Today, we observe the day set aside to honor our fallen heroes, those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, from past and present wars. With that in mind, I present to you the music of the various branches.
As you go about your activities today, please remember that the reason we are able to freely go about those activities is due to the sacrifice, and on this day specifically the ultimate sacrifice, of those who have worn the uniforms of our great nation.
US Air Force
US Army
US Marine Corps
US Navy
Monday, May 25, 2009
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Administration open to taxing health benefits
As reported here, [t]he Obama administration is signaling to Congress that the president could support taxing some employee health benefits, as several influential lawmakers and many economists favor, to help pay for overhauling the health care system.
The proposal is politically problematic for President Obama, however, since it is similar to one he denounced in the presidential campaign as "the largest middle-class tax increase in history." Most Americans with insurance get it from their employers, and taxing workers for the benefit is opposed by union leaders and some businesses.
What is not mentioned at all in the article is the fact that if this does go into effect, people will then be inclined to not have health insurance through their employer, to avoid the tax hit from having health insurance. That would then increase the burden on emergency rooms across the country from people who no longer would have employer provided insurance turning to emergency rooms for their health needs, which would in turn increase the drain on public money to fund services for those without health insurance. In effect, we already are being taxed on our health insurance, to provide coverage for those that do not have health insurance and make use of hospital emergency rooms, and by placing a tax on employer provided insurance means we would be, in effect, getting hit twice for the same thing.
The bad economic ideas just keep coming, folks.
The proposal is politically problematic for President Obama, however, since it is similar to one he denounced in the presidential campaign as "the largest middle-class tax increase in history." Most Americans with insurance get it from their employers, and taxing workers for the benefit is opposed by union leaders and some businesses.
What is not mentioned at all in the article is the fact that if this does go into effect, people will then be inclined to not have health insurance through their employer, to avoid the tax hit from having health insurance. That would then increase the burden on emergency rooms across the country from people who no longer would have employer provided insurance turning to emergency rooms for their health needs, which would in turn increase the drain on public money to fund services for those without health insurance. In effect, we already are being taxed on our health insurance, to provide coverage for those that do not have health insurance and make use of hospital emergency rooms, and by placing a tax on employer provided insurance means we would be, in effect, getting hit twice for the same thing.
The bad economic ideas just keep coming, folks.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Feds OK gray wolves' removal from endangered list
As reported here, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Friday he was upholding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision to remove gray wolves from the federal endangered list in the Northern Rockies and the western Great Lakes.
Wolves would remain a federally protected species in Wyoming because the state's law and management plans were not strong enough, he said. But management of the predator will be turned over to state agencies in Montana and Idaho and parts of Washington, Oregon and Utah, in addition to the Great Lakes states of Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The Obama administration had ordered a review of the decision made by the Bush administration shortly before departing. Salazar said he had concluded that dropping the wolf from the list was justified by its strong comeback in the two regions, which together have a population of nearly 5,600 wolves.
On the one hand, I'm cautiously pleased with the findings that the gray wolf can safely be removed from the endangered species list, as that means that their population has reached a certain self sustainability level, which is wonderful news.
On the other hand, this does not bode well for individual animals, as they would then move to the list of animals that people are allowed to hunt. Don't get me wrong, although I'm not a hunter, I fully support the right of people to hunt, both for sport and for food. However, I personally do not see the attraction of hunting predators merely for sport, whether it be wolves, cougars, coyotes, bears, etc. The one caveat I have to that is when a particular individual predator animal goes "rogue" and rather than hunt wild game, turns instead to domestic live stock. The selective removal of that particular animal, imo, is justified.
Predators keep the populations of wild grazing animals at sustainable, and healthy levels, allowing hunters to be able to "harvest" robust animals, rather than sickly, weak animals. Also, by keeping the wild grazing animal populations in check, this allows ranchers to maintain their domestic grazing animal stock at an appropriate level for the environment.
Idaho Gov. C.L. Butch Otter on Friday repeated his desire to get the first available wolf hunting tag in the state so he can try to shoot one of the animals.
As for Idaho's Governor desiring to have the first wolf permit issued by his state, all I can say is, gray wolves are a lot smarter than you think they are, pal - one of them might just bag you! :p
H/T specialrpt, writing in quicknews
Wolves would remain a federally protected species in Wyoming because the state's law and management plans were not strong enough, he said. But management of the predator will be turned over to state agencies in Montana and Idaho and parts of Washington, Oregon and Utah, in addition to the Great Lakes states of Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
The Obama administration had ordered a review of the decision made by the Bush administration shortly before departing. Salazar said he had concluded that dropping the wolf from the list was justified by its strong comeback in the two regions, which together have a population of nearly 5,600 wolves.
On the one hand, I'm cautiously pleased with the findings that the gray wolf can safely be removed from the endangered species list, as that means that their population has reached a certain self sustainability level, which is wonderful news.
On the other hand, this does not bode well for individual animals, as they would then move to the list of animals that people are allowed to hunt. Don't get me wrong, although I'm not a hunter, I fully support the right of people to hunt, both for sport and for food. However, I personally do not see the attraction of hunting predators merely for sport, whether it be wolves, cougars, coyotes, bears, etc. The one caveat I have to that is when a particular individual predator animal goes "rogue" and rather than hunt wild game, turns instead to domestic live stock. The selective removal of that particular animal, imo, is justified.
Predators keep the populations of wild grazing animals at sustainable, and healthy levels, allowing hunters to be able to "harvest" robust animals, rather than sickly, weak animals. Also, by keeping the wild grazing animal populations in check, this allows ranchers to maintain their domestic grazing animal stock at an appropriate level for the environment.
Idaho Gov. C.L. Butch Otter on Friday repeated his desire to get the first available wolf hunting tag in the state so he can try to shoot one of the animals.
As for Idaho's Governor desiring to have the first wolf permit issued by his state, all I can say is, gray wolves are a lot smarter than you think they are, pal - one of them might just bag you! :p
H/T specialrpt, writing in quicknews
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Lawmaker out to outlaw Barbie
West Virginia state delegate says iconic toy overemphasizes beauty to girls
Barbie could get an unwelcome present for her 50th birthday: outlawed in West Virginia.
