Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Merry Christmas World

The Climate change conference is long gone, but with Christmas just around the corner, I figured there had to be a connection. Also, I'm writing this after a holiday party, so I'm drunk.

As President Obama says, let's be clear: that comical Copenhagen conference wasn't about science, it was about wealth transfer. The gist: because of America's "hyper-industrialization," we need to pay off poor countries for all the harm we've caused in the world. That's the real green in the green movement: It's cash, not grass.

What's this have to do with Christmas? Well, I think the world has forgotten that the biggest gift to this planet is America's industry - and it's time to remind them where they would be without it.

1. Whenever a horrible disaster hits, they would be dead. Be it an earthquake, a tsunami or a Madonna tour - we're usually the first and biggest responders - saving the injured, and helping to rebuild. It is because of our tremendous capability to mobilize quickly that makes us a nation of superheroes. It also takes planes, trucks and tractors to do that stuff. Imagine that carbon footprint.

2. If they ever get sick, they would be dead. It's true. While critical cretins like Chavez and Mugabe actually harm their own people, we save millions of strangers' lives. Even that bozo called Bono admits it was George Bush who helped prevent the death of millions of Africans from AIDs. Yeah - I know what our critics will say: it's easy for America to do this stuff. Well, it's even easier not to do it.

3. If their family is hungry, they would be dead. Let's not forget Norman Borlaug, who invented disease resistant wheat, saving hundreds of millions of lives in India and Pakistan. You can only do that if you're of an industrial mind - thinking about people, not polar bears.

4. If they're under the thumb of fascism, they would be dead. We possess the greatest military technology in the world, and we've used it to end horrible wars. Our industry of annihilation gave new life to many countries.

In sum, the very people complaining about America would not be alive, if it weren't for America. Which is why, I say to them: Merry Christmas.

It sure beats a pair of socks.

Friday, December 18, 2009

Facts vs. Hysteria

We, in our present form, have walked the earth for about 120,000 years. During that time there have been 20 sudden global warmings. In most of these sudden warmings the temperatures rose by about 18 degrees over a span of 20 years. Right now the Copenhagen Clowns are freaking out over a rise of 1.5 degrees in 100 years.

There have been about 142 mass extinctions since life began on the earth about 3.8 billion years ago. These mass extinctions were not caused by man. They were caused by nature.

Those goodies came from this column by Howard Bloom, author of "The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism" Here's another excerpt for you to ponder:

"What's the real cause of the Earth's norm--a climate that rocks back and forth from steamy tropical heat to icy freeze? A climate that deposits fossilized seashells on mountaintops and makes dry land into seas and swamps?

The Earth is a traveler. Its angle as it sweeps around the sun produces the massive weather flips we call seasons--the dance from summer to winter and back again. But there's more. Our planet has a peculiar wobble--its precession. And that precession produces upheavals in our weather, weather alterations we cycle through every 22,000, 41,000 and 100,000 years. This is called the Milankovich cycle, named for the Serbian engineer and geophysicist who discovered it.

But the wobbles in our trip around the sun are just a start. The sun is a traveler, too. It circles the black hole at the galaxy's core every 226 million years. And it takes its tiny flock of planets with it. That means us. The result?

The journey around the galactic core is fraught with dangers. For example, every 143 million years we pass through a spiral arm of the galaxy, an arm that tosses tsunamis of cosmic rays our way. Those rays produce massive climate change. Then there's the innocent-sounding stuff astronomers call galactic "fluff," massive clouds of cosmic dust lurking in our solar system's path that also cause dramatic climate change.

Meanwhile, the sun itself is going through a cycle from birth to death. As a result of its maturation, good old reliable sol is 43% warmer today than it was when the Earth first gathered itself into a globe of planetesimals 4.5 billion years ago."

Isn't it time for you to start studying this global warming stuff on your own? If there actually is a concerted attack being launched against Capitalism by tired old communists and socialist leading hoards of youngsters with no experience in the real world ... wouldn't you want to know about it?

This is a very dangerous time for our country and for the world. We have a president who is enamored of Karl Marx and communism; a president who is clearly of an anti-Capitalist bent; a president who referred to the private sector as the "enemy" in one of his books .. and that president is over there in Copenhagen at the epicenter of anti-capitalist furor right now trying to hammer out some kind of a deal. A deal to accomplish what? To stop the meanderings of the Earth around the sun? To make the sun stand still in the universe?

We elected an American Idol president who is now being exposed for the inexperienced academic he actually is.

Can I get a Sheesh!

Climate Change You Can Believe In

Every circus needs a clown, but sometimes it takes a clown to tell the truth.

And so we have Hugo Chavez, the pockmarked prince of all things petulant - paying a visit to the Climate Change conference to rousing, delirious applause.

In sum, Chavez is all about ending "imperial dictatorships," and that "capitalism is the road to hell." He says, "Let's fight against capitalism and make it obey us."

He also said he liked to have sex with goats while Sean Penn watched, but I may have gotten that translation wrong.

Anyway, according to the Herald Sun, all of this was greeted with a standing ovation. And Hugo deserves it - for he's exposing this crap fest for what it is: a massive transfer of wealth from the west, to scumbags like him.

But Chavez wasn't the only one to lecture America on how evil we are. There was Zimbabwe President, Robert Mugabe, who noted that as "these capitalist gods of carbon...belch their dangerous emissions," it's "the lesser mortals of the developing sphere" who die. Yeah, we're the murderers. Not Mugabe - who delighted in the torture, starvation and killing of his own people, for years.

This would all be hilarious- if these creeps didn't have our own leaders on their side. Witness secretary of State Hillary Clinton announcing that our country is ready to create an annual $100 billion climate protection fund to help "address the climate change needs of developing countries."

Where will this money come from?

Well, Hillary wouldn't say - but she didn't have to. There's only one place it can come from - you. And that's why the Chavez's and the Mugabe's of the world love climate change hysteria so much. To the world's thugs, thieves and murderers, the US becomes that fat tourist in his favorite vacation hat, jingling his change on a street corner.

Easy pickings.

And--should you not agree with me you're probably bowing to a photo of Mubabe while licking a bobble head Hugo.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

What is she thinking?

Hope you didn't miss this. Our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has pledged $100 billion dollars A YEAR to "developing nations" to help them fight global warming. That's promising $100 billion a year that we don't have to fight a problem that doesn't exist. Are you comfortable with that? Aren't you glad these people are in charge?

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Man doesn't matter one wit....

Isn’t it interesting how narrow the laws of nature are? Water at sea level boils at 212 degrees Fahrenheit, not 210. It freezes at 32 degrees above zero, not at 34. Water that contains 20 percent salt will not freeze until the temperature gets down to 30 degrees below zero. I don’t understand how the water knows when it is time to freeze, but it never makes a mistake. It never forgets, and it is never influenced by anyone’s opinion. Like all other natural laws, it performs right on the nose every time.

Eternal laws of the universe are narrow. They are never repealed. The verdict has been handed out even before the act is committed. The smartest lawyers, the most sympathetic witnesses, or the most powerful judges cannot change the verdict in the slightest degree. The sentence is not softened because of mental or physical incompetence, and there is no time off for good behavior.

Each year our planet makes a 595-million-mile orbit around the sun. It always travels at the rate of 66,600 miles per hour, and it completes its journey in exactly 365 days, 6 hours, 9 minutes, and 9 and 54/100 seconds. The time of the completion of the 595-million-mile journey can be more accurately foretold than your trip from the living room into the dining room.

Electricity is also a little bit on the narrow-minded side. A compass always points to the magnetic north—never to the east, the west, or the south.

The climate also follows a natural law.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Just for you Doc...

Kanye just interrupted the Swayze funeral to remind them Michael Jackson had the greatest funeral of all time.

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Twits and Town Halls

So what happens when you produce something so huge that it's virtually unreadable? Normally it's left unread. I call it the Harlot's Ghost maxim.

But what do you get when this strategy of over-delivering backfires? Pure comedy unmatched even by a Golden Girls marathon.

More specifically, you get pols who never read the health care bill faced with people who have. Witness the town hall meeting this past week with Senator Arlen Specter. The folks present didn't just read the bill, they're now quoting it - something even the titan of transparency never really wanted.

Even better, this level of discourse is coming from the non-Twitter crowd, the beyond Facebook folks more concerned with Lipitor side effects than Lady Gaga's lady parts. They are not motivated by racism, as the left wants everyone to believe, but by real concerns - some raised at the dinner table, some reasoned in books. None from Twitter, I imagine.

I only bring up Twitter, because as I watched the PA town meeting, I also came across an online column by Meghan McCain, i.e. Ron Reagan with curves. In a catty struggle for relevance among perceived rivals, she points out that while Michelle Malkin has the number one book on the New York Times bestseller list, McCain has "nearly twice as many Twitter followers as she does. And trust me, Twitter is more of an indication of where young people are than books published by the hyper-conservative publisher Regnery."

Maybe so, but did these "young people" read the health care proposal? Did they show up at town hall meetings? No – they're too busy Twittering about Twilight (yes, a dated reference, but I like how it sounds). Twitter might have been there for Iran, but in the end, the young people weren't.

