Saturday, November 10, 2007

Semper Fidelis

Today is the Marine Corps' birthday, as it were. Uncle Sam's Misguided Children were formed November 10th, 1775, and they've been putting the fear of God and America in our enemies ever since.

While I may be somewhat biased in my choice of service (GO ARMY!) the Marines have my utmost respect. My father spent 22 years as a Marine.

Yeah, we have some interesting family reunions.

DAD: So, what does Army stand for again? Ain't Real Marines Yet?

ME: Aren't the Marines just a sub-department of the Navy or something like that?

Anyways, Happy Birthday, Marines! No matter what uniform you wear, we all have the same first two letters - U.S.

Spread the news

Spread it. Spread it far and wide. Write people and have them link to Sondra's posts. And have those people write people they know.

I want this spread over the net in 24 hours or less. This is disgusting. This is foul. Abhorrent. This is a picture perfect example of Leftists in action. They don't care about anything but themselves.

I'm so pissed off after reading what Sondra went through that I can barely type. It's probably a good thing that I wasn't there, otherwise I would have spent the night in a jail cell after I busted a few heads. A few? Fuck it, I would have kept swinging until there wasn't any traitor left standing.

These people that Sondra describes ARE THE ENEMY. They are antithetical to everything America stands for. They don't deserve to be called Americans.


Friday, November 09, 2007

Power Outage

They're cutting power to the post tomorrow for about 12 hours. I'll have my generator up and running, but it's main function is to keep the refrigerator cold. If I have some power cords left, I'll see if I can hook up the Internet.

So with that in mind, I'm going to post more pictures for you to download in case I don't get online tomorrow.

Sunset over Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. 597KB

Rock Formation, Stevens Pass, Washington State. I took this shot when I lived in Seattle, and the Ragin' Mrs. and I went on a motorcycle trip. 801KB

Inner Gate, Castillo de San Cristobal, San Juan, Puerto Rico. This is the gate that was on the inside of the city, leading up to the main fortress. 1.31MB

Enjoy. I see ya when I see ya.

Not the fringe

Code Pink? Fringe?

Nope. Not when they have the ear of the Speaker of the House and control what the Democrat American Communist Party does and says. Despite all the success in Iraq, the Defeatocrats still want to surrender. They still want to run away in shrieking hysterics.

I'm so sick of them right now that I wouldn't piss on 'em if they were on fire.

And to pile on, anyone who says that Khalid Sheik Mohammad has the "moral high ground" is crazy as a shithouse rat. These are all just extra examples of why the Democrat American Communist Party is unfit to hold any position higher than local dog catcher.

UPDATE: Nailed it in one. Ouch.

Frankly, I don't understand why so many mock us for wanting a future for Iraq. Is your hatred for George Bush so great that you prefer to see millions of civilians suffer just to prove him wrong?

It really comes down to this: you are determined to see Iraq become a permanent hellhole because you hate Bush. And we are determined to see Iraq become a success, because we want to live.

It needs repeating

via Curmudgeonly & Skeptical

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

  1. The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
  2. The fifth would pay $1.
  3. The sixth would pay $3.
  4. The seventh would pay $7.
  5. The eighth would pay $12.
  6. The ninth would pay $18.
  7. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
  1. The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
  2. The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
  3. The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
  4. The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
  5. The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
  6. The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. I only saved a dollar,too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

The next time some braindead idiot blurts out "TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!" just remind them that if everyone's tax rate gets cut by 10%, then those who only paid $10 in taxes get one dollar back. Those who paid $100 in taxes get ten dollars back. The percentage rate is exactly the same! There are no extra tax cuts for the rich, they just pay a hell of a lot more in taxes than the rest of us!

Anyone who doesn't understand that should be forced to take remedial economics classes until they can recite it in their sleep.