A state lawmaker proposed a bill Tuesday to ban sales of the iconic Mattel doll and others like her.
The Barbie Ban Bill, proposed by Democratic Delegate Jeff Eldridge (D) Lincoln County, says such toys influence girls to place too much importance on physical beauty, at the expense of their intellectual and emotional development.
With the economy in the tank, and getting worse, thanks mainly to others in this guy's party, he thinks that now is the time to try to push something this stupid through his state legislature? There must not be a whole lot going on in West Virginia if this guy can waste the time, and tax payer dollars, on something even he admits has a slim chance of passing.
I have some advice for you, Jeff, and for others of like mind - pay attention to what is REALLY important right now, like getting the economy turned around so people can have jobs, instead of tilting at inconsequential windmills like banning Barbie dolls. Besides, isn't it up to parents whether or not their little girl has a Barbie doll or not? Where do you get the idea that it's your job to remove parental responsibility in the uprearing of their children? Don't you think that's it's the job of parents to ensure that their children grow up with realistic attitudes about themselves, and not to get caught up in the "beauty is everything" trap? Oh, wait - you don't, otherwise you wouldn't have proposed such an idiotic bill.
Way to waste tax payer dollars, you moron.
Barbie could get an unwelcome present for her 50th birthday: outlawed in West Virginia.
A state lawmaker proposed a bill Tuesday to ban sales of the iconic Mattel doll and others like her.
The Barbie Ban Bill, proposed by Democratic Delegate Jeff Eldridge (D) Lincoln County, says such toys influence girls to place too much importance on physical beauty, at the expense of their intellectual and emotional development.
With the economy in the tank, and getting worse, thanks mainly to others in this guy's party, he thinks that now is the time to try to push something this stupid through his state legislature? There must not be a whole lot going on in West Virginia if this guy can waste the time, and tax payer dollars, on something even he admits has a slim chance of passing.
I have some advice for you, Jeff, and for others of like mind - pay attention to what is REALLY important right now, like getting the economy turned around so people can have jobs, instead of tilting at inconsequential windmills like banning Barbie dolls. Besides, isn't it up to parents whether or not their little girl has a Barbie doll or not? Where do you get the idea that it's your job to remove parental responsibility in the uprearing of their children? Don't you think that's it's the job of parents to ensure that their children grow up with realistic attitudes about themselves, and not to get caught up in the "beauty is everything" trap? Oh, wait - you don't, otherwise you wouldn't have proposed such an idiotic bill.
Way to waste tax payer dollars, you moron.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Hearst Threat to Close Chronicle Underscores ‘Terrible’ Climate
As reported here, Hearst Co.’s plan to close or sell its San Francisco Chronicle newspaper unless it can cut more jobs signals that the industry’s advertising sales may be headed to new lows.
The publisher, already trying to sell its Seattle Post-Intelligencer, yesterday said it would seek voluntary buyouts for a “significant” number of its 1,500 employees after it lost $50 million last year. The announcement follows two newspaper owners filing for bankruptcy protection since Feb. 21.
The rest of the article goes on to list other papers that are also in financial trouble, citing that the main reason for that is the decline in print advertising revenue, but they don't go into the reason why the print ad revenue is declining. Well, let me tell you why. It's quite simple, really.
With only a few exceptions (the SF Examiner being one mentioned in the article), all print media charge money for their product. Several years ago, I paid for my news in print format every day on my way to work. Then two things kind of jumped up and slapped me upside the head. The first was that it was costing me money! I mean, actual, real coin to get this product. OK, at the time, it was only $2.50 a week, but still, that was actual money out of my pocket that could be better spent elsewhere. The other realization was, I had to do something with the left over product once I was finished with it. I don't own any birds, so I couldn't line the bottom of cages with it, nor am I a fishmonger, so I couldn't use it to wrap my wares with it, so ... what to do with it? I'm kidding, of course. I recycled it, as should have been done. So, people all over came to the same realization - why pay for this, when the money spent on this could be spent on something more important, like an extra latte a week, or something else equally critical to ones happiness and well being. And that's not all - most print media also have web sites (loaded with ads galore!) that replicate on line what they publish on paper, and other than the ISP access charges that people pay to gain access to the internet, most news on the web is free. Why pay for something you can get for free, and that you don't have to dispose of later (and have to pay for)? The MSM have basically cut their own throats with just this first example.
The next thing is the rise of what the MSM refers to as "alternative media", aka blogs, and "citizen journalism". Of course, the elites in the MSM look down their noses at "citizen journalists", aka bloggers, since those people didn't go to journalism school like they did, so how could they possibly be taken seriously? Which leads me to my next point.
Most (but certainly not all of course - there are wacko's out there of every stripe who just want somewhere to push their latest conspiracy theory or ideology) bloggers do their very best to post well researched articles and tell the truth, unlike the vast majority of "journalists" in the MSM. Most bloggers know that if they don't "get it right", their failing will be pointed out to them quite quickly, and usually in unflattering terms, and so are held accountable for what they post. However, most "journalists" in the MSM have no real checks to what they write, and as a result have, by and large, become too lazy to do even the most simple of on line searches to verify what they are going to publish (ever heard of Google you guys?).
The last thing is that in most cases, those who write for the print media have taken to inserting "editorial opinion" in their articles, rather than simply reporting events as they happen, spinning the event they are covering to fit their own biases. Whether you are a liberal or a conservative, most people reject whatever bias you inject into your articles, tiring of the whole "spin machine" climate that this type of editorializing has engendered.
So, to recap -
Why pay for something you can get for free on line?
Why wade through non-truths and sloppy, lazy writing when you can get the truth from blogs?
Why put up with someone's opinion when you are seeking information?
Unless and until the elites in the MSM face up to these three main factors, their industry will continue to decline until they become the next historical footnote in a long line of past failures.
