Saturday, December 31, 2011

Auld Lang Syne, Historically Speaking.

Happy New Year fellow bloggerites.

As the clock strikes midnight on New Year's Eve, one song will usher in 2012 in time zones
Linkaround the world: Robert Burns's "Auld Lang Syne." Even in Burns's native Scotland, many people don't understand all the words, but that's done nothing to diminish the song's appeal.

Canadian bandleader Guy Lombardo also played an important role in popularizing "Auld Lang Syne" in North America. He adopted the song in 1929 for use in his annual New Year's Eve broadcasts on radio and television.

May the New Year find us all in better circumstances. Yeah, I get that it ain't likely. But hope springs eternal.


Thursday, December 29, 2011

Firearms Refresher Course

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

3. Colt: the original point and click interface.

4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.

5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

8. If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

10. The United States Constitution (c)1791. All Rights Reserved.

11. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

12. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

14. Guns only have two enemies: rust and politicians.

15. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.

16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

17. 911: government-sponsored Dial-a-prayer.

18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

19. Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer and easier.

20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.

21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

22. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.

23. Enforce the gun control laws we ALREADY have; don't make more.

24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

FACT: Gun control - While drafting the 1968 bills, Sen. Thomas Dodd had the Library of Congress provide him with an English translation of the gun control regulations that the Nazis used to disarm Jews and political dissidents...

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Charlie Brown's "Christmas Special"

Human Nature

Some guy bought a new fridge for his house. To get rid of his old fridge, he put it in his front yard and hung a sign on it saying: 'Free to good home. You want it, you take it.' For three days the fridge sat there without even one person looking twice at it. He eventually decided that people were too un-trusting of this deal. It looked to good to be true, so he changed the sign to read: 'Fridge for sale $50.'................ The next day someone stole it!

*One day I was walking down the beach with some friends when someone shouted....'Look at that dead bird !' Someone looked up at the sky and said...'where?'

*While looking at a house, my brother asked the estate agent which direction was north because, he explained, he didn't want the sun waking him up every morning. She asked, 'Does the sun rise in the north?' When my brother explained that the sun rises in the east, and has for sometime, she shook her head and said, 'Oh, I don't keep up with that stuff..'

*My colleague and I were eating our lunch in our cafeteria, when we overheard one of the administrative assistants talking about the sunburn she got on her weekend drive to the beach. She drove down in a convertible, but 'didn't think she'd get sunburned because the car was moving'.

*My sister has a lifesaving tool in her car it's designed to cut through a seat belt if she gets trapped She keeps it in the trunk.

*My friends and I were on a Lager run and noticed that the cases were discounted 10%. Since it was a big party, we bought 2 cases.. The cashier multiplied 2 times 10% and gave us a 20% discount.

*I was hanging out with a friend when we saw a woman with a nose ring attached to an earring by a chain. My friend said, 'Wouldn't the chain rip out every time she turned her head?' I had to explain that a per son's nose and ear remain the same distance apart no matter which way the head is turned...


The United States of Fools

While tens-of-millions of Americans are out of work, losing their homes, and having trouble paying their bills and feeding their families, our elected representatives are living high on the hog. Of course, the illusion they create is that it's not your money they're spending. But, on an average salary of about $185K a year, how can they spend $10K-a-night on a luxury hotel suite? Can it be that we're all that bad at basic math? Or, is it that we're all that stupid. Personally, i'll bet on the latter. Our elected, lying, crooks know that sheep don't protest...

Terrorism 2.0

Thanks to 9/11, we are all painfully aware of most of the tactics used by terrorists. Shoe bombs, underwear bombs, I.E.D's, remote-controlled bombs, car and truck bombs, and God only knows what else. Most people with experience in dealing with these matters will tell you that there is no real defense against terrorism. The reason is quite simple. You can't fight what you can't see. The terrorists main weapon is anonymity, blending in with everyone else. This is one of the main tactics used against our warriors in Iraq and Afghanistan which accounts for almost all our KIA's and wounded. (and the PC'ized "rules of engagement" account for the rest) It is in fact, a tactic learned from the Viet Cong.