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Brain Exercise

I was reading a post over at Mrs. du Toit's and the comments got me to thinking..... well, reading either of the du Toit's will get you to thinking, but this specific idea was about voting. The Founder's Intent was to have free, landowning men vote. Now, I don't know if that intent would be workable in today's day and age. To put it bluntly, there are enough people who pay taxes and put in their fair share who don't own land to make a sizable chunk of the population. When I lived in Seattle I was certainly paying quite a bit in taxes, but rented the house I lived in. We've gone far enough away from the Founder's intent with regards to taxation (income tax was unconstitutional until the 20th century) that we can no longer say that only landowners should be able to vote.

Yet, as another commenter at Mrs. du Toit's said:

I used to think that the free landowning men was the best possible alternative
... but more and more I’m thinking that it needs to be more along the line of
“them what pays, decides.”
I believe that a good portion of our problems in this country is due to the fact that we have a huge portion of people voting for things that they have no stake in whatsoever. If you're on welfare, sitting on your ass and taking money from the government, why should you care if taxes go up? You're not paying any taxes at all, so your decision does not effect you what so ever. On a personal level, you have no worries about jacking up tax rates, and more importantly you have no real prerogative to learn about why high tax rates are a bad thing to begin with.

All too often, it is only when you have a vested interest in something that you begin to educate your self on that subject.

Too many people today know little to nothing about the way the government is supposed to work. They know little to nothing about WHY the Founding Fathers set up the government the way they did. And most people I've met did not know that an income tax was NOT written in the constitution until the Sixteenth Amendment. Most people do not know that until the Seventeenth Amendment, Senators were elected by the state's legislature, NOT THE GENERAL POPULATION. The general population were responsible for electing their Representatives. Too many people don't even know what the Tenth Amendment states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Got that? If the constitution does not specifically say "This is what the Federal Government can do" then that power is automatically given to the states or to the people. The Constitution was, above all, a check on the power of the government itself, NOT ON THE PEOPLE!

It was all a system of checks and balances until people started screwing it up. We need to re-educate people on their government, but in order to do that we first have to ensure that the people voting have a vested interest in what their vote affects.

Anyways, that's my meandering thoughts for the day. Anyone want to try to clarify what I said? Go for it.

Oh, and as for what I would do to get people to "own" their vote? Simple - I would restrict voters to those who pay taxes. If you paid the government this year, you get to vote. If the government paid you, you don't get to vote. And I would bring my property tax bill to the voting station and pull the lever.

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

A day late and a (billion) dollars short

John F. Kerry has finally come up with a defense against the Viet Nam veterans who told the country what a worthless pile of excrement he is.....

back in 2004.

“We have put together a documented portfolio that frankly puts their lies in such a total light of absurdity and indecency, that should they ever rear their ugly heads again, we have every single ‘t’ crossed and ‘i’ dotted, and I welcome that in a sense,” Kerry said after addressing Boston’s South Shore Chamber of Commerce. “It’s a shame we weren’t able to produce all that at the time.”

This whole bruhaha started when 'ol Jonny "American troops love to rape and murder children" Kerry called up a few of his former sailors and said "This is my Band of Brothers!" on national TV.

To which the rest of the sailors who served under him said "Oh, HELL NO!"

John Kerry was such a despicable wanker back in '71 that the people he served with felt the need to tell the rest of the country what a worthless slimebag this douche was. They were not about to allow one of the perpetrators of the Winter Soldier hoax to go and try to lie about what he did. And now, three years after the fact, we're supposed to believe that he now has his defense prepared?

What an idiot. What a poltroon. What a brainless twit.

Here's a clue for John "I like to shoot my fellow veterans in the back" Kerry - why don't you sign the DD Form 180 to release your military personnel record, LIKE YOU SAID YOU WOULD BACK IN 2004, and let the record, your record, speak for itself?

Anything else is just an exercise in lies and obfuscation.


Iran just announced that they have 3,000 centrifuges. Which means that they could have a nuclear weapon within a year.

I have met people who actually believe that Iran just wants a nuclear power plant. No, really, stop laughing! These people actually believe it!

And those people are a bunch of naive morons.

