Archive for January, 2009

Winter storms stretch to New England

The storms have cut power to tens of thousands of homes, glazed roads and been blamed for at least five deaths.

Thus, of course, further emphasizing the desperate need for drastic measures to combat global warming, such as spending millions of the creation of the position of  a global warming “czar”, with the requisite increase in bureaucracy by creating a new “federal department” to develop a national global warming strategy.

So, do you spend money to create a panel of “experts” to study a nebulous, ill-defined bugaboo called global warming…?

Or…do you instead “spend” that money in the form of reduced taxes on heating oil to provide real help to real people freezing their collective arses off?

I guess it depend on how “progressive” you are.

WorldNetDaily had this new article this morning:

Economic stimulus? Feds want your medical records
Electronic database to include lawsuit, mental health, abortion, sexual details

 A little-discussed provision in President Obama’s economic stimulus plan would demand that every American submit to a government program for electronic medical records without a choice to opt out, and it has privacy advocates more than a little alarmed.

A national coordinator to develop a “nationwide health information technology infrastructure that allows for the electronic use and exchange of information.”

Except that…Pres. Obama isn’t the first one to come up with this idea.  As a matter of fact, it was Pres. Bush who laid the groundwork for this when he signed an executive order in August, 2006 mandating the creation of a national healthcare database for Federal Agencies.

It is the purpose of this order to ensure that health care programs administered or sponsored by the Federal Government promote quality and efficient delivery of health care through the use of health information technology, transparency regarding health care quality and price, and better incentives for program beneficiaries, enrollees, and providers.

(c) ‘‘Interoperability’’ means the ability to communicate and exchange data accurately, effectively, securely, and consistently with different information technology systems, software applications, and networks in various settings, and exchange data such that clinical or operational purpose and meaning of the data are preserved and unaltered.

(a) Health Information Technology.
(1) For Federal Agencies. As each agency implements, acquires, or upgrades health information technology systems
used for the direct exchange of health information between agencies and with non-Federal entities, it shall utilize, where available, health information technology systems and products that meet recognized interoperability standards. (emphasis mine)

So, the move towards an interconnected network of systems sharing health care information is nothing new.  This is merely the next step towards a nationalized database of every person’s health care information, openly shared between a broad spectrum of health care agencies and providers.  And it’s clearly a “bi-partisan” effort.

Say good-bye to your medical privacy…what little you still have left.

Ready for that global wedgie?

Posted: January 26, 2009 in Linkie Love, Politics

Great quote:

Let me ask anyone reading this: did you know anyone in your school who was known for trying to get everyone to like them? Did you think they were great people or did you laugh when you heard they were stuffed in their locker by one of the jocks? Get ready for America to be stuffed in a locker.

Go read the rest of it here. Go.  Now.  Okay, fine.  Pretend Obama says so.

Ah, that’s better.

..but Iz hasta wonder just how exactly gifting 3.4 Billion dollars of tax money to non-profit organizations…who by law pay little to no taxes…stimulates the economy.  The E-C-O-N-O-M-Y.

Once more, for the learning impaired:  Giving money to NONprofit organizations to stimulate the ECONOMY.

Profit.  Economy.  See what I did there?  Groups which are forbidden by law from making a profit, stimulating the economy.  Do I need to break it down any farther for anyone?


Oh, but wait.  We’re also apparently spending four billion to: 

be used for neighborhood stabilization activities related to emergency assistance for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes.

How do you put “emergency” and “redevelopment of abandoned homes” in the same sentence?  Is this some sop to the Katrina folks, who after three and a half years haven’t fixed their own homes?  If so, how is it now suddenly an “emergency?”  If a house is abandoned, just who exactly are we renovating it for?  Next question:  Once it is renovated/restored/remodeled, WHO GET’S THE MONEY FROM ITS SALE?  The bank who holds the paper on it?  So we are taking tax money and giving it to banks?  To stimulate the economy.

Let me break this one down for you, too.   If a house is in a neighborhood or area where the people cannot afford to fix or maintain it, or in such a shitty area that the previous owners said screw this, and moved out, HOW IN THE HELL DO WE EXPECT ANYONE TO BUY IT ONCE WE FIX IT UP?  If they can’t afford it now, will they be able to afford it once we remodel it and increase it’s market value by 30-50%?

Foreclosed homes can be purchased from the banks for pennies on the dollar, if you know what you’re doing.  Many people make quite a living “turning” these kinds of homes.  The fact that there are homes out there NOT being snatched up, means that they aren’t in a marketable area.  Which means that they will sit empty, beautiful, but empty, until the locals break in, steal all the new fixtures and paint graffiti all over the new paint job.  And then it’ll look just like everything else in the neighborhood, again, but you’ll have spent millions feeling better about yourself because you “did something.”