But what happens when that terrorists weapon is, your computer? What the linked story is showing us is the new face of terrorism. No loud explosions. No blood. No gunfire. But make no mistake, the casualties are just as real. In fact, there are experts who are saying this type of terrorism can do a lot more damage than exploding bombs...

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Merry Christmas to all

Merry Christmas to all......... blue

Friday, December 23, 2011

What If...

What if you're the president of the United States, and you're told that back in the 90's, another idiot who had your job introduced a program whereby the U.S. would exchange nuclear scientists and secrets with, (are ya ready?) our biggest enemy, China. And, that the program resulted in one of, if not the largest intelligence loss we've ever suffered. What would you do?

Well, if you're an anti-American, mooselamb, Marxist who lied and conned his way into the Oval Office, you would see a chance to a) pander to your radical left-wing, anti-nuke base, and b) make America weaker than you've already made it by reintroducing that same program, again!

Someday, if the American sheeple are ever able to stop listening to all their electronic devises and take those idiotic little headphones out of their ears, they're going to hear a very loud noise. That noise is the whole world laughing at us...

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Mullah Obama's Magic Trick

December 21, 2011:

New Yorkers can be forgiven for shock at the newspaper headlines last week informing them that millions more of them were “near poor” or “low income.” They might relax a bit on learning that the “root cause” is simply new definition of poverty from the Census Bureau. Indeed, under the Census definition, a family in New York City is “near poor” if it has full medical insurance and an annual income below $77,000. (In Oakland, Calif., the figure is $88,000!)

The Census report actually put nearly half the US population as “low income” — and news stories typically implied the startling new number was the result of sharply deteriorating economic conditions. In fact, it was a surreptitious and dubious shift by the Obama administration, setting the “near-poverty” income level very close to the median-household income in most communities. (“Median income” is the point at which half the households have more income, and half have less.) Thus, it was foreordained that, using this new standard, the Census folks “discovered” that almost half the population is living in “near-poverty” conditions. That is, if you define “near poverty” as an income roughly equal to the median, that means that by definition nearly half the population will always be “poor” or “near poor” — regardless of any changes in actual living standards.

Obama’s new poverty measure will produce very odd results. For example, if the real income of every single American were to magically double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty or “near poverty,” because the poverty- and near-poverty income thresholds would also double. In other words, the president has introduced a statistical trick that gives new meaning to the saying that “the poor will always be with you.” The shift seems designed to promote Obama’s obsession to “spread the wealth.” By suggesting that many more Americans are poor or near-poor, the Census generates political pressure to raise taxes and expand the welfare state.

Of course, President Obama has already permanently increased welfare spending by nearly a third. This year, the government will spend more than $900 billion on means-tested aid, providing cash, food, housing, medical care and social services to poor and low-income persons. (This figure does not include Social Security, Medicare or unemployment insurance.)
This welfare spending comes to around $9,000 for each person in the lowest-income third of the population. And the new “poverty” measure is propaganda to raise the figure further. What does all this have to do with poverty?

For most Americans, the word “poverty” means a family that is unable to obtain reasonable food and shelter. Along that line, news stories about poverty typically feature a homeless family with kids sleeping in the back of a van. In fact, nearly all poor Americans live in houses or apartments that are in good condition and not over-crowded. Even under the old, stricter definition of poverty, only 4 percent of the poor became homeless during the course of a year — while the typical “poor” American lived in a house that was larger than the house of the average nonpoor Englishman or Frenchman.

Under the old standard, more than 80 percent of poor Americans had air conditioning, nearly two-thirds had cable TV and half had a computer. Most of the poor were able to obtain medical care whenever needed. Even in the middle of the current recession, some 96 percent of poor parents stated their children were not hungry for even a single day during the last year.
Clearly, there was a huge gap between poverty as it is understood by most Americans and “poverty” as defined by the government. And now Obama has widened that gulf. Under this new, propaganda-driven definition of poverty, the gap between common-sense and government poverty statistics will grow much larger. The Obama administration is twisting statistics to confuse voters, rather than providing accurate information...

