Thursday, February 28, 2013

Mandatory Sequester comment . . .

Remember that around a year ago, President O said that he would veto any congressional attempt to avoid the sequester of funds, which he demanded?

Nah, they didn't think you would.

For the last six years (that includes Bush, doncha know, but doesn't exclude Obama) the American population has suffered continual erosion of their family budgets, both through price increases, like gasoline, and through loss of revenue, from job losses and income reductions.  And our federal rulers can't find a way to reduce expenses and are yelping about national disaster in the form of a mere 1 or 2 percent reduction in spending?  When spending already exceeds income by a hell of a lot more? 

The sequester would be a decent first step towards resolving the problem, even though insufficient in and of itself.  And it won't be a disaster, that is, it won't be a disaster unless it is implemented disastrously to punish the impertinence of people who don't think that increased government spending must be supported in any and all cases and by any means possible.

We have fallen in amongst bandits.

Sunday, February 17, 2013

Should we start looking for cover? . . .

Last year our government bought, according to published information, 1.2 billion rounds of hollow point ammunition.  That's not our military; that's government civilian agencies like Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.  Simple math tells us that there are multiple rounds for every man, woman and child in the U.S. 

And your little dog Toto, too.

Wonder if our government masters are planning to do something they expect will seriously arouse the citizen subjects?

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

State of the Union Speech . . .

Oh, this guy is go-o-od!  Slick can get it done, can't he?

I mean, when you watch and listen to the speech, it sounds really terrific.  There are points where you feel like standing up and cheering.

But then when you read the speech, and you are restricted to the cold, hard logic of English sentence structure --  he repeatedly contradicts himself, that is, when what he is saying isn't actually nonsense or false to fact. 

But it truly sounds so good, doesn't it?  'What we have, here, is a seamless blend of "finally, somebody who gets it,"  with "this guy just doesn't get it."

I guess that's why commentators have termed him, "magnetic."  He has a positive, attractive pole and a negative, repulsive pole.  All in one.

Friday, February 01, 2013

These people perturb me off . . . mightily . . .

The currently fashionable snark of the right hand side of the political spectrum is to refer to people on the left as "low-information voters." Well, guess what.  There's low information voters on both sides, and in far greater numbers than there should be. 

But that isn't the real problem.  An absence of information can be corrected.  It's bad information that is the problem.  And where does the bad information come from?  News media just publishes stuff.  It normally doesn't create the stuff it publishes.  (The key word is "normally.")

When it comes to politics, the news media gets the information from the political people  - the politicians and all their operatives, suckups, agents and cronies.  The truth isn't in them.  Right and left, blue and red, conservative and liberal, fat cats and wellfare pimps, bullies and whores, big and small government believers, all of them, with the constant 24/7/365 spin, "analysis", and polls, are responsible for the fantastic, bad information breathlessly published, also 24/7/365,  by the news media.

Is there anybody left who isn't convinced, by now, that except for the religious terrorists in the middle east, the source of all the problems and challenges facing us is Washington D.C., and all the state capitol buildings?

I hereby move that it be resolved that we relentlessly present all politicians with nothing but disrespect, sarcasm, mockery and contempt.  It shouldn't be hard to do and we get plenty of opportunity.

They've earned it.