Sunday, December 14, 2014

Hollywood hypocrisy is not news, folks

As I was browsing through my favorite blogs, I stumbled across a link on "Geez"s blog written by Juan Williams ( THIS) pertaining to the Hollywood unflattering emails that were hacked and published recently. 

The main beef I have with Juan, who is a relatively reasonable guy most of the time (for a liberal), is that on several occasions within his article, he clearly stated that conservatives were justified in feeling a sense of Schadenfreude - the joy felt in watching the misfortunes of others - at the blatant hypocrisy of these Hollywood moguls.

Nothing could be farther from the truth: no conservative worth his or her salt could possibly have this kind of reaction to these recent revelations on the thought processes present in the Hollywood elite.

The fact is that we all know this is how these guys think.  It's nothing new, it's 'dog bites man,' and not the other way around. Why on earth would anyone get a feeling of joy at these Hollywood liberals squirming in their moment of lucidity?

I think Juan Williams' point is that since their raging hypocrisy is now on display, there will be accountability on their part to change, to atone for their sins, to become better people.  Accordingly, the conservative cause will have gained merit, and the liberals will have lost some mojo because of this kerfuffle.  

HA.  Fat chance.  None of that will happen.  These liberal moguls will continue to fund liberal causes, produce liberal movies and do liberal things just like nothing happened.  No accountability will reduce any of their activities, no face will have been lost for the liberal philosophy, life will go on exactly as it has before.

Why would conservatives be joyful over essentially nothing?  Nobody is taking this little episode to heart, and changing things in their lives: there is absolutely no chance that some of the clueless out there are suddenly going to read the National Enquirer and declare: "did you read this about those Hollywood hypocrites, Marge?  By golly, they are rotten to the bone saying those things, I think I will stop believing them and their liberal views.  I am never voting for another liberal ever again, and I am now going to vote conservative, Marge.  C'mon, Marge, let's go register as Republicans...."

Like that's going to happen? In a pig's eye.   Juan couldn't be more wrong about this Schadenfreude on behalf of conservatives.  


Sunday, December 7, 2014

U.S. justice system is frayed and tattered

You can't turn on the TV anymore without seeing mobs of angry protesters throwing bricks through Starbucks and 7/11 convenience store windows.

It's not that these angry mobs are irritated that Starbucks charges $5 for a cup of coffee, or that 7/11 charges $4 for a dozen eggs.  

These mobs are lashing out at a system that is fraying and tattered: it takes months and sometimes years to have a legitimate court case adjudicated.  Policemen are getting ruder and more volatile in virtually everything they get involved in.  Simply watch the video of 5 police goons tackling, subduing and arresting Eric Garner for the heinous crime of selling individual cigarettes - a legal product in the land of the free and home of the brave.  5 police officers, count 'em.

And the mobs don't like that image, not that these angry mobs are the epitome of virtue, goodness and righteousness themselves.

Hardly.  

In my opinion (of which I have many and of which are all rock solid and correct, just ask me, and I will tell you so), it is not hard to put the finger on what the root cause of all of this indignation: the justice system is swamped with activity.  It is overwhelmed with people wanting perfect justice.  And most of the people who make up these angry mobs are not removed from the root cause, either. 

When an angry woman calls 911 when a Port St. Lucy, Florida McDonalds Restaurant runs out of Chicken McNuggets, the system begins to fail.  When a McDonald's restaurant serves a woman scalding hot coffee and she spills it in her lap, sues and winds up with a jury verdict awarding her millions of dollars, the beginning of the end is upon us.  

We as a nation are guilty of demanding a Supreme Court decision on every little dispute, and we all want our neighbors clapped in irons, frog marched over to a police cruiser and taken downtown, and ultimately thrown into a federal prison because their neighbor committed the gross injustice of owning a dog that dug up their begonias. 

This is where we begin to see things run amok.  We sue everybody for every little thing.  Lawyers are everywhere, suing the pants off of everybody for the smallest of grievances. There is no end to the complaints that we process against our neighbors.

This is just one of the ways in which we swamp our system of justice.  And the other has become quite obvious as well: our police force is simply understaffed and under qualified to deal with what our society now expects out of them.

We are an educated society, so much so that we demand that our public schools hire only 4 year college graduates to teach our kindergarten students to finger paint.  You think I am exaggerating, think again.  Nowhere in the land of the free and the home of the brave, not one U.S. state will allow anyone without a bonafide four year college degree from an accredited four year college in front of a group of public school kindergarten kids to lead a class in finger painting.  Not one.  Anywhere.  

AND YET:  we issue hand guns, shot guns, assault rifles, tasers, billy clubs, and an assortment of deadly weapons to virtual kids with only a high school diploma, pin a badge on their lapel and call them a policeman.  Sometimes these high school graduates might have some college (aka college drop outs), and in a tiny, minuscule number of instances, some police have college degrees.

Armed with a high school diploma and an assault rifle, along with a billy club, we send these guys out on calls from the public to resolve an untold myriad of complaints.  It is not possibly reasonable to expect these kids to be all of the following: psychologist, marital counselor, hostage negotiator, soldier, business arbitrator, and even at times judge, jury and executioner when a fatality occurs with their involvement in the use of deadly force. 

The solutions to our fraying and sputtering justice system are simple, but elusive:  we need to change the justice system in two major areas: 1) loser pays court costs always, and 2) all police agents who are given authority to use lethal force have college degrees.

1)  Tort Reform.  When frivolous lawsuits are brought before judges, it bogs down the system with back logs stretching out for years.  If every little beef is processed through the system without cost to the plaintiff, there is no restraint to the number of beefs admitted onto the dockets and we get what we have now: chaos in the justice system.  Once a plaintiff understands that if they lose, they are hammered with the court costs involved,  which are substantial, only the most egregious of beefs will be prosecuted.  Problem solved.

2)  Upgrade police force requirements.  When high school kids, many of them college drop outs, are sent on calls to potentially arrest a perp, we see what we get (Eric Garner case): bad judgement.  The guy should have been issued a ticket at most.  Maybe not even that.  Terrible judgement by a gang of Wyatt Earp wannabes.  I do not have the information on all of these 5 arresting cops in the Eric Garner case, but I would wager an enormous amount of money that not one of them had a college degree.  Not one, and their judgement clearly shows this. Yes, they were trained on subduing a perp.  But they were clearly NOT trained as to when and under what circumstances to use this authorized force. 

Obtaining a college degree is not the end-all and be-all in obtaining a semblance of judgement, but it certainly goes far.  It takes the following to complete a four year degree at an accredited four year college: 


  • Resources, either from a stable family or a municipal entity which sponsors your candidacy.  These resources are only available from stable factors that invoke that same stability in their candidates.  
  • Respect for authority, and this is a critical factor in the composition of the character of the candidate, for if there is no respect for their professors, administrators or institutions of higher learning, they will have little or no respect for their ultimate charges (the general public) once they are conferred with any power over another.
  • Work ethic, something that many non-graduates do not have. You have to show up for classes, whether you feel like it or not.  You have to study for your tests and do your homework, regardless of what parties and ski trips you will be missing. You have to sacrifice to achieve your educational goals. 
  • Tolerance of high levels of frustration.  Slogging though four years of high stress and expensive college classes is not a cake walk, regardless of your major.  You will be forgoing full time wages, and accordingly will not be in any way affluent (starving student syndrome).  You will have to work on group projects with sluggos who drag your group performance down, and you have to resist the urge to purge these slugs from your midst with nefarious and nasty means.  You have to work with all forms of disagreeable people around you, to include class mates, instructors and administrators.  
Simply put, our justice system is in need of overhaul.  The police force nationwide is understaffed by largely unqualified personnel who are asked to perform duties that are unarguably beyond their abilities to adequately perform.