And here is where McCain's crowing about Twitter reveals a mistake many people make: confusing mass for meaning; accumulation for content. The fact is, the phone book has everything I need to know about the world around me, but I don't take it to the beach to read. The phone book inspires no one, for it is (or was) a tool used by others to facilitate communication – much like Twitter. To confuse the messaging system with the message should tell Meghan her message needs work. Considering she just signed a hefty book deal, I'd get on that soon.

Which brings me back to those old coots railing at Arlen Specter. That was an honest spectacle generated by a generation unencumbered by the desire for "followers." Their concerns are bigger: increased government control, their family's well-being, and of course their own mortality. They realize that 5000 followers will not come to their funeral. And sadly for Megs, they probably don't buy books either.


So you remember Barbara Boxer's attack on the townhall protesters, calling them disruptive "plants," because they were too well dressed to be protesters.

She had a point: they were well dressed. And most protesters of the lefty persuasion are not - a marker of people who lack real professions allowing them to purchase clean clothes. Boxer believed that these outspoken, button-downed folks were all part of a right-wing plot meant to stir up anxiety, fear, and perhaps soup. And of course, this week, President Obama kept the joke alive at his own town hall meeting, saying he didn't "want people thinking I just have a bunch of plants in here."

How funny is it then, that when it comes to plants, the leftwing response is beginning to look like a spread in House and Garden. Michelle Malkin points out that the little girl that asked that key question about those old people "saying mean things" is actually the daughter of a major Obama campaigner, supporter and donor.

Now, never mind that using a kid to smear some old folks holding signs is a tad sleazy. If an adorable child is concerned over evil people saying mean things, how can you not agree? I mean, children are our future, as long as they agree with Obama.

And besides, old people are old: a drain on our resources. And they smell of Vicks.

Meanwhile, according to so many websites that I lost count, that jackass parading around a "Barack Obama as Hitler" poster at a John Dingell town hall may actually have been a John Dingell supporter. Remember, Dingell was the douche who compared health care protesters to the KKK. The KKK and Nazis – that's quite a coincidence, don't you think?

But hey, maybe I'm a plant. I do require regular sunlight and watering – and I'm often soiled.

Our New Surgeon General

So President Obama`s nominee for surgeon general has a dirty past – one so lurid it has many concerned experts wringing their hands in typical hand-wringing fashion.

What might this skeleton in Dr. Regina Benjamin's closet be? Did she run a meth lab out of her camper? Were the children running the meth lab doing so without health insurance? Did she use the proceeds from this meth lab to fund the world`s largest puppy mill? And was the puppy mill actually a puppy buffet for a puppy-devouring white power group? No, no, no, and uh, no.

Nope, what she did was far worse: she worked part-time for Burger King, as a scientific adviser.

Predictably, nutritional experts claim that nominating a doctor who worked for Burger King is a horrible conflict of interest - that someone in charge of public health should not be in the business of selling evil fast food. It`s like hiring the shoe bomber to manage a Footlocker.

But I disagree. The fact is, from a public health perspective, fast food restaurants like Burger King and McDonalds have done far more to help people than harm them. The fat-bottom line: people in America and around the world aren`t dying from malnutrition because places like BK have made food fresh, cheap and simple to prepare. Seriously, where ever you find a fast food restaurant, you'll find fat kids, but not starving ones. But in this easy age of value-free moralism, experts are more inclined to demonize Ronald McDonald than Robert Mugabe.

Granted, that clown makeup is kinda scary. Which is why I always ask him to remove it before we go to bed.

Thursday, August 06, 2009

It's all about "The One".

The Democrats have really taken this healthcare reform argument to a new level. First we had the switch from healthcare reform to health insurance reform. That one happened in a matter of one day. One press conference. The talking points went out and the Democrats received their new marching orders .. this is no longer a battle over healthcare. We now have a new enemy to contend with: the insurance industry. Easy to figure out why ... Obama's behavioral scientists told him that people liked their doctors. It was the insurance companies they hated ... so shift the focus and demonize insurance.

Then the Democrats returned home to their districts for the August recess. They expected parades. They expected praise and accolades from their constituents, thanking them for working to make healthcare reform a reality. But what did they really get? A bunch of angry citizens who are starting to wake up and smell the koolaid. They realize that this healthcare reform debate isn't about their healthcare at all. They don't have faith in their government officials to reform the system for the better. Heck, maybe some of these constituents realize that the government isn't always the solution to every problem.

So now we pull out the big guns. Waging war against the insurance company hasn't hit deep enough with voters. So now, we put it all on Barack Obama's shoulders. Yep. Anyone who opposes this healthcare reform is only doing it because they want to hurt Barack Obama. That is according to Barbara "Call me Senator" Boxer. She told MSNBC's "Hardball," "All of this is a diversion by the people who, frankly, want to hurt President Obama." Then we have Princess Pelosi telling the media that these people are showing up to protest government health care "carrying swastikas." Yup! We learning form the Democrats that all of these people showing up at the Townhall meetings are "thugs" paid by insurance companies and other special interest groups. Their true goal is to "hurt" Obama.

So now we're supposed to sit back and quietly accept a government takeover of almost 20% of our economy in order to avoid hurting Barack Obama? We're supposed to accept the idea of rationing healthcare so Barack Obama won't be damaged? You're going to accept the news that you can't get a hip replacement with "Well, at least Barack Obama wasn't hurt." Yeah .. that would be the thought going through my mind if I had to wait four or five months for an MRI. "You know, I can go ahead and wait for this MRI. We won't find out what's wrong for a couple of months, but at least I won't be hurting Barack Obama.

Isn't that just dandy? Right now the Democrats are pinning their takeover of health care on the need to avoid hurting their president. Yeah ... works for me.

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

It's about power---not health care

An interesting report was prepared by a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of radiology and chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical School by the name of Scott W. Atlas. He has prepared ten reasons why America's health care system is in better condition than you might suppose. Here's an overview, but the whole thing is worth a read. This is for all of your liberal friends who are convinced that a single-payer, government healthcare system is going to "save" our healthcare system.

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.

2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.

3. Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.

4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.

5. Lower-income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians.

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed.

8. Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians.

9. Americans have better access to important new technologies such as medical imaging than do patients in Canada or Britain.

10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

Well .. remember. No matter how good our medical care is today, it simply doesn't empower politicians enough. That's the goal of ObamaCare, and the sooner you realize that the better prepared you are to fight for your freedom. ObamaCare is not about improving health care in the United States. It is ALL about increasing the power that political hacks have over your life and your bank accounts.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Killing those who want to kill you.

So according to the Wall Street Journal, the CIA had been kicking around a secret plan designed to off al-qaeda chieftains – something the Democrats say they were never told about.

The actual program was dropped early on – either because it was a dumb idea, or it didn`t work, or maybe something better came along. What bugs me is that the plan was probably canceled because it actually could work - but having to disclose the plan would have endangered those asked to carry it out.

I mean, if your job is to sneak around the globe killing really bad people, then it should be kept secret – which is something frowned upon by people who don`t understand that beating evil means eradicating it. We call them asshats. You see them now, trying to score political points out of something that didn't even happen (although, I wish it did).

Which brings me to a handy quiz you can take while you`re on a bus, a train, or perhaps even a plane!

Of the two statements below, check off the one you most agree with:

-The thought of the CIA contemplating a secret plan to kill terrorists behind 9/11 strikes you as wrong – so wrong in fact that those involved in it should be investigated for war crimes.

-The thought of the CIA contemplating a secret plan to kill terrorists behind 9/11 strikes you as something the CIA is paid to do, and if they don`t do it, they should probably be fired or at least relegated to running the sexual harrassment seminar in human resources.

If you agreed with the first statement, then get off that bus, train or plane. You don't deserve to be there. After all, the very actions that you want to see prosecuted are the actions guaranteeing your safety on those modes of transportation.

You should travel by foot. And, if you're in my neighborhood, be careful where you step. I have an active bladder.

Monday, July 13, 2009

Did you know we are an unhappy nation?

So over the weekend, while I was sunning myself by the pool, surrounded by all the things that make me happy (my masseuse Gertie Stoozt, my aromatherapist Tandelayo Schwartz and a hollowed-out gourd), a report was released ranking nations from least to most happy. According to the New Economics Foundation's "Happy Planet Index," Costa Rica came out on top – reporting the "highest life satisfaction" in the world.

Meanwhile America, the GREATEST country in the world - came in at 114th.

Guatemala, which is somewhere, came in second.

Okay. Let's look first at Costa Rica – whose primary source of income is tourism. Who goes there? Americans. So without miserable jerks like us who need to snorkle nude and do coke off the tails of shaved mules, Costa Rica would be nowhere. Guatemala? According to the World Bank, three quarters of its population live in poverty. Yeah, that's got to be fun.

So, forget the list. Let's look at its creator - the New Economics Foundation. It's a front for ecological cretins whose corrupt ideology drives them to link happiness to less consumption – a destructive, inhumane lie that most starving countries would take issue with if they weren't busy fighting flies for food.

So what's behind this dishonesty? Well, what do you think? Nic Marks, the founder of this joke of an organization, says less happy nations need to change their ways before their "high-consuming lifestyles plunge us into the chaos of irreversible climate change."

So there you have it. If you don't succumb to global warming hysteria, you're a selfish prick, living in an unhappy country. Please refer this information to all those Guatemalans and everyone else on the "happy" list risking their lives to get here.

Michael Jackson is still dead....