H/T Ace
The publisher, already trying to sell its Seattle Post-Intelligencer, yesterday said it would seek voluntary buyouts for a “significant” number of its 1,500 employees after it lost $50 million last year. The announcement follows two newspaper owners filing for bankruptcy protection since Feb. 21.
The rest of the article goes on to list other papers that are also in financial trouble, citing that the main reason for that is the decline in print advertising revenue, but they don't go into the reason why the print ad revenue is declining. Well, let me tell you why. It's quite simple, really.
With only a few exceptions (the SF Examiner being one mentioned in the article), all print media charge money for their product. Several years ago, I paid for my news in print format every day on my way to work. Then two things kind of jumped up and slapped me upside the head. The first was that it was costing me money! I mean, actual, real coin to get this product. OK, at the time, it was only $2.50 a week, but still, that was actual money out of my pocket that could be better spent elsewhere. The other realization was, I had to do something with the left over product once I was finished with it. I don't own any birds, so I couldn't line the bottom of cages with it, nor am I a fishmonger, so I couldn't use it to wrap my wares with it, so ... what to do with it? I'm kidding, of course. I recycled it, as should have been done. So, people all over came to the same realization - why pay for this, when the money spent on this could be spent on something more important, like an extra latte a week, or something else equally critical to ones happiness and well being. And that's not all - most print media also have web sites (loaded with ads galore!) that replicate on line what they publish on paper, and other than the ISP access charges that people pay to gain access to the internet, most news on the web is free. Why pay for something you can get for free, and that you don't have to dispose of later (and have to pay for)? The MSM have basically cut their own throats with just this first example.
The next thing is the rise of what the MSM refers to as "alternative media", aka blogs, and "citizen journalism". Of course, the elites in the MSM look down their noses at "citizen journalists", aka bloggers, since those people didn't go to journalism school like they did, so how could they possibly be taken seriously? Which leads me to my next point.
Most (but certainly not all of course - there are wacko's out there of every stripe who just want somewhere to push their latest conspiracy theory or ideology) bloggers do their very best to post well researched articles and tell the truth, unlike the vast majority of "journalists" in the MSM. Most bloggers know that if they don't "get it right", their failing will be pointed out to them quite quickly, and usually in unflattering terms, and so are held accountable for what they post. However, most "journalists" in the MSM have no real checks to what they write, and as a result have, by and large, become too lazy to do even the most simple of on line searches to verify what they are going to publish (ever heard of Google you guys?).
The last thing is that in most cases, those who write for the print media have taken to inserting "editorial opinion" in their articles, rather than simply reporting events as they happen, spinning the event they are covering to fit their own biases. Whether you are a liberal or a conservative, most people reject whatever bias you inject into your articles, tiring of the whole "spin machine" climate that this type of editorializing has engendered.
So, to recap -
Why pay for something you can get for free on line?
Why wade through non-truths and sloppy, lazy writing when you can get the truth from blogs?
Why put up with someone's opinion when you are seeking information?
Unless and until the elites in the MSM face up to these three main factors, their industry will continue to decline until they become the next historical footnote in a long line of past failures.
H/T Ace
Personal update
Been a while since I've posted anything here, and for that I guess I should apologize to those of you who do check here now and then on a regular basis, for wasting your time. I plan on rectifying that (see below), and am thankful for your continued "patronage".
All I can say is that for the past several months, I've been putting in some hard hours at work, making it virtually impossible for me to do much more than eat, sleep, get up in the morning and do it all over again.
Well, thanks to the economic crisis enabled by the likes of Mssrs. Frank, Dodd, Schumer, Rangel et al., and their "let it roll for a little while longer" policies towards the various failed and/or failing financial institutions that became so entangled in the sub-prime mortgage mess, I now have plenty of time to get back to posting on a more regular basis, seeing as how I got laid off from my job this past Friday. Oh, and the "porkulus" bill isn't going to get it back for me any time soon, either! So thanks Barney, Chris, Chuck and Charles, et al. You should be proud of yourselves.
All I can say is that for the past several months, I've been putting in some hard hours at work, making it virtually impossible for me to do much more than eat, sleep, get up in the morning and do it all over again.
Well, thanks to the economic crisis enabled by the likes of Mssrs. Frank, Dodd, Schumer, Rangel et al., and their "let it roll for a little while longer" policies towards the various failed and/or failing financial institutions that became so entangled in the sub-prime mortgage mess, I now have plenty of time to get back to posting on a more regular basis, seeing as how I got laid off from my job this past Friday. Oh, and the "porkulus" bill isn't going to get it back for me any time soon, either! So thanks Barney, Chris, Chuck and Charles, et al. You should be proud of yourselves.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Oregon looks at taxing mileage instead of gasoline
Oregon looks at taxing mileage instead of gasoline
As reported here, Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of how much gas they use, even going so far as to install GPS monitoring devices in 300 vehicles. The idea first emerged nearly 10 years ago as Oregon lawmakers worried that fuel-efficient cars such as gas-electric hybrids could pose a threat to road upkeep, which is paid for largely with gasoline taxes.
This is on top of the call for a 50% increase in gasoline and diesel fuel taxes proposed by the National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing, a 15-member panel created by Congress.
The first idea is troubling in thatBig Brother the government has no need to know where we are going, and when we are going there, and if enacted will face legal battles based on invasion of privacy constitutional grounds. It is simply none of their business what we do in our cars, as long as we are abiding by the laws.
The second idea is illogical (which has never stopped a government bureaucracy from doing anything, I know) in that the world is facing a global economic crisis and raising taxes now is beyond idiotic.
Why is this commission calling for a 50% increase in gas taxes? Because of two things - people have been getting out of their cars due to the high price of fuel (which isn't quite the propblem it was), and because of the government mandated CAFE rules which stipulate that cars be more fuel efficient. Both factors have contributed to the decline in tax revenue through less fuel consumed, hence the call for the increase in gas taxes.
But raising the taxes any amount (let alone 50%!) will create a "Catch-22" situation, in that as the price of gasoline jumps, people will be motivated to drive even less, which will only cause a decrease in fuel consumed, resulting in even less revenue generated through taxes.