Our courts are swamped with frivolous beefs that should be dealt with outside the justice system, and only the most egregious cases are adjudicated in the municipal courts.

Until this happens, we are going to see our frayed and tattered justice system get more frayed and more tattered, and the mobs at our doors will start to turn ugly.  Once these mobs start creeping outwards from their mostly urban confinements and into suburban environs, things could get very, very ugly.




Wednesday, November 26, 2014

The Ferguson riots: what they have accomplished

It's the same old page out of the same old play book: black Americans burn down their own town over some grievance (fill in the blank here), and think that their criminal actions will change America for the better.

And things don't change for the better.  We've seen it again and again, same ol' same ol'.  Watts and Detroit in the 1960's.  Los Angeles after the Rodney King beating.  Blacks burning down their own businesses, and blaming whites for everything that is wrong with their lives.

What are the results of this latest riot in Ferguson, MO?  Is the criminal justice system now going to look the other way from black crime?  Can blacks now steal and mug their way into the mainstream of American society without consequences?

The results of this riot in the short term are crystal clear: many black-owned businesses in Ferguson are gone, burned to the ground.  Hundreds of families are now without a source of income.  And the millions of white viewers around the country who watched these riots on TV are horrified that things could get like this in their country.

The results in the long term are the same as they have always been: white flight.  Whites fearing black violence move their families away from predominantly black and urban areas, leaving the black community to fend for itself.  The black community left behind is then hard pressed to make up for the lost business revenue, lost tax revenue and lost opportunities that have fled along with the fearful white Americans that have moved their families to safer grounds in the suburbs.

The results are exactly opposite of what the black activists who are calling for 'no justice, no peace': a viscous cycle of violence that plunge the black community into further chaos and despair.

I have no advice for the black community that it already doesn't know: their leaders are leading them down the path to ruin.  And things are not going to change for the better any time soon.

Friday, November 21, 2014

All we have to do is survive just two more lame duck years

Obama just threw down the gauntlet in front of the Republican's feet a mere two weeks after his party's historic landslide defeat at the national ballot box.

He will write new immigration legislation because the Republicans are dragging their feet on presenting him with a bill that he agrees with (like that is ever going to happen in our lifetime).

We'll see how the GOP takes this brazen violation of the Constitution.  Sitting down?  Maybe.  They might fly off the handle (I'd like to see that, I don't think they have it in them).

In any event, all we have to do as a nation is survive just two more years somehow of Obama's lame duck years.  Just two more.  He has now poisoned the Democrat brand so thoroughly up to this point in his presidency, most Americans have had it up to their eyeballs in liberalism's failures.

There's just no way any Democrat can succeed in 2016 in sneaking into the Oval Office.  Barry has so tainted every major Democrat's standing with Americans, they simply can't distance themselves far enough from Barry now, regardless of what they do or say.

How about Elizabeth (Pocahontas) Warren (D-Ma)?  High cheek bones and all, she is more liberal than Barry, and that is saying something.  Trust me, Kimosabe, this heap big liberal squaw will go-um down in heap big flames if the Dems have the nerve to nominate her, regardless of how much wampum she has in her war-teepee.  Pocahontas Warren was touted as the first 'woman of color' appointed to her position at Harvard.  Woman of color?  Elizabeth Warren?  She is arguably the whitest white gal east of the Mississippi.  I have seen better tans on jars of mayonnaise than on this 'woman of color.'  She's a complete and total (or as her people say, 'heap big') fraud and has no chance at attaining a position at the national level. 

Jim Webb (D-Va) has recently dipped his toe in the presidential waters.  He is so in bed with Barry philosophically, the GOP nominee in the 2016 race will lay a coat of Barry-paint on him so thick, it will take a battalion of chisel-bearing toadies to chip it off him.

And of course, there's Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-anywhere), who is joined at the hip with Barry.  She was in charge when Benghazi blew up in their liberal faces, there isn't a chance in hell that she won't be tarred and feathered with that debacle during the 2016 campaign. 

Americans are so sick and tired of this liberal crew and their devastating policies, even low info types like the Obama-phone lady in Cleveland have had enough.

All the GOP has to do is nominate somebody not named Bush and they are a shoe-in in 2016.

Friday, November 7, 2014

Liberal pockets of free cheese still plague the US

From the looks of this map, with red representing conservative land areas by county, and blue liberal, you would think the U.S. House of Representatives would consist of 400 Republicans, and 35 Democrats, right?

Nope.  With a few out-lying areas of blue, such as most of New England, much (but not all) of the blue liberal land is high density population areas which vote Democrat, even in Republican wave elections.

Why is that?  What is it about big cities that makes people vote against their own liberty and freedom?  Why do they pull the Democrat handle in the booth straight down the line in these blue urban areas?  Is it the water?  Maybe.

But mostly its the concentration of population that allows Democrat ideologues to prosper by simple logistics: it's easier to deliver the free government cheese to one big huge warehouse in one big city, than deliver the free government cheese to thousands of tiny warehouses spread out over  hundreds of thousands of square miles all over God's green earth (to borrow a Michael Medved phrase).

People who are susceptible to huge government promises to take care of them from cradle to grave typically have nothing: no skills, no cars, no education, no money, no land, no nothing, and they wind up in ghettos and slums packed on top of each other in big cities.  And when a slick talking liberal politician shows up on the urban stump with a bullhorn promising to take the money from those that greedily hoard it for themselves and give it to the mobs, who do you think they vote for?

It's not rocket science.  It's simple logistics.  This also facilitates the famous 'get out the vote' efforts that Democrats excel in: just drive around the ghettos in Democrat buses, with signs on the side stating "Get on this bus, vote Democrat and get free cheese...and cigarettes".  Hardly any money is spent on the diesel for the get out the vote buses, since they only have to drive for a few hours to pick up a couple of million low lifes and haul them to the polls.

Democrats know where their bread is buttered: high density population areas, where people and rats number in the millions. This is where they make their money.

And it clearly shows on the map.  

Sunday, November 2, 2014

"Tea Party" and "Republican" are dirty words in Chicago

With only a few days before the midterms, the Chicago airwaves are chock full of political ads, nearly all of them negative.  I kind of miss the ads for Chevrolet, Minute Rice and Cialis.  But those guys have been sidelined for the time being, there's negativity to be put out, courtesy of the big buck political machines, both Democrat and Republican.

And, of course, everyone knows that the Republican ads are all true, and the Democrat ads are all false and evil.  It's clear for everyone to see.  And I never write sarcastic posts.  Never.  Just ask me, I'll tell you that I don't.  