By Robert Rector is a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation.Read more:

Monday, December 19, 2011

Blue Predicts

Blue's predictions for the November elections are:

Democrat - Obama/ Hillary
Republican - Romney/ Condi Rice
3rd party - Ron Paul/ Bachmann

the 3rd party will pull enough votes away from the Republicans that the Stuttering Clusterfuck Of A Miserable Failure will be reelected.......

Sunday, December 18, 2011

To ME, this was 50 STAGGERING Facts about our Economy

I'm still shaking my head. Shake yours too. I'm thinking of starting my New Years drinking early now. I'm just loading the first 10. There are some real humdingers from 11 through 50.

The following are 50 economic numbers from 2011 that are almost too crazy to believe....

#1 A staggering 48 percent of all Americans are either considered to be "low income" or are living in poverty.

#2 Approximately 57 percent of all children in the United States are living in homes that are either considered to be "low income" or impoverished.

#3 If the number of Americans that "wanted jobs" was the same today as it was back in 2007, the "official" unemployment rate put out by the U.S. government would be up to 11 percent.

#4 The average amount of time that a worker stays unemployed in the United States is now over 40 weeks.

#5 One recent survey found that 77 percent of all U.S. small businesses do not plan to hire any more workers.

#6 There are fewer payroll jobs in the United States today than there were back in 2000 even though we have added 30 million extra people to the population since then.

#7 Since December 2007, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% once you account for inflation.

#8 According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 16.6 million Americans were self-employed back in December 2006. Today, that number has shrunk to 14.5 million.

#9 A Gallup poll from earlier this year found that approximately one out of every five Americans that do have a job consider themselves to be underemployed.

#10 According to author Paul Osterman, about 20 percent of all U.S. adults are currently working jobs that pay poverty-level wages.

And yet, our fearless leaders are squabbling over WHO CAUSED this mess. Well, I think it's all of them. So Merry friggin' sad ass Christmas to all our elected over lords of the last 40 or 50 years, who put us here.
Santa Schteveo

Friday, December 16, 2011

Friday (Visual) Funny!

Tip o' the hat to my little brother, Tio Orso. Thanks for sending me this one Bruh!
It would appear that the 'teleprompter' plays a bigger part in the President's life than we previously thought...

UPDATE: Saturday, 06:35, I was wrong, HORRIBLY WRONG! I attributed this to the WRONG brother. This didn't come from Tio! It came from Schteveo's & Tio's LITTLE brother, Chris.

(this was an easy mistake. Chris, like me is a dyed in the woll conservative, Tio Orso is new to this side. He used to be from the DARK side. He was... a , non-voting, I don't care, no matter who you vote for it's all the same, liberal / moderate. Then he got married, had kids, ...grew up. Tio is a actor / comedian. I know he's the one who usually sends me stuff like this.
But not this time. I was wrong. It's OK though, I made it to December 17th this year without being wrong, or making a mistake!)

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Times Magazine does it Again!!!

In the past, Time Magazine has picked some real 'winners' as their Man / Woman / Person / Object of the year. We've had such luminaries as Hitler, Stalin, Ayatollah know, important people.
Well, justifiably that has changed over the years. It was originally a person who had made some major difference in the world. And those I noted certainly qualify on that front. But now, they've 'pushed' their choice, IMHO.
Time's Person of the Year, 2011 is...

Once upon a time, when major news events were chronicled strictly by professionals and printed on paper or transmitted through the air by the few for the masses, protesters were prime makers of history. Back then, when citizen multitudes took to the streets without weapons to declare themselves opposed, it was the very definition of news — vivid, important, often consequential. In the 1960s in America they marched for civil rights and against the Vietnam War; in the '70s, they rose up in Iran and Portugal; in the '80s, they spoke out against nuclear weapons in the U.S. and Europe, against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, against communist tyranny in Tiananmen Square and Eastern Europe. Protest was the natural continuation of politics by other means.

Massive and effective street protest" was a global oxymoron until — suddenly, shockingly — starting exactly a year ago, it became the defining trope of our times. And the protester once again became a maker of history.

