Sunday, February 27, 2011

Intents And Purposes: The Constitution

It has been said and written many times that people should not engage in discussions about religion and politics, especially at work. Even with this knowledge so well ingrained in our minds, there is usually someone who occasionally will make a light (or not so light) comment that will easily reveal their ideological and philosophical beliefs.

I try to refrain from responding. As a father (and grandfather) who has raised teens, I am well-conditioned at ignoring things.

One day at work, I was talking with a nice lady (who has made such subtle self-revealing comments in the past) made a statement that left just enough of an opening where I thought it to be profitable, in shutting down future invitations of such discussions.

I was able to communicate something similar to what I have said here many times.

I am a person who is guided by deeply held principles. I respect all people's rights to believe anyway they wish as long as they do not try to force what they believe onto to me (and this is especially true, when they use their belief system as an excuse to want to kill me....only because I disagree with them). I then said something to the effect of, I am not one to praise or extol the virtues of government because they have not not looked out after any of my interests....but only their own.

I could tell she disagreed with me, but remember I said she was nice. And she is. So she remained courteous in her response, by saying something that has led me to this post. She said that she believes the government is us, the people. She added that it is a dynamic force that changes because we are the ones who can change it. It must change, as we change.

It was at that point where I chose to change, the subject, because I knew that where she was coming from wasn't quite where I sat. But she wasn't entirely wrong.

It is our responsibility to vote personnel in or out, based on what we the people think needs to be done, at any given point in time. But I certainly did not want to tell her that the Constitution is not what I believe to be a dynamic, living document that changes with the whims and impulses of people. Somehow, I knew how she would feel about this, so there was no need to extend the discussion any further.

I did, however, think about this quote--which has widely been attributed to a person who was once considered a radical in some circles, in his day:

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."~Patrick Henry

Today's debate about whether or not the Constitution is a living document will often rest on what people think the founding fathers thought, or what they meant when they wrote it. The words contained within are words that are parsed over and  often distorted to justify government taking more control over people's lives.

With this in mind, it is not surprising to learn that there are even debates over whether Henry actually said this. Many people dispute this being attributed to him, because he was at first a staunch opponent of the Constitution in it's initial phases. The reason was, he feared the Federalists would take it down a path that would leave susceptible  to becoming another monarchy. That's where they just came from and it's all they knew. He was afraid that we would eventually replace one form of tyranny with another.

Like all good statesmen who find themselves on the losing end of an argument, he acquiesced and accepted the outcome.

When he learned of the brutal outcome the nation of France was made to endure, after its bloody revolution, he did come to an understanding that there needed to be some kind of a reasonable blueprint for a union to prevent an out of control mob, from taking control of this new experiment he had worked so hard to initiate. It had to be one that provided for the rights of the states and protected the rights of the citizens of the new nation.

He knew that by working through the system, he could make the Constitution better by adding protections to the states and citizens, who could someday become victims of an out of control federal government. He was an instrumental force for the adoption of the amendments known as the Bill Of Rights.

Once these safeguards were in place, he became a staunch supporter and defender of the Constitution. So with this knowledge, it is not so unreasonable to think that he could have made this statement in some forum or another. But in the big picture, it is not important whether he said it or not (for it does not negate the fact that it is a true statement).

If we fast forward to today, we see that Henry and many other skeptics of his day were wrong about, as far as, the federal government becoming a monarchy that would become an imposing force upon the people. It didn't. But it did become an oligarchy, which has become an imposing force that is strongly influenced (and in many cases controlled) by out of control special interests.

These are interests that do not care about the rights of the citizens, but only what is best for them.

As free thinking intelligent people, we know this did not come to be overnight. It had to evolve over time.

The metamorphosis was slow, gradual, and insidious in nature. The sad part is that it was tolerated by the people along the way. Based on handouts to states, corporations, and individuals who failed develop a strong functional understanding of the Constitution and it's original purpose, the people let their guards down.

In short, they traded safety, security, and comfort for the present time, for loss of rights in the future.They became addicts to big government.

When states, corporations, and/or individuals ran into trouble along the way, the federal government would give them handouts to help them recover. They did it with the full knowledge there were strings attached to that help. Rather than help them with no stipulations, the federal government would use it as bribery, to get the entity being helped to do things that the federal government thought was best.

