Thursday, December 2, 2010
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
CAIR said Muslims who object to full-body scans for religious reasons should know their rights if they are required to undergo a pat-down, including asking for the procedure to be done in a private place. In addition, CAIR offered a “special recommendation” for Muslim women who wear a hijab, telling them they should tell the TSA officer that they may be searched only around the head and neck. (And the Muslim woman should then be escorted to the nearest jail for violating established security procedures)
In the “special recommendations for Muslim women who wear hijab,” it states: “Before you are patted down, you should remind the TSA officer that they are only supposed to pat down the area in question, in this scenario, your head and neck. They SHOULD NOT subject you to a full-body or partial-body pat-down.” (And then the Muslim woman should be shown to the street-side exit from the airport.)
It also states: “Instead of the pat-down, you can always request to pat down your own scarf, including head and neck area, and have the officers per form a chemical swipe of your hands.” (REQUEST DENIED!! There is no constitutional guarantee of a "right to fly"; comply, stay home, or return to your Sandbox of Origin.)
The new TSA pat-downs involving “head-to-toe” screening techniques follow recent airliner bombing attempts. Passengers who reject a full-body scan or who are selected for secondary screening may be searched using the enhanced pat-down.
“Pat downs are one important tool to help TSA detect hidden and dangerous items such as explosives,” a TSA statement issued on Oct. 28 stated. “Passengers should continue to expect an unpredictable mix of security layers that include explosives trace detection, advanced imaging technology, canine teams, among others.” (And we don't do "profiling" because of what? Oh, yeah... it might hurt somebody's feelings - instead of killing a couple of hundred innocent bystanders.)
Posted on its Web site under “TSA’s Head-to-Toe Screening Policies,” the agency said how people are dressed may lead to closer inspection, including baggy or loose clothing. Those policies also include individuals being searched by a “professional” of the same sex. “It is TSA's policy that passengers should be screened by an officer of the same gender in a professional, respectful manner,” the policy reads.
In February, the Figh Council of North America, a group of Islamic scholars, issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, that full-body scanners violate Islamic law. (Another fatwa? Islam definitely seems to be a "make-it-up-as-you-go-along" religion... I'd bet money that nowhere in the Qu'ran is the term "full-body scanner" seen. Is there something in the USA that inconveniences a Muslim? If so, they can go Figh themselves, and issue a fatwa incorporating that inconvenience into their religious "rulings".)
“It is a violation of clear Islamic teaching that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,” the ruling states. “Islam highly emphasizes haya (modesty) and considers it part of the faith. The Qu’ran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.” (If they are clothed, they have met the requirement "to cover their private parts." It's not their fault technology have circumvented their efforts. But, it IS the fault of the Muslims that such security precautions are necessary. If you can't live under the laws of the United States... GO BACK TO YOUR SANDBOX OF ORIGIN, and STAY THERE!)
CAIR endorsed the fatwa, according to a Feb. 21 article in the Detroit Free Press. (I don't CARE about CAIR and their fatwas - assimilate and live by the laws of your host country... or return to camel country!)
Sunday, November 14, 2010
The world of politics is treacherously labyrinthine, as evidenced by the almost annual coups d'état (the sudden, illegal deposition of a government) somewhere on this planet. For centuries a ruler's worst enemies were his closest relatives (it was a matter of "succession to the throne")! Second place on the "enemies list" seems to have been held by the general(s) in charge of a ruler's military forces, and Julius Caesar was stabbed twenty-three times - unto death - from dagger wounds inflicted by members of his own Senate.
Today, total strangers are also assassins of leaders. In 1950 an attempt was made on President Harry Truman's life by two Puerto Rican nationalists. Lee Harvey Oswald, with no known relationship to President John F. Kennedy, took that President's life. A lone Turk attempted to assassinate Pope John Paul II. The Pope was shot and severely wounded as he entered St. Peter's Square in the Vatican. The would-be assassin, Mehmet Ali Agca, was a member of a Turkish terrorist organization known as the Gray Wolves. The list goes on and on, showing perhaps hundreds of attempts we have never heard of.
Politics and large scale leadership positions can be a very dangerous place for those who have the strength of their convictions, but a safe-haven for the cowards of the world. Someone once said that "The United States of America has the best politicians money can buy", and money apparently does buy them. Who - enjoying good mental health - would spend millions of dollars running for an office that only pays in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars? An altruist? If you can show me an altruist in national politics, I'll show you a nun in a brothel!