I get it. Most of the 'journalists' in America identify with the left, they see the protesters as little journalists in training, they despise the power structure and want the world to be 'level' for everyone.
And monkeys might fly outta my butt too!
You want to see open and level? Send your resume to Time and tell them you're a journalist based on your two years on the college newspaper and 3 years blogging here. You won't even get an 'FO' Letter. Because THEY have power structure in their industry (like all industries) that keeps YOU out unless you meet THEIR internal standards. Plus, in journalism, the BIG story of the new decade has been the demise of newspapers.
And those papers are dying because they aren't making money. They are cutting back, slowing down, tightening up because money is in short supply. And what are the 'protestors' protesting? They are protesting because their governments are cutting back, slowing down, tightening up because money is in short supply.
Is it that the 'journalists' at Time don't get the similarity? Or, is it, that they get it, but they're too gutless to protest and strike at their bosses office?

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

It's a Brand New Day

Food For Thought

"You are a Republican. You consider yourself a “conservative,” maybe even a “Tea Partier.” But whatever you prefer to call yourself, the truth of the matter is that there are some basic facts of contemporary American political life that you detest.

First, the federal government has grown well beyond anything that our Founding Fathers could have envisioned. Today, it has come to assume authority over virtually every aspect of your life.

Inseparable from this first fact is another: You have far less liberty as an American than you should have under the U.S. Constitution. The exponential expansion of the federal government over the decades has been inevitably attended by an equally exponential diminution of liberty.

Third, both major national parties, Republicans and Democrats, “conservatives” and “liberals” alike, in spite of their assurances to the contrary, have continued to feed the Leviathan that is our federal government.

You want change. You want real change.

More specifically, you want for your elected representatives to finally — finally! — walk in accordance with their talk. You want, in other words, for Republicans to proceed to revoke the Big Government agenda that has dominated American politics for most of the 20th century to the present. You ache for politicians who will fight to restore the constitutional Republic that our Founders bequeathed to us, politicians who will supplement their rhetoric of “limited government” with real action.

As a self-avowed “conservative” or Tea Partier, you have had it with establishment Republicans. You have had it with those prominent figures in your own party who live to convince “independents” and “moderates” that it is “an open tent,” so to speak, a party able and willing to accommodate a rich, even staggering, diversity of viewpoints. It isn’t that you have a problem with intellectual diversity in itself; it is just that you know all too well that the only viewpoints that establishment Republicans are eager to embrace when they speak thus are those that entail an ever larger role for the federal government in our daily activities.

Establishment Republicans have proven time and time again that they are most certainly not in favor of the “limited” or “constitutional” government to which they routinely pay lip service. With this you are exasperated. But you are just as exhausted with those establishment Republican politicians who never tire of trying to convince you that they are not establishment Republicans.

Since their crushing losses in ’06 and ’08 Republicans have expressed regret over having “lost their way.” While you are relieved that they have unreservedly conceded their betrayal of the very principles for which they have claimed to stand, you are no less frustrated now than you were while they were in power, for you still don’t know what in the Republican Party agenda has changed.

Now there is another Republican Party presidential primary race. Let’s say that you don’t know the names of any of the contestants. All that you know is the following: Of the seven candidates, all of them, save one, adamantly supports “the War on Terror.” More specifically, they support President George W. Bush’s “Freedom Agenda,” an enterprise that requires the U.S. government to deploy the time, treasure, and blood of its citizens toward the end of “spreading Democracy” throughout the world. It was for the sake of this mission that we have spent the last decade attempting to “fundamentally transform” Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is also for the purpose of waging “the War on Terror” that all of the candidates, save one, enthusiastically endorse “the Patriot Act;” the nationalization of airport security; and every liberty-imperiling measure ostensibly intended to provide ever greater security for Americans.

In other words, the very same policies that drove legions of American voters into the arms of Democrats in 2006 and 2008 continue to be embraced just as ardently now as they did back then by all of the GOP’s presidential candidates, save one.

Although most of the base of the Republican Party and, truth be told, most Americans oppose “foreign aid,” all of the candidates, save one, supports it. This lone candidate deems it unconstitutional and immoral that American citizens should be made to part with their time, energy, and money to subsidize any foreign governments.

