Re: The "Cornhusker Kickback" given to Sen. Ben Nelson for his vote on the Senate Healthcare bill (by extension, this also goes out to Mary Landrieu of Lousiana, who got a hefty $300 million for her vote).
The democrats (small 'd' intentional) don't even attempt to hide graft anymore, it seems.
Don't congratulate yourself on your skill and cunning at having swiped a shitload of money from the Treasury for your state.
That money doesn't exist. It never will.
Or won't until the very Congress that 'gave' you these windfalls decides to raise taxes on your state's citizens to pay for it, or worse, the Treasury prints funny money which dilutes the value of the 'real' money your state's citizens earn, reducing their purchasing power and destroying their quality of life.
Your 'great negotiating skills' (yeah, like bribery ever required those?) will have to be paid for one day by the very people you supposedly represent. Don't be surprised when all this money you've gained mysteriously vaporizes into a Healthcare system that doesn't work, and when, in ten years time (maybe sooner), both Nebraska and Louisiana are back crying poor mouth, crushed by the expense of supporting Obamacare, complaining that this wasn't what they were promised or expected.
I wonder just who pulled one over on who?
Monday, December 21, 2009
Why Leftists Are Typically Wrong...And Dangerous...
In an effort to explain the mental disorder that manifests itself in leftist politics, I postulate the following:
Lefties really are well-meaning people. At least the foot soldiers are. It is said that the the left is a collection of the well-intentioned, but ill-informed being led by the well-informed but ill-intentioned. There is some truth in this. Your typical Leftie is concerned about...things...They care about...stuff. Ask them to explain their feelings and beliefs, and you'll most often get a mishmash of gobbledeegook which they 'learned' in sociology class, but which makes no sense whatsoever. The Leftist front-liner is a retard (or a college student or aging hippie, which is pretty much the same thing) or a ward of the state. Thinking is not required to be a Leftist, and it isn't their real talent...whining is.
They don't very often don't know why they care, they very often can't explain what they're concerned about, they just know that they are concerned (or believe they should be). It's an emotional compulsion; they are drawn to issues that elicit emotional responses and act accordingly, because being drawn to issues that require thought is apparently too hard. Add the herd mentality (people tend to want to be involved in activities which seem popular within their peer group), and you get the basis for most Lefty-influenced 'movements'.
Once the emotional and pack-mentality aspects take over, Lefties usually get into a bizarre pissing match with one another over who cares more than whom, which leads them into internal conflict (typically of the passive-aggressive sort which involves whispers, rumors, and eventually full-blown public exposure and humiliation of their enemies), and ever-more ridiculous displays of public emotionalism which take the forms of 'symbolism', 'solidarity' and 'support', which lead us to the next problem with Lefties...
None of this is ever directed into an genuinely-meaningful, or even just useful action. Meaningful actions require purpose (which is hard to formulate when your inspiration is emotional and not rational), and useful ones require personal effort. Lefties hate personal efforts because it's much easier to say you care and then demand someone else do something. Someone else must do the work, someone else must make the sacrifice, someone else must pay for whatever they advocate because, dammit, they CARE already!. The Good Lefty, having expended emotion, having made the symbolic-but-empty gesture to show she (it's usually a she, or a metrosexual) cares, believes they've done their part. There are people on the Left who make a living at this; they continue to 'advocate' for their emotionally-inspired-issue-that-will-require-someone-else's-effort-and-money-to-correct. They manage to skim proceeds from it from their brain-dead fellow travelers, and because they can scream loud enough and are politically-connected, from the taxpayer, which brings us to the next problem with Lefties...
They don't understand money. Since many of them don't really work, or worse, work in 'industries' which bring little in the way of positive gain to society (like the arts, media, academia, government, NGO's and so forth) they don't understand economics. They don't earn their livings doing something that involves the marketplace, they are handed the excess that the more productive society creates. This leads them to make several basic mistakes when discussing economic issues. The first is that wealth (they euphemistically call it 'resources') are finite. All resources, money, oil, air, water, food, raw materials of a thousand sorts, are always finite. It's why they can shout about 'peak oil', and the 'population bomb' and it's been the driving force behind socialism, communism and now the environmental movement. The second is that 'government' has money of it's own, independent of the taxpayer.