If I became the Grand Poo-bah of the USA, there would definitely be some changes made. Let's begin with the most hotly debated issue affecting primarily the southwestern United States - "Immigration Reform": We have federal laws in-place forbidding entry into our country without the proper authorization, but the feds choose not to enthusiastically enforce those laws. Illegal immigrants have demonstrated their disregard for our laws simply by their unauthorized presence within our borders. Our government, disregarding the will of the people, has chosen to reward the illegal aliens by allowing them to not only remain in the country, but to provide them with benefits that average American citizens are denied. What's wrong with this picture?
In my world here's what undocumented visitors to our country would get... NOTHING!
1. It would be a violation of the law for illegal aliens to be given bank loans and, if they were given, the loan officer, the bank manager and the president of the bank issuing such loan would be arrested and prosecuted.
2. Housing would not be available to anybody unable to prove citizenship or government authorization. Anyone providing housing in violation of that law would be subject to arrest and prosecution.
3. Medical care - for anything other than life saving procedures - would not be available to illegal aliens. Hospitals would be required to report anyone without documentation - who requested a life saving procedure - to Homeland Security/I.C.E. Division. Failure to do so would make the offending medical personnel subject to arrest and prosecution.
4. Illegals would not be eligible for welfare, unemployment insurance or Social Security benefits. Any agent of a municipal, county, state or federal agency permitting illegal aliens to apply for such benefits would be subject to arrest and prosecution.
5. Any child born to an illegal immigrant would not receive automatic citizenship status upon birth. The child is determined to be as illegal as the parent(s) inasmuch as it was transported into the USA in violation of our immigration laws.
6. There would be no amnesty for reasons other than political persecution, and even then amnesty would be on a case-by-case basis. There would be no automatic amnesty.
7. Border enforcement would be the responsibility of the "National Guard". What is the purpose of a "National Guard" if not to guard the nation? The Governor of each state has the right and responsibility to activate that state's National Guard in times of emergency. What's the emergency? A subtle, silent "invasion" of our country - primarily across our southern borders.
(The presence of a foreigner in Mexico without proper authorization is classified as a felony. The penalty for the first offense is imprisonment, not to exceed 2 years. The penalty for the second offense is imprisonment, not to exceed 10 years. The Mexican government seems to take its sovereignty much more seriously than the US government takes ours.)
My second objective would be the elimination of Obamacare - the mandatory national health care program. The people don't want it... but the left-wing, bleeding-heart, Marxist, liberal-"progressives" in charge do. It's just another way for the government to increase citizen dependency upon the "Nanny State".
1. The government does not have the Constitutional authority to require citizens to buy a non-competitive government product or service, nor do they have the authority to monopolize any industry by legislating its competitors out of business. On the other hand, the current administration doesn't seem to be aware that we even have that pesky document call the Constitution.
2.Healthcare for all U.S. citizens is desirable, but those of us who have our own health insurance should not be forced to purchase that demanded by the government. Again, life-saving procedures should be available to all, regardless of their ability to pay. Colds, sprains and other sources of discomfort not being seen as "life-threatening" should not be treated on the public dime. Deal with it - as responsible people have for centuries.
3. No single "class" of people (i.e. - illegal residents) should be free from any taxation imposed upon the majority of citizens. Nor should our elected officials be free from the same healthcare system that would be forced upon the general population.
4. Healthcare should be available nationwide, and at reasonable rates in a competitive environment. Competitors should not be restricted to providing coverage only in a particular state or region as they are now.Next I'll tackle "Outsourcing". This is probably the single greatest source of unemployment in the United States. Outsourcing is the practice of establishing production facilities and/or subcontracting the production of U.S. goods and services to a foreign nation. Why are manufacturers turning to outsourcing more and more? Quite simply it saves them money. How? Because the countries that are benefiting from outsourced American jobs do not have to engage in collective bargaining with the AFL-CIO and the SEIU. Labor Unions are responsible for the recent collapse of two-thirds of the U.S. automotive industry. Automotive assembly line workers in the U.S. (who may not even have a high school diploma) are making (as opposed to "earning") - on the average - approximately 60% more in their pay and benefits package (negotiated by the UAW, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO) than a tenured college professor. At the same time, we still produce an inferior automobile compared to Japan and much of Europe. Why? Because the union contracts make it almost impossible for Ford, GM and Chrysler to fire anybody. The attitude has become one of - just show up for work even if you don't do anything of quality... or anything period, since they can't fire you without facing potential work stoppages from your union brethren. How would I rectify this situation?
