Monthly Archives: August 2011

I love stupid people…they’re so entertaining

So recently I was reading the blog of my friend The Snark Who Hunts Back  and she had reposted one of those loveable make your own video with two cartoon characters talking to each other videos. This one was focused on how hard it was to discuss anything with die hard liberals. For the most part it was more humorous than serious. I’ll be the first to admit that the Right also has some lunatics that won’t listen to reason either (Palin, Perry, Paul supporters to name just a few) so it shouldn’t be hard for people on the left to realize there are idiots among their ranks as well. It certainly wasn’t making a serious point that needed response.

Yet somehow it got a serious response…from an Obama supporter…who clearly knows nothing at all about economics. And while I’m working on a few blogs, even some current event ones, I know that sometimes it is more important to destroy the lies that keep persisting before they spread further than deal with new information too quickly because the stupid talking points that get repeated are regrettably what people base their opinions on. And as I know the Snark would probably respond herself, but is at the moment getting ready for an out of state trip, I thought it a fun time to rip apart just some truly terrible liberal lies. That and I’m just feeling petty and mean…yes I may have just gone on for two weeks about the need for forgiveness, but stupidity and ignorance should never be tolerated.

Sections will be lifted word for word, with no editing to change the meaning in context. You may also find the complete comments at the bottom of the Snark’s post if you think I have edited it unfairly.

“[…]and if you sharpen up some of the other Obama-side rhetoric, you have some good points to ponder.”

Really? No, I don’t think so. In fact I don’t think liberals have had a good point about economics in my entire lifetime. So I don’t need to “ponder” your points. I have run across them a thousand times already, subjected them to things like facts, reason, and real life and they have never stood up…never come even close to standing up…so not a lot of pondering is required anymore, I’ve already thought about these thing….you however may wish to actually study and think.

“For one thing, deficits are generally going to get worse during a recession, because tax revenues go down, but the cost of government goes up, and interest rates usually drop, so, hell yes, borrow money now!”

Okay I’m not seeing the causation of cost of government going up. Yes, governments since Hoover have responded to recessions and depressions by spending more because they listened to that utterly incompetent hack name Keynes…doesn’t mean that it must go up. In fact an intelligent government (obviously not one headed by Bush or Obama) would and could CUT spending. So it is not some kind of immoveable fact that deficits go up in a recession. Nor should they! Higher deficits lead to massive inflation, which in turns leads to a slower economy. More government spending always means more red tape which means a slower economy. More government welfare always means that the proper system of incentives that exists under capitalism is screwed up if not destroyed, which slows down the economy. If you cut spending and cut the deficit you would actually improve the economy. Borrowing more will only make things worse. Books to read for justification on these points would be almost any economics book by Thomas Sowell (although “Basic Economics”, “Applied Economics” and “Economic Facts and Fallacies” might be most relevant), “The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression” by Amity Shlaes, and for a more lighthearted look “Eat the Rich” by P.J. O’Rourke.

“And the stimulus did work, if you agree that gaining 100,000 jobs a month is better than losing 500,000 jobs a month. A bigger stimulus would have worked better, and more stimulus spending now would do more good.”

I want some of what you’re smoking. Oh wait, no thanks, it’s clearly the same stuff that Paul Krugman is smoking. The easy insanity of Keynesianism. Or as someone else put it “Keynesian economics is easy, even for stupid people. More thought and analysis are required to understand why it has not worked as it is supposed to.”  Stimulus doesn’t work. It can’t work. The economy must go through high and low points to maintain health, trying to skip the low points will only result in a lower and longer low point.

And your statement about 100,000 jobs a month is just perplexing. The economy has not added 100,000 a month, and it has seen a massive amount of people becoming underemployed and even more just giving up and not looking for work. It is stalled because of the government not letting the economy hit its low point and begin a recovery on its own which must and will happen. The only question is when (sooner being better than later) and how bad will that bottom be (the longer we take to get there, the worse it will be). Further where do you get laying off 500,000 a month? That would be about 18 million people since Obama took office. Do you really think that the TARP and the OBAMA stimulus saved us 18 million jobs? Exactly what industry was doing so bad that 18 million jobs would have been lost? If Bush had let a couple of banks fail maybe a few hundred thousand would have lost their jobs…but they would have been quickly rehired by the other banks which bought what was left of their competitors at fire sale prices which would have left the banking industry far more stable in the long run than it is now. The car industry perhaps? Nope if GM had gone under, their competitors would have bought their equipment and plants at low prices, hired people to retool the factories and equipment and then probably hired back most of the employees…and as an added bonus, you wouldn’t have more GM (i.e. some of the worst POS cars on the road, even the brand new ones are POS) and the car industry would be more stable…and as an added bonus the U.S. government probably wouldn’t have engaged in criminal slander against Toyota. The fact is that without TARP and the Obama stimulus in the short term yes it would have been worse…but if we hadn’t had those two truly abhorrent pieces of legislation we would actually be in a much better recovery right now.

“You know what makes things worse in a recession? Cutting spending. “
No that would be wonderful. That would mean that there would be less red tape and less interference which means the economy could actually begin to recover. Cutting spending will help reassure businesses, especially small businesses that they can get back to work without the fear of interference, regulation, and crushing taxes. Cutting spending will signal that we have returned to sanity, rather than the fear that Obama propagates right now.

“Laying off hundreds of thousands of state and local government employees.”
Actually that would also be good as there is no such thing as a government employee (outside of the armed services, and maybe a few people at the FBI and State) that is not grossly overpaid and in all likelihood utterly incompetent. Get rid of as many of them as possible. Pink slip whole Federal Departments. Sell the post office to UPS, FedEx and DHL, you’ll see faster, cheaper, more efficient service that will not incur the obscene cost of government healthcare, government salaries, government pensions. Cutting 100,000 government employees and not stealing that money from businesses and tax payers would mean 2 to 300,000 more jobs in the private sector.

“Canceling or postponing infrastructure, research, and modernization projects.”

Again if you privatized those things, they would be cheaper and more efficient.

“Incidentally, the video-maker is seemingly unfamiliar with the filibuster, along with other ways the Republicans thwarted the President while still a minority in Congress. There’s a limited shelf life on that strategy, however.”

Really. So you’re saying that Obama was hindered by Republicans filibusters in the Senate. Interesting when you consider no such filibuster ever occurred. EVER! And if the GOP was going to filibuster something…don’t you think they would have done it with Obamacare? The GOP in the Senate is a large group of liberal Republicans who would willingly follow him into much of the liberal delusions if they thought they could still get reelected. And if you’re saying that Obama didn’t do things because of the threat of a filibuster…then I must ask is he also afraid of his shadow? Butterflies? Monsters in his closet? Bringing up the threat of a filibuster as the reason why Obama has not been able to get anything done just once again portrays him as a truly incompetent excuse for a leader.