Since all resources are finite, Lefties are free to believe in a mystical unit of wealth which they refer to as 'the fair share'. They cannot tell you how much a 'fair share' is, only that everyone is entitled to one and those who typically do the least and add the least, are somehow entitled to a bigger 'fair share' than the productive who actually make the shares in the first place. When this sort of lopsided economics (wealth exists in finite quantities, everyone gets a fair share, some pigs are more equal than others) is applied in real life, you get a welfare state of entitlement programs which bankrupts a nation, and which requires ever-more oppressive taxation to support (which only certain non-Leftie-approved castes will have to pay. They always exempt themselves because while they may be economically retarded, they ain't stupid). Of course, Lefties never apply this sort of economic lunacy to their own finances. Which leads us to the next problem with Lefties, which is...
Screaming hypocrisy about wealth. They claim to despise wealth, to despise the people who possess it as thieves and rapists who have stolen it from 'the people', rather than earned it through hard work and intelligence. But, the ranks of the left are full of some of the richest people on the planet; George Soros, Bill Gates, Al Gore, Bill and Hillary Clinton, The Kennedys, John Kerry, all stalwart defenders of the downtrodden, have bank accounts the average working stiff can only look upon with envy. In many cases, they came into possession of this wealth by less-than-honest means; the Kennedy's built their fortune on Prohibition, George Soros was a Nazi Collaborator, John Kerry simply marries wealthy widows, Al Gore takes advantage of the mentally-challenged. The ever-expanding list of the glitterati that often act as surrogates, advocates and role-models for the left, the actors and actresses in Hollywood, the musical artist who advocates this or that policy, the athlete who couldn't tie his own shoes without a government program, are also good examples of this; they earn their living from practices and activities which involve the extraction of wealth from those who earn or create it. They are prime examples of a movement made up of people who add little of lasting value to society while taking as much as they possibly can from it. The Leftie screams about the money given to Wall Street bankers, calling it unfair and wasteful, yet never bats an eyelash at a guy who gets $100 million from another rich guy to hit a baseball, or to make a movie. Usually because the first is a minority (there's that 'some pigs are more equal than others' thing), or an artist (which means jack shit to anyone with half a brain).
Those people can be forgiven their hypocrisy because they give the Lefties the attention they crave. That's the real problem with the Left; it's full of needy, clingy, annoying people who crave constant attention. These people give them hope that someone takes them seriously -- all the while stealing money and votes with the classic strategy of un-anchored emotionalism, empty symbolism and making all things 'someone else's' problem. Until now, that is.
Now the Lefties have gotten wise to the scam, and they're angry. They've finally seen that their Paragons were little more than charlatans and they demand that that they get what they've been wanting for the last 100 years. It's why they rioted in Copenhagen, it's why Howard Dean opened a can of Whoop-Ass on Harry Reid on Health Care; They've waited for Communism long enough.
Because at root, this is what all the Leftist nonsense of the last century has been about; World Communism. They've dressed themselves up as 'Progressives", they've insinuated themselves into the fights for Equality, Social Justice and Civil Rights, they are at the vanguard of the Environmental movement. They believe (still) that communism can work. They believe that Communism will (finally) bring 'peace' to the planet. They believe that Communism will 'save' mankind (from what, they can't exactly tell you). Which leads us to the biggest problem with Leftists...
Despite all the evidence that everything they espouse usually fails, spectacularly, they keep trying. They believe that communism has failed not because it is a flawed system which takes all incentive out of the individual, and thus, society, but because we just haven't found the right communists to run the World State yet. All Communism will do is make us all equally miserable; Lefties more than others because they are not especially well-known for enduring discomfort and suffering... especially when it's their own.