1. Eliminate labor unions. (I can hear almost the screams of outrage from the brotherhoods now!) I can understand why they love their union-supported "job". Union members are at the very top of the labor pay scale - stopping just short of junior corporate executives. In closed-shop states (union membership required in order to work) the cost of living is based upon union-scale wages, which is fine for the workers of that state. However, the increased cost of that which they produce, and consume, is felt nation-wide.
2. Collective bargaining between the employees and the corporation/company for which they work would be allowed in order to establish a fair wage and benefit package for the workers. There will be no outside involvement other than independent arbitrators
3. Any American corporation outsourcing jobs outside the 50 United States and its Trust Territories would be required to do the following:
a. Pay normal import taxes upon any product produced either by their overseas corporation, or any foreign subcontractor.
b. Pay complete unemployment compensation, including medical insurance, for each American job or product outsourced to a foreign location.
c. Any American business entity establishing its headquarters overseas will be treated as a foreign corporation and subject to all tariffs imposed upon a foreign corporation, plus be subject to a tax equal to the cost of providing American workers - equal to the total number of foreign employees of that corporation - with unemployment insurance, including medical benefits.
And THAT'S just for openers!
YOU ARE OWED NOTHING EXCEPT AN OPPORTUNITY TO FAIL ON YOUR OWN!
(and if you don't... CONGRATULATIONS!)
Monday, October 25, 2010
For all you liberals suffering from anosmia out there, the odor is overwhelming! The current House and Senate have approved more "pork" than Sarah Lee's "Jimmy Dean" division! Our Congress has so many hogs satiating themselves at the public trough, that it is overrun with weenies! As Senator Everett M. Dirksen once opined, “A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money." If you can't smell the stench of corruption emanating from Washington D.C. then your olfactory has probably been nationalized by the administration.
I laugh every time I hear the phrase "House (or Senate) Ethics Committee". The Congress, as a whole, is totally unethical! Selling their votes to support Obama's national health care fiasco for a few million dollars in pork. What kind of people vote in support of anything in which they don't believe? "Sheeple". People without convictions - people who don't stand up so they won't stand out. Who sells their vote for some down home pork? Political whores. Who sees the bigger picture and supports only that which is good for the United States and it's citizens? The smallest of political minorities. Who voted to provide Welfare recipients with FREE CELL PHONES AND AIR TIME EACH MONTH? The same people who voted against a Cost Of Living Allowance increase for senior citizens (who worked all their lives providing the government with tax dollars to waste on Freebies for Freeloaders). You can verify that claim for yourself at - https://www.safelinkwireless.com/EnrollmentPublic/Home.aspx
The Obama Administration is all about tax, borrow, and spend. And they spend like the proverbial "drunken sailor". Are they spending money they have earned themselves? NO - of course not! They're spending money you and I have earned, but the government has claimed as their "due" through taxation. Have they shown any responsibility to the taxpayer through judicious use of our hard-earned tax dollars? Not just no, but Hell no! It's a continuous round of "I'll buy into your pork, if you'll buy into mine". Have they forgotten that they are charged with the protection of the United States of America and not just their little piece of it? Apparently so. But, that is the liberal socialist-progressive, Marxist approach to governing.. as opposed to governance. Governing is a process of controlling the people. Castro "governs". Saddam Hussein "governed". Robert Mugabe "governs" Zimbabwe, just as Kim Jong-Il "governs" North Korea, and as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "govern" Iran. Governance is the act of governing the process of government.
The USA has never had a less competent President than Barack Obama. His lack of ability has become obvious to all but the most entrenched Demobots. He is bankrupting our nation, and he has - in effect - nationalized two-thirds of the U.S. automobile industry, the entire financial industry, and has purchased enough Congressional votes to pass an unwanted national health care bill. He is buying the right to socialize our nation, and he is doing so without much opposition from the House and Senate. He has stacked the deck against the citizenry, by putting liberal-progressive Marxists, and avowed Communists in power positions in every branch of our government, including the recent appointment of two Muslims to directorships in the Office of Homeland Security!!
WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE, AMERICA!! The Republic is being hijacked by those who would convert us from a Democratic Republic into a socialist-Marxist state, and they are doing so following the guidelines of the Fabian Society (aka "the Socialist Society") - "The Fabian Society has played a central role for more than a century in the development of political ideas and public policy on the left of centre. ...the society's programme aims to explore the political ideas and the policy reforms which will define progressive politics in the new century." The Fabians put their faith in evolutionary socialism rather than in revolution.(http://www.fabians.org.uk/about-the-fabian-society) Keep in mind that the term "progressive", as applied to politics, is nothing more than a euphemism for "socialist".
November 2nd provides those of us who truly care about the course our government has taken during the last 19 months with an opportunity to stop the progressives "progress". Those of us who have served in the US armed forces, did not serve in order that the principles of our founders could be circumvented by the socialist-progressives. Our oath was "to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", not to any other cause or individual. Will we, as a nation, continue to support the undermining of our Constitution by one man and his appointed political cronies? I certainly hope not. But then, I didn't believe that we as a people would have been stupid enough to elect a freshman Senator - with less than 6 months experience - to the highest office in the land, either. There is only one way Congress will get the message...
Friday, October 15, 2010
THERE IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING ROTTEN IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA!
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Obama's motto seems to be, "There are some things money can't buy... and for everything else, there are taxpayers!
PERHAPS THE NEW CROP OF REPRESENTATIVES WILL GET THE MESSAGE -
"WE THE PEOPLE WILL BE HEARD!"
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Of course, we all know that politics never enters into any governmental entity's impartial decisions on any matter... don't we? The fact that Zeituni's nephew, Barack Hussein Obama, was elected president of the United States in 2008 had absolutely nothing to do with the decision of the administrative judge in 2010. What a fine example of "equal treatment under the law" this is!
Okay... time to play "Did you know?" Did you know that the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fourth Edition), underwent a "text revision" (known as the DSM-IV TR), in the year 2000? Granted, the DSM-IV (and all of it's predecessors) is a relatively obscure publication to most (99.999%) of us - not nearly as well-known in the general public as any of Stephen King's works - it is, nonetheless, the premier volume relied upon by mental health professionals around the world. You may be muttering to yourself, "Get back on point, Gil... what did the text revision do?" What DSM-IV TR did was remove from homosexuality, lesbianism, bi-sexuality, trans-gender, and virtually all sexual lifestyle choices, the heading of "Sexual Deviations". Suddenly, after 47 years of documented case studies, indulging in aberrant sexual behavior is no longer "deviant". What happened to cause this reversal? It is not that the behavior is no longer deviant... it is that it is not officially classified as such - thanks to pressure from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Trans-gender alliance. (Enter the Democratic Representative from Massachusetts Barney Frank - who probably spends more time on his knees than the Pope. Not praying... playing!)
Barney Frank, the Flaming Fag From the Fourth (Congressional District, MA), sponsor of the "Gay Bill of Special Rights" and the "Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009" (HR2981 ). There is absolutely nothing wrong with the concept of ENDA. Everybody should be allowed an opportunity to work in their chosen field. HOWEVER - it is the employer who should determine what is or is not appropriate dress and behavior while on the job, not the applicant or the government. The employer is, after all, the sole entity responsible for production and marketing, establishing and maintaining a harmonious working environment, and providing appropriate compensation/benefit packages for their employees. What would be the outcome if say 65% of the sworn officers of the San Francisco Police Department decided they should be able to wear colorful dresses to work instead of those boring blue uniforms with badges on them. And, although those 4" heels would be a bit more difficult to run in while pursuing a fleeing suspect, the more fashion conscious officers may feel compelled to wear them. Should they be denied that "right"? At the risk of repeating myself from earlier blog postings - DAMN RIGHT THEY SHOULD BE DENIED! Employers must have the right to determine what type of person can best represent their company's interests in an appropriate manner - but only during working hours. When the employee is on his/her own time "he" can dress like the Queen of Sheba, and "she" can dress like a lumberjack if they so desire. But, at work... if you take the man's money, you must play by the man's rules.
"Equal protection under the law" is the main thrust of Amendment XIV to the U.S. Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution does it provide for special protections for any individual or group, yet the Obama administration is working hard to establish special protections for radicals of any and all stripes, and he (and/or his minions) are unceasingly chipping away at the foundations of our Republic. THEY MUST BE STOPPED!!
Saturday, September 11, 2010
THIS NEEDS TO BE SEEN - IF IT CAN HAPPEN TO ONE, IT CAN HAPPEN TO ALL! Today your neighbor, tomorrow your friend. Your day will eventually come. The longer we stand in silence, the more power is gained by those who pose this great threat to our freedoms... and to our Constitutional Republic.