Once more, for the brain-damaged:  If you rebuild a crack house in a dead-end neighborhood, all you’re going to do is give the crack heads a nicer place to crash.  Which is nice.  But ultimately unproductive.  And just how much of this money goes for the “administration” of the program, and how much, ultimately, will ever make it into the pockets of people actually swinging hammers and hanging sheet rock? 

Yeah, I think you and I both know the answer to that one.

Oh, and the millions of this “stimulus” package that will pay for abortions and birth control?  Now you know how the Dems are going to pay for this “universal health care for children.”

By reducing the number of children they have to cover!  INGENIUS!  People this smart should CLEARLY be running the world.  I’m so happy that Obama won, I may just spontaneously evolve into a higher life form.

You know, a progressive.

I know I said that the blogging was off for a while, but this question has been burning its way through my brain for a while now, and I’m simply just dying to find the answer.  So here goes:

Just what exactly is it that Pres. Obama is supposed to deliver us out of?  The sweeping rhetoric during most of his campaign, and the rallying cry of his fervent followers is that Pres. O! will right what is wrong, and deliver the downtrodden people of America from….what?  In all seriousness.

Everyone seems to point to the last “eight years,” as though only in the last eight years has our country devolved into some sort of nightmarish monster, and Pres. O! is the dragon slayer come to rescue the defenseless villagers from the menace of….what?

Why just the last eight years?  Because there was a Democrat president before that, so of course things couldn’t have been that bad?   It’s the sole responsibility of one Republican president that drove this country into the ground in just eight years, and only through the vision and greatness of O-ba-Ma! can we hope to recover?

So please, in all seriousness, if there is some minority reader out there, a black or hispanic or some other group who feels that Barack Obama is somehow this Ghandi or some other visionary who will lead you out of your circumstances, please tell me what exactly those circumstances are.  Because I’m just not seeing it.  Or at least, I’m just not seeing how Pres. Obama is somehow the magical cure for whatever ails you.

Is Barack Obama going to somehow resolve the problems of innner-city single mothers raising teens at risk from gangs and drugs?  Will he solve teen pregnancy once and for all?  Broken marriages, unfaithful husbands and wives?  Will he somehow magically bring economic prosperity to areas suffering from urban blight and business flight?  How?  What makes him so different that he will somehow be able to miraculously solve problems that have been plaguing Presidents – both Democrat and Republican – for the last 30 years or more?

How will Barack Obama “finally” free the black men and women of this country from their chains?  And of what are those chains made?  What oppression do you suffer?  And how is it Barack Obama that will fix it?  I’ve seen t-shirts with His image overlaid with those of Martin Luther King and Harriet Tubman.  Harriet Tubman, who helped slaves escape to the North, and Freedom.  MLK who helped break down long-standing racial and social barriers, the catalyst to sweeping changes in integration and equal rights for minorities.  And so now Barack Obama steps up and ushers in the next era of…what?  He can’t help free the slaves, get blacks the vote, or secure equal access for minorities.  IT’S.  BEEN.  DONE.  ALREADY.

So, what is this next great barrier, this next level of oppression that B.O. is supposed to break through, to bring freedom and release from?  What EXACTLY is it that he is saving you from?

Please help me understand.

Well, how goes the Inaugural afterglow?  Has your Obamagasm left you feeling spent, a little weak in the knees?  Me, I’m feeling that sort of bitter, dirty regret you feel when you wake up after a big kegger and realize that you probably cheated on your girlfriend last night with some ugly, fat chick, but you’re not really sure, because it all gets a little hazy after the third Jeager-and-Red-Bull shot. It’s probably a good bet, though, considering that she’s still lying in your bed, snoring heavily, and is wearing your underwear.

Yeah, it’s kind of like that.  I’ve even changed the theme of my blog to reflect that I’m officially in mourning.  The death of innocence, or some such.

As a tribute to the departing President Bush, I’d like to briefly recap some of his more significant failures.  These are things that a fairly significant portion of the American populace expected of him, on which he completely failed to step up or follow through:

  • The Constitution wasn’t suspended, scheduled elections weren’t postponed, and he didn’t declare himself Emperor For Life.
  • A theocracy wasn’t established, Christianity did not become the official state religion, and prayer wasn’t made mandatory in schools.  Atheism wasn’t outlawed, and Michael Newdow wasn’t assassinated by a CIA hit team. Damnit.  No wiccans were burned at the stake in the public square.
  • Large swaths of the GLBT crowd weren’t rounded up and sent to re-education camps to cure them of Teh Gey.  Homosexuality was not outlawed, there was no fatwah or Kristalnacht smashing out the windows of hair salons and designer boutiques.
  • He didn’t force the Supreme Court didn’t overturn Roe v. Wade, thus condemning women to endure another reproductive Dark Age.
  • Liberal bloggers were not rounded up and imprisoned for daring to question the ruling junta.  Although, I might mention that several conservative commentators were threatened with fines or jail for alleged “hate speech.”