The Left looks at Barack Obama and the current American Congress, and they believe they have, finally, found the right communists. But this bunch haven't moved quickly enough for the Left's tastes, and thus, all the brouhaha and infighting. This is just the beginning of a shitstorm that will, we can hope, finally expose this bunch of hacks for what they really are in a way that it will be impossible to mistake.
Lefties really are well-meaning people. At least the foot soldiers are. It is said that the the left is a collection of the well-intentioned, but ill-informed being led by the well-informed but ill-intentioned. There is some truth in this. Your typical Leftie is concerned about...things...They care about...stuff. Ask them to explain their feelings and beliefs, and you'll most often get a mishmash of gobbledeegook which they 'learned' in sociology class, but which makes no sense whatsoever. The Leftist front-liner is a retard (or a college student or aging hippie, which is pretty much the same thing) or a ward of the state. Thinking is not required to be a Leftist, and it isn't their real talent...whining is.
They don't very often don't know why they care, they very often can't explain what they're concerned about, they just know that they are concerned (or believe they should be). It's an emotional compulsion; they are drawn to issues that elicit emotional responses and act accordingly, because being drawn to issues that require thought is apparently too hard. Add the herd mentality (people tend to want to be involved in activities which seem popular within their peer group), and you get the basis for most Lefty-influenced 'movements'.
Once the emotional and pack-mentality aspects take over, Lefties usually get into a bizarre pissing match with one another over who cares more than whom, which leads them into internal conflict (typically of the passive-aggressive sort which involves whispers, rumors, and eventually full-blown public exposure and humiliation of their enemies), and ever-more ridiculous displays of public emotionalism which take the forms of 'symbolism', 'solidarity' and 'support', which lead us to the next problem with Lefties...
None of this is ever directed into an genuinely-meaningful, or even just useful action. Meaningful actions require purpose (which is hard to formulate when your inspiration is emotional and not rational), and useful ones require personal effort. Lefties hate personal efforts because it's much easier to say you care and then demand someone else do something. Someone else must do the work, someone else must make the sacrifice, someone else must pay for whatever they advocate because, dammit, they CARE already!. The Good Lefty, having expended emotion, having made the symbolic-but-empty gesture to show she (it's usually a she, or a metrosexual) cares, believes they've done their part. There are people on the Left who make a living at this; they continue to 'advocate' for their emotionally-inspired-issue-that-will-require-someone-else's-effort-and-money-to-correct. They manage to skim proceeds from it from their brain-dead fellow travelers, and because they can scream loud enough and are politically-connected, from the taxpayer, which brings us to the next problem with Lefties...
They don't understand money. Since many of them don't really work, or worse, work in 'industries' which bring little in the way of positive gain to society (like the arts, media, academia, government, NGO's and so forth) they don't understand economics. They don't earn their livings doing something that involves the marketplace, they are handed the excess that the more productive society creates. This leads them to make several basic mistakes when discussing economic issues. The first is that wealth (they euphemistically call it 'resources') are finite. All resources, money, oil, air, water, food, raw materials of a thousand sorts, are always finite. It's why they can shout about 'peak oil', and the 'population bomb' and it's been the driving force behind socialism, communism and now the environmental movement. The second is that 'government' has money of it's own, independent of the taxpayer.
Since all resources are finite, Lefties are free to believe in a mystical unit of wealth which they refer to as 'the fair share'. They cannot tell you how much a 'fair share' is, only that everyone is entitled to one and those who typically do the least and add the least, are somehow entitled to a bigger 'fair share' than the productive who actually make the shares in the first place. When this sort of lopsided economics (wealth exists in finite quantities, everyone gets a fair share, some pigs are more equal than others) is applied in real life, you get a welfare state of entitlement programs which bankrupts a nation, and which requires ever-more oppressive taxation to support (which only certain non-Leftie-approved castes will have to pay. They always exempt themselves because while they may be economically retarded, they ain't stupid). Of course, Lefties never apply this sort of economic lunacy to their own finances. Which leads us to the next problem with Lefties, which is...
