I Think Too Much

What If We Cool The Earth Too Much?

2009-06-30T09:41:00.004-05:00

Now that the winsome idiots that we have in Washington have determined that the Earth is warming and the USA's industry, jobs, economy, and working class pocketbooks are at fault, and that legislation passed before anyone can read it is the solution, we must ask ourselves some questions. I've asked these before and not one global warming/global climate change believer can answer them.

Following the Ice Age the Earth warmed, was that a good or bad thing? Were there SUV's, coal-fired power plants, oil refineries, that caused that warming trend? If Congress and the UN and the "scientific consensus" had been around back then, would they have tried to stop it? Were the campfires that Ogg and Thag used to cook their sabre-toothed tiger steaks the cause of the global warming? If the solution to arresting global warming were to live more primitive lifestyles, would we have to live more primitively than did the caveman?

At what point will we know that we have cooled the Earth enough? 5 years? 10 years? 100 years? When will we know if we have cooled the Earth too much? How long will it take before we discover that our conservation efforts have caused a global ice age? Will the scientists then suggest that we drive SUV's, use more coal-fired power plants, return to using incandescent light bulbs?

Since the Earth has recently been in a cooling (and not warming) trend and this trend could continue for the next 10 years, how will we know if our efforts have had any effect? What criteria are being used to decide how much is natural warming/cooling and how much is man/made? Precisely what criteria are going to be used to measure the efficacy of this legislation? Who decides what these criteria are?

Since "scientific consensus" is all the rage, who decides how many climatologists constitutes a "consensus"? Indeed, is the "consensus" composed entirely of climatologists? Who decides the composition of the "consensus"? What if a new "consensus" declares that the old "consensus" is all wet? Is a "consensus" of idiots more correct than a minority of scholars?

These are just some of the questions that I have and that, sadly, not one adherent of the global warming theory has yet to answer.

And judging by the rush to idiocy shown by our parliament of whores, I seriously doubt that we'll ever have an answer, at least until we are huddling around a campfire like our Ice Age caveman ancestors did.

What Will the "Human Rights Groups" Say Now?

2009-06-27T10:07:00.005-05:00

As I've gotten older I've become more jaded about the motives and actions of the so-called "human rights advocates" such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. for the most part they poo-poo true human rights violations by the Islamic countries and the Islamic terrorists while focusing on far less egregious violations by western countries, particularly the USA.

Now it comes out that Iran is torturing protesters that I captures. You can be assured that this torture goes way beyond the sitting naked in a cold room or being slapped in the face and yelled at that Amnesty and others have accused the USA of doing at Gitmo. (Horrors!) Now I wonder if there will be international outcry and protests and cries of outrage directed at Iranian torture? Will the news media parade photo upon photo of the outrages of the Iranians? Will Amnesty and HRW demand severe punishment for the torturers? Doubtful. If anything, there will be tepid condemnation and not a peep of that condemnation will be reported in the media. Indeed, there won't be so much as a scintilla of the reporting on Iranian torture that we saw directed at the laughable mild "torture" inflicted by Americans. Indeed, when this news item was made public, most Americans never read about it in their newspapers or saw it on TV. If they did at all it was a news media outlet questioning the authenticity of the document.

Will there be any USA politicians who express outrage at Iranian torturers? Highly unlikely given the current administration's love affair with Iran. Remember that Obama had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the mildest of condemnation of the Iranian crackdown.

The Bad News Is That Pessimism Sells

2009-05-19T09:29:00.002-05:00

I was reading the Drudge Report and saw this post that said that our GPS satellite system will fail in 2010. Sigh, more pessimism. Me, being the eternal optimist, cannot understand why anyone would buy into this line of crap.

First off, you gotta understand that any article declaring that the sky is NOT falling would never get published in any news organization. Beyond the fact that by definition it would not be news it would have no "head turning" ability. Who'd glance twice at a news paper bearing that headline? Newspapers and other publications, including radio and TV exist solely to deliver an audience to someone paying to advertise to that audience.

Second, in most, if not all cases, you have to read well into the article to find words such as "...if nothing is done...". They are often the optimum words that indicate that the angle that the writer is taking is that someone is willfully refusing to action that is required. That is rarely the case. Most often, the person refusing to take the action required has a perfectly logical reason for doing so: it is actually not needed or an upgrade is in the works. Other times the writer is talking to some dolt who doesn't have the insight to speak with knowledge to current situation. The writer then takes the angle that the person speaking without insight has the correct view and the person who does have insight is the person forced to defend the indefensible.

Lastly, we need to ask ourselves the optimum question whenever we read a news story: Does this make sense? Look at the current question: Is the GPS system going to have a total breakdown in 2010? Is the US military going to let that happen to a system that is key to the operation of aircraft carriers, JDAM bombs, fighter jets, tanks, and the common ground-pounder? I doubt it. Neither will they let airliners, trains, semi-trucks, and common citizens end up without GPS service. The same goes for politicians, who would have to answer to everyone who relies on GPS service if it were going to suddenly go dark. Yet, you can be assured that in a few days or weeks you'll have folks running around exclaiming that the GPS system is failing and all of the satellites will suddenly fall to Earth.

If any of the satellites truly do fall from the sky, with any luck they will land on the heads of the folks who go around spreading this crap.

What REAL Torture Looks like

2009-05-16T10:10:00.002-05:00

So, with all of the chatter now on supposed torture by the CIA, perhaps it is time to take a look at what real torture looks like. It isn't slapping someone in the face or forcing them to stand in their skivvies in an air conditioned room. It isn't even waterboarding. It is the following, dated May 2007, and that can be accessed HERE. (If you access it, beware of very gruesome drawings and photos.)

In a recent raid on an al-Qaeda safe house in Iraq, U.S. military officials recovered an assortment of crude drawings depicting torture methods like "blowtorch to the skin" and "eye removal." Along with the images, which you'll find on the following pages, soldiers seized various torture implements, like meat cleavers, whips, and wire cutters. Photos of those items can be seen here. The images, which were just declassified by the Department of Defense, also include a picture of a ramshackle Baghdad safe house described as an "al-Qaeda torture chamber." It was there, during an April 24 raid, that soldiers found a man suspended from the ceiling by a chain. According to the military, he had been abducted from his job and was being beaten daily by his captors. In a raid earlier this week, Coalition Forces freed five Iraqis who were found in a padlocked room in Karmah. The group, which included a boy, were reportedly beaten with chains, cables, and hoses.

In all of the hoopla about torture, it is very surprising that no one talks about the torture performed by the Islamic terrorists. Far and away worse than anything that the USA has done or ever has done, it still flies way below the radar of most of the discourse in Washington DC or by any of the so-called "human rights organizations". The UN has completely and totally ignored it. The side effect of that is that the USA ends up looking like the only and the worst torturer in the world when, as you can see by this article, we are far from anything that the Islamic terrorists do.

A Very Scary Horizon

2009-05-09T08:46:00.002-05:00

Mark Steyn is rapidly moving up on my list of favorite commentators. But on the downside, his commentary, while spot-on, can end up being downright depressing. Essential, prophetic, but also depressing. I give you his recent article in Commentary as an example.

I give you a sample:

On the heels of his call for the incorporation of Sharia within British law, the Archbishop of Canterbury gave an interview to the Muslim News praising Islam for making “a very significant contribution to getting a debate about religion into public life.” Well, that’s one way of putting it. The urge to look on the bright side of its own remorseless cultural retreat will intensify: Once Europeans have accepted a not entirely voluntary biculturalism, they will see no reason why Israel should not do the same, and they will embrace a one-state, one-man, one-vote solution for the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.

The Muslim world has spent decades peddling the notion that the reason a vast oil-rich region stretching thousands of miles is politically deformed and mired in grim psychoses is all because of a tiny strip of turf barely wider than my New Hampshire township. It will make an ever more convenient scapegoat for the problems of a far vaster territory from the mountains of Morne to the Urals. There was a fair bit of this in the days after 9/11. As Richard Ingrams wrote on the following weekend in the London Observer: “Who will dare to damn Israel?”

Well, take a number and get in line. The dust had barely settled on the London Tube bombings before a reader named Derrick Green sent me a congratulatory e-mail: “I bet you Jewish supremacists think it is Christmas come early, don’t you? Incredibly, you are now going to get your own way even more than you did before, and the British people are going to be dragged into more wars for Israel.”

So it will go. British, European, and even American troops will withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, and a bomb will go off in Madrid or Hamburg or Manchester, and there will be nothing left to blame except Israeli “disproportion.” For the remnants of European Jewry, the already discernible migration of French Jews to Quebec, Florida, and elsewhere will accelerate. There are about 150,000 Jews in London today—it’s the thirteenth biggest Jewish city in the world. But there are approximately one million Muslims. The highest number of Jews is found in the 50-54 age group; the highest number of Muslims are found in the four-years-and-under category. By 2025, there will be Jews in Israel, and Jews in America, but not in many other places. Even as the legitimacy of a Jewish state is rejected, the Jewish diaspora—the Jewish presence in the wider world—will shrivel.

And then, to modify Richard Ingrams, who will dare not to damn Israel? There’ll still be a Holocaust Memorial Day, mainly for the pleasures it affords to chastise the new Nazis. As Anthony Lipmann, the Anglican son of an Auschwitz survivor, wrote in 2005: “When on 27 January I take my mother’s arm—tattoo number A-25466—I will think not just of the crematoria and the cattle trucks but of Darfur, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Jenin, Fallujah.” Jenin?
You can see why they’ll keep Holocaust Day on the calendar: In an age when politicians are indifferent or downright hostile to Israel’s “right to exist,” it’s useful to be able to say, “But some of my best photo-ops are Jewish.”

The joke about Mandatory Palestine was that it was the twice-promised land. But isn’t that Europe, too? And perhaps Russia and maybe Canada, a little ways down the line? Two cultures jostling within the same piece of real estate. Not long ago, I found myself watching the video of another “pro-Palestinian” protest in central London with the Metropolitan Police retreating up St. James’s Street to Piccadilly in the face of a mob hurling traffic cones and jeering, “Run, run, you cowards!” and “Allahu akbar!” You would think the deluded multi-culti progressives would understand: In the end, this isn’t about Gaza, this isn’t about the Middle East; it’s about them. It may be some consolation to an ever-lonelier Israel that, in one of history’s bleaker jests, in the coming Europe the Europeans will be the new Jews.

The Danny Gokey Hype? Oh, PUH-leez!

2009-05-08T07:43:00.003-05:00

I just watched the much over-hyped, nay BIZARRELY OVER-HYPED arrival of Danny Gokey at the Fox6 studios in Milwaukee. I was so taken by it that I got up and got myself a cup of coffee and checked my e-mail. I am sure that Mr. Gokey is a nice young man. To be sure he is a good singer. But then, to me, anyone is a good singer if they aren't off-key. He is a Christian and the worship leader at Faith Builders International in Milwaukee. Wonderful! But then, there are a lot of good singers in church. Most of them have their head on straight and realize that they are singing for the Lord and not for man.

But two weeks ago I was at Mitchell Field for a far more impressive homecoming, one that the local media totally ignored: The arrival home of 100 elderly World War II vets who, thanks to Stars and Stripes Honor Flight, had spent the day in Washington DC visiting the World War II memorial, Arlington, and the Iwo Jima Memorial. About 1000 of us, mostly family members, cheered on these vets as they walked (but mostly were wheeled) up the concourse.

One of them was my dad.

I saw proud former Marines, Army, Navy, and Coast Guard vets attempt to keep true to the code of their generation and look stalwart and not cry. Notice that I said "attempt" as most failed. I saw people, kids, grandkids, and great-grandkids, cheer these old men for bravery and dedication that occurred well before these kids were born. None of these old men had made their name via a contrived competition on a TV show. None of the folks cheering these old men can ever comprehend the degree of selfless bravery that it required for these men to do what they did. None of the crowd would be able to really put themselves in the shoes of these guys and comprehend the storming of the beaches at Normandy, or fighting a battle while freezing to death at Bastogne, or, as in the case of my dad, facing sudden death from a submarine attack while sailing in the frigid seas around Alaska on a cheaply built Coast Guard patrol frigate. The cheering crowd was not hyped-up by cheerleaders and TV producers.

Indeed, there was no media there at all. None from the print or TV industry. And that is a real shame. Not one brief video clip. Not a single picture in the next day's paper. Fox6 morning person Nicole Koglin was not there screeching with ecstasy about the veterans. Mark Concannon of Fox6 was not there gushing like an oil well about how marvelous everything is. Did state or local government even recognize this homecoming? No. Perhaps if Danny Gokey had said something about it they would have.

Am I bitter? I shouldn't be, but I am. I shouldn't be because Fox6 is only doing what most media these days does and that is hype pre-staged events that are spoon-fed to them by network publicists. The true heroes come home with dignity, unencumbered by the manufactured flash and glitz that we have come to expect. We now have huge community events, staged by event managers and show biz producers, for people who have done little more than excel at a sport or in the entertainment industry. Media personalities gush all over these contrived "stars" while the true heroes quietly sit back, in dignity and honor, and wonder at the stupidity of it all.

Ah, Dear Sweet Schadenfreude!

2009-05-07T17:25:00.002-05:00

I'm glad that Arlen Spector is now their problem and not ours.

Let's be frank senator, you've painted yourself into a pretty tight corner. Never the most popular fellow in the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body, you have at least always had everyone’s grudging respect as a tough, smart guy. We may not like Snarlin' Arlen, they['d say, but we’d much rather have him as an ally than a foe.
But in the space of a single week, you have squandered that respect. First, you alienated the Republicans by defecting to the Democrats and then you managed to annoy the Democrats enough to have them vote to strip you of your seniority -- the preservation of which was the very reason you switched parties in the first place.
Now you are the 79 year-old rookie senator on every committee the Democrats will consent to let you sit in on. Without that seniority, it is hard to see what you have to offer the voters of Pennsylvania to stay in office. It's not like anybody in the Senate is rushing to do you favors right now.