"IF WE DO NOT HANG TOGETHER, WE SHALL SURELY HANG SEPARATELY!" ... Thomas Paine
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
As convenient as the cell phone is, and the fact that the unit itself appears quite harmless and using a cellphone is not illegal, you can still take a life with one when you are behind the wheel. Several states have made cellphone usage while operating a motor vehicle illegal period. Several other states have mandated the use of a "hands-free device", such as a blue-tooth earpiece, for those who feel that they cannot be without that cellphone glued to the side of their face for that 15 minute trip to the store.
Is that conversation so crucial that you would risk taking a life to initiate it, or allow yourself to become engaged in it while piloting a two ton vehicle down the highway at 70mph? I'm certain that almost all of us have witnessed somebody blowing through a stop light, or drifting from side-to-side while busily chatting away on the cellphone. The hands-free device reduces the risk only slightly, it does not eliminate that risk!
Friday, September 3, 2010
DO NOT BELIEVE THE LIES FROM THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION! Those lies are what put us in this position. They would love to be able to blame George Bush, and their believers still do. They conveniently forget to mention the fact that during the last 2 years of the Bush administration, the Congressional purse strings were controlled by the liberal, tax-and-spend Democratic Party!
REPLACE ALL THOSE FROM EITHER PARTY WHO VOTED TO SUPPORT OUR IMPENDING BANKRUPTCY. Perhaps you can't FIX stupid, but you can vote it out of office!
The citizenry must remember the intent of our Constitution, for the Congress has surely forgotten what it means. Demand adherence to the Constitution - VOTE CONSERVATIVE this November!
Friday, August 27, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Question: Who is Steve Wynn?
Answer: A self-made real estate developer, Las Vegas casino magnate, and multi-billionaire.
Question: What does he know about decisions that will have a significant financial impact on our economy?
Answer: Consult Webster's Dictionary for the meaning of "multi-" and "billionaire". (One doesn't get to be one of those without some understanding of economics. It is not simply "dumb luck".)
Question: Does he have a sufficient understanding of the political process to pass judgment on it's shortcomings?
Answer: Do you? Glad-handing, backslapping, unfulfilled promises and outright lying are the underpinnings of politicians since the beginning of time. Tell each group you address that which they wish to hear, throw in some charisma and you will become their leader. This is also the domain of those who have chosen to become rich, as opposed to being open and completely honest. Constituency is just a high-sounding word for "sheeple"... people who follow as would sheep.
Question: Where does Steve Wynn get off criticizing the actions of the President of the United States of America?
Answer: The same place I get off criticizing your president (lower case intentional) - the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Someone recently said, and I paraphrase, "The problem is not with Barack Obama, it is with the people that would elect him to the office of President." (or words to that effect)
Here's Steve Wynn's take on what's happening to our country -
Silence is not golden! Silence is acquiescence. Silence is mute acceptance. Silence is indifference. Silence is to become - and remain - unrecognized. Silence is the manna of sycophants and political toadies. Silence is the sustenance of fools.
We CAN save the Republic! We CAN stop this runaway train of tax, borrow and spend. But only if we find our collective voice... silence will change nothing. I have spoken with many people who have said, "I will never vote again!" And, to them I say this: If you do not vote, someone else will determine the course upon which the Ship of State sails, and you have forfeited your right to complain. Be heartened by the display of dedication shown by the many thousands of people, who, rising from their Illinois graves, voted for Barack Obama! Does it take more effort from those who are still among the living to go to the polls? Is their dedication more powerful than ours? Of course it isn't!
I'm Gil, and you're not... count your blessings (I still have one more than you).
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
The following video seems to prove that he is not even a good American, much less a natural born citizen -
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Plans for the $100 million mosque have drawn strong criticism from 9/11 families, as well as prominent figures such as Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.
Rauf personally has become controversial because he refuses to acknowledge Hamas is a terrorist group and for his stated belief U.S. foreign policy partly was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
The trip’s announcement Monday raises concerns Rauf will be taking advantage of taxpayer dollars to raise money for the divisive project. But the State Department says the publicly funded trip intends to foster “greater understanding” about Muslim communities in the United States."