Screaming hypocrisy about wealth. They claim to despise wealth, to despise the people who possess it as thieves and rapists who have stolen it from 'the people', rather than earned it through hard work and intelligence. But, the ranks of the left are full of some of the richest people on the planet; George Soros, Bill Gates, Al Gore, Bill and Hillary Clinton, The Kennedys, John Kerry, all stalwart defenders of the downtrodden, have bank accounts the average working stiff can only look upon with envy. In many cases, they came into possession of this wealth by less-than-honest means; the Kennedy's built their fortune on Prohibition, George Soros was a Nazi Collaborator, John Kerry simply marries wealthy widows, Al Gore takes advantage of the mentally-challenged. The ever-expanding list of the glitterati that often act as surrogates, advocates and role-models for the left, the actors and actresses in Hollywood, the musical artist who advocates this or that policy, the athlete who couldn't tie his own shoes without a government program, are also good examples of this; they earn their living from practices and activities which involve the extraction of wealth from those who earn or create it. They are prime examples of a movement made up of people who add little of lasting value to society while taking as much as they possibly can from it. The Leftie screams about the money given to Wall Street bankers, calling it unfair and wasteful, yet never bats an eyelash at a guy who gets $100 million from another rich guy to hit a baseball, or to make a movie. Usually because the first is a minority (there's that 'some pigs are more equal than others' thing), or an artist (which means jack shit to anyone with half a brain).
Those people can be forgiven their hypocrisy because they give the Lefties the attention they crave. That's the real problem with the Left; it's full of needy, clingy, annoying people who crave constant attention. These people give them hope that someone takes them seriously -- all the while stealing money and votes with the classic strategy of un-anchored emotionalism, empty symbolism and making all things 'someone else's' problem. Until now, that is.
Now the Lefties have gotten wise to the scam, and they're angry. They've finally seen that their Paragons were little more than charlatans and they demand that that they get what they've been wanting for the last 100 years. It's why they rioted in Copenhagen, it's why Howard Dean opened a can of Whoop-Ass on Harry Reid on Health Care; They've waited for Communism long enough.
Because at root, this is what all the Leftist nonsense of the last century has been about; World Communism. They've dressed themselves up as 'Progressives", they've insinuated themselves into the fights for Equality, Social Justice and Civil Rights, they are at the vanguard of the Environmental movement. They believe (still) that communism can work. They believe that Communism will (finally) bring 'peace' to the planet. They believe that Communism will 'save' mankind (from what, they can't exactly tell you). Which leads us to the biggest problem with Leftists...
Despite all the evidence that everything they espouse usually fails, spectacularly, they keep trying. They believe that communism has failed not because it is a flawed system which takes all incentive out of the individual, and thus, society, but because we just haven't found the right communists to run the World State yet. All Communism will do is make us all equally miserable; Lefties more than others because they are not especially well-known for enduring discomfort and suffering... especially when it's their own.
The Left looks at Barack Obama and the current American Congress, and they believe they have, finally, found the right communists. But this bunch haven't moved quickly enough for the Left's tastes, and thus, all the brouhaha and infighting. This is just the beginning of a shitstorm that will, we can hope, finally expose this bunch of hacks for what they really are in a way that it will be impossible to mistake.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Mark Steyn Should Be Saving the Planet, Not Gore...
Proving once again that Mark Steyn is a savant for the ages, he exposes the stupidity on display in Copenhagen, and then reprints an old article proving that Al Gore is a Me-Too Idiot of epic proportions and shameless self-promoter with less substance than a hole in the Ozone Layer.
Those Who Can Do, Those Who Can't Teach...
And those who can't even do that, write about it for a living.
Oh yeah? I worked in IT for over 20 years and there were plenty of women, many of them (very good, often better than male) managers, and on the whole, every bit as competent as their male counterparts. Someone needs to get out into the real business world before they write such nonsense.
