is considered one of the best American Presidents is beyond me. Spare me the crap about his "commitment" to Civil Rights: that was all about avoiding a repeat of the 1960 election where he only managed to beat Nixon by the skin of his teeth. Kennedy needed more votes for the next go-around, and there simply weren't enough White people's votes to buy, or dead Chicagoans, to guarantee victory in '64.

What came after JFK and RFK were simply the dregs of the Kennedy DNA line, and they have polluted the halls of power for far too long. Eventually, the aura attached to a dead Uncle wears off, and people grow up. Or at least their priorities change; the Aging Hippies who creamed for Kennedy are no longer interested in lip-service to equality, Civil Rights, and a dreamy rhetoric about a loftily-idealistic-yet-infantile Utopia; they want free goddamned Viagra and someone to bear the cost of their fast-approaching retirement, now that the home they bought as a retirement vehicle is now basically worthless, and their stock portfolios have been wiped out by their own generation's economic stupidity. They no longer have the time or patience for sentimentality.

The Attachment to All Things Kennedy, under these circumstances, must surely fade, and with it, the stranglehold on both power and stupidity that has rested in the hands of a single (probably-inbred) family for far too long must surely loosen.

If only this would become a Nationwide Phenomenon, and we could do away with all the other political dynasties in America; Coumos, Bushes, Clintons, and so forth. How much better, how much fresher, how much more effective our political system would be (and I mean that in the hope that it would be more responsive, and responsible, to we the citizens who don't belong to the country club set) when it was no longer just "the family business".

Mike McMahon is a Big, Fat Douchebag...

Most democrats are. You would think that a man who owes his position to the good fortune of having had a predecessor who was an even bigger scumbag might make someone careful about what he does in public. After all, had Vito Fossella not been a drunk-driving adulterer with a love child, and worse, a persistent Republican at a time when that was only slightly more popular than dysentery, Mike McMahon would still be posing for his portrait on the Lucky Charms box.

But no. Displaying taste and class, especially during an election which one might lose, is something for other people to worry about. In the Great War to Keep The Phony-Baloney Job That You're Not Qualified To Do, all is fair game.

So why not make certain that your opponent's ex-wife is sitting in the front row for a debate?

Most people wouldn't be this petty and childish. Democrats, however, dance to a different tune. Usually, that tune involves complaining about the crass tastelessness and cluelessness of your republican opponent, while ignoring your own tasteless, clueless and asinine behavior.

Yet another reason to vote your local libtard out of office next week.

I guess nothing is out-of-bounds when it comes to keeping a Congressional seat that you didn't really earn, isn't it, Mikey? I would say that McMahon should be ashamed of himself, but he is incapable of shame. Expect some other douchebag libtard to try this stunt, or a variation upon the theme (maybe some Republican in the closet can expect his gay lovers to get the seats of honor at the next debate? My, but I wonder how many libtard pieties that sort of thing would violate?) between now and next Tuesday.

Disgusting. These people have no scruples, whatsoever.

Thomas Friedman: Peckerhead...

The New York Times pays this douche a lot, for writing with the insight --and vocabulary --of a fourth grader, and for pretending to be smarter than you average Irish Setter...and not me?

Tea Parties Are More like "Tea Kettle" Parties.

Friedman makes two mistakes here; the first is that he's writing about something he so obviously knows nothing about. The second is to believe that anyone who isn't already a retard takes him seriously.

I'm sure the premise behind your "opinion piece" was received with a great deal of giggling from your panty-bunched-stick-up-their-asses-libtard-metrosexual-asshole-butt-buddies at the Times water cooler, Tom, but you shouldn't have taken that as a tacit encouragement to write something this incredibly vapid. You should know by now that when the nancy-boys at the Times snicker so, it isn't because they've found your little diatribe oh-so-clever; it's because they've just wet themselves. They like the feeling of wet shorts against their skin, and they also derive a sick pleasure from their own urine...

So do you -- don't deny it.

Unfortunately, one has to reach the very, very end of Mr. Friedman's Tour-de-Force of ignorance to reach the only sentence which makes sense, or which allows the reader to momentarily feel as if the effort required to get through Friedman's nonsense wasn't a total waste of time;

"Maureen Dowd is off Today".

We Dodged A Bullet....

John Kerry is a waste of DNA.

The American Public is too stupid to understand the issues that confront them, says Kerry.

Say what you will about the American People, Senator: they were at least smart enough to keep you and your Two-timing Poodle Boy from the White House. I guess you're still bitter about that, or maybe it's just that Ter-ay-zuh hasn't stopped hounding you to get back all her inherited millions that you squandered in the attempt.

It must be difficult living with a wealthy drunk who is capable of kicking your ass, and who probably reminds you of your failings and shortcomings as a man on a daily basis.

But really, must you take your sense of frustration, the knowledge your personal inadequacies, the sting of your failures, out on us? We're not to blame: in the great choice between Giant Douche and Turd sandwich, we opted for Turd Sandwich (he, at least, didn't insult our intelligence, or try to dodge taxes on his foreign-built luxury yacht) , and frankly, some of us would dearly love for him make a triumphal return, given the current state of affairs and personalities.

Get over it, already: you lost to a man your party insists was a mouth-breathing doofus, and in retrospect, he looks more and more like a gold-plated Pericles in comparison to you and your lot with every passing day.

As an aside, I would like to encourage the Press in this country to stop talking to John Kerry, about anything. He's about as interesting as a piece of dry toast, and just slightly less-useful than mammary glands on a bull. He never has anything worthy of note to say, and his sort of condescending, old-New England money patronizing gives most people the piles.

That Didn't Take Very Long, Did It?

In response to this post, I got the usual diatribe about the difference between "REAL Conservatives" and RINOs ("Republican-in-name-only"). The writer, who was such a cowardly little bastard that he/she responded Anonymously (they all do, you know), made reference to my oft-repeated opinion that, for some, "conservatism" means only holding to a very narrow interpretation of Scripture-approved axioms, particularly when it comes to the topic of homosexuals.

I needed to be taken to the woodshed and educated on just why this small-but-vocal wing of the republican party was right. They always are, you know (smell that? It was sarcasm).