These things were not in the best interests of the entities accepting the help. however as you can imagine, they were certainly in the best interests of the federal government. These were things wrested from the entities in question and were absorbed into the national responsibility, coming further under the grip of an ever-increasing beast that we see today.

We are now many generations removed from the one that carved out the blueprint for our beloved republic. We now find ourselves in a state of dependency, which is about as far from the original vision as we can get. We can see the federal oligarchy dictating to states, what they must do with money they receive. We see the same with corporations and individuals too. It's especially disheartening, when we realize that we are the ones paying for this.

So now, we see a movement within the nation that desperately wants to reverse the current course of certain destruction. It is comprised of an informed and enlightened citizenry who are not fooled by what has been transpiring over the many decades of foolish actions. But the individuals of this movement are not well-received by the beast we have created, or those who are dependent on its handouts.

In fact, they are often demonized by those who have become accustomed to the free flow of taxpayer money and cannot learn to live without it. They are corporations, both private and public. They are individuals who would rather sit idly by and be parasites of host organisms--who are out in the world making things happen. They know that by cutting off the gravy train, many of them will have to produce something of value to survive, and they know they are not capable of doing so.

So, what do they do? They make those of us who are tired of this massive injustice out to be the villains. They carry signs, they shut down governments. They do it a variety of ways. They are refusing to acquiesce and resign themselves. While clearly being in the minority, they try to bully, threaten, and manipulate events to get their way--because they are too afraid to accept they are losing the argument.

They are not going to win.

Not as long as there is a real working class made up of strong individuals who have made their names and reputations by by hard work and dedication to their duties they committed themselves to perform. Not as long as they realize they want their children and grandchildren to have the same opportunities they did, when given the chance. Certainly not as long as there is breath in my aging body, will I resign myself to accepting the fact that this is a nation of weak and pathetic leeches who want to destroy what we have worked so hard to build and preserve.

Do I speak for you? Or against you?

You must make that decision. But if we are to survive this onslaught from the beast we have created, we must make a stand now. So....for all intents and purposes, I must once again quote the man that I spoke of earlier in this essay:

Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

He used it in a literal context, but I use it metaphorically. Because there is no war acceptable in this struggle, except at the ballot box. I condone no shedding of blood for this, only working hard from within the system as Henry once did in his later life.

I have made my choice.

Have you?

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Another Blast From the Past

Ten days until Fat Tuesday, so you know it's getting cranked up in NOLA. Here's one of the city's favorite sons and a real jazz legend:


Friday, February 25, 2011

Friday Funnies

Liberal Reasoning 101:

On second thought, maybe that's an oxymoron.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

She Lives On Dream Street

 Obama hack, Candy Crowley with Donald Rumsfeld:

No burning of Obama in effigy? Candy doesn't do her homework before she makes a fool of herself:

The streets look different? This was in 2009.

Islamists who want Qadaffi out of power blame America. Qadaffi blames America because of the uprising. I'd say it really not that much different than when Bush was in power. But Candy can have her delusions, if she wants.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

The Market For Unions Is Crashing

Unions and their Left-Wing supporters are demonizing the efforts of governors and legislators, whose only offense is they want to make paying union dues voluntary.

The Teamsters are fed up and not going to take it any more. At least that is what they are saying in essence as they oppose what they call Wisconsin Governor Scot Walker’s “job-killing budget.”

"Wisconsin needs three things right now: jobs, jobs and more jobs," said Gegare. "We do not need a budget that destroys jobs and lowers the standard of living for everyone in the state.

"Walker's budget plan is a partisan, job-killing proposal aimed at punishing his political enemies and rewarding his political backers. Walker claims to be the original Tea Party in Wisconsin."

The argument being used here is, without unions having the ability to forcibly extract union dues from workers, the result will be a loss of jobs. The argument for implementing this is, it will keep the government solvent and save jobs.

To analyze and evaluate these opposing view points, I think we must look at the law of supply and demand. To properly do this, we must examine the most basic principle of microeconomics. When supply is high and demand is low, we know that prices go down. The opposite is true when demand is high and supply is low.

Labor is something we can use in the equation.

When there are a number of workers in a given area that outnumber the number of jobs available, wages go down. Companies figure that because unemployment is high, workers will work for less. And they will, if the government isn't handing out limitless unemployment benefits.