“If Obama wins in 2012, while Republicans lose ground in the House of Representatives, we’ll see some movement.”

Finally you say something correct. If Obama did win and the House did move to the democrats, yes we would see movement. First into a worse recession. Then into the greatest depression. Then finally into the dustbin of history never to return.

Leave a comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Debt, Economics, Education, Evils of Liberalism, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, liberal arrogance, Long Term Thinking, Obama, Problems with the GOP, Taxes, Unjust legislation, Welfare

Laws for the GOP to pass: Sane Teacher Certification

I don’t know if this could be a federal law or just have to be 50 state laws. Let’s have it be both so that we never have to deal with the BS I’m about to deal with.

So I went to go renew my teaching certificate today. It was a fairly painless process but I was reminded that I need to get more hours of “professional development” before my next renewal in six years.

Let me run down what I’ve had to do so far to get my credential in Arizona.

I had to have a credential in another state (I had two, California and Washington, they have since expired). To get the Washington Credential I had to earn a degree in English, minor in Education, pass a background check, and complete a student teaching program.

I had to have 60 hours of Structured English Immersion training. (60 hours of learning how to help students for who English is not their first language…it boils down to having some idiot tell you to treat high school students like elementary school kids with lots of games and visuals. It was 60 hours of my life that was wasted and I’ll never get back. Actually more than 60 if you count travel time.)

45 more hours of professional development. More being told to draw and act out and play with high school students. I have never used a single thing I learned in any of this because to do so would be to insult the intelligence of the slowest student I’ve ever had. I’m an English teacher, not one of these hours was dedicated to learning anything about English, grammar, writing, or literature above a 3rd grade level. Given that I primarily teach Juniors and Seniors this was all but another 45 hours of my life that was wasted.

I had to take a test on English Literature. The SAT’s were harder. And given that I have a degree in English from one of the best colleges in the nation, this too was insulting. 3 hours of my life wasted. Plus the money I had to pay to take the test.

I had to take a test on teaching skills. It was half vocab test and half what would you do in this situation questions. A trained monkey could have passed it. More money and more time wasted.

And my favorite, I had to take a test on the U.S. and Arizona state Constitutions. Because that’s relevant to my job as a teacher of English (primarily British literature if I have anything to say about it). There was actually a question about the article in the AZ state Constitution that deals with mining rights. HOW IN THE NAME OF GOD WOULD AN OBSCURE ARTICLE IN A STATE CONSTITION BE RELEVANT TO MY SKILLS TO TEACH?!!!! More time and money wasted.

Just about the only legitimate thing I had to do since leaving Washington was A) complete two years of teaching full time, and B) get my background check renewed.

Everything else was an utter waste of my time.

The tests, the hours of professional development, all worthless. Now I might respect the tests if they had been relevant to teaching, but they weren’t. Just about anyone who went to college should be able to pass those tests (of course I do live in Arizona, home of ASU)

And just to show that this isn’t just me bitching, here’s another person pointing out the system is broken. 

Teaching is an art, not a science. There is no way to test on paper whether someone is going to be a good teacher or not. Yes, there are some basic classes that everyone needs. They need classes in their subject area. They need at least one class in every subject they will not be teaching (the four subject primary and secondary education are English, History/Social Sciences, Science, and Math). They need classes in general psychology and developmental psychology. They probably need at least one class in acting because good classroom teaching involves putting on a persona that is not necessarily who you are in real life. You need a course or two in curriculum development and implementation. And maybe a course on the history and philosophy of education. There, that’s your major and minor right there.

But no, states all seem to think you need more and more and more useless “professional development” which develops nothing. You know what actually develops a teacher? Teaching! Actual teaching. It’s an art form; the only way you get better at it is by actually doing it, followed by moments of reflection and discussion with other teachers. But certainly not so-called professional development! Now I’ve been lucky and the schools I have worked for have provided this requirement for their teachers (at great cost to the company) but if you aren’t so lucky then you have to take college courses at your own expense (courses which will likely teach a teacher nothing!). So really it’s all a big scam for the colleges and states, they get to charge money for all these courses.

Do you think all this worthless education, much of it at your own expense, is going to drive out some people from the field? Probably does. Not the great teachers, no. They’ll stay because to them teaching ranks up there with breathing and water as basic needs. And it doesn’t drive out the incompetent teachers either, because they usually know they have nowhere else to go…but it drives out all of the mid-level teachers—the ones who may never inspire a student, will get the job done and teach something. You think that may have any negative repercussions…like not being able to fire the morons because you can’t replace them with anything other than another idiot.

Trust me teaching hasn’t changed much in the last few thousand years. One of the single best forms of teaching is called Socratic Discussion, it was a form of teaching used in fifth century BCE by Socrates, it hasn’t changed much since then. You don’t need to be caught up on studies or professional journals; you just need to be passionate and self-reflective.

All these piles of requirements and tests and professional development and hoops and money are a farce. States need to change their requirements to be as follows:
A) B.A. or higher in the field you’re teaching (or at least it’s tangentially related).
B) An education minor
C) A background check every few years
D) Completing a student teaching program
And for that you get a provisional certificate.

Add on three years of teaching experience and you’ve got a life time certificate because this is not something that needs to be renewed ever. If you knew it at one point you will know it until senility fully sets in.

States, get rid of all this BS….oh and make all teaching certificates for all 50 states completely reciprocal in all states.

1 Comment

Filed under Arizona, Congress, Conservative, Education, GOP, Government is useless, Laws the GOP should pass, Long Term Thinking, Teaching, Unjust legislation

Libya: Waste of Money

Wow.  Last night I was almost getting ready to write a blog saying, okay, I’ll give Obama some credit for helping get rid of Gaddafi…but that I was going to have to hold off actually congratulating Obama because I would have to wait to see if the new rebel government would actually turn out to better than Qadhafi and his sick regime.  I’m glad I didn’t post that last night.  Why you ask?

Have you read the new Libyan Constitution?  You know the one that states Sharia is the basis of all law.  You know Sharia, that wonderful legal philosophy that women are somewhere below shit, and non-Muslims are somewhere below women.  There’s also some Draconian legal codes and rampant animal abuse in terms of health codes.  I’d call it barbaric, but frankly historically most barbarian tribes were more civilized than the codes set down in Sharia.