Note to politicians thinking of pushing either of these two ideas - your terms will come to end at some point in the near future, and I wouldn't pin my hopes on getting re-elected if I were you.
H/T Reality Hammer
As reported here, Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of how much gas they use, even going so far as to install GPS monitoring devices in 300 vehicles. The idea first emerged nearly 10 years ago as Oregon lawmakers worried that fuel-efficient cars such as gas-electric hybrids could pose a threat to road upkeep, which is paid for largely with gasoline taxes.
This is on top of the call for a 50% increase in gasoline and diesel fuel taxes proposed by the National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing, a 15-member panel created by Congress.
The first idea is troubling in that
The second idea is illogical (which has never stopped a government bureaucracy from doing anything, I know) in that the world is facing a global economic crisis and raising taxes now is beyond idiotic.
Why is this commission calling for a 50% increase in gas taxes? Because of two things - people have been getting out of their cars due to the high price of fuel (which isn't quite the propblem it was), and because of the government mandated CAFE rules which stipulate that cars be more fuel efficient. Both factors have contributed to the decline in tax revenue through less fuel consumed, hence the call for the increase in gas taxes.
But raising the taxes any amount (let alone 50%!) will create a "Catch-22" situation, in that as the price of gasoline jumps, people will be motivated to drive even less, which will only cause a decrease in fuel consumed, resulting in even less revenue generated through taxes.
Note to politicians thinking of pushing either of these two ideas - your terms will come to end at some point in the near future, and I wouldn't pin my hopes on getting re-elected if I were you.
H/T Reality Hammer
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Another union sues Gregoire over pay raises
As reported here, Gov. Chris Gregoire is facing another lawsuit from notable political supporters over her decision to skip agreed-to raises and benefits for government workers.
Gregoire, a Democrat, was sued Monday by a local branch of the Service Employees International Union 775, which represents about 25,000 home health care workers in Washington state.
The union objects to Gregoire's recently released budget proposal, which didn't include more than $26.8 million in raises, benefits and training money for workers represented by SEIU 775.
Well, isn't that just special. At a time when the State deficit is in the billions, and the global economy is in shreds, the unions still want theirs. Just like the UAW not being willing to give a little to help their own industry (thereby slitting their own throats, eh?), the SEIU is suing their own candidate to try to force the realization of campaign promises made - promises that were made before the global financial crisis, mind you - even though there is no feasible way the State can actually afford this.
While it appears that Gregoire is biting the hand that fed her, it also appears that the union is cutting off their own nose to spite their face.
This should be a fun one to watch. Stay tuned!
Gregoire, a Democrat, was sued Monday by a local branch of the Service Employees International Union 775, which represents about 25,000 home health care workers in Washington state.
The union objects to Gregoire's recently released budget proposal, which didn't include more than $26.8 million in raises, benefits and training money for workers represented by SEIU 775.
Well, isn't that just special. At a time when the State deficit is in the billions, and the global economy is in shreds, the unions still want theirs. Just like the UAW not being willing to give a little to help their own industry (thereby slitting their own throats, eh?), the SEIU is suing their own candidate to try to force the realization of campaign promises made - promises that were made before the global financial crisis, mind you - even though there is no feasible way the State can actually afford this.
While it appears that Gregoire is biting the hand that fed her, it also appears that the union is cutting off their own nose to spite their face.
This should be a fun one to watch. Stay tuned!
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Merry Christmas everyone!
Christmas Day is once again upon us, and that means for most, gathering together with family and friends to celebrate, exchanging gifts, feasting at the holiday table, and sharing good times.But what is it that causes us to celebrate? I think the following verses from the Book of Luke, chapter 2, verses 1 - 14 pretty much sums it up:
Luke 2
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
Remember, whether you believe or not, Jesus is the reason for the season - Merry Christmas, everyone.
Luke 2
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
Remember, whether you believe or not, Jesus is the reason for the season - Merry Christmas, everyone.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
My, my, my
Looks like Chicago style politics isn't limited to just Chicago.
Ill. governor charged in Obama successor probe.
Ill. governor charged in Obama successor probe.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Never Forget
Today marks the 67th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Empire of Japan, shortly before 8:00 AM on Sunday, December 7th, 1941. The attack, which brought the US into WWII, resulted in 5 of 8 battleships sunk or sinking, with the other three heavily damaged, and a large majority of the other ships in port also heavily damaged or sunk. American deaths that horrible morning were approximately 2,400 - the true number will never be known. The most devastating loss was the USS Arizona, which took a direct bomb hit to one of it's main gun magazines, immediately sinking the Arizona, and taking 1,177 of her crew.
In the mid-1970's, I had the privilege of serving on a ship home ported in Pearl Harbor, and as I spent time there, I would often walk through the base. As I walked, I could plainly see in some of the structures still remaining from that time, bullet strike marks. From time to time, I would walk up to a structure (either part of the piers or a concrete bunker) and run my hands over those bullet marks, and contemplate what that day must have been like, hearing in my mind the roar of plane engines, the rattle of machine guns firing, the dull booming sounds of bombs exploding, the terrified screams of people as they tried to get away from the inferno, and the determined oaths of those who fought back. As I contemplated all this, I was saddened by the loss of life, angered by the fact that we could be so surprised, and proud that my country had responded as it did, eventually prevailing over the evil of fascism.
Every December 7th at Pearl Harbor, various ceremonies are conducted in remembrance of the attack, including the laying of a wreath from the USS Arizona Memorial, and the lowering of all flags on the base to half-staff. The last December 7th that my ship was in port while I served aboard her (1975), we were tied up in full view of the USS Arizona Memorial. On that particular day, my entire ship's complement was mustered on the main deck in our dress whites, and as the clock struck 0755, over the loudspeaker came the shrill whistle of the bosun's pipe, followed by the order to stand at attention and render honors (salute) as we faced the Memorial. As we stood there at attention, holding our salute, and we watched as the colors were lowered to half-staff on the Memorial, chills ran up and down my spine (and I'm sure not a few other spines as well). Soon enough (all too soon to me now), the bosun's pipe sounded once again, we ended our salute, and headed below to change into our dungaree's to begin our normal daily routine.