When there are more jobs available than there are workers available to work, wages go up. Workers have more choices based on this scenario. The reason for this is because, if they do not like their jobs they can usually find others fairly quickly. That's why we see a lot of job-hoppers in a booming economy.

So if we look closely at the union position in these cases, we are being told that by compelling workers to pay union dues, this will magically create more jobs and raise the standard of living in these areas. They make these weak and faulty claims in face of looming layoffs that will most certainly be necessary to accommodate union jobs. These are jobs that the employers are forced to pay for, under the duress.

When there is only so much money in a labor budget, it's all a company or government can use and still remain solvent. You only have X amount of dollars to use and if the unions are demanding more, this means a certain amount of people will need to be let go to accommodate the union workers' and their demands.

When people are let go, the union will often blame the company or government when it is in fact the union that caused it. Pointing fingers is little consolation for the one who lost his/her job. The result is more workers looking for work while there are less jobs for them, thus bringing down wages on the whole.

If states have "right to work" laws on the books, it can be used as a tool to attract more businesses to the state. The more businesses in the state mean more opportunities for workers who are looking for work. When this gets to the point where there are more jobs, very often there will be a bidding war between companies for labor and wages will rise. Companies will also do more to retain good workers who show up every day and give it their all.

The only losers in this scenario are the union leaders who have made themselves rich by using agitation and coercion, as a middleman in all of this. Worker sell their time to companies, so companies can make money. If the company makes money, the workers' jobs are secure--unless a worker misbehaves and is terminated for it.

This serves as incentive to do the job, a worker has been hired to do. But under union domination, we have created an environment where tenure and seniority rules. The man or woman who has the most seniority can and often does get away with things, because they are safe from layoffs and the union makes it much harder for the company to shed the dead weight.

Maybe it's time someone makes a stand against this fraud that unions have created in many workplaces, in America. I certainly believe it's time for union leadership to be on the job market, and experience the frustration that comes with losing a job. My guess is the only thing they will qualify for is a position as a petty street thug, who is hired by a mob boss to shake down store owners for protection money.

Sunday, February 20, 2011


From Dictionary.Com, here is the definition of the verb, advocate:

-to speak or write in favor of; support or urge by argument; recommend publicly: He advocated higher salaries for teachers.

The word, by its very definition, suggests there are opposing stances that must be reconciled in some way. This also suggests that there are two interested parties with two different viewpoints, on how to find a solution to a problem.

Many times the relationship of the two parties is not an equal one, meaning one side has power and control while the other side must adhere to the one in authority. The one that must submit will sometimes, seek a more egalitarian approach to the relationship. If the side that has power relents and cedes some of it to the other, it often leads to the desire of the weaker one to obtain more. If this is done enough times, they may eventually seek to completely subvert the one in authority and assert themselves into complete control.

This principle can be applied to many different situations and issues.

Let's look at one issue, which is one being followed closely right now....the standoff at the state capitol building in Madison, Wisconsin. But first let's look at a little history.

The 2010 Wisconsin Gubernatorial Race was won by the Republican Scott Walker with 52% of the vote, over the Democratic candidate Tom Barrett with 46%. Walker was the Milwaukee County Executive and Barrett is the Mayor of the city of Milwaukee.

I am not well informed on the fine details of this race, because I do not live in Wisconsin. But I do know that the state has historically been a hotbed of progressive ideology due to strong union activity and the influence of University of Wisconsin-Madison. I also know that it is also the home state of an early 20th century progressive leader, Robert LaFollette Sr, who was originally a Republican but later helped form the 1924 version of the Progressive Party.

So it's easy to see why progressivism is deeply embedded into the psyches of many people in this state. In fact, I think it can be safely said that it is a cultural tradition, passed on from generation to generation. For this reason alone, the location is quite symbolic.

Now here comes Scott Walker--campaigning on fiscal responsibility, spending cuts, and mathematical realities. Like many others doing the same thing in other states, he wins the election. Then, he looks at the books he has inherited from an unpopular Democratic governor (Jim Doyle) who was once a teacher and later a trial lawyer. Both professions have a very strong symbiotic affinity for unions. So as you may guess, for the eight years he was in office he let the union write its own ticket.

At one time many years ago, some unions had purpose. They were advocates for people who badly needed them. They were once a necessary entity back when child labor laws were sorely needed, when corporate interests were served by heavy exploitation of workers. Ten year old boys were working in coal mines under dangerous conditions, because the parents couldn't make a living wage otherwise. Families were dependent on their children's incomes so much so that they were compelled to risk their safety, while the corporate fat cats were living well and educating their children.