Oh yeah? I worked in IT for over 20 years and there were plenty of women, many of them (very good, often better than male) managers, and on the whole, every bit as competent as their male counterparts. Someone needs to get out into the real business world before they write such nonsense.
If Only Jack Nicholson Actually DID Talk This Way...
In regard to the whole Healthcare boondoggle, a high muck-a-muck of the Healthcare Industry puts some words into Colonel Jessup's mouth...and reveals the stupidity in this reinvention of American Healthcare:
(H/T to HotAir.com)
(H/T to HotAir.com)
Not So Fast, Sean Hannity...
For the last three weeks, I have listened to Sean Hannity make the mistake of conflating the Tea Party movement with Conservatism, and then postulating that the whole thing simply must be the natural state of the American political landscape reasserting itself; it's a Conservative country, always has been, and now Conservatism shall return in force.
I beg to differ.
Frankly, I think if you looked at it intelligently, you'd probably come to this conclusion; about 30% of the country is actually republican/conservative, about 30% of the country is actually liberal/democrat, and the 40% in the middle wouldn't know what they were if you wrote it down for them on the back of their hands. That 40% is simply too ignorant to care much about politics, is too easily bribed with other people's money to be a reliable vote for either party, or is too dependant upon one party or the other to shift to the other side.
Sean trumpets some recent polls in which 40-something-percent of Americans call themselves Conservative, and thinks this bolsters his argument. But it doesn't. Considering what the democrats placed in office with the help of the so-called moderates, if a pollster called you and asked if you were a lib-comm-symp or a conservative, how many of you would actually admit to having been on Obama's side all along? I'd bet at least 50% of those who answered the question lied through their teeth to avoid the embarrassment.
The fact is that Obama was elected by the moderates, many of them now telling pollsters "I've always been a conservative". They voted for him because they bought the Hope and Change nonsense, and because John McCain was perhaps the worst Presidential candidate since...well, John Kerry.
Now, as to whether or not the Tea Parties are Conservatives in disguise; to a certain extent, yes, they are. They are the small-government, lower-taxes, federalist conservatives which the right has largely ignored these last 20 years because it would rather kowtow to the Religious Right. It's the wing of conservatism that has been ignored because it's more Republican than Puritan, and because there wasn't any money in it.
Here, we come to a difference of opinion over a definition. This is why people like Sean Hannity should read more George Orwell. Because if they did, they'd realize that what they describe as "Conservative" is nothing of the sort, because the terms 'liberal' and 'conservatism' no longer mean what they should, and this blurring of definition is done on purpose by both parties and their operatives for their own reasons. Sean and others like him are unwittingly helping to carry this deception forward.
Technically, a Conservative is someone who seeks to preserve that which was created by liberal means (like the rights and privileges spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, a fairly radical document, historically speaking), or as Irving Krystal once put it (paraphrasing) "A conservative is someone standing in front of the runaway freight train of progress yelling STOP!".
In modern parlance, a Conservative has very slowly been morphed into a caricature of the Bible-carrying, shotgun-toting, gay-hating-flannel-wearing-flag-waving-rural-dwelling hick who is a) under the impression that he's always right -- even when he's wrong -- because God said so, and b) he believes all us city-dwellers don't 'get' him or his way of life, and we're out to persecute him because apparently we have nothing better to do, and c) will do anything Pastor Bob tells him to do, especially if it's presented to him as a holy imperative, because his form of Christianity is often indistinguishable from Islam, in many respects.
You can disagree -- and so would I -- but that is the general impression of 'Conservative' that most people in this country have, and you know what? That's exactly how the so-called leaders of Conservatism would like to have it; they actually believe there is a value in this fable of the continued virtues of the Pioneer Spirit, and the American Do-or-Die drive, concepts which no longer exist in a world of Sleep Number Beds, Sexting, E-mail, cable television, the NFL Network, Once-a-day Osteoprosis 'cures', and frozen pizza rolls. That sort of Conservative, trapped between his traditions and the modern world, is in the same boat as the guy who joins the Taliban. It's an 'us-versus-them' mentality which the republican party has been able to milk for money and votes for a very long time.