Monday, August 9, 2010
It is a tradition among Islamic nations for the Muslims to build a mosque on - or near - a site they have conquered. How can Mayor Bloomberg not know this? Is New York City conquered? Not at all! Bloomberg may be vanquished, but the spirit of the people of NYC cannot be crushed so easily. Where are the cries of outrage? Not only from his constituency, but from coast-to-coast and border-to-border? Or... could it be that those cries are there, but they remain unheard due to (at best) an indifference among the various media outlets? Or, is it due to the overwhelming preponderance of left-wing liberals among the media moguls, who do not wish the people to know of the nefarious schemes which are being played out in NYC?
Believe it or not, you CAN fight City Hall... and you can emerge VICTORIOUS! (After all, the Muslims have done just that. I wonder when they will replace City Hall with a mosque?)
There should be no mosques built within two STATES of New York City's "Ground Zero"! Build it in Iowa or Maine - anywhere except within the confines of NYC, New York County, or New York State! Better yet, build them in an Islamic country!
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Much has happened since my last post in June. There has been too much happening in the political arena for me to keep tabs on, so this posting will be relatively bland - for which I must (again) apologize to those of you expecting my usual fire and brimstone attack on the occupants of our nation's capital. I'm certain that Nancy Pelousy has done some tremendously ignorant things in the past 60 days, as has the entire Congress with the appointment of ultra-left-wing, ultra-liberal Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court! (how "brilliant" does one have to be, to be frequently overturned by a higher court?) Obama is doing everything he can get away with to destroy our Republic in his first (and obviously ONLY) term in office. We cannot change the culture of our nation's capital, but we can modify their group philosophy in November. The House and Senate have become accustomed to ignoring the vox populi (voice of the people), and the only way to get their attention - and to get our nation back on track - is a figurative "bloodletting" at the polls this November.
Any and all incumbents, regardless of party affiliation, who have supported Obama's efforts to marginalize our international reputation, to destroy our economy, and to essentially nationalize our financial, automotive, insurance and health care industries MUST BE REPLACED! To do otherwise, is to insure Obama's success at converting the USA from a Democratic Republic to a European-style Socialist state. We have seen how well socialism works around the world... it DOESN'T! Resistance is NOT futile, and we shall not fail - IF we believe in the principles upon which this once-great nation was founded. Obama's motives are HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE, even though our Congress lacks the fortitude to challenge those motives. There are too many unanswered questions about his backers, both financial and political, and his personal background and affiliations, to allow him to "change" the direction of our country. This is a course which we must not stay! But, should Obama retain a political majority in the House and Senate, we are doomed militarily, fiscally, economically, and educationally. To be succinct about the conditions that will exist... we will be S.O.L.!
I don't wish to sound alarmist, but somebody has to sound the alarm! We are aboard the national equivalent of the Titanic, and there will be few survivors. (Good thing I left the fire and brimstone out!)
Friday, June 18, 2010
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Q. Why were they drilling 40 miles out to sea at that depth?
A. Because the "greenies" got a moratorium placed on off-shore drilling. The funny thing about oceans is the further toward the middle you get, the deeper the water gets.
Q. Isn't there a law about safety requirements including fire boats, auto shut-off valves, etc?
A. Yes. There has been a law on our books since 1984 requiring fire boats and skimmers to be on-site where drilling is being performed - apparently our government doesn't enforce those laws when the correct palms are "greased".
Q. Whose fault is it?
A. Everybody and nobody. Shit happens, even when your plans say no.
The Administration pussy-footed around for more than SIX WEEKS before really getting "involved " - even to the minor extent which they are now "involved". Our government rejected offer of help made 3 days after the spill began, and is CURRENTLY (as in STILL) REJECTING SUCH OFFERS!
And now - FINALLY - the Obama administration wants to appear as if they are "in command" and have a plan. BS! It took Obama almost two months to even talk with Tony Hayward, BP's CEO, and then - according to the media - Hayward was "summoned" to the White House. Hayward should have told Obama he was busy managing the cleanup effort... and to "go pack sand".