But now, the unions have become parasites. They only exist to make their leadership rich. They do it by making workers believe that they are not getting their fair share of the pie, and deserve more. They do this in a time when, we have labor laws and minimum wages.

Auto workers and steel workers are but two examples of unions laborers who have secured great wages and benefits over the years. They make living wages better than or equal to some educated professionals. Historically, the UAW and USW are two powerful unions that have used coercion and strong-armed tactics over the years to secure those perks. And they have used the same tactics to usurp much of the authority from management and ownership.

But while these unions are as rough as any Gambino mobster, they do not wreak nearly as much havoc and cause nearly as much damage to our society as the public service unions do. One example is the teachers union. It is directly responsible for the dumbing down of America, it is directly responsible for educating the masses to believe that unions are there for the workers. They have taught multiple generations that without the unions, workers were without advocacy.

The other unions I mentioned are those who fight their battles within the realm of the private sector. The result of their greed and thuggery is pricing American products right out of the market. Why else would the bulk of textiles now come from overseas? Who wants to pay $200 for a pair of jeans and $60 for a tee-shirt to wear with them?

But public service unions like the NEA and the AFT suck their blood directly off of the taxpayers. And when politicians are in bed with these leeches, those unions use classical conditioning to make their members believe that they need union representation to protect them from the greedy taxpayers, many of whom are barely making it in this poor economy. This only serves to create a sense of entitlement among the teachers, they feel as if they are owed this because the union tells them this.

Keep in mind that these are educated professionals, many of them with Masters Degrees. They are not GED forklift operators we are talking about, they are people we have entrusted to educate our children and grandchildren. And they act like we owe them the world.

The bottom line here is simple.

Unions are dying off and the leaderships of these organizations know it. They know that if they make the kind of concessions Gov. Walker and the GOP-led legislature are proposing, they will be weaker than they have already become.

They want the public to believe that it will be grievous for teachers and other public service employees to contribute to their own healthcare and retirement, like we all must do. They want us all to believe that they are the only advocates capable of defending the jobs and reputations, of these civil servants.

But I say they aren't advocating for them at all. Because if they were, they'd be trying to save the jobs of those will most certainly be laid off, if these concessions are not agreed to in this proposal.

The state is broke and headed for a California and Illinois kind of fiscal meltdown, if something doesn't give. The Governor is not trying to bust the union, he is trying to save jobs of people who will not have them next month, or next school year.

If it were me, I would bust them up. Because I do not think union bosses (who produce nothing of any real marketable value) should be getting taxpayer money, for any reason at all. But out of the kindness of Gov. Walker's heart, he is only asking that the benefits be exempt from collective bargaining. They will still be allowed to (ahem) "advocate" for the workers on salaries and wages.

So be ye not deceived here. They are going to lie endlessly to persuade the dumb masses, into believing that they are there for those who cannot (ahem) "advocate" for themselves. But I say, the best advocate for a worker is the worker. If he/she shows up everyday and commits himself/herself to doing a good job for those who sign the paychecks, he/she becomes an asset to the company or whatever entity they work for.

Management has a responsibility too. If they have workers who they see are valuable assets to the organization, it would be wise to work hard to retain those people by keeping them happy. Too many times in a down economy, we hear employers tell workers they should be thankful they have jobs, so get to work and shut up.

Management and labor need each other, so it is wise to have the ability to work towards the best interests of the organization as a whole. When that happens, everyone wins. In tough times, however, all sides must be willing to sacrifice something to maintain stability and solvency.

In the case of the Wisconsin public service unions, they are not advocating anything of the sort. They would rather see jobs lost, they would rather have taxes raised on the private sector citizens, than give one little inch for the greater good of the citizenry.

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Another Blast From the Past

This week's musical selection comes with some political commentary.

The Progressive thugs are at their moment of truth, as we plainly see in Wisconsin. This is where the test of true grit and mettle is being played out before our very eyes.

They are desperate. They are weaker now than they were before the new Congress was sworn in... and they know it. So be ye not surprised at all this, because it's likely to get ugly before it's over. They cannot accept the fact that the majority of the people in the nation have rejected their message.