So if there`s one thing we learned recently, it`s that it`s not nuclear war that can wipe everything off the map. It`s the death of a pop star. Think about the things that mattered back in June: Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, cap and trade, that insipid health care infomercial – and ask yourself what happened in regard to any of those issues in the last few weeks.

C. A lot?

The answer is C, but we just didn`t see it.

We know that some of our brave troops died fighting for freedom. Protestors in Iran were violently silenced too, fighting for a glimmer of what we have. You can also be certain that the opportunity to actively undermine fascism in Iran has passed – our President choosing "wait and see" over "hope and change." He also snuck a few hundred pages of climate bill baloney past us in the dead of night.

No biggie, right?

But I`m not wagging my stubby, sausage-shaped finger. In that same span of time, I probably purchased about 50 bucks worth of music on iTunes. I saw a pile of movies (including "Up," and "Zoo." One is about tracking a rare bird; the other sleeping with a horse – please don`t confuse the two when making plans with the kids). I caught up on "Daisy of Love," "Charm School," and the clumsy replacement for "Project Runway," "The Fashion Show." I now know that Izrah could never replace Heidi.

Not to belittle the coverage of the passing of "the world`s greatest entertainer," in fact I`m in awe of it. But while Jackson took over the news, Obama made a deal with Russia - signing an agreement to reduce nuclear stockpiles by as much as a third.

Is this good or bad? Who cares? You can`t download nukes or fast forward to their best parts, so what good are they? Never mind that the whole point of having nuclear deterrents is HAVING them. And that by HAVING them, they are effectively a nuclear deterrent, whether or not the shrink wrap is removed.

In a way, nuclear weapons are like Stephen Hawking books. I have one on my coffee table. It`s never been opened, but it serves its purpose (it`s where I place the stromboli).

But here`s what do I know. if we are going reduce our nuclear warheads, let`s at least replace them with something we know can obliterate a city. I`m talking a years worth of The Hills, a million Transformer DVDs, and of course, the entire Michael Jackson catalogue. I`m thinking the only way to effectively beat our enemies is by making them as aimless and satisfied as we are.

Thursday, July 09, 2009

It's the Jews

So on some recent radio show hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton, a female caller phoned in with a theory about Michael Jackson`s death. Turns out he didn`t kill himself using a panoply of pharmaceuticals. It was all Sarah Palin`s doing.

Yep, according to the caller, "maybe she did something to Michael Jackson," and "maybe she`s stepping down because something`s about to come out."

Now, crazy people calling into radio shows isn`t anything special – I used to call Loveline ten to twenty times a night, just to complain about the pixies living in my urinary tract. However, what`s hilarious, is Sharpton`s thoughtful response to the caller`s intriguing theory. He says, "All right, thank you for your call, Ashley. That's interesting. I'll put it out, we'll see. I don't know."

"I'll put it out. We'll see. I don't know."


Now, I said it's hilarious, but it`s not surprising, for Sharpton has never met a conspiracy he didn`t embrace, and possibly grope. After all, he was the man who helped push the Tawana Brawley hoax - a fabricated tale of rape and feces perpetrated by a 15 year old girl -used to racially bludgeon six white, innocent men.

But that was years ago, so who cares - right?

AnyHooo – I love conspiracies because they are as inevitable as death. When an event occurs that can be easily explained (like, say, a reclusive pop star overdoses on prescription narcotics), the demented emerge from the woodwork like lurid worms with complex explanations that defy logic and Pampers. Look at the Truthers, limping along under an impervious dome of self-inflicted idiocy, convinced that only they know the truth - when all they know really are twin beds, canned food purchased from the dented bin, and reusing their underwear on alternate days. You gotta love 'em, for they`re pure comedy.

My last point: why is it that people who cling to conspiracies, never put that much effort into the things that might benefit their actual lives? Like their school work? Their jobs? Their hygiene?

I blame the Jews. Only they could create a complex framework that keeps so many destructive minds busy contemplating nothing.

Thursday, July 02, 2009

So---Still have that Obama sticker on your car????

I know, it's hard to admit that you were wrong, isn't it? I mean, after all, how in the world can you admit that voting for someone with absolutely no experience at all - a former ACORN street organizer - someone who gravitated to Marxist professors and communist student groups in college - someone with no record of significant accomplishment at any endeavor - and someone who ran for office on the basis of focus-group slogans - how can you ever admit that such a vote might have been a mistake?

Do you see our economy improving? Have you noticed the improving employment figures?

Are you impressed by the burgeoning national debt that your children are going to have to pay back?

Are you looking forward to seeing your health care rationed?

How about the nationalization of General Motors, Citigroup and others? That's why you put that bumper sticker on your car, isn't it? So Obama could use some of his immense business experience to run some of our major industries. You do know he will nationalize the banks soon, don't you? Is that the change you had in mind?

Don't you see how smart this "sort-of" God really is? He's raising taxes while other nations are lowering business and personal taxes to fight the economic downturn. You knew that he knew something that the other world leaders didn't know ... didn't you?

How about our shows of determination and strength to North Korea and Iran? Obama really has the Gargoyle and Shorty in a tizzy, doesn't he? And I'm sure you're very impressed by Obama's instantaneous backing of that wannabe dictator and Chavez acolyte from Honduras.

So ... still got that Obama bumper sticker on your car? It's one thing to have been so profoundly ignorant in the last election. It's quite another to advertise it.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The real Prezbo

So according to a new poll by, Barack Obama is the most trusted political leader in the world. The poll was of nearly 20,000 residents of the largest nations, including even Macau. Oh how I love Macau. From my own experience, the authorities tend to look the other way when it comes to so many things.

So Obama was right: he truly is the citizen of the world, even as his own country is left wandering and confused. I suppose it`s easy, however, for Jabrail in Azerbaijan to swoon over Obama, when he`s not faced with cap and trade, nationalized health care, and those new mandatory curly light bulbs. But then again, in Azerbaijan, I guess you`re just happy to have any kind of light bulb. Even if it`s a candle shaped like a light bulb.

But I digress. The poll looked at "confidence ratings," and found that while Obama had the highest, and would "do the right thing regarding world affairs," Vladimir Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had the lowest. Now, these standings might mean something, if Obama actually had the balls to take advantage of them. I mean, what`s the use of being loved, if you can`t actually scare the crap out of those who love you? It`s what confuses me most about our President. He chose initially to sit on the sidelines - as the people of Iran cried out for help - preferring to see which dude wins. A true leader, however, would know that it`s not the leaders who matter, but the people caught in the middle.

Which is why Obama`s recent response to the Honduran mess is even more bizarre. Immediately after the coup – Obama raced to condemn it. So our President develops a spine over an abducted politician in pajamas – but not about widespread bloodshed of innocent folks in Iran? Where the heck are his priorities, or his sense of proportion?

Does Obama make a list of things that piss him off, and if so - what`s at the top? Fascism or poorly inflated tires? The murder of innocent protestors, or midtown bodegas that sell cigarettes to teens? Nukes pointed at Hawaii, or sugary sodas at school? Our nation`s prosperity or his abs?

I don`t know. Which is why – at least for now - I`m taking down my Obama poster from the ceiling above my bunk bed. I`m replacing it with a poster of Sarkozy. He's got abs, and balls

If you (as I do) believe Golbal Warming is Bullshit --- you are committing treason

If you're against Global Warming... then you are against the world! Yep, this is the new line from liberals and Democrats. If you are against this climate change, cap-and-trade legislation that is making its way through Congress, then you are basically immoral.

Let's start with Henry Waxman, who is one of the chief architects of this cap-and-trade scheme. In response to the Republicans who voted against his plan, he says: "They [Republicans] want to play politics and see if they can keep any achievements from being accomplished that may be beneficial to the Democrats. They're rooting against the country and I think in this case, even rooting against the world because the world needs to get its act together to stop global warming."

Then, we get this from Paul Krugman in The New York Times. He writes, "A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases. And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn't help thinking that I was watching a form of treason -- treason against the planet. To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research."

Treason ... rooting against the world ... immorality ... wow, do these guys have a high opinion of their fraudulent cause or what?

Have you read Atlas Shrugged lately?

You Should!

PrezBo sides with a Wannabe Dictator

North Korea launches a missile and it takes Barack Obama and the UN five days to respond. Iran holds fraudulent elections, kills protesters and it takes weeks before Barack Obama can stand up and say that he is "concerned" about the situation.

Then the people of Honduras try to uphold their constitution and laws of the land from being trampled by a Chavez-wanna be ... and it takes Barack Obama one day to proclaim that this was not a legal coup.

Why the sudden decisiveness? Where were these strong opinions on foreign matters when Iranian authorities were trampling protestors and cutting off media access to the outside world? Where was this decisiveness when Kim Jong Ill decided that he was going to launch missiles toward Hawaii on the Fourth of July? Why ... NOW ... is Obama suddenly speaking out loudly

How about a little background. Are you really sure you know what has been going on in Honduras? Do you think that this was simply a coup? Let me give you a rough outline here, and then you can sit back and wonder just why PrezBO is in the weeds with Chavez and Castro on this one.

Mel Zelaya is, or was, the President of Honduras. He and Hugo Chaves were tight. So tight, it seems, that Zelaya wanted to emulate Hugo by changing the Honduran constitution to allow him to run for office until he durned well gets tired of it.