Later that day, I again had the opportunity to run my hands over some remaining bullet strike marks, and as I did, I again looked over to the Memorial. As I gazed over there, my heart swelled with pride, and surprising myself by my own actions, I drew myself to attention once again, and saluted. Unknown to me, a full Captain (Colonel in the other services) was walking past as I was saluting, and cleared his throat to get my attention. As I turned to face him, he saluted me, and said something that I will always remember.
He said, "Never forget!", dropped his salute and walked on his way. As he walked away, I responded, "I won't, Sir!".
I have kept that promise.
In the mid-1970's, I had the privilege of serving on a ship home ported in Pearl Harbor, and as I spent time there, I would often walk through the base. As I walked, I could plainly see in some of the structures still remaining from that time, bullet strike marks. From time to time, I would walk up to a structure (either part of the piers or a concrete bunker) and run my hands over those bullet marks, and contemplate what that day must have been like, hearing in my mind the roar of plane engines, the rattle of machine guns firing, the dull booming sounds of bombs exploding, the terrified screams of people as they tried to get away from the inferno, and the determined oaths of those who fought back. As I contemplated all this, I was saddened by the loss of life, angered by the fact that we could be so surprised, and proud that my country had responded as it did, eventually prevailing over the evil of fascism.
Every December 7th at Pearl Harbor, various ceremonies are conducted in remembrance of the attack, including the laying of a wreath from the USS Arizona Memorial, and the lowering of all flags on the base to half-staff. The last December 7th that my ship was in port while I served aboard her (1975), we were tied up in full view of the USS Arizona Memorial. On that particular day, my entire ship's complement was mustered on the main deck in our dress whites, and as the clock struck 0755, over the loudspeaker came the shrill whistle of the bosun's pipe, followed by the order to stand at attention and render honors (salute) as we faced the Memorial. As we stood there at attention, holding our salute, and we watched as the colors were lowered to half-staff on the Memorial, chills ran up and down my spine (and I'm sure not a few other spines as well). Soon enough (all too soon to me now), the bosun's pipe sounded once again, we ended our salute, and headed below to change into our dungaree's to begin our normal daily routine.
Later that day, I again had the opportunity to run my hands over some remaining bullet strike marks, and as I did, I again looked over to the Memorial. As I gazed over there, my heart swelled with pride, and surprising myself by my own actions, I drew myself to attention once again, and saluted. Unknown to me, a full Captain (Colonel in the other services) was walking past as I was saluting, and cleared his throat to get my attention. As I turned to face him, he saluted me, and said something that I will always remember.
He said, "Never forget!", dropped his salute and walked on his way. As he walked away, I responded, "I won't, Sir!".
I have kept that promise.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Veteran's Day
Today, November 11th, 2008 is Veteran's Day. This day is set aside to honor those who have served this Nation in both war and in peace.
If you know someone who was in the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy or Coast Guard, tell them "Thank you!". They deserve it, for they have given up the soft life of a civilian to endure the rigors of military life to stand watch over all of us, to protect us from those who would do us harm, guarding our liberty and the freedoms we all enjoy.
To those veteran's who may see this post, I say Thank You!
If you know someone who was in the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy or Coast Guard, tell them "Thank you!". They deserve it, for they have given up the soft life of a civilian to endure the rigors of military life to stand watch over all of us, to protect us from those who would do us harm, guarding our liberty and the freedoms we all enjoy.
To those veteran's who may see this post, I say Thank You!
Parallels
With the election of Sen. Barack Obama to the Presidency, I want to draw your attention to some parallels that I see between this election, and one that took place 32 years ago.
First, a brief history lesson -
1973 - VP Spiro Agnew resigns, Rep. Gerald R. Ford appointed as VP.
1974 - Nixon resigns over Watergate scandal (the beginning of "gotcha! journalism"), VP Ford sworn in as President; Democrats vote to de-fund military aid to South Viet Nam.
1975 - Saigon falls to North Viet Nam in April.
1976 - a virtual "unknown" peanut farmer turned Governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, wins Democrat nomination promising "change" and "hope", runs against Ford, and wins; next four years sees change - major economic chaos (20+% prime interest rates, double digit unemployment), and an international crisis involving Iran, as they occupy the US Embassy in Teheran, and hold US hostages captive for 444 days. Nation gripped by ennui and angst, believing what Carter has said - that the good old days are gone forever, and everyone must learn to get along with less of everything, and loses "hope".
Fast forward to recent history, up to the present -
2000 - Governor of Texas George W. Bush is elected President, defeating VP Al Gore; Democrats claim he stole the election due to US Supreme Court intervening in Florida vote debacle (which claim was disproved by studies conducted by the liberal media showing Bush won Florida); beginning of "Bush Derangement Syndrome".
2001 - Worst terrorist attack in US history occurs on September 11; Nation comes together in support of GWB - briefly; Dems talk the talk, but don't walk the walk due to "BDS"; US invades Afghanistan, ousts Taliban and helps set up democratic government, which Dems "support".
2003 - US invades Iraq; Bush declares reason for invasion is WMD, although there were other reasons stated as well; liberal media fixates on WMD, and when "none" is found, begins assault on Bush; Democrats first vote in support of war in Iraq, and then attempt to undermine policies of Bush/Cheney, due to "BDS".
2004 - Bush wins second term as President over Sen. John Kerry; liberal media continues with false "Bush lied, people died" meme; Democrats continue efforts at undermining Bush/Cheney domestic and foreign policies; "BDS" reaches epidemic proportions.
2005 - War in Iraq starting to not go so well, due to inadequate planning on the part of Rumsfeld and General Staff; Democrats proclaim war is "quagmire" and "lost", therefore US should abandon Iraq (just like Viet Nam).
2006 - War in Iraq getting worse; Democrats call for abandoning Iraq getting louder; Bush calls for new strategy; liberal media discounts talks of new strategy; virtual "unknown" Senator Barack Obama from Illinois declares for Presidency.