It's what I like to call the God-Guns-and-Gays mentality. It's a political philosophy that revolves around school prayer, abortion and opposition to gay marriage, with the small-government-low-tax thing more or less accepted as a good thing only after you promise to pack the Supreme Court. It's not conservative in any real sense, politically. It has very little cachet in a world where the prime concerns of the people are unemployment, a broken economy, out-of-control government and simultaneous wars.
You don't see that sort of thing at a Tea Party Rally. Oh, yeah, you do see a few signs with "God Bless America" and "One Nation Under God", and so on, but you don't see people singing hymns, you don't see men of the cloth making impassioned speeches before the multitudes, you don't see Jerry Falwell -figures front-and-center. In fact, you don't even see establishment politicians in the van of this movement, and the ones who have tried have looked extremely sycophantic and phony while doing it. What you do see is a bunch of reasonably intelligent people who seem to have checked their social conservatism (if they had any) at the door; for them, this is not about abortion and school prayer, it's about getting the government to do what it's supposed to do and then forcing it to stop doing what it actually does.
In that respect, Sean, I would argue that the Tea Parties are actually out to knock that Calvinist brand of Conservatism out of the conversation, and focus the energies of the American people into a more positive direction; into restoring the sovereign rights of the people...not the Republican Party.
Discuss.
I beg to differ.
Frankly, I think if you looked at it intelligently, you'd probably come to this conclusion; about 30% of the country is actually republican/conservative, about 30% of the country is actually liberal/democrat, and the 40% in the middle wouldn't know what they were if you wrote it down for them on the back of their hands. That 40% is simply too ignorant to care much about politics, is too easily bribed with other people's money to be a reliable vote for either party, or is too dependant upon one party or the other to shift to the other side.
Sean trumpets some recent polls in which 40-something-percent of Americans call themselves Conservative, and thinks this bolsters his argument. But it doesn't. Considering what the democrats placed in office with the help of the so-called moderates, if a pollster called you and asked if you were a lib-comm-symp or a conservative, how many of you would actually admit to having been on Obama's side all along? I'd bet at least 50% of those who answered the question lied through their teeth to avoid the embarrassment.
The fact is that Obama was elected by the moderates, many of them now telling pollsters "I've always been a conservative". They voted for him because they bought the Hope and Change nonsense, and because John McCain was perhaps the worst Presidential candidate since...well, John Kerry.
Now, as to whether or not the Tea Parties are Conservatives in disguise; to a certain extent, yes, they are. They are the small-government, lower-taxes, federalist conservatives which the right has largely ignored these last 20 years because it would rather kowtow to the Religious Right. It's the wing of conservatism that has been ignored because it's more Republican than Puritan, and because there wasn't any money in it.
Here, we come to a difference of opinion over a definition. This is why people like Sean Hannity should read more George Orwell. Because if they did, they'd realize that what they describe as "Conservative" is nothing of the sort, because the terms 'liberal' and 'conservatism' no longer mean what they should, and this blurring of definition is done on purpose by both parties and their operatives for their own reasons. Sean and others like him are unwittingly helping to carry this deception forward.
Technically, a Conservative is someone who seeks to preserve that which was created by liberal means (like the rights and privileges spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, a fairly radical document, historically speaking), or as Irving Krystal once put it (paraphrasing) "A conservative is someone standing in front of the runaway freight train of progress yelling STOP!".
In modern parlance, a Conservative has very slowly been morphed into a caricature of the Bible-carrying, shotgun-toting, gay-hating-flannel-wearing-flag-waving-rural-dwelling hick who is a) under the impression that he's always right -- even when he's wrong -- because God said so, and b) he believes all us city-dwellers don't 'get' him or his way of life, and we're out to persecute him because apparently we have nothing better to do, and c) will do anything Pastor Bob tells him to do, especially if it's presented to him as a holy imperative, because his form of Christianity is often indistinguishable from Islam, in many respects.
