July 18, 2011

Cracks, Part II.5

In scouring the internet, it was revealed that Obama had raised some $86 million this past quarter and that he was ahead of his projection to raise one billion for his campaign. But, like so many things put out by this cretin, it just doesn't add up. So I went back to the original Miami Herald article and did some math. I also consulted another site (and will continue to look for more sources) and saw that some other things didn't add up either.

First the math.

The Obama campaign has declared that they will raise a billion for this race and as one commented on that in the article:

Some observers downplayed the significance of Obama exceeding his fund raising goal.

"No one puts out a number they don't think they can get to," said Nathan Gonzales, the deputy editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report.

I don't know what his starting point was, but let's forget that for the moment. According to the article, he has approximately $86 million contributed. That means he has to raise $914 million more to meet his goal. Presumably the deadline is November 2012 and let's start with June of 2011 -- the end of last quarter. That means he has to raise an average of $57 million per month from July 2011 through October 2012. That's $171 million per quarter.

He just finished his most recent quarter and officially reported that he raised only the $86 million. This included some 260,000 "bundled" donors and the Hollywood big-wigs.

I know those guys are well-heeled and all that, but my preliminary sense is that -- like current government spending -- the pace to the billion is unsustainable. One cannot believe that idiots like Katzenberg and Clooney will be donating the same amounts month-after-month. But I will keep my slide rule and calculator close at hand and will rework these computations as I receive additional data.

Now, the reality.

There is a good web site which will allow you to track this if this is/will become your obsession. It's called Open Secrets and will present the campaign contributions and spending for candidates as we roll along towards November 2012. Here is an except on The Chicago Jesus's efforts to date:

"..but, what's this, Uncle War Planner?" you say, "according to to Open secrets, he's only raised $48 million. where does the rest of the $86 million come from?"

Courtesy of the Miami Herald article:

The president's fundraising arm, Obama for America, pulled in $47 million, the DNC another $38 million. In a conference call with reporters, Messina said more than 260,000 contributors are "totally new" and had never given to Obama before.

I think the number that Open Secrets cites -- the $48,662,185 -- refers to the $47 million that the Mimi Heralds article attributes to Obama as collecting along with the DNC's $38 million.


But note that Open Secrets has Obama as spending $80,235,455 and that they have $37,110,346. on hand. Without going into a formal mathematical proof about what his starting figure was nor how much he is spending and to try to reconcile the two sources' figures, we can come to the following conclusions:

(1) Obama's campaign is collecting a lot of money.
(2) They are already spending the money on campaigning.
(3) They are NOT on target to meet their billion dollar projection.

Anyway, this analysis is getting pretty ragged (and math was never my strong suit). I do take heart in the following quote from the Miami Herald article, however:

Obama's healthy haul comes as Republican candidates have reported raising less than Republicans did in the year before the 2008 election.

But Messina warns "it's going to get tougher from here," noting that GOP outside spending "could be as much as $500 million."

Wertheimer said he thinks the eventual Republican nominee will enjoy "very substantial resources."
While Arterton said Obama has raised an impressive amount of money so far, it may not matter as much because the public will be more engaged as the campaign picks up steam. He expects high turnout in 2012.

"The more general attention there is on the race, the less effective money is," Arterton said.

Wertheimer thinks that both sides will raise and spend a total of more than $2 billion.

"This is simply opening day of an unprecedented campaign finance season," he said.

So the bottom line seems to be that no matter what the president or his opponents raise to fight this battle for the hearts and minds of the American people, Obama is selling a tired, old pig that has been on display for the past 30 months and has proven defective and incapable of accomplishing the job; the American public have become restive and discontented with his administration's inability to pull this economy from the recession it's in. No amount of money can buy enough lipstick and dresses to make this pig anything other than what it is -- a pig.


What ever happened to that anal pore over on MSNBC?

The irrepressible Steven Crowder has just released his tour de force:

Olbermann: The Lost Months

..and, sadly, Olbermann, being clueless on the ways of the internet, does not have a suitable venue to respond, though he desperately tries:

(and, YES, those are Michelle Malkin and Hannah Jiles in Steve's video.)


July 17, 2011


Because this is why:

..and so is this:

..these courtesy of  a pass-through from Nicky Goomba's blog. It ain't that I am old and get social security, it's because this mealy-mouthed, lip-flapping, incompetent, putrid pile of festering pond scum would utter such a veiled threat like that (while his Slimy Dem cronies put out that grandma-over-the-cliff Paul Ryan video) and the tongue-bathing, kneepad media let him get away with it.


Cracks, Part II

"THE POUTUS (courtesy of Big Hairy News)

SISTER TOLDJA MOMENT: So soon? News breaking courtesy of Bloomberg via Hot Air headlines (emphasis added):

A year after President Barack Obama signed into law the most extensive financial regulations since the Great Depression, Wall Street so far is putting its political money elsewhere.