I’m glad we just spent a BILLION dollars to get rid of a tyranny so that we can replace it with a tyranny.  Oh wait, maybe I shouldn’t be so glad about that.  In fact that’s more like a complete waste of money.  Thanks Obama, because you weren’t wasting money in enough places as it was.

Yeah Afghanistan is as much a waste…but at least we tried to create a democracy…failed miserably, but we tried.  And Iraq actually looks kind of  stable at the moment, so the investment there might not be a complete waste.  But in Libya we spent a billion dollars just to trade tyrannies.  And I’m a little worried we may not have backed the lesser of two evils.

You we could have spent nothing and still have had the same outcome, a tyranny.  Who knows maybe the fighting would have gone on longer and more tyranny supporting people would have killed each other.  It’s like the battle of Stalingrad, it’s doesn’t matter who loses, because so long as the two tyrannies fight and kill each other the rest of the world wins.

This is what happens when you enter a war without an actual purpose.  You need a purpose (Obama) and need a plan to get to that goal (Bush), in the absence of one or both you’re an idiot (Obama and Bush).

1 Comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Evils of Liberalism, Foreign Policy, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Libya, Obama, War on Terrorism

Laws for Conservatives to Pass: Executive Order Oversight

One of the things that makes me like Michele Bachmann is that she has said that if elected one of the first things she is going to do is go through all of Obama’s executive orders and throw out most of them. After all, Obama has been giving executive orders that not only are not popular, that put the whole nation under some loose kind of rendition  (yeah, you nearly forgot about that one didn’t you), executive orders creating more czars than a Bolshevik could possibly deal with, putting in rules specifically rejected by Congress on the deportation of illegal aliens , and of course an executive order that will allow the EPA to shut down power plants.

There's a check or balance missing somewhere here

Let’s see he can veto any law he wants, and now apparently he can write any law he wants on his own, and dare we forget he has the audacity to tell the Supreme Court that it doesn’t have the right to interpret the Constitution differently from him…what do you call it when a single person has all the powers of government invested in themselves?

Now some very, very foolish people have argued that the right of executive orders needs to be done away with. That’s insane. The executive office could never operate if it did not have the ability to issue orders on how to carry out laws. However executive orders are meant to clarify how laws will be carried out, not to write new ones, and certainly not to trump the power of the legislative branch.

Now I would prefer this to be a Constitutional Amendment, and will probably argue for that when I get around to writing a book on all the Constitutional changes that need to be made (but that is years off right now) but for right now it seems that this might only require a law (it may require a Constitutional Amendment, but I’d love to see Obama try to defend some of the shit he’s done with these orders publicly). Congress needs to pass a law that says that any executive order can be taken up by the Senate and voted down by a majority vote. This would return some of the power to the Senate, as the upper house of the legislative branch is supposed to have over the powers of the Presidency in order to check rampant insanity (like what we see with Obama), and offer just another check and balance to the system. Remember it was never supposed to be efficient or powerful.

Now as far as I can tell such a law wouldn’t require a Constitutional amendment since the power of executive orders isn’t exactly a power granted to the president in the first place. So Congress reasserting its right to be the sole legislative authority shouldn’t be a stretch constitutionally (although as I said, this might just make a good amendment anyway).

I think the Senate should have the right to look at any executive order and decide whether it is in line with the laws they have already passed. And if not the right to vote it down. If an executive order isn’t brought up within a year of it being issued it will just be assumed to have passed the bar.

Notice what you’re arguing if you don’t like this. You’re saying that a President can just issue orders of how the entirety of the federal government will act and behave and no one has the right to overrule him. That’s effectively a law, a law without any checks and balances involved in its creation. To give one branch, literally one man, that much power is beyond insane.

For generation this power has mostly been used only to fill in the grey area that comes in with enforcing most laws…but then there came Obama who decided that he should just legislate from the Oval Office whenever he felt like it. This is insane. Even if you agree with everything Obama has done, you have to know that someday a conservative will return to the White House, that’s inevitable, do you want someone you disagree with to have this much uncontrolled, unchecked, unfettered power? I don’t trust Obama, but even if you do, can you honestly say you trust every single person who will ever hold that office to not use that power like a dictator? I doubt it. There needs to be a check on this power. And since it is effectively a law, but one that the legislative branch did not pass, it should be held to a lower standard (only half of one branch has to vote it down).

Yes executive orders are a necessary part of the system. But it is a power that can easily be abused and it needs to be curtailed


Filed under Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Declaration, Economics, Environmentalism, Evils of Liberalism, Founding, Free Will, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Illegal Immagration, Laws the GOP should pass, Long Term Thinking, Michele Bachmann, Natural Rights, Obama, Tyranny, Unjust legislation

Books for New Agers: Temple Of The Winds by Terry Goodkind

And so we come to the fourth book of the Sword of Truth Series. Wait weren’t the other books “Books for Conservatives”? Yes, yes they were, but the theme of this book more suits a spiritual lesson than a political one.

First, of course, my very brief synopsis that tries not give out spoilers for the whole series but still makes it seem like a book you should read. In this volume Richard and Kahlan have to deal with Emperor Jagang’s first major move against their kingdom: the releasing of a deadly plague that threatens to kill everyone in their kingdom. And the only way to stop it is to betray one another. It really sucks to be the hero sometimes.

But it is this threat of betrayal that leads directly into the book’s main theme, the Wizard’s Fourth Rule:
There is magic in sincere forgiveness; in the forgiveness you give, but more so in the forgiveness you receive.

(Yes, there is a reason this is getting published on the same day as this week’s meditation).

The Sword of Truth Series is based quite heavily on Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophy (this will become really evident when we get to the 9th rule which it takes word for word from Atlas Shrugged) but in many ways Goodkind has created a philosophy somewhat superior to Rand’s beliefs in these books. Rand is famous for saying that there are only two ways to deal with people, through reason and through force. This sadly completely ignores the third way people interact with each other—through love. And it’s moments like this that show Goodkind knows much more than Rand.

As I suggested in the meditation for the week, forgiveness helps you out. Not forgiving someone for something often takes far more energy, far more time, far more effort in our lives than forgiving them and moving on. And it’s very refreshing to let it go and not carry that around anymore. In fact it’s almost cliché to list the psychological benefits to forgiving people even if you don’t tell them you have forgiven them, whereas holding onto grudges creates long term health problems from the constant stress. But more than the physical benefits, it is the spiritual benefits that this rule provides that are more important.