To change the constitution in Honduras you have to convene a constituent assembly. The president cannot do that. The Honduran congress must approve a national referendum calling for the constituent assembly to consider changes to the constitution. Zelaya didn't like the part about the constitution requiring approval of the congress before a national referendum could be called. So ... he decided to call one on his own.

OK .. so here we have President Zelaya calling for a national referendum when he doesn't have the power to do so. The next problem is obtaining ballots! Since the Honduran congress had not called for the referendum, as required by the constitution, the government certainly wasn't going to print the ballots! After all, how smart would it be to print ballots for an illegal referendum? So ... Zelaya had to get the ballots printed elsewhere. Here's an idea! Get his pall Hugo Chavez to print them! Yes! That will work!

So Chaves prints Zelaya's ballots and they're shipped to Honduras. Enter the Honduran Supreme Court. The court considers Zelaya's election in light of the requirements of the Honduran constitution, and rules the referendum illegal and unconstitutional. The court then issues an order to the Honduran military telling them not to do the logistical work associated with Zelaya's phony referendum. Remember, now ... all of this has one primary goal. To get rid of the term limits limiting Zelaya's rule in Honduras.

After the supreme court's decision, General Romeo Velasquez tells President Zelaya that he is subject to a proper order from the Supreme Court and will not be able to carry out Zelaya's referendum. So ... Zelaya fires him. The Supreme Court orders Zelaya to reinstate Velasquez, and Zelaya refuses to do so.

At this point Zelaya's ego is getting the better of him. If the military won't run his illegal referendum, he'll just do it himself. He gins up a mob and leads them to the military compound where Hugo's ballots are stored and then has his supporters begin distributing the ballots to the masses.

Based on the Supreme Court's ruling the Honduran attorney general said that the proposed referendum was illegal and said that he would arrest anyone attempting to carry out the election. Zelaya was arrested by the military and was escorted out of the country.

Now ... does this sound like a military coup-de-etat to you? The attorney general and the military were operating in accordance with the Honduran rule of law. They acted under a valid court order. Coup? The Honduran congress has convened and designated a successor president, all in accordance with the Honduran Constitution. Military coup? The presidential elections set for November .. the election that Zelaya was trying to get around ... will go on as scheduled. A blow for democracy?

Fidel Castro, Daniel Noriega, Hugo Chavez ... all on the side of Zelaya. But Obama? Obama fighting against the rule of law and for a wannabe dictator? What gives?

Monday, June 22, 2009

Jesus H. Christ....

Am I an old fart or am I right to be pissed that some jackass is skateboarding down the halls of the White House while all this Iranian shit is going down?

We truly have succumbed to the idiocy of the MTV/Mountain Dew/Road Rules backward hat and baggy short culture. Did I miss something, or is the White House the future set for the next Real World? Where are the wallet chains? Is Hot Topic handling our foreign policy? Obama should be grounded for a week for letting Tony Hawk play in OUR house. Where in hell are the adults?

Look: Tony Hawk is in his mid forties. He's a grown man...and he skateboards. Could you imagine your dad or anyone who lived during World War II treating a man who skateboards with anything less than scorn and ridicule?

Right now, people are risking their lives for the glimmer of freedom, and Tony Hawk is in the White House tweeting about Frosted Flakes.

Someone please dig up Reagan. I'd take a dead leader with balls over a living camp counselor who wants all the cool kids to like him.

What a screaming joke.

Monday, June 15, 2009


Around 12:30 last Friday afternoon the switches were thrown and America's television stations turned off their analog signals. All that was left was digital. We've known about this for over a year. For over six months virtually all of these TV stations were broadcasting announcements about the switch. If you watch TV even a little you've seen hundreds of announcements telling you that the switch was coming and that you needed to take steps to make sure you could still watch your precious boob tube. The government was handing out coupons whereby the dumb masses could tap the taxpayers for the cost of a converter box. There were volunteers out there attaching the conversion boxes for people who still haven't managed to master the ballpoint pen. Everything that could be done was done. And yet ... on Friday afternoon the calls came pouring in to the TV stations .......

"What happened to my soap opera?"

"Where can you get one of them converter things?"

"I can't afford one of them converter things."

"Where is Barack Obama's birth certificate?"

"Why didn't you warn us this was going to happen?"

"I have a right to TV."

"The government needs to do something about this."

We are presented with a great opportunity here. Let's get the names of all of the ignoranuses who couldn't figure this thing out by Friday and get them converted to digital ... with one condition. They surrender their voter registration cards. We have enough idiots voting in this country ... and since there is no Constitutional right to vote in a federal election, we need to find ways to cull the herd. Clearly anyone who couldn't figure out this analog-to-digital conversion thing isn't bright enough to cast an intelligent vote. Sure ... we need them. Someone has to cook the French fries ... but we don't need them voting.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

$12 million a head.

So President Obama finally figured out what to do with those detainees at Gitmo, and it only cost 12 million dollars per captive. That's right: we're sending those 17 Chinese muslim terror suspects currently at Gitmo to a place called Palau, in exchange for 200 million bucks in aid.

FYI: Palau is a little island somewhere near the Philippines, with a population of about 20 thousand people. It was also the site for Survivor, twice – so it`s obviously familiar with housing no-good, belligerent ass-hats.

So let me get this straight: Obama`s solution for fulfilling his promise to dismantle a prison camp in a foreign land... is to replace it with another prison camp in a foreign land.

Truly, this is change we can believe in.

And this is what happens when you make a campaign promise, without any actual plan behind it. You`re left with whatever you had before, except of course, it now costs us 200 million dollars. It really makes you wonder what the Messiah has planned for health care reform. Well, we already know. It will be no better - most likely worse - and it will costs more money they we can possibly imagine, or even afford.

And that`s what really pisses me off. If I had known what Obama was willing to pay to house these folks, I would have immediately volunteered my basement, which could easily take at least a dozen of these detainees. True, it would be a little tight, but that`s why I have all those double bunk beds. They can sleep four up and four across, with each person`s belly serving as another inmate`s pillow.

It's kind of like a bed and breakfast, if by "breakfast" you mean "ball gag."

Wednesday, June 03, 2009

Let's start a pool.. What's next to be nationalized?

On Monday it was General Motors. On Tuesday, the Senate advanced a bill giving the government some controls over the tobacco industry. Let's see what our imperial federal government can come up with today! Oh wait! Almost forgot. There's Citigroup too. And our health care industry. Are you keeping a list out there? Just how much of our economy is going to be under government control, if not ownership, by the end of Obama's first year. The question now is whether to call this guy a fascist or a socialist. He's certainly not a capitalist.

Well ... it's going to be OK, isn't it? After all, we all recognize that the government does a much better job of running businesses and enterprises than the private sector does. Right?

Let's use the insurance industry as an example here. How would things be different if the government were running our life insurance companies? As things stand the life insurance companies have to take premiums and invest them. The object is to obtain a decent return on those investments so that the company will not only be able to make money for its shareholders, but also have enough assets to pay death benefits as they come due. Now ... if the government was running a life insurance company it would set enough money aside in any given year to cover expected claims, and then spend the rest. There would be no investment accounts. An inability to sell new policies and collect new premiums to cover current claims would lead to failure. Sounds good, doesn't it?

I know you're tired of hearing this, but elections have consequences ... as does allowing ignoranuses to vote

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Today's Reality Slap

Candidate Barack Obama, October 15, 2008, third presidential debate:

But there is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments.

Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.

Economist Kevin Hassett, May 19, 2009, Bloomberg News columnist:

Extrapolating out the 2007 CBO forecast, our government plans to spend about $5.6 trillion more between 2009 and 2018 than was projected to be spent when the Democrats took over control of Congress.

To put that number in perspective, at the start of the 2007 budget year, Democrats inherited $4.8 trillion in outstanding government debt. That means that all of the deficits that have been run through all of history, funds that were used to finance the Vietnam War and the Iraq War and everything else in between, would be smaller than the spending increases of Democrats over the next 10 years if they are permitted to stay in power and keep up this pace.

Monday, May 18, 2009

Reality Slap in the Face for Today

The federal income taxes for every taxpayer would have to rise by roughly 81% to pay all of the benefits promised by the government under current law.That is just Social Security and Medicare

How do you figure that? Bruce Bartlett will explain.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

The Press is more than biased--They are INVESTED in "The One"

The Media Research Center did an analysis of the lamestream media's coverage of Obama's first 100 days. Guess what? Turns out that they have done a great job of sending tingles up their legs but a lousy job acting as watchdogs.

MRC analysts looked at all 982 broadcast evening news stories about Obama and his administration from Inauguration Day (January 20) through April 29. Here are some of the interesting, though not surprising, things that they found:

- Obama's first 100 days were defined by massive spending, aggressive intervention in the private sector and proposals for a huge expansion of the federal government. Yet none of the networks aired a single story on whether Obama's policies were pushing the U.S. toward socialism, and no reporter used the term "socialist" to describe Obama.

- Not only that, network reporters never used the word "liberal" to describe either Barack Obama or his agenda during the first 100 days.

- The networks lavished good press on every major initiative of the early Obama administration, including the massive stimulus package, all of the various bailouts, health care, stem cells, the environment and foreign policy.