Thoughts on Governor Perry's Remarks

2009-04-16T20:40:00.003-05:00

Let me say up front that I have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy. They also died fighting for the Confederacy. One of them, Pvt. Joseph Hughlett of the 40th Virginia Infantry, survived what we sometimes call "Pickett's Charge" at Gettysburg and was captured shortly after that battle. He died in a Yankee prison camp. I became a Confederate Civil War reenactor to honor them. When I got too old for the rigors of that hobby I joined the Sons of Confederate Veterans to insure that the heroism and truth of the Confederate soldier who be remembered. I was the charter commander of the charter camp in Wisconsin and the first commander of the Wisconsin Division of the SCV.

When someone broaches the word "secession" my ears perk up. Texas Governor Rick Perry hinted at that topic and I listened. It's not that I'm a die-hard for secession. While I do believe that it is the right of every state to voluntarily join and voluntarily leave the Union, I question the practicality of such a move. We've had over 130 years for the states to become almost slavishly interdependent in ways that our ante-bellum ancestors could never have dreamed of. Drive along I-94 between Milwaukee and Chicago and you'll see trucks galore hauling who knows what between the states. Mitchell Field handles the overflow from O'Hare. Business travelers use Crites Field in increasing numbers every year.

But there is something about secession. The War Between the States cost the lives of well over 600,000 young Americans both North and South. While the South lost, the question of secession was never settled. The only thing that was settled was that that attempt had failed. But let me put that to you in a different way. I first heard this at an SCV meeting and it took me a long time to come to the realization that it is true:

Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland are not now part of the United States of their own free will. They had legally seceded, were invaded, conquered, subjugated, and made to do penance for over 20 years. But they never voluntarily rejoined the USA.

That is a truly scary thought. But it is an undeniable truth. True, the legislatures of some of those states DID vote to be readmitted. But those legislatures were sitting in session while still under the occupation by Northern troops. Sorta hard to vote against what the military authorities want you to vote.

It's a hard concept to accept, this idea that we forced our southern brothers and sisters to voluntarily join the United States. But that is exactly what we did. And we never did decide whether any state could do it again.

HE IS RISEN!!!

2009-04-12T08:17:00.000-05:00

Nothing expresses the joy of Easter like this timeless hymn.

The Cruelest Thing You Can Do To A Congressman...

2009-03-20T17:07:00.003-05:00

...is to trust him. I heard that line a long time ago in a speech by Dr. Mathew Sandel given to a Sons of Confederate Veterans meeting. Dr. Sandel was talking about how after we elect a Congressman he then goes off to Washington and forgets who is was that got him there. Dr. Sandel says that it's because we let him forget who elected him and what we expect him to do. I wish that I could remember the speech exactly. I'm afraid that I can only paraphrase that wonderful part where he says that the cruelest thing that we can do to a congressman is to trust him. Here is how I remember that portion of the speech.

We have to remember that a congressman is just another of God's fallen creatures. Many of them would like to do the right thing, but we don't tell them how. We need to be on them constantly and threatening them with political annihilation every moment of their lives. In the short story "A Good Man Is Hard To Find" by noted Southern author Flannery O'Conner, a mean, spiteful treats two robbers kindly in hopes that they will spare her life. After one of them shoots her, the other remarks "She was a good woman." "She'd-a been a good woman," says the other, "if there hadda been someone there to shoot her every minute of her life." THAT is how we should treat our congressmen. No one ever tells them what to do so they run off looking for the first person who will tell them. Then we complain that they would rather represent the folks in New York City and Washington DC than the folks that sent them.

I wish that I could remember the whole thing in all of its glory. It is a deeply inspiring speech, and quite funny at times. But overall it is like an arrow short right into the heart. It convicts us of the sin or trusting our representatives.

A Very Dangerous Comment

2009-03-20T07:01:00.003-05:00

Friday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports President Obama as saying in regards to entrepreneurship: "Show us that your idea or your company is best suited to meet America's challenges, and we will give you the chance to prove it(...)"

Sorry, Mr. President, but that is not how it works. Entrepreneurs DON'T NEED the approval of government. They certainly DON'T NEED to show "...that your idea or company is best suited to meet America's challenges...". And above all, the government is not the one that is the gateway to deciding who will have a "...chance to prove it...". You see Mr. President, in this country we all have what is sadly becoming an antiquated concept: Freedom. We can go out and start a hundred companies with incredibly stupid ideas and fail at each one of them and no government agency can say yes or no to that. Entrepreneurs don't have to go hat-in-hand to some bureaucrat to convince that bureaucrat that the idea is "...best suited to meet America's challenges...". If said entrepreneur thinks that it is, he/she can go balls to the wall to make a stab at success. That is the American way. We don't have the freedom to be successful. We have the freedom of opportunity.

Sadly, it seems that the current administration is trying to change the traditional concept of freedom of opportunity where by one is free to take his/her idea to the marketplace to be judged by the customer, to a more restrictive freedom of petitioning a bureaucrat for approval of your idea and then government sponsors it in the marketplace. The latter concept is very, very dangerous. It is a flame capable of starting a conflagration of all of our liberties.

And it is becoming more obvious each day that this administration wants exactly that.

Watch Out For Those Exploding Cameras

2009-03-05T11:40:00.004-06:00

Yesterday I was watching the local news on WTMJ-TV, channel 4. They promo'd a story about using a hidden camera to investigate car washes that might be swiping your change. Here you can read the promo for yourself. Well, the question that comes to my mind is: Why do they need an "explosive hidden camera"? Isn't that kind of dangerous. What if the thing explodes when they are mounting it? And aren't they afraid that the car wash guys might get hurt when it explodes? Why, if we need gun control in this country, what about exploding cameras???

;)

Paul Harvey...Good Day!

2009-02-28T21:13:00.003-06:00

I'm going to miss him even though has hasn't been heard in the Milwaukee area for the last several years. Before WISN-AM dropped him, followed by WTMJ-AM dropping him, I almost never missed his "News and Comment". Back when I worked in real estate appraisal in the mid-1970's, the entire office stopped at 3 PM while we listened to "The Rest of the Story". Paul Harvey was quite a guy. Another distinctive voice has been silenced.

The Rich Just Won't Pay

2009-02-26T16:31:00.003-06:00

President Obama has said that he is going to make up for the massive budget deficits by raising the taxes on the folks making over $250,000 per year. Tonight I heard the White House budget director staunchly stick up for the plan and aver that it will bring down the budget shortfalls.

No it won't.

The reason is that the very wealthy, the folks making over $250,000 a year, have an amazing degree of flexibility in their income. THE WEALTHIEST 5% OF AMERICANS ARE ALREADY RICH!! THEY DON'T HAVE TO GENERATE INCOME IN ORDER TO STAY RICH. You see, in the USA we tax income, we don't tax wealth. "Income" (what you earn) and "wealth" (what you already have) are two very different things. We don't tax Bill Gates on his multi-billion dollar fortune. We tax his income which is considerably less. Indeed, Bill Gates and many others have an amazing ability to reduce their annual income to zero via a lot of fancy legal shenanigans. If Obama's plan goes into effect, you'll see some of the wealthiest folks in the country suddenly making less than $250K per year. I can't believe that Obama's economics team seem to be blindly assuming that the very wealthy are going to sit on their hands and pay the tax increase. They won't. The majority of folks in that category will use every legal means available to reduce their annual income to a level that avoids a tax increase. As I said, those folks are already rich, they don't NEED to create additional income like you or I have to do. Yet, it appears that Obama believes that the very rich are going to just blindly pony up the additional percentages.

Remember when Bill Clinton put a big tax on luxury items such as furs and yachts? The yacht building business in the US, which is not a small industry, just tanked. Thousands were put out of work. The repercussions cut through the industrial panorama in this country as orders for engines, steel, electronics, etc. dried up. Foreign yacht builders saw a huge increase in their business and you also saw a lot of US yachts suddenly home-ported in places such as the Grand Caymans, Mexico, and the Canary Islands. Folks who made their living maintaining and repairing yachts suddenly were out of jobs. It didn't just affect the yacht building industry. We are already seeing the same thing happen to the private jet business. Those jets require a ton of maintenance. It isn't just the pilots. Their are mechanics, too. Lots of them. Suddenly there are a lot of those guys looking for work. The same goes for pilots and cabin attendants.

So, we could be seeing a pretty nasty convergence of forces in the coming days and months. By raising capital gains tax rates you will cut off a lot of home purchases and other investments as folks just hold onto investments rather than expose them to increased taxation. Add that to a financial slowdown among the wealthiest people as they cut back or simply don't create income because of the bigger hit, and suddenly you are going to see a lot of folks hurtin' for certain.

And it won't be the wealthy.

Remember Them...

2009-02-14T09:00:00.002-06:00

RINO Senators Arlen Spector, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe--remember those names. Remember those names when you are still unemployed a year from now. Remember those names when your grandchildren complain about confiscatory tax rates in the 70% zone. Remember them when a federal bureaucrat tells you that you are considered too old to get the surgery that you need to save your life. Remember them when your neighbor says that you are an idiot for trying to get ahead when the government dole is much more lucrative than any job you might find. Remember them when the job you got fixing the roads dried up after the roads were fixed. Remember them when four years from now nothing has changed except for the amount of money ripped from your paycheck by huge tax increases.

Above all pray that the folks in Pennsylvania and Maine remember that these three could have stopped this financial fiasco in its tracks but chose not to do so.

Hugging Henrietta Hughes

2009-02-10T21:16:00.002-06:00

Today President Obama struck out on another whirlwind media event to promote the "porkulus" package. At his townhall meeting in Fort Myers, Florida he "encountered" Henrietta Hughes, who is supposedly homeless and living in a pick-up truck. She sobbed about needing a house, a kitchen, etc. and then Obama walked over and hugged her, told it would be okay, and offered her some sort of assistance.

All very touching, if not staged. But I have a question: Why is he hugging folks who are in need and trying to screw folks who are making a living? All well and good to help this woman, but why isn't he hugging and feeling the pain of the folks who are busting their butts to make money and pay the taxes so that he can hand out trillions of dollars in pork and earmarks? How about hugging the CEO's who are creating and maintaining jobs in a lousy economic environment? How about getting all teary-eyed for the guys who are actually managing to achieve a measure of success? Instead of hugging the achievers in the marketplace, Obama is scolding and berating them and their achievements and their success, then turning around and gouging more and more tax money from them so that the failures in our society can be rewarded.

Why does someone have to fail in order for the "Hope and Change" to embrace them?

Has this country gone nuts?

The Teleprompter President

2009-02-10T21:12:00.003-06:00

I was in a teleconference last night and didn't get a chance to see Pres. Obama's press conference. I probably wouldn't have watched it anyway. But when I saw the news reports on TV today, my first reaction was "What's with the Teleprompters? Since when do presidents use Teleprompters at news conferences?" It also gets me wondering about how truly "off the cuff" the man's answers really were. Was this press conference truly spontaneous, or at least as spontaneous as most of them are? To be sure, most press secretaries readily admit that the reporters attending the press conference usually let the press secretary know the general areas which they will ask their questions. But Teleprompters?

Legalistic? Or Just Honest?

2009-02-09T07:57:00.002-06:00

I don't often write on theological stuff because, quite frankly, I find theology boring as all get out. Theology is what a bunch of old men talk about when they want to try to bore one another to death. They get all hung up, and nuts even about, such minor points as whether it will be a pre-tribulation rapture or a mid-tribulation rapture. Who cares? We're going to have a rapture AND a tribulation and God knows when it will be. All we have to worry about is whether we're in a right relationship with Him.

Well, yesterday I asked a lady if she had watched a DVD that I had loaned her of a sermon that James MacDonald gave on living as a Christian in tough economic times. "Yes, I did watch it," she replied. "He's awfully legalistic." Legalistic? Or was he just being honest? MacDonald preaches is a very, "in your face" sort of style. He doesn't sugar-coat the truth of the Bible and he often confronts you with what the Bible says vs what society says. In the Bible, God makes some very direct statements regarding such things as tithing, serving others, loving your enemies, forgiving others, and so forth. Is it "legalistic" to preach these things, to preach what God thinks if His children ignore His standards? I don't think so. Take tithing, for example. In Malachi 3 God commands us to "bring the whole tithe into the storehouse that there may be food in My house". He then goes on to say that we should test Him in this and see if we won't be blessed beyond measure. Is it legalistic to say that if we don't tithe, even during tough economic times, that God will withhold blessing us? I don't think so.

We Christians seem to want to throw around the term "legalism" with every c all by someone to live according to God's standards. Society has so poisoned our thinking that if we hear someone preaching a black and white standard such as tithing we call it legalism rather than rejoicing in the fact that God has made plain to us that we will be rewarded for our obedience.

A Nation of Helmsley's

2009-02-03T08:38:00.003-06:00

Copied from Wikipedia:
“I said : "You must pay a lot of taxes". She said : "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."[2]”
—Elizabeth Baum, former housekeeper to Helmsley (October 1983)

Is this what we've become? Probably not. But to be sure our leaders in Washington are apparently taking the Helmsley approach. I just can't help but feel that the current Treasury Secretary and the future Health and Human Services Secretary are the tip of the iceberg.

What is truly galling is that had Geithner and Daschle not been nominated, there is good evidence that they would still not be paying their fair taxation. How many other big shots in DC are not paying their taxes?

Beyond that, there is this: If the taxes weren't so blasted high in this country, and especially here in Wisconsin, then perhaps folks would pay them. Not even the IRS can claim to fully understand the IRS' own code. It is so complicated that the IRS' own service agents are immune from making false claims about what is taxable and what isn't. Perhaps with a bunch of lefties being caught up in tax troubles this is a good time for someone to suggest a massive simplification of the tax code. Flat tax? Sales tax? Who cares?

Just fix the blasted thing so that the "big people" pay their taxes, too.

