Tuesday, February 21, 2006
You know you're in trouble when...
...Jimmy Carter and George Bush agree on Dubai Ports World handling the most vulnerable of our homeland security defenses.
Monday, February 20, 2006
A great point...now why hadn't I thought of it?
This from a post in Captain's Quarters....
Despite having a deathgrip on the black vote for four decades, the party has almost no leaders of African descent and have fielded almost no such candidates in national elections. Carol Mosely-Braun is the only black woman ever elected to the Senate; the Democrats, in their monopoly of that demographic, could never bother to find and support another? How many blacks have won mainstream Democratic support in races for governor or senator?
Despite having a deathgrip on the black vote for four decades, the party has almost no leaders of African descent and have fielded almost no such candidates in national elections. Carol Mosely-Braun is the only black woman ever elected to the Senate; the Democrats, in their monopoly of that demographic, could never bother to find and support another? How many blacks have won mainstream Democratic support in races for governor or senator?
Up to now, it has been enough for the Democratic party to use the African-American community as a vote bank, and they have exploited it as such while giving few of them high-profile positions of power. It has been one of the least-rewarded dynamics of loyalty for any constituency in politics. In contrast, the Republicans have offered real leadership positions to those who support the GOP despite the embarrassingly small penetration the GOP gets in the African-American community. Newsweek should ask why Democrats apparently felt that blacks could not represent them in leadership instead.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
More wading in the Liberal cesspool...
Part of an exchange I had with a liberal blog:
My initial point was concerning liberals continuing to say they support the troops but not the war...
Supporting the troops but not the war they're fighting...let's try an analogous situation between a ditch digger and a liberal:
Liberal: "Hey there, ditch digger. Just wanted to let you know that I support you, but not that ditch that you're digging."
Ditch Digger: "But its what I do. It's what I chose to do. I'm proud of the ditch I'm digging. It looks like I'm making some progress here."
Lib: "But its the wrong kind of ditch. Your boss is a bad man and shouldn't have made you dig a ditch there."
DD: "Well, I still have this ditch here to dig. I joined up to do it, and promised to finish digging it. How in the world can you say you support me as a ditch digger and be against the ditch I'm digging at the same time?
Lib: "Well, I understand your frustration, but you don't understand. I support you as a ditch digger, and I know that the ditch has to finished now that you've started it, but I'm against the ditch just the same. I still support you.
DD: "But I'm still confused. You say you understand the necessity of finishing the ditch, but you're against it anyway? How about cheering me on to finish the ditch as quickly as possible and maybe helping my family out at home until I get finished here digging the ditch? That would feel more like you're supporting me than saying bad things about the ditch I'm digging, right as I'm in the middle of digging it, doncha' think?"
Lib: "What, and give up my right to criticize the ditch and the head ditch digger? What kind of ditch digger are you? Look, I'm doing the best I can to support you. I say that I do, all the time. What more do you want?
What more, indeed...
The response?
"nice try, guitanguran. but ditch diggers aren't threatened with court martial, loss of lifetime benefits and even jail if they refuse to dig a ditch which they consider to be immoral.
and not too many ditches kill over 100,000 iraqi civilians either.
metaphor much, do ya?"
My response:
As I alluded to in my analogy ( as opposed to a simple metaphor), my ditch digger joined up voluntarily, knowing what restrictions he had as a ditch digger. He wasn't forced to join. In my business, I'm restricted as to things that I can say in public and in private, by my company and the Feds. I knew that going in. I was required to stay at least two years with the company as a condition of my hiring. My choice was to abide by all that, or refuse to take the job.
100,000 civilians? Now you know there is no credible documentation of any number even remotely close to that figure.
Lastly, you offer nothing in specific rebuttal to my position that you can't support the troops and oppose what they're doing at the same time. You zip off on a tangential argument that has nothing to do with the point I raised...nice try yourself...:-)
My initial point was concerning liberals continuing to say they support the troops but not the war...
Supporting the troops but not the war they're fighting...let's try an analogous situation between a ditch digger and a liberal:
Liberal: "Hey there, ditch digger. Just wanted to let you know that I support you, but not that ditch that you're digging."
Ditch Digger: "But its what I do. It's what I chose to do. I'm proud of the ditch I'm digging. It looks like I'm making some progress here."
Lib: "But its the wrong kind of ditch. Your boss is a bad man and shouldn't have made you dig a ditch there."