This particular year the Democrats are panicked big time, as Obama's popularity, or lack thereof is creating a disaster for the country because Marxism, socialism and communism have never worked for any country, ever.  Duh.  But you can't tell this administration that uncomfortable fact.  They continue plowing forward with Obama's stupid philosophy that is killing his party.

The political ads reflect Democrat panic, as they face a shellacking of Biblical proportions owing to the country's floundering over the last 6 years, and the public's newly found attention span that, unlike the past 6 years, now exceeds that of a common housefly.  Not by much, mind you, but more than a few of these low information voters are starting to put 2 and 2 together and see that Obamism is a total and unmitigated failure up to this point.

Over Chicago airwaves, the words "Tea Party" and "Republican" are on constant parade, with the low, ominous cellos sounding the alarm of the upcoming evil that these two words mean for the average Chicago voter.  And for good reason: the average Chicago voter is a black, welfare receiving, child support addicted, unemployed or labor union affiliated taker of tax payer funds.

And the Tea Party and the Republicans have articulated that all of these income redistribution policies of the Obama administration and the Democrat party in general have got to change.  

Accordingly, the mooches and government largess recipients are being put on alert by big Democrat money and the message is clear: Tea Party and Republican forces will alter your comfortable way of life without being a productive member of society.

Let the cellos groan ominously here in Chicago (Barack Obama's feeding grounds): a change is afoot.  

Friday, October 31, 2014

Dem candidates running from Obama like he has the plague

...or Ebola.  In any case, the president of these 57 states is about as unpopular as George W. Bush was before the 2006 midterm elections. Maybe more so.  And if anybody remembers, the GOP took a beating, losing both the Senate and the House to the Democrats who ran on the 'culture of corruption' drum beat.  After that gruesome election, both gavels of both congresses were turned over to Harry Reid(D-NV) and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

Both sitting leaders of the Senate and the House back in 2006, Bill Frist and Denny Hastert respectively, had their own issues of their own creation: Bill Frist was seen as weasley, mealy mouthed and easily bullied by the minority into lousy deals for the GOP.  Denny Hastert was seen as a weak leader who could not contain the Tom Foley scandal and tried to sweep it under the rug.

Dubya called the elections of November 2006 'a thumpin'.  This election on November 4th is looking every bit as thumpy for the Democrats, as Obama, while not on the ballot, is dragging down every Democrat's polling because of his scandalous presidency and disastrous foreign and domestic policies which these Democrats supported - much to their peril.

And now when any of these Democrats are asked about Obama, all we hear are crickets chirping.  Kentucky Senate Democrat Alison Grimes can't even find it in her liberal heart to admit that she voted for Barry (twice), as she knows that saying as much in very conservative Kentucky is like Dracula asking for a glass of Holy water.  It'll kill her politically.  But she doesn't even need to say it: everyone knows who this liberal commie pinko babe voted for in the past two presidential elections, and her candidate's name does not rhyme with either McLain or Momney.  

The incumbent Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) is trying to convince voters that he was not with Obama all the time: he did not support any gun control measures, and did not support Obama's restrictive energy policies.  To do so in Alaska would have been an immediate kiss of death politically.  Of course he couldn't support those policies, as every man, woman and child in Alaska is armed to the teeth, and they use 40-gallon barrels of sweet Alaska crude as kitchen chairs.  

But what Sen. Bagich, the imperiled incumbent, can't run away from is that he supported the other 97% of Obama's liberal, job killing, foreign policy damaging agenda.  And Alaskans have watched Begich like a hawk voting with the Democrats on all of that garbage.

He's toast.  And probably the same fate awaits the rest of those incumbent Democrat candidates in the shaky seats up for grabs in North Carolina, Georgia, Kansas, West Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, Louisiana, South Dakota and a few surprise states.

All of these petrified Democrats are running from Obama as fast as their chubby little liberal legs can carry them.

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Are San Francisco low achievers exempt from the effect of market forces?

San Francisco, California and its metropolitan areas contain some of the highest property values in the world.  The price per square foot for commercial real estate rivals that of Hong Kong and New York.

Ditto for residential property, the prices are sky high and rising.  In typical liberal fashion, these market forces for this highly desirable part of the country have been thwarted several decades ago by rent control laws that prohibited landlords from obtaining fair market rates for their assets.

And the low achievers that pay way less than fair market value in the short term can enjoy screwing their landlords out of the fruits of their labor owing to liberal politicians securing votes by sticking it to 'the man' and passing laws that prevent rents from achieving equilibrium....in the short run.

But these rent control laws are running up against very powerful forces, namely the laws of supply and demand.  In the long run, the supply and demand forces will simply find a way to prevail despite the best efforts of scumbag politicians to keep them at bay and keep those whose lives are artificially improved through legislative fiat intact, in addition to their votes.

Landlords in general are not stupid.  These guys are actually pretty damn savvy, on the whole.  They have been patient, and since they are for the most part law abiding citizens, have gone along with the local governments' restrictions on their assets.  But they have not been idle: there are ways, and then there are ways to beat the system.

Additionally, these landlords have hired particularly sharp attorneys, who have been hard at work finding ways to free up the locked value of San Francisco property, and legally evict these free loaders who have been squatting on the assets of others for decades and only paying peanuts for the privilege to do so.

The squeals of outrage from these low life squatters are now evident, as the chickens come home to roost in San Francisco.  Evictions of deadbeats who either cannot afford any longer the cost to live in paradise, or choose to default and let the authorities work their charms while the TV cameras are rolling.

In any event, subverting the laws of supply and demand is not possible - in the long run.  In the short term, sure.  But those who live in the short term always have hell to pay in the long run.

Welcome to the NFL, all you San Francisco hippies who now have to pay fair market value.  It's about time.

Thursday, October 16, 2014

What would one party rule look like in America?

Barack Obama would love nothing more than to destroy the Republican party and create one party rule.  In that manner, he and his successors could get quite a lot done without that pesky 'Party of No.'

We already have several areas within the United States that are defacto one-party ruled: Detroit comes to mind as the poster boy of what happens when dissent to an out of control government is crushed and extinguished as a countervailing force in politics.

Barack's old stomping grounds of Chicago are also governed by one party only: the Democrat party.  And this has been the case since "Big Bill" Thompson (R) was mayor ending in 1931, although "Big Bill" was so corrupt that he may as well have been a Democrat.

Chicago politics is now in play nationally, with Barack Obama ruling through executive orders and virtually ignoring the will of Congress and the American people.  He learned this style of politics in the least democratic area in the US - The Windy City.

Just a few days ago, Chicago Public Schools' teacher's union boss Karen Lewis withdrew her name from the upcoming mayoral race, and it now appears that the current uber-liberal, big spending Democrat mayor Rahm Emanuel will not face any credible opposition.

This news of Karen Lewis' withdrawal was bemoaned as a loss of choice for the voters of Chicago, since Karen Lewis was running ahead of Rahm in the polls.  The choice was never between the two dominant philosophies within the US currently: liberal or conservative.  The choice Chicago voters would have had with Karen Lewis in the race was re-electing a big spending liberal in Rahm, or electing an even bigger spending liberal in Karen Lewis.