You can disagree -- and so would I -- but that is the general impression of 'Conservative' that most people in this country have, and you know what? That's exactly how the so-called leaders of Conservatism would like to have it; they actually believe there is a value in this fable of the continued virtues of the Pioneer Spirit, and the American Do-or-Die drive, concepts which no longer exist in a world of Sleep Number Beds, Sexting, E-mail, cable television, the NFL Network, Once-a-day Osteoprosis 'cures', and frozen pizza rolls. That sort of Conservative, trapped between his traditions and the modern world, is in the same boat as the guy who joins the Taliban. It's an 'us-versus-them' mentality which the republican party has been able to milk for money and votes for a very long time.
It's what I like to call the God-Guns-and-Gays mentality. It's a political philosophy that revolves around school prayer, abortion and opposition to gay marriage, with the small-government-low-tax thing more or less accepted as a good thing only after you promise to pack the Supreme Court. It's not conservative in any real sense, politically. It has very little cachet in a world where the prime concerns of the people are unemployment, a broken economy, out-of-control government and simultaneous wars.
You don't see that sort of thing at a Tea Party Rally. Oh, yeah, you do see a few signs with "God Bless America" and "One Nation Under God", and so on, but you don't see people singing hymns, you don't see men of the cloth making impassioned speeches before the multitudes, you don't see Jerry Falwell -figures front-and-center. In fact, you don't even see establishment politicians in the van of this movement, and the ones who have tried have looked extremely sycophantic and phony while doing it. What you do see is a bunch of reasonably intelligent people who seem to have checked their social conservatism (if they had any) at the door; for them, this is not about abortion and school prayer, it's about getting the government to do what it's supposed to do and then forcing it to stop doing what it actually does.
In that respect, Sean, I would argue that the Tea Parties are actually out to knock that Calvinist brand of Conservatism out of the conversation, and focus the energies of the American people into a more positive direction; into restoring the sovereign rights of the people...not the Republican Party.
Discuss.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Technical Problems?
It seems there's been a major delay today between when I post something, and when it finally hits Blogger. Something on the order of 2 1/2 hours delay. I'm not certain what's causing it, but please be patient while I try to find out.
Thank you!
Thank you!
Makes You Ashamed to Be Italian...
On the Jay Leno Show, the cast of "The Jersey Shore". The sad part is that I have known people like this my entire life, and they are, indeed, proof that stereotypes continue to exist because they are essentially true. That goes for everyone.
The two young men are what we refer to as "Guidos" or "Goombahs", the original metrosexuals made popular by Saturday Night Fever (see here), and the girl, Snooki (and what sort of Italian girl goes by a nickname like that, and you wonder exactly how she got it?) is what's known as a "Squaldrina" (harlot, trollop, strumpet or tart), but more commonly referred to as a "Scifooza" (Ski-foo-ZA); colloquial Italian for "whore".
It makes you sick to think that not only are these idiots the public face of Italians for the younger generation -- they're also the morons who will run the country in my old age.
(Note: I tried to upload the video, but it may be too big for Blogger. You can see it HERE).
We were once a proud race of people, possessed of an amazing cultural inheritance, but we've apparently given birth to an entire generation of mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging idiots who are too dumb or shameless to avoid putting their stupidity on public display.
The two young men are what we refer to as "Guidos" or "Goombahs", the original metrosexuals made popular by Saturday Night Fever (see here), and the girl, Snooki (and what sort of Italian girl goes by a nickname like that, and you wonder exactly how she got it?) is what's known as a "Squaldrina" (harlot, trollop, strumpet or tart), but more commonly referred to as a "Scifooza" (Ski-foo-ZA); colloquial Italian for "whore".
It makes you sick to think that not only are these idiots the public face of Italians for the younger generation -- they're also the morons who will run the country in my old age.
(Note: I tried to upload the video, but it may be too big for Blogger. You can see it HERE).