2007 - Due to new strategy - surge in troop levels, and different tactics - war in Iraq begins to dramatically turn around; Democrats still claim war is "lost" (Reid), a "quagmire" (Kennedy), and continue to call for abandoning Iraq (most of the rest of them); liberal media complicit with Democrats in description of how the war is going, continuing their drumbeat of negativity, refusing to report on gains; Obama defeats Hillary Clinton for Democrat nomination, promises to bring "change" and "hope"; Senator John McCain wins Republican nomination; liberal media in tank for Obama, and refuses to even consider looking into negatives about Obama, while conducting a despicable "witch hunt" on McCain's running mate, Governor Sarah Palin.
2008 - Surge in Iraq successful, and more and more areas of Iraq are turned over to complete Iraqi control; Obama defeats McCain, and wins US Presidency; liberal media complicit in getting Obama elected.
Parallels
Carter comes on the scene at the end of an unpopular war (Viet Nam), and takes advantage of electorate disgust with Republicans.
Obama comes on the scene towards the end of another unpopular war (Iraq), and with liberal media complicity, takes advantage of electorate disgust with Republicans
Both proclaim they are the one to bring about "change" and "hope".
Carter brings "change" in the form of economic chaos, and causes America to lose "hope" in his inept handling of the international crisis in Iran, allowing American citizens to be held hostage for 444 days.
After four years of "change" and "hope" under Carter, the US electorate wakes up, and elects Republican Ronald Reagan to the US Presidency. Real change happens almost immediately, as Iran releases the US hostages, and the economy begins to rebound and then boom again, bringing real hope to Americans.
Obama brings about "change" in the form of economic chaos even before he became a state Senator through his representing ACORN in their lawsuit to force banks to loan money to people they knew would never be able to pay the loans back, and then backs the risky economic policies of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac after he becomes a US Senator, enabling (with Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd) the sub-prime mortgage crisis, causing many Americans to lose "hope" of keeping their homes.
What will the next four years under Obama bring America? Probably an abandonment of Iraq before they are ready for us to leave, and possibly an international crisis involving Iran. Definitely higher taxes, which will only exacerbate the economic crisis we are in right now. As he has stated, Obama wants to implement various new government programs which will mandate acceptance and forced compliance by the American people. These programs will take away freedom of choice in many areas, diminishing hope for many Americans. Will the liberal media continue to be complicit, or will they wake up and begin to finally ask the hard questions they should have been asking all along?
After four years of Obama, will the American electorate wake up and take back our government, and elect a Republican who will bring real change and hope to America? Only time will tell what will happen, but my hope is that Obama doesn't do permanent damage to America, and that the American electorate will wake up, and elect someone to change the direction Obama wants to take America.
Will the Republicans be able to stop any of Obama's socialistic plans, or will they continue to fold? Will the Republicans present a candidate to run against Obama that will invigorate the American electorate as Reagan did? I believe that the answer to these last two questions is yes. Yes, the Republicans will be able to stop most, if not all, of the more obvious socialistic programs Obama wants to institute, and yes, the Republicans will present a candidate in 2012 who will invigorate not only Republicans, but Independents and even Democrats, someone who will be a truely charismatic leader, who isn't afraid to stand up to Obama and speak the truth, and who will not be afraid of the liberal media.
Last but not least, who will this person be? Will it be Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin? Will it be Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal? Or will it be a relative unknown, someone new to the national stage? Only time will give us the answer to that, but don't lose hope, for change - real, positive change - is coming.
First, a brief history lesson -
1973 - VP Spiro Agnew resigns, Rep. Gerald R. Ford appointed as VP.
1974 - Nixon resigns over Watergate scandal (the beginning of "gotcha! journalism"), VP Ford sworn in as President; Democrats vote to de-fund military aid to South Viet Nam.
1975 - Saigon falls to North Viet Nam in April.
1976 - a virtual "unknown" peanut farmer turned Governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, wins Democrat nomination promising "change" and "hope", runs against Ford, and wins; next four years sees change - major economic chaos (20+% prime interest rates, double digit unemployment), and an international crisis involving Iran, as they occupy the US Embassy in Teheran, and hold US hostages captive for 444 days. Nation gripped by ennui and angst, believing what Carter has said - that the good old days are gone forever, and everyone must learn to get along with less of everything, and loses "hope".
Fast forward to recent history, up to the present -
2000 - Governor of Texas George W. Bush is elected President, defeating VP Al Gore; Democrats claim he stole the election due to US Supreme Court intervening in Florida vote debacle (which claim was disproved by studies conducted by the liberal media showing Bush won Florida); beginning of "Bush Derangement Syndrome".
2001 - Worst terrorist attack in US history occurs on September 11; Nation comes together in support of GWB - briefly; Dems talk the talk, but don't walk the walk due to "BDS"; US invades Afghanistan, ousts Taliban and helps set up democratic government, which Dems "support".
2003 - US invades Iraq; Bush declares reason for invasion is WMD, although there were other reasons stated as well; liberal media fixates on WMD, and when "none" is found, begins assault on Bush; Democrats first vote in support of war in Iraq, and then attempt to undermine policies of Bush/Cheney, due to "BDS".
2004 - Bush wins second term as President over Sen. John Kerry; liberal media continues with false "Bush lied, people died" meme; Democrats continue efforts at undermining Bush/Cheney domestic and foreign policies; "BDS" reaches epidemic proportions.
2005 - War in Iraq starting to not go so well, due to inadequate planning on the part of Rumsfeld and General Staff; Democrats proclaim war is "quagmire" and "lost", therefore US should abandon Iraq (just like Viet Nam).
2006 - War in Iraq getting worse; Democrats call for abandoning Iraq getting louder; Bush calls for new strategy; liberal media discounts talks of new strategy; virtual "unknown" Senator Barack Obama from Illinois declares for Presidency.