- In the days before the President unveiled his unprecedented $3.5 trillion budget -- with a record-shattering $1.75 trillion deficit -- four out of five statements on the evening newscasts parroted the White House spin that Obama was a deficit fighter.

- Reporters treated Obama's hugely expensive $787 billion stimulus bill to mainly positive coverage (58 percent positive, 42 percent negative).

- The networks applauded Obama's decision to use taxpayer money to fund embryo-destroying stem cell research (82% positive coverage).

- Network coverage of Obama's mortgage bailout was also positive -- 59% of statements supported the bailout or wanted even more intervention, compared to 41% who opposed the bailout as unfair to responsible homeowners.

- Reporters heavily skewed their coverage in favor of the President's actions on global warming (78% positive).

- President Obama's decision to send thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan was greeted by nearly unanimous (91%) positive coverage -- a far cry from the highly negative coverage of President Bush's successful troop surge in Iraq two years ago.

- Like Obama and the Democrats, the networks went on a feeding frenzy against big corporate bonuses. The networks aired six times more statements forwarding the "infuriated" reaction to business (104) than criticized politicians' grandstanding (16).

- The networks spent days decrying AIG's $165 million bonuses, but hardly mentioned the $210 million in bonuses handed out by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the bailed-out mortgage giants with strong Democratic ties). ABC and NBC completely ignored the Fannie and Freddie bonuses, while the CBS Evening News gave it 27 seconds.

They made him. They must support him.

ASSUME the position!

Do you remember when the painstream press when nuts covering the Bernard Madoff ponzi scheme of over $50 billion? Well----are you ready for a $33 TRILLION ponzi scheme brought to you courtesy of our deficit hawk government? The newest accounting estimate is now out.

This is bound to set off the discussions about Social Security and Medicare. The latest news is that these two entitlement programs have gotten worse because of the recession. In fact, they are in such bad shape that Medicare is now paying out more than it receives.

The Trustees of the program said that Social Security will start paying out more than it collects in 2016. That is one year sooner than previously projected, and the entire system will be depleted by 2037.

Medicare is doing even worse. The trustees say that it will be insolvent by 2017, which is two years earlier than projects.

By the way .. there is not now and there never has been a Social Security Trust Fund. That's a fiction created to keep the dumb masses placated.

But what does Barack Obama want to do? Create MORE entitlement programs and grow the size of the government. Do you REALLY think this is going to work out well for us?

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

State's Rights

Have you heard about the standoff between California and the Obama administration? California's governor's office says that a politically powerful union has an inappropriate influence over the Obama administration. Why is that? Because the Obama administration decided to withhold billion of dollars in federal stimulus money until California reverses a wage cut for labor group workers. Now this wage cut between the California government and the home health care worker's union was negotiated. Both sides agreed. But the Service Employees International Union didn't like the idea of any union negotiating for a lower wage ... so they went to DC and complained to the government. Obama steps in and tells California that he is going to withhold $7 billion in federal funds unless the negotiated agreement is cancelled and the home health care workers get their money.

Governments run by unions. Change you can believe in.

Friday, May 08, 2009

Assume the position---Again

Another detail in Obama's budget is that he plans to end tax breaks for those evil, filthy oil and gas companies. In other words, Obama wants to increase taxes on the oil industry. He wants to end $26 billion in tax breaks, which he classifies as "unjustifiable loopholes ... costly to the American taxpayer and do little to incentivize production or reduce energy prices."

Did he say "costly to the American taxpayers?" Well, he can get away with that because he suspects you don't realize - and many Americans don't - that every penny of additional taxes these evil oil companies have to pay to the federal government will be added to the cost of the products they produce. The tax increases will show up at the gas pumps. I know that this is a difficult concept for the government-educated dumb masses to understand, but corporations - and this includes oil companies - don't pay taxes. They collect taxes from their customers, shareholders and employees and pass them on to the government.

Again ... let me point out that the greatest ally the looters in Washington could possibly have is an uneducated population.

Thursday, May 07, 2009


Do you think that Arlen Specter has had his "oh crap .. what have I done" moment yet? Considering the fact that he has lost all seniority in the Senate, I would say that moment is coming soon if it hasn't already. The amazing part of the story is that Senator Harry Reid apparently promised Specter that he would retain his seniority if he jumped parties. Angry Arlen trusted the cadaver? He didn't take into consideration the fact that government is all about power, and his fellow Democrats weren't about to give up any of their precious power just so they could claim another desk on their side of the aisle. Either way, Specter is confident that Harry is going to "work it out" and that his assurances on seniority "will be fulfilled." Keep dreamin, Arlen.

So what may have done it for the Democrats? Debbie Stabenow says that many of her colleagues were irritated when Specter told The New York Times that the Minnesota courts should "do justice" by declaring Norm Coleman to be the winner of the Senate race against Al Franken.

Here's why this seniority issue is a big deal for Arlen Specter .. it limits his ability to get pork projects, money and jobs for his state. See, Specter was a senior ranking member on the all-powerful Appropriations Committee. He says, "My senior position on Appropriations has enabled me to bring a lot of jobs and a lot of federal funding to this state." Without this, Arlen believes that he doesn't have the "power" he has accumulated during his 29 years in the Senate. Without power, he probably won't be re-elected.

That said, my bet is that Arlen will flip on "Card Check" and get some of his juice back.

Taxpayers take another screwing from our American Idol PrezBo

You knew this one was coming. Chrysler is not going to repay the taxpayers more than $7 billion it received in the form of a bailout. It has been confirmed with the Obama administration that this is included as part of its bankruptcy filing.

So there you go. Not only do secured creditors get the hind teat ... but so do the taxpayers. Who gets the front? The very union workers who helped destroy the American automobile industry. How wonderful. That's $7 billion ... gone. Poof. Never to be seen again by you or your children or grandchildren.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Tea Party - Teabagging - Your Momma

So if there's one great thing we learned from yesterday's Tea parties, it's how Anderson Cooper spends his nights off. It had happened during a conversation with talking thumb, David Gergen, who had just noted that the tea party protestors had yet to find their voice. Cooper's response: "It's hard to talk when you're teabagging."

Now, if you're too old or too high to get what's going on, here's the joke: The liberal-leaning media are goofing on the tea parties by invoking the term teabagging, a phrase used to describe an act of oral sex performed by a man - either on another man, woman, or in Alec Baldwin's case – a cheeseburger.

And so you have Cooper's joke – it's just a shame he ripped off the shtick from David Shuster, who apparently has never met a joke he hasn't beat to death like a hunter on a harp seal. On MSNBC, Shuster repeats testicle-based puns with a fervent relish not unlike an eight-year old boy who just can't stop sniffing his fingers. And, this, coming from me. I mean – I always thought I was the king of obvious jokes, but I relinquish that crown – because the real obvious joke is Shuster.

So why is it the MSM finds it so easy to sneer at a group of protestors, when you've never seen them do the same with the bedraggled buffoons protesting environmental ills, animal testing or the WTO?

Well, first: the protests involve people they've never actually met. I mean, these are average folks – not professional sign carriers. Most of these people work for a living, and ration their marching for parades. Also, the media abhors these people because they question the ultimate goal of their Messiah. These protestors know wealth distribution when they see it, and they're calling it out - because the media cannot bring themselves to do it for them. After all, if they did, that would hurt Obama's feelings. And if you learned anything from high school – you never make fun of Mr. Popular.

Lastly, the media hates it when they can't control the story. These tea parties were out of their hands from day one–a movement that was hard to figure and impossible to spin. So, why not make fun of it? Why not make ball jokes?

But hey, who am I to judge? Whatever gets you off on a Wednesday night, Anderson, when nothing else will.

Monday, April 13, 2009


I was glued to the Masters on TV when the text message came through: The Navy Seals have saved the day.

You know the story by now. Three Seal snipers on the USS Bainbridge coordinated their efforts and delivered three simultaneous head shots to the three Muslim pirates holding Captain Richard Phillips. I'm really looking forward to getting the details on this. The seas were getting rough and both the lifeboat and the Navy vessel were rolling on the seas when the shots were taken.

Up until yesterday The United States had been showing weakness: Weakness with Korea, and weakness in dealing with these Muslim pirates. Well, Obama came through. He told his military commanders to bring this episode to an end if they saw the means to do so. Obama said yes to a Pentagon request for standing authority to use appropriate force to save the life of the captain. We have to recognize that a failure of this mission would have been used against Obama ... so his decision showed courage. I was surprised. Pleasantly surprised.

Now we're getting reports that the Muslim pirates are really PO'd that actual force was used against them. They're vowing revenge against the United States and France? Why France? Because the French military killed a few Muslim pirates while rescuing hostages from a yacht the pirates had seized. One hostage was killed in that attack.

One regret. The head shots that killed the three pirates were simultaneous. This means that none of the Muslim goons got to see their buddy's heads explode. Oh well ... can't have everything, I guess.

Now its time for the shipping lines to do a bit more to defend and protect themselves so that the U.S. Military won't have to do the job for them. Hire Blackwater .. get mercenaries .. do something! But put some really mean and serious guards on these ships so that they can feed the sharks some more good, tasty Somali garbage.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Braindead Botox Ignoramous

I feel like I have been asking this question a lot more lately. But honestly .. read this quote from Nancy Pelosi. It is about health-care legislation that will include an option for a government-run program that would compete with private insurers.