Not much of a choice, given that Chicago's public unions (including Karen Lewis' CPS teacher's union) are running billions of dollars of unfunded pension liabilities that has bankrupted Chicago to the point that it is another Detroit, only in zombie form - Chicago is fiscally dead but just doesn't know it yet, much like zombies are dead but don't seem to understand the concept.  

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Fredd saw this coming 5 years ago....

Dumb ol' Fredd published this post way back in 12/2009.  With how things stand in Afghanistan (and Iraq) now, this makes me look like some kind of prophet - read this and then consider what has transpired in the Middle East since then:

'With our 18 month time table now in play, President Obama has laid out the framework of our mission in Afghanistan. We send 30,000 more troops, secure the Afghani population from terrorism within their borders inflicted by the Taliban, and train the Afghani army and police forces so that they can assume responsibility for their own security. 

Sounds good. Sounds achievable. Right? No way in hell is this going to happen, and I would be more than happy to elaborate on why I think this administration has absolutely no chance in achieving these pie in the sky goals. 

We have been trying to do this since the inception of hostilities in 2001. According to my math, that is eight years and counting. Eight years. You would think by now that some serious training would have transpired, and that a stable standing Afghan army would now be in place. In addition to the standing Afghan army, we have been training (and training, and training, and training…..) an Afghan civilian police force to assume some of the civil security now under tenuous control by the U.S. Army for eight years now. 

Eight years. 

Well, we all have to consider what kind of raw materials we all have to work with as it pertains to available personnel within this endeavor. Most Americans think that the citizens of the world are all made up of the same DNA (which is true, but irrelevant) and accordingly, other than some minor differences in politics, that we all behave the same; we all have similar hopes, desires, fears, and dreams for a just and righteous society. 

Right? Wrong. Profoundly and demonstrably wrong. 

The template that most Americans and nearly all the U.S. politicians have in place is horribly wrong. We assume that the Afghan population has the same desire, the same potential and the same tenacity to take control of their national security as that of the typical American. 

This is where a disconnect the size of the Grand Canyon throws the monkey wrench into our strategy: the Afghani population are not by any standard in the civilized world what we would call ‘civilized.’ And that is the key here. This country, if you can even call it a country, is one of the most primitive societies on earth. Illiteracy is well above 90% of the population. More than 9 out of 10 Afghanis can neither read nor write. This society consists solely of local brutal and savage tribes with no contact to what the rest of us would call civilization at all. 

Karl Rove in his interview with Fox News last week said that illiteracy is an issue with regards to our goals in Afghanistan. This is the understatement of the century. Saying illiteracy is an issue with regards to our goals in Afghanistan is akin to saying that having a 5 foot 9 inch center on your NBA team is an issue in winning the NBA Championship. It is like saying that having a 167 pound average on your NFL team’s offensive line is an issue to achieving a Super Bowl win. It is similar to saying that having an IQ of 77 is an issue to securing a Rhodes scholarship. 

This issue of illiteracy is not only huge, it is an impediment, a virtual road block to our ultimate goal of training Afghanis to defend themselves from overthrow by the Taliban. In order to maintain an effective fighting force or civilian police, it's imperative that the soldiers and policemen have the ability to reason, to make split second decisions regarding whether to use deadly force or not, and to make these decisions on the side of justice consistently. An uneducated, uncivilized goat herder with no formal education has no business being placed in any position of power over others, such as are civilized soldiers and police personnel. 

The U. S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines require anyone entering military service in an enlisted capacity to have at least a high school education, or have completed a G.E.D (General Equivalency Diploma). Ditto for nearly all U.S. civilian police force entry requirements. Additionally, these branches of our armed forces also require an officer to have completed a college degree prior to receiving the commission. Our armed forces have by far the highest standards of any significant military force on the planet. You cannot possibly get into the U.S. armed forces if you can’t read, since all of the training you are expected to complete to master your specific job entails a significant amount of reasoning, logic and comprehension. 

And yet we as a nation seem to expect that we can train these savages to achieve our civilized standards of behavior in a matter of a year or two. Good luck with that. The average Afghani picking up a rifle and trying to keep in step in a platoon formation is much like the old TV show ‘Gomer Pyle, USMC.’ Gomer couldn’t do anything right, but had the typical heart of gold that Hollywood script writers always gives these fish out of water characters. And it took every bit of energy on Gomer’s marine platoon sergeant, SFC Vincent Carter, to keep Gomer in line. Imagine an entire army of Gomers. And of course who could forget deputy sheriff Barney Fife of the 60's sitcom 'The Andy Griffith Show.' Stumbling, bumbling Barney (with his standard issue heart of gold) was issued only a single bullet, and for good reason: give him an entire cylinder of ammo in his service revolver and the idiot became a bona fide menace. 

Now consider trying to train an entire standing army and police force of Gomer Pyles and Barney Fifes. And once you have that image in your mind, then imagine hitting all of those Gomers and Barneys in their heads with a brick 20 or 30 times, until dementia and brain damage was well established. Then you would have a better feel as to what kind of standing Afghan army and Afghan police force you will have at the ready. It will take much more than 18 months to train these ignorant and brutally savage goat and yak herders. It will require them all to attain high school diplomas. And how long will that take? Well, it took me 12 years, if you don’t count Kindergarten. 

But before you start with that process, you have to build schools. And before that construction starts, you have to have the will of the population to initiate this process. Good luck with that. And Obama is confident that 18 months will do it. The reality is that the Afghanis will never, ever be up to the task of their own security as a nation. The only force on earth strong enough to get rid of the Taliban in Afghanistan is the United States military. And we have yet to unleash our awful and terrible deadly forces within our awesome arsenal to do that. 

We, contrary to any and all common sense regarding this situation, continue with this pie in the sky hope that we can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. 

Good luck with that.'

End of post.  This material was published in December, 2009.

Monday, September 29, 2014

We're all 'Little Eichmanns' now (Part II)

A relatively recent concept has changed the world...for the worse. The term 'collateral damage' was never considered in wars of the past.  

The manner in which wars were won in the days of yore were simply a matter of the winning side inflicting such damage on the losing side that no other possibility existed other than surrender or annihilation.

In this manner of warfare, the winning side would impose on the losing side every action, thought and philosophy it deemed as the way of life to which all under the victorious regime would abide henceforth, with dissenters killed, imprisoned and otherwise dispatched as the realm saw fit.

Of course, back in 'the good ol' days,' there were no media to cover wars in action, and broadcast to the world the tactics and messiness in general of such conflicts.  Now, each and every civilian death is photographed, spread to each corner of the world and denounced by opponents as barbarian, murderous and heinous behavior.

'Collateral damage' came about only recently in human history.  It became the rule of combat that soldiers of one side could only target and kill soldiers of the other, leaving be the 'innocent civilians.'  If, heaven forbid, a civilian was killed in the course of combat, then a campaign was immediately undertaken to discredit the careless combat unit and its command throughout the world as evil.

Accordingly, with all civilized peoples careful to avoid at all costs (including victory) injuring civilians, the formerly weaker side in any conflict was empowered to use this abhorrence by civilized folk in inflicting collateral damage to its advantage: knowing that their adversaries would not target groupings of known civilian areas such as churches, schools, hospitals and the like, the historically weaker and more ruthless combatants would then entrench themselves and their weapons inside such areas and conduct their attacks with impunity.