All of the candidates claim to oppose the exorbitant spending in which our federal government engages. Yet none of them, save one, has proposed a substantive plan to address it. That is, none of the candidates, save one, has specified a single program, much less an agency, that he or she is unequivocally committed to eliminating. The exceptional candidate, in stark contrast, has explicitly and unequivocally identified one trillion dollars worth of programs and agencies that he or she would abolish within one year of being elected President.

Here is the proverbial $64,000 question: As a conservative or Tea Partier who seeks to reduce the federal government to a size and a scope that our Constitution would recognize, who among the seven GOP presidential candidates sounds most inviting?... "

Written by Jack Kerwick, Ph. D.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

The Dumbest Congressional Idea of 2011!

LinkI'm not sure yet, WHO the three Republicans are who voted against this, but THEY are the only one's who should be allowed to get re-elected. The other 97 (D)'s and (R)'s need to GO!

The bloody drug war in Mexico shows no sign of relenting. Neither do calls for tighter border security amid rising fears of spillover violence.

This hardly seems a time the U.S. would be willing to allow people to cross the border legally from Mexico without a customs officer in sight. But in this rugged, remote West Texas terrain where wading across the shallow Rio Grande undetected is all too easy, federal authorities are touting a proposal to open an unmanned port of entry as a security upgrade.

By the spring, kiosks could open up in Big Bend National Park allowing people from the tiny Mexican town of Boquillas del Carmen to scan their identity documents and talk to a customs officer in another location, at least 100 miles away.

The crossing, which would be the nation's first such port of entry with Mexico, has sparked opposition from some who see it as counterintuitive in these days of heightened border security. Supporters say the crossing would give the isolated Mexican town long-awaited access to U.S. commerce, improve conservation efforts and be an unlikely target for criminal operations.

"People that want to be engaged in illegal activities along the border, ones that are engaged in those activities now, they're still going to do it," said William Wellman, Big Bend National Park's superintendent. "But you'd have to be a real idiot to pick the only place with security in 300 miles of the border to try to sneak across."

Gee, that last sentence makes it all OK. No one would ever try to come across the 'protected' areas. I guess that's why they NEVER catch drug or gun runners actually at a Border Patrol Guarded Crossing.
But here's the bottom line, they've proposed to open the border and hold US indefinitely as terrorists with no recourse, ALL in the same week. Is THIS the country ANY of us took an oath to protect?
Not me!

Friday, December 9, 2011

What NOT to do.

I just watched the first episode of a show on the History Channel, called "Off the Grid". The premise is two 'regular' Americans are being 'chased' by a team of security experts. If they get away and complete 4 tasks, they win a Million Dollars. If they get caught, they go back to work Monday, knowing they're really stupid.
Tomorrow night (Thursday, Dec. 8) at 11 p.m. ET/10 p.m. CT, a new show premiers on The History Channel that pits two regular Americans against an "A-team" of surveillance experts in a race to stay hidden. It's called "Off the Grid", and the catch for this reality TV show is that the two contestants win a million dollars if they can remain hidden from the surveillance experts for a single day, while completing a few essential tasks in downtown Los Angeles. It's a real-life game of cat-and-mouse for the biggest purse prize in cable TV history.

Armed with only very basic information about the two contestants, a team of surveillance experts led by human tracking expert Kevin Reeve, is tasked with learning enough about the contestants to find where they might be and then to go out and actually bring them in. At Kevin's disposal are Rob (an experienced hacker) and Matt (a proven corporate security IT specialist). These guys can infiltrate your cell phone, gain access to public records information and generally put the digital eye on you. Also on the team is Dave, a former Navy SEAL who works a day job training SEAL teams in California. They're exactly the four guys you wouldn't want tracking you in an urban environment.

Despite their backgrounds and knowledge, co-producer Charlie Ebersol (who also produced NBC's terrorist-tracking program "The Wanted") said it's still a tough job for these guys to pursue people who want to remain hidden. He added that it raises bigger questions about being hidden in today's electronic environment.