On a more serious note, despite the vitriolic lambasting by the Progs and the Gay caballeros, George W. Bush has probably done more for AIDS research, global AIDS awareness, and funding for AIDS prevention in Africa than any other President.  But you don’t hear about that much.  You hear about the 4,000+ plus that died in Iraq, but there are no stats on the number of lives he may have saved through his efforts to combat AIDS in underpriviledged countries.

There are a great many things on which I might disagree with Pres. Bush, things I didn’t like, such as his stand (or lack thereof) on immigration, and his just flat stupid approach to economic “recovery,” but the fact remains that he has persevered through eight hard years, dealt with a number of severe crisis in a more than adequate fashion, and, whether you agree with the specific methods or not, prevented another terrorist attack on U.S. soil for the entire tenure of his presidency.  Through his efforts, numerous attacks have been prevented in OTHER countries as well.

It will be interesting to see if Pres. Obama will be able to claim the same thing at the end of his tour.

It will be interesting to watch as the months and years progress, how long the dopey school-girl crush between the media and Prog pundits and O-Ba-MA! lasts?  I wonder how long it will be before the feral, demanding special interest groups begin to savage B.O. for his “failures” to live up to all the hype and promises.  Until they start using words like ‘betrayal” and “sell-out” if he doesn’t bring sweeping special rights and privileges to gays and other minorities, or if he fails to trim the military down to the size of the Coast Guard in four years.

I, for one, am going to do my best not to become a victim of ODS and scream bloody murder every time He does something liberalish.  Besides, as a government service employee and a member of the Reserves, I’ve got to keep my bile in check since he’s actually the Commander in Chief now, and not just some marxist looney running for office.  That doesn’t mean that I won’t be checking the list of Presidential Executive Orders almost daily to see what kind of wacky shit he’s trying to slide in under the radar.

All that said, blogging will be light to non-existent over the next couple of weeks as I try to get out from under a couple of big projects.   So, all 12 of you can spend your time doing other, more important things, like scraping your Bush/Cheney ’04 bumperstickers off, and replacing them with O! stickers.  I know I have.

I’m sorry, but if you have a burning molotav cocktail in your hand, arm cocked back to throw, you have lost your status as “peaceful protestor” or even “activist” and moved right up into “combatant.”  And I will shoot you dead’r-n-shit.  Twice.

If you charge at me, bandana over your face, screaming unintelligible gibberish about allah akbar and his cousins fatwah and jihad, all the while swinging a club, baseball bat, or tire iron, I will assume that you intend me grievous bodily harm, and will respond accordingly.   In the form of shooting you dead’r-n-shit.

Perhaps someone ought to pass these ideas and concepts along to the many police forces currently getting their collective asses kicked, or at least, being complete marginalized and utterly mocked as rioters run rampant through the streets smashing, looting and burning.  You know, all those tradtionally “peaceful” ways to express your angst.

They are not protestors. They are terrorists and violent thugs, and should be dealt with accordingly.

In a related corollary:  Name me ONE time that Hamas has EVER honored a cease-fire for longer than a week?  Yeah.

For some reason this gave me quite a chuckle…

Economic recovery is not achieved through more government spending, but rather, through more consumer spending.   The two are, by definition, mutually exclusive.  For greater government spending entails both increased taxation and increased national debt, resulting in less consumer spending power through less available cash, decreased value of what is available, and a reduced willingness to spend it based on uncertainty about the future.

Greater consumer spending results in increased production, marketing and distribution of goods, which of necessity means more jobs to performs these tasks.  Consumer confidence translates across a variety of economic and social sectors, driving an overall confidence in the economy as a whole, and thus both directly and indirectly increasing the stability of the markets and all the governmental and social institutions reliant on them.  Increased consumer spending actual increases tax revenue as well, through those taxes already levied on durable and consumable goods, road taxes, sales taxes, fuel taxes, etc.

Giving people more of their own money to spend is far and away the better prescription for economic health than greater doses of burdensome taxes which, rather than spreading the wealth, insteads result in an oppressed, sullen, resentful and insecure populace, one less and less likely to view its own government with forebearance or affection.