Simply setting up rocket launchers, mortars, howitzers and weapons caches inside mosques, hospitals and schools along with a battery of photographers has now given much weaker combatants the upper hand in all warfare now: they know that civilized opponents will not knowingly lob artillery into a school, because if they do the ever present photographers will broadcast to the world the women, children and civilian casualties that the 'evil' warmongers did to the innocents in the population.

Works every time it is tried.  But these rules only apply to civilized combatants. Muslim based combat units such as Hamas, al Qaeda, and now ISIS have based their entire war strategy on this fact of war now, and launch their weapons from within as many civilian shield areas as possible, and they launch their weapons into largely civilian populations on the other side as possible.

Muslim combatants don't play by civilized rules.  That kind of nonsense is for losers, and they want no part of such foolishness. They correctly understand that there really are no such thing as innocent civilians: populations support and are complicit in all combat operations.  They feed, clothe and fund their soldiers.  They work in the factories that provide arms and support for their soldiers.  This is unarguably true for populations on both sides.  

The bad guys know this plain fact of life.  They see everyone that resists sharia law as a 'Little Eichmann.'  And they know that all of us 'Little Eichmanns' do not have the same view, much to the advantage of Muslim terrorists.

It's time that the West started to view Muslim populations as 'Little Eichmanns' and act accordingly.  Only until this happens, we will be forced to live the the atrocities we see Muslims commit in the name of Allah on the West and our philosophy.  

The violence will never end until we come to our senses.




Thursday, September 25, 2014

We're all 'Little Eichmanns' now

Islamic terrorists have declared war on the West and all we in our society stand for.  They call it jihad, but it's the same thing.  From the Muslim perspective, if you are a non-believer (in the teachings of the prophet Mohamed the term would be infidel), then you have two choices:


  • Convert from your infidel ways and follow the teachings of the prophet.
  • Die.
There is no middle ground as far as Muslims are concerned.  The Koran puts this in writing.  ALL MUSLIMS believe this.  They have to.  Or they themselves are condemned to die.  There are no 'radical Islamic' terrorists.  The term 'radical' suggests that those who are engaged in jihad have strayed from the mainstream Muslim beliefs.  They have not strayed.  These jihadis are following the exact words in the Koran.  From a Muslim's eyes, they are not terrorists, but warriors for Allah.  Big difference from the Muslim perspective.

This is the reason why we do not see mass repudiation of the jihadi methods by 'moderate Muslims.'  None of the rest of the timid Muslim world will raise their voice against the tactics of these bolder members of their sect, as that would paint a target on themselves for elimination in the name of Allah.  In essence, there is no such thing as a 'moderate Muslim.'  

For us in the West, who are typically Christian, we all have bulls' eyes painted on us by these jihadis.  We are targets for either conversion or death.  All of us.  And accordingly, random acts of terrorism such as mall bombings, Boston Marathon bombings, and rockets launched into population centers within Israel intended to kill as many civilians as possible are not considered 'terrorism' by those who commit them.

These acts are permitted, and even encouraged and celebrated, by followers of the prophet.  All of them.  

If we ever want to stop these jihadis from killing in the manner which they prefer: mass killing via bombs and rockets into civilian population centers, aircraft, buses, malls, etc., we must confront the truth as our enemies see it: we are all 'Little Eichmanns' in their eyes.

And we are indeed from the Muslim perspective.  The term is fairly decently described by Wikepedia:  '“Little Eichmanns” is a phrase used to describe persons participating in society who, while on an individual scale may seem relatively harmless even to themselves, taken collectively create destructive and immoral systems in which they are actually complicit.  This is comparable to how Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi bureaucrat, unfeelingly helped to orchestrate the Holocaust.'

The term was popularized by uber-leftist, faux-Indian professor Ward Churchill a few years ago, and he was widely derided by many on the right as outrageous in this claim.  Churchill, in the eyes of the Muslim, is dead spot on, however, in his assertion that our enemy views us all as a society complicit in rejecting the teachings of Mohamad, and accordingly our mass executions via jihad are entirely justified and proper.

This jihad has been going on since the Koran was written.  This Muslim sentiment against infidels is what led to the Crusades in the Middle Ages.  It is what caused our little tiff with the Barbary Pirates back in Thomas Jefferson’s day.  It is the stuff that keeps the Middle East in constant turmoil.

We have been in this war, whether we want to acknowledge it or not, for over 1,400 years now and counting.  This war will continue, assuming we continue to ignore it and assign the reasons for our mounting casualties to criminal activity or radicals and their madness.

It is not madness.  It is what 20% of the population of the earth believes should happen to us infidels, or ‘Little Eichmanns.’  It is what ISIS/ISIL/IS, al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezzbolah, al Fatah, Boco Haram, and back to the Barbary Pirates and Suleiman the Great all believe, and who all structure their assaults on the infidels accordingly.  All of these Muslim groups above, to a man, woman and child, believe the same thing, and there is not a nickel’s difference among any of them.  This, in their belief system, is what Allah wants and DEMANDS that they do.

But if we want this to end, what should we do?  I have a real simple answer for that, stay tuned….

Friday, September 19, 2014

Obama doesn't listen to anybody

We are hearing a drumbeat of support for 'boots on the ground' to eradicate the ISIS scourge from the most experienced military minds in the country.  To a man, general after general after general tells us that air strikes and advice without back up from combat troops from the US will accomplish absolutely nothing in combating these animals.  No effect whatsoever.

Obama, just like always, rejects this advice and is going his own way.

He was also forwarned three years ago that we had to leave a residual force in Iraq to maintain the gains the US had won through our military presence over the prior 8 years of combat or so.

Nope, he blew that advice off as well.

And now we see what we get with this guy in charge of military decisions.  Chaos in the world.

Even a liberal pinko commie can see the results of this guy's pacifism in the face of global evil.

Well, maybe not.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

You don't hire a sumo wrestler to run a Weight Watchers clinic...

...and you don't choose that same sumo wrestler to jockey your Kentucky Derby thoroughbred horse.

Some things in life should be obvious:
  • bald, fat, old guys don't make good television news anchors
  • ugly, fat, old unpopular girls don't win beauty pageants
  • short, stubby overweight accountants shouldn't start at center for the Boston Celtics
  • slow, chubby, short, old advertising executives should not be selected to carry the ball for the Chicago Bears
  • stupid, slow high school dropouts should not head up NASA space exploration programs, or other rocket science related endeavors
And something that should be patently obvious to every red blooded American is you simply don't elect a dyed-in-the-wool, card carrying, liberal, weasly mealy mouthed pacifist to be our Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.

And yet we did.  And we all see what happens when we do: look at how this guy, Barry Obama, has been all over the map regarding the rising Islamic terror threat that demands some sort of response.

Barack Obama is simply not the guy to deal with any serious threat to American interests.  Nor is any other liberal pacifist Democrat. They just don't know how to properly wield the considerable military power of the U.S.  And there IS most definitely a proper way to use it, and an improper way to abuse it.  

If we have by now learned our lesson, then we will never elect another liberal Democrat to the presidency.  If we do, we see what we get.  