2007 - Due to new strategy - surge in troop levels, and different tactics - war in Iraq begins to dramatically turn around; Democrats still claim war is "lost" (Reid), a "quagmire" (Kennedy), and continue to call for abandoning Iraq (most of the rest of them); liberal media complicit with Democrats in description of how the war is going, continuing their drumbeat of negativity, refusing to report on gains; Obama defeats Hillary Clinton for Democrat nomination, promises to bring "change" and "hope"; Senator John McCain wins Republican nomination; liberal media in tank for Obama, and refuses to even consider looking into negatives about Obama, while conducting a despicable "witch hunt" on McCain's running mate, Governor Sarah Palin.
2008 - Surge in Iraq successful, and more and more areas of Iraq are turned over to complete Iraqi control; Obama defeats McCain, and wins US Presidency; liberal media complicit in getting Obama elected.
Parallels
Carter comes on the scene at the end of an unpopular war (Viet Nam), and takes advantage of electorate disgust with Republicans.
Obama comes on the scene towards the end of another unpopular war (Iraq), and with liberal media complicity, takes advantage of electorate disgust with Republicans
Both proclaim they are the one to bring about "change" and "hope".
Carter brings "change" in the form of economic chaos, and causes America to lose "hope" in his inept handling of the international crisis in Iran, allowing American citizens to be held hostage for 444 days.
After four years of "change" and "hope" under Carter, the US electorate wakes up, and elects Republican Ronald Reagan to the US Presidency. Real change happens almost immediately, as Iran releases the US hostages, and the economy begins to rebound and then boom again, bringing real hope to Americans.
Obama brings about "change" in the form of economic chaos even before he became a state Senator through his representing ACORN in their lawsuit to force banks to loan money to people they knew would never be able to pay the loans back, and then backs the risky economic policies of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac after he becomes a US Senator, enabling (with Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd) the sub-prime mortgage crisis, causing many Americans to lose "hope" of keeping their homes.
What will the next four years under Obama bring America? Probably an abandonment of Iraq before they are ready for us to leave, and possibly an international crisis involving Iran. Definitely higher taxes, which will only exacerbate the economic crisis we are in right now. As he has stated, Obama wants to implement various new government programs which will mandate acceptance and forced compliance by the American people. These programs will take away freedom of choice in many areas, diminishing hope for many Americans. Will the liberal media continue to be complicit, or will they wake up and begin to finally ask the hard questions they should have been asking all along?
After four years of Obama, will the American electorate wake up and take back our government, and elect a Republican who will bring real change and hope to America? Only time will tell what will happen, but my hope is that Obama doesn't do permanent damage to America, and that the American electorate will wake up, and elect someone to change the direction Obama wants to take America.
Will the Republicans be able to stop any of Obama's socialistic plans, or will they continue to fold? Will the Republicans present a candidate to run against Obama that will invigorate the American electorate as Reagan did? I believe that the answer to these last two questions is yes. Yes, the Republicans will be able to stop most, if not all, of the more obvious socialistic programs Obama wants to institute, and yes, the Republicans will present a candidate in 2012 who will invigorate not only Republicans, but Independents and even Democrats, someone who will be a truely charismatic leader, who isn't afraid to stand up to Obama and speak the truth, and who will not be afraid of the liberal media.
Last but not least, who will this person be? Will it be Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin? Will it be Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal? Or will it be a relative unknown, someone new to the national stage? Only time will give us the answer to that, but don't lose hope, for change - real, positive change - is coming.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Happy 233rd Birthday USMC
From a Vietnam Era vet of the US Navy, Happy 233rd Birthday to the United States Marine Corps!
Here's an amusing, but affectionate (affectionate? you bet!) write up on our beloved Corps. Enjoy!
Here's an amusing, but affectionate (affectionate? you bet!) write up on our beloved Corps. Enjoy!
Monday, November 03, 2008
Remember to vote
Tomorrow is November 4th, the day We the People of the United States of America have the opportunity to choose the leaders of our nation. This right to vote should not be squandered by anyone who is legally eligible to vote. Whether you think your candidate is going to win, or whether you think your candidate is going to lose, your vote still matters.
I had originally intended this post to be a rant against the Obama/Biden ticket, as I fully support the McCain/Palin ticket in the race for President and Vice President, but as I sat down to begin composing this post, I realized that those of you who are set to vote for the Obama/Biden ticket were not going to be dissuaded from that objective, no matter what I had to say. I also realized that those of us who are going to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket don't need any persuading to do that.
So I changed my mind.
Instead, what I want to say to everyone who reads this is, vote for whomever you want to - that's your right under the Constitution - but when you vote, vote your conscience. Don't vote for one ticket or the other simply because it's the "thing to do". Think about what you are doing, and before you pull that lever and slip your vote into the ballot box, ask yourself one thing - am I really voting for the right ticket? - and let your conscience be your guide.
Remember to vote tomorrow.
I had originally intended this post to be a rant against the Obama/Biden ticket, as I fully support the McCain/Palin ticket in the race for President and Vice President, but as I sat down to begin composing this post, I realized that those of you who are set to vote for the Obama/Biden ticket were not going to be dissuaded from that objective, no matter what I had to say. I also realized that those of us who are going to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket don't need any persuading to do that.
So I changed my mind.
Instead, what I want to say to everyone who reads this is, vote for whomever you want to - that's your right under the Constitution - but when you vote, vote your conscience. Don't vote for one ticket or the other simply because it's the "thing to do". Think about what you are doing, and before you pull that lever and slip your vote into the ballot box, ask yourself one thing - am I really voting for the right ticket? - and let your conscience be your guide.
Remember to vote tomorrow.
Sunday, November 02, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
House GOP leader asks Bush to cut off ACORN funds
As reported here, House Republican leader John Boehner on Wednesday urged President Bush to block all federal funds to a grass-roots community group that has been accused of voter registration fraud.
"It is evident that ACORN is incapable of using federal funds in a manner that is consistent with the law," Boehner, R-Ohio, wrote Bush, saying that funds should be blocked until all federal investigations into the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now are completed.