So they are pulling out all of the stops in Madison, by shipping in union thugs from all around the country to make this look like a huge show of discontent among the citizens of Wisconsin. But if we can withstand this last blast, if we can outlast this last ditch Hail Mary and "expend all ammo" strategy being employed by the Leftist unions, we can be heroes---even if it's just for one day:

Enjoy the music.

And stand firm for the Constitution. Stand for the rights of hard-working taxpaying citizens, everywhere. Stand firm for our democratically elected republic and the will of the people who make it strong, not the blood-sucking parasitical union thugs who produce nothing.....nothing but agitation and division. Stand tall and stand fast.

If not now, when?

Friday, February 18, 2011

Friday Funnies

For your overall household fiscal and financial well-being, please note the following diagram:

For your overall household happiness and emotional well-being, please note the following graph:

Study this material well, as you will tested on it in the future.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

No Time For Talk

Time is short this week, so I am sorry for the absence.

But here is a short video put out by the Heritage Foundation that I think many of you will find interesting.

I think all of it made sense, but two comments stood out the most.

1. Did you note what Rep. Allen West (R-FL) said at the 0:47 mark?

It takes five miles to turn an aircraft carrier. So if we want this thing turned around, we have to start sometime. We have to do it now. Nancy Pelosi and her band of bitter screechers will just have to scream how unfair it is. We have to turn it around or it's going to sink. We have no choice.

2. Did you note what Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) said at the 1:27 mark?

Every generation I have been acquainted with in my time on this earth has worked hard to make things better for their children and grandchildren. My parents did it for me, their parents did it for them.

Take heart folks, because this is no game. It used to be funny, jokes about politicians spending money have always been around and have been quite entertaining at times. But not anymore. now it's going to take men and women with guts to make tough decisions.

Time to suck it up folks. Time to see who gives a damn and who doesn't.

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Meet Gov. Mitch Daniels

For those of you who do not know my governor, I hope you will make some time and watch this speech given by Mitch Daniels at the CPAC. It's a little over a half hour. First you will need to bear through the short introduction by George Will. Those who know George will know that he is not the most animated speaker you will ever encounter, but he says much in a very short passage.

Although he's more lively than Will, Gov. Daniels is not an oratorical scientist either. He does not use a speech to incite by emotion like our current President did on his way to the White House. There are no rhymes, no abundance of tone fluctuations. What you will find, however, is that he uses intelligent and reasoned statements to inspire and provoke deep and careful thoughts. He uses the power of persuasion to convince, and does it through a deep sense of conviction.

The Governor is not without some fault. As is the case with every human being drawing breath on this earth, he is not perfect.

If he gets serious about a run for the WH, it is certain that the left will dig up something insignificant from his formative years, which is a time when we all were susceptible to poor decisions now and then. And as we all know, the MSM will run with it like he knocked off a gas station and shot a clerk. Those people are despicable and will stop and nothing to distract us from the here and now, and it will be no different with Mr. Daniels.

In the matters of policy, there may be some things he says that may not be agreeable to every conservative--maybe not in this speech, but in another down the road. He may not be as socially conservative as some people will prefer, which means you may not hear him get overly involved in some issues of conscience. But that doesn't mean he is oblivious to them.

The point is, if you listen to this speech carefully, without bias and prejudice, you may discover that this a man who is both qualified capable to lead this nation in the direction it so desperately needs to be led. And to answer the more important questions in your mind, he can beat Barack Obama and he can raise the money it will take to do it.

I am not writing this to sing his praises because he is my Governor. I am presenting this to my readers, in the hopes that they will listen to the speech. I am hoping that it will give cause for many to think about the choice they will face in the 2012 GOP nomination process. Daniels hasn't declared his candidacy yet, but we can still hear what he is saying and use it to make the best informed choice we can... based on everything that is important, not related to pure emotion.

It will not be easy an easy choice to make, when the time comes. By the time it all gets going, there will be a lot being said and the words will be flying everywhere. My hope is that this speech will give you a good overview of who Mitch Daniels is and what he has done for the state of Indiana. And if he ends up being a candidate, you can put him on your short list.

He is down to earth, he rides a Harley, and has spent a lot of time listening to the common citizens of this state. He has executive experience in the private sector, as well as several advisory roles in government going back to the Reagan Administration. And more than anything else, he has not been afraid to do what he thinks is right despite the horrible things the Democrats have said about him, along the way. And the harsh words have been many.