Dithering, fumbling, stumbling foolishness. Democrat presidents make us look bad to the rest of the world.  

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Dumb ol' Dubya saw this ISIS threat SEVEN YEARS AGO!!!

Yes, that stupid, Texas hick.  The guy that couldn't pronounce 'nuclear' right ('noo-que-ler').  That idiot cowboy.  That guy.  He saw ALL OF THIS happening seven years ago.

George W. Bush in 2007, in responding to cries of a war weary liberal left to abandon Iraq and leave their future up to the four winds, warned us all of what would happen.

He said Iraq would fall into chaos, with the vacuum of our absence being filled by terrorists, who would murder and maim their way into power.  He warned that if we left back then, we would have to return and fight an enemy that was much more powerful later than it was back then.

But that brilliant, genius Messianic Obama took the exact opposite view and ran his presidential campaign based on that totally erroneous and wrong headed position.  He was bound and determined to abandon Iraq totally, and wipe clean the memory of the U.S. ever having been there in the first place.  Not a single boot left on the ground.  And he made it happen: the last boot on the Iraqi soil was lifted in 2011.

And now the place is lousy with blood thirsty terrorists, drunk with power and victory, and threatening each and every one of the neighboring countries in the Middle East.  The region has never been less stable.  It is a complete wreck.  A mess.

Obama's position 7 years ago has been totally repudiated.  Totally discredited.  It was absolutely wrong, and this is not even arguable.  There is no debate.  Obama blew it badly.  Horribly.

George W. Bush's position has been validated completely.  He was 100% right, and that is not even arguable.  There is no debate.  What is happening right now in Iraq and Syria is just what Dubya said would happen if we did what we ended up doing after a liberal community organizer assumed occupancy of the Oval Office.

Obama, in response to the ISIS threat in the Middle East, is now preparing to commit U.S. blood and treasure to combat an enemy that we HAD DEFEATED 7 years ago, and they would not have been anywhere near this current threat had the U.S. left a stabilizing U.S. presence in the region, just like we did in Japan and Germany after WWII, and Korea after 1952.

That dumb, stupid hick from Texas was 100% right, and that brilliant, genius Messiah we elected in 2008 was 100% wrong.  Now, after all is said and done 7 years later, I don't think there is any doubt as to who the genius was, and who the moron was.

I think the proof is in the pudding.

Friday, August 29, 2014

The fallacy of recyling, or 'Don't feed the hippies'

Each Friday morning, I look out my front window and watch a very large, new, beautifully equipped recycling truck stop at my neighbor's driveway and pick up the dutifully sorted recycled materials in color coded bins: blue for aluminum, red for glass and green for paper.

And I shake my head.  The cost in doing this foolishness is just huge, if you do the relatively simple math.  Recycling in any community is nothing more than a camouflaged jobs program, costing the local community way more money than it claims is made by recycling.  These trucks are expensive, and the guys that man them are even more expensive.  Many times there are TWO guys on these trucks, but one guy can also get it done.  

I did the simple math.  Without getting into the weeds, I put together a spreadsheet to determine the costs of operating a fully equipped recycling truck and operating it over a typical month.  The cost to each community for each truck per day is approximately $719.82, considering the cost of the truck to buy, depreciate over 10 years, pay a union crew with retirement benefits, and administrate and garage, not to mention fuel up, plus other costs I have not even put into consideration.

To break even, an average recycle truck would have to pick up at each and every household a total of 256 aluminum cans, considering each can at market value of aluminum per pound is not quite a dollar per pound (97 cents per pound as of today),  or about 1/2 a penny per can, slightly more.  Each can weighs 2.7 grams, and a pound of cans would require around 166 cans. ( I would insert my Excel spreadsheet here for your verification of my numbers, but I don't know how. )

Simply stated, there is absolutely no way that each household puts out 256 aluminum cans per week for recycling.  Not even close. These trucks are roaring around everyone's neighborhood, spewing diesel exhaust into the environment, and in the end, they are losing money and wasting everyone's time and effort.  

Again, without getting into the weeds on the numbers, these nicely equipped and staffed recycling trucks are losing big money each month in their endeavors.  "But Fredd, but Fredd, they are also picking up glass and paper, you have to include that money made from recycling into your spreadsheet to be fair!!"

Be satisfied that I don't include those hippie-feeding activities. Recycling costs of glass and paper are not even solid technologies that can't even come marginally close to the costs of simply using available and cheap raw materials to manufacturer new glass and paper, rather than go through the expensive process of collecting, processing, cleaning and distributing recycled materials.  The math here only goes south on a cost basis, and will only subvert your liberal argument.   

At least the recycling of aluminum, unlike glass and paper, is close to an achievable and viable technology, but not quite.  I did not include in my spreadsheet above the costs involved in storing these cans, which are partially full of Coke, Red Bull, honey bees, wasps, flies, maggots, vomit (also known as backwash), and other impurities that I am way too modest to list.  Then the costs to clean all of the above and distill these cans into a marketable form are not calculated, either.

The whole point is that this recycling business is based purely on emotion and not on economics.  You feel good that you are helping the planet by ensuring that your cans, paper and glass are not going into land fills and befouling Mother Earth (Gaia).  

Truth be told, none of this stuff is toxic, and all came from the earth originally and when properly buried, will return to the earth from whence it came.  All we are doing in our recycling efforts are creating jobs for liberals.  You may notice that I mentioned that I watched each Friday as that recycling truck stopped at my neighbor's driveway, and not mine. I don't participate in this foolishness in any way, shape or form, at least not voluntarily.

My philosophy is solid: I say 'don't feed the hippies.'

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

What has Ferguson taught us all?

This conversation never ends.

It is always the same soap opera, which goes something like this: poor man and poor woman have children.  Poor man leaves for greener pastures, which are never greener.  Poor woman is left with the children, and is resentful of her lot in life.  Her children are neglected, and have no male role models, other than the thugs living in their neighborhood who live off of terrorizing the community.

The poor children of the poor single woman grow up, hating authority and feeling like their community owes them stuff.  They take what they want, regardless of the opposition to their uncontrolled lusts for things they have not worked for.

After a time, people of means grow tired of the violence in their community and leave.  Many of the people of means are white, while the people of little or no means have few options in life and stay in crime riddled neighborhoods, trapped by the cycle of poverty.

The poor black people living in crime ridden neighborhoods blame the white populations for abandoning them to these urban hell holes.  The white refugees seek safer communities for themselves and their children and are subsequently hated by those left behind.  'White Flight' occurs as a result of this never ending cycle.

And it will continue.  People want to live their lives in peace, and will do whatever they can to avoid hell holes like Ferguson, where the Zeit Geist dictates that it is OK for the public to ransack the town because an undisciplined black teenager was confronted and killed by police.

Ferguson will in time become another Detroit.  Filled with despair, hopelessness and violence.  The lesson we learned from Ferguson?  Avoid Ferguson.

Monday, August 11, 2014

ISIS goal: rule the world. That was Charlie Manson's goal, too...

These ISIS dopes are all over the internet now, claiming that one day they will raise their black flag over the White House.  They are drunk with success in terrorizing a bunch of tribes in northern Iraq. 

Their victories came so easily, they figured ISIS will rule the world by Christmas.  