"God Hates Fags" this brave Bible Warrior assures me, making certain that I got the message by conveying it in bold italics with seven exclamation points, and two useless verses of Scripture to back it up (one predictable mental defect in these people is that they can always be counted upon to quote a verse which is often totally divorced from the topic at hand, and presented to you as unshakable truth. It's almost as if by reciting the Good Book word-for-word, in any context, the argument is supposed to be over, and they've won it, you fucking Heathen!).

God doesn't "Hate Fags" if only because:

a. God doesn't exist.

b. If She did exist, then you would have to admit that she created Fags, and in Her image, too. She also created people who can decide that blowing up supermarkets and turning passenger planes into WMD's is legitimate political discourse. She's created headhunters, child molesters, robber barons and Nazis, too. The idea that God is a benevolent force that can do no wrong and is possessed of an infinite ability to love is belied by the fact that She also created Ebola, Cancer, Malaria, and bears some moral responsibility for the "Jersey Shore". God as the ultimate force for good and justice in the universe is a human invention. An omnipotent and omniscient God devoted to the cause of good would not have produced the world we live in, with war, the more disgusting aspects of human nature, disease, natural disasters, and the often-contradictory and violent natures of our religion and politics.

And the idea that God gave Man free will to disobey Her by conscious action is one that has long outlived it's usefulness. Manipulating guilt is one of the tools used Communists and Socialists to come to power and excuse the worst of abuses, you know.

The God of the Old Testament (you know, the one that flooded the planet, destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, tormented Job, and tried to keep Adam and Eve from gaining wisdom?) bears no resemblance to the God of the New Testament. That Old God was all "Thou shall not" this and "I will smite thee" that, and the New-and-Improved version was all "turn the other cheek and love they neighbor". Either God mellowed, someone is laboring under some serious misunderstandings, or the whole thing is being made up as we go along, and fags are (one of many groups) suffering for it.

c. Someone has to enforce the unwritten "No White After Labor Day" rule.

Spare me, please.

There are no more "real conservatives", and the word -- much like it's counterpart "liberal" -- no longer means what it once did. In the past, a conservative was one who espoused Classically Liberal ideals about personal freedom and the role of government in securing innate human rights. Now the term has been hijacked to encompass a movement which is less dedicated to personal rights as much as it is to imposing it's own belief system upon others for it's own (mental) comfort.

These people are the "Base" of the modern Right, much like the libertines and welfare queens are the base of the Modern Left, and they're angry about Tea Parties and such. While they most certainly agree with the anti-Tax/Anti-corruption thrust of the Tea Party, they often can't square that with their requirement that everyone think and behave and believe as they do. Muslims claim that there will be no peace on the earth until the four corners of the world are under the thumb of the Caliphate, and so do the Christian FundaMENTALists; they just happen to think their version of the Caliphate is better. Both are aiming at the same goal (imposing their worldview on a great mass of people who don't agree with it),only by different means: the Islamofascists use violence, the Pantybunched Right uses electoral politics.

And when neither gets it's way, they throw a tantrum.

The Tea Parties and Anti-incumbent movements aren't about conservative and liberal, and certainly not about God; they are about what is Right and Legal, and what the proper relationship between citizen and government is. The second you inject God -- and what you arrogantly believe She thinks -- into the conversation, you've lost the battle because it's really all about we mortal men. This movement respects God, but doesn't look to Her for all it's answers, and that drives you absolutely batshit insane. You're afraid that any movement which does not kiss your ass, or play by your rules, is one that will ultimately displace or perhaps even destroy you.

So much so that you can write "God Hates Fags" and not notice the logical contradictions between that statement and the very religious beliefs you claim to espouse.

They Don't Even Try to Hide it Anymore...

Democratic Congresswoman caught demanding "contribution" from lobbyist...on tape.

A few observations:

1. Expect the following defense: Eleanor Holmes Norton is black. Andrew Breitbart , a White Devil, "attacked" the NAACP and Shirley Sherrod only a few months back, therefore, Breitbart is a racist. Ergo, this tape is a piece of Conservative propaganda, deliberately presented in an out-of-context fashion by a known Conservative Fascist Racist, who wants to preserve the Bush Tax Cuts for The Wealthy. While it may look as if Congresscritter Norton might be engaging in an act of could-be-possibly-described-as extortion -- at least to the untrained-Washington-outsider's-eye -- it is just business-as-usual in Washington -- everyone does it -- and did we mention that Andrew Breitbart is a racist?

2. You now know why Tea Parties are becoming such powerful organizations. The corruption in Washington cannot be hidden anymore; it's taking place in broad daylight now. The amazing thing about it is that there's almost a sense of entitlement amongst so-called "Lawmakers"; we're allowed to break the law, because of who we are, and because the law is whatever we say it is...or rather, need it to be at this moment in time.

3. Our political class seems to be completely unaware of some aspects of modern technology, particularly the ubiquitous presence of recording devices. Nowadays, cellphones with e-mail and Internet access, with cameras capable of recording video and free voice mail, are like piles of dogshit: they're everywhere and you can't always avoid them. There's a 24/7 news cycle that requires everything be looked at in the most minute detail to judge it's fitness for broadcast...unless you're CNN and (P)MSNBC, in which case you'll broadcast anything just to fill airtime.

Everything you say and do is probably being recorded by someone...someplace...and you probably don't even know it, or even think about it. If you did, you wouldn't be caught on a voice mail extorting a donation (allegedly) or walking into a Los Angeles hotel in the wee hours to change diapers...after denying paternity repeatedly, or after insisting that "my plan will lower the cost of healthcare", have to retract those statements while denying ever having made them less than six months prior, knowing full-well that no one believes you (you're on tape!), but determined to brazen it out anyway.

This same technology that allows people to catch a John Edwards, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Charlie Rangel or Barack Obama in the act, also allows people who don't approve of that sort of behavior to organize themselves in ways that the political class cannot comprehend, and therefore bitterly fears. This why, since the rise of the Tea Parties, the average citizen is insulted by his "betters" on a near-daily basis. We're all racists; we're too dumb to understand what the government does and what the governing class talks about; We don't need to read bills before Congress votes on them; we just haven't been able to perceive that Recovery yet because, stupid Us, it's not about jobs and wages and ridiculous things like that, you know.

We are ruled, sadly, by a class of crooks that makes the Robber Barons of old look like third-grade pikers. At least the Robber Barons put people to work while they stole, and made no secret of their real intentions.