Whatever religious tradition you follow, there is likely a theme of forgiveness, of letting go of the past and moving on. The reason for this is that within every rational religious tradition is the idea that there is something of the divine within us. We sometimes do not live up to that, but forgiveness is the recognition that the divine within us is more important and more lasting than any mistake. Forgiveness lets you ignore the dark part of our lives and admit that those times are temporary and already past, that what exists now is only that part of the divine.

Forgive. Not necessarily forget, someone may screw up to the point where you can no longer trust them, but you can still forgive them even if you never trust them again. But you do need to sincerely forgive those around you because it is the only way to see yourself as something better than a collection of your mistakes, which we all have made. We probably all fall short of perfection in living up to this rule, but that doesn’t mean we should give up in trying to live up to it. Just forgive yourself the moments where you were not your best and move on.

1 Comment

Filed under 4th Chakra, Art, Ayn Rand, Books, Books for Conservatives, Books for New Agers, Charity, Faith, Free Will, Heart Chakra Love, Individualism, Love, New Age, Novels, Reading Suggestions, Sword of Truth

Books for Conservatives: Blood of the Fold by Terry Goodkind.

I just bought the new Goodkind book which reminded me it had been a while since I reviewed a book in his Sword of Truth Series. We left off with the first two wizard’s rules:
People are stupid
The best intention can lead to the worst consequences.

Both are basic principles of any rational form of conservatism and thus we come to third book of the Sword of Truth series Blood of the Fold.

This is probably one of the weaker books of the series, to be honest. One of the strengths of the series from a plot and character point of view is the relationship between its two heroes Richard and his wife Kahlan. A book which has them together for almost none of the book thus comes off as rather weak. It, in many ways, is bridge piece between the first two books which pit Richard against the villain Darken Rahl (a fascist lunatic) and the villain of the rest of the series, the Emperor Jagang (a tyrant who believes in all the evils of socialism and wishes to force it on everyone). (With villains like this it becomes obvious why I love this series for more than just the wizard’s rules). This book also has a secondary villain who represents the small-minded religious fanatics that we are all tired of dealing with. I suspect that the religious fanatics may have had a larger role if the book had been written post 2001, but as it was it was written in 1996, when religious fanaticism was more annoying and less genocidally deadly in the view of most Americans. The writing is still crisp and enjoyable, but I will admit the plot is a little weaker than most of the other books in the series—but it’s a necessary part of the series (you can’t just skip the dull chapters in a book and you can’t skip the duller volumes in a series and expect either to make sense.)

Now what still makes this book well worth the read is, as always, the Wizard’s Rule that forms the core theme of the book: Passion Rules Reason.

“Letting your emotions control your reason may cause trouble for yourself and those around you.”

And, as with all the rules, we all fall victim to its warning at some point.

For instance a couple weeks ago I misread an article on a law passed by liberal California. I missed a key contingency in that law while reading the article. I became so giddy in being able to once again insult liberals that I ignored that key part of the law. Now this law was ridiculous (moving to get rid of the Electoral College) but it was not as suicidally stupid as I first thought it to be. But rather than do my usual thing of wait a day or two to publish an article that deals with real issues (the flippant humor can usually go out immediately, but I like to usually let bigger ideas sit for a day or two so I see if there is anything I need to add/change) I was so eager to once again stick it to liberals I published the blog as soon as it was spellchecked. My passion for showing up liberals checked my reason, and a day later when someone pointed out that I had missed that rather important point in the law I had to take the post down.

And don’t roll your eyes; we’ve all leapt before we looked. We’ve all acted on emotion before thinking.

And often following emotion without reason only leads to destruction. Do you think those rioters in London were driven by emotion or logic? Do you think Islamic fanatics are driven by passion or reason? Do you think almost all marketing is playing to your heart or your mind? Notice it’s Democrats who play toward hope and change and Republicans who play to $14 Trillion Debt and dull budgetary cuts…who is playing to reason and who more to logic? (Not that Republicans are guiltless in playing to emotion…I’m just saying when is the last time you saw a rational argument laid out by a Democrat?)

And of course more than any other emotion we fall victim to: fear. A terrible emotion that holds us back from doing what we need to, what we should do, what we have to do. Often in the battle between fear and logic, I’m sorry to say logic does not always win. How many people have not stood up to a dictatorial boss, even though logic said it was the right thing to do because of fear? How many people have passed up a good investment opportunity because of the fear it might fail…or more predominantly how many people bought homes they couldn’t afford because of the fear that the price would go up even higher if they didn’t buy now. How many budget deals were passed because of the fear that our credit rating would go down if we didn’t even thought reason told us that the credit rating was going down because of our debt, not because we didn’t take on more debt. I can think of at least one. How many trillions were spent because we were afraid that we would have a depression if we didn’t spend, ignoring the fact that deficit spending never helps an economy?

Yeah, fear is an emotion that rules us too often. An emotion that needs to be eradicated if you ever have the chance.

Now, that is not to say that you should never act on emotion. There are lots of times you should. But, contrary to some odd Vulcan logic, it is because passion and emotion are actually logically called for in those instances. Reason will tell you when and where to follow your heart…however just listening to your heart will never tell you when and where to use your brain. Which is why we all need to listen to our brain first, and our heart second.

I know this isn’t easy. Never has been. Most of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, the cornerstone for all rational systems of ethics and morality, deals with training and habituating your emotional responses to be in the right degree at the right time.

Or think of it this way. When you are lead by passion instead of reason, you are far more likely to transgress those first two wizard’s rules. When following only your heart, you are more likely to make stupid mistakes in judgment. When following only your heart you are far more likely to care only about your good intentions and not about the long term results of your actions.

And passion will always rule reason if you don’t train your passions to be subordinate your reason and will. It’s not easy, but it’s worth it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aristotle, Books, Books for Conservatives, Fear, Purpose of Life, Sword of Truth

Why Obama is not worried about the debt…

I was rewatching the “Obama is a flake” video I posted yesterday and I suddenly understood the Obama economic plan.

Obama stated that:

There are 57 states

That the Constitution was written 20 centuries ago (which would mean it was written sometime between the birth and death of Christ).

That tens of thousands of people were killed in a disaster that killed 11 people.

Obama habitually exaggerates numbers to make them sound more impressive.  Facts be damned.

And then one just needs to look at basic human psychology.  We all have, at times, the problem of “I am the world.”  Habitual liars think everyone is a liar because they think everyone is like them.  Thinking rational people who always question every thought they have are shocked to find that other people don’t do that too.  Vicious scheming people assume that everyone is scheming against them because that’s what they would do.  People who make up facts to justify their points assume that everyone is making up facts so why should they listen to anyone.  I am the world.