'Splain Poetry For Me

2009-01-22T07:19:00.001-06:00

I really just don't get it. On Tuesday I was in and out of the car all day and didn't catch much of the inauguration doings. In fact, rather than catching only snippets of it, I spent the day listening to some excellent bluegrass music (Flatt and Scruggs, Cherryholmes, Roarin' Creek, John Douglas and the West Virginia Travelers et al). Later in the day I heard a reply of the poem that was read during the ceremony. I think that my reaction can be summed up in one word: "Huh?"

I really hope that no one paid for that poem. Am I old fashioned, or a country rube, to think that poems are supposed to rhyme? And where was the poetic rhythm, the old iambic pentameter that I had to learn in grade school? What that poet read sounded like the stream of consciousness that I have while shaving int he morning. "I gotta get an oil change today. Darn, I'm out of new razor blades. Why is it so cold out? Did I remember to close the garage door last night? Where's that styptic pencil?"

I'm wondering if you could poke inside of folks at the podium who listened to it if they'd say "This is supposed to be really good stuff. So, I better act impressed or I'll look like a dullard." I have a feeling that if you plied some of those folks with enough drinks they'd admit to you "As a matter of fact, to be honest, I don't know what the hell it was all about either. The guy next to me said it was incredible so I gotta say it was incredible."

If there is anyone here who could explain just what the hell that poem was all about, please explain it to me. And why didn't it rhyme?

But Can He Decide?

2009-01-19T08:27:00.003-06:00

Tomorrow we inaugurate Barack Obama as the 44th president of the United States. The moment that he takes the oath of office he will be forced to make a series of decisions. For the next four years he will make decisions big and small and every single one of them will have an impact.

Barack Obama has never had to make decisions before. He's never been in an executive position. In the Illinois Senate he studiously avoided making decisions on the votes that he placed. I'm not trying to re-run the campaign. Barack Obama is set to become my president for the next four years. May God bless him and guide him. But I have a huge worry and that is that I don't know anything about his quality to make decisions. Does he waffle and second guess? Does he make knee-jerk decisions? Can he lay down the law? Does he have the ability to stay the course when the American public tells him that he's wrong but he knows that he's right? Can he make a decision that droves down his poll numbers but is the right decision for the USA? Will he be able to ignore the clamor of world leaders and do what is right for the USA? We simply don't know.

That is my biggest concern with the man--we don't know how he makes decisions. As president, sometimes you have to make a decision in the span of seconds and very crucial decisions at that. You don't have time to take a poll or run it by a focus group. It has to be a decision that is based not on what the world thinks or even the American public thinks, but what you know is correct at the moment. George W. Bush, for all of his perceived faults, was a decision-maker. The world may not have liked his decisions, he may have had terrible poll numbers, But he'd make a decision and he stuck to it. Will Obama do that? Will he make a decision based upon what he knows is correct and stick with it even as he watches the public that now fawns all over him begin to call him every rotten name in the book? We simply don't know.

Perhaps Barack Obama will end up being the wisest decision maker that has ever sat in the Oval Office. If he does, it will be something completely new for the man. During the campaign his supporters constantly told us that experience means nothing, that Obama's greatness will transcend his lack of experience. Maybe so. But making tough decisions is a quality that goes far beyond just giving a speech or making a promise. On Tuesday the 20th he will move into uncharted water for him. He is going to be tested and tested immediately. Will he be up to the test?

I pray that he will---for our sake.

Sanders Gets Canned!

2009-01-04T20:16:00.003-06:00

Finally! Some good news out of Green Bay.

Green Bay - Green Bay Packers defensive coordinator Bob Sanders has been fired by coach Mike McCarthy, according to a report at nationalfootballpost.com.
Players on the Packers' defense had not been told of the move yet.
The web site is run by Andrew Brandt, the Packers' former VP of player finance, and Jack Bechta, the agent of cornerback Al Harris. No other details were offered.
Sanders' ouster follows the retirement of special teams coordinator Mike Stock by just a few days.

Perhaps the days of safest place for for an opposing team being 3rd and long are now over.

"Atlas Shrugged" Is Really Scary

2009-01-03T10:12:00.004-06:00

I've dedicated myself to reading Ayn Rand's book "Atlas Shrugged". It is a classic of conservative literature. But beyond that it is truly scary.

The book was written in 1957. But it could have been written last week. So many of the characters and plot points come right out of the pages of the newspapers today: Folks with a sense of entitlement to the earned wealth of others, folks who view their jobs as being the shrewd evasion of responsibility, and a government that is totally hell-bent on punishing success under the rubric of it isn't fair that someone has succeeded when others haven't.

The book is scary enough that it is hard to read for any length of time. I find myself wondering how close we are to this dark, dreary existence where "need" triumphs over "achievement", where those who have achieved find themselves facing punishment by a government that claims to want to "spread opportunity" and then cannot understand why business after business fails. Of course, the government declares the reason for its failures is that it didn't try to regulate enough.

"Atlas Shrugged" is a long book. The paperback version that I'm reading is over 1100 pages. Don't let that stop you. There are also lengthy sections of some pretty stiff philosophical discourse. But if you don't wade through it you don't grasp what happens next. Although the book is an expertly written mystery, Ayn Rand was first and foremost a philosopher.

Take the "Atlas Shrugged" challenge today. Just don't read it before you hit the hay. Trust me, it will keep you up all night worrying!

My Plans For 2009

2009-01-01T09:22:00.003-06:00

I don't want to make resolutions. But I do want to make some plans. Here is what I hope to do in 2009:

1. Lose about 20 pounds.

2. Exercise daily.

3. Stop being a convenience store junkie.

4. Finish reading "Atlas Shrugged".

5. Surprise my wife by how much income I've generated.

6. Be awed by the Blue Angels at Janesville.

7. Increase the impact of my ministry at Slinger Speedway.

Merry Christmas Everyone!

2008-12-25T07:48:00.001-06:00

see more puppies

Hoo-Ray for the Founder of Air America!

2008-12-22T08:01:00.002-06:00

At least there is one liberal who sees the idiocy of trying to re-impose the so-called "Fairness Doctrine". Jon Sinton, the founding president of Air America, has a column in today's Wall street Journal where he defends Rush Limbaugh and denigrates the so-called "Fairness Doctrine".

In the column Sinton writes:

As the founding president of Air America Radio, I believe that for the last eight years Rush Limbaugh and his ilk have been cheerleaders for everything wrong with our economic, foreign and domestic policies. But when it comes to the Fairness Doctrine, I couldn't agree with them more. The Fairness Doctrine is an anachronistic policy that, with the abundance of choices on radio today, is entirely unnecessary.

I couldn't agree more with what Sinton says. Read the whole thing.

"Who's On First" in Shakespearian English

2008-12-19T09:27:00.002-06:00

Take your mind off the snow and have a laugh with a classic comic bit, only as Shakespeare might have written it. Zounds!

Anthrax Scare In Green Bay

2008-12-18T10:06:00.001-06:00

My brother just sent this to me:

Green Bay Packers football practice was delayed nearly two hours yesterday after a player reported finding an unknown white powdery substance on the practice field. Head coach, Mike McCarthy, immediately suspended practice while police and federal agents were called to investigate.
After a complete analysis, FBI forensic experts determined that the white substance, unknown to the players, was the goal line.
Practice was resumed today after special agents decided the team was unlikely to encounter the substance again.

Nice To Know That.....

2008-12-08T18:21:00.003-06:00

I'm one of those gun owners who've been stocking up on ammunition. And if I could sneak it past my wife there is a a new pistol or two that I'd like to add to the collection. Here Obama tells us that we have nothing to worry about, that he will respect the right to keep and bear arms. He says: "I believe in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the second amendment," Obama said at a news conference. "Lawful gun owners have nothing to fear. I said that throughout the campaign. I haven't indicated anything different during the transition. I think people can take me at my word."

Attention your president-electedness: THAT'S THE PROBLEM!!! "...common-sense gun safety laws..."? Whose common-sense will be the standard? Chuck Shumer's? Yours? The only thing that we can go on is your record and it isn't one that makes a lot of gun owners feel all warm and fuzzy. You've advocated for draconian tax increases on ammunition. It would be just like you to parse your campaign rhetoric and say that it makes perfect common sense to raise the price of ammunition, or to say that you were talking about gun laws and not ammunition laws. By the time that a lot of this stuff hits the floor, market forces will drive up the costs of guns and ammo, costs which happen to already be sky-high thanks to Obama's buddies in the trial lawyers.

Perhaps if Obama could point to meaningful anti-criminal legislation where he favors stiff, draconian penalties for criminals who perpetrate any felony with a gun in their possession, then maybe we wouldn't be running out trying to buy all of the ammunition that we can get our hands on. As it is, I have a lot more to say. But I'm headed out to Wal-Mart to buy some more jumbo boxes of .45 ACP and 9 mm.

Fred Explains the Financial Mess

2008-12-06T16:48:00.003-06:00

Actually, he's got it figured out just about spot on! Tongue firmly in cheek, here's Fred Thompson telling us that we have a serious mess on our hands.

Do the Big Three Know What They Are In For?

2008-12-05T09:38:00.004-06:00

Today the CEO's of the Big Three automakers again prostrate themselves before Congress in a plea for money. Do they realize that if they get that money they suddenly have a 535-member committee running their companies? Might I add that that committee is largely devoid of any knowledge of how to run a major corporation? True, the committee can not do any worse than the corporations have already done. But is that the level of accomplishment that is needed? Add to the fact that there are scads of special interest groups that will want to tell the Big Three, via the "select committee 535", how to run their companies and what types of cars to produce.

We are told that bankruptcy is the worst thing that can happen to these companies and the country if they go bankrupt. I aver that being ruled by a committee of 535 incompetents is even worse than that.

Big Three Execs vs Al Gore

2008-12-04T13:11:00.002-06:00

This came to mind today. A few weeks ago there was a huge outcry over the CEO's of the Big Three car makers flying private jets to Washington DC hearings. But if memory serves me correctly, Al Gore flew a private jet to his hearings before Congress and was squired around in gas guzzling SUV's as well.

Why wasn't he harassed about not driving his Honda Prius to DC?

Chambliss Wins In Georgia--NUTS!

2008-12-03T13:59:00.002-06:00

Okay, I'll admit it. I was really looking forward to the Republicans not being able to stop the Democrat juggernaut. Don't get me wrong--I'm as conservative as they come and I even vote Republican (but not as much as I did during the 80's).

But with Saxby Chambliss (R) winning in Georgia the Democrats no longer have a "super majority" in the Senate. That means that they will be able to pin any policy failures on the Republicans even it is blame for the Republicans not stopping the measure from advancing. I'd have much rather the Republicans be in the position of being powerless to stop anything and also blameless. They might still find themselves powerless as solid RINOs like Snowe, Collins, Hagel and others will probably vote with the Dems most of the time.

But for now, we can look for the Dems to blame the Republicans for every failure and laud themselves for every success.

The Lonliest People In The World

2008-12-01T08:03:00.003-06:00

I keep searching and searching the Internet for something: A group that speaks out for the victims of islamic terrorism. There are none. Those folks who have been tortured, maimed, abused, and had family members killed and dismembered in grotesque ways, are perhaps the loneliest people in the world.
Who speaks out for them? Who makes sure that the rights of the victims are assured? When a terrorist group takes people hostage, who assures that the hostages have their human rights? Not their governments, at least for the greatest part. Most Third World countries are terrified of the terrorists and will do whatever it takes to appease them. The European countries are barely any better. France, and especially England, are close to allowing sharia law and have already given over vast sectors of land and culture to radical islam. Don't think so? Read "Londonistan", a book by Melanie Phillips. (And yes, it is banned in England as being offensive to islam and not "multi-cultural".) Don't like that one? There are many others. And we are not without blame. Zacharias Moussoui, the only 9/11 hijacker to survive never faced charges of attempting to violate the civil rights of the victims of 9/11.
Who speaks out for the victims of islamic terrorism? Not the so-called "human rights groups". At the very, very most, they give off-hand expressions of condolence to the victims. Those sentiments are usually buried in a press release expressing howling outrage at the treatment of terrorists in custody of police or military. Groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have produced volumes upon volumes of outrage at the treatment of terrorists facing prosecution for their crimes. They warn governments, police agencies, and military forces that they are constantly being watched by so-called "human rights activists" who are ready with legions of lawyers to descend at a moments notice with scads of litigation should so much as one jot or tittle of a terrorists rights or physical body be harmed. But the victim? The one whose face is permanently scarred by acid burns, the one who has had his or her tongue cut out, the who one has had their genitals mutilated, the one who has had bones permanently deformed, the family of the man or woman beheaded for the fun of seeing a beheading? Not one so-called "human rights group" has ever dispatched one attorney or given any succor at all to the victims of islamic terrorists.
Christian groups across the globe have dropped the ball as well. There is no ministry that I've ever heard of that has reached out to the victims or their families. Some, particularly the liberal denominational Christians, have gone so far as to meet and try to be friendly with islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. None have ever set foot in a hospital or met an actual victim of these despicable terrorists. Indeed, on some occasions they have even sided with the terrorists and sought to justify their acts of terror. A while back there was some small ballyhoo about a liberal Christian group that was formed to support the victims of torture. I contacted them, excited about the possibility that finally someone was going to take on the task of standing with the victims of islamic terror. I was told tersely that they were only interested in helping the victims of torture by the USA. Apparently they were more interested in supporting Khalid Sheik Mohammed than his victims.
The answer is that no one, not a single group out there stands with the victims of islamic terrorists. Not governments, not the UN, not the so-called "human rights groups", not Christian groups. No one. If you or a family member have been tortured or killed by islamic terrorists the rest of the world says to you: "Good luck. Don't bother telling us how things turn out." The folks who were injured or killed in Mumbai? The world says to you: "Meh!"

Someplace to Enjoy

2008-12-01T07:27:00.002-06:00

Finally, a conservative discussion board where ideas can be batted around in a dignified manner. Check out CodeRed:White & Blue.

See ya there!