Unfortunately, I expect Eleanor Holmes Norton to survive the accusations -- despite the evidence -- because, well, let's be honest: she's Black and "represents" Washington, D.C. If Charlie Rangel can manage to win re-election with his baggage -- because he's black and represents Harlem --then Eleanor will most likely skate, too. That, too, is another aspect of the system of double-standards our politicos have erected for themselves; racism is bad...unless it benefits me.

I Don't Care if She's a Democrat...

...I'd vote for her just because the rest of the NY Congressional delegation is so damned unattractive! We have the ugliest Congressional delegation in the country here in the New York, and it's a national disgrace!

This stunning lady is Reshma Saujani, and she's about to square off with Carolyn Maloney (Useless Mouth-New York) who turned her husband's murder on the Long Island Railroad into a congressional seat many years ago, and has done nothing else since...except help promote the disintegration of America by voting liberal-line on everything possible.

She's apparently caused a bit of a kerfuffle in democratic political circles by suggesting that she's not exactly an orthodox democratic footsoldier.

Now, if the fact that there's a smart AND attractive democrat female running for Congress in a state that's dominated by the likes of Louise Slaughter, Charlie Rangel, Anthony Weiner and Chuckie Schumer, wasn't enough to make you think about crossing party lines, she's should get the nod just for this:

But if she loses her Sept. 14 primary with incumbent Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan-Queens), Saujani said she might just stay home and not vote at all.

"I'm a Democrat, I'm a passionate Democrat, [but] I don't know. I'm going to be honest with you ... I might not vote."

Unfortunately, it was the wrong thing to say, if only because the democratic machine in New York quickly attacked her for having the temerity to suggest that she might break ranks and not support her opponent, if Maloney wins. Quoth some democratic party apparatchik pretending to be a college professor:

"If she plans as running as a Democrat again, it would behoove her to think about expressing support for Democrats," said David Birdsell, a Baruch College political scientist.

And of course, the retraction came right away:

A damage-controlling Saujani spokesman backpedaled via an emailed statement that said simply, "Reshma will vote a straight Democratic ticket on November 2nd no matter the outcome of the primary.

Still, if Miss Saujani wants to come over to "The Dark Side", we republicans would never treat her in such shoddy fashion. Democrats are such bullies. The fact that the democratic party so quickly jumped on someone they usually claim is one of their own (woman, person of color) in order to enforce ideological orthodoxy, though, is extremely telling and let's you know just what their priorities truly are. They aren't interested in finding the best-qualified individuals for those congressional seats, just the most politically-reliable.

Then again, perhaps the fact that they came out so strongly and attacked Miss Saujani over her initial stance is a harbinger of things to come: New York democrats are terrified of losing so many races that they can't afford to lose a solitary vote, not just to gain victory, but in the vain hope that they can perhaps make some of these races look closer than they might otherwise be.
I expect to see at least one repeat of Florida 2000 in New York this November.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I might take the rest of the week off to drool...

UPDATE: I have made an error in identifying Ms. Saujani's opponent. I have mixed up Carloyn McCarthy and Carolyn Maloney. A correction can be found here.

Teachers and Firemen Bribed for Votes; Film at 11:00...

Visi-a-vis yesterday's $26-billion bribe to union labor labor disguised as a bail-out of the states; Oh,it's on now, Baby!

The battle lines are just a little more distinct, now. Now the fight is no longer just between Libtard and Conservacrat; it ain't about Haves and Have-not's, anymore. Now this fight is about The Taxpayer and the Giant Sucking Sound.

That Giant Sucking Sound (with props to Ross Perot) is the sound The System makes when the political class tries to maintain it's power and authority by using the money of the Taxpayer to build themselves their own little Empires. The Poor, Union Jerkoffs, Bureaucrats, the Permanent Underclass, the Third-World Imports, are all, to one extent or another sustained by a systematic rape of the Public Treasury undertaken for the benefit of a very few, mostly-self-appointed elite. This was true even before yesterday's vote, and all that vote did was to bring the thing out into the light of day and surround it with a Flashing Day-Glo Yellow Nimbus that basically screams "Corruption!".

They didn't even bother to NAME THE BILL before they voted on it. First they didn't read 'em, now they don't even name 'em, and they did this is a "Special Session" which means that the Congressdouches basically gave up part of their summer vacation to commit a "legal" crime. If only they had the same sense of personal sacrifice when it came to...oh, I don't know...paying their taxes, or subjecting themselves to the same laws they pass.

Anyways, part of the reason why the states (and Federal Government) are in the financial mess they find themselves in is BECAUSE of teachers and firemen, Union Labor, in general; these are folks who have outrageous state-funded retirement and medical plans, not to mention paychecks that often dwarf those of the average Private-sector worker...the poor slob who actually pays the fireman in the first place.

It's all a very transparent (and successful!) attempt to bribe Union Labor to come out for the democrats this fall in mid-term elections. It might work, but probably not, because Union Labor accounts for less than 20% of the workforce. If the majority of the other 80% came out and voted against a Dimwit for supporting this bill, perhaps there's a chance to get the Empire Builders out of Congress. It's a small hope, but one which I would dearly love to see come into full bloom.

In any case, if you see a democrat, cop, garbageman, meter maid, teacher or fireman today, make certain you give them the finger, because through the politicians they support, they just stole more of your money, and gave you the Shaft.

Worse, they took that $26 billion, in part, from people who need food stamps. Probably unemployed Private-sector workers, no doubt, because no one would dare take food stamps away from Tan'eesha and her seven children-by-twelve fathers in Cincinnati, with a (half-) Black Man in the White House,right?

The priorities in this country are seriously corrupted, because the political class that sets the agenda and manipulates it to their personal advantage are themselves corrupt, and so is the union machinery that both supports and feeds off of them. Remember this in November, and vote your local parasite right the fuck out of office!

Of Joe Biden and Irish Setters...

RE: Joe's prognostication vis-a-vis mid-term elections.

Joe tells dimwit activists and the select morons at Nancy Pelosi's fundraiser not to worry; the democrats (small 'd' intentional) will handily beat the snot out of those republicans (small 'r' intentional) and keep control of the government, because President Obambi ain't done giving us all the full measure of ass rape he has planned for us, a good old-fashioned buggering, the likes of which Joe and his cronies believe, deep in their black little hearts, we're all just clamoring for.

