Monday, August 22, 2011

Obama the Oracle

A recent prediction of Obama, during a CBS interview last week:

"I don't think we're in danger of another recession, but we are in danger of not having a recovery that's fast enough to deal with what is a genuine unemployment crisis for a whole lot of folks out there..."

Because not one of his other predictions have come true, I'll stick with my financial advisor, who thinks there is a huge chance of another recession, or even a depression, and a bear market like he predicted in October 2007. He has a much better track record than any politician.

What does Mr. Obama want to do? (After he gets off vacation of course.) While he talks about reducing the deficit and balancing the budget, he doesn't mean now. No, no. He's talking 10 to 20 years from now. Right now we have to "double-down" on stimulus spending. Oops, I meant investment. Because the last few trillion worked so well at jump-starting the economy, which we know it didn't.

 That's because we haven't done enough. Well, Mr. President, I think you and your party have done more than enough, and if you and Congress would just stay on vacation and leave us alone, we'll work this out just fine without you. 

Treacherous puppets of The Man

"There may be a touch of Stockholm syndrome in there, because anytime I see a person of color or a female in the Republican Party or the conservative movement or the tea party, I wonder how they could be trying to curry favor with the oppressors."

This was out of the mouth of actress Janeane Garofalo -- a former comedian who has become a vile, offensive, Republican-bashing bitch -- on the Current TV talk show of foul-mouthed and former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann.

The response from Michelle Malkin, a "person of color" herself, and a female conservative:

"I've heard more than 20 years of this oppressive windbaggery from do-gooder liberals who treat my unhyphenated American brothers and sisters and me as treacherous puppets for The Man. Their smug refusal to acknowledge free will, individual choice and true diversity of thought confirms that race-obsessed liberals remain the most unrepentant and odious racists of all."

Saturday, August 20, 2011

For those who survived the 30s thru the 70s

Got this in an email. Thought it cute enought to repeat...

TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED THE 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s!

First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they were pregnant.

They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can and didn't get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-base paints.

We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, locks on doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had baseball caps not helmets on our heads.

As infants and children, we would ride in cars with no car seats, no booster seats, no seat belts, no air bags, bald tires and sometimes no brakes.

Riding in the back of a pickup truck on a warm day was always a special treat.

We drank water from the garden hose and not from a bottle.

We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and no one actually died from this.

We ate cupcakes, white bread, real butter and bacon. We drank Kool-Aid made with real white sugar. And, we weren't overweight. WHY?  Because we were always outside playing...that's why!

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.

No one was able to reach us all day. And, we were OKAY.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride them down the hill; only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem

We did not have Play stations, Nintendo's and X-boxes. There were no video games, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVDs, no surround-sound or CDs, no cell phones, no personal computers no Internet and no chat rooms.

We had friends and we went outside and found them!

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.

We would get spankings with wooden spoons, switches, ping pong paddles, or just a bare hand and no one would call child services to report abuse.

We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.

We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.

We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them.

Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law! When we got in trouble in school, our parents sided with the school. It was double trouble.

These generations have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever. The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned how to deal with it all..

If you are one of us, congratulations!

You might want to share this with others who have had the luck to grow up as kids, before the lawyers and the government regulated so much of our lives for our own good.

While you are at it, forward it to your kids so they will know how brave and lucky their parents were.

Kind of makes you want to run through the house with scissors, doesn't it? Or at least eat a big bowl of real ice cream, not the low-fat variety...

Friday, August 19, 2011

Tax the miles you drive?

As vehicles get better and better gas mileage, we use less gas. That reduces the revenue the government collects because it taxes each gallon. Well, that just won't do. Democrats will always find a way to increase taxes.

By the way, is there anything that is not taxed today?

So to increase the amount of revenue for all of Obama's pet projects, Sen. Kent Conrad (D.-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, is expected to make a recommendation later this year on whether the federal government should drop the gas tax and implement the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) tax.