The result of this immeasurable courage has been a solvent state that is in the black, while every state that surrounds it is sinking in a sea of red ink. There are problems here in Indiana, just like anywhere else. The economy has created suffering here too. But it is nowhere near the levels we see in other parts of the country--places where government promotes government solutions, over those of private enterprise.

Here is the full text to read if you choose, with or without the backdrop of the sound. I listened to it twice to make sure I didn't miss something while I was thnking deeply about something he said.

I truly hope you take the opportunity to listen and digest what he is saying.

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Another Blast From the Past

An age old question put into lyrics and an awesome tune, by the man known as the quiet Beatle:


Friday, February 11, 2011

Friday Funnies

How does Washington manage to spend so much? There are a whole host of reasons, but a couple components to this complex answer can be found in this video:

It might seem funny to intelligent free-thinking rational people like us, but in a way we should feel a bit ashamed for laughing at their stupidity. It's just their culture. It's the Washington way.

Thursday, February 10, 2011

A Convenient Truth

I hate to keep harping about certain subjects when there are so many pressing issues in the news. But as I sit here knowing that it's one whole degree Fahrenheit outside, with four inches of snow on top of two inches of ice on top of another three inches of snow, it is hard to focus on Egypt's woes and the thorough and complete incompetence of this Administration.

Recently, someone I know posted on Facebook a picture of a marquee outside of a local Baptist church with snow knee deep, a message that said, "whoever is praying for snow, please stop". In my usual tone, I put up a comment that said:

"Tell Al Gore to stop with the global warming stuff".

One of her friends replied:

"Unusual and excessive weather swings are a product of global warming. Personally, I consider this unusual"

Well, I looked up the information that I could find about that person and saw she was from Bloomington Indiana, a progressive bastion of moonbattery and every whacked out theory known to mankind. So needless to say, it wasn't hard to see where she was coming from.

So what we can now gather from all of this frigid weather and uncharacteristic snow patterns in the south is, we are now supposed to buy into the new argument that the cold weather proves that warming is man-made, and we must act now or we will all be headed for a certain perilous future.

Here is an interesting article written over a year ago, worthy of a look.

The article cites National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) American consul at Norway, George Ifft:

The Arctic seems to be warming up. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers who sail the seas about Spitzbergen [an island 12 degrees south of the North Pole – ed.] and the eastern Arctic, all point to a radical change in climatic conditions, and hitherto unheard-of high temperatures. In fact, so little ice has never before been noted. The warmth of the waters makes it probable that the favorable ice conditions will continue for some time.

Sounds like anyone from the current group of educated idiots who are propagating this lie. But if we read on we see:

Ifft’s report appeared in NOAA’s Monthly Weather Review of November 1922. Whatever caused the “favorable conditions” in 1922, it is certain man-made greenhouse gases had nothing to do with it, and the rest of the world went on with the political and cultural revolutions of the 1920s without noticing any catastrophic climate change.

Of great interest is Ifft’s comment that the unprecedented melting brought about “favorable ice conditions” everyone hoped would “continue for some time.” In the report Ifft also detailed an expedition made that summer which set a record, “sailing as far north as 81˚ 29’ in ice-free water.” Ifft published a follow-up report in the December edition of the same publication in which he explained researchers credited sun-spot and oceanic cycles with the “exceptionally favorable ice conditions.”

But in the present crowd of alarmists, we see nothing that would indicate a change of thinking despite the fact that the weather has been cooler than when this whole religious cult began. Nada, zip, zilch.

Instead, we hear the false prophets trying to rationalize their way out of their man-made farce, by now saying that the world will get cooler for a few years before it will get warmer. So in essence, the earth is cooling because of man-made warming and we must continue to invest billions of dollars in green technology so that big greedy corporations like GE can nurse off of the government teat.

Here's a news flash for anyone who is falling for this crap: It's called weather. And even with all of the new meteorological technology that is available, the weather man still gets it wrong sometimes.

In my lifetime as a person who is aware of his surroundings, I have seen a cold period in the 60s and 70s. I have also seen a warming period in much of the 80s and 90s. This was once known as El Nino and was welcomed by most people who live in areas where winters can be harsh. Now, we are seeing a cooling trend again. But just as soon as the next El Nino appears, you can bet Bro. Al and his medicine show will once again be proclaiming the sins of the world to another generation of gullible idiots who educate themselves from news sound bites.