"This is not only about the health of individuals in our country, which will be justification enough ... It's about the competitiveness of our businesses to make them globally competitive because they are competing with companies and countries where the federal government -- their governments -- pay for health care. They don't have to bear those health care costs."

Hey .. Nancy .. newsflash. It is not the government that will be paying for this healthcare. The government does not generate an income to pay for healthcare. It seizes money from its taxpayers. Money that was earned by the taxpayers. So if the taxpayers have earned the money, and the government seizes it to pay for Democrat dreams and schemes like healthcare .. then the taxpayers are really the ones "bearing those healthcare costs" now aren't then?

Thursday, March 26, 2009

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED--well---not really..

So here's good news on the Global War on Terror – it's officially over.

Well, at least the use of that phrase is.

The Pentagon has "codified" it, which has nothing to do with cod, but still smells fishy. According to the Washington Post, the phrase is being put out to pasture, to be replaced by something called an "Overseas Contigency Operation,." Now, I have no idea what that means, but then again I'm still wearing shoes with Velcro snaps.

But look, it's not difficult to see where this new language is coming from: it's pure civil servant speak designed to take the meaning out of what clearly is the most important battle in our lifetimes. The sad fact is, ever since the rise of deconstructionist thinking in academia, every Ivy League graduate knows that the concept of "good vs. evil" is infantile, and the concept of terror is "relative." There is no difference between our war, and their war – even though we don't fly planes into buildings, or wear vests packed with things that look like roman candles (but aren't). We're just as bad as terrorists, because we're big and powerful – even if we don't behead people who disagree with us.

But look, I don't care about words. What I do care about is commitment. Whether it's a "war" or a "contingency operation," it's never going to be over. It's a battle fought each and every day by brave men and women all over the world. And a change in language is not going to make their work any easier.

But at least there will be a new logo for the coffee mugs.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Hedge Funds win again

The Treasury acknowledges that private investors will be subsidized to take on the ownership of what it’s calling “legacy loans” and “legacy securities.”
(If these horrific securities are legacy loans, then the funeral industry should reclassify corpses as “legacy bodies.")
The Treasury cites as an example a loan valued by a bank at $100 that is sold for $84. In that instance, the private investor and the government would each put in $6, and the investor would borrow the other $72 from the government. If you’re keeping score at home, it means the private investor would put in 7 percent of the cash but would receive a much higher percentage of the profits. However at the end of the day if it doesn't work the taxpayer eats 83% of the losses.

Are you aware of what the word "Toxic" means?

Without the teleprompter he is lost.

Just a question. You do know that Obama wrote a letter to Jacques Chirac recently. In that letter Obama wrote "I am certain that we will be able to work together, in the coming four years, in a spirit of peace and friendship to build a safer world."

The "coming four years?" Well, it seems that there's a small problem here. Jacques Chirac is not the president of France. That honor goes to Nicolas Sarkozy.

Now if, say, Sarah Palin had done this the press would be full of outrage. Hmmmm. Oh well, read this for yourself.

Monday, March 23, 2009


You may remember that last month Obama unveiled his budget for 2010. And guess what it included? More government! He proposed spending $3.6 trillion, which is more than 25% of our GDP. And that number will only grow so long as Obama is in the White House.

It seems that the Congressional Budget Office has some news for Obama .. his budget would commit Washington to unsustainable deficits and increase borrowing by over $9 trillion over the next decade. That is more than four times the deficits of George Bush.

It gets worse, folks. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that "Obama's policies would cause government spending to swell above historic levels even after the costly programs to alleviate the recession and shore up the financial system have ended. The result, the CBO said, was that by 2019 the US national debt would be about 82 per cent of GDP - about double where it is today."

How about that? You voted for this guy because he looked cool and enjoys basketball. You voted for him because he appeared on all of your favorite magazine covers and was praised by your favorite TV and movie stars. And, of course, you voted for him because of that magical word "change!" Working out pretty well, isn't it?

Obama, of course, is saying that the CBO has it all wrong. HE, based on his immense government and management experience - which he has been displaying so brilliantly - says that he will cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. The ONLY way that will happen is if the House and Senate are turned over to a new breed of Republican and a stop is put to this idiocy.

FYI .. the Heritage Foundation has an excellent analysis of Obama's budget.

Friday, March 20, 2009

The Flying Monkey Show

Yesterday's vote in the House was completely expected. Overwhelmingly, your representatives in Washington voted huge taxes on bonuses for AIG employees. Nancy Pelosi said, "We want our money back and we want our money back now for the taxpayers." Funny .. after recently passing a bill with more than 8,000 earmarks worth over $400 billion, the hollow-eyed hippy from Haight-Ashbury and her flying monkeys are suddenly worried about the taxpayers.

First point. It is not "their" money. The money, whether you like it or not, belongs to the people to whom they were paid. Those bonuses were paid pursuant to a valid contract and are not the rightful and legal property of the payees. Let's us also remember that the amount paid in those bonuses was less than one-tenth of one percent of the bailout money received by AIG. Remember, though ... politicians believe that ever penny you earn actually belongs to the government. In the official language of Washington any money from your paycheck that these political hacks allow you to keep is a "tax expenditure." You earned it ... but if you're allowed to keep it they treat it as a government expenditure. To the Democrat mind, and in the mind of all too many Republicans, all wealth is owned by government. Produced by the people, but owned by government.

Second point. This is absolutely unconstitutional. Con su permisio I'll explain.

So the House succeeded in passing a 90% tax on bonuses given to employees of AIG and any company receiving at least $5 billion in bailout money. But only with those evil rich employees whose family income is above $250,000 a year will have to pay this 90% tax.

You just cannot like what you're seeing here. These politicians are targeting specific individuals out there who have received some money that the politicians, for political purposes, just do not want them to have. So they pass a law allowing the government to seize that money. Can you imagine where this goes from here? How about Ann Coulter? She delights in writing books that just irritate the ever-luvin' puddin' out of Democrats and liberals. Let's say that one of Nancy Pelosi's flying monkeys reports to the Princess that Coulter made $1.5 million from her last book. This money was legally paid to Coulter pursuant to a contract. Sound familiar? But Pelosi feels that Coulter has made this money by promoting divisiveness in the population, so she decides that punishment is in order. She then has her minions pass a bill establishing a 90% tax on the royalties from all books and writings that promote political dissention and defame public servants in the Congress of the United States. Come on now, you tell me the big huge difference between a confiscatory tax on legally earned bonuses and one on legally received book royalties.

This is going nowhere folks. It will never make it through the Senate. If the members of the House had any appreciation at all for the Constitution it wouldn't have gone this far. And why, pray tell, would that be? That would be because of one pesky little clause found in our (once) supreme law of the land.

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 5 - United States Constitution

"No bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed."

Do you know what that means? The key is the word "attainder." Let's go to Websters: It's a 15th century word meaning "extinction of the civil rights and capacities of a person upon sentence of death or outlawry usually after a conviction of treason." A definition, this one from the Catholic Encyclopedia, describes "bill of attainder" thusly: "A bill of attainder may be defined to be an Act of Parliament for putting a man to death or for otherwise punishing him without trial in the usual form. Thus by a legislative act a man is put in the same position as if he had been convicted after a regular trial."

Well, in this case the Congress isn't trying to put anyone to death ... they're just trying to steal some money. They are trying to deprive some individuals of property that is rightfully and lawfully theirs without accusing them of a crime and without the benefit of any trial ... except, that is, for this trial that has been taking place in the media for the last week. Well, there's that pesky little Constitution again. A man cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process, and in our country due process means a trial before a jury of one's peers. Barney Frank et al are trying to take these people's money through legislative action without a trial. I would truly hope there isn't a federal judge in this country that wouldn't smack this idiocy down at the earliest opportunity.

This isn't about whether or not those people deserved those bonuses. Perhaps they don't. But the bonuses were paid pursuant to a legally enforceable contract. A contract BTW that was seen approved and dated by Tim Gietner and Chris Dodd. So where should the outrage be? Can you rationalize focusing your anger on Ed Liddy. This (Liddy) is a guy in the job for six months who wanted to serve his country and is being paid $1.00 per year to unwind a financial disaster not of his making and must take take grief from the flying monkeys in congress?

The property belongs to the employee. Now we have politicians who are trying to take it away just because they're unhappy and embarrassed because they didn't take care of this little problem before the bailout money was paid.They sat there yessterday and preened and bitched and beat their collective breast while demonstrating their total lack of any understanding of contract law of AIG's business model. They are idiots!

On to the Senate. Let's hope someone over there has read the Constitution.

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

In over the collective heads.

Yesterday, President Obama and tax cheat Tim Geithner outlined their plan for small businesses. But before doing that, Obama wanted to make sure he had his say about these AIG bonuses. And not surprisingly, he believes that they are outrageous. Not only that, but he wants tax cheat Tim Geithner to "pursue every single legal avenue" to block the payments.

Obama, of course, just had to use this occasion to play into the wealth envy. He used one of my favorite words ... "greed." He said, "This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed ... This isn't just a matter of dollars and cents. It's about our fundamental values ... All across the country, there are people who work hard and meet their responsibilities every day, without the benefit of government bailouts or multi-million dollar bonuses. And all they ask is that everyone, from Main Street to Wall Street to Washington, play by the same rules." What rules would that be, PrezBO? Abiding by your contractual obligations? That rule?