ACORN, a group that has led liberal causes since it was formed in 1970, this year hired more than 13,000 part-time workers to sign up voters in minority and poor neighborhoods in 21 states. Some of the 1.3 million registration cards submitted to local election officials, using the names of cartoon characters or pro football players, were obviously phony, spurring GOP charges of widespread misconduct.
For more on the voter fraud antics of ACORN go here. (Oh, yeah - here, too!)
I was beginning to wonder if this was ever going to happen!
"It is evident that ACORN is incapable of using federal funds in a manner that is consistent with the law," Boehner, R-Ohio, wrote Bush, saying that funds should be blocked until all federal investigations into the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now are completed.
ACORN, a group that has led liberal causes since it was formed in 1970, this year hired more than 13,000 part-time workers to sign up voters in minority and poor neighborhoods in 21 states. Some of the 1.3 million registration cards submitted to local election officials, using the names of cartoon characters or pro football players, were obviously phony, spurring GOP charges of widespread misconduct.
For more on the voter fraud antics of ACORN go here. (Oh, yeah - here, too!)
I was beginning to wonder if this was ever going to happen!
Monday, October 20, 2008
I used to like you, but not any more
I've seen through the veil you hide behind, and what I see is not a pretty sight. I used to like you, but not any more. I used to respect you, but not any more. Because of your prior association with one of the greatest President's this country has ever seen, you used to have "cred" with me, you words carried weight, and I looked forward to reading your thoughts. But not any more. I've seen behind the veil.
This latest example is the straw that broke the camels proverbial back, Peggy. Yes, you, Peggy Noonan, I'm talking about you, to you.
The title of your elitist screed is, "Palin's Failin'", with the subtitle stating, "What is it she stands for? After seven weeks, we don't know." You're wrong, Peggy, when you use the word "we", for we DO know what she stands for. It is, however, quite apparent that you don't. Oh, and if you're going to write something about someone - anyone - you might want to mention that persons name sooner than the FIFTH paragraph, even if that mention is to mention that the Dems consider her a dope, and unqualified. It seems that you hold the same opinion as well, by what you wrote further in your elitist screed. Some choice nuggets -
"But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for?"
Oh, she has the tools, alright, but you're so far removed from the true halls of power - the People - Peggy, that you wouldn't recognize someone having the tools even if they thunked you up side the head with a hammer. Her aspirations, Peggy? She's made that perfectly clear - to serve the People of the United States of America. Apparently that concept has become foreign to you, now that you're a part of the "power elite".
"For seven weeks I've listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite ..."
You, who once walked the same halls as Ronald Reagan, can't figure that out? How far you have fallen, Peggy, how far you have fallen.
"Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery ..."
BINGO! You're proving us right, Peggy.
"In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn't, really, understand."
I believe she understands us very well, Peggy. However, I also believe that you are the one who doesn't understand us - at all, if you ever really did.
"This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine."
There you go again - to quote my favorite President. Saying that someone who is a bona fide card carrying member of the base cannot imagine the pain we've felt over the past several years is simply ludicrous, because she's felt it too.
Last but not least, Peggy, trying to keep us from criticizing you for your elitist screed by holding up Christopher Buckley as a paragon of martyrdom, sacrificed on the altar of "Thou shalt not criticize!", is a straw man at best. The real reason he was allowed to resign from the organ his father established? Because he endorsed Barack Obama.
H/T for the link goes to specialrpt, posting in quicknews.
This latest example is the straw that broke the camels proverbial back, Peggy. Yes, you, Peggy Noonan, I'm talking about you, to you.
The title of your elitist screed is, "Palin's Failin'", with the subtitle stating, "What is it she stands for? After seven weeks, we don't know." You're wrong, Peggy, when you use the word "we", for we DO know what she stands for. It is, however, quite apparent that you don't. Oh, and if you're going to write something about someone - anyone - you might want to mention that persons name sooner than the FIFTH paragraph, even if that mention is to mention that the Dems consider her a dope, and unqualified. It seems that you hold the same opinion as well, by what you wrote further in your elitist screed. Some choice nuggets -
"But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for?"
Oh, she has the tools, alright, but you're so far removed from the true halls of power - the People - Peggy, that you wouldn't recognize someone having the tools even if they thunked you up side the head with a hammer. Her aspirations, Peggy? She's made that perfectly clear - to serve the People of the United States of America. Apparently that concept has become foreign to you, now that you're a part of the "power elite".
"For seven weeks I've listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite ..."
You, who once walked the same halls as Ronald Reagan, can't figure that out? How far you have fallen, Peggy, how far you have fallen.
"Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery ..."
BINGO! You're proving us right, Peggy.
"In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn't, really, understand."
I believe she understands us very well, Peggy. However, I also believe that you are the one who doesn't understand us - at all, if you ever really did.
"This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine."
There you go again - to quote my favorite President. Saying that someone who is a bona fide card carrying member of the base cannot imagine the pain we've felt over the past several years is simply ludicrous, because she's felt it too.
Last but not least, Peggy, trying to keep us from criticizing you for your elitist screed by holding up Christopher Buckley as a paragon of martyrdom, sacrificed on the altar of "Thou shalt not criticize!", is a straw man at best. The real reason he was allowed to resign from the organ his father established? Because he endorsed Barack Obama.
H/T for the link goes to specialrpt, posting in quicknews.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
PUMA's* and Conservatives have something in common
That would be a loathing of Obama.
Emperor Mischa and Ace both extend a hand to PUMA's, asking if there is any way we can work together to defeat Obama. I, for one, agree with both of them.
Speaking of PUMA's, this is very interesting (pretty long, too, but read it anyway).
* PUMA = Party Unity My Ass - disaffected Hillary supporters who, for the most part, are going to vote against Obama.
Emperor Mischa and Ace both extend a hand to PUMA's, asking if there is any way we can work together to defeat Obama. I, for one, agree with both of them.
Speaking of PUMA's, this is very interesting (pretty long, too, but read it anyway).
* PUMA = Party Unity My Ass - disaffected Hillary supporters who, for the most part, are going to vote against Obama.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)