Wednesday, February 09, 2011

Multicultural Failure

I think PM Cameron is finally starting to get it.

"We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values."

And it's not just him. Angela Merkel is coming around too.

Speaking to a meeting of young members of her Christian Democratic Union party, Merkel said the idea of people from different cultural backgrounds living happily "side by side" did not work.

She said the onus was on immigrants to do more to integrate into German society.

"This [multicultural] approach has failed, utterly failed," Merkel told the meeting in Potsdam, west of Berlin, yesterday.

The theory of a melting pot is only a myth in this day and age. Europe is not a melting pot, neither is America.

If anything, we are a mosaic, separate tiles formed together by force. No common connections, no blending of minds and/or spirits. No blending of colors like in an oil painting. No blending, period.

The two strongest nations that comprise Europe are finally getting the hint here. It's nothing to jump up and down about. But it is a start.

At least they are not afraid to talk about it.

Monday, February 07, 2011


Packer 31 - Steelers 25

This is the last one of the year. But in all honesty I must confess that I went to bed after the halftime show nauseated me. If my Facebook news feed was any indication, I wasn't the only one.

As for the game, I didn't have much a dog in the fight. That and the fact I have been dealing with a medium-level family crisis the past 3 days, I just didn't have much interest this year.

It sounds like it was a good game down the stretch. Aaron Rodgers was the MVP, as he has finally blossomed into the elite QB status (where the media has had him since he took over for Favre). My congrats go out to Green Bay and their fans.

Now, it's your turn to tell me what I missed in the second half and any other thoughts you have on the past season, here in the season's last edition of Mon AM QB.

Until September.....when we can once again see Greg say that Eli Manning is the most overrated QB in the league and Rocket tell us just how much he hates the Dallas Cowboys.

Sunday, February 06, 2011

Desperate Measures In A Surreal Existence

Since late last year, there was a concerted effort to cast Obama as channeling Reagan as part of his miraculous recovery, from liberal tax and spend policies to just plain spend. Someone who says he's Howard Fineman is thus quoted:

"The irony here is that the president is sort of channeling Ronald Reagan in an effort not to become Jimmy Carter ... but the point is, the president is validating the idea of tax cuts as the centerpiece of economic policy."

That was HuffyPo.

In Time magazine, it's still being discussed. became clear to several in the room that Obama seemed less interested in talking about Lincoln's team of rivals or Kennedy's Camelot than the accomplishments of an amiable conservative named Ronald Reagan, who had sparked a revolution three decades earlier when he arrived in the Oval Office.

Okay, let's really channel Reagan right now and see what he would say.'s coming....hold on......

Thus saith Ronald Wilson Reagan to Barack Obama:

Cut taxes, cut spending, and get government off of the backs of the people. Let the market decide.

Reagan was far from perfect, as even the staunchest of conservatives may not want to admit. He was forced to compromise with a Democratic Congress too often, which always ends up bad. But he picked and chose his battles wisely. And if avoiding being painted like Carter is Obama's goal, it's way too late for that.

As we watch the events in the Middle East unfold and learn more details about the sad economic numbers, it only stands to reason that what we are doing isn't working. If Obama really wants to surrender his heart and soul to what is right and true, this is what he needs to be able to say this publicly... and often.

But somehow we all know this isn't going to happen.

He isn't giving up his core beliefs that includes government being the answer to all problems. He is trying to cozy up for the moment, to see what he can do in order to get the priority things on his agenda through. So far, he's agreed to let people keep the tax cut they already had. Nothing changed.

I really think he and his handlers are trying to BS the people into thinking that he cut taxes, when he really didn't. Simply put, Obama and his wayward Congress didn't allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. Nothing went up or down. He'll have to do way better than that to claim some inner channeling of the Gipper.

Reagan made the country stronger in mind and spirit, and generally uplifted people by restoring their pride in their country. Obama has embarrassed this nation, time and time again by bowing to despots and kissing a monarch's ring. Reagan went to Iceland and walked away from a crappy deal offered to him by Gorbachev, who thought the U.S. President was as weak as the one who preceded him. Obama gave the Russians everything they asked for with no bargaining, whatsoever.

In the desperate moments of what will likely become a failed presidency, it will be hard to note which act or inaction caused the most damage. Equally, it will be difficult to determine how long the damage caused will last. If nothing else, this bunch is setting the thing up for further failure in the next administration, should they not win re-election.