My Heart Cries for India

2008-11-28T12:36:00.003-06:00

Anyone who has followed the news the last few days must certainly be crying for India and lifting her up in your prayers. Islamic terrorists have killed 140 innocent people, people who merely wanted to go about their lives in peace. Included in that number were an American rabbi and his daughter. The islamic terrorists were reportedly targeting Americans, Brits, and Jews.

Disgustingly enough, so-called "human rights groups" are completely silent on this wholesale slaughter of the human rights of 140 people who were in no way involved with whatever it is that the terrorists oppose. Indeed, the euphemistically named Human Rights Watch has no comment at all. The only thing that they report about India is a week-old story that, ironically, denounces some Indian police officers for supposedly torturing islamic terrorists in their custody! Amnesty International USA has a very tepid press release regarding the attacks in India. They do not directly denounce the islamic terrorists. Indeed, they don't even call the attackers terrorists. Without having a background on the event, you could even read the press release as the Indian government did the attacking!

Why anyone gives those so-called "human rights groups" any shred of credibility at all is beyond me.

Pray for India. Please pray for India.

We've Decided to Find Him Entertaining

2008-11-25T16:55:00.002-06:00

A Russian political analyst predicts the break-up of the USA. Coming from the folks who promised us global domination of communism and UFO reports ad nauseum, this means a lot.

Ah, no. It really doesn't. But if the USA really DOES break up, can I have Kentucky?

Good Grief! The Ego Of The Man!

2008-11-24T12:28:00.003-06:00

Anyone see some ego in this? "The Office Of The President Elect"? Has any president before done something that egotistical and no one has mentioned it? If he has such a swelled head now what is he going to be like a year from now?

Make no mistake, for the sake of the country I hope to God that this guy succeeds in repairing things. But with such a massive ego he is priming himself to have a huge fall.

By the way, I was watching this announcement of his economic team while I was working out. The cable network had the Dow index in an window. on the lower edge of the screen. An interesting things was watching the Dow Jones industrial average. It started at 325 when he walked out on stage and promptly went into a tailspin to a low of about 189. To be fair, it is up to about 250 and change right now.

Scratching His Back

2008-11-24T12:24:00.002-06:00

Elliot over at From Where I Sit has offered to mention on his blog anyone that mentions him. Well, I'm nothing but a cheap date. So, Elliot, here's your mention!

Saturday Morning Bluegrass Returns!

2008-11-22T08:51:00.002-06:00

I haven't done a Saturday Morning Bluegrass in a long time.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present Doc Watson and David Holt doing "Shady Grove"!

One-way Tolerance=No-way Tolerance

2008-11-22T08:40:00.003-06:00

Some of you probably read this article in the Saturday (11/22) edition of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. To be sure, it is a wonderful gesture, one of those "diversity" things that cause us to all join hands and sing "Kum Ba Yah". But when I read the article I found it gave me a sense of vague uneasiness. Something was missing. That something is: reciprocity. Where are the Islamic boys being lectured by the Jewish people about the Jewish religion? Where are the Jewish boys being lectured by the Christians about Christianity?

This whole program smacks of what I call "one-way multiculturalism". Apparently the folks who initiated this program have determined that only one group of people is capable of intolerance and in need of training. Honestly now, who could blame the boys who are the subject of this article for being a bit resentful and rebelling at this training? To be sure, the guy who started this program probably feels all warm and fuzzy. But is he really accomplishing anything when only half of the folks involved are exposed to learning "tolerance"?

The sheer arrogance of these programs appalls me. It closely parallels the "soft bigotry of low expectations", the concept that says that if you, say, live in the inner city that you are automatically incapable of excelling on your own and without a special government program simply because you are a resident of the inner city. Programs such as this one in question apparently feel that kids who are Jewish and Islamic are incapable of being intolerant and bigoted. They may be in the minority, but just as African-Americans can be racist towards white Americans, Jewish and Islamic folks can be prejudiced against Christians. One look at the Middle East will tell you that Jews and Muslims can be intolerant (at the very least!). No matter who has power, bigotry is bigotry and intolerance and intolerance. Simply to fix half of the equation does more damage than to fix none of the equation.

The other problem that I have with these sorts of programs is that they assume that all Christians are the same, believe the same things, and are motivated for the same reasons of belief. That is incredibly wrong and is totally ignorant of history. Just off hand as I write this I can think of churches that fit the following streams of Christianity: Roman Catholicism, evangelical Protestantism, liberal Protestantism, fundamentalist Protestantism, Pentecostal Christianity, charismatic Christianity, Greek Orthodox Christianity, Russian Orthodox Christianity (note to "Seinfeld" devotees: there is no "Latvian Orthodox"). A Christian who attends, say, Elmbrook, would have a pretty tough time grasping the complexities of the Greek Orthodox faith. A Russian Orthodox Christian might well feel uncomfortable with the worship at a Pentecostal service. So, to paint Christianity with a broad brush is not quite being fair, or tolerant, or multi-cultural.

Indeed, I have first hand experience with internal intolerance among Christians, Christians who brayed about how tolerant and multi-cultural they were at that. Quite a few years ago, when I was still a member of the ultra-liberal (theologically and politically) denomination called the United Church of Christ, our daughter at age 13 was scheduled to begin confirmation classes. The pastor told us about the program and how the kids were going to visit a mosque and get lectured by the imam about the Islamic religion, then go to a synagogue and be lectured by the Rabbi about Judaism, and that a Native American shaman was going to lecture the kids about his religion. Anyone see a problem here? No where in that program were the kids getting exposed to and lectured by evangelical Christians, Pentecostal Christians, charismatic Christians, Roman Catholic Christians. When I asked the pastor about this he made it quite clear that he felt that question was out of line. In short, our daughter was going to end up knowing all about those other religions, direct from the source, and be totally ignorant of what other Christians believe. That was the last straw in a long and painful separation from that denomination. My wife and I vowed that our daughter was never going to go through confirmation in the UCC. We left the church and denomination shortly afterwards and have never regretted it.

For all of the vaunted rhetoric about multi-culturalism, tolerance, and diversity it is always a one-way street. I'm not claiming that I'm aware of every program, but I can't think of an instance of kids from a mosque or synagogue being lectured by a pastor from, say, Oak Creek Assembly of God, Milwaukee Vineyard Christian Fellowship, Elmbrook Church. When is the last time that you heard about a busload of Hindu kids going to the Cousins Center to be lectured by Archbishop Dolan? Perhaps they have and I'm just ignorant of it.

Any multicultural program that pats itself on the back for running kids down a one-way street is, IMHO, seriously misguided.

Well, So Much For Bipartisanship

2008-11-13T08:14:00.002-06:00

The Old Grey Lady reports today that the Democrats are preparing for a criminal investigation of Bush after he and his administration leave office.

Of course, never mind that Bush quashed investigations into the Clinton administration as have all previous administrations stopped investigations of their predecessors. But if the Dems want to investigate Bush, well, Obama has at most 8 years. After that, who knows what might need investigating?

They Said "Rule" Again

2008-11-10T09:11:00.003-06:00

They said it again. The Dems said that they plan to "rule" and not "govern". Accuse me of parsing words or getting agitated about trifles, but this is starting to worry me. Add in that they want to restrict free speech and gun ownership rights and you might get some insight into the Dems plans for the next few years.

Dear Obama, Let's Not Be Fair

2008-11-08T07:09:00.004-06:00

(This was originally posted on my Fox6 blog.)

Dear President-Elect Obama;
First, a hearty congratulations. You won fair and square. I wish you the best in your upcoming term as president. Having a majority in the House and Senate, a doggoned near super-majority in the Senate at that, is really going to help. I understand that you are planning to be really bi-partisan. I have to admit that your selection of someone as hot-headed and hyper-partisan as Rahm Emanuel as your chief of staff concerns me. But you are the boss and as my new president I will give you the benefit of the doubt until you prove otherwise.

I'd like to offer you a suggestion from a conservative that I know that you will take in the same spirit of bi-partisanship and unity that I offer it. It is going to be incumbent upon you to reach out to the Republicans, particularly the conservative ones. (I'm sure that you know that they, being the minority party, are by tradition and practice not the ones who are required to reach out.

My suggestion to you is that you publicly announce that in the spirit of reaching across the aisle that you are going to declare dead on arrival any legislation or regulation that would re-impose the Fairness Doctrine; that you simply refuse to consider it. Contrary to what others may say, imposing the Fairness Doctrine would only re-invigorate the contentiousness of the Right. It would give them a raison d'etre. You, as the most visible of all Democrats would end up being the target. It would kill any chance that you might have to "reach across the aisle".

What would you be risking by taking the Fairness Doctrine off the table? The enmity of the far left? Where would they go? Some of your major contributors to your campaign war chest? How much do you really need and can you get by with less? Cost you support in the House and Senate? You are the Number One Democrat in the eyes of a ton of folks. How could anyone in your party oppose you right now?

But by and large the good that would be done by taking the Fairness Doctrine off the table is priceless. First, the incredible good will that you would gain among Republicans who would not have to face a very, very angry crowd. Two, major broadcasters make a lot of money off of talk radio. You killing it certainly wouldn't gain you any support from them. But the biggest gain that you could make is assuring conservatives that you are someone that they can work with. If you end up killing talk radio by re-imposing the Fairness Doctrine, you will end up really reinvigorating the folks that you just totally demoralized in the last election. They will get to listen to Rush, Hannity, Ingraham somehow. And those talkers will be leading the charge to crate the hostile environment that you save stated that you want to end. You may argue that they would do that if the Fairness Doctrine is not imposed. True, but imposing it will only make Limbaugh that much more effective. Not imposing it could--just could--"defang" him a bit.

So the choice is yours, as it always has been. To me taking the Fairness Doctrine off the table is win-win for you and for conservatives. And keeping it off the table could make the political discourse that much more civil. That's what you want, right?

Praying for your, and the country's, success,
I remain,

Jim Zeirke

Why The LEFT Fears an Obama Presidency

2008-11-01T07:44:00.000-05:00

The old saw about a dog that chases cars and doesn't know what to do when it finally catches one might be coming true. The left might just get what they want--their own president and a super-majority in the Senate. Although each day it looks less and less likely all of that will happen, the left, I think, will actually harbor secret relief if McCain wins or they fail to gain a super-majority. For 8 years the left has virtually written a rule book on what is proper ground for criticism of a president. Many of these rules are downright scary in and of themselves. Yet, the left always justified these rules in the name of preserving this country from totalitarian rule by Bush. They never seemed to think ahead to the day when one of their own would be president. Now, to quote Rev. Jeremiah Wright, their "chickens are comin' home to roost". All of the rules that they so strongly argued for are going to get applied to their own guy.

First off, in the 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency the left has established an impossibly high standard for the president--absolute and total perfection. Zero mistakes. Never so much as a hair out of place, a wrong facial expression, or tip of the hat. Obama has never held an executive position. As with any legislator, specifically a US Senator (however brief), he's been a consensus builder and not the final decision-maker. In short, especially early on in an Obama presidency, he is going to make some hugely awful decisions and the left will have to excuse him, explain him, and exonerate him. In short, they will have to cut him slack that they never cut George W. Bush. They will be spending a lot of time and political capital explaining away their hypocrisy.

Second, there are ghosts in the Obama closet--lots of ghosts--big time ghosts--ghosts that we don't even know about yet. How could there not be? He has spent a lot of his life on the political trail, especially in Chicago politics that is anything but neat and orderly. We know by his own admission that he has associated himself with unsavory characters such as Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, and so forth. What other relationships did these relationships lead to? The leftist conspiracy theorists (now there is a scary crowd for you!) had a field day with George W. Bush's extended circle of friends. They tied those folks into all sorts of conspiracies. What are they going to say, then, when the rule of unsavory relationships gets applied to their guy and woven into some really bizarre conspiracy theories? How are they going to explain how they could demand that their conspiracy theories, no matter how loony, regarding GWB be accepted at face value and the conspiracy theories regarding Obama are considered to be out of bounds?

Third, left-wing artists had a field day creating all sorts of disgusting and degrading works about George W. Bush. The right-wing artist colony is tiny, to be sure, yet it is there. The leftists made a point of demanding that ALL artwork no matter how disgusting and degrading was the First Amendment right of any artist and therefore must be protected, if not celebrated. We had movies about Bush being assassinated. We had degrading, Photo shopped pictures of him and his family. There were wanted posters, filthy songs, and you name it. Comedians and singers mocked him unmercifully. All of this was rationalized by the left as within artistic bounds. Now, their guy is looking like he will inherit the White House. What are they going to say when offensive artwork is produced about their guy? How are they going to rationalize why it should be banned or censored while the stuff about Bush was supposed to be celebrated?

Fourth, one of the laws of economics is that the rich will get richer and the poor poorer. If you understand the economic brackets (called "quintiles") you understand that the very rich cannot move up any further and the very poor cannot move down any further. So, the folks in both of those brackets get "richer" and "poorer". So, how will the left explain that, even though they are "spreading the wealth around", the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer?

Fifth, they have promised the moon with the Obama presidency. The Obama proposals amount to something like $1 trillion in new spending. Even now the Obama team is laying out the strategy of reducing the expectations that their guy has raised. He has promised us lower gas prices, higher wages, more jobs, cleaner air, lower ocean levels, free mortgages, and on and on. Somehow he is going to have to explain away why almost none of this is going to happen. If, and this is the left's biggest fear of all, they end up increasing the majorities in both houses of Congress and get a super-majority in the Senate, they will have no one to blame if they fail at anything. Oh, they will try. "It was worse than we thought!" they will try to say. But they have had two years of being the majority in both houses already. How will they be able to say that they were ignorant of anything?

Sixth, if Obama gets his way and government spending increases and with it taxes, there is going to be a slowdown in the economy. From an economics standpoint, you cannot take money out of a receding economy and expect it to reinvigorate. Again, ALL of the blame will fall on the shoulders of the left. They have the presidency and both houses. How are they going to explain this?