So if Obama habitually exaggerates numbers he must be assuming everyone else is doing the same.

So if you tell him that the debt is 14 Trillion dollars, he knows you’re just exaggerating and it’s only like a million or so.  We can pay that off.

When you tell him that’s he’s spending 10 Billion dollars a day, hey you’re just making that number larger, and he’s only spending a couple C-notes a day…that won’t bankrupt anyone.

When he’s warned that nearly 10% of the public is unemployed, why worry, it’s really only like 1%, you just made the number bigger to make it sound impressive.

Suddenly his economic policies sort-of make sense.  He’s working with a completely different set of numbers than you and I  are.

It suddenly makes sense why he doesn’t seem that worried that’s he down in the polls by double digits.  Because really we’re just exaggerating, the American public still worships the very ground he walks.

1 Comment

Filed under Budget, Debt, Economics, Humor, Obama

It's entirely possible that I could be nostalgic for a world that never existed… (via The Snark Who Hunts Back)

but I like to think that's not the case. You read the history books and watch the news reels from the World War II and there is something there that the American (and British and European, but I was inspired to write this after watching Captain America, so…the American theme seems appropriate) people are missing today. The ability to judge right from wrong. We've gone from a country that, from at least the view of popular history, came together … Read More

via The Snark Who Hunts Back

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Is Obama a flake?

Chris Wallace asked Bachmann if she was a flake.  He should have said “How do you respond to the extreme element of your critics who claim you’re a flake.”  But there is someone who might just be a flake….

…now if Bachmman, or any Republican had said something this stupid would the media have just ignored it, or would it have been front page humiliation?


Filed under Election 2012, Michele Bachmann, Obama

Obama the Economy Slayer

So I got sent a recent article that basically said that despite all the whining, Obama had done nothing at all to ruin the economy, Republicans could point to nothing Obama had done to ruin the economy…and implicitly that it was all the fault of Bush and Republicans that the economy was in the trouble it was.

Now I will not completely defend the Republicans here. Bush was an idiot who backstabbed his party by applying the name NeoCon to the most ill planned non-neocon foreign policy action imaginable and a complete bastard in passing TARP (this is one of those moments I regret not believing in Hell, because Bush deserves to go there for his betrayal of capitalism…remind me, in the traditional model, where do traitors go?). Republicans for the last decade have been nothing but Democrats-lite, so there is a bunch of blame to go around.

However Obama has done more than his fair share of ruining the economy. If Bush was an idiot farmer who let a pasture go fallow for no reason, Obama dropped Napalm on that field and called it fertilizer.
Let’s take a look at some of the things this man has done to capitalism.

And we start our look with:
Yes, Obamacare the wonderful little bill that could. Problem is exactly what it could do. It could bankrupt the entire medical insurance industry. Did I say could…I meant will. At which point we will all have to go onto government healthcare. Yes the people who can’t do anything right…you trust them to handle your medical practice don’t you. Just ignore all those doctors and nurses saying they’ll quit if Obamacare is put into practice. Just ignore all the drug companies saying they will no longer be able to make a profit. Just ignore the high standards set by British and Canadian healthcare (you know the health care where if you have the money you go to the US because you don’t trust government provided healthcare). So, hmmm, this will also cause most companies to drop medical care because the few remaining private policies will be too expensive to provide to employees and stay afloat. Yes that’s right your single largest benefit in your salary package and you’ll have to pay the government out of what you’re being paid now. That will do wonders for your bank account I’m sure.

Oh and did I forget that with Obamacare, the government can now demand you buy things even if you don’t want to? What happens next? Since GE is so chummy with Obama and the Democrats will we have to buy new washers and dryers? New green technology whether we want it or not. If my history serves there are only a few cases where a supposedly Liberal country made people buy a product from a particular company. The company was the East India Trading company, and it was a British government desperate for funds that thought to force the company’s wares on some people, namely tea…I think we know how well that plan worked out for the British economy.

But Obamacare hasn’t gone into effect you whine. Yes, it hasn’t, but the fear of it has. Ever ask why a lot of companies aren’t hiring…maybe for fear of what it will soon cost to insure new employees. Ever wonder why so many companies are desperate to get Obamacare waivers, maybe because they know if they don’t it will destroy them.

Then we have the Obama Administration’s support of Unions!

From pushing the unethical, unconstitutional, and certainly blatantly immoral card check plan which would allow unions near absolute power to unionize any and every business they wanted. The fact of the matter is that unions are now more corrupt, more violent, and more in bed with politicians than the robber-barons they were created to opposed. Hmmm…unions with more power. Unions with more ability to bully and intimidate employees to vote for unions…if they know what’s good for them. After all why should you have the right to a secret ballot…what good do does that do…it’s not like we felt it important enough a right to create a Constitutional amendment to guarantee it. And it’s not like unions have ever been known to rely heavily on physical intimidation and violence. And it’s not like the Obama union protected SEIU thugs from assault charges for beating a Tea Partier so badly he nearly died. Not at all.

I can’t see how supporting an organization which have literally hastened the fall of and destroyed America’s manufacturing and educational industry is a bad thing. (Manufacturing would have eventually fallen without unions; they just made it happen decades ahead of when it would have happened without them.).

Or how about the Obama’s appointees at the SEC giving Unions the power to replace any management they find opposed to their destructive takeovers. How could that possibly be bad for business? I’m sure that must have stimulated the economy lots.

And it’s not like that massive union the SEIU is being charged for criminal acts under RICO. Fine upstanding people I understand completely why Obama would support them with his last breath.

Cap and Trade

Then there’s that cap and trade BS he keeps pushing. I’m sure destroying the entire power industry and what remained of industry would be great for the American economy.

Pushing Sub-Prime Loans

Oh and look Obama is once again threatening to sue banks if they don’t offer subprime loans! That did wonders for the economy last time. I’m sure that another round of having people get loans they can’t afford, ruining the value of the banking system, and plummeting the prices of house one more time will be great for the U.S. economy.

How about Obama’s energy policy?

You know, banning almost all offshore drilling and not allowing more exploration (while at the same time praising South American companies for doing the very things he has forbidden U.S. companies from doing), I’m sure that has nothing to do with the rise in fuel costs which in turn has caused inflation of almost everything across the board. Nothing at all.

Oh and dare we mention the panic and instability that he caused to the markets by releasing oil from strategic reserves for no reason other than to cause panic. No harm there I’m sure.