When I read that (paraphrased) statement, I finally remembered just who...more like just what...Joe Biden reminds me of.

I remembered when I was a child, and my uncle owned an Irish Setter. She was a great dog; cute as hell, playful, affectionate, gentle, loyal. She was an over-grown puppy, always ready and eager to play, with this great, big, clumsy sort of gait. Plenty of energy, and at the first sign of children, the dog would jump up and down (usually falling to the floor at least once in the process), running around in circles, her tail wagging and her tongue hanging out of the side of her mouth, usually with a string of drool hanging off of it. She would then rush off across the house to get her favorite toy, which invariably, was a tennis ball.

This was the dog's way of saying "Hey, spend several hours tossing this piece of shit so that I can chase it, crash into all the furniture, bang my head a few times on the coffee table, and bring it back to ya, okay?"

And, of course, we did. We were kids, and the sight of a big, gawky dog pouncing left,right and sideways and running head-first into the Lay-Z-Boy was great fun. We'd laugh for hours. Eventually, however, the game would take a cruel turn -- we'd get bored after a bit, and children can often be cruel without meaning to be so -- and the rules of the game would change.

We'd start psyching the dog out, and only pretend to toss the tennis ball. We'd make the throwing motion, the dog would follow with eager eyes, but the ball would never be released and would instead be quickly buried in an armpit; a bit of sleight-of-hand that dog fell for every time. The dog would then dutifully run from pillar-to-post, sniffing here and there, sticking her nose under the sofa, digging behind the couch, running from room-to-room in search of a tennis ball that she was never going to find.

She was diligent. She was determined. She would search for that stupid ball for hours, single-minded. You could not fault her effort, nor her work ethic. She would literally spend the rest of the day searching high-and-low for that tennis ball until some other thought pushed it right out of her head, like feeding time, or the whimper in front of the door that meant "Take me out: I have to pop a squat".

Once, I played that trick on that dog, and I swear; she went to sleep that evening, and the first thing the following morning, she was still looking for that tennis ball. Eventually, keeping the tennis ball away from the dog lost it's lustre, too, and became needlessly mean, so we'd give in and let her have it again. And she'd lie right there in front of you , gnawing at the tennis ball as if it were a T-bone -- the Huntress Enjoying Her Kill --and we'd pet her and tell her she was a good girl ,and give her a nice belly-rub.

I loved that dog, and I miss her (Seana finally succumbed to old age one day. She just lay down one evening and never get up again).

Joe reminds me of Seana; you can't doubt his earnestness and eagerness to please. He's determined, even to the point of being preoccupied by his single thought, oblivious to anything other than finding that tennis ball (or, in this case, the cause of rallying the troops on behalf of an Administration that half the people in the country disapprove of strongly, while the other half is deeply disappointed in it).

Joe has the same qualities as Seana: in his own way, he's a lovable doofus, too, who sometimes just doesn't realize that his quest is Quixotic, and that we're all having a good laugh at his expense. The only difference, I'd say, is that Joe probably doesn't whimper at the front door when he has to take a dump. He doesn't look housebroken to me.

But you can almost picture him doing so.

Do We Really Need A Congress?

I watched some of the posturing about BP CEO Tony Hayward this afternoon, and based on that performance my answer would have to be a resounding "NO". At least not if it meant that if we kept Congress, we'd have to keep the parade of morons currently there. That bunch of people I saw this afternoon were scary; there wasn't enough intellectual firepower up there to burn calories. The performance, the fake concern, the sarcasm, the posturing, the begging for Hayward to resign, was pathetic.

If none of those people aren't already sterile, we should probably make it a requirement for public office. After all, we spay and neuter house cats, so why not Congresscritters? But I digress...

Let's get something straight: Mr. Hayward did himself no good today, either. His company, which is already on my List of 10,000-Least-Favorite-Things-After-Ebola, is in deeper shit than I might have thought possible. If the e-mails that the Congresscritters were jabbering about today are any indication -- e-mails which contain complaints about safety from members of the drilling team, hints about cost-cutting, and internal memos which paint a picture of a company that was in total disarray, where the executives don't know what the workforce does, where the line-managers seem to be cowboys, and this was before the disaster -- are anything close to true, BP will probably cease to exist.

And that is as it should be; that's the Free Market at work. Companies that fuck up go out of business, it's just a shame that Congress can only remember that when they have a convenient foreign whipping boy willing to be shaken down to the tune of $20 billion just to keep the lawyers at bay (for now), and conveniently forgot it when Citibank, General Motors or AIG -- whose executives contributed to the campaign coffers of every Congressional Retard on the Hill -- were at the helm of their own disasters.

But don't get the idea in your head that Congress, by exposing BP's internal e-mails and hectoring Hayward with questions they knew he wasn't going to answer was actually doing anything that will prevent another Gulf Oil Spill, plug the damned hole, or clean up a solitary shoreline.

They just kept asking Hayward questions in an attempt to get something on record with which to clobber him later on. It's an old lawyer's trick, and it's how they eventually got Martha Stewart, you know. They want to lock Hayward into a story so that when the facts eventually do come out (especially the ones that show the government asleep at the switch, or which catch the regulatory agencies at their usual dumb-as-dogshit best), they'll be able to dance around those inconvenient revelations by hammering Hayward over "changes in his story".

BP is not off the hook, as far as I'm concerned, but the dog-and-pony show these last few days with the oil industry being beaten up in the public square so that complete and utter dingleberries can look "concerned" and "tough" and "in command", is an even sadder sight than seabirds slathered in crude oil.

Especially that asshat Joseph Cao, who started all that stuff about hara-kiri. If I remember correctly, Cao was one of the republican votes for ObamaCare, so maybe he'd care to demonstrate the proper technique for the rest of us? At least it would spare us his fake sanctimony and transparent grandstanding. Incidentally, Cao is Vietnamese, I think, and hara-kiri (more properly called "seppaku") is Japanese. Vietnamese don't kill themselves: they surrender to the nearest communists they can find and then take to rickety boats to save their worthless asses...at least the ones who eventually grow up to be Congressmen, that is. Cao is the Republican Party's answer to Anthony Weiner.

