Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Liberal hypocrisy on parade in Hawaii

Facebook CEO billionaire Mark Zuckerberg is currently building a 6' stone fence around his sprawling estate in Maui, Hawaii.  Locals of course do not like how this affects their view of the ocean, but that's the way things go in the U.S...for now.  If the locals wanted to keep this locale and its view unblemished, they should have ponied up the bucks to buy the land, and then do nothing with it.  But they didn't.
Having said all of that, this Facebook mogul was just a month or two ago bad mouthing Donald Trump as a fiend that wanted to build walls, not bridges.  Talk about hypocrisy.  But liberals are completely OK with flagrant hypocrisy, as long as it suits them and their agendas. 
  • Liberals want no borders or walls, and are OK with everybody from everywhere moving here - as long as they don't move anywhere near THEM.  The rest of us, to hell with all of us. We'll get over it, they figure.  
  • Liberals want nobody to have guns for any reason, other than the government - and of course, their own personal security details.  They can arm their own interests to the teeth, but the rest of you guys, no need for you to own guns since the police will protect you.  I am a little confused about this stance, since if police protection only is fine for all of us, won't the police protect them as well?  Apparently not.
  • Liberals want to jack up taxes to a confiscatory level on the rest of us, but hire battalions of lawyers and accountants to make sure that they themselves do not pay anywhere near the levels that they consider just dandy for the rest of us. 
Mark Zuckerberg is no different than your run-of-the-mill pinko, who thinks he knows how all the rest of us should live, but exempts himself from those same ideals.

Liberal hypocrites, a pox on them all.

Saturday, June 25, 2016

I don't need to know the pro's and con's of Brexit

All I needed to know, without paying any attention whatsoever to the debate on the UK severing its relationship with the European Union, was that Barack Obama was in favor of the UK remaining in the EU.

That's all I needed to know to weigh in on the side of departure.  If Barry likes it, it has to be detrimental to my interests.  Or to the interests of capitalism and conservatism in general.  Every decision, speech, meeting or activity that Barry has ever been involved in favors taking money or assets from one group of people and giving it to another to further two of his goals in life:

1) To achieve 'fairness' on the planet.  This utopian, hare brained dream sounds great on paper, but it will never be achieved here on earth, regardless of how much money he has to confiscate from others.  Human nature cannot be changed via politics.  Sure, it can be diverted for a time, but not changed.  

2).  To maintain power over others by him and his ilk.  As long as Barry and his liberal buddies are in charge of things, it doesn't matter how things are going (great or badly, same same), as long as they are calling the shots, that's all that matters.

If Barry supports something, no matter what, I oppose it in self interest.  He has shown this over and over to be the formula for what I believe.

If you wanted to lose weight, would you seek the counsel of the chef in charge of the training table of a sumo wrestling camp?  

If you wanted some advice on the stock market, would you seek out counsel from a stinking, filthy, drunk wino on the streets of The Bowery?  

If you wanted to get in on some beauty secrets, would you ask Quasimoto?  Or Pat Caddell?

No, no and again, no.  And of course, the same philosophy as laid out here can be applied to the mainstream media: if they like the idea, you better run for the hills.  If they hate it (like they did with the Brexit vote, they were absolutely apoplectic), then pop the champagne corks, happy days are here again.

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

America is awash in killer products

From the ABC News bureau, New York:

In the recent weeks, several gruesome deaths have been attributed to deadly products, widely available for sale on U.S. grocery shelves, and this humble and impartial ABC News correspondent has just a few examples to report to an unsuspecting public:

Vero Beach, Forida - a woman was killed by a shark attack while swimming in neck deep waters off the coast of Florida on Monday morning, sources say.  It was determined that the woman, Edna G. Getaclue, age 34, on vacation from Kentucky, harmlessly strapped fresh, juicy T-bone steaks to her arms and legs in a routine and common attempt to keep cool from the hot Florida sun.  When she went swimming with the steaks still strapped firmly to her, a hungry shark attacked and killed the woman, in a completely surprising move by a usually harmless fish.  When the butcher shop where the deadly steaks were purchased by the unsuspecting victim was contacted regarding the known deadly attraction to sharks, they had no comment.  It is suspected that the steaks, a known deadly product, had something to do with the deadly attack.  The family of the victim has no comment currently, pending criminal investigations into the rogue butcher shops' past evil activities.

Coeur d'Alene, Idaho - a couple was mauled to death by a 12' grizzly bear Tuesday evening while hiking in the wilderness near this mountain vacation spot, reports the U.S. Forest Service.  Apparently the couple, Harvey Q. Dipshutt, 33 and his wife Chloe, 28, had just stocked up their backpacks with Oberto beef jerky, and Hostess Twinkies for snacks on their hike when suddenly, out of nowhere the huge bear attacked the couple, killing them and eating the snacks. Incriminating shredded wrappers of both deadly but commonly available products were found near the bodies of the victims, reported a U.S. Forest Service official. Spokesmen for both Oberto and Hostess were unvailable for comment when asked by ABC News why such a known deadly bear attracting product was still on the market, despite their well known deadly properties.  Criminal and civil suits are likely to follow in the coming weeks.  

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the U.S. is awash with products widely known to cause injury and death, and yet they continue to be available on supermarket shelves nationwide.

This is Fredd, your impartial and vigilant ABC News correspondent, back to you in the studio, George. 

Sunday, June 12, 2016

Undesirables in our midst

It is no secret that as urban blight and crime spread, people with the means to escape will do so.  It's human nature: if you are exposed to danger, you take steps to mitigate your exposure to harm, and one of the most sure fire methods of doing so is vacating the area that is teeming with danger.