Executive orders for review of red tape…
And then there are czars, and firing the heads of private companies, and piles upon piles of regulations and executive orders. Billions of dollars in red tape alone, red tape that not only costs us as taxpayers, but red tape that literally destroys companies and absolutely prevents the growth of businesses. You know, those people who hire people.

Then there was the fact that he didn’t push or back his own debt commission’s recommendations which, while not perfect, would have solved a lot of problems.

Then you have the clear impression that Obama is letting every single agency ride rough shod over everyone their petty bureaucratic hands can get to. IRS agents harassing everyone4 million dollar fines selling a few bunnies (and then demanding that the person who sold those rabbits must relinquish all his rights as a citizen to petition the government if he wants to get out of that fine…)…or arresting the Amish and hippies for selling unpasteurized milk. Can’t imagine why businesses wouldn’t be growing in a climate where the government’s attitude to anything that even resembles a capitalistic venture or exchange by free individuals as a criminal act that must be stopped, fined, and punished. True Obama isn’t ordering these abuses of power himself, but the buck stops somewhere, and he doesn’t appear to be stopping them either.

One might look to the highly immoral Frank-Dodd bill which does nothing to stop any of the financial problems that started this recession, but gives cover to the worst offenders and encourages more of that bad behavior. Maybe that has something to do with the lack of growth…I mean when you set up a system that is absolutely going to fail, I can’t imagine why no one wants to buy in.

The destruction of the fastest growing industry, the internet, through corrupt and socialist Net Neutrality rules.

And how about this crappy debt deal he engineered.

And then there is just the general state of fear caused by this man. The attacks on free speech by forcing cigarette companies to advertise the government’s party line. The attack upon major news outlets like a two-bit banana republic dictator when they don’t agree with him and worship the ground he walks on. The public support of violent racist groups like the Black Panthers and La Raza. The illegal collusions with companies like Google and Media Matters to raise cash for his reelection campaign. The extortion of campaign money for Obamacare waivers. All of this creates a state of fear and terror where no one wants to invest in the future because they’re not sure if there is going to be one. Frankly the last man to preach this much hope and provide this much terror was Robespierre.

Have I glossed over some of these points? Yes. This blog was getting long and my point was merely that Obama has acted directly to destroy the economy and has destroyed the economy through an equal amount of inaction. He is the worst of all possibilities. The question shouldn’t be “What has he done to hurt the economy?” because I think I have more than enough examples of that…the question should be “Has he done a single F!@#$%^ thing to help the economy? One thing. One.”

Again I know I glossed over some of this, and will elaborate more on any of these points if anyone makes such a request.


Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Civil Liberties, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Debt, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Fear, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Health Care, Individualism, liberal arrogance, Long Term Thinking, Net Neutrality, Obama, Problems with the GOP, Taxes, Unions

In (what’s the opposite of defense?) of Ron Paul

So Jon Stewart is apparently upset about the media ignoring Ron Paul. He seems to think that ignoring this lunatic is something wrong. His proof… Ron Paul is doing well in the polls.

First let me point out that I doubt Ron Paul will ever go above those numbers. Paul’s supporters are a hard core bunch. They latch on easily and stick like a lamprey until they have no other option…but he does not appeal to anyone but that core bunch. Ever!

Stewart claims that Ron Paul is the original Tea Partier and that all others like Bachmann are merely new comers to the party. This is a terrible misrepresentation. I think that if some darling of the Tea Party, Bachmann, Christie, Ryan or Rubio were given complete control of the country without any opposition and a Supreme Court and Congress that would just rubber stamp everything they wanted, somewhere around 40% of the government would be gone in 8 years, with perhaps long term legislation to get rid of another 30% within the next 10-15 years. If Paul got that same deal 95% of the federal government would be gone in the first year of his term (even die hard libertarians can usually see why such a radical shock would be bad for the economy…hell even Ron’s son seems to think his dad is a little crazy).

Ron Paul isn’t so much a Tea Partier, as he is the GOP answer to Dennis Kucinich. A loveable lunatic who says things his side thinks need to be said, but not the kind of person you actually want to give any real power to.

And I think most of the media understand that while he has his hard core following there is not a snowball’s chance in Hell of him getting more (God please do not let humanity disappoint me once again on this point) and thus there is no real chance of him winning the nomination (unless perhaps Satan himself intervenes) and thus no chance of him facing off with Obama. This is as it should be. Ron Paul needs to be in the House as a strong voice of a particular ideology…I might even go as far to say that he might need to have one of the lower GOP positions within the House. (And if we gave him the Speakership it would be a complete disaster, but it would make CSPAN the funniest sitcom on TV).

But more importantly, is the reason why we can’t let Ron Paul ever get near the White House. His foreign policy beliefs.

This is a man who thinks that all countries are created equally and should be left alone to do whatever they want, because none of it is America’s business. First off it’s frightening to think that someone who claims to understand economics has not a single clue that the economy has reached a point where every country in the world is connected into one giant economy. No country is an island; every country is a piece of the whole global economy… any country’s economic problems diminishes America, because we are involved in the global economy, and therefore never seem to know for whom the closing bells on Wall Street tolls; it tolls for thee.

(Yes, I had to go there.)

But more importantly it is that this man has no ethical compass. Yes Iran and Israel are equally good. Huh? I worry about someone who can’t make any distinction between them, yeah maybe with Israel their economy sucks and they’ve got some problems but they’re not psychoville hellbent on destroying the free world. You know there is a lot of grey in the world, but sometimes there is also black and white, and when you don’t recognize that you shouldn’t be allowed to pretend you’re a leader. But it might not just be that he doesn’t see anything wrong with Iran, it may be he supports their goals. I browsed Paul’s book “Liberty Defined” in Barnes and Noble a couple of weeks ago (I had no intention of buying it and giving Paul a cent, but I thought I should take a look at it). My favorite part (and by favorite I mean the part for which I would most like to see Paul thrown into a dark cell and never let out) was his section on “Zionism.” (Because everybody uses the word Zionism…oh wait, no, it seems almost exclusively used by the same people who buy “Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”) In it he talks about hearing a Palestinian “refugee” coming to speak at his school when he was young and talking about all the terrible things that happened to Palestinians because of those evil, evil Jews. And because they said the Jews were evil it must be true. That nice Mr. Goebbels wouldn’t lie to us, would he? You know I might be willing to forgive a young Ron Paul not knowing that 90% of the so-called atrocities against Palestinians to be a lie as vile as any Riefenstahl movie and the other 10% was defensive measures in response to barbaric terrorism on the part of the, you guessed it, the Palestinians. I could forgive young Paul for this mistake. I cannot forgive Congressman Paul who now has access to the truth for believing such BS. Either he’s an idiot, or he is intentionally ignoring the facts because he has problems with the people of Israel. I don’t think it’s only because of their less than capitalistic economy that Ron Paul doesn’t like the Israeli’s.