So, we must hope and pray that someone along the way can get some detailed plans together and put them to the test. Getting something solidly together in the the way of spending cuts all around the board, makes a good first gesture. If Mr. Obama is serious, he'll have no problem giving up a goodwill gesture and offer to cut spending in every government department. No exceptions.

Despite these things I noted in this story, I still have to shake my head in disbelief at what we have now seen ourselves become in the last four years, with the last two being the clincher.

We are watching the Middle east explode, we have not seen any real gainful improvement in the jobs numbers, food and oil prices are going up, and we have a press that wants to assist the White House by creating a myth for an image. We are watching nation after nation lose confidence in both, our integrity, resolve, and our financial solvency.

And despite these massive red flags, very few people are the least bit concerned. The biggest dilemma in this life for them is, they cannot decide whether or not they like the new American Idol without Simon.

If this is a dream, please wake me now. If not, pour me a stiff drink.

Saturday, February 05, 2011

Another Blast From the Past

Many of the modern artists, who are part of today's rock scene, clearly got their creative influences from others who laid the ground work before them. Music tends to be a bit cyclical that way.

If you close your eyes and just listen to this tune, you might start to think you are listening to Roy Orbison:

This next one isn't quite as obvious unless you can dig deep and go way back in your minds.

The singer, Scott Weiland, does not sound a bit like Allan Clarke or Graham Nash. But the musical composition and the melodic harmonies are what make me think of the Hollies when I listen to it.

See what you think:


Friday, February 04, 2011

Friday Flashback

For all of you history buffs who like to remember and/or study how the America culture has evolved over time, here is something sent to me via e-mail:

High School Class of 1958 vs. 2010

Scenario 1:

Jack goes quail hunting before school and then pulls into the school parking lot with his shotgun in his truck's gun rack.

1958 - Vice Principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.

2010 - School goes into lock down, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers.

Scenario 2:

Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.

1958 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.

2010 - Police called and SWAT team arrives -- they arrest both Johnny and Mark. They are both charged with assault and both expelled even though Johnny started it.

Scenario 3:

Jeffrey will not be still in class, he disturbs other students.

1958 - Jeffrey sent to the Principal's office and given a good paddling by the Principal. He then returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2010 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. He becomes a zombie. He is then tested for ADD. The family gets extra money (SSI) from the government because Jeffrey has a disability.

Scenario 4:

Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1958 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college and becomes a successful businessman.

2010 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang. The state psychologist is told by Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has an affair with the psychologist.

Scenario 5:

Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school..

1958 - Mark shares his aspirin with the Principal out on the smoking dock

2010 - The police are called and Mark is expelled from school for drug violations. His car is then searched for drugs and weapons.

Scenario 6:

Pedro fails high school English.

1958 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English and goes to college.

2010 - Pedro's cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against the state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English is then banned from core curriculum. Pedro is given his diploma anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.

Scenario 7:

Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the Fourth of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle and blows up a red ant bed.

1958 - Ants die.

2010 - ATF, Homeland Security and the FBI are all called. Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. The FBI investigates his parents -- and all siblings are removed from their home and all computers are confiscated. Johnny's dad is placed on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

Scenario 8:

Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary hugs him to comfort him.

1958 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2010 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison. Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.

Note--I would have called this post the Friday Funnies. But when I think about it, this stuff really isn't funny anymore.

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

An Unimportant Quote

Supposedly, this is the latest press release from Al Gore.

Last week on his show Bill O’Reilly asked, “Why has southern New York turned into the tundra?” and then said he had a call into me. I appreciate the question.

As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now and they say that increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming:

“In fact, scientists have been warning for at least two decades that global warming could make snowstorms more severe. Snow has two simple ingredients: cold and moisture. Warmer air collects moisture like a sponge until it hits a patch of cold air. When temperatures dip below freezing, a lot of moisture creates a lot of snow.”

“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”

You see, this is why Saturday Night Live is not that good anymore. In the old days, they would have been all over this. There is no way this goes without a skit.

In just a day or two, the system that is slamming me with ice right now will be in NYC and surely the producers will find this quote very amusing. 

But if that's not the case, maybe this flashback will help stir up the creative comedic storms (pun intended):

On second thought, maybe the skit has already been written.