President Barack Obama wants to change human nature.  He doesn't like how human nature works in this regard, since the statistics bear out that most people with means within urban populations areas that leave are white.  And these white people that flee crime ridden areas take their assets with them, leaving behind those without means.  Those left behind to fend for themselves in these blighted areas are for the most part black.  Or in other words, Obama constituents.  

Barry doesn't like the way this is working.  According to a pie-in-the-sky, dues paying leader of the liberal Democrat voting left, it's just not fair that only people with money can move to safe parts of the country.  In a fair world, everybody should be able to live in safe, affluent neighborhoods.  And since he is the boss, he's not going to let this kind of human nature stand, not on his watch.

Under the Obama administration, the extension of HUD Section 8 vouchers has sky rocketed, and those vouchers have to be used somewhere, and woe be it to the landlord who tries to discriminate against a holder of one of these vouchers.  

This use of taxpayer money is just one of the man ways that Obama and his ilk get back at those rotten 'white flight' evacuees from urban crime, and who took all their money with them.  He will do his best using the ham fisted power of the federal government to make sure that the crime these refugees escaped will follow them.

A perfect liberal nostrum: rather than encourage conservative solutions to urban crime, such as job creation, elimination of excessive regulations, etc., his solution to the concentration of criminals and undesirables within an urban setting is to spread them among the honest, hard working parts of the country.  Once these Section 8 lowlifes infect an area, the property values plummet, and 'white flight' begins anew.

Perhaps President Trump should consider eliminating the Department of Housing and Urban Development.  That would go far towards eliminating undesirables in our midst.    

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

I hate bad cooking

I am at that point in my life where I have had enough well cooked meals to know the difference between good cooking and bad cooking.  And I suspect that I am no different than most folks: I prefer good cooking.

But it seems that in our politically correct culture these days, it is completely and totally taboo to point out bad cooking.  To do so would be to create conflict and confrontation.  You know, squabbles between the cook, the cook's supporters and the recipient of the cook's shitty fare.

Of course, we can't have that.  So here goes: I hate bad cooking, but I am forbidden from griping about it. When I am hungry, I will eat bad cooking.  Which in my extended family is most all the time.  In my household, I will not eat bad cooking and remain silent.  I will speak up.  To speak well of a poorly crafted meal will only serve to perpetuate the badness of the meal: if I say that I enjoyed something crappy, then I will see it show up on my plate again. Why encourage bad cooking?  I don't, at least not in my own home.  And my wife has come to expect a truly honest opinion of everything she cooks, and no phony baloney praise.  She is a good cook, and bats around .925 or so.  But every now and then, something turns out bad, and I let her know.  And of course, I let her know that the good stuff came out nice, too.  Which is most of the time.

But when I am on the road eating meals cooked by others, I am prohibited by this unspoken pressure to never criticize Aunt Sally's spaghetti sauce.  In fact, I am under pressure to actually praise it, even though I would prefer to flush the stuff down the toilet, given half the chance.  But I won't say boo, and I will eat the stuff, smile and when prompted indicate it was very good.

What makes bad cooking?  Plenty of errors are made by the average bad cook.  Here are but a few:

1.  Trying recipes out for the first time on guests.  Many bad cooks feel that they must impress their guests with fancy, schmancy food that looks great in the magazine, but they have never in fact ever tried to produce it in person.  And when the guinea pigs formerly known as guests try this never before prepared fare, it is usually more of the same: 'ummm, Aunt Sally, this is the BEST.'  And it's not.

2.  Poor guest management.  Well prepared food is best when served at the proper temperature.  Hotcakes, for example, should be hot when served (flapjacks, pancakes, all the same thing).  And steak.  Steak should be sizzling hot.  But not at Aunt Sally's, not by a long shot.  Aunt Sally will cook the steaks, and then let them cool down to room temperature because she doesn't want to serve them until everyone sits down, and that means waiting for Uncle Bert to wake up from his nap.  Bad cooking can come in the form of poor guest management.  If Fredd were the cook, Uncle Bert would have been sitting at the table well before the steaks were done.  Even if Uncle Bert had to be woken up by a bucket of ice water in his fat face.  There is nothing worse than cold food that is supposed to be hot.

3.  Improperly timed dishes.  A good meal is served with all the fare ready to eat and on the plate or in the bowl at the moment the guest sits down.  The steak will be hot, the French bread will be hot and crispy, the milk will be cold, you know, whatever is supposed to be served hot is hot, and whatever is supposed to be served cold is cold.  But not at Aunt Sally's, not a chance.  Aunt Sally will cook one dish at a time, then pull it off the stove and cover it with tin foil.  Like that is supposed to keep food hot.  It doesn't.  And so it goes for the rest of the meal: next the green beans, pull them off, then make the mashed potatoes.  Then pull them off the stove, cover the pot with tin foil, and on and on and on it goes.  Then the lovely and gracious Aunt Sally will serve her guests (assuming they are awake from their naps and ready to eat, if not, the food can properly attain room temperature, just the way everybody likes it).  And when the everyone sits down, everything on the table is room temperature.

In other words, bad cooking.  Of course, because everybody is hungry, the only words coming out of every mouth (even mine) is: 'great stuff, Aunt Sally, you really know how to strap on the feed bag.'

And now I am guilty as the rest of the gang, praising Aunt Sally's inedible garbage as great cooking.  Which ultimately leads to more bad meals in the future.  

And I hate bad cooking, you think I would muster up the gumption and say something.  But I am cowed by political correctness, and will put up with Aunt Sally's bad cooking until I die.