Here we have Obama wants to worry about fundamental values. Where were those values when he nominated a tax cheat to be the Secretary of the Treasury and the head of the IRS? Willfully cheating on your taxes is OK. Getting a bonus for the work you've done pursuant to a contract is not.

Well---here's the view all of us including the "Chosen One" should be acting on. The American taxpayer owns 80% of AIG. WE are the owners and have the necessary proxies to do what ever the hell we want with AIG. Having that kind of ownership that makes the congress and the Executive branch the Board of Directors. Rather than act the role of the Board they sit back and snipe at the guy running the AIG mess for $1.00 a year. ONE DOLLAR!

So my advice to congress and PrezBo is shut the hell up and do your god-damned job!

Saturday, March 07, 2009

Go Figure

One of the big topic of conversations around dinner tables (or in my case, a lunch box filled with discarded ears), is Obama's tax philosophy. Some find it confusing - for he claims he's for tax cuts, yet he's still raising taxes for some Americans (otherwise known as rich jerks).

Now, here's the thing: if the president is going to cut taxes for something like 95 percent of the population, then he`s got to think that tax cuts are good. I mean, you don`t do something to 95 percent, unless it works.

So, why not just go to 100 percent?

Seriously: Imagine having a classroom full of kids waiting for a flu vaccine. Do you only give it to 95 percent of the class? No - if you believe there`s an antidote that repairs what's wrong, you don't leave any one out.

But here, we do.

The question, then, is why.

Well, It's not because we need the revenue, because that cash from the top 2 to 5 percent won't help.

So then, why?

Oh yeah - that five percent is "rich." And if you've been basting in the sauce of class warfare most of your life - the rich need to be punished, even if all they've done wrong is get rich.

Which is a nasty form of negative reinforcement. Look, if you're going to get nailed for elevating yourself to a higher financial class, after awhile, you`re going to think, "Why bother."

And then, "Is that meth?"

Worse, the definition of rich? Bull crap. What's rich in one area, is poor in another. A family can live happily on 75 grand in Kansas, but in Manhattan, they'll be turning tricks for oatmeal. Inevitably, the so-called rich are going to have to move out of cities, so they can live on skimpier means – which means a lot of whiny Columbia grads wandering confused at Ace Hardware.

And that's something we can all live without.

It`s Saturday, and it`s time for the Saturday's list!

Because, it's Saturday and I feel like crap but not nearly as crappy as what the "Chosen One" and his American Idol presidency has done so far to prove without a doubt that how he ran for president was a lie!

So far: what we`ve learned in the first six weeks of Obama`s presidency!

-When Wall Street suffers, so does main street. The distinction between the two made by Obama is a ruse – class warfare rhetoric that worked to win an election, and lose an economy. But what a historic election!

-"Historic" doesn't mean it can`t be disastrous. For example, see the sky. It`s falling.

-If you`re a corporation - throwing parties is totally evil in these hard times. But if you`re the President – then it`s perfectly fine to bask in your messiah-like popularity every Wednesday night. Seriously, he really is as gorgeous in person as he is on the stamps we haven`t made yet, but certainly will.

-In Canada you can behead a man, and get away with it - which makes me wish that all those folks who said they were moving there during the Bush administration, actually did.

-Jon Stewart understands it`s easier to pick on some dude from CNBC, than to question harmful policies put forth by a charming President. Great job Jon – speaking truth to power.

-Unlike the world press – countries like Russia, Iran and Venezuela haven`t let Obama`s abs go to their heads. Yeah, he`s cute and everything, but check out our missiles

- Obama is no longer worth the trouble. The only way now to stop the madness is for Americans to go after Congress. Seeing how the Obama Administration is actually pretty unconcerned that the most successful system for human survival and happiness in the history of mankind is being dismantled in favor of politics and policies that have failed all over the world, it makes it hard for me to say something hopeful about Obama`s presidency.

I guess it`s above my pay grade.

Has anyone seen or heard from Paul Volker?

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Ya just gotta love it.

Letter from a Law Student:

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters,

We've stuck together since the late 1950s, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know that we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and just will not ever agree on what's right. So let's just end it right now while we can do it on friendly terms. We can smile, shake hands, chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and each go our own way.

So here's a model separation agreement.

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass, each taking a portion. That's going to be the difficult part, but I'm sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy. Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate taste. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can have those. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. And since you hate guns and you hate war, we'll take the firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell. But you are going to be responsible for finding a biodiesel vehicle big enough to haul them around.

We'll keep the capitalism, the greedy corporations, the pharmaceutical companies; we will keep Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have the homeless, the homeboys, the hippies and illegal aliens. We will keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, the greedy CEOS and all of the rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and we'll let you have NBC and Hollywood.

You can be nice to Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer anybody that threatens us. You can have the peaceniks and the war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we will provide them with security. You won't have to worry about it. We will keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley Maclaine. You can also have the UN, but we will no longer pay the bill.

We will keep the SUVs, the pickup trucks and the oversize luxury cars. You can have the compacts, the subcompacts and every Subaru station wagon you can find. You can give everybody healthcare, if you can find any practicing doctors. We will continue to believe that healthcare is a privilege and not a right. We will keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and the national anthem, and I am sure you will be happy to substitute in their place "Imagine." I'd like to teach the world to sing "Kumbaya" or "We are the world." We will practice trickle-down economics and you can give trickle-up poverty your best shot. And since it so offends you, we will keep our history, our name and our flag.

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots. And if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the friendly spirit of parting, I'll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in about 15 years.


John J Wall

Law student and an American

P.S. You can also have Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda

Wednesday, March 04, 2009


The "Chosen one" yesterday told us that he wanted us to go out and buy stock.

Is he kidding? He's waging an all-out war against capitalism, and he wants us to buy stocks? This man who wants a government-controlled economy wants us to invest in the stock market? This is like the Surgeon General telling us to go out and have unprotected sex with and HIV infected, drug addicted street whore.

Yeah ... let's all do that!

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Read the Speech

After getting a chance to sit and read the text of "The Chosen One's" speech of Tuesday night I tried to find some analogous framework in my life that was relevant to the content of "His" speech. I found that I could only relate to when I was in my teens and 20's.

Way back in the 1950's and 1960's, one of the easiest ways to get a woman out of her party dress was to use the apocalypse as your wing man. The old line, "Honey, what if the world were to end tomorrow," was designed to narrow prospects for her future, in the hopes that she would spread her legs. And of course, the next morning (if the tryst lasted that long), the sense of terror and urgency would disappear - along with the young man, the lady's honor and probably a thing or two from the fridge and/or her purse.

So it's no wonder that after President Obama's speech, I felt a little like the suckered chick. See, up until last Tuesday night, we were all in a state of panic, thanks to Obama – but now, judging by Tuesday night's tone - it turns out, maybe things aren't so bad after all. "We will recover," he now says. And to me, it feels like the morning after - and he`s saying, "Anyway babe, that was great - I'll call you."

I hope he`s right. I still have a little confidence in the guy, and I want to be wrong about the expanding role of government. But the problem with exaggerating fear is that it obscures legitimate fear. When referring to Iraq, he talks of "ending" the war, instead of "winning." That the concept of victory is unseemly to him – well, that kinda scares me. And tucked away near the end of his address, he manages only a few words about the war on terror, giving it less weight than his obsession for windmills. The scary fact is, if a terror attack were to happen tonight here in the US - our economic troubles would be wiped off the front pages.

Then you'd be truly scared – which probably means we should hook up later.

I mean, seriously –life is short, and why die with regret?

I have a sleeping bag in my truck and I wrote you a poem. Let me get my guitar.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

The Speech last night

It seemed that the focus of Obama speech last night was to convey the message that all of the economic problems faced by this country were created by evil banks and criminal CEOs "disappearing on private jets." This was classic leftist populism. Us vs. them. The ordinary people engaged in mortal combat with the monsters of capitalism --- and government is here to save you.

This was an "America is great because of government" speech ... and the message was that more government we have the greater America will be. Obama has his finger on the pulse of the people. People want more government. They want the government to provide them with the basic necessities of life. The age of self-reliance is waning - the age of government dependency is on the rise.

When this country first began to flourish historians and social scientists took note. They traveled from Europe to the United States to witness this miracle first hand. They studied what was working and what was not .. and they put their thoughts on paper. Its really too bad some of those writings aren't explored in today's government schools - but I can understand why that is so. There seemed to be one universal warning that was sounded by many of these scholars: Once the American people figure out they can use the ballot box to reach into someone else's pocket .. we're screwed. Well, the American people have figured that out ... and Obama is their champion. The question now is how do you manage to take a population that is dependent on their ability to use the government as an instrument of plunder to want to once again stand on their own two feet?

Monday, February 23, 2009

You Have To Be Kidding...

Here’s the headline:

Obama to Stress Fiscal Responsibility

Here’s the only possible response:

Alcoholics Urge Sobriety


Saturday, February 21, 2009

Pampered litle shits....

So there`s some kind of student protest going on at New York University, and it serves one important purpose: to show you how many tools actually attend New York University.

According to the New York Times, these students are vowing to continue occupying the school cafeteria until their important demands are met. Sadly, none of these demands include a better quality of vegetarian corn dog - instead what`s listed is "a thorough annual reporting" of the college`s budget, a freeze on tuition, and get this: 13 scholarships given every year for students from the Gaza Strip (which I believe is an Arabic Gentleman`s Club on the Jersey Turnpike).