"One of the reasons that this show is so appealing is that we all live in a digital world and people are starting to realize that what they do and where they go can be tracked," said Ebersol, who says the program is like a reality TV version of the movie "Enemy of the State".

The first two contestants got caught because the repeatedly used cell phones and credit cards!
They were both 'professionals', meaning, supposedly people with education. (educated does NOT = Smarts!) But having said that, they committed some really stupid mistakes. Like taking an 'anonymous' phone call from a guy (actually one of the electronic trackers) who kept them on the phone for 5 or 6 minutes under the guise of 'helping' them evade capture. It's an interesting thing to watch, IMHO, if for two simple reasons.

First, it shows you what NOT to do if you want to go off the grid or how to avoid being tracked.

Second, it shows just HOW broad the capabilities of LEO's and investigators are in the 21st Century, electronic, everything tied together, modern world. At any rate, HERE is an interesting article from the Security Industry, about the show, and surveillance capabilities.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

So Who's Protecting Our Military?

Doesn't that sound like a rather crazy question? Crazy perhaps, but certainly legitimate, and damned scary! As we speak, Rep. Peter King, (R-NY) is holding congressional hearings. The topic? Just how deeply has Al-Qaeda infiltrated our military? WHAT? Yes, infiltrated.

1) How many actual Al-Q members and sympathizers are in American uniform?
2) How many have access to "secured" American military bases?
3) How many have access to sensitive/secret military info, weapons, and computer systems?

BTW, i'm not talking about some obscure overseas bases. I'm talking about, "right here at home"! Sound nuts? It really does, until you stop and remember Ft. Hood.

For me, the question becomes, "will the weak, gullible, and gutless American people allow political correctness to destroy our military, just as it's destroying our entire society"?

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

The Peoples Republic of Amerika

( 12-6-11) -
The Departments of Justice and Education on Monday released new guidelines intended to help grade schools and universities "promote diversity" and reduce "racial isolation," even if it means students with the highest scores are left out.

"Providing students with diverse, inclusive educational opportunities from an early age is crucial to achieving the nation's educational and civic goals," the document states. "Racial isolation remains far too common in America's classrooms today and it is increasing," said Education Secretary Arne Duncan. "This denies our children the experiences they need to succeed in a global economy, where employers, co-workers, and customers will be increasingly diverse. It also breeds educational inequity, which is inconsistent with America's core values."

The guidelines, which are said to be consistent with Supreme Court rulings, explain that it's okay for educators to consider the race of students in "carefully constructed" diversity plans. Some of the examples included in the document make it clear that the goal of achieving diversity is more important than allowing schools to select the brightest students. Under the guidelines on admitting students to competitive schools or programs, the administration offers the following example: "A school district could identify race-neutral criteria for admission to a school (e.g., minimum academic qualifications and talent in art) and then conduct a lottery for all qualified applicants rather than selecting only those students with the highest scores under the admission criteria, if doing so would help to achieve racial diversity or avoid racial isolation."

Another example says: "If it would help achieve racial diversity or avoid racial isolation, a school district could decide to admit all applicants with grades that put them within the top quartile of their class at the schools from which the competitive program draws."For K-12 schools, the guidelines focus on school attendance boundaries, grade realignment and school feeder patterns. The guidance for post-secondary institutions describes how race can be taken into account in admissions, pipeline programs, recruitment and in mentoring, tutoring, retention and support programs.

Attorney General Eric Holder said the guidance will help schools provide true equality of opportunity: "Diverse learning environments promote development of analytical skills, dismantle stereotypes, and prepare students to succeed in an increasingly interconnected world," he said.

The new guidelines replace those laid out by the Bush administration in 2008...

(Borrowed from the patriotic minds at PIG)

"To conquer a nation without the use of military force, you must first control the minds of their young..." ------ Karl Marx

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

The 'experts' say you can't build a 2000 mile long fence, to keep the borders secure.

They OBVIOUSLY didn't ask any 'experts' from places like the old U.S.S.R. Or The 'Peoples' Republic of North Korea. Or The 'Peoples' Republic of China. Or The 'Peoples' German Democratic Republic.