I have a dog whose leadership abilities equal (or exceed) those of Barack Hussein Obama. Perhaps Obama should "organize" the cleanup effort - it's the only area in which he has experience. Never wade in water that's deeper than you are tall.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
As sad as the unnecessary loss of any life is, the unnecessary loss of a life not yet lived is even worse. But... here's the "bottom line" as I see it, based upon the information contained in the AP article:
a. The young man was with a large group attempting to violate our southern border and enter the country illegally.
b. The group did breach our border and was in the United States of America without undergoing due process.
c. When confronted with Border Patrol Agents, the group chose to hurl "big stones" at the officers.
d. Flying stones are potentially impact weapons, and impact weapons striking a human being in the right place with enough force can kill a person just as dead as a rifle or pistol round. The bigger the stones, the greater the impact.
e. The Border Patrol Agents were in fear of their lives. At least one officer fired his weapon rather than wait and see if he - or one of his fellow agents - was killed, maimed, blinded or otherwise seriously injured before opening fire.
f. A young Mexican was mortally wounded, and the group of illegal entrants retreated to the Mexico side of the river.
Could this tragedy have been avoided? How?? Quite easily... Sergio Adrian Hernandez Huereka could have stayed in Mexico with his loving family and friends, and awakened in his bed on Tuesday morning, rather than lying dead on the banks of the Rio Grande River Monday evening.
To make matters worse, Mexican President Felipe Calderon said Tuesday that his government "will use all resources available to protect the rights of Mexican migrants." Here's the deal Felipe - if you want to protect the rights of Mexicans keep them on your side of the border! And they are not "migrants". Once they enter the USA illegally they are CRIMINALS! Build a fence on your side of the river Jefe. Put your soldiers along your side of the border, esse. Keep your citizens within the confines of your country and they will remain as safe as they can be... considering they're still in Mexico.
Hey, Felipe... stop your whiny-ass fault-finding in our actions and ask yourself one question - "Why do my people keep trying to leave our country and sneak into the USA?" Make your own country a better, safer place to live, you hypocrite, and then...
I'm sure that your criticism of our country is emboldened by our own "president's" lack of respect for his Constitutional responsibility to protect our country and it's citizens. But, most people over the age of 6 years in this country understand the meaning of the word "illegal", and that illegal acts are punishable. Assaulting a federal officer is just one of those punishable acts.
a. It is not our fault that your economy is in the dumper even deeper than our own.
b. It is not our fault that your government is even more corrupt than our own.
c. It is not our fault that your people would rather risk death sneaking into the United States than live in the squalor of Mexico.
d. The blame for the mass exodus from Mexico lies not with the people of the United States, but with the non-responsive U.S. government, which continues to turn a deaf ear to the demands of it's citizens to SECURE OUR BORDERS!
Never fear though... Emperor Obama will probably have the Border Patrol Agent executed for protecting our border. He certainly wouldn't want to do anything to upset the 12,000,000-
20,000,000 of your countrymen living here illegally that might vote for him in 2012.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
If you are not an American, but you can read English well enough to leave comments, please leave them in English. Thank you for stopping by and attempting to leave comments.
First Chancellor of the Confused Inquiry
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Okay, there's nothing up my sleeves, and I have here in front of you three walnut shells and one pea. Your job is to keep your eye on the pea... and here we go!
What is the main cause of Europe's financial crisis? The single currency called the "euro". Yes, it was convenient to be able to travel though out most of Europe without having to worry about exchange rates, without having to deal with multiple unfamiliar currencies or having to do currency conversions in your head to insure you weren't being ripped off. The euro was initially used for non-cash transactions between banks. Personally, I was surprised the euro stayed strong for as long as it did. It was a good thing there were a few fairly healthy economies involved from the outset, or the euro wouldn't have survived my 18 month expectation. In fact, in September of 2000, the European Central Bank (ECB) had to intervene to prop up the failing euro, which had lost 30% of it's value in less than 20 months. In January of 2002 the first euro banknotes and coins were released to the 12 participating European Union nations for use as currency, and by March 1st, 2002 the euro was the only legal tender in those 12 countries. The EU has since increased to a total of 15 member nations.
What do those nations have in common - other than financial hard times? They are socialist countries. As laughable as the comedy routine above may be, it is an accurate representation of just how the world is responding to this financial crisis. And, as long as the banks of the world are in agreement on the process, it can continue - and possibly even be successful. Why? Because "currency" is what "we" determine it to be. Currency has only the value which we assign to it, whether it has intrinsic value or not. One society used rocks with holes drilled in them as currency, another used woodpecker scalps, and another used porpoise teeth as their medium of exchange for goods and services.
For some strange reason, our current one-term President seems to admire the way the Europeans do things, and desires to remake the United States in their image - the type of governance against which our forefathers and founders fought in order to to extricate themselves from under the rule of tyranny. Our Constitution was designed in such a way as to insure our sovereignty and our God-given rights and freedoms were protected.