Iran announced it's intention to build a nuke years ago. They've also stated that once they had one, Tel Aviv goes bye-bye. This is THE major state sponsor of terrorism, and yet there are people who still walk around convinced that Iran is just "misunderstood", or that they really didn't mean it, it was all talk, yada yada yada. How frigging self-deluded do you have to be in order to think that Iran would hesitate to nuke either Israel or the USA? What kind of sand-poundingly stupid idiot do you have to be in order to look at Iran's track record and say "Oh, I don't see a problem!"

As Captain Ed mentions, Iran doesn't even need to put a nuke on a missile in order to get it where they want it - they can just give it to the latest splodydope JERM (Jihadist Extreme Radical Muslim) and have them walk it across our nice open border. And when LA, or Phoenix, or Dallas, or Miami goes up in a mushroom cloud, the same mentally deficient morons who told us that Iran wasn't a threat will be the first to blame Bush, the Republicans, the neo-cons, the jews, and everyone else for the deaths.

Oh, and if Iran starts a nuclear war with Israel? Yeah, you can count on half of the Middle East becoming a flat, glowing pane of glass. And when most of the world's oil supply is unusable for the next ten-thousands years or so, what do you think will happen? How many millions of people will die? Perhaps it would even reach the billions?

Iran cannot be trusted with anything more dangerous than a rusty spoon. Letting them build a nuke would put the entire world at risk. And yet that seems to be just what many people are willing to let happen.

I wonder if Israel is going to have to do all the dirty work again.

In God We Trust

Our national motto is:
In God We Trust

Now, I've always been comfortable with that given our Judeo-Christian historical legacy. But today I learned something that caused me some consternation.

You see, I always bought the "BigLie" that 'In God We Trust became the official U.S. national motto after the passage of an Act of Congress in 1956' which provides some argumentative support for the notion that it was a product of ColdWar politics.

Today I learned that Francis Scott Key made it a specific reference in the final stanza of our National Anthem The Star-Spangled Banner giving it significantly more weight then I previously understood. But I learned something more...

In our darkest hours of our Civil War our national motto was directed to appear on a two-cent coin and repeatedly showed up on coins between 1864 and it's official adoption in 1956.

In God We Trust is our national motto because it was used as such in our darkest hour.

In God We Trust represents more then a random stanza ripped from a forgotten verse of our National Anthem. It represents all that is good in the (R)epublican's heroic crusade to liberate our fellow citizens in bondage from their enslavement by (D)emocrats.

Is it any wonder the
fight against this reminder of their historical legacy to this day?

To reject our national motto, and to do so via misrepresentation as an establishment of a national religion, in contrast to it's celebration of our religious freedoms, is to demean the sacrifices made by so many.

Our unique Republic liberated itself from it's Colonial masters and a scant 80 years later fought against that an inherited colonial legacy to liberate our fellows in servitude into citizenship.

Our Republic is an unprecedented historical triumph in the history of mankind. It's actions since it's foundation have only enhanced that marvelous legacy.

God Bless America.
Cross Posted at DANEgerus

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

These people are nucking futs.

Outright insane. Crazy. Loony. Loco. CooCoo for Cocoa Puffs. And do you want to know what really scares me?


I'm pretty damn sure that there will be another civil war in this country during my lifetime. And it's insane Leftists like Kucinich and the people who elected him that make me believe that. Seriously. Impeaching Cheney? On what charges? For what? I say let them try, let them debate it, and prove to the sane people in this country that the Left can't be trusted with any more authority than hall monitor at a local elementery school.

Monday, November 05, 2007

Anti-War propaganda bombing

The pundits claim that the Iraq War doesn't sell...

In the Valley of Elah

Cost est. $25 million

Domestic Gross : $6,704,576


Cost est. $27 million

Domestic Gross : $9,283,593

The Kingdom

Cost est. $70 million

Domestic Gross : $46,844,125

But what Iraq War movies have been released that aren't condescending anti-war/anti-American propaganda?

Here is a template for success for you...


Cost est. $65 million

Domestic Gross : $210,614,939

Here is a clue. Men. Men go to war movies... and they like war movies that have positive heroes that are heroic. Then they buy the DVD.