(I sense both a theme and a fence system that DID work)

(could it be that countries that couldn't feed themselves, could build a fence)

(then, I'm pretty sure WE can handle it too)
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have promised to complete a nearly 1,950-mile fence. Link Michell Bachmann wants a double fence. Ron Paul pledges to secure the nation's southern border by any means necessary, and Rick Perry says he can secure it without a fence — and do so within a year of taking office as president.

But a border that is sealed off to all illegal immigrants and drugs flowing north is a promise none of them could keep.

"Securing the border is a wonderful slogan, but that's pretty much all it is," said Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. "Even to come close would require measures that would make legal commerce with Mexico impossible. That's an enormous price for what would still be a very leaky system."

Perry, the longest-serving governor of a state that makes up roughly 65 percent of America's border with Mexico, already knows that. What he's actually pledging, clarifies spokeswoman Catherine Frazier, is achieving "operational control" of the border — defined by the U.S. Border Patrol as areas where it can detect, respond to and interdict illegal activity either at the border or after entry into the U.S.

The U.S. Border Patrol says 873 miles of the border, about 44 percent, have been brought under operational control. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has said that "the border is better now than it ever has been."

OK Janet, if it's SSSSOOO good, then YOU move YOUR fat butt down there, and build a house about 100 yards from the border, and see if YOU feel like it's secure.

Pearl Harbor rant removed.

Nothing much to say worth talking about.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

37 y/o Mother of 15 says, "somebody needs to be responsible...", ...well NO DUH!!

On the heels of Adam Carolla's rant, I found THIS story. It's actually a series of reports that took a few days to shoot.
In Tampa, this woman was evicted for having 12 of her children living with her in a TWO bedroom apartment. (ya' think) And then she was in a hotel room, bitching that she has nothing. BUT, their stuff is ON the street, outside that apartment! She didn't take anything when she 'left'? I've seen people get evicted, they throw your shit OUT and it's still yours. She's too sorry to pick it up, that's all.
You gotta hear this brain dead chick to believe anyone could be this nuts! And she is a prime example of WHY we need to re-open orphanages in America. Or at least make adoptions a hell of a lot easier. Bottom line, somebody out there WOULD be responsible if the nanny state was more worried about the kids, than this crazy woman's 'right' to live like this, teaching children that "...somebody needs to be responsible...", but it ain't US!

Friday, December 2, 2011

From The "WTF !!" File

Here's a story i'll bet you never thought you'd see...

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Are You Ready?

In one month from today, January 1, 2012, the United States Government, with all it's power, will march into your home and officially tell you what kind of light bulbs you are allowed to use. No, they will not be using armed Police or Navy SEALS to enforce this mandate. Not at first, anyway. They will simply ban the production and sale of the incandescent light bulbs we've all grown up with. Why? Because they say so. Can you just see old Thomas Edison spinning in his grave?

As an example of how the Left is always looking for ways to save us from ourselves, decades ago, the social engineers of the Left, using the govt. as they usually do, declared war on glass. Yes, glass. Glass bottles that carried milk, soda, beer, etc. were demonized to the point where they seemed to be Public Enemy #1. It's an old and effective tactic used by the Left, even today. Instead of glass, which they said would end all life as we know it, we were "urged" to use plastic. Plastic containers, plastic bags, plastic everything. Today of course, those same Left-wing social engineers tell us that plastic is killing us and the entire planet, and that we should switch to glass. (which BTW, can be recycled endlessly)

How, you may ask, can they come into my home and tell me what to do? Well, you might want to take a look around at all the other things they now dictate, like what to eat, what to drive, what to watch and read, etc. While we've all been busy watching TV "reality " shows, while we've allowed the MSM to inform us about what's going on, we've become exactly what the govt., the MSM, and the rest of the Left wanted us to become, a nation of weak, mindless, sheep. You see, sheep don't protest. They simply go along to wherever they're pushed and do whatever they're told to do. Perhaps it's time we replaced the eagle with the sheep as our national symbol, or would that be too honest...