Good luck with that, Mustafa.

These maniacs of ISIS remind me a lot of Charles Manson and his murderous 'family' back in the late 1960's.  Yes, it's a stretch, but here goes:

Charlie figured he could start a race war in the US by randomly killing some 'piggies' (rich white folk) and blame it on blacks.  He then figured that the whites would retaliate by rising up and killing blacks indiscriminately and subsequently society would fall into chaos.  He and his bunch would then hide out at the Spann Ranch until the shooting subsided, and then he would emerge and unite everyone, with him as king.

Yes, this was about as numb-nutted a plan as was ever concocted by a human in the history of the planet, with as many holes in this moronic plan as a million pound chunk of Swiss cheese.

And the same idiocy can be assigned to these dolts that comprise ISIS.  Their plan involves sweeping throughout the world installing their caliphate on everybody.  Everyone will fear their tactics of chopping off heads, hands, legs and eyeballs willy nilly and subsequently everyone will submit to the will of Allah.

Nice plan if you can pull it off, Mahmoud.

Mustafa, Mahmoud and the rest of that murderous ISIS bunch are nothing more than a pack of uneducated goat herders who have been given AK-47's and told to shoot infidels.  They then capitalized on the Obama failure to retain any residual US forces in a fractured Iraq and subsequently seized a ton of US weapons from the stupid goat herders-turned-Iraqi-soldiers when they dropped their rifles, abandoned their Abrahams tanks at the first sign of trouble from ISIS.  It's a local mess that will fizzle out to nothing once ISIS runs out of US howizter ammo, and their M1 Abrahams tanks conk out (which will be real soon, those babies need a butt load of maintenance: something about which these ISIS boobs have no clue).

Once their cache of seized weapons is expended, they are done with their expansion plans.  They couldn't manufacture so much as a toaster, to say nothing of assault rifle rounds and RPGs.

But they sure know how to make the news.

And, of course, so did Charlie Manson .



Thursday, August 7, 2014

“The Kid” predicts investors lose their shirts

“Fredd, looks like a 10-12% correction in store for the markets this month.”  This sentiment was uttered in a post script comment  to me just a few days ago. The Kid, proprietor of the site Diary of a Right Wing Pussycat  has gazed into his relatively reliable crystal ball and has spoken.

If this is indeed our future, we would all make some serious scratch if  we were to short the shares of some index stocks such as QQQQ and SPY, which mirror the general direction of assets in the exchanges.

So far, I have made some pretty good bucks on Kid’s predictions, although he has missed the mark recently on a marijuana stock (PHOT), the only blight on Kid’s record.  And I’ll be danged if so far this month, stocks are certainly trending in that general negative direction.

From an all-time high of 17,138, the Dow Jones index has fallen to 16,443, or about 4% in a few weeks.  We’ll give The Kid some slack, and allow his prediction of ‘this month’ to start at the high of July 22nd or so, and continue for 30 days.  To reach The Kid’s prediction of at least a 10% correction, the markets must lose another 1000 points or so in the next two weeks, or by August 22nd.

Go ahead and ask me if I am betting the farm and pumping my life’s savings into equity shorts.  Not on your life.  The Kid, even with his huge, bulging brain working overtime analyzing the markets is probably wrong on this prediction.  We have two weeks to see, but I am betting on the markets staying the course and moving at worst sideways, but probably ticking upwards in the next two weeks.

Here’s why: Obama is president, and people don’t like Barry’s effect on the markets.  That is not arguable, since both times he won, in 2008 and 2012, the markets tanked the following day.   He is a socialist (not even arguable here either), and firmly and steadfastly believes in redistribution of wealth.  The market doesn’t share his beliefs in this regard, and has been strangled owing to so much capital sitting on the sidelines and overseas since his election.  Imagine how equity markets might have performed had Mitt Romney been elected in 2012 – perhaps a Dow Jones topping 20,000 or more.  No way to tell now, but my theory is as follows:

There is pent up demand for equities, but investors are tentative in putting their hard earned money into the markets in earnest until they are convinced that uncertainty regarding tax policy, foreign policy and health care costs has been alleviated.  The administration has also set the Fed funds rate at 0.0%, which affects interest rates throughout the economy, so bonds and CD’s are not attracting any money, either.

So where does all the money go, waiting for some certainty to return to the markets, besides sitting overseas and in low interest bearing cash accounts?  The money that is not sitting on the sidelines (a huge amount, folks, YOOGE)  is still in the market, since the stock market is still the only game in town.  And this ‘town’ consists of the entire world. 

Once Barry is gone, all of that pent up demand for investments that have attractive ROI’s is going to be unleashed in a big way.  When President Christie, President Cruz, President Paul or President Romney (a dark horse) is elected in 2016, watch the markets hit dizzying highs.  We could possibly even see a huge surge in stocks if the US Senate changes hands this November.

Until then, there is still no place else to park your spare cash that earns anything close to reasonable returns: the US equity markets.  Our feeble recovery is simply reflecting reticence on part of worldwide investors in investing in a socialist-leaning American economy.  It’s still the best bet in the world, but it will be a much better bet with adults in charge, rather than the hapless fools that are holding us back now.

Either Kid is wrong, or I am wrong.  We will see in the next few weeks, so stay tuned, boys and girls…..






Sunday, August 3, 2014

Read this post or you're going to die!

Not really.  But that headline is the typical method of hawking too many products today.  And much like sex, fear sells very well indeed, and it's not even arguable.

A few years ago, we all saw the Rosland Capital ad featuring G. Gordon Liddy (of Nixon 'Watergate' scandal infamy) telling us to buy gold and buy it now, as much as you can, or you will suffer losses to your nest egg much like we all saw in 2008 and 2009 when the stock market lost 45% of its value.  When Gordo was pitching us this schtick on gold, this was when gold, a commodity, was trading at around $1,900 per ounce.  Then over a period of about three weeks a few years ago, gold prices plummeted to $1,280/ounce where they still remain today and have hovered around this level for well over a year, now: had you listened to Gordo, you would have seen a loss of about a third of your investment.

Where is G. Gordon Liddy now?  Where is Gordo when you need answers to his claim that you needed to invest in his crappy garbage or face ruin?  Gordo? You said my investment was going to 'go up, not down.' What happened, Gordo?  Buddy?  (.....crickets chirping......)

I am a classically trained financial advisor, and I am acutely aware of these tactics every time I see or hear them.  Typically, the bogus ads begin with a startling statement that casts doubt on the performance of equities listed on the various stock markets.  Many of these ads cast fear into the hearts of those watching, and suggest that they will end up in the gutter, eating dog food and living in a dumpster unless they buy the hawked product du jour.

The truth of the matter is that stocks rise and fall, but generally rise over the long term, and that long term rise in assets is averaging around 9% per annum (over the last 100 years).  It's the inherent volatility of the equity markets that these predators focus on, and they completely disregard the general long term positive performance of the markets.