Employees of Goldman Sachs Group gave Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney $238,250 in the last three months, more than workers at any other company, according to a computer-assisted analysis of Federal Election Commission data. Obama took in $10,113.

Four years ago, employees of New York-based Goldman gave $994,795 to Obama and $234,275 to Romney, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group. For both candidates, it was more than any other company’s employees.

I know it's not much and I know Obama's fund raising has raked in $86 millions to date, but it is a shift in the paradigm and the GOP candidates are totally unfocused and in contention with each other. But I am -- at the moment -- an A.B.O. (Anyone But Obama) and if Romney can drive a lance through his re-election bid's heart, then I am backing that horse.

Funny thing though, you get the whiny pissant spokesman trying to defuse this:

"It’s telling that they would make Governor Romney’s support for rolling back Wall Street oversight -- protections put in place to ensure that the financial crisis doesn’t reoccur -- part of their fundraising pitch,” said Ben LaBolt, an Obama campaign spokesman.

Yeah, whatever. They report how you guys are going after small contributions and staying away big interests -- or at least you say you are -- but recently Obama released a list of "bundlers" who contributed funds to the campaign:

Obama announced his fundraising totals on Wednesday, saying that the campaign and the party took in more than $86 million between them. The Democratic National Committee will spend most of its money to re-elect the president.

The president on Friday released a list of 244 people who raised at least $50,000 for his re-election campaign by donation bundling, the practice of soliciting friends and associates to make donations to the campaign.

..and whose to say that the "small contributors" to The Pantload's campaign are union members who have been shown the light of day by their bosses?

For now, Obama's machine owns fund raising (he's doing a lot of it on our dime) but it will be instructive to see what happens to donations to the GOP candidates as the field adds the likes Perry of Texas or even Sarah Palin.


Cracks, Part I

Pursuant to my last entry, these will appear from time to time, not as evidence that this turd will be flushed but to encourage those out there who may fall for the Kneepad Media propaganda about the difficulty of unseating an incumbent president -- especially this president. They want you to believer that resistance is futile, to coin a phrase, and that The Lightbringer is a shoo-in. Taint necessarily so and, at this point in time, there are some disturbing indications that Obama may have difficulty capturing the lightening in the bottle once again, like he did in 2008.

I am afraid this series will be shamelessly derivative -- borrowing on posts, assertions, statistics, and other numbers and facts -- to repeat them to whatever minuscule audience this blog may attract. I encourage you to blatantly rip off anything I post here to the same effect.

Let's start with today's numbers:

The Rasmussen daily tracking (a.k.a., Raz DT) has Fearless FosDICK at 45% but also note that he has been orbiting in the negative double digit approval index range since June 9th where he inexplicably went from -12 to -9 and then back up to -15. (Can we say aberration, boys and girls?) Also note that he only stays in single digit negative approval range is for brief stretches in January and February of this year. Altogether nothing to crow about. His stretch of Raz DT negative double-digit approval index days is staggering. Check it out.

The image of the Raz DT is below; click to embiggen.

(I recommend you consult the Rasmussen Daily Tracking as opposed to looking at their one-day post. It will give you a better ideal of the trends. Pay particular attention to the excursions of the Strongly Approve and Strongly Disapprove columns; they are instructive. There is a link from this blog to the Raz DT down there on the right.)
"THE POUTUS (courtesy of Big Hairy News)"

Well, that was Rasmussen. In other disturbing news for The Pantload, the Gallup Daily has him at 50% Disapprove/42% Approve. While not the lowest, it seems to be the latest in a series of numbers that is trending lower. Truth be told, though, Gallup is a left-favoring poll and the numbers seem to bounce off the low end of the 40% range.Click to look at that as well.

An interesting note is that you can download the actual data into Excel if you wish. There's a tab on the Gallup graph that makes it so.

But the question is always asked, "why is Obama in still in the forties?" I offer two explanations: Firstly, some of the MSM and pollsters probably skew the Dem/Republican/Independent laughably in an effort to keep The POUTUS's head above water. This assertion on my part could (and [probably will) consume a whole other post. For the moment, if you get addicted to following these numbers, I recommend you visit Hot Air and become a student of Ed Morrissey's excellent analyses (plural) Ed not only artfully unpacks the poll skewing, he blows truck-sized holes in the employment and job number spin made by Obama's crack economic team and their MSM handmaidens.

The second reason I offer is the infamous Bradley Effect. Go to the link and read up on it, I ain't going to explain it suffice to say that, unlike how they like to paint us on the right, we are NOT racist.

As an after-dinner mint, I offer the observation that Hugh Hewitt (Hew Hughitt?) made the other day. Realize that heretofore, Obama had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to press conferences. Now, in the midst of the so-called debt crisis, he's held three in the past fortnight. Hugh surmises that the internal polling numbers by his staff on this must be absolutely horrid for him to keep going to the well that often. And, as we all know, when he was popping up all over the place back in 2009, he did not wear well with the American public. One wonders how he will do when he campaigns -- well, campaigns more than he is doing now.