I know we have to keep a Congress, if only because if we didn't have one the President of the United States would become a dictator...oh, wait, that's already happened...but do we have to keep this one, and give them excuses to stage trials, asking questions (written by aides who did some actual research) of people who know even less than they do?

After that disgusting display, I'm of the mind that all 535 members of both Houses would be more useful if they stopped shovelling their usual nonsense, and hit a Gulf Coast beach to shovel tar balls, instead.

Certainly, BP should be punished for whatever it has done, or failed to do. The time for that, however, will be after they manage to plug the hole in the Gulf and start the cleanup in earnest, because there is no other entity at present who can do either. The Federal Government is inept, and it's hands are tied by bureaucratic bullshit, legalities, and the fact that public employees don't work very hard, or display much initiative. So, lay off BP, especially with the lawyer's tricks and the third-degree bullshit, until they've done what you need them to do.

The fucking lawsuits can wait.

But then I guess if there weren't this Show Trials, some people (mostly the Press, which is an even bigger crowd of idiots than Congress) would ask "where's the government in all this?", and those jerkoffs on Capitol Hill would have no answer. At least now they can claim to have "grilled Tony Hayward and asked him tough questions on the record...", which at least keep them occupied long enough so that they weren't trying to figure out how to tax us to pay for penile implants for illegal aliens.

Unfortunately, it doesn't stop the leak, or clean up one drop of oil. How much you wanna bet that every one of those flapping rectums will make certain the video of today's puppet show appears in their campaign commercials this fall, though?

BP can't plug the hole fast enough, and 2012 can't come soon enough.

101 Things You Need to Know About Liberals...

Note: The following is a collection of observations that I have gathered over the years from various sources. I cannot, and do not, claim authorship of any of these maxims.

1. Liberalism is a movement of the well-intentioned, but ill-informed, led by the well-informed and ill-intentioned.

2. At heart, a liberal is an eternal adolescent, forever in search of escape from conventional morality, consequences and responsibility.

3. Freedom from moral consequence can only be secured by a collectivist, totalitarian state.

4. The Liberal religion worships the twin gods of The Government and The Genitalia.

5. A Liberal believes that psychology is a hard science in the same way that physics and chemistry are hard sciences.

6. Freedom, to a Liberal, refers solely to the freedom of the genitalia.

7. All non-sexual individual freedoms are despised by the Liberal because they contain within them an element of personal responsibility, self-sacrifice, or abstention.

8. Collectivism seeks to eliminate the need for personal responsibility and moral consequence by shifting blame for failure from the individual to "society" or "the System".

9. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the enemy of the Liberal. Because they are clear in their elaboration of both the rights of the Individual and the Powers of Government, both documents must be subverted, re-interpreted, or ignored, as needed.

10. The Liberal hates the United States because it has been the premier guarantor and promoter of individual rights in the history of mankind.

11. All institutions – schools, environMENTAL organizations, Civil Rights Groups, Law courts, Markets, etc., serve no relevant purpose to a Liberal except when they can be made to promote the concept of the collective.

12. Abortion is necessary to guarantee genital freedom and to further erode the concept of personal responsibility, while eliminating future generations of less-desirable human beings.

14. The Liberal must create an atmosphere of perpetual crisis, fear, and envy in order to justify continued collectivist oppression.

15. Religion is the enemy of the Liberal since it promotes morality and responsibility and suggests an authority set above Government.

16. Despite decades of failure, the Liberal clings to his collectivist ideology because it is HIS religion.

17. Liberals seek to dominate any institution that can be used to undermine or eliminate parental rights, such as schools, child-abuse agencies, pediatric associations, etc. and which can be used to turn children into informants for the State against their own parents.

18. The Liberal seeks to sanction and jail those who dare to home school their children, or who have the balls and wherewithal to raise their children in an environment outside of Liberal control or influence.

19. Individual ownership of firearms is the greatest threat to collectivism and the greatest expression of individual rights, therefore, all Liberals despise guns.

20. All freedoms demand responsible behavior. The Liberal despises responsibility, therefore, he despises freedom.

21. A Liberal worships his pantheon of Kennedys, Clintons, Cuomos, Jacksons, Gores and Obamas, for WHO they are, and in spite of WHAT they are.

22. The Liberal despises National Sovereignty, which is a guarantor of individual freedoms.

23. The Liberal promotes international government, such as the United Nations and the European Union, which seek to destroy National Sovereignty. The Soviet Union did not collapse, it merely moved west.

24. The Liberal is obsessed with the idea of centralized control of all human endeavors.

25. Liberals often speak of tolerance but can only tolerate other Liberals.

26. Liberals seek to criminalize any speech promoting responsibility, morality, or individualism as "hate speech" or sedition.

27. To a liberal, the thought cannot be separated from the deed -- unless one of his or her own is thinking or doing it.

28. Environmentalists lie as a matter of course, promoting paranoia based upon verifiable falsehood.

29. A Liberal’s only method of discourse is to insult and discredit all who disagree with him. Failing that, they attempt to draw attention away from the subject at hand by "moving on" and changing the subject.

30. Your freedom is a Liberal’s oppression.

31. Private property and wealth are disgusting and distasteful concepts to a Liberal -- unless they should have more than you do.

32. Liberals hate freedom-loving people with a passion bordering on mania.

33. The Liberal seeks to replace a moral world-view with an emotional one which can be more easily manipulated for political ends.

34. A Liberal claims to "care" for the homeless, mentally ill, lame, lazy and shiftless, but would never invite one of them into their own home.

35. The Liberal typically chooses a career – law, psychology, academic, bureaucrat, "activist", which produces nothing of value and which uses the power of government to extract the wealth of others.

36. Liberal "programs" enrich Liberals and screw the people they were purportedly supposed to help.

37. Liberals despise masculinity, as they view it as a symbol of individual freedom and power.

38. Feminist groups exist to promote lesbianism and socialism and have nothing to do with "equal rights".

39. The EEOC regularly invents incidents of racism and discrimination in order to justify its existence and to promote the collectivist ideals regarding employment and equality-of-outcome-type Liberal programs or thought.

40. Liberals despise suburbs as the manifestation of individual property and prosperity -- but seem to have no such qualms about gentrifying ghettos.

41. Liberals hate marriage and the family because they are institutions that strengthen the bonds between individuals -- leaving no room for collectivism -- and because they are institutions which frown upon immorality.