In all of these cases they will likely try to blame the Bush administration. "Well, if they hadn't of screwed it up so bad..." But the American public doesn't swallow excuses like that. He's gone, they say, and you were hired to fix it. The left has never been very good about accepting criticism. Remember what happened when you challenged that lefty professor in college? Talk about temper tantrums! I'm sure that what will pass for defense of the failures of the Obama administration will be insulting invective thrown at the questioner, vile name-calling, questioning of the critic's intelligence, and the classic "well, Bush was worse!"

"Lefty" the dog is chasing a car and is getting oh so close to catching it. As he does he gets more and more worried about what he is going to do with the thing once he has it in his jaws.

The Hilarious Hypocisy of ACORN

2008-10-29T11:38:00.000-05:00

Even if this was not an election year, this story would be not just funny, but hilarious. From the American Spectator we learn that even though ACORN wants you to pay more taxes, it finds itself not wanting to do so:

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and its affiliates are content to impose crippling big-government laws, regulations, and taxes on Americans, but when called upon to obey those same rules, ACORN's network of scofflaws and deadbeats simply refuses to comply.
The most egregious example is the fact that more than 200 federal, state, and local tax liens adding up to more than $3 million have been filed against the ACORN network since 1989. All of these liens, which are only issued by creditor tax agencies after a tax debt has become seriously delinquent, are associated with ACORN's 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue address in New Orleans, Louisiana. That address is the official headquarters for nearly 300 ACORN-affiliated groups.
The most recent lien ($23,383) was filed by the IRS against an ACORN affiliate, American Workers Associates Inc., on Sept. 9. The largest lien ($547,312) was filed against ACORN itself by the IRS on March 10.

Not only that, but the organization has a problem with having a labor union represent its emplyees:

ACORN stoutly defends the right of workers to organize unions, but the group doesn't like it when its own workers try to organize. It has tried to stop its own employees from signing up with unions, and in 2003 the National Labor Relations Board determined it had unlawfully blocked its workers from organizing.

And it apparently has a problem with paying the living wage that it demands businesses pay:

ACORN supports raising the minimum wage and enacting so-called living wage policies, and claims it organized community and labor coalitions that succeeded in enacting living wage laws in 41 cities by the end of the 1990s.
Yet a 2003 study of ACORN by the Employment Policies Institute found the group paid a wage of $5.67 per hour, which was "less than half the level demanded by many proposed 'living wage' ordinances that ACORN supports."

You just gotta read the whole thing. It will make your day!

Spiders on Drugs

2008-10-28T21:00:00.000-05:00

Normally I'm somewhat afraid of spiders. But this one makes me howl with laughter!

Big Money in Politics? No Problem!!

2008-10-18T14:09:00.001-05:00

Obama is spending huge amounts of money--more than ever and multiple times more than McCain. Yet, we aren't hearing a peep about how awful it is that there is so much money in politics and candidates "buying an office". Wonder why (he asked rhetorically)?

Spread The Wealth Around--Take Two

2008-10-16T08:59:00.001-05:00

I'm still nagged by Obama's comment that he wants to "spread the wealth around". Thinking about it, I find it a very scary concept. Indeed, the whole idea that the government could say that someone, including me, is making too much money and needs to give it to someone who isn't, is downright repulsive. First, it plays into the class envy and class hatred that is doing nothing productive in this country and needs to be stopped. Second, it is based upon the false idea that income production is a zero sum game. It most certainly is not. There simply is not amount X that we all draw from and if I get more that means that there is less for you. Income--wealth--is fluid. There is always more. It just has to be produced. So, if you have more than I do, there is nothing economically that prevents me from going out and producing just as much as you, if not more. Believe it or not, it is still happening every day in this country. Third, who gets to say whether the wealth that you or I have or have earned is too much? What standard will be applied and who will judge whether that standard is just, fair, and correct? To whom would we appeal if we have been wronged? What if we don't like who gets the wealth that we generated but was taken from us because it is too much? How do we as a society benefit if we impede wealth production?
More than anything else, what benefit to society is there when we punish wealth production? If the level of taxation skyrockets at $250K, what incentive is there for me to go past that amount? If expanding my business and hiring more workers moves me to the level where government has determined that I make too much money so that they must confiscate it and give it to others, then I'm not going to expand my business, people won't get hired, and more income won't be entering the overall economy.
Yet, that is exactly what The One told Joe the Plumber that he wants to do.
And it is why I'm pretty certain that his four years in office will amount to a redux of the economic stagnation of the 1970's. Drag out your leisure suits and polyester shirts! We're headed to the disco!

"Spread The Wealth Around"?

2008-10-14T11:18:00.000-05:00

Obama tells a plumbing contractor that he needs to raise his taxes in order to "spread the wealth around". Memo to Obama: "IT AIN'T YOUR WEALTH TO SPREAD AROUND!!!!!"

One of those videos...

2008-09-27T11:44:00.000-05:00

that you watch over and over again, but don't know why.

Financial Crisis: How Did We Get Here?

2008-09-27T10:21:00.000-05:00

H/T to Charlie Sykes

What the Journal Sentinel Doesn't Want You To Read

2008-09-25T08:50:00.000-05:00

H/T Charlie Sykes

Story Published: Sep 24, 2008

Dear Mr. Sykes,
I have been a Community Columnist for the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel for the past year. During that time, they have published over a dozen of my opinion pieces, most of which took provocative positions on controversial issues.
This week I submitted a column rebutting a recent editorial written by Mr. Othman Atta, the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee.
Mabel Wong, the Perspectives Editor of the paper and my superior during my tenure as a Community Columnist, referred the column to Ricardo Pimentel, who killed the column.
The explanation that I received was that the column "made generalizations that were too broad, that the issue was a touchy one and that the paper feared it would fan the flames of controversy". I stand behind the accuracy of the content which highlighted specific incidents which failed to elicit any response from Mr. Atta and his organization.
I have attached a copy of the column to this message, so that you may judge for yourself whether the Mr. Pimentel's rationale was accurate or not.
I am very concerned that many media outlets are allowing themselves to be intimidated into silence by the implied threat of Islamic violence. If that is the case, the long term implications for free speech are ominous.
If you have an interest in this issue, I will be happy to discuss it with you.
Regards!
Al Smith

HERE IS THE COLUMN:
“Suicide Bombers and Their Enablers”
By: Al Smith
Mr. Othman Atta, president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee, is outraged. He’s angry because the September 14 edition of Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel included a DVD about Muslim terrorism.
According to Atta, this was the result of a vast conspiracy involving evil Zionists, right wing hate groups, Christian fundamentalists and other folks who don’t enjoy having their heads sawn off by masked jihadists. Mr. Atta’s opinion piece was published on September 21, in the very issue that featured reports of the terrorist bombing of the Marriott in Pakistan, in which dozens were killed by his coreligionists. How ironic.
Of course, it would be unfair to blame Mr. Atta for this bad timing, since barely a day goes by without some new atrocity committed by deranged Muslim zealots. Unfortunately, it appears that Mr. Atta and his organization follow a wavering and very selective moral compass.
Where, for example, is his outrage over Iran ’s practice of stoning women to death for the crime of adultery? Was he angry that young girls were burned alive in Egypt because Muslim police locked them inside a flaming school until they were fully concealed in their burkhas?
When did Mr. Atta protest against fatwa’s, religious edicts issued by Islamic clerics, calling for the assassinations of writers, filmmakers and artists with whom they take issue? When mullahs in Afghanistan sentenced a man to death for wishing to covert to Christianity, did Mr. Atta come out publicly against that?
Did Mr. Atta’s group place any paid ads, write any opinion pieces or offer any broadcast condolences when men, women and children were blown to bits on trains in Madrid ? Did they respond sympathetically when the same murderous fanaticism killed innocents on the London subway?
“People who do not understand something tend to fear it,” said Mr. Atta in 2006. He’s absolutely correct and, perhaps, would benefit from knowing exactly what it is that Wisconsinites don’t understand.
We don’t understand why your organization’s website doesn’t contain a single word condemning suicide bombers who destroy the lives of the innocents in countries all over the globe. We don’t understand why you fail to denounce extremist mullahs by name.
We don’t understand why you and other American Muslim leaders remain silent when Bin Laden and his henchmen release widely publicized videos urging members of your religion to kill American citizens in this country. We don’t understand why members of your religious community protect, conceal and support known terrorists. We don’t understand why you aren’t angry when Islamic mobs blow up Hindu temples, Christian churches and Jewish synagogues.
Most of all, Mr. Atta himself needs to understand that by making excuses for Islamic holy war, and then blaming us for misunderstanding Muslims he is, in effect, enabling terrorism.
Patriotic Muslim-Americans are actively serving in our military. Muslim soldiers from friendly nations are also fighting alongside our own troops on many battlefields in the global war against fanatic jihadists.
Americans are a fair minded and tolerant people, and Mr. Atta should worry more about extremists of his own faith than he does about conservative commentators.
He should spend less time ranting about talk radio and Zionist plots, and more time denouncing radical Muslims who have hijacked his theology and are converting his religion into a medieval death cult.
Finally, he should understand that Americans do not, and never will, fear Islam. We are, however, losing patience with apologists who disguise murder under the veil of faith.

Why You Won't See A Middle Class Tax Cut

2008-09-20T13:31:00.000-05:00

"The One" has been proposing this "middle class tax cut" idea. It is a total fraud. Never mind that Clinton tried it and then cried big crocodile tears about how, after he was elected, he couldn't make it work. Of course he couldn't make it work. There is simply no way for anyone to make it work.

A middle class tax cut is an almost economic impossibility because of a multiple of reasons all related to simple economics. First we need to understand "quintiles", that's simply a fancy way of saying that the entire population is broken down into five groups ranging from the poor to the mega wealthy. The poor are the bottom quintile and the wealthy have the top quintile. The three middle quintiles compose the middle class with the true middle class being in the third, or middle quintile. That middle quintile contains the vast majority of America's wage earners. Consider the basic bell curve. The middle income is at the apex of the bell curve with the poor and wealthy at the opposite ends. The old adage of "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is quite true. People float up and down the quintiles all during the life. Right out of college most folks are near the bottom. But after a few years they are close to the top middle income quintile. Once you enter the top quintile, you can't go up any further. So, the folks in that quintile just get richer but stay in the quintile. The same goes for the poor. Most folks in that category rarely spend a lifetime there. But those who do land there and have little capacity to move up, typically just get poorer. Now, while there are more middle income tax payers, the very wealthy pay the most in taxes. That is simple math. The wealthy make more money and they are in the highest marginal tax bracket.

But why can't we simply cut the taxes on the middle income and raise the taxes of the very wealthy? Seems simple enough and it seems a fair and just way to do things. I agree. But that doesn't make it possible. For one thing, there are a ton of middle income tax payers, many more than there are wealthy tax payers. In fact, you simply can't have it any other way and still be a functioning economy. (Witness most third world countries which have virtually no middle class.) So, if you cut middle income taxes by $1000 each, as The One has proposed, you would need to generate an equal amount of money from the wealthy taxpayers or you have a shortfall in tax income to the government. No decent Democrat wants that! In fact, no one wants that since it would have a catastrophic effect on the economy. But since there are such a small number of wealthy taxpayers compared to the number of middle income tax payers, you will have to make a very large increase in the wealthy tax rate to make up for the shortfall. Now, regardless of whether you think that the wealthy can afford it or not, the government does not want to make a huge increase in the top marginal tax rate.

The reason for that is simple. In the USA we tax income and not wealth. Again, you wouldn't want it any other way. (Think about it.) Wealthy people, especially the mega wealthy, are already wealthy and don't need to make income. Middle income folks need income as they cannot live off of their wealth. Jimmy Carter learned this fact in the late 1970's when his administration ended up with an 85%+ top marginal tax rate. Suddenly this country was bereft of wealthy people. They simply decided to not earn income. At least they didn't earn it in the United States. And what income they did earn was shuttled to tax shelters such as municipal bonds, off shore banks, and tax havens. The number of divorces among the wealthy also increased as they found that being unmarried and filing separately moved them into a lower tax bracket. (I remember seeing a "60 Minutes" that showed a couple getting divorced on December 1st and remarried on January 1st.) Wage earners such as tax attorneys and accountants were making a lot of income. But the mega wealthy...well, I also remember seeing stories on the news about billionaires who weren't paying much if any income tax. They had put it all in shelters and had shut down their income production here in the USA. So congress devised the alternative minimum tax to punish the wealthy for not creating income that could be taxed. And now, since the dollar amount that is considered wealthy is always increasing, that AMT almost bit all of us since it was never indexed to inflation.

But wait, you say, what about a middle income tax break stimulating the economy? Yes, it would stimulate the economy, but not to a sufficient amount as to really spur the economy. Middle income folks don't spend their money like the wealthy do. They can't afford to do it. Note that the government actually had to run advertisements to encourage spending earlier this year when they sent out "stimulus checks". It still had an almost negligible effect. For one thing, middle income folks are the bulk of the people who are stretched thin on credit right now. Wealthy folks aren't and the poor don't get credit--well, they didn't until the congress mandated that they get home loans. But the stimulus necessary to overcome the $1000 per middle income taxpayer rate cut would be a nearly record setting stimulus to the economy. It would have to be since the majority of Americans are middle income. That just isn't going to happen given traditional middle income spending patterns. And those patterns don't change. Trust me, merchants have tried to do it for at least 100 years and are still failing.

So, the folks who decide who will pay how much in taxes are left in a quandary. They have to determine the "tipping point", that tax rate that sufficiently gouges the wealthy to appease the envious and covers a middle income tax cut shortfall, yet doesn't shut down the wealthy income engine. Frankly, given the disparity between the number of middle income taxpayers who would receive a tax cut and the amount of income tax revenue that could be accrued by raising the top marginal rates, I am positive that The One is going to see his promise of a middle income tax cut fly out the window just like Slick Willie's. "Well, close the loopholes that the wealthy use to avoid paying their fair share." First off, the wealthy pay their fair share in that according to the IRS the top quintile pays about 86% of all income taxes. But secondly, as I said before, they don't have to. Income that is taxable is optional to most of the wealthy. So, for the government the trick is to raise taxes on the wealthy just enough to keep them paying and making money that can be taxed. They don't want to shut off the spigot. But shut it off they would if they tried to pay for a middle income tax cut by raising the top marginal rates. And closing the loopholes would be devastating to the economy. Clinton tried it just a little and just about destroyed several major industries that served the wealthy, such a boat builders, high value home builders, and so forth. And again, if you close the loopholes the wealthy will cease doing the things that create taxable income.