Anyway, you know what I mean.

In closing, I'll say that I want to continue to traffic in these types of tidbits; it's good intel and we need to keep ourselves in the game, committees of correspondence, and all that. The man can and will be thrown out of office if we get to work like we did in 2010.


July 16, 2011

One and done..

The Conservative Lady, a frequent visitor and gracious commenter here remarks on her -- and a lot of our shared desires -- that The Chicago Jesus be a one-term president. In a similar vein, LL -- author and practitioner of the black art of covert ops -- -- assures us that the POUTUS will end up on the scrap-heap of history. (Although I prefer to refer to it as the dumpster.)

I have had a post brewing within me that will take wings some day in the near future, but let me preview it by saying that it is becoming apparent that there are cracks beginning to appear in Fortress Obama.

To competently post this, however, I gotta do some research to bolster my intuition. If any of you have seen these cracks as well, I'd be happy to hear from you.


Figures of Speech..

On this, the august 32nd anniversary of Jimmah "I'm no longer  last" Carter's famous "malaise speech", I was ruminating on the parallels with the current nitwit and this heaving, sighing sack of crap and heretofore worst president of the United States.

For those of you who were (fortunately) not old enough to remember the Carter Years, the excerpt below will give you an idea of just how uninspiring this man was:

I recall watching this on TV back in 1979 and thinking that it was a good thing there wasn't a handgun in the house at the time (I had two sons, aged 5 and 3) because I would have reached for it and either emptied the clip into my head or the TV.

Yeppers, that's how depressing this message made me feel. It is also my recollection that it was soundly rejected by the American people who chucked this fool out on his ass in favor of a sunny, optimistic Ronald Reagan

This speech set the tone for the ensuing Iranian hostage crisis and cemented in the minds of most Americans that this man was truly an incompetent chief executive.

On this occasion, Laura Ingraham has come up with an interesting example just how derivative and unoriginal The Chicago Jesus really is:

What's even more interesting is that The Pantload seems to be making a habit of cribbing lines from other people to fill out his oratory:

I am sure there are many other examples of this shallow, incurious, lazy man phoning it in by plagiarizing others' words, but you get the idea. The chilling juxtaposition of Carter and Obama, however, calls into question the latter's wisdom that he would choose to use the words from a speech that epitomized all that was wrong with the former's attitude towards America: one of gloom and cynicism.

Here is hoping that. like Carter, Obama now has one foot on a banana peel and is loitering over the yawning abyss of historical ignominy. Or, as the Gipper himself might have responded:


July 14, 2011

Why teachers drink..

Somehow, Obama and the NEA have something to do with the dumbing down of our students that results in this:


The art of the put-down is not what it was..

These glorious insults are from an era before the English language got boiled down to 4-letter words.

  • A member of Parliament to Disraeli: "Sir, you will either die on the gallows or of some unspeakable disease." "That depends, Sir," said Disraeli, "whether I embrace your policies or your mistress."
  • "He had delusions of adequacy." - Walter Kerr
  • "He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire." - Winston Churchill
  • "I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
  • "He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary." - William Faulkner (about Ernest Hemingway).
  • "Thank you for sending me a copy of your book; I'll waste no time reading it." - Moses Hadas
  • "I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain
  • "He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends.." - Oscar Wilde
  • "I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend, if you have one." - George Bernard Shaw to Winston Churchill
  • "Cannot possibly attend first night, will attend second ... if there is one." - Winston Churchill, in response.
  • "I feel so miserable without you; it's almost like having you here." - Stephen Bishop
  • "He is a self-made man and worships his creator." - John Bright
  • "I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial." - Irvin S. Cobb
  • "He is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dullness in others." - Samuel Johnson
  • "He is simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up." - Paul Keating
  • "In order to avoid being called a flirt, she always yielded easily." - Charles, Count Talleyrand
  • "He loves nature in spite of what it did to him." - Forrest Tucker
  • "Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address on it?" - Mark Twain
  • "His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork." - Mae West
  • "Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go." - Oscar Wilde
  • "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
  • "He has Van Gogh's ear for music." - Billy Wilder
  • "I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it." - Groucho Marx
..to the above, let me add one of my favorite remarks about classical music made by Mark Twain:

"Wagner's operas are not nearly as bad as they sound."


July 13, 2011

In his own words..

Ed Morrissey, over at Hot Air, prefaces this new RNC ad with the disclaimer:

The upcoming election may be easier for the GOP than people think, since Barack Obama has agreed to star in most of their commercials. Oh, he probably didn’t offer his services explicitly, but thanks to his 2008 campaign rhetoric and laughably unrealistic promises, the RNC has a treasure trove of material from which to offer a comparison between rhetoric and reality.