42. Liberals despise the automobile as a symbol of personal freedom.

43. Other diseases kill far more people, but Liberals are obsessed with AIDS because it is the consequence of promiscuity and immorality.

44. Liberal activities are driven by ego and a need for self-satisfaction. A liberal believes and does the things he does because he must prove that he "cares" more than you do.

45. Liberals thrive on emotion and die by reason.

46. Anything espoused by a Liberal as "for the children" is a direct assault upon your family, your privacy, your wallet and your rights.

47. Liberals have no compunction against using violence, deceit, or oppression if it furthers the collectivist cause.

48. Liberals are elitists who routinely exempt themselves from the very rules and suggested behaviors they impose on everyone else.

49. A Liberal must accept as an article of faith that my gun has killed more people than Ted Kennedy’s car or Janet Reno's ATF and FBI.

50. Liberals believe that Geraldo Rivera, Katie Couric, Dan Rather, and Oprah Winfrey are "journalists".

51. Liberals howl if a "protected" group is offended by speech or action, but will remain dead silent if the offended happen to be any of the following: Christians, White Males, Heterosexuals or Taxpayers.

52. Liberals believe wealth is static and quantifiable, and that that it should be divided equally. So, if I have "too much money", it follows that I must have stolen someone else’s "fair share".

53. Liberals believe that Richard Nixon was a vile criminal but that Stalin, Mao, and Fidel Castro are "progressive" leaders who had only the best of intentions.

54. All Liberal ideologies tend towards worldwide totalitarianism.

55. A Liberal is quite ready to point out misconduct by a member of a group opposed to them, but will routinely excuse even more vile behavior by their own.

56. Liberals are obsessed with the theory of evolution because the alternatives terrify them.

57. A full-time, stay-at-home mother enrages a Liberal.

58. Human life is cheap in a Liberal world.

59. The Liberal routinely changes the definition of a word to suit his purpose. For example, you have the "choice" to abort your unborn children, but not the "choice" of smoking, owning a gun, or buying an SUV.

60. A Liberal cannot conceive of a problem that cannot be solved without Government intervention.

61. Hillary Clinton's village is a totalitarian state: it used to be called the Soviet Union.

62. Given the chance, a Liberal would ban the Bible, Constitution, Declaration of Independance and  Tom Sawyer as "hate speech".

63. Liberals view people as objects without moral motivation, thus we have the welfare state, abortion rights, etc. Conversely, they view inanimate objects in strictly moral terms, thus they are able to vilify and impart motives to firearms, cigarettes, SUV's, corporations, etc.

64. "Third Way" politics is a new shade of lipstick on the same Socialist pig.

65. Liberals are often intolerant, immature, violent thugs, laboring under the misapprehension that they do what they do for "social and moral causes".

66. The Liberal would sooner pluck out his own eye that to cut a tax.

67. Liberals still believe that Marx was right, despite the evidence to the contrary.

68. Hitler was a Socialist, not a Fascist and certainly NOT a Conservative. (See # 53 and #55).
69. Liberals believe that AIDS kills people because prevention and treatment services are underfunded, and not because people behave irresponsibly.

70. Liberals detest the death penalty, but favor abortion, thus setting up the convoluted idea that it’s okay to save the guilty and kill the innocent.

71. Liberals believe that trial lawyers are selfless heroes and that doctors are overpaid robber barons.

72. A Liberal believes that gender roles are "imposed by society" and that homosexuality is "normal" behavior.

73. A Liberal believes that business creates oppression and that Government creates wealth.

74. To a Liberal, self-esteem, the concept, is far more important than doing anything to actually earn some.

75. A Liberal regularly engages in symbolism because if he told the truth, no one would listen.

76. Liberals hate the NRA for their defense of the Second Amendment, and praise the ACLU for their perversion of the First .

77. To a Liberal, Taxes are too low and ATM fees are too high.

78. Racial profiling by police departments is wrong, but perfectly acceptable for deciding who gets into Law School.

79. The only difference between a Liberal and a Communist is that a Communist is AWARE of what he is doing.

80. Continued Liberal support for the shiftless, lazy, halt, lame, and crippled is necessary because they are the groups most easily manipulated by fear and envy.

81. Any proposal to build "low-income" housing is applauded by a Liberal, unless, of course, someone chooses to build it on the Upper West Side, or Malibu Beach.

82. In Liberal math, an 8% increase in government spending on any favored program rather than the usual-and-customary 10% increase equates to a 2% "cut" in funding, which somehow always results in someone starving or dying unnecessarily.

83. All of society’s ills can be cured by "education" inside a union-run institution that does no such thing.

84. All Liberals use words like "Ethnocentric", "jingoistic", "homophobic" and "trans-gendered" at least three times a day.

85. All Liberals have a primal urge to refer to any idea that they cannot comprehend -- or merely dislike -- as "sexist", "racist", "homophobic", etc.

86. A Liberal finds it perfectly acceptable to dispense condoms in a public school, but would cry bloody murder if the package had the Ten Commandments printed on it.

87. A Liberal advocates the killing of human beings (abortion) and the preservation of wildlife.

88. A Liberal feels that the only thing wrong with Communist States of the past was NOT that they were founded upon a flawed political ideology and engaged in awful repression, but rather that the results would have been far different if only the RIGHT Communists had been available to run them.

89. A Liberal believes that character doesn’t count...because they very often have none.

90. A Liberal will tell you that the First Amendment protects those that burn a flag, protest at a dead soldier's funeral, or beat up a Tea Party activist, and in the same breath, insist that Rush Limbaugh promotes "hate speech".

91. A Liberal would like to see the National Anthem replaced with the "Two Minutes Hate".

92. Liberals have such high opinions of themselves, their motives, and their ideas, that they would have you believe that the rest of us actually want to live in a world with dirty air and water, hip-deep in starving schoolchildren and dying elderly people..

93. Human nature does not exist to a Liberal, and when it routinely manifests itself, it is routinely ignored, and if possible, legislated and taxed.

94. Liberals view people in the same way a sculptor views a lump of clay, or a block of marble.

95. Liberals believe that man is inherently malleable and that all that’s needed is the proper training of man to enact to collectivist vision of the universe.