Proof that generating taxable income is optional for the wealthy? Remember when Lee Iaccoca became chairman of Chrysler? He vowed to only take a $1 per year wage for his job until Chrysler earned a profit. Lee Iaccoca did not go broke. He paid all of his bills. His compensation package was structured in such a way as to avoid being income. It was all perfectly legal and it still is. And those things are still going on. Compensation packages for everyone from CEO's to professional athletes are structured in such a way as to expose the barest minimum of their compensation to income tax liability.

So, that is why you won't see a middle income tax cut even if The One is elected president and congress remains in Democrat hands. It is a practical, financial, and economic impossibility. But don't get your dobber down. One way that the middle income would get a tax break is the way that The Gipper did it--across the board tax cuts. Then you have a real stimulus to the economy because everyone, especially the ones who pay the most in taxes, gets more money in their pockets and therefore into the economy.

And government bean counters don't have to try to figure out what the tipping point is.

The Booth Brothers Are Back!

2008-09-18T17:15:00.000-05:00

Oh man, I'm just a fiend for great Southern Gospel music. The contemporary Southern Gospel with great harmonies and orchestra backing just get me vibrating!

This Saturday the 20th one of the best Southern Gospel groups out there will singing at the Fine Arts Center at Sussex Hamilton High School. They are The Booth Brothers and they are the most awarded group in Southern Gospel music today. What is amazing is that they are a trio! Yet their singing has all of the power and tight harmony of any quartet. Last year I saw them at a performance in Menomonee Falls and I can honestly say that was one of the most fun nights of Christian music that I've ever had. It isn't just a concert, it's a show. Topping it off they sprung a surprise guest on us: Bill Shaw, one of the founding members of the Blackwood Brothers back in the late 40's. Now in his 80's the guy can sing! He had us on our feet cheering and clapping as he did a couple old Gospel numbers.

The opening act for The Booth Brothers is Eternity, a local Southern Gospel quartet that is really on the edge of breaking out into big time. So, it will be quite a night to remember. Can't wait to be there. Good seats still remain and the show starts at 7PM.

No Doubt They Discussed The "Little People" Clinging to Guns and Religion

2008-09-17T07:54:00.000-05:00

This is truly sickening.
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. (AP) - Barack Obama partied with Hollywood celebrities Tuesday night and with the help of Oscar-winning singer and actress Barbra Streisand raised an eye-popping $9 million for his presidential campaign and the Democratic Party.
The night was split into two glitzy events, a reception and dinner costing $28,500 each at the Greystone Mansion, followed by entertainment by Streisand at the nearby Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel. About 250-300 people were expected at the dinner and about 800 at the entertainment, which cost $2,500 a ticket.
Dinner guests seen by reporters, or noted by waiters, included Will Ferrell, Jodie Foster, Leonardo DiCaprio, Jamie Lee Curtis and DreamWorks founders Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg.

Cops Ignoring DUI's For Harley Riders??

2008-08-30T13:11:00.000-05:00

I saw on the MJS web site that last night they were lined up 5-deep at the beer stands in the Summerfest grounds. On Fox6 I saw Chris Goodman reporting from what appeared to be a very boozy party on Water Street. Today all of those riders again invaded the Summerfest grounds where I'm sure there is a beer vendor or two.

Can someone explain to me just how the hell this doesn't end up to be scads of drunk driver arrests? Every event these Harley riders are involved in seems to include lots of beer. Yet, I'm hearing from the cops that the crowd is amazingly well-behaved.

Now c'mon, all summer long we've been treated to commercials and news stories about how cops are cracking down on DUI in Wisconsin. The .08 level for intoxication means only a few beers and you are legally drunk. "You gotta have a designated driver if you are going to drink!" is hammered into us all of the time. Well, I don't know how you'd have a designated driver for a motorcycle. But just judging from the TV coverage of the parties, I'd say that there are plenty of Harley riders who are in no condition to drive their bikes.

So, I'm left with two points to consider: First, the cops have been instructed to look away when it comes to drunk driving for Harley rider. Second, if the cops aren't looking away then the Harley folks have some really highly refined technique for drinking scads of booze and still remaining sober enough to drive. If that is the case, they should share that secret with the rest of us.

What A Cluster!!

2008-08-28T19:50:00.000-05:00

From the American Spectator's blog:

DENVER -- The decision by Barack Obama to relocate the Democratic National Convention into Invesco Field so he can deliver his acceptance speech before 80,000 people has resulted in massive confusion and long lines that have delegates steamed.Just after 3 p.m. this afternoon (about five hours before Barack Obama took the stage), I boarded what I was told was a media bus that would take us to the designated media entrance at Invesco, but it turns out in addition to media, there were delegates to the convention on the bus. After about a ten minute drive, we ended up about a quarter mile away from the stadium, where a long line of thousands of people snaked around the sidewalks and pathways leading to the entrances. "Do you want to get out here and walk to the end of the line or do you want to be dropped off at the end of the line?" a police officer who road with us on the bus asked.That resulted in confusion, because both the media and delegates were informed that they would be allowed to enter separately. The people waiting in line had "community passes" given to Obama fans and members of the general public.Several miffed delegates asked the officer if there were separate entrances. But he said he had no idea, that he was told there was only one line, and that we would have to wait with the tens of thousands of other people in the boiling heat. Then he let us off the bus and said, "Good luck."Along with about a half dozen frustrated delegates, I decided to just keep walking toward Invesco, hoping to find the right entrance -- or at least somebody who knew something. "This is totally disorganized," one Connecticut delegate fumed. "They wanted to fill a stadium, now a lot of people are going to say it's not worth it."Another delegate snapped."They basically took a convention, and decided to throw an extra 60,000 people into it."After about a five minute walk, we came to an intersection, and approached a cop car. One of the women asked an officer if he new anything about other entrances. But he and his partner just shook their heads. "I'm sorry, the information flow here is more of a trickle."So we kept charging along, but eventually got to a place where we couldn't walk any further without running into a fence and another massive line. Trying to walk past it, we were harassed by angry people who had been waiting for hours. "Hey buddy, there's a line here!" one man barked at me.What made the man from Connecticut particularly angry was that they told everybody to arrive early. "I bet if we waited until the last minute, we would have gotten in, no problem." So, I started to make some phone calls, starting with a superdelegate I know who is an elected Democratic politician. I asked him what the deal was. "I have no idea," he told me. "They just said to get there early."Then I called the press office, which said there was, in fact, a press entrance, and they said I should just walk through the line, and tell a police officer. So I started to walk, before a guy in a green neon vest with "EVENT STAFF" printed on it stopped me and started yelling."If a police officer comes, he's going to escort you to the back of the line," he barked.But I ploughed ahead, getting about 10 paces before I encountered a police officer. I explained my situation."There's no media entrance," he said. "I can't let you through this line. I'm under strict orders from the Secret Service."After waiting about another 20 minutes, I finally came across a police officer who knew about the media entrance and who pointed me in the right direction -- where I got to wait in another line, though a shorter one.
Posted By: Philip Klein

THIS Is What Passes For Political Discourse These Days?

2008-08-26T09:42:00.000-05:00

Michelle Malkin gets accosted by a totally apoplectic left wing nut job. Apparently yelling anything that comes to your mind is discourse. Note her reserve and class in dealing with this jerk.

I'm reminded of this quote: "And isn’t this an outgrowth of the, of the hatred that seems to have been injected into what has in the past has been simply normal competition and normal rivalry and certainly election year emotionalism and all. But if something is to be done about this kind of tragedy for anyone, isn’t it necessary that all of us review our own attitudes and say yes, it is possible for men and women of good will to differ, to have opposing viewpoints, to discuss and debate them, and perhaps never to come to agreement on them, but as God is in his heaven do we have to hate each other to the point that people with less balance are stimulated to deeds of this kind?"
–California Governor Ronald Wilson Reagan’s off the cuff remarks on May 15th 1972 in reaction to an assassination attempt on Alabama Governor George Wallace during a campaign appearance for 1972 Democrat Presidential primaries.

What's This Tell Ya?

2008-08-25T09:28:00.000-05:00

From Tim Cuprisin's column in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

TV One, available on digital cable and satellite, has nightly Democratic convention coverage from 7 to 10 p.m. But the channel, which targets African-American viewers, won't be broadcasting from the Republican convention.

So, as far as TV One is concerned blacks are irretrievably in the pocket of the Democrats. Taking it even further, the Democrats pretty much don't have to worry or even do anything (and they haven't) to support or hold blacks to their party. Perhaps that is why the social conditions for blacks haven't changed in over 40 years. Perhaps if TV One were to show the Republican convention the blacks in the country would see that they actually have an alternative.

To me it looks like just another means to keep blacks "in their place" and voting Democrat without much thinking.

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-08-16T09:48:00.000-05:00

Ever hear of Alecia Nugent? Until a year ago I hadn't. But she is a real up and comer in the world of bluegrass. "Another Rhonda Vincent," some say. Here she is doing the title cut to her album "Too Good To Be True".

Still No "Anti-War" Protests Against Russia

2008-08-15T09:55:00.000-05:00

I was doing some checking of the websites of the usual suspects in the leftie so-called "anti war" groups. Most of them are breathing, indeed almost hyperventilating, regarding the possibility of the USA invading or attacking Iran. Nothing has even happened there yet and probably won't.

Yet, with an actual war going on, where a super power invades a tiny, new-born democracy, the sound of silence from these same so-called "anti war" groups is deafening.

Hypocrites. Here they have an actual war to protest and--they do nothing. These same folks pride themselves in the "anti war" protests that they've attended denouncing the USA. They have "STOP the war!" and "War is never the answer!" signs in their front yard and on their car. Yet, an actual war happens and they are silent. If they are truly against war, then why do they have to wait until some group's leadership tells them to protest? Why not put up signs demanding that Russia get out of Georgia now?

As I said, they are hypocrites. The press should remember that the next time these hypocrites try to get coverage for a so-called "anti war protest".

Whither the "Anti-War" Protestors?

2008-08-14T23:54:00.000-05:00

Russia invades Georgia, a nascent democracy. Gobs of civilians killed. Russia thumbs its nose at negotiated cease-fires. More and more it appears that Russia wants to crush Georgia and control the oil pipelines that run through it.

Where are the "Anti-War" groups? Here's an interesting blog that researched that question. The writer of the blog has more time than I do. Where are the Hollywood lefties who screech about every move by the US military? Jane Fonda? Barbra Streisand? Whoopi Goldberg? Rosie O'Donnell? Martin Sheen? Haven't heard a word from them. The groups that scream about "No Blood For Oil" haven't said anything when Russia invades for what is beginning to appear to be a quest to control major pipelines to Europe. What about all of the pulpits in the liberal churches in this country? A quick check of the denominational web sites reveals no mention of the Russian invasion of Georgia. Are they only anti-war when the USA is involved? Where are the peace group protests in front of Russian embassies world-wide?

Locally, where are those punks who vandalized the Army recruiting office on the east side? Indeed, where are all of the college "peace protesters and activists"? Not a word.

What's even more distressing is that not one reporter has apparently bothered to call up any of these folks and ask them "You have any comment on the Russian invasion of Georgia?" You'd think that one reporter somewhere would get some gumption and look into the story of the stunning silence by so-called "Anti-War" groups as pertains to one of recent history's most egregious violations of national borders.

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-08-09T09:16:00.001-05:00

Haven't done one of these in a few weeks. Here's a band from Georgia called "HWY 76" doing an old favorite of mine "Big Spike Hammer"

O puh-LEEZE!

2008-08-07T14:21:00.000-05:00

From the "Get A Life Department":

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

THURSDAY, Aug. 7, 2008, 1:11 p.m.By Sharif Durhams

Packers fan flies flag at half staff

Greg Kurzynski of Greenfield is frustrated with the Green Bay Packers for trading Brett Favre to the New York Jets and he's in mourning.So he did what you're supposed to do when there's a tragedy.He's flying his Packers flag at half staff."When I woke up this morning and saw that they had made the trade, I had to so something," he said. "It was just eating me up."Kurzynski, a lifelong Wisconsinite and Packers fan, said he bought a Packers flag when he moved from South Milwaukee to a house on Howard Ave. in 2003. He flies it on game days.He's been on vacation from work for the past two weeks and fuming over what looked to him like the Packers seeming to push Favre away.Usually Kurzynski spends his vacation at Packers training camp, but he couldn't this year, he said, because Favre wasn't going to be under center...

The "Royal We"

2008-08-06T12:32:00.000-05:00

I don't know where I first heard this bon mot of wisdom...but for some reason it is stuck in my head today.

"The only people who should use 'the royal we' are editorial writers and people with worms."

Giant Slide Obsession

2008-08-05T16:44:00.000-05:00

Anyone notice how this year the news media is obsessed with the Giant Slide at the State Fair? It's not like it is new or anything. The thing has been there for over 20 years that I can remember. But this year the TV news outlets and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel are ballyhooing it like it is something brand new. What gives?

Total Eclipse of Congress

2008-08-02T08:00:00.000-05:00

See this picture of a solar eclipse? It reminds me of what happened in the US House Of Representatives yesterday. Tight Face Pelosi tried to block out the light. But no matter how hard she tried, light still leaked out.

We had a Total Eclipse of Congress.

I'm So Proud To Be A Republican!!!

2008-08-01T15:44:00.000-05:00

Finally! My conservative Republican brethren have gotten a backbone! They've torn a page from the Democrats playbook and are stuffing it in Pelosi's face. Old Tight Face Pelosi doesn't know what to do. Every attempt to shut up the Republicans they stuff right back at her. I pray that they keep this going.