..sure seems like The Chicago Jesus will be starring in a lot of these productions over the next 16 months, don't it?'


July 11, 2011

Visualize Whirled Peas..

Peas in a pod.

Split pea soup.

Snowe Peas?

Eatin' goober peas. (I know, I know.)

Peas on Earth, good will towards men.

"I always eat my peas with honey;
I've done it all my life.
They do taste kind of funny but
It keeps them on my knife."

"Me and Jenny goes together like peas and carrots."
~Forrest Gump

"I'd as soon listen to dried peas in a bladder, as listen to your thoughts."
~William Butler Yeats quotes

"In dealing with kids, no matter how little we understand their explanations, we must always remember that we're the adults. What this means I have no idea. It certainly means nothing to the kids, who instinctively seem to know that adults are merely strange people who have dopey ideas like "Stop throwing peas at your sister."
~Bill Cosby

"Banquet: a plate of cold chicken and anemic green peas completely surrounded by dreary speakers and appeals for donations"
~Anonymous Politician

“A few peas short of a casserole”
~Colloquial idiom

"I am as comfortless as a pilgrim with peas in his shoes -- and as cold as Charity, Chastity or any other Virtue."
~Lord Byron (English Poet)

"I want the right to bet Lord Byron!!"
~Trotter, the movie "Let It Ride"

..all we are saying, is give peas a chance.
~John Lennon or something


MOO-Chelle's Mirror

Stumbled on this over the weekend. It's a simply marvelous blog for dishing the dirt on THE WIDE LOAD FLOTUS. Don't just sit here, go there immediately to read about the throw-down between the Duchess of Cambridge and MADAME TRUNK JUNK.

"Mmmm..double fries!"
UPDATE: What do you 'spose the over/under on Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) in a food throw-down with THE WIDE LOAD FLOTUS? Well, if the princess ever wants to engage in such an activity, then she'd better get into some serious training. Seems The First Lady of Fast Food -- and head nagger in charge --is practicing the old liberal mantra, "do as I say not as I do". Per Andrew Malcolm's Top of the Ticket blog in the L. A. Times:

Michelle Obama has become the nation's foremost advocate for restaurant menu reform and healthier eating to reduce obesity, especially among children.

She has made much of the need for Americans to routinely pack away fewer calories and carbs, more veggies, fruits -- that sort of stuff.

Plus, of course, get more exercise.

But alas one of those annoying media types, a reporter from the Washington Post, happened to be on the scene in Washington today.

Of course, it's hard to miss when a busy street and a new diner are totally shut down to the public for its normal bustling traffic of lunch-hour customers for the benefit of one VIP eater.

While her husband was telling the country it's time to eat its peas and address the staggering national deficit, Mrs. Obama went out for lunch.

But the healthy-eating advocate was nabbed doing 60 in a 35 zone: At today's lunch Mrs. Obama downed a good-sized ShackBurger.

And french fries.

And a milk shake of the chocolate variety.

Andrew reports that The Shack -- where MOO-Bird was Hoovering up all the groceries -- says her meal scaled out at 1,700 calories. I'm thinking that she will be dining on a lot of meals consisting of peas and ice water to make up for that. But like Mell Brooks once said: "It's good to be the king queen.


July 9, 2011

Somewhere in Hollywood, a Communist-sympathizing Moonbat Quietly Sheds a Tear

By the Left Coast Rebel

...because of this news at the Wall Street Journal.

Should freedom-loving peoples around the world shed a tear?

Not hardly.

Sean Penn: Never met a Communist human rights abuser that he didn't love

More at Heritage's The Foundry.

Is CA-36 up for Grabs? Follow Robert Stacy McCain's Coverage of CA-36

By the Left Coast Rebel

This morning (Saturday) is the first time I have been able to sit down and check out the blogosphere....I'm behind on a lot of things, like the details and updates in California's 36 Congressional district race.

Robert Stacy McCain called me on Thursday and I promised to give him a big hat-tip and put my Google-search-engine-stamp on the salacious CA-36 story.

Here's the lede (the meat and potatoes) of the story, from Stacy, last month:

Janice Hahn is the Democrat running for Congress in the July 12 special election in California’s 36th District, to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Jane Harman.

As a member of the Los Angeles City Council, Hahn promoted a program to use taxpayer money to hire convicted criminals as “gang intervention specialists.” Predictably, Hahn’s government employment program for gangsters amounted to a taxpayer subsidy for violent crime.
A potential California liberal congress-critter (I know, that's redundant) that hired convicts? Sounds juicy indeed. It doesn't stop there, though. Stacy has followed with several updates from mid to late June:

Are you up to speed?

The plot thickens, keep your focus, this is crazy stuff.