Then he also likes to go off on all the problems the U.S. has caused in our sometimes less spectacular foreign policy. Yes we’ve made some major blunders in our interventionist behavior. And we’ve gotten involved in wars we shouldn’t have (Libya comes to mind). But you know what, that’s still better than when we didn’t get involved. Last time I checked when we didn’t get involved you had 6 million+ dead Jews, homosexuals, gypsies and other minorities (although I doubt Paul actually thinks of that as a loss) in Europe (not even counting the dead British, French, and other allied members who fought in war) and millions tortured and killed by Japanese in China, Korea and the South Pacific. Somehow I find American blundering on its worst day to be somewhat better than that. But that’s just me, and every sane person, who understands that, as P.J. O’Rourke put it, “Evil is an outreach program.” And dear god do we have a lot of countries in the world that could easily be classified as evil. This country already has enough blood on its hands; we don’t need the callous indifference of Ron Paul to add more.

These crazy at best beliefs may be why the media doesn’t give Ron Paul a lot of attention…because he isn’t worth it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Election 2012, Foreign Policy, Michele Bachmann, Problems with the GOP

Movies for New Agers: “Lady in the Water”

“Man thinks they are each alone in the world. It is not true. You are all connected.”

It’s been a while since I’ve done a New Age movie, and I realized I still hadn’t done Shyamalan’s Lady in the Water (I primarily realized this while watching Shyamalan’s Devil this weekend which has convinced me he had five great movies in him and that’s it. He’s got nothing left. He could make a semi-decent movie right now and I’d probably spit on it. Unless he somehow finds it within him to outdo Nolan this man has no career left. It’s even worse that I need to write a whole blog on how terrible a movie Devil is.) It’s kind of odd that I put off doing this one as it’s actually my favorite of all of Shyamalan’s movies.
Also I realize that I have to do all these older movies because very seldom does it appear that people get the more spiritual message of these films.
So we at last come to the final great film of Shyamalan where M. Night still could remember how to make movies (and while 5 great films in a row is a spectacular accomplishment, The Happening, The Last Airbender and Devil do seem to almost erase my opinion of him as a writer/director, but Lady in the Water is a great movie regardless). So why is this movie great? Well because it takes most of the topics of his previous themes, that everyone has a purpose in life, that there is a higher order in the universe, that nothing happens by chance, that fear is the greatest enemy in life, that faith and love are a great weapon against that fear, and puts them together into a single magnum opus.
Well first off, Shyamalan had the guts to do what every other person in Hollywood wants to do but doesn’t have the guts to do: he showed movie critics to be small, petty, disgusting people who can only critique things they couldn’t make and praise crap only because they can’t understand it. And then had the critic eaten by a monster. No shock that critics panned this movie.
Now it’s not an overly complicated movie. It’s not meant to be. In fact it has all the subtlety of an Ayn Rand speech. I think at some level Shyamalan knew this was his last hurrah and knew he had to get this message out in no uncertain terms. The story is simple enough; an angel comes down to inspire people, does, is threatened by the forces of darkness, but returns home. Sure it’s dressed up in the following tale:

Once, man and those in the water were linked. They inspired us. They spoke of the future. Man listened and it became real. But man does not listen very well. Man’s need to own everything led him deeper into land. The magic world of the ones that lived in the ocean… and the world of men… separated. Through the centuries, their world and all the inhabitants of it… stopped trying. The world of man became more violent. War upon war played out, as there were no guides to listen to. Now those in the water are trying again… trying to reach us. A handful of their precious young ones have been sent into the world of man. They are brought in the dead of night… to where man lives. They need only be glimpsed… and the awakening of man will happen. But their enemies roam the land. There are laws that are meant to keep the young ones safe… but they are sent at a great risk to their lives. Many… do not return. Yet still they try… try to help man. But man has forgotten how to listen…

But it’s essentially a story of an angel. The difference between this and real life is that we don’t have an angel come to only a few people only once in a lifetime, we have them talking to us, each and every one of us, at all times during our lives. And just like in the movie “but man does not listen very well.” We can choose to ignore those voices of advice, but only at our own loss.
What is the message that they bring? It’s a simple one as repeated several times by the story’s central character “Story” (yeah, not very subtle that you should take her message as allegory, but then again somehow everyone seemed to miss this basic interpretation): “You have a purpose. All beings have a purpose.” This is what Shyamalan has been building up to through all of his films (the kid and Bruce Willis in the Sixth Sense had a purpose to help people, Bruce Willis in Unbreakable had a purpose to be a hero and was miserable until you fulfilled it, every person had a role to play in Signs leading up to a moment that made it clear everything is part of a higher plan). It just becomes so obvious in this movie as people are put into purely archetypal (The Healer, The Guardian, The Interpreter, The Guild…you get the impression that Shyamalan is getting tired of trying to get a message across and said “screw it, I’m just going to be so blunt a 5 year old could get it”…it of course went right over the head of critics) roles to show that people do have a purpose in life. The idea that you’re supposed to get from this is that yes, you too have a purpose in life. It may not be obvious, it may not be pleasant at all points in time, but it is your purpose, and you do need to find out what that purpose is. Or as one character states:

“This world is about finding your purpose, right? And the only way to do that is to find your own voice. You told us that. […] Finding one’s purpose is a profound thing. Sometimes it is not always what it seems.”

The movie also brings up the problem of the false path. Lots of times we get it in our head that we are meant to be something when we’re not…or worse we think we can tell other people what they should do with their lives. “What kind of person would be so arrogant as to presume the intention of another human being?” What kind of person? Well in Shyamalan’s mind it’s the petty self-righteous intellectual embodied in a movie critic…but I might extend that to anyone who thinks they have a right to dictate what another person does with their life. We all have this habit of trying to tell people what do with their lives, especially when people ask us for advice, try and downplay that urge. Advice has its time and place, but don’t let it become a habit. People need to find their own way, and sometimes that involves taking a detour or wrong path for a while so that they can learn with clarity what the right path is—it should be noted that while the first group of people who took on the archetypal roles in Lady in the Water were technically not the right people for those jobs, they were the right people to help set up the situation so that the right people could find their purpose (so were they the wrong people if they helped bring the correct realization about?)