Nothing Like A Vacation to Get Your Thinking Right

2008-08-01T08:30:00.001-05:00

I have been out in Colorado, delightfully out of contact for a week or so while I lingered at Deer Valley Ranch near Buena Vista. Nothing like horseback riding and trout fishing in the mountains to get your thinking right, I always say. Here's some proof:

It's Slinger Nationals Time!!!

2008-07-14T17:42:00.000-05:00

This will my first time attending the Slinger Nationals. In the past I've never been able to go because of either work, work, or sometimes even work. Well, now that I'm a Motor Racing Outreach chaplain at Slinger Speedway I MUST be there and be there I will be. This is going to be one incredible night of racing. Matt Kenseth and Kyle Busch will be there as well as just about every conceivable big name in Wisconsin stock car racing: Kelly Bires, Scott and Chris Wimmer, Richie Bickle, and I'm sure many more will be there. I wouldn't be surprised if Dick Trickle showed up as well. He was one of the progenitors of the Nationals.

Last night at the regular Sunday night program Dick Bergen of Speedway Illustrated and Fox Sports coverage of NASCAR Cup series racing was at the track as was Gilbert Brown, ex-Green Bay Packer and one of the partners in the Milwaukee Mile.

Why Isn't This News?

2008-07-08T15:51:00.000-05:00

In two days oil has dropped more than $9 a barrel. Since we've been told in banner headlines about every little increase, why aren't we being told about a $9 decrease?

Here's Some Good News About the Great Lakes

2008-07-08T09:55:00.000-05:00

Did you know that with all of the doom and gloom about the Great Lakes and how global warming is causing them to dry up that they are actually making an incredible rebound? Check this out from the Great Lakes and Seaway Shipping website (it originates from the Duluth News Tribune):

Lake Superior continues rapid rise

7/8 - Duluth - Lake Superior rose by six inches in June, double the usual increase for the month, and now sits 15 inches above its July level last year. The International Lake Superior Board of Control reports that Superior sits just five inches below its average level for July.
Rainfall during June, especially the first half of the month, was well above normal, helping fill Superior’s tributaries and eventually the big lake itself. Duluth received 5.21 inches of rain in June, an inch more than usual. Except for a few, dry winter months, Lake Superior has been on a rapid rise toward levels normal since September after setting new monthly low water level records and brushing with the 80-year-old all time low water record.
Lakes Michigan and Huron rose six inches in June, when they on average rise two inches, and now sit six inches higher than July, 2007 but still 14 inches below their long-term average.

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-07-05T07:27:00.000-05:00

Here's Doc Watson and Earl Scruggs and their sons gathering around a microphone to do "John Hardy"

Remembering The Reason For The Day

2008-07-04T17:53:00.000-05:00

This is what the Revolution was all about: The Declaration of Independence. Here is a dramatic reading of it. Now, I know that these are the Hollywood types. Yet, they do a surprisingly good job.

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-06-28T08:39:00.000-05:00

Here's the Iron Ridge Band doing a traditional version of "Old Joe Clark". Excellent fiddle and mandolin work. The banjo work leaves something to be desired.

If It Sounds Too Good To Be True...Gas Price Edition

2008-06-27T08:05:00.000-05:00

Well, maybe. I'm not sure what to make of this article from MarketWatch. Gas prices falling to $2 a gallon within 30 days of Congress passing legislation to regulate oil speculators? I'm just not convinced that would happen. First off, Congress has never successfully regulated anything that result in lower prices. Then you are talking about a commodity that we don't have much control over SINCE WE REFUSE TO DRILL FOR OIL THAT WE ALREADY OWN!!! Third, how do you control oil speculators that trade on a global market? I'm concerned that this sort of legislation would actually cause shortages ala the Carter years.

But then, I'm not sure. I really don't know what to think.

That's a first!

McCain Ain't Happenin'

2008-06-27T07:24:00.000-05:00

I used to be a devoted listener to sportscaster Steve "The Homer" True when he was on the old WISN-AM1130 morning show with Don Vogel, Jay Weber, and Ann Catalane. "Homer" had a saying "I'm a homer. I'm not an idiot."

That's how I feel as a conservative and a nominal Republican.

Don't go trying to tell me that McCain is a conservative. He most certainly is not. For one thing, the man has always reached out to Democrats but never to conservatives. That alone should tell you something. At the very best he is only a "nominal conservative". A look at his American Conservative Union ratings show that at best he is in the 80's (out of 100). The guy's "maverick" streak only seems to go one way: Over to the Democrats. He's never been a maverick who is more conservative than the Republican Party--as was, for example, Bob Barr. And don't get me started on the assault on the Constitution that is the McCain-Feingold law. All that law did was empower news media outlets at the expense of individual rights. His steadfast opposition to drilling in ANWR, or anyplace else in the USA for that matter, is going to come back to haunt him and already has. He's having to modify his stance already.

But my biggest problem with McCain is McCain himself. He loves himself too much. He's unwilling to sacrifice himself . Ronald Reagan didn't mind being on the receiving end of scorn and ridicule, especially that coming from the press. McCain, on the other hand, is loathe to get on the news media's bad side. He so much wants their favor that he will sacrifice anything to get it. He won't point out Obama's shortcomings, he says that he won't attack (wanna bet Obama will attack and already has), he's accepted global warming as an incontrovertible fact, he even attacks those conservatives that the news media decides are wrong.

So, I don't who I'm going to vote for. But for certain I won't be voting for either McCain or Obama. When it comes to McCain being labeled a conservative, I think back to that great Western epic "The Outlaw Josey Wales" where John Vernon's character Fletcher tells the Senator: "...Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."

Yes We Can! We're the USA Dammit!!!

2008-06-26T08:14:00.000-05:00

I am sick and tired of hearing the enviro-extremists telling us that "we can't drill our way out of this mess". Obama has based his entire energy policy on the statement that "we can't" and that crude oil from Alaska or the Outer Continental Shelf wouldn't be hitting the gas pumps for at least 10 years.

Well, to quote John Belushi in "Animal House" "nothing is over until we say it is."

Perhaps we need to remind folks of this nation's accomplishments and how we have repeatedly dumbfounded the "experts".

We committed ourselves to going to the moon in less than ten years time. We did it, even with a major accident that killed three astronauts and caused a long delay in the process.
We went from a naval fleet decimated at Pearl Harbor to a world power on the waves in less than 4 years.
Our shipyards went from nearly dormant to cranking out "Liberty Ships" at a rate of one per month. One ship, the Robert E. Peary, was built in 5 days!
Remember how we were told that it would take years, 10 or more and some said even 50 years, to put out the fires and cap the wells that Saddam Hussein order sabotaged after the first Gulf War? We did it in less than one year.

Folks, it is in the American spirit to do the impossible. This country has always done it. We've risen to every challenge. When you tell an American that he can't do something, he ALWAYS looks for a a way to do it. You lay a profit incentive out there, get the hell out of the way because there are a whole bunch of hungry entrepreneurs who will be looking to snatch the gold ring.

The only limiting factor in all of this is the years of liberal education telling all of our youth that we are a bunch of losers who have never and can never do anything right. How many kids, I wonder, have been taught as fact that every accomplishment of the American spirit has been something stolen from someone else, or was illegally done, or unethically done, or done on the back of poor people?

Perhaps this country rising to the challenge of providing for our crude oil needs from our own reserves and doing it in record time will again imbue us with that quintessential American "Can Do!" spirit. To be sure, there will be tons of folks telling us that we can't or trying to throw roadblocks in the way. But there always have been those types. I call them "liberals" and by this great accomplishment they will be ashamed.

That is why they oppose it.

Why Do WE Need To Curb OUR Emissions????

2008-06-21T09:58:00.000-05:00

Beijing is one of the world's most polluted cities and vehicle emissions from more than three million cars are chiefly to blame for poor air quality, which represents one of the biggest challenges to the successful staging of the Games.
International Olympic Committee chief Jacques Rogge has warned that endurance events, such as the marathon, may be postponed to protect athletes from the effects of pollution.

Read the whole thing. I've even had folks tell me that China doesn't have a pollution problem yet so we have to cut them a lot of slack. That's nuts! We need to be on China like flies on **** dogging them every minute of the day to clean up their act. Why, oh why, are the environmentalists worried about us drilling for oil and not screaming at the Chinese to stop drilling for oil and to look at "alternative energy"?

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-06-21T09:55:00.000-05:00

Byron Berline and Gang play "The Forkey Headed Deer"!

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-06-14T07:42:00.000-05:00

Cherryhomes doing a favorite of mine "Last Old Shovel"

Is Everyone In Washington DC Under the Age of 30?

2008-06-11T07:06:00.000-05:00

They must be, because it is the only way to explain how the Dems figured that a "wind-fall profits tax" on the oil companies would be a good way to lower gas prices--or even a good policy.

If anyone lived through the depressing Carter years of long lines at the pump they would have fled from a wind fall profits tax with all alacrity. What is even more amazing is that 51 Senators thought that it was a good idea. This only proves that we have an amazing collection of egotistical boobs in the Senate.

As an aside, someone claiming to be Herb Kohl voted in his name. Of course, it was cast as it was directed to be cast by the Democrats. There are no reports of anyone actually SEEING Kohl voting. Just that the vote mysteriously materialized. Hm-m-m-m-m-m. The mystery continues.

Windfall Profits Tax = Lower Prices???

2008-06-09T14:24:00.000-05:00

Someone, ANYONE, explain to me how Obama's promise of a windfall profits tax will produce lower gas prices? Indeed, how is it going to help anything except to RAISE pump prices?

Why McCain Will Lose: #1 He Refuses a Meeting With Billy Graham

2008-06-09T08:05:00.001-05:00

Another reason why I'm so pessimistic about McCain's chances. He just blew off an invitation to set up a meeting with evangelical Christian leader the Rev. Billy Graham. McCain somehow feels that he can do this because evangelicals have nowhere to go. He's wrong. According to the story:

But McCain’s team is missing the fact that the vacuum created by the GOP’s divorce from them is being filled by the Democrats.
Both Clinton and Obama have been quietly courting evangelicals, the former in private meetings last year and the later with open, religious language.

Besides, the evangelical vote is notoriously fickle. Speaking as an evangelical Christian, I can tell you that my friends will never hold their nose and vote. They will vote their faith. You blow them off, they will blow you off and find a candidate that they can support. And yes, they will refuse to vote for anyone before they vote for someone who does what McCain just did.

Saturday Morning Bluegrass

2008-06-07T09:23:00.000-05:00

I'm a nut for traditional bluegrass. I typically favor the traditional style that uses just one microphone that the band all gathers around. But the late and very great Bill Monroe is exempt from all such restrictions. I present to you THE MASTER:

OH. MY. GOD.

2008-06-06T15:59:00.000-05:00

The world, well, Seattle, has officially gone over the edge with this global warming crap.

BEACH BONFIRES MAY BE BANNED
They fuel global warming, parks department says

"...According to a memo to the park board from the staff released Thursday, "The overall policy question for the Board is whether it is good policy for Seattle Parks to continue public beach fires when the carbon ... emissions produced by thousands of beach fires per year contributes to global warming...."

You gotta read the whole blasted thing. It is a priceless description of a loony part of the country exhibiting total lunacy.

The Dems Get Away With Inaction

2008-06-06T09:06:00.000-05:00

I was just listening to some clips from a speech that Obama gave in St. Paul last night. In it he proclaimed that he will bring the troops home from Iraq.

Nonsense.

He knows that Reid and Pelosi have not followed though on that promise as well as their promise to impeach Bush and Cheney. They have suffered no repercussions from that whatsoever. There have been no huge demonstrations in Washington DC demanding that they do what they promised. To the contrary, they have been rewarded with honor laud and glory for their so-called "work". They have been feted by all of the liberal establishment and have faced not one cross word from any liberal pundit. Obama knows that. He also knows that there is no way under the sun that the troops could be unilaterally withdrawn from Iraq without the USA showing the terrorists that nothing has changed since the attack on the Cole and the US Embassies in Africa.

He is playing the crowd for the chumps he thinks that they are.

Since Reid and Pelosi have been in office they haven't lifted a finger to follow through on the promises that brought them to power. Some might say that the Republicans have blocked every attempt to enforce the Democrat agenda. Bull hockey! The Republicans don't have the majority in either house. The best that the Republicans can do is stall Senate action because it takes 60 votes to do much of anything important in the Senate. Besides, the Dems have the bully pulpit of the majority leaders. They could call out obstruction for what it is. They could rain down on the obstructionists the scorn and media pressure of thousands. They are the ones who can rant and rave and arm twist. But then, why should they? Not a single anti-war group has uttered so much as a peep about the lack of effort on the part of the Dems. Not one Hollywood lefty has shot his/her mouth off in criticism of Reid or Pelosi. Not a single newspaper editorial that I can find has criticized in the least Reid and Pelosi for failing to follow through on their promises. So, why should they bother to do anything to follow through on their anti-war promises? They are sitting in the proverbial catbird seat: They don't have to do anything and no one is going to blame them.

What is so totally surprising about this is that the liberal pressure groups have completely rolled over and played dead. When the Republicans controlled both houses these groups screamed bloody murder and seemed to be on the news every day demanding an immediate and complete withdrawal from Iraq. They screamed about Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. They demanded war crimes trials for Bush and Cheney. But now that they have their own folks in control of Congress who aren't lifting a finger to do what they promised---not a peep. Yet, they are getting the shaft of all shafts by their own buddies. I'm really surprised that some enterprising reporter hasn't approached the Code Pink group or other anti-war groups and asked them why they've given Reid and Pelosi a pass. Indeed, left wing news site Democracy Now has only a very few tepid and quite tangential mentions of how Reid and Pelosi have not honored their promises. Incredibly, as the left charges Bush now with murder of millions in Iraq and all sorts of crimes against humanity, not a single word is directed towards Reid or Pelosi for their lack of doing anything at all about any of it.