Apparently this Democrat -- Janice Hahn -- was not happy with a particular L.A. news station coverage of her involvement in the convicts-for-hire program. Hahn's lawyers issued a cease and desist order against the station! Again, Stacy writes:
When Janice Hahn’s lawyers sent a cease-and-desist letter to KTTV Fox 11 — trying to stop the Los Angeles station from following up on its 2008 investigation of Hahn’s controversial “gang intervention” progam — they probably didn’t expect this. “Large mistake, madame,” says the award-winning Ace of Spades. Because KTTV and Chris Blatchford not only stood by their original coverage, they followed up with an in-depth eight-minute report that devastates Hahn’s credibility.
Here's the video from KTTV that Stacy eludes to:

Whiskey, tango, foxtrot! Hahn is facing her Republican candidate, Craig Huey on Tuesday. Does this lunacy mean that a G.O.P'er actually has a shot at a congressional seat here in the People's Republic of Kalifornia?

Stranger things have happened, like pigs flying and cows jumping over the moon...so we can all cross our fingers for next week's results. A Huey victory would be a pleasant palate cleanser after the November, 2010 Democrat rout here in California.

Follow The Other McCain's coverage of CA-36 here.

Gun Control?

Just sayin'..


One Big Joke..

A recent NY Magazine News & Features shows a bunch of pics of The Chicago Jesus the target of sycophantic laughter.

..but what if the people in this picture were laughing at this boob instead of with him?


July 8, 2011


Betty Ford passed away today. No qualifications, no "ifs", "ands", or "buts". She was simply one of the so many decorous first ladies who brought grace and charm to that role -- and despite her personal difficulties as a breast cancer and her addiction to pain killers. -- she presided over the social aspects of the White House as the wife of a president who arguably inherited the job as our chief executive in a most difficult time.

There were many rude and inconsiderate jokes made about her husband, Gerald Ford, and his clumsiness. (Lyndon B. Johnson once remarked, "He's a nice fellow but he spent too much time playing football without a helmet.") But these two were of good Midwestern stock and the type of people you would want in the White House after Watergate and Richard Nixon's resignation.

They came within a whisker of getting Gerry re-elected but, nonetheless, carried off their apres-POTUS and FLOTUS years with that quiet, plain, simple dignity that was their hallmark.

May she find happiness in being reunited with her husband and God bless them.



..hopefully in 2012, he'll be:



Michelle Bachman, first GOP candidate to comment on the latest massive stink bomb laid by The Chicago Jesus's [non]economic policies (emphasis added):

"Today's unemployment report is another stark reminder of the failure of President Obama's economic policies. The President promised if we passed the massive stimulus package that unemployment wouldn't go above 8 percent, we are now at 9.2 percent. Unfortunately, millions of Americans are suffering today as a result of the president's broken promise and his policy of attempting to create jobs through massive government spending that has added over 35 percent to our national debt.

"Amidst this economic freefall, it should not be lost that the architect of the President's failed economic policies, Timothy Geithner, will head for the door after he attempts to cement the President's legacy of massive spending and debt by raising the debt limit another $2.4 trillion dollars. We can only hope that the President will be right behind him after the next election.

"The President promised 'shovel-ready' projects that would create jobs, but now the President says 'shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected.' Mr. President, it's time to take the shovel out of your hand and stop digging. ATM's aren't responsible for our high unemployment rate; your administration's threat of higher taxes, massive government spending, and overregulation are."


Our Fearless Leader
Barack: using a real three-letter word, "you suck!"

As all of you no doubt know by now, the June jobs report emerged like a huge smelly -- well -- pile of defecation:

Nonfarm payrolls rose only 18,000, the weakest reading since September, the Labor Department said on Friday, well below economists' expectations for a 90,000 rise.

The unemployment rate climbed to a six-month high of 9.2 percent, even as jobseekers left the labor force in droves, from 9.1 percent in May.

Yessir, folks, for the umpteenth time, The Pantload's laser-like focus on the economy has yielded and employment picture somewhat akin to a still life of crap on toast. But the real howler was a statement by one of Obama's clown troupe, David Plouffe:

President Obama’s senior political adviser David Plouffe said Wednesday that people won’t vote in 2012 based on the unemployment rate.

Plouffe should probably hope that’s the case, since dismal job figures aren’t expected to get any better for Obama and the economy on Friday.

Most economists expect a report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to show that the nation added about 100,000 jobs in June. That’s not enough to keep up with population growth, let alone lower the unemployment rate or make a dent in the 9 million jobs lost during the so called Great Recession.

The article sure does not blow any sunshine up The Chicago Jesus's skirt as it goes on to say:

It’s looking more and more like Obama will have to do something no president has done since Franklin Roosevelt: Win reelection with unemployment around 8 percent.

Ronald Reagan, another president Obama is sometimes compared with, was reelected in 1984 when unemployment was 7.2 percent. Obama isn’t likely to see a number that low.

Maybe he should have checked with Joltin' Joe "Gaff-o-Matic" Biden before he mouthed off.