As the poet Dylan Thomas once wrote:
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."
McClanahan's open sexuality, combined with Getty's acid-tongued judgments of the others, Betty White's portrayal of the semi-conscious, "lights are on but..." Rose Nylund, and Bea Arthur's role as the level headed peacekeeper could put those who watched the show on the floor!
Although it would be a very tough call, I'd have to say that The Golden Girls was THE funniest television sitcom ever produced - outstripping All In The Family, and even the riotous I Love Lucy.
Thank you, Rue. Thanks for all the belly laughs you brought to us in the high camp role of Blanche Devereaux. And at 88 (and one-half) years of age, as the only surviving member of the cast... Betty White, HANG IN THERE BABY!
Monday, May 31, 2010
Blockade: blockade ( ) n. The isolation of a nation, area, city, or harbor by hostile ships or forces in order to prevent the entrance and exit of traffic and commerce.
That's not so complicated as to be incomprehensible, even to those nitwits. A blockade is essentially a physical barrier telling people they cannot pass - at least without interception and inspection for items declared to be contraband (weapons, munitions, military/medical/food supplies, etc.) by those conducting the blockade.
The Gaza Strip, which was the destination of the flotilla's cargo, has been under the control of Hamas, one of many Islamic terrorist organizations, since 2007. Israel has every right to protect itself from attack, and the blockade is intended to do so by restricting the types and quantities of cargo allowed to pass.
Here's the problem - as the Israeli Commandos rappelled from helicopters down to the deck of the ship, they were immediately attacked by activists wielding knives, huge metal clubs (which are visible on AlJazeera's own video on YouTube), and "live weapons" (whatever those are - maybe the activists were swinging babies at the soldiers). Everybody knows that you don't whip out a knife or a club to assault soldiers armed with genuine military weapons. Sadly, 9-10 activist's lives were forfeited in the ensuing melee.
The entire incident could have been avoided - including the loss of life - had the Palestinians and their activist co-conspirators not tried to break the blockade. Once again: Blockade: blockade ( ) n. The isolation of a nation, area, city, or harbor by hostile ships or forces in order to prevent the entrance and exit of traffic and commerce. If you do not respect a military blockade you should expect to forfeit lives. Personally, I think they were fortunate that more of their number weren't killed, and that the ships weren't all scuttled. Deep sixed. Sent to Davy Jones' Locker. SUNK!
You can't antagonize a pitbull and not expect to be bitten. As for me, I assign blame to the organizers of the "relief" flotilla... they got exactly what they wanted.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Many people actually begin some sentences with "I mean". I ask you... how can a person clarify or expound upon something they haven't yet said? Say what you mean initially and you can avoid abusing "I mean". This grammatical faux pas has been with us for decades!
Then there's the issue of misusing "you know?"... and we all know people who inject "you know?" into their speech patterns as an interrogatory. If you are speaking in a language that the person you are speaking with understands, and if you avoid the excessive use of jargon, cant or idiom, your chances of engaging in an effective communication are greatly enhanced. You will alleviate the need to finish your sentences with "you know?". This one has been around longer than I have.
Interestingly, the three preceding items are generally only found in verbal communications, and rarely - if ever - in written communications.
The current King of Hackney seems to be the phrase "At the end of the day...". Those six little words have been worked to death over the past several months. Exactly where is the end of the day to which those people (primarily broadcast media talk show hosts and guests) refer? At what point in time has it been reached? Is it when they get off work? Is "the end of the day" at sunset, when it is no longer "day"time, but technically nighttime? Is it when they retire to bed for the evening? Or is it the end of the temporal day at midnight? They are talking about the culmination of something, but there are many other ways to express the concept of an activity which has reached fruition. Here are a few that express exactly the same thought:
"When night falls..."
"At the stroke of midnight..."
"When the chickens come home to roost..."
"As the sun sinks slowly below the western horizon..."
At the same time there are other "tried and true" hackneyed phrases that can be substituted for "At the end of the day...", such as:
"When the fat lady sings... (or the PC version, "When the BBW sings...")
"When all is said and done..."
"When it's all over but the shouting..."
"When there's nothing more to be said..."
I mean, at the end of the day it's like... whatever! We have gotten quite sloppy in our use of the predominant language of the USA. Give us another ten years and we'll have developed a competitor for Esperanto. If you consider yourself to be an adult then speak like an adult, not like some airhead kid.