Lady in the Water also shows in a very clear way the nature of the universe in intervening in our lives. In the film there are a group of creatures known as Tartudek, they are the police of this magical world and enforce the rules of this world…and meet out punishment when they need to. However they don’t show up until the very end of the film, long after they could have been really useful. However, while it might seem as if their lack of intervention made everything more complicated for the characters in the story, it is actually that his is merely a reflection of the way the world works. People actually complain, maybe not always vocally but pay attention and you’ll see signs of this; that the world (read God) doesn’t perfectly always line up for them. They don’t always get that raise. Traffic backs up on them. It’s raining. Why me? And with this comes a list of prayers to a higher power for just a string of incredibly small and trivial things (you ever prayed for a parking space?) and the indignation that comes when your prayers are not answered. This is not exactly how the universe works. Yes, I do believe if you’re in tune with the universe everything has a domino effect of working your way, but most of this is more that you’re recognizing the signs and responding, not that the universe is always going out of its way to provide big budget miracles to you. The universe/God only intervenes in major ways when you can’t do things on your own. Tartudek only appears in the film once the acts of people alone are not enough to stop the villain of the film, ONLY WHEN THE ACTS OF HUMANS ARE NOT ENOUGH. If you can do it for yourself, the universe expects you to do it for yourself. That it is hard, you complain. Tough, it’s hard only because you make it so…as pointed out in this movie and Shyamalan’s other films, the universe has been trying to show you signs and messages on how to make your life easier, it’s up to you to listen to that or not.

“Man thinks they are each alone in the world. It is not true. You are all connected. One act on one day can affect us all. “Even more central than the idea of your purpose in life is how connected we all are in life. The lives of almost everyone in the small apartment complex that the story of Lady in the Water takes place are interconnected. It is only through the actions of each of them that they are all able to learn and progress in life. One of the main characters, a writer, (played by Shyamalan himself) writes a book that will one day help change the world for the better. Now some have criticized Shyamalan’s choice of casting himself in this role (even though they didn’t critique him putting himself into all his other films), however this kind of makes sense as, it’s not so much arrogance, as it is the feelings of any artist. Nobody does any kind of art without hoping that it will affect people. Yeah most of the time artists may just be hoping to entertain or please, but you’re always hoping it will affect people. Is it then wrong for the artist of the film, it’s writer/director, to put himself in the archetype most fitting himself (at least he didn’t try and tell us what to believe in terms of politics which many other people in Hollywood are all too eager to do). Not really. But this small matter aside, this central idea that we all have the power to affect change in our own lives and in the world this is not exactly a new idea, but it is one that we too often forget and become depressed about because we don’t immediately see. Shyamalan’s more extreme tale of a single book causing great change is trying to tell us that we can change the world for the better, just not necessarily in the next three seconds. Change takes time…even in Lady in the Water it takes nearly a generation. This should make you think about each small act you perform each day. What will the long term effects of each choice in your life, each moment you could have been creative, charitable, helpful…what will the ripple effects (like how I use the water metaphor there relating back to the title) of your actions will be. How much greater might that be if you actually tried to do things if we intentionally did things we thought would make the world better for years to come. And because all actions have effects that stretch far beyond our own little corner of the world it could eventually reach everyone in the world, thus we are all connected.
…What have you done to make the world better today?

If the movie has a flaw it is in its promise of hope, “The world will line up and reveal we are on the right path….” Yes we are given this in that we see everyone find their purpose and our main character get through his greatest personal problem…but we are only left with all of the characters staring at the sky at the end as if being shown this moment of revelation in the last scene. I know there is probably no way even the greatest artist could show anything even more revealing, but it still feels like I’m being cheated just a little.

The movie is simplistic in its plot and characterization, yes, but that is so you have no choice but to focus on its theme. If you haven’t seen the movie, or haven’t seen it with an eye toward looking at it as a philosophical story you should give it a try.

Leave a comment

Filed under Free Will, God, Lady in the Water, Movies, New Age, New Age Movies, Prayer, Purpose of Life, Shyamalan, The Sixth Sense

Some quick GOP election thoughts 8/16

1.  Bachmann needs to replace some of her people.  Her stands on actual policy are consistent, logical, and she stands by what she says.  But these minor little gaffes she keeps making are getting silly.  Now I think everybody is making gaffes like this (for instance has anyone noticed Obama can’t pronounce the word Pakistan…Pakeeeeeeestan) and that there is a double-standard being held to Bachmann.  You may remember that every small flaw that Hillary had was front page news.  The media is a bunch of misogynists, and they are proving that once again.  However, that doesn’t excuse the fact that this is now the 2nd gaffe with an American icon.  Yes these facts are minor and pointless, but Bachmann needs to understand, right, wrong or indifferent she is being held to a higher standard and needs these gaffes to stop.

2.  I was wrong, Rick Perry is not going after the nutty-Christian voters that went for Huckabee.  Perry is challenging Ron Paul for the full-blown batshit crazy voters.  I don’t want Perry or Paul as president…however I think we should have a debate between these two and put it on Pay Per View…we could pay off a healthy chunk of the debt with that freak-show.

1 Comment

Filed under Election 2012, Michele Bachmann

What I’m looking for…

With Pawlenty the field is beginning to narrow for the GOP.  Now I admittedly have my favorites, but I am still willing to take anyone who will do the following:

A.  Attack Obama on every valid point possible (I’ve been rather unimpressed by the lack of attacks on this man’s rampant acts of socialism and violations of my basic rights.)


B.  State in no uncertain terms their priorities go as such:

    1. Return America to #1 status on the list of economically free nations by stripping the federal government of powers, of red tape and of its M.C. Escher inspired tax system.  See the video below.

2.  Have a strong policy of blowing up terrorists and tyrants in their own countries before they get to ours.

3.  Apologizing to the entire world for the 4 years of bad diplomacy and rampant insults that Obama dealt to them.

4.  Admit that really all of that is going to take at least 4 years (probably more) so who has time to worry about anything else.  All social issues can wait.

D.  Has experience as an executive of a city of more than 6 million residents and has experience of being an executive during a major terrorist attack (I’m flexible on this, but not by much).

All I really want is someone who will put sane economic values and foreign policy at the front of the line.  Is that too much to ask?

Leave a comment

Filed under Election 2012

The poor are getting richer!

hmmm…I think I read this in a book somewhere too..which book was that…oh yeah! Republicans and Reincarnation


Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Equality, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Reading Suggestions, Republicans and Reincarnation