But it probably won't go very far. Even environmentalists oppose the legislation because they said it would be contrary to the incentive to buy fuel-efficiency vehicles, and that the technology required to collect the mileage information is an invasion of privacy.

But the idea does shed light on the way your average Democrat thinks.

What has become of America?

Originally printed in the local newspaper in Tawas City, Michigan, by Ken Huber:

Has America become the land of special interest and home of the double standard? Lets see:

If we lie to the Congress, it's a felony and if the Congress lies to us its just politics; if we dislike a black person, we're racist and if a black person dislikes whites, its their 1st Amendment right; the government spends millions to rehabilitate criminals and they do almost nothing for the victims; in public schools you can teach that homosexuality is OK, but you better not use the word God in the process; you can kill an unborn child, but it is wrong to execute a mass murderer; we don't burn  [history] books in America, we now rewrite them; we got rid of communist and socialist threats by renaming them progressive; we are unable to close our border with Mexico, but have no problem protecting the 38th parallel in Korea; if you protest against President Obama's policies you're a terrorist, but if you burned an American flag or George Bush in effigy it was your 1st Amendment right.

You can have pornography on TV or the internet, but you better not put a nativity scene in a public park during Christmas; we have eliminated all criminals in America, they are now called sick people; we can use a human fetus for medical research, but it is wrong to use an animal.

We take money from those who work hard for it and give it to those who don't want to work; we all support the Constitution, but only when it supports our political ideology; we still have freedom of speech, but only if we are being politically correct; parenting has been replaced with Ritalin and video games; the land of opportunity is now the land of hand outs; the similarity between Hurricane Katrina and the gulf oil spill is that neither president did anything to help.

And how do we handle a major crisis today? The government appoints a committee to determine who's at fault, then threatens them, passes a law, raises our taxes, then tells us the problem is solved so they can get back to their reelection campaign.

What has happened to the land of the free and home of the brave?

Another liberal talking point about Texas

One statistic that we’re likely to be hearing a lot over the next few months, and over the next year if Gov. Rick Perry becomes the nominee, is that Texas has the highest uninsured rate of any state in the nation, with one out of every four residents lacking health coverage (or 25.6 percent).

Those poor, poor Texans. And it must be Perry's fault to treat Texans so mean. (Perry has already been called "Perry the Meany")

But not so fast, batman! Statistics are useless unless you dig into the data and find out why the numbers are what they are.

The following facts are based on an article in the Washington Examiner:

1. Census data on the number of uninsured are often misunderstood or intentionally distorted.

2. The high proportion of Hispanic immigrants, a community that has a higher than average uninsured rate. In fact, if you look at the Census data on the uninsured, the four states that border Mexico are among the top six states when it comes to the uninsured rate: Texas (1), New Mexico (2), Arizona (5), and California (6). The top 10 included other states in the general neighborhood: Nevada (4) and Louisiana (10); and Florida (3), which also has a high Hispanic immigrant population.

3. It has been estimated that in 2006, 29 percent of the state’s uninsured were illegal immigrants.

4. Texas has a younger population than the national average, and as noted above, many young people don’t purchase insurance because they don’t feel they need it.

5. Another factor is that despite being a low regulation state in many ways, Texas actually ranks fourth when it comes to mandating insurers offer certain benefits in all of their policies, according to a Council on Affordable Health Insurance report. Texas has 60 such mandates driving up the cost of insurance, such as making sure policies cover in vitro fertilization and morbid obesity treatment. Perry opposed most of these mandates, but was overridden by the State Legislature.

Perry will have a tough time defending the insured rate in Texas, because the underlying reasons are complicated, which can't be crammed into a 30-second sound bite.

And then, if you're a liberal, you won't listen anyway.

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Refuting liberal talking points about Texas

I knew it wouldn't take long after Gov. Rick Perry announced his presidential campaign before all the pundits came out with "facts" about how Texas is really a bad place and Perry is a bad governor. I've heard it all before, but most of it is not based on any thoughtful analysis of the real data.