96. Loyalty is a concept foreign to most Liberals because it entails responsibility.

97. Ethics can be easily dispensed with in a Liberal world if they conflict with the creation of the collective.

98. Euphemism is the language of a Liberal, and symbolism is his modus operandi. Clarity and actual accomplishments are the enemies of Liberalism because Liberalism thrives on vagueness and the emotional aspects of "struggle".

99. Liberals believe that criminals should have more rights than law-abiding citizens.

100. Liberals routinely invent extra-Constitutional rights in order to further their agenda (i.e. abortion, gender and racial preferences, etc.) and routinely invent "repressed groups" in order to expand the power of the State (i.e. homosexuals, minorities, illegal immigrants, etc.) or to subvert the power of established institutions (i.e. the Church, family, nationalism, etc.).


101. Most Liberals would feel more shame in standing to attention during the National Anthem then they would in stealing from a Poor Box.


Remember these dictums when next President Obambi makes a speech, or Nancy and Dirty Harry introduce some new legislation, when Barney Frank tries to bluster his way out of his moral obligations and responsibility, the next time a Democratic Senator takes a bribe for a vote, the next time a Liberal cries about "racism", or whenever a Liberal is concerned about your health, your children or your status.

Remember this when Obama nominates this next Supreme Court Justice.

Certainly remember them come Novemeber.

You Call This Financial Reform?

I'm not completely up on the whole new package of Obamatard Financial Reforms. I really don't plan to be, either, since wading through endless pages of financial terms and Senatorese about Sub-section 2651.V, appendix J, of United States Code... is about as rewarding as the wishful thinking that one day Arabs might actually discover their own retardation and make an effort to improve themselves has been. There are more constructive uses for my time; smoking, a vodka and tonic, and a hockey game come to mind.

But, you do have to pay attention to some aspects of this sort of thing, if only because if you don't, you miss the chance for a belly laugh and perhaps another insight into the Retards we let run our lives.

The Excuse for a new slew of Federal Regulations (i.e. Congressional and Presidential meddling in Financial Markets, in a subject they know little about, the creation of new Bureaucracies and the Strengthening of the Old and Ineffective Ones, and a smorgasbord of New Taxes) is that Wall Street Has Run Amok, and that it has Destroyed the American Free Market System, which required massive bailouts of every major financial firm on the planet. In order to Repair The Economy, and Save the Taxpayer from further abuse and grief, the government must, in the immortal words of Peter Arnett, "...destroy the village in order to save it..."

We need the government to be empowered to do things it's never been able to do before -- and give it the discretion to do it capriciously -- because the Old Way resulted in rampant fraud, crashing markets and a $700 billion bailout.

Hold yer horses there, Mr. Barack Hussein Ojerkoff!

The reason Wall Street failed (and I must admit, I'm not an expert here, just someone who watched how the Brokers and Bankers operate) , has nothing to do with regulations, or the lack of enforcement, thereof. In fact, you can trace most of the original problems directly TO regulations, or more specifically, Congressional action, and a lot of stupidity and greed on the part of people who should have known better, but who have no moral compass.

The first of these plagues was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, a Depression-era safeguard which prohibited Banks, Brokerages, Mortgage Brokers and Insurance companies from being owned by the same entities, and their businesses intertwined. No sooner than this Law was repealed, than I saw the creation of Citigroup (where I was working at the time); it steadily acquired more and more business units, until by the time I left (2004), Citigroup contained the original Citibank and several regional/state banks (core banking services), Smith-Barney/Salomon Brothers/Nikko Securities and Schroeder's International (investment banking and securities trading -- and that's in addition to the previously-absorbed rumps of E.F. Hutton, and parts of the old Shearson-Lehman-American Express conglomerate), Traveler's Insurance (along with the Traveler's portfolio of smaller insurers), Primerica Corp. (mortgage lending and mortgage-backed securities), and approximately a dozen other, smaller operations, including several foreign (mainly Mexican) banks, or firms dedicated to more specific aspects of all-things-Financial.

The Idea was to create the Financial equivalent of a One-Stop Shopping Center, where you could walk into a Citi branch, and not only make a deposit, or get a new checkbook, but build a stock portfolio with your personal Smith-Barney financial advisor, apply for a mortgage through Primerica, get that college loan form your regional bank, buy auto or home insurance from a Traveler's Representative, all in a conveniently-located central location. And of course, all this cross-selling of services had it's benefits: if you used Citi finanical products exclusively, you got discounts, and you got other incentives mostly related to cheap promotional junk; you got free calculators, t-shirts, and other crap, all with that nifty Red Umbrella on it. If you had some scratch, you got better gifts. Eventually, Citibank grows to have it's fingers in every pie you can think of, and has money tied up in anything you can imagine. That's when it's not lending money to countries (Argentina and Russia, specifically) which default on billion-dollar loans more often than democrats make stupid statements.

The Second problem was a monetary policy promulgated by the "Genius", Alan Greenspan, who was so preoccupied by the specter of inflation, and struggling to understand an electronic revolution that overwhelmed a 70-year old's mental capacity, and who also made "Cheap Credit" his mantra. Cheap credit eventually made riskier investments easier, because cash was available at lower interest rates. That had two practical effects: it made the practice of borrowing money from the Fed at ridiculously-low interest rates, and then lending it (via mortgages and credit cards) at outrageous interest rates, very lucrative. It also helped to trap many Americans in debt. It made making riskier loans easier to hedge -- if there was a shortfall, you should be able to borrow money from the Fed to cover the losses, at practically no interest.

The practice of giving 300k mortgages to people who made less than 50k a year, at variable or higher interest rates, was a gold mine in this sort of environment. And it was safe, so long as everyone stayed gainfully employed, and managed the Minimum Monthly Payment. The practice of charging 18-25% interest on credit cards was even more lucrative, since people given access to more credit (thanks to loose interest policies and a consumer-based society hooked on the products of the Information Age) sucked the stuff up and began living via plastic instead of cash. They lost perspective on the value of money. If the suckers overextended themselves, no problem; Wall Street managed to get the bankruptcy laws changed so that no one walks away, anymore. It's all profit.

The final Nail in the Coffin was the belief that Everyone Deserves A Home of Their Own. That's a nice sentiment, but with all that easy credit and ridiculously-obtainable mortgages floating about, not to mention Congress driving the Banks to make this a reality for Low-Income people (i.e. deadbeats and minorities), or suffer the consequences, we created a certain mindset; not only do I deserve a Home of My Own, I Deserve a Home No one Else has Ever Lived in Before, Too -- and I can pay for it because there's all this Free Money flying around.