We were once a proud race of people, possessed of an amazing cultural inheritance, but we've apparently given birth to an entire generation of mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging idiots who are too dumb or shameless to avoid putting their stupidity on public display.
It Ain't Easy Bein' Green...
A roundup of posts about the stupidity in Copenhagen;
Titling at Windmills: The Diplomatic charade of trying to look as if you've agreed to something no one really wants to agree to.
U.S. Negotiators are right, on two counts, here; first, who the hell would agree to anything that doesn't apply to China and India, and second, who the hell wants to give money we don't have to Robert Mugabe and Raul Castro, leaders of two countries which don't even have economies to spew carbon dioxide anymore, thanks to their outstanding leadership. Once again, the whole AGW bullshit is revealed for what it is: redistribution of wealth on a global scale. These people don't love polar bears, or care about the planet, they just hate capitalism and consumerism.
If that wasn't bad enough, Senator John Kerry (Douche bag-Massachusetts) managed to find his way to Copenhagen (Tereza let him off his leash?) to assure the world that if and when something is agreed to, that he will be for it before he's against it, and not only that, but he managed to say something over there that might have cost him his worthless life over here; that the U.S. Congress has plans to impose Carbon Taxes on American citizens and industry. Perhaps we can connive at not allowing the Senator back into the country...for his own safety?
Oh, and he shared the stage with Hugo Chavez. Appropriate. Don't we have a CIA that's supposed to be trying to assassinate this man?
In the meantime, the protesters are back in force, or is it farce? -- proving that for some strange reason , hippies never die. And they never seem to get any smarter, either.
Not to be outdone in the stunning lack of intelligence department, Prince Charles of Britain arrived in true royal, carbon-spewing style to dictate to the peasants. Apparently, there was no other "practical and punctual" means of arriving at the conference for His Highness that didn't involve great luxury, waste and blaring hypocrisy.
And just in case you actually feared that anything of substance will emerge from this conference, Mark Steyn assures you that these people can't even organize a queue to get into the conference, so perhaps greater disaster may one day be averted.
(H/T to Pajamas Media, Instapundit, and Steyn Online)
Titling at Windmills: The Diplomatic charade of trying to look as if you've agreed to something no one really wants to agree to.
U.S. Negotiators are right, on two counts, here; first, who the hell would agree to anything that doesn't apply to China and India, and second, who the hell wants to give money we don't have to Robert Mugabe and Raul Castro, leaders of two countries which don't even have economies to spew carbon dioxide anymore, thanks to their outstanding leadership. Once again, the whole AGW bullshit is revealed for what it is: redistribution of wealth on a global scale. These people don't love polar bears, or care about the planet, they just hate capitalism and consumerism.
If that wasn't bad enough, Senator John Kerry (Douche bag-Massachusetts) managed to find his way to Copenhagen (Tereza let him off his leash?) to assure the world that if and when something is agreed to, that he will be for it before he's against it, and not only that, but he managed to say something over there that might have cost him his worthless life over here; that the U.S. Congress has plans to impose Carbon Taxes on American citizens and industry. Perhaps we can connive at not allowing the Senator back into the country...for his own safety?
Oh, and he shared the stage with Hugo Chavez. Appropriate. Don't we have a CIA that's supposed to be trying to assassinate this man?
In the meantime, the protesters are back in force, or is it farce? -- proving that for some strange reason , hippies never die. And they never seem to get any smarter, either.
Not to be outdone in the stunning lack of intelligence department, Prince Charles of Britain arrived in true royal, carbon-spewing style to dictate to the peasants. Apparently, there was no other "practical and punctual" means of arriving at the conference for His Highness that didn't involve great luxury, waste and blaring hypocrisy.
And just in case you actually feared that anything of substance will emerge from this conference, Mark Steyn assures you that these people can't even organize a queue to get into the conference, so perhaps greater disaster may one day be averted.
(H/T to Pajamas Media, Instapundit, and Steyn Online)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)