Saturday, May 19, 2007


Oh Jimmy Carter! I wish we could say we’ve missed your sorry ass since you were quite unceremoniously dumped from the White House by a very disappointed electorate in 1980, but we can’t, for two reasons. One, nobody has fond memories of your disastrous term on Pennsylvania Avenue. Two, you won’t get your toothy grin out of our lives long enough to be missed. You’re like a chronic hemorrhoid on the ass of the Democrats’ donkey. Please quit embarrassing us with your anti-American escapades. How about going on a mission to save the word by eradicating killer rabbits? Remember when you were attacked by a rabbit, Jimmy? My God, how embarrassing…for US, not you! What a Wus! The only killer rabbit in the entire world and it had to attack a United States President…a President who couldn’t successfully defend himself against a bunny. And you haven’t figure out why you couldn’t persuade the Ayatollah Khomeini and Iran to release the 52 American hostages they seized and kept captured for well over a year during your disastrous tenure?! To rub salt in the wound, enter President Reagan and the hostages were released moments later.

Here is what Jimmy had to say about one of the most influential and popular leaders of modern times, Great Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair: “I think that the almost undeviating support by Great Britain for the ill-advised policies of President Bush in Iraq have been a major tragedy for the world.” He also called PM Blair: “Abominable. Loyal, blind, apparently subservient.” This from a person like Carter to a man like Blair???

This Carter creep is the guy who Hugo Chavez sent running for his saggy life when he went to Venezuela to “monitor” elections. He did such a good job monitoring that Chavez, who hates America and Americans more than Jane Fonda, won a very questionable, steeper than landslide, election victory. Carter also gave his stamp of approval to the sham election of Yasser Arafat in 1996. A historical lover of socialism and even dictatorships, he decided to sit out the Iraq elections because….How do I put this politely? I’m guessing he didn’t want any part of George Bush getting credit for helping to establish a democratically elected government in Iraq! He would, it seems, begrudge Iraq a democracy simply because George Bush helped make it happen. What a piece of work this Jimmy guy is! But no problem helping Venezuela establish a socialist state!?

And he regurgitates this puke on foreign soil, on BBC radio!? C’mon Libs…I understand a lot of your grievances, but how is the United States of America itself such a grievance that you have to spew your uncontrolled diatribe directly to foreign audiences? Have some pride…control yourself and your anger for a change and do something constructive with it (hear me, Dixie, Chicks?)!

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), during a meeting on immigration legislation, told Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), when McCain objected to part of the bill, that McCain had been too busy campaigning for president and hadn’t contributed much, telling him he can’t just “…parachute in here on the last day” and accuse Cornyn of voicing “petty objections”. “You’re out of line.” To which McCain replied, “F__k You! I know more about this than anyone in the room!” Not much, but I think McCain is borderline certifiable and needs to let go of his presidential aspirations so we can breath some fresh air. So like I said, not much, but it speaks to his temperament.

If you’re tired of all of this kind of stuff, I highly recommend you treat yourself and someone else to a screening of “Shrek The Third.” Extremely entertaining…dry, sophisticated adult humor and chuckle-out-loud funny! If you have a sense of humor (sorry Speaker Pelosi), it’s GREAT STUFF!!! GO SEE IT!


DEMS - 0, GOP - 0

We're back and resuming regular posts today. I hope you'll continue checking this page for new information and a realistic, though abbreviated, take on some of the news of the day. Read on...

We have at least 18 current presidential candidates, at least four others intending to announce, and not one of them does anything for me. I have to agree with Jed Babbin of “Human” when he calls them, not candidates, but contestants. When you see eight or ten people sharing the same stage, what else does it look like?

I watched the second GOP debate the other night on FOX and though the questions were much, much, more intelligent than the childish queries made by the MSNBC dopes, the answers weren’t much more exciting than the first round. And even though the contestants injected much more humor - unfortunately, not all intended – they were still quick to invoke answers they think Ronnie would offer. President Reagan was again, the clear winner as stooge, I mean candidate after candidate, told us that they would do as Reagan did and…well, you fill in the blank.

All and all it was another real yawner. I’ll say this…for as much as they like to compare their answers to what Mr. Reagan would do, there isn’t a Conservative in the bunch. Not that I recognized anyway.

The more they told me how they would do like President Reagan, the more I yawned. It would seem that not one of these people can take a stand, stick to it and sell us on why it would be good for us. Instead, they try to convince us that their stand is the same as Ronnie would take. Man, grow a pair, guys!

Horrible as it was, I had to watch it because, well, I’m messed up like that.

I’ll give the GOP candidates this though; they sounded like men. One more time, they sounded like men. Well, with the exception of Ron Paul, who seems like the missing link between Jimmy Carter and Mike Dukakis. When I watched the Democrats debate, it was real hard telling where Hillary left off and Edwards and the other wusses began. They could have had a real man candidate but they ran him out of the Party during his senate race. His name was Joe Lieberman.

Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner in their book “Freakonomics,” argue that statistically, elections come down to pretty much one element…likeability. Well, some of them are likeable. Take Obama…please! Barak Hussein is likeable, but empty as a porn shop in Tehran! If our extremely intelligent electorate is going to elect the most likeable candidate, we’re screwed! I mean…if the four years from 2009 to 2013 doesn’t bring us another conservative for the nation to rally around again, like Mr. Reagan, then we’ll know that conservatism is truly dead.

So not one of the three Republican front runners; McCain, Giuliani or Romney have any kind of conservative track record. And none of the other contestants stand a chance anyway. Enough of that for now. But if you can tell me how one or two of them don’t suck, please let me hear from you! I’m always open to enlightenment…

‘Till then…


Wednesday, May 16, 2007


We've got some good stuff to go over tomorrow!

Talk to you then.

Monday, May 14, 2007


My regular (almost) daily blog will return later this week. We have some technical issues. READ ON:

Try not to construe this as an endorsement of abortion policies in the U.S. But I do think the following thesis is very intriguing and worth a discussion.

The stats in today's blog were gleaned from the book Freakonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. These stats come from simple cause and effect and are therefore mathmatically relevent.

In 1966, Nicolae Ceausescu made abortion illegal in Romania, a country that had one of the most liberal abortion policies in the world. Also, all contraception and sex education was banned. Compared to Romanian children born just a year earlier, the contingent of children born after the abortion ban would do worse in every measurable way: they would test lower in school, they would have less success in the labor market, and they would also prove much more likely to become criminals.

In 1989, Ceausescu met a violent death. It should not be overlooked that his demise was precipitated in large measure by the youth of Romania - a great number of whom, were it not for his abortion ban, would never have been born at all.

Think of the Romanian abortion story as a reverse image of the American crime story. The point of overlap was on Christmas Day of 1989 when Nick learned the hard way - with a bullet to the head - that his abortion ban had much deeper implications than he knew.

On that day, crime was just about at its peak in the United States. In the previous fifteen years, violent crime had risen 80 percent. When the crime rate began falling in the early 1990s, it did so with such speed and suddenness that it surprised everyone. In the mid to late '90s, teenage murder rates dropped by 50% and crime of all categories was the lowest it had been in over 35 years.

The Clinton Administration was quick to take credit by touting his police hiring initiative, tougher gun control in the form of the Brady Bill and gun buybacks, along with a strong economy.

What hasn't been widely reported, for all the politically correct reasons, is the impact of Roe v. Wade in 1973. Many criminals that were to be, were never born.

Indeed, where have all the criminals gone? Let's talk!