(A side note: this Homebuyer's Revolution led to another, smaller revolution; the vast array of Home-based television shows, like Dream House, or Home and Gardens TV, or those dumb shows where people renovate each other's houses based upon their own taste and such, and don't get me started on the whole A&E series of Gay Real Estate Agents and their House Flipping. They make this seem all-so-easy, and people laboring under the impression that a) money is easy to come by, and b) I can do what they just did made some of this appreciably worse).

The combination of easy mortgages, a marketplace who wanted more and unique housing, and government encouragement, the ability to pass off bad loans in as Mortgage-Backed Securities guaranteed by Freddie and Fannie at no risk, and the housing market was soon in full swing, producing New Homes like Inner-city crack whores produce illegitimate offspring; the market became saturated with houses that can only be sold so long as credit was easy to obtain..

And then, It Happened. Someone swiped half-a-Trillion dollars from the Economy on day in September 2008.

(Ed. Note: I say "someone" in the belief that the Fed, or anyone else involved, can never actually tell the truth about this event, and we will likely never know who was actually involved. If the Fed tells you it knows how it was done, and by whom, you might not like those answers, and might even begin to question why it was "they" were allowed to do what they did. If, on the other hand, the Fed should try to tell you that "it doesn't know How It Happened", that would be even worse. Either way, faith would be lost in the Federal Reserve System and the American Economy, and we'd be in an even bigger hole. I think, this, more than anything else, explains the speed and lack of debate, or even information, that preceded the $700 million Bailout. This country was either attacked economically by our enemies, either an act of economic terrorism or an attempt to weaken us in some way, or the Fed found itself the victim of a simple, and entirely-foreseeable-in-retrospect mistakes that someone probably brought to their attention, and which they failed to subsequently correct).

Citigroup (amongst others) became Too Big To Fail, because it had been allowed to become a bloated, under-capitalized frat house of extreme risk-takers driven by the promise of easy credit, which would save them from their worst mistakes. The outrageous profits to be gained by gaming the system were too heady a brew to ignore, and Financial Professionals are all about getting while the getting is good, no questions asked, no ethical or professional line that can't be blurred by fine distinctions or willing stupidity . It was a game made easier by the Federal Reserve and several Acts of Congress.

When the System Failed, the solution was to "pump" $700 billion into it in order to keep all the "Too-Big-To-Fails-Afloat". It's actual effect was to dry up all that low-interest liquidity that encouraged the bad loans and the Plastic Economy in the first place, further exacerbating the problem. The $787 billion "Stimulus" bill further reduced the amount of available credit by restricting the money supply. The subsequent printing of money to pay for this "stimulus" has lessened the value of what cash can be obtained through inflation. The Wall Street firms may have gotten colossal amounts of bailout funds -- but they got it at the expense of every other business in America. And far from clearing the "toxic assets" from their books with that money, like they were supposed to, the Big Firms simply propped up their stock prices, which allowed their Executives (the one's who presided over this mess) to profit even more, and pay back the loans quickly in some cases. The speed involved in both the formulation of the original Bailout package, and the Stimulus Program, left little details like directing Wall Street on how to best spend that money and making certain they used it for that specific purpose, completely un-discussed, let alone enacted or included in the final product.

The Housing Market, one of the foundations of the economic system, is in disarray: it's got units it can't -- and perhaps never will -- sell. It's got houses that are going into foreclosure (because the sucking up of credit by the Fed and the Government are hurting their mortgage-holder's employers), and it will lose out on these, also. Large numbers of homes (old and new) will soon be empty, and simply left to rot, because high unemployment and harder-to-get credit will ensure there are no buyers.The Banks now hold so much worthless paper that the tellers are wiping their asses with it.

AIG, General Motors, Chrysler, General Electric, Citigroup, Shearson-Lehman, Goldman Sachs, Bear-Stearns/UBS, Merril Lynch, and their finance arms, are now owned, in large part, by the federal Government (incidentally, the Obama System of Government intervention is almost exactly how things worked in Nazi Germany). Obama already has command of these institutions by virtue of the bailout; now he wants the ability to micro-manage these companies for political ends, and to beat them up in the media to keep that Class Warfare theme going.

Obama now cites all this abuse and lack of oversight as a prime reason why we need a New Set of Rules. To Ensure that This NEVER Happens again. This is now something like my fifth or sixth "recession" and I've discovered that they always happen again, and usually for the same reasons.

People get greedy. People get stupid. Congress gets even greedier and stupider (because it's full of cloistered morons who don't know what the real world is like, and who expect to be bribed), and makes the process of being Greedy and Stupid much, much easier. We don't need Better Rules; we need Better Human Beings. The problem is, you're not likely to find either in the Government or The Boardroom.

Besides, we already had a system of punishing the guilty; It was called Bankruptcy Law, and it wasn't given the chance to work. The mentality (panic, really) of the time, was that bankruptcy was a giant No-No. It shouldn't be allowed to happen because the consequences would be so hideous (like the election of B.O. hasn't been a disaster?). The government didn't even allow the system it set up to work they way it was supposed to. It would have worked, too. And this "recession" would probably be a lot shallower and eventually shorter, if it had.

Having already facilitated the corruption of the Old System, then preventing the safeguards and punishments they mandated for that System to function -- all for selfish political ends -- the government, President Obama specifically, is now arguing that because The Old System Failed, because of our willing and purposeful failure to obey it's rules, we now require a Whole New System.

And there's no politics involved in it...at all.

Well, he's already sold the notion of "free" Healthcare, a political program that consists largely of staged media events and little of substance, Himself as a "post-racial-post-partisan" healer of Divine Origin, so why shouldn't he give this one a try, too?

The sooner we get a new Congress to rein this bastard in, the better off this country will be. We already have a system of laws to punish Goldman-Sachs. Let it work the way it's intended, and reserve judgement on whether or not new rules are required until the Goldman situation has been hashed out. The speed and lack of debate with which Obama is pushing this new initiative is part of the same pattern he's used on Healthcare and Cap-and-Trade, and seems to be his preferred method of operation; get the press release, get the photo-op, screw the details.