The biggest abuser of playing on people's fears are the annuity companies, which peddle insurance products.  Unlike products available through banks or exchanges, the twist on these scams are that they are simply contracts between insurance companies and those buying their crap.  And these contracts are written by lawyers employed by the insurance companies, and those smarmy shysters write those contracts in heavy favor of the insurance company, and not you.  The biggest problem with these products is that they limit your benefits as much as possible during boom times, and your exposure to losses are not always limited - it all depends on how the lawyers spelled out the terms.  Additionally, these products are not guaranteed like bank products - they are paid out based on the good will and financial viability of the guys writing the checks.  Nobody is compelling these insurance guys to write checks to customers.  They write them if they feel like it.  If they don't write the check, so sue them.

Buy my annuity or die alone in the gutter, penniless and pitiful.  Don't buy into that crap, folks.  Yes, fear sells.  And it sells very well.  All I can tell you is that these fear mongers lie like dogs.  But you will still probably succumb to their Siren's call.  You can't help it.

Just like you can't help buying Bud Lite, because when you do you will be popular and hang out with swimsuit models just like on the ads.


It has to be true, the ads wouldn't lie, would they?


Wednesday, July 30, 2014

How to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - guaranteed to work.

This conflict has been going on since 1948: vagrant Arabs see Jews as making something of their desert they moved into that was formerly infrequently inhabited by migrant Bedouins. And even these Bedouins didn't stay in one place in the desert that is now Israel for very long.  It was just too desolate.

Now it is an industrial and political powerhouse.  And the vagrant Arabs want it back.  'Right of return' my butt.  Nobody to speak of ever lived there before Israel was formed, and everyone knows it.  These vagrant Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians were in reality Jordanians, Lebanese, Egyptians and Syrians.  They were never Palestinians, ever.  There was no Palestine, other than the area that consisted of western Jordan, northern Egypt, southern Syria and later on, southern Lebanon.  There was no country called Palestine.  There just wasn't.  

But now, these angry Arabs have sworn to wipe Israel off the map, nothing less, and take back Palestine (which they never owned to begin with), now that Israel has put the energy and money into the land to make something of it, where before it was nothing but a desolate wasteland.  

There can be no peaceful co-existence.  There never will be.

Solution?  Easy, piece o' cake.  Let the conflict begin in earnest. Let the combatants loose, and let the bullets fly.  May the best army win.  And the winning army will not win by avoiding civilian casualties.  The winning army will decimate the other's will to fight once it has demonstrated that it can annihilate them.  

Works every time it's tried.  Always has, always will. May the invention of the 'surgical strike' pass into oblivion as the surest way to lose a war in the long term.

Just let 'er rip.  Like I said, may the best army win.


Wednesday, July 16, 2014

A visit to San Francisco: behind enemy lines....

I just returned from a four day stint in the City By The Bay, home of Barry Bonds*, Al Capone and Nancy Pelosi.  Yes, four days in San Francisco to celebrate my niece's 16th birthday.

This was not my city of choice to spend any time in whatsoever, but there was no convincing a 16-year old that there are communist outposts in the U.S.  Even if she did believe me, she didn't care.  We went anyway.

During my brief encounter behind enemy lines, I was fascinated by what I saw and heard: a city that is in its death throes, but doesn't know it yet.

Our cabbie who took us from the airport to the hotel near Fisherman's Wharf (obviously a gay guy) was explaining with great delight his rental digs up on the hill overlooking the town was rent controlled: he was paying around a $1000/month, as he had been in this apartment for over 30 years, while his next door neighbor was paying 'market price' for identical digs: $5000/month.

I chose not to get into it with 'Gary the Cabbie,' about the effects of price controls and that they simply don't work in controlling prices (just ask Gary's neighbor).  Sure, they are working for Gary, since he's already got his, but they are not working all that great for his neighbor.  I am sure Gary doesn't give a damn about his neighbor, but that is the subject for another day.

We took the 'hop on, hop off' bus tour of the city, and saw all the sights, to include:


  • Haight-Ashbury.  This dump is arguably the dirtiest, crappiest neighborhood in town.  I literally had to watch each and every step I took to avoid stepping in vomit, human feces, french fries or bird crap.  The residents walking up and down the street opening smoking dope looked like they were freshly released from the asylum in 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.'  Haight-Ashbury is a toilet of a town.
  • The Painted Ladies.  You know, those lovely buildings shown in the opening scenes of 'Full House,' with the scenic backdrop of the city.  They were covered in scaffolding at the time I saw them, but I was guessing that were they for sale, they would have been priced at $100,000,000 per unit, in this price controlled town.  Pretty nice digs for  Danny, Aunt Becky, Uncle Jesse and Uncle Joey to hang out in let me tell you.
  • A walk from the free bus stop to the San Francisco Giant's baseball park was enlightening.  I have never in my life seen so many big, fat obese bums sleeping the day away along the many benches and sidewalks.  San Francisco has the fattest homeless population in the world, where not one bum has missed a meal in over thirty years by looking at them.  Pickings are pretty good for the homeless in San Francisco, if the size of the bum beer guts I saw is any indication.
  • Free buses.  Technically, they are $2.00 a ride each way, but the driver's really don't want to bother with taking your money, despite me trying desperately to pay my way.  The angry bus driver just told me to move along, and looked irritated that I wanted to bother him with payment.  Since everything in San Francisco is subsidized by Nancy Pelosi's Democrats, what's the point in trying to squeeze a profit from anything?  Lots of money is available from the Democrats so why bother.
This city will someday collapse like any other socialist society in human history.  The bums will overwhelm all available resources (the paradox/tragedy of 'The Commons'), and all of this free stuff will go away, and most likely not peacefully.  Those bums are pretty aggressive in San Francisco and will most likely not go away quietly into the night.



Monday, July 14, 2014

Peter Doocy doesn't belong on Fox News

Nepotism is alive and well on Fox. Peter Doocy didn't need to start at the bottom and work his way up, why go through all of that when your dad can pull some strings and get you a gig on a top rated national news broadcast right out of college.  I can't help but shake my head in disappointment each and every time I see the no-talent son of Fox and Friends morning co-anchor Steve Doocy's covering a story.

Steve Doocy must have embarrassing photos of Fox chief Roger Ailes, because Roger is the consummate professional when it comes to running a news program.  He knows that the heavy weight talent that people tune in to for their news should not include a snot nosed, wet-behind-the-ears greenhorn like Peter Doocy.

This kid looks like Richie Cunningham of 'Happy Days' trying to act like Walter Cronkite.  It just doesn't work.  The kid has as much talent and looks as anyone off the streets, but unlike Joe Average, he has clout in his dad pulling for him to keep him on the air.

Remember these Fox guys hammering Chelsea Clinton when she got her short lived NBC gig?  Remember them saying the very same thing I am saying about Peter when reporting on this blatant nepotism in Chelsea's hiring, relying on dear ol' mom and dad to pull some strings at NBC?  I recall Steve Doocy ticking off the many low rent TV gigs he had prior to Fox and Friends, and that nobody handed him the job without putting in his dues as a  weather guy in Dented Pig, Wyoming, then moving up to a larger audience in Butte, Montana, etc.  (no, these are not really Steve Doocy's early gigs, but you get my point).

Note to Roger Ailes: unless Steve Doocy really does have those aforementioned photos, you need to dump his rookie son and get someone on air with some street cred.  And looks.  And talent.  You know, somebody who paid their dues.

For what it's worth.