Okay, I know that these students probably think they`re speaking truth to power – but in reality, they`re nothing more than pampered poodles who need a good a spanking, preferably by me while wearing my patented spiky spanking glove (with spikes). Look, if you have a problem with the tuition – go to another school. That`s how it works. I mean, seriously, I can`t afford to fly first class – but that doesn`t mean I protest United Airlines. I just fly coach.

Well, actually, I go Greyhound.

More important, these scholarships for Gaza Strip students are little more than a calculated effort by self-centered spoiled brats to make themselves appear thoughtful and sympathetic to their progressive professors and the scruffy scribes at the Village Voice. Somehow we`re all supposed to think they`re heroically selfless - when they`re just being what they accuse evil rich Republicans of being: greedy, soulless bastards.

If Ronald Reagan was alive, and Governor of New York – he turn on the hoses. And I`d bring the soap.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Change you can believe in..

  • The Dow at a 10-year low.
  • A tax cheat running the IRS
  • Another tax cheat as the Chief of Staff
  • A trillion-dollar plus federal deficit
  • Over one-half of voters relieved of any federal tax liability
  • Government mandated limits on executive compensation
  • Three failed attempts and still no Commerce Secretary
  • Tom Daschle rides his free limo into the sunset - after paying taxes he evaded.
  • The White House performance czar turns out to be a tax cheat also
  • Lobbyists hired to work for the Obama Administration
  • The census gets politicized
  • Double government spending in one year
  • The word "freedom" fades into obscurity
  • Increasing home loan mortgage rates across the board
  • Millions of Americans made dependent on government
  • Moving unionization-by-intimidation forward
  • Welfare checks become "tax cuts."
  • Illegal aliens free to work on taxpayer-funded "stimulus" projects
  • Welfare reform reversed, states ordered to increase welfare roles
  • Move to silence critical talk radio shows
  • Selling Senate seats
  • Obama books in religious sections of book stores
  • More government workers, not private sector jobs
  • A government bureaucracy to intrude on doctor/patient relationships
  • Stage set for medical services rationing
  • Annual welfare checks for middle income families

Illinois and Democrats just keep giving and gining

I'll just make this simple. If Roland Burris, the new Democrat Senator from Illinois, were a Republican ... he would be burnt toast. As it is you have to work to find the media even referring to this character as a Democrat.

You do know the story, don't you? After Blago appointed him to fill Obama's Senate seat Burris was called back to Illinois to testify before a state Senate committee looking into Blago's corruption. While under oath Burris said that he had not had discussed making any payments to Blago with any of Blago's staff, including his brother. Then Burris discovers that the feds have a tape of him discussing a campaign donation with Blago's brother. Don't you just hate it when that happens? So ... time for a little CYA. Burris suddenly wants to submit an affidavit to the Illinois senate expanding his testimony. Since they have him on tape he had better fess up and tell them that he talked to Blago's bro about some money.

This is called perjury. We learned while Bill Clinton was president that only Republicans like Scooter Libby are punished for perjury. Democrats get a pass. Let's see if it works this way for Burris.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Prince Charley is an ugly misinformed Toad...

Surprise: a rich environmentalist is a stupid hypocrite.

It`s true, Prince Charles is traveling to South America for an environmental tour of the place, in order to preach the crisis that is climate change.

(Notice how "climate change" has now replaced "global warming" as the panic button - since more scientists now predict a new era of global cooling, as people in general are wising up to Al Gore`s lies).

The problem here of course, is that the Prince is using an A1319 Airbus – which normally seats 140 passengers, but in this case it will fit just 14 staffers, and the Prince`s two monstrous ears. Camilla won`t be traveling with him - she`ll be towed along in a blacked-out horse trailer because she`s easily spooked.

According to experts in this field, this 16,000 mile trip will cost over a half million dollars, and create a 322 ton carbon footprint (equal to five Joy Behars or twelve farting cows). Now, this would usually make Prince Charles – the ultimate self-righteous greenie - a hypocrite. But only if the climate change science he speaks of is correct. Which it isn`t. Skeptics of CO2 theology are winning the battle, finally – Prince Charles could fly around the world a thousand times and it wouldn`t make a bit if difference.

But sadly, his global jetting does far less harm to the planet than his spreading of poisonous ideas that discourage development and destroy economies. Mark Steyn said America is rich enough to survive stupid ideas – to which I must add South America isn`t.

But what can you expect from royalty? They embrace climate change, because it discourages human creativity – something royalty can understand. They do nothing but produces likenesses for commemorative plates – and, unless it`s ear wax, they cannot understand how real things are made.

To them it`s easier to put trees before humans – mainly because they`re closer genetically to the former than the latter.

Monday, February 16, 2009

Have to have it pass RIGHT NOW-

First .. remember this. This whole so-called "stimulus" bill is the largest government spending bill in the history of the U.S. Government. Would you have expected anything less from a Democrat-controlled Washington DC?

The Democrats just had to have this stimulus bill passed by Friday. I still think it is because Nancy Pelosi had to make sure it was passed before she jetted off to Italy .. but the Democrat House broke a promise by voting on the bill without giving the public and the media 48 hour to review the darn thing. We were told that they just couldn't wait another minute. Had to do it NOW! They had to have it NOW, my friends, so that it could be signed into law before the people really started to figure out what this was all about - the growing of government - and that our economy may well be improving without this hideous bill.

Now another broken campaign promise. During the "Change You Can Believe In" campaign Obama told us that he would never sign a critical piece of legislation until the American people have had five days to read it, ask questions about it and understand it. That promise is no longer operative. He said that to get elected --- but he certainly never met it. Obama will sign this disaster tomorrow in Denver.

Denver? Yeah ... Denver. He sure is enjoying that Air Force One bit, isn't he?

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Religion of Peace---or is it Piece?

New York man Muzzammil Hassan founded pro-Islam station Bridges TV five years ago to combat the negative public image of Muslims. He is currently under arrest for beheading his wife.

The couple in happier times, before Hassan removed his wife’s head

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Our Hustler in Cheif

I have been watching parts of PrezBo back out on the campaign trail waxing eloquent about selling the stimulus plan that he's already managed to put into that enima space we guard so carefully. So I sat and listened to him and tried to understand what exactly he was saying other than don't live in a cardboard box and if you do it's Bush's fault. Instead, I sensed that I`d just been sold something that even the seller couldn`t entirely comprehend.

See, while I can`t expect a vacuum salesman to tell me exactly how the vacuum picks up dirt, at the very least he should know where the power button is. I need to know our President has a fundamental understanding of economics, rather than say, the ins and outs of weatherizing homes. That`s for some other wonk to deal with – not the dude-in-chief.

No – his job is to tell us how this stimulus plan works. Meaning, he needs to answer one question: how do massive government programs jump start an economy? Because, I don`t know. And I don`t think he does either.

At first, even he said that only the private sector can fix an economy - and you can't rely on the government for solutions. But then he added: in this's more government we need pronto. That makes perfect sense, if you've just ingested a bottle of cough syrup. Which, thankfully, I have.

Worse, he also spoke about the importance of bipartisanship – while blaming everything on Bush – as if Barney Frank never existed. Claiming you`re bipartisan doesn`t mean you can have it both ways.

Even more, at some point we all have to realize that going after rich folks does nothing to help the poor. It may feel good, but it doesn`t do any good. President Obama maintains that tax cuts for the wealthy are what have caused this crumbling economy. But he`s wrong. Fact is, while he elaborates on the difference between Wall Street and Main Street – we`ve just realized: THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. When Wall Street suffers, so do we. When the rich become poor, the rest of us become poorer.

In the end, what we`re seeing is an opportunity for people who never liked economics to run, and possibly ruin, economy. It`s like letting a ten year old take the controls of a plane.

In both cases, it probably pays to be highly medicated.

Some CEOs loot their companies, Most Congress-critters loot the Country

So, according the Congressional Budget Office, this year's deficit may be a record $1.2 trillion. And while this number includes the financial bailouts, it doesn`t include the humongous stimulus proposal that`s before us now. Once you add outstanding deficits from prior years, say the number crunchers, every single one of us would have to pay $37,000 apiece to cover the cost.

Which, in simple terms, makes me want to puke. But I wouldn`t be so disgusted by all of this, if we were just honest about what`s really going on. This isn`t a stimulus plan – it`s looting.

Our government is looking at this financial crisis the same way looters looked at the Rodney King verdict - a momentary excuse for seemingly inexcusable behavior - a chance to smash and grab, knowing you may never get that chance for a free set of tires again (at least until the Lakers win another championship).

At least that`s how the Democrats are looking at it. They see this financial catastrophe as an opportunity to check off every program on their wish list – knowing that the consequences from such behavior will prevent them from ever having that opportunity again.

So they`re getting it all in now.

Even worse, the media is treating the bill the same way they treat normal looting – it`s just a natural reaction to the injustices of the world, meaning the last eight years of Bush-Hitler.

So I say - let`s stop calling it a stimulus bill and call it what it really is: the looting of America – a free-for all against free markets. Sure, Nancy Pelosi may not be running down the street with a case of toilet paper under her arm.

But she might as well be.