DD: "Well, I still have this ditch here to dig. I joined up to do it, and promised to finish digging it. How in the world can you say you support me as a ditch digger and be against the ditch I'm digging at the same time?
Lib: "Well, I understand your frustration, but you don't understand. I support you as a ditch digger, and I know that the ditch has to finished now that you've started it, but I'm against the ditch just the same. I still support you.
DD: "But I'm still confused. You say you understand the necessity of finishing the ditch, but you're against it anyway? How about cheering me on to finish the ditch as quickly as possible and maybe helping my family out at home until I get finished here digging the ditch? That would feel more like you're supporting me than saying bad things about the ditch I'm digging, right as I'm in the middle of digging it, doncha' think?"
Lib: "What, and give up my right to criticize the ditch and the head ditch digger? What kind of ditch digger are you? Look, I'm doing the best I can to support you. I say that I do, all the time. What more do you want?
What more, indeed...
The response?
"nice try, guitanguran. but ditch diggers aren't threatened with court martial, loss of lifetime benefits and even jail if they refuse to dig a ditch which they consider to be immoral.
and not too many ditches kill over 100,000 iraqi civilians either.
metaphor much, do ya?"
My response:
As I alluded to in my analogy ( as opposed to a simple metaphor), my ditch digger joined up voluntarily, knowing what restrictions he had as a ditch digger. He wasn't forced to join. In my business, I'm restricted as to things that I can say in public and in private, by my company and the Feds. I knew that going in. I was required to stay at least two years with the company as a condition of my hiring. My choice was to abide by all that, or refuse to take the job.
100,000 civilians? Now you know there is no credible documentation of any number even remotely close to that figure.
Lastly, you offer nothing in specific rebuttal to my position that you can't support the troops and oppose what they're doing at the same time. You zip off on a tangential argument that has nothing to do with the point I raised...nice try yourself...:-)
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
OK. Let me explain about "budget cuts"...
There's been some bloviating going on about the President's budget concerning "budget cuts" on some domestic programs. Democrats are accusing Bush of taking money from seniors, children, and probably my dog to pay for guns and to give big businesses tax breaks. Arrggh...
When our guys in Washington announce a budget cut for any program, its not a cut.
Huh? Wuzzat? That's right, its not a cut after all.
Back in 1974, Congress set forth a baseline regarding any budget calculations. All budget calculations run off this baseline. Well, any government program will have a built in increase in its budget from year to year, based on the 1974 baseline. They don't have to pass a bill to increase the budget on a given program. It gets bigger all on its own. When they say they're cutting the program, they're simply reducing the amount that program is growing.
Did you hear that? The programs aren't staying the same, or getting smaller. They're simply growing at a slower pace. When Republicans announce they're cutting programs, it sounds like we're spending less money this year than last. Wrong. When Democrats accuse Republicans (or vice versa) of cutting programs, its sounds like gramma is out on the street. Wrong again.
Tsk...
When our guys in Washington announce a budget cut for any program, its not a cut.
Huh? Wuzzat? That's right, its not a cut after all.
Back in 1974, Congress set forth a baseline regarding any budget calculations. All budget calculations run off this baseline. Well, any government program will have a built in increase in its budget from year to year, based on the 1974 baseline. They don't have to pass a bill to increase the budget on a given program. It gets bigger all on its own. When they say they're cutting the program, they're simply reducing the amount that program is growing.
Did you hear that? The programs aren't staying the same, or getting smaller. They're simply growing at a slower pace. When Republicans announce they're cutting programs, it sounds like we're spending less money this year than last. Wrong. When Democrats accuse Republicans (or vice versa) of cutting programs, its sounds like gramma is out on the street. Wrong again.
Tsk...
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Just an observation
So, when we have an artistic type putting an image of Christ in urine, we uh don't set fire to buildings. Certainly, we have no one from the Baptist General Convention encouraging their folks to burn down museums. If someone makes a political statement through a cartoon about Mohammed, embassies burn. 
Imams encourage their folks to riot, wreak havoc, and commit acts of violence. I think most Christians go right on being believers about the things they believe in, irrespective of any artist. Makes me wonder whyIslamic leaders and followers of Islam feel so compelled to burn buildings...
Imams encourage their folks to riot, wreak havoc, and commit acts of violence. I think most Christians go right on being believers about the things they believe in, irrespective of any artist. Makes me wonder whyIslamic leaders and followers of Islam feel so compelled to burn buildings...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)