You would think that there would be left wing outrage. There would be massive demonstrations, screaming, vein popping speeches condemning the Democrat leadership. As I said, to be sure, there would be days of rage and nationwide moratoriums all over the place were the Republicans still in control.

Odd, isn't it? When the Dems can do something but refuse to do so, the left gives them a total pass. When the Republicans don't do what the left wants, there is screaming galore. You would think that the outrage would be directed at those most likely to change.

Let the Kid's Pay for Their Nannies! ;)

2008-06-05T11:12:00.000-05:00

Yesterday I had a chance to think a bit about the folks who are still complaining that the government has not solved all of their problems following Hurricane Katrina. I saw in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel a filler piece about someone who was robbed while they were living in a FEMA trailer.

It should be no surprise that we have an entire generation coming along who thinks that government should solve all of their problems. If a storm blows down the barn and the cattle are killed that somehow the government is supposed to make them whole. But you also have some dear souls who believe, that in a case like that, government can only make things worse. So, on one hand you have folks who want government to wipe their noses, put a BandAid on their owies, and hang with them until everything is better again. But on the other hand you have folks who would just as soon punch a government bureaucrat in the nose and tell him to get the hell out of the way because you have work to do.

How about this for a solution: You want you own personal government bureaucrat to watch over you and protect you from everything from cradle to grave? Fine, we'll give you that and put you in the 75% tax bracket. We'll tax the hell outta you. You'll swear that you had moved to Sweden. But in return you have a bureaucrat wipe your nose, tell you to put a jacket on, tell you what to eat, and make sure that nothing bad will ever happen to you. You'll also have all of the health insurance that you could ever need and more. The rest of us will be taxed only enough to pay for the government services that we can't do for our self--police, fire, national defense. We're on our own for everything else. If the folks who sign up for their own personal bureaucrat want more services, well, their taxes go up to pay for it.

What to do about those who cannot afford a cradle to grave bureaucrat? Those in poverty, homeless, on welfare? I don't know!! I just think of this stuff. I can't do everything!

Help Me Out Here!

2008-06-05T08:00:00.000-05:00

I've been digging and digging trying to find a reasonable estimate of he number of Iraqis killed by the jihadist terrorists. I can't find anything--not even a guesstimate by a responsible adult. Anyone able to direct me to something that they think is an accurate estimate please be so kind as to post a comment. Thanks.

Slinger Speedway Ain't Closing

2008-06-03T08:58:00.000-05:00

Even before I joined with a friend of mine to begin a chaplain's ministry at Slinger Speedway, I spent a considerable amount of time there as a fan in the stand. In fact, I've been going there since I was a kid in 8th grade. I love the place! The track is ultra fast and loaded with tradition.

However, for about the last 25 years every time I mention the words "Slinger Speedway" some wag tells me "You know that place is sold and they are closing it." NO, THEY HAVE NOT AND ARE NOT. It is not becoming a parking lot for a shopping mall, it isn't becoming a luxury condo development, it simply is not closing.

First off, the speedway is Slinger. It draws that village national attention every year and is mentioned on just about every other TV broadcast devoted to stock car racing. Wayne Erickson, the current owner of the track, works as hard as any businessman that I know to keep short track racing alive. I spoke with him last Sunday and the fire of racing almost burns alive in him. You can see it in his eyes when he talks about track operations. With his dying breath he will refuse to close that track. Any idiot that has spent five minutes with the guy would know that Slinger Speedway is not closing as long as Wayne Erickson has a say in it.

Slinger's local government is loyal to the track and vice versa. Look at the "Welcome to Slinger" signs at the edge of town. See the stock cars on them? Look at the patches that the local cops wear. See the stock cars and checkered flag on them? Is this any indication that the town wants to rid itself of Slinger Speedway? And the noise that you hear coming from the track every Summer Sunday night? That is the sound of cash for the village. Main Street businesses make good money off of the fans there and they always have. I've spoken to both local businessmen and Slinger village officials. Both tell me that anyone coming there with a proposal that included closing the track would be showed the door in short order. If luxury condos were built on the site of the old Little Switzerland ski hill (they are not), those condos would have to live next door to the speedway as long as the track wanted to stay.

So where do these rumors come from? Idiots, for one. Folks who haven't bothered to do a small bit of checking into the facts. I had one guy who wanted to bet me $50 that the track was closing at the end of the 2005 season. Said that he had heard it from the track owner himself. I was an idiot for not taking the bet. But then, I don't gamble. But then there are jealous track operators who would love to have Slinger out of the picture. Dissatisfied drivers and car owners are another source. As emotion-charged as racing is, a guy who has had his car disqualified after winning a feature race would do everything that he could to hurt the track. That's the nature of the biz.

Slinger Speedway will live on. It's been there for over 50 years through lean years and fat years.

It isn't going anywhere.

Well, Now I have Something to Think About Today

2008-06-03T08:30:00.000-05:00

GM is going to permanently close the Janesville plant. Inevitably someone is going to want to place blame. Might as well be me. I'm just as good at it as any of the "experts". Who's to blame in the issue of he closing of the Janesville plant is easy to decide--there is so much blame to go around.

First, GM get a load because those guys have all of the foresight of a golden marmot. Tell me that they didn't have a forecast for declining SUV sales and I'll agree. Also, the GM corporate structure is heavily tilted towards inertia. Even if someone at the very top clearly predicted declining revenues from SUV sales, there was no way that they were able to make the change in time. Toyota, Honda, Subaru, all of the Japanese car makers are able to change on a dime it seems. They are better structured to adapt to changing markets.

Second, state and local government has repeatedly urged investment by GM into an antique facility instead of leading Janesville towards diversifying into other industries.. It's like everyone keeps stuffing food into an aging grandpa and then wondering why he is getting fat and his health is declining. I'm sure that Thompson and Doyle and the Janesville government leadership tried to diversify. But they seem to want to always be attached to building cars and trucks. True, that is what is (was) there right now. But how they could have avoid ed the lesson of Gary, Indiana and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania is beyond me. Janesville, it seems, hitched its wagon to a star--and it fell.

I won't blame the workers at the Janesville plant. They did everything that they could. In this case, the corporate structure failed them and the corporate structure needs to pay a price for that failure. They need to give the Janesville workers a send-off worthy of the efforts that they put into producing cars and trucks for 97 years.

Janesville is now going to drift into that land where old factories are turned into shopping malls, boutique restaurants, and trendy hotels, all in a vain attempt to capture the lost glory. Sorry, I don't buy it. First off, every city that has a huge old abandoned factory does that. They are a dime a dozen. What Janesville needs to do is bulldoze the shame and start over with a clean slate. The factory was built in 1911. Let it finally die. Janesville needs to find something cutting edge, offer stupendous incentives to locate here and grow with it. Don't go looking for the assembly lines of the past. Now Janesville has a terrific chance to start something small and watch it grow, instead of vainly trying to keep a falling star in the sky.

Go Ahead, Try It Here

2008-05-31T09:12:00.000-05:00

I triple-dog dare you. Charles Krauthammer's column on the environmentalist wackos trying "carbon rationing" in Great Britain, is an excellent read. In it he says this:

Just Monday, a British parliamentary committee proposed that every citizen be required to carry a carbon card that must be presented, under penalty of law, when buying gasoline, taking an airplane or using electricity. The card contains your yearly carbon ration to be drawn down with every purchase, every trip, every swipe.

We are a free people, an independent folk. You try to pull something like "carbon rationing" on us, the likely response will be a thriving black market and subterfuge at the very least and full-scale armed revolt at the likeliest. My folks tell me that during World War II it was fairly easy, if you had a mind to, to get what you needed in spite of the rationing program. People knew how to scam the system. To be sure, most people abided the system because there was a war on and the folks had already seen this country attacked. They knew that the threat was real.

But you try carbon rationing because of a threat that is little more than conjecture and based upon the tenuous evidence of computer models, well, as Jerry Seinfeld once said, you got a pretty huge matzo ball hanging out there. For one thing, no one is dead certain sure, like they were after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, that there is a real threat. Secondly, no one can truly say that man, particularly the USA, is at fault. It is all speculation. No one knows, if indeed there is a global warming trend, if the Earth is simply going through a natural and routine warming cycle like it has centuries upon centuries before. In fact, over 31,000 scientists say that there is no evidence of human-caused global warming.

You say you want a revolution? Just try, JUST TRY, to impose carbon rationing here.

Who Says Wisconsin Has No Talent?

2008-05-30T16:51:00.000-05:00

I am a serious nut for Southern Gospel music. Yes, I rarely miss a Gaither show on TV. Well, there are a couple groups from Wisconsin that I've "discovered" that just blow me away.

Eternity, a quartet of guys from Germantown are fantastic. Tons of fun, put a great show, and their harmony is tight--tight--tight. They do classic and contemporary Southern Gospel and are superb showmen. They also donate their concerts to charity.

Now I come across these gals--341 Wow! Their from Mosinee and I haven't heard harmonies like this in a long time. They sing a capella, Italian for "hanging it all out there". You can't hide behind loud violins when you sing a capella.

Check them out!

Dole Blasts Scott McClellan

2008-05-30T14:37:00.000-05:00

Why wasn't Bob Dole this feisty when he ran for president? We might have avoided 4 additional years of Slick Willie.

Anyway, Dole lays into McClellan and gives the little twit the tongue-lashing that he deserves. Writes Dole:

"There are miserable creatures like you in every administration who don’t have the guts to speak up or quit if there are disagreements with the boss or colleagues. No, your type soaks up the benefits of power, revels in the limelight for years, then quits, and spurred on by greed, cashes in with a scathing critique."

Where has this Bob Dole been? This guy hasn't been seen since about 1992. Bully for him.

Oh Please! Oh Please! Oh Please!!!!!!!!

2008-05-30T13:50:00.000-05:00

If only this gal has the guts to follow through:

SUSAN SARANDON, who appeared in three films last year and won kudos for her TV movie "Bernard and Doris," is still not a contented soul. She says if John McCain gets elected, she will move to Italy or Canada. She adds, "It's a critical time, but I have faith in the American people."

The 2000 election saw a lot of these celebs promise to leave the country if Bush was elected. Blasted liars!!! This time we have to hold them to it.

If enough of the Hollywood Left promised to leave, I might just be convinced to vote for McCain!

Please! Do It Now!!

2008-05-30T08:43:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I heard that Democrat Congressman Henry Waxman said that he had a mind to bring for White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan before Waxman's committee and have him give sworn testimony. PLEASE, MR. WAXMAN, DO IT NOW!!!

Of course, the problem is that if he does that the political gain for the Democrats evaporates the moment that McClellan takes the oath. Given the rapid news cycles these days, once the hearing is over a new issue will replace McClellan's. For politicians of both sides, the point isn't solving the problem, it is getting as much political gain out of each and every issue. Between the two parties, the Democrats play the game masterfully. When they held the majority, the Republicans were stupid enough to either let issues die or to run with hearings and advance legislation that solved problems rather than using them for political gain.

Anyone notice that the Democrats have not done a thing about gas prices other than piss and moan? Anyone notice that the Democrats have accused Bush of all sorts of criminal acts but have never held a single hearing looking into any of it? There's a reason for all of this: The Democrats don't want a solution--they want the issue. That's why you will see nothing come out of the recent Senate hearing with the oil executives. (Besides, that was simply a media event that was staged solely to give the Senators a chance to vent for their constituents.)

So, we hear about "possible" hearings into the allegations by Scott McClellan. We have Nancy Pelosi blinking her way around the country and praising Iran for the success of the surge in Iraq. (Sorry. Had to throw that one in there.) You have Democrats of every stripe braying about the high oil prices, accusing "big oil" of gouging, and threatening a windfall profits tax and stripping the oil companies of subsidies.

The answer to all of this is for the Republicans to say: "Okay, let's vote. Bring it on. Take your shot." Indeed, I'd almost be willing to let the Dems have a windfall tax and let them strip the oil companies of their subsidies just to let the country see how destructive such a proposal would be. But, hey, you want to impeach Bush and Cheney? Bring it to the floor and we'll vote this afternoon. You say the oil companies are illegally colluding to raise gas prices? Fine, you guys pick any special prosecutor that you want (heck, you can have Eliot Spitzer if you want) and then you can bring it on, investigate to your hearts content. You want out of Iraq? Great! Let's vote right now! Up or down! The Dems would flee in terror from that. "How dare you!" they would scream. The last thing in the world they want is to have to vote on something. They don't want to solve anything. They only want the issue, not the vote.

Even though the Dems have the power in both houses to hold hearings and pass legislation, they don't want to do that. The Republicans should be out there every day of the week telling the press "We're ready to vote on that today." But then, that would be asking the Republicans to do what is impossible for them: Lead.

If He Must.....

2008-05-29T08:09:00.002-05:00

Rumor has it that McCain is considering Sam Nunn as vice president on the ticket.

Good grief!

If he SIMPLY MUST have a Democrat as his veep, then why not go for Zell Miller?

Now It's The Walrus

2008-05-29T08:09:00.001-05:00

Michelle Malkin notes that the Pacific Walrus is now targeted by the enviros for litigation to force adding it to the endangered species list.

When does the "American Economy" get added to the list?

Malkin says that the enviros specifically state in their lawsuit that the walrus is endangered because of "off-shore petroleum development". Well, our economy is endangered because of environmentalists destroying off-shore petroleum development.

MJS's Article on McCain Rally

2008-05-29T07:56:00.000-05:00

I'm normally quite impressed with Greg Borowski's work. But his article about McCain coming to Milwaukee today is, well, a real turd. The term is richly deserved. Fully 2/3 of the article, if not more, is about the Democrat Party's response to McCain's visit. Nothing about the topic of McCain's visit. Nothing from McCain supporters. The whole subject of the article is about the Democrat criticism of McCain.

Can't wait for Obama's next visit. Then again, considering the wimpy nature of the Republican Party they'll probably praise Obama.