Here's one example. One writer compared the median income in California vs. Texas, stating that the level of income in Texas was so much worse than anywhere else. California has a median income of $56,000 while Texas comes in at $48,000. Now go look at the cost of living and decide which income has more purchasing power. Texas blows California away. According to, a one-bedroom apartment in Los Angeles ranges from $1,500 to $2,500 a month. In Dallas, the same apartment rents for $700 to $1,200. You can get a fairly nice three-bedroom, 1400-square-foot house in the Dallas area for about $100,000, maybe a little more. Try that in California.

But don't get me wrong. Texas ain't perfect and I haven't decided if I'd vote for Perry. And while there is no income tax, property taxes make up for it.  Take a look at Texas' neighbor Oklahoma, with an income tax, but lower property taxes. And it's scorchingly hot here in the summer.  Like Phoenix, but with a little extra humidity thrown in. But the winters are much colder. Half the state is mostly desert, and it's pretty flat. I like mountains, so I'll probably not retire here, but many people from California and New York are doing so right now. But baby, there are jobs here.

Here's some more liberal myths (thanks to

Texas Liberal Myth #2: Texas' 8.2 percent unemployment is hardly exceptional - Texas is adding jobs at a rate faster than any state at 2.2 percent. But the state's unemployment rate is 8.2 percent, which is higher than blue states like Massachusetts and New York. How is this possible? Easy. Texas' population is growing much faster than any other state. They have added 739,000 residents since the recession began. If Texas had the same population at the beginning of the recession that they do now, its unemployment rate would be 2.3%.

Texas Liberal Myth #3: Texas has only created low-paying jobs - Texas median hourly wage is $15.14 which is actually slightly below the median (28th out of 51 regions). But wages in Texas have actually increased in Texas since the recession began. In fact, since the recession started hourly wages in Texas have increased at a 6th fastest pace in the nation. And as stated above, the cost of living in Texas more than makes up for slightly lower wages.

Texas Liberal Myth #3: Texas wouldn't be leading in job creation without the oil industry - Energy has been a major source of job growth in Texas. In the last year, 25 percent of all job growth has come from the energy sector (which includes all natural gas, coal, and electricity generation). But even if you remove all of Texas' energy-job growth, it would still lead the nation in job creation.

At, the following line of reasoning highlights the errors in thinking made by many people:
One can argue that Perry had very little to do with the job situation in Texas, but such a person should probably prepare themselves for the consequences of that line of reasoning. If Rick Perry had nothing to do with creating jobs in Texas, than why does Obama have something to do with creating jobs anywhere? And why would someone advocate any sort of "job creating" policies if policies don't seem to matter when it comes to the decade-long governor of Texas? In short, it seems to me that this line of reasoning, in addition to sounding desperate and partisan, hogties its adherents into a position where they are simultaneously saying that government doesn't create jobs while arguing for a set of policies where government will create jobs.
You can also read about more myths and why there aren't really true, with charts and data sources. Another author blows Debbie Wasserman's (DNC Chairman) reasoning out the water.

So the next time you hear left-wing talking points about Texas coming from the mouths of Democrats, or MSNBC, the Huffington Post, bloggers, or other "news" sources, think again. While I may or may not support Perry for president, I'm pretty tired on "informed" people blowing "facts" out of their rear ends. If you want to refute this post, you'd better have some hard data, with links, and not some reference to a idiot blogger.

Yea, I get cranky about this. So be it. I'm just tired of all the bool sheet, as they say in Texas.

Worst President Ever!

"President Obama is barnstorming the heartland to boost U.S. jobs in a taxpayer-financed luxury bus the government had custom built -- in Canada, The New York Post has learned."

What a jerk. First, he should have had the bus customized here, in the United States of America. Second, he shouldn't even use a bus at my expense. Third, he isn't boosting anything except his own ego.

Can't wait until we get this ass out of office.

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Just as Gunnery Sgt Ermey would say

For more information about the Gunnery Sgt. Ermy, see R. Lee Ermey at Wikpedia. (Hint: He played a therapist in a Geico commericial, among many other tv and film projects).