Chicks don't go to war movies. Chicks don't care if those movies, they don't go to, are historically accurate and they won't go even if General Patton has self-loathing reflective moments that displace his entire campaign kicking the krauts across Europe.

Ken Burns? He made a multi-part chick flick and shoved it up our ass on PBS.

Men go to war movies.

Make some.

Cross Posted at DANEgerus

Update via Jonah Goldberg:

'Anti-' doesn't sell

...The Kingdom... ...Its anti-war credentials come from suggesting that the sworn lawmen (and women) investigating the slaughter of families playing softball are no better than the murderers.


We've all heard the stories, many true, some apocryphal, of soldiers returning home from Vietnam only to be disrespected and shunned by an ungrateful nation. How many were called war criminals or spat upon is as controversial as it is unknowable. But there's one thing we know our troops never experienced. We never filled the movie theaters during wartime with films calling them war criminals, rapists and, figuratively, spitting on them or on their mission.

More AID to Palestinians = More Terror from Palestinians

MereRhetoric has the charts to illustrate that

More Aid To Palestinians Means More Murders A Year Later

Every time aid increases, homicides increase. Every time it decreases, homicides decrease. There's a not uncompelling theory about how cultures degenerate into corruption and depravity when they have to rely on outsiders to literally feed and clothe them. That explains some of what's going on, but it isn't enough to explain such a strong and consistent correlation.

A lot of the correlation is probably accounted for by the simple fact that all humanitarian assistance is de facto security assistance. More US and EU money for schools and hospitals means that the Palestinians can shift their Saudi and Iranian money towards guns and ammo. Which may help explain why Palestinians are able to kill more people every time they get aid, and why they're forced to kill less people every time it's taken away...

Cross Posted at DANEgerus

OK, any camera nuts out there?

Here's the deal - I'm going to be getting a belated Birthday present for myself - a digital SLR camera. I've been reading reviews, going over my budget, and I'm down to a couple of choices - the Pentax K100D, and the Nikon D40X. There are pros and cons to both of them. I've owned both Pentax and Nikon film SLR cameras in the past, and I've been happy with both of them. I don't have any sentimental favorites. So here are a few questions for anyone who knows the answers:

How much of a difference does 10.2Megapixel make vs. 6.1Megapixel for someone who is not a professional photographer? The Nikon D40X is 10.2MP, and the Pentax is 6.1MP. I've had some work published, but I've never gotten paid for it. It's not what I plan on doing for a living either. I don't see my photos getting blown up and placed on a NYC building. I wouldn't mind getting a photo enlarged to 14X11 or 18X22, but I'm not going to be making any posters.

Does anyone know how sturdy they are? I'm not a gentle guy; I take care of my gear, but I do a lot of traveling (I'm in the military) and any camera I own would have to travel with me. It would not have a cushy lifestyle. Chances are it would end up in the desert for a period of time.

What, if anything, would cause you to purchase one camera over the other?

I welcome any input. This is going to be my Birthday present/Christmas present/Anniversary present all rolled into one, so I'm giving it some thought before I shell out the bucks.

Oh for Pete's sake!

Apparently, there's a moonbat named Kevin Drum who's posted a poll titled "All-Time Wingnuttiest Blog Post"

Say what?

This is why I refuse to bother debating with most Leftists these days. Go read the comments, and you will see most of the Leftist arguments repeated ad nauseam. "You hater! You hateful person! You racist! You sexist!" Blah blah blah blah blah.

The ideology of the political Left is made up of emotion-based attacks, feeeeeeeeeelings, insults, ad hominem attacks, straw-man arguments, and failed ideas that should have been killed decades ago. "Debating" Leftists is like dealing with a two-year old throwing a temper tantrum.

The best argument they can come up with in regards to Kim du Toit is to call him "fat", and make fun of his name.

Childish, juvenile, sniveling little shitheads, the entire lot of them.

As an aside, the posts they have in the poll are some damn good reading, full of thought and completely shredding the Left apart. Which is why the Leftists can't stand them.

Sunday, November 04, 2007

I'm Back

And I have mosquito bites in places that I never knew I had before now.

Much expounding will come later.