Also the word out on the bricks is that Plouffe's remarks -- aside from being mumbled by lips attached to a head firmly inserted into his rectum -- were a grevious insult to the 14+ millions who are looking for work. Me? Personally, I think it's time that Obama just flat submit his resignation and retire to pasture with Moo-Chelle where he can write books and play the Jimmah Carter "coulda-woulda-shoulda" game.

I'd say quit winners but the guy has been a loser since day one.


July 5, 2011


One of my jobs for the Civil Air Patrol is to periodically send out announcements for various radio communications training classes we hold from time to time. Invariably, these e-mail broadcasts bang up against the spam filters our California Wing membership set up for their accounts.

It is frustrating in the extreme to receive these arrogant little missives so, being the passive-aggressive bastard I am, I fashioned a response to reply to them:

I too sincerely regret that I am unable to receive your e-mail owing to some numb-nutz spam filter I set up because I cannot negotiate your e-mail and locate the "unsubscribe" link and accomplish what ordinary, reasonably technically competent users of e-mail are able to accomplish.

Oh to be sure, I am personally affronted by ads that suggest I might be afflicted by penile dysfunction and require some medicinal assistance to return to the former glory of my youth. And, verily, I do not want my virgin ancient eyes to be cast upon the comely derriere of a nubile 20-ish (although professing to be 5 years younger) woman attired in a tight sweater, short pleated skirt, bobby sox, and sneakers lest I be struck down by the Lord God Jehovah and rendered blind for my evil transgressions.

So, instead, I must live with sending out these condescending, pretentious, annoying notices explaining how you will have to run the gauntlet of link clicks and provide the most intimate details of your life just to gain an audience with me.

Why, I would not be surprised at all if you were crouched in your freezing garret, huddled over your keyboard, mouthing epithets like, "Aw blow it out your ass!"

Lordly and patronizingly yours,

William, the unavailable.

---- asshole@earthlink.net wrote:

I apologize for this automatic reply to your email.

To control spam, I now allow incoming messages only from senders I
have approved beforehand.

If you would like to be added to my list of approved senders, please
fill out the short request form (see link below). Once I approve you,
I will receive your original message in my inbox. You do not need to
resend your message. I apologize for this one-time inconvenience.

Click the link below to fill out the request:


There, I feel so-o-o-o much better; never mind the fact that my retort will bounce up against the very same spam filter once again.


July 4, 2011


Sometimes you walk through life in a fog and then someone comes up to you and awakens you with an oil-soaked 2x4 to the temporal lobes. Oner of my beloved frequenters, the author of The Conservative Perspective, did so with his July Fourth post.

Ironically, it goes to the shenanigans being pulled by a group of those very people to whom we told to piss off some 235 years ago today: our English brethren ~~ and, for the most part, our staunchest allies in this world. It seems that they have their own problems, principally how they show reverence for their fallen:

The issue is that politicians and the politically correct seek to have the route through the RAF town Wootten Bassett altered, thereby obviating this incredible outpouring of reverence for the fallen. It is at once chilling and awe-inspiring to see the reverence and respect the citizens of this town show for their returning heroes. As one commenter put it in an article in the London Telegraph:

It is always the "common people" who demonstrate class when class is needed. This is moving - and profound. And don't think that just thousands of Britons are standing behind you - there are many of us here in the United States who are proud to stand behind you as well. Well done Wootten Bassett - you demonstrate that there will ALWAYS be an England.

Joseph R. Martan

I was mindful of this tribute paid to those who served as I attended the Huntington Beach July Fourth parade today. As the veterans groups passed by, I came to rigid attention and gave them all a salute that they justifiably deserved.

Of special attention and smartness of salute were my brothers who served in Viet Nam. They may have been ignored some forty years ago when they returned but they were not today.

God bless the people of Wootten Bassett, Huntington Beach, and all of the other towns to whom these fallen heroes return. God bless the men and women who make freedom and liberty a reality from both Great Britain and the United States, once adversaries almost two-and-one-half centuries ago, they are our brothers and our fondest kin.


Remember me..

..it is not Memorial Day nor Veteran's Day but we should always remember them..


The Star Spangled Banner
By Francis Scott Key 1814

Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more!
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!


When, in the course of human events..

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton


July 2, 2011


CNN Money released an article summarizing the recent disclosure of the White House staff salaries. Some salient comments from that short article (emphasis added):

One out of every three White House employees makes at least $100,000 a year, according to data released by the White House on Friday.

Top earners pull down a salary of $172,200 a year, while three employees have a salary of $0. Most staffers fall somewhere in the middle.

The average salary is $81,765 a year, while the median employee salary is $70,000. The lowest full time salary is $41,000 a year.


Now that's all well and good and you might want to check out the original list at the OpenData site, but I am wondering about the staff mathematicians and statisticians at CNN who can state the average salary of $181 large while the "top earners" get $172 large.

Seems like CNN is just as dysfunctional as CBS.

UPDATE: Woodesterman points put that the average salary in the article said $81,000 not $181,000. Now, don't I feel the fool? Oh well, regarding my rant, as Rosanne Rosannadanna used to say:


Just so we're clear here..

..if this man, Herman Cain, were to become the nomineeof the GOP, I would work for my tail off for him. Were he to become our President, I would follow him to the gates of Hell..and beyond:

Content of character, not color of skin. If that is racism, then call me a racist.

BEDSHEET-WEARING, RACIST UPDATE: If the ticket were Cain/Rubio, I'd probably take time off from work, take out another mortgage, sell my firstborn, etc. to work for these two.


South California? Is Southern California Secession from the State of California Possible?

By the Left Coast Rebel

Secession is a possibility, even if remotely so. It would involve so-called "red" counties such as Orange, San Diego (where I live), King, Mariposa and eight other counties breaking off from the state, forming so-called South California.

The idea is being floated by Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Stone (good for him).

Many of us So-Cal business owners/tax payers/limited government proponents think (rightfully so) that Sacramento is broken beyond repair. Secession from California and formation of a "South California" would undoubtedly create a highly prosperous wealth-creating Hong Kong-esque hub set free from the choking tentacles of the progressive wealth-spreaders, welfare-state metropolis's of Sacramento, San Francisco and Los Angeles.

Video from CBS/Los Angeles:

Note that the link and the actual CBS video seems to be broken. All you get is a re-run of that awful AT&T commercial and then it hangs. The LCR is busy disporting himself in lovely San Diego (where a lot of smart, conservative people live) and asked me to fix the post -- so I changed it to a .png image. We all know that CBS is a dysfunctional MSM outlet anyway; sure hope the AT&T is better. But I ain't holding my breath.
-The War Planner

South California secession would also create another interesting dynamic. Because of the demographics of the 12 counties discussed, a permanent "purplish" swing state in electoral-college politics would be created, perhaps changing the nature of presidential politics forever -- if a significant chunk of California's electoral college votes were in play every presidential cycle.

It's a super long shot but interesting to contemplate nonetheless.

Hat-tip Leslie Eastman/Temple of Mut. Cross posted to Proof Positive and LCR.

Updated: There's an unscientific poll up at the L.A./CBS affiliate carrying this story. The poll asks, "South California: politics as usual or time to split?"

The results aren't even remotely close:

Updated x2: Warplanner, also a California resident, responds in the comments:
This is an interesting proposition and, for historical context, there was a movement on the eve of World War II where a number of like-minded counties in north Northern California wanted to secede from California and re-enter as the 51st state. In reading the link, you will find they were considerably more libertarian than their more southerly counterparts.

It would be interesting and welcome to separate ourselves form the liberal cesspool of San Francisco and their hand maidens in Sacramento. Hell. it'd be freaking marvelous!

..where do I sign?
Count Warplanner in the 88% of poll respondents above saying "aye" to secession.


July 1, 2011


..won't glob up this NRSC ad calling attention to Obama's "leadership":

But I will hasten to add my wish that he take some of that billion dollars he is going to raise to fix those goddam whistling teeth.


June 29, 2011


..or, I guess Gaff-o-matic Biden said J-O-B-S was a three letter word but, whatever. Like his boss, Biden is pretty much a dim bulb anyway.

Time magazine -- an unlikely source and part of the coterie of tongue-bathing, knee pad mainstream media -- questions the wisdom of The Pantload running on the central premise of his policies and accomplishments creating two million jobs.

As it now stands, the President’s stump speech features a backward-looking message at its core. Obama trumpets “more than 2 million jobs in the private sector” that have been created in the last 15 months. At a recent speech in Ohio he dismissed May’s bad jobs numbers as “bumps on the road to recovery.” In Greenberg’s estimation, this is an error on par with President Obama’s midterm election pitch, which described the nation as a car that had just gotten out of a ditch that Republicans drove into in the first place. The metaphor didn’t work, Greenberg explained in a recent memo, because “people thought they were still in the ditch.”

The usual suspects -- incompetent Ivy League faculty lounge refugees on Obama's revolving-door team of economic advisors and his campaign team -- seem to be agreeing with Greenburg that this "Mission Accomplished" approach is folly:

President Obama’s own strategists agree — but only in part. New projections of tepid economic growth under 3%, and unemployment over 8.5%, have all but erased hopes that Obama can run for reelection as the guy who saved America from the worst economic crises since the Great Depression. It’s not a convincing message when four out of five Americans still rate the economy as “poor.”

Irrespective of the flailing going on over at Team Obama Headquarters, even marginally referring to any policy of his rescuing the economy represents pure delusional folly. Going near that hoary old bromide of two million jobs "saved or created" is kind of like firmly grasping the to secondary poles of a 25 KV substation transformer -- bound to be a shocking experience.

This is especially true when you consider that fully 45% of these two million so-called new jobs were created in the state of Texas:

Richard Fisher, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, dropped by our offices this week and relayed a remarkable fact: Some 37% of all net new American jobs since the recovery began were created in Texas. Mr. Fisher’s study is a lesson in what works in economic policy—and it is worth pondering in the current 1.8% growth moment.

Using Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, Dallas Fed economists looked at state-by-state employment changes since June 2009, when the recession ended. Texas added 265,300 net jobs, out of the 722,200 nationwide, and by far outpaced every other state. New York was second with 98,200, Pennsylvania added 93,000, and it falls off from there. Nine states created fewer than 10,000 jobs, while Maine, Hawaii, Delaware and Wyoming created fewer than 1,000. Eighteen states have lost jobs since the recovery began.

The data are even more notable because they’re calculated on a “sum of states” basis, which the BLS does not use because they can have sampling errors. Using straight nonfarm payroll employment, Texas accounts for 45% of net U.S. job creation. Modesty is not typically considered a Texas virtue, but the results speak for themselves.

Texas is also among the few states that are home to more jobs than when the recession began in December 2007. The others are North Dakota, Alaska and the District of Columbia. If that last one sounds like an outlier at first, remember the government boom of the Obama era, which has helped loft D.C. payrolls 18,000 jobs above the pre-crisis status quo. Even so, Texas is up 30,800.

Interesting factoid and one you should slip into your ammo bag for those upcoming debates with the nouveau bitter clingers, the die-hard Disciples of The Boy King. It will be interesting to see the scales drop from their eyes when that data is presented to them -- especially if Texas governor Rick Perry gets into the race.

Still in all, it is becoming more and more apparent that there are cracks in the fortress wall of the Team Pantload castle.It is delicious to visit them, to chew on each morsel as it were, to watch with glee as the corpse twists slowly in the wind:

This is a time when the president needs to find his inner Bill Clinton, and feel Americans’ pain.  If he wants to be one of the few presidents to win reelection in a stagnant economy, he’ll have to devote less time to defending past policies, like the auto bailout, and more to offering specific solutions to help people get back to work. Think a 21st century version of FDR’s fireside chats.

..oh, puh-lease!

Just how is this ass clown and his coterie Keystone Kops advisors going to get it right now when they still espouse more taxes on businesses using that laughable mantra of taxing the rich.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said that President Obama believes taxes on small businesses across the country must rise in order to prevent a general reduction in the overall size of government programs.  Geithner added that the administration seeks to raise taxes on all individuals earning $250,000 per year or more, and this would necessarily include small business owners who file as individuals.

It's 2011, fercrissakes, and after almost three years of nothing but bad news, stagnating growth, and steadily-UN-improving unemployment Geithner and his boss still don't get it. So, given they have about 15 months to go, its unlikely that anything short of a miracle will cause a turnaround.

But Hopey-Changey is still out there giving those clueless speeches and makin' all that jive talk. Like Ramirez' cartoon above, you can put a dress and lipstick on a pig but, in the long run, it's still a pig.

UPDATE: It's instructive to read the comments of the articles one cites in posts. I was sourcing some of my assertions over at this article at The National Journal when I came upon one of those remarks that isn't edgy political dialog, but rather common business strategy:

Click to Embiggen

Deal with that, pig-boy.


June 28, 2011


..dunno; was chasing links and came upon this:

Thought you'd like it.


June 27, 2011


(courtesy Scooter Van Neuter at (Big Hairy News)

Seems that the First freeloader have done it again. They've sent the FLOTUS on a safari to Africa and invented some flimsy pretext to charge off part of the trip to us (emphasis added):

First Lady Michelle Obama’s trip to South Africa and Botswana last week cost taxpayers well over half a million dollars, possibly in the range of $700,000 or $800,000, according to an analysis by White House Dossier.

Many of the trip’s expenses cannot be obtained with specificity, including the cost of local transportation for the first lady, Secret Service protection, the care and feeding of staffers, and pre-trip advance work done by administration officials in South Africa.


While the goals of her journey – “youth leadership, education, health and wellness” in southern Africa, according to the White House – are laudable, many may question whether such an expensive outreach overseas by the president’s wife is worthwhile given the threat of the ballooning federal debt to the economy.

This is particularly true given that the trip, while featuring many official events, also included tourist components such as visits to historical landmarks and museums, a nonworking chance to meet Nelson Mandela that Mrs. Obama described as “surreal,” and a safari. Mrs. Obama also brought along her mother, her daughters and two of their cousins – the children of her brother Craig Robinson.

Right now, I am too flummoxed to comment further but there's a whiskey front advancing on the Warplanner household later tonight and I will take advantage of such a target-rich environment.

But for now, to quote Martin Sheen in Apocalypse Now, "Oh man, the bullsh*t piled up so high around here, you needed wings to stay above it.."