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Obama's lack of leadership

After all that has happened in the last week, what is our "leader" in the White House calling for?

1. Extend the payroll tax cut. As if that really worked in the first place.
2. Extend unemployment benefits beyond 99 weeks. Another great program that has completely failed to lower unemployment. It actually makes it worse.
3. More "investment." Let's build some roads and bridges. Really? Let's spend some more money we don't have. That should do the trick.

"Markets go up and markets go down," was his response to the recent implosion of the markets. What a lack of insight this man has.

Is he really trying to destroy us from within? Or is he just incompetent?

But remember: None of this is his fault, or so he says.

Friday, August 5, 2011

Throw the bums out

Amusing quotes from Ronald Reagan

To highlight this day in history, Aug 5, when President Reagan fired 11,000 air traffic controllers in 1981, here's some humorous quotes from the gipper. And we all need a good laugh now and then.

"Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Barack Obama loses his."

Opps. Sorry. He actually said Jimmy Carter, but you get the drift...

"Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement."

''The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.''

''Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.''

''I have left orders to be awakened at any time in case of national emergency -- even if I'm in a Cabinet meeting.''

Would someone please educate Paul Krugman?

According to this quack, inflation is "hypothetical." A quote from Paul Krugman's latest op-ed  in the New York Times:

The Fed has by no means done all it could, partly because it was more concerned with hypothetical inflation than with real unemployment, partly because it let itself be intimidated by the Ron Paul types.
Time to get out of your ivory tower, dude. Have you been to the gas station or grocery store, looked at your electric bill, or even been out of the house lately?
I don't know about this guy, but ever time I turn around, something is more expensive than it was last week, last month, or last year.

The problem with Krugman is that too many people take his word as gospel, when it should be relegated to just another left-wing nut trying to form a economic theory through liberal filters. Doesn't work.

And don't defend him because of his Nobel Prize. These prizes are now not worth the paper they are printed on (even though the recipient gets a huge amount of cash.)

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Democrats? Republicans? Who created the Federal debt?

I read this all the time on left-wing web sites: "George Bush and the Republicans created our Federal Debt. (Or Reagan started it.)" And if you visit conservative web sites, just the opposite. "Obama and the Democrats exploded the debt."

Well, it can't be both ways. Maybe both parties are responsible. So what's the truth, based on hard numbers?

First, some assumptions for those of you who are a little fuzzy on how our Federal government works. Presidents submit budgets to Congress (or at least they are supposed to). Congress then takes that plan, debates and revises it, votes on it and when approved, sends it to the President, who can then either sign it, or veto it. If it's vetoed, it goes back to Congress for another round, until it finally gets signed by the President. In some cases, the President's veto gets overruled by the Congress, in other cases a compromise is reached.

So technically, Congress is responsible for spending, as outlined in the Constitution. But the President also has a huge influence in the amount and type of spending that is approved.

To get to the bottom of this, I created a chart of Congresses and Presidents and which party controlled each chamber and what party the President was from, beginning in 1953 and ending in 2010. I totalled all deficits and put them in columns based on who controlled Congress and who controlled the White House. The deficit or surplus amounts I used were in current dollars, not adjusted for inflation.

Who controlled what?
Republican Presidents: 36 years
Democrat Presidents: 21 years
Republican Congresses: 10 years
Democrat Congresses: 37 years
Split Congresses: 10 years

Who spends what?
Democrat Congresses: $10,350 billion
Republican Congresses: $1,397 billion
Democrat Presidents: $4,353 billion
Republican Presidents: $7,394 billion

(Note: I didn't include split Congresses, because in all cases except one, the Democrats were in control of the House, which has the most power over the budget).

The only conclusion I can reach is that the Democratic Party, when in control of Congress, spends like drunken sailors with no restraint. But, as Reagan once said, that is unfair to drunken sailors because at least they're spending their own money. Yet, on the other hand, many of our Republican Presidents should be ashamed of themselves for approving all the Democrat-approved spending. (In a few cases they actually didn't, because the Congress overruled them).

Well, it takes two to tango, and the result is that we are now more than $14,000 billion in debt (when you add in the 2011 deficit of approximately $1,500 billion), and by the end of next year this will go to more than $16,000 billion. The two worst years where 2003 with $892 billion (all Republicans) and 2010 with $1,350 (all Democrats).

For those of you weak in math, $16,000 billion is $16 trillion, or $16,000,000,000,000. This works out to about $52,400 for each man, woman and child living in this country. And here I thought I was finally debt free.

So it isn't all one party's fault, though in the long run Democrats tend to spend more.

But regardless of who's at fault, We the People are sick and tired of this and want Washington to live within its means. The rest of you who want more of this crap, or think its all good and we should be spending even more, should see a therapist.

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Tea Party Terrorists

Remember when Obama called for more civility in our public discourse? He really only meant that for Republicans and conservatives. Liberals and democrats are exempt.

Personally, I'm a little tired of the double standard, but I understand the mentality behind it. Left-wing tactics call for marginalizing your opponent. They know they can't debate facts; therefore, if you disagree with a liberal, you're a racist, moron, ignoramus, terrorist, bigot, homophobe, islamaphobe, idiot, extremist, crazy, greedy, and the list goes on.

When you try to correct their re-writing of history (see a good example of typical liberal rants here), you're at least ignorant, but more probably stupid.

Here's what Maureen Dodd wrote in the New York Times about Tea Partiers:

But, in this case, it was the president — and the federal government — being chased through dim corridors by a maniacal gang with big knives held high...They were like cannibals, eating their own party and leaders alive. They were like vampires, draining the country’s reputation, credit rating and compassion. They were like zombies, relentlessly and mindlessly coming back again and again to assault their unnerved victims, Boehner and President Obama. They were like the metallic beasts in “Alien” flashing mouths of teeth inside other mouths of teeth, bursting out of Boehner’s stomach every time he came to a bouquet of microphones.
So true fiscal conservatives are now monsters.

But wait, there's more. In another NYT opinion piece, Joe Nacaro wrote:
You know what they say: Never negotiate with terrorists. It only encourages them. These last few months, much of the country has watched in horror as the Tea Party Republicans have waged jihad on the American people. . . . Their goal, they believed, was worth blowing up the country for, if that's what it took. . . . For now, the Tea Party Republicans can put aside their suicide vests. But rest assured: They'll have them on again soon enough.
All that over $7 billion in spending cuts for next year (none for this year)! Sure, our politicians are saying they'll cut $1.2 trillion, or $2.4 trillion (they really don't know) or more over 10 years, but that doesn't even come close the balancing the budget.

James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal summarizes the whole mess like this:
The Obama presidency has reduced the liberal left to an apoplectic rage. His Ivy League credentials, superior attitude, pseudointellectual mien and facile adherence to lefty ideology make him the perfect personification of the liberal elite. Thus far at least, he has been an utter failure both at winning public support and at managing the affairs of the nation.

Obama's failure is the failure of the liberal elite, and that is why their resentment has reached such intensity. Their ideas, such as they are, are being put to a real-world test and found severely wanting. As a result, their authority is collapsing. And if there is one thing they know deep in their bones, it is that they are entitled to that authority. They lash out, desperately and pathetically, because they have nothing to offer but fear and anger.
Americans wants Washington to quit over-spending. But Democrats -- and liberals in general -- are acting like children who don't get their own way.

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Washington Examiner: Daily Outrage

Who: The National Institutes of Health

What: The NIH sent more than $90 million of taxpayer money to China to fund several public health research projects, according to the Daily Caller. In one of those studies, which cost $17 million, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention conducted a study of prostitutes, some only 14 years old, and their clients that looked into the use of microbicides as a way to prevent sexually transmitted diseases.

Where to vent: Call NIH Director Francis Collins at 301-496-2433.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: