Tuesday, September 30, 2008

I Just Puked Again

Honestly.  I had to, given this:  http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/274518.php

"I'll let Kim Priestap delve into just how creepy and reminiscent of the concerts by kids in totalitarian states this is, and focus on those behind it." (hyperlink theirs)

They're "advertising" it as "..grassroots effort..."

Really?  Read down the article to see who's behind it:

1)  Jeff Zucker
2)  Holly Schiffer
3)  Peter Rosenfeld
4)  Darin Moran, and
5)  Andy Blumenthal

Grassroots?  Not in this universe.

You should recognize those names.  All bigwigs in the Hollier-than-thou-wood liberal elite.

But I loved how the Drudge Report phrased it:

Since it is so small, it reads "VIDEO:  Obama Kids Sing for Dear Leader."

Dear Leader???

Oh, and before you tell me that the Drudge Report is a conservative organization, I'm going to point you right back to that UCLA study about bias in the media:


"The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left." AND "The fact that the Drudge Report appears left of center is merely a reflection of the overall bias of the media."

In plain English, since people think that the Drudge Report is hard conservative, that's a reflection of the overall liberal bias of the media.

The World Is Gonna End!!!

From Mark Levin:  http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDExN2YzNDFkMTkxM2I1NWM5MmJiNDZmOGVmMDRkNmM=

"The liberal uses crises, real or manufactured, to expand the power of government at the expense of the individual and private property. He has spent, in earnest, 70 years evading the Constitution's limits on governmental power. If conservatives don't stand up to this, who will? If they don't offer serious alternatives that address the current circumstances AND defend the founding principles, who will? The House Republicans have done both.  And I, for one, thank them.

Incidentally, if you want to buy a home or car today you can. And if your credit is decent, you can get loans at a good rate. Last week we were told that if a deal was not struck by last Friday, our economy would collapse. It has not. That is not to say the evidence of economic troubles or worse should be ignored. It is to say that now is a time for reasoned decisions based on tried and true principles, not for abandoning them. I notice that the socialist, who, for the last 30 years, has insisted that private institutions make risky loans based on non-economic factors, still has not abandoned his policies. Socialism does not work. We shouldn't support more of it.  (emphasis added)

Remember the world meltdown we were warned was coming?  Hasn't happened.  Just more scare tactics.

In fact, stocks in Germany did go down ... by a whopping 1%.

They stayed flat in Britain and France.

The Shanghai Composite was also down ... by a whopping 0.2% (two-tenths of a per cent.)

The Hang Seng was up 0.8% (eight-tenths of a per cent)

And Bombay's BSE 30?  Well, it went up ... by 2.1%.

And right here in the USA?  After dropping 777 points (which as a percentage was not as bad as it sounded, but the liberal press won't tell you that), the Dow today gained 500+ of it back!


No meltdown here, folks.  Just more loud noises being made by politicians who want to line their (and their lobbyists) pockets at your expense.

Call the switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and tell them you do not want a bailout.

The Bill That Just Won't Die

Yes, your corrupt politicians are at it again.  Not satisfied with their stinging defeat of the first Mother of All Bailouts (aka: socialism 215), they're at it AGAIN


This time, however, they don't want you emailing them about it:

"The House is limiting e-mails from the public to prevent its websites from crashing due to the enormous amount of mail being submitted on the financial bailout bill."

Try calling them instead. 

Call your worthless, bloated politician and tell them

(202) 224-3121. 

the Obamessiah's Ties to Fannie


That video says it all.  the Obamessiah was in the room, his wife was in the room, he took $126,349 from them, and now he says he can fix it?

I wouldn't trust him to fix a leaky faucet.

Here We Go Again - Part I

If you remember, the last time it was deals20092 . com, which was registered through GoDaddy . com

This time, it's deals20091 . com, which is no real surprise.  What is the surprising part, however, is that it too was registered through GoDaddy . com.


Our spammer even used her same name.  The initials are DB.

I'm going to give the folks at GoDaddy . com the benefit of the doubt and assume they missed this one, since it was registered on the same day that deals20092 was.

But the registrant information, name, address, contact info is the same.


"AOL Hometown is Closing its Doors"

But I will give them kudos for one thing - at least they didn't put "...Closing it's Doors."

This was a banner ad as I came online to check my journal and to post other stuff.  But I've been sick since Sunday (vomiting, cold chills, trouble breathing, and frequent diarrhea) so I haven't been online much.  I'm going to need to lay down again after this.

Anyway -

"Dear AOL Hometown User,

     We're sorry to inform you that on Oct. 31, 2008, AOL (registered trademark) Hometown will be shut down permanently.  We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may cause."

My answer:  Bull.  This was a calculated business decision, nothing more and nothing less.  You're looking to cut costs, and when it comes to that people usually cut what isn't used much, or that which costs too much.  IQ of 127, remember?

Either, or both, of those conditions might apply here - the situation really is that simple.  So while you might "regret" shutting AOL Hometown down, I'm not sure that you as a company "...sincerely apologize..." for it.

Remember, I've already dealt with a liar at AOL, my ACI contact who told me that even though I was removed as a Community Leader for daring to speak my mind I could reapply in six months.

I say she lied because 1) once you're removed as a Community Leader, you have little or no chance of becoming one again, and 2) I received an email from a then-current CL who told me that my ACI had sent an email explaining that the CL program was going away.  The point is that my then-ACI almost certainly knew at the time of my removal that the CL program was going away.  The two truths of the situation, however, made no difference to her.

From GoDaddy.com

"Ads are not an endorsement by the blog author." 

You can say that again.  And again.  And again.

Anyway - I just received this from GoDaddy . com's support staff:

"Dear Sir/Madam,

We have become aware of the blog you have posted on your AOL journal at the following address:


We have researched your situation regarding the domain deals20092.com. We apologize for any inconvenience this registrant may have caused with the spam. We have blocked this IP address and added the domain to our spam database for the benefit of any who have been spammed through this domain."

Thank you. :)

For those who are wondering why I do this (report spammers) it's because I'm frankly tired of them.  I know they could easily go to another host and peddle their filth (and many of them end up doing just that) but it gives me a certain degree of satisfaction.

It's the same reason I try to do a Random Act of Kindness everyday.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_Act_of_Kindness

In today's world of self-absorbed and self-important people, I figure it's nice.  Besides, it's the right thing to do morally.  (Yes, I know.  There's that politically incorrect word again.)

"Important Information About Your Walmart.com Digital Music Purchases"

A few days ago, I got an email which confirmed what I've known since Feb of 2008.  Walmart has dropped DRM (Digital Rights Management) from their .MP3 music purchases.

Colour me thrilled.

"...2007 and have offered only DRM (digital rights management) -free MP3s since February 2008. As the final stage of our transition to a full DRM-free MP3 download store, Walmart will be shutting down our digital rights management system that supports protected songs and albums purchased from our site." (emphasis added)


To be fair, in the past Walmart has done some things that I was none too keen about.  But this isn't one of them.  I'm thrilled that they've done this.

But I'd be willing to bet that the RIAA was none too happy.

To be fair, if the RIAA had actually been giving the monies it had gotten through their lawsuits to the artists, I wouldn't have too much to say.  From Wikipedia:

"In February 2008 it became known that the RIAA has been withholding roughly $400 million from artists for several years now. The RIAA gained the money through lawsuits claiming to defend the rights of artists, although none of the artists whose music was 'illegally' downloaded have received any of the settlement money.[49]"

Here's THAT link:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_group_efforts_against_file_sharing

You can find it in the "Counterclaims" section.  Methinks that the RIAA has a lot of explaining to do.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Another Stupid Spammer

Some time ago, I got a spam from Dizneyroad4.com which was registered through Go Daddy.

Now, they're at it again.  A new domain name, but the same old scam and spam.

WHOIS information for: deals20092.com:

The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.'s WhoIs database,
while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is"
with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy.  This
information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you
in obtaining information about domain name registration records.
Any use of this data for any other purpose is expressly forbidden without the prior written
permission of GoDaddy.com, Inc.  By submitting an inquiry,
you agree to these terms of usage and limitations of warranty.  In particular,
you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible,
dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any
purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and
and solicitations of any kind, including spam.  You further agree
not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic
processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose,
including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes. 

Please note: the registrant of the domain name is specified
in the "registrant" field.  In most cases, GoDaddy.com, Inc. 
is not the registrant of domain names listed in this database.

(I removed this information.)
   United States

   Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
   Domain Name: DEALS20092.COM
      Created on: 17-Sep-08
      Expires on: 18-Sep-09
      Last Updated on: 17-Sep-08

   Administrative Contact:

   Technical Contact:

   Domain servers in listed order:

Mother of All Bailouts

First, a link:  http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/inclusion-minority-real-estate-professionals/story.aspx?guid=%7B16A1C9E7-2FDF-4ACF-B892-58EE9AACF956%7D&dist=hppr

"WASHINGTON, Sept 26, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Maria Kong, President of the National Association of Real Estate Brokers (NAREB) today urged Congressional leadership, President Bush and Secretary of the Treasury Paulson, to act fairly and responsibly to ensure that minority-owned real estate, finance and legal professionals are included among the firms tapped to manage the multi-billion dollar asset portfolio the government plans to purchase from failing Wall Street investment houses, and flailing financial institutions."

No, no NO!!!  This is exactly what got us into this mess to begin with!!  The last time you did this, you told us it would be "...enacted fairly and responsibly..." which were your exact terms if I remember correctly.  Guess what? 

IT WASN'T!  That is exactly what led us into the mess we're in now!!  The last time we trusted you politicial idiots to enact it "...fairly and responsibly..." and guess what?  You really screwed it up.

So now you want us to trust you again?!?  Politicians, at this point, I wouldn't trust you to find your own way into the bathroom if you were standing outside its open door!

At this point, I need to take a step back.  I would have no problems whatsoever making sure that minorities got their fair share.  After all, that's only fair.  But more importantly, it's the right thing to do morally.  Now there's a politically incorrect word ... morally.  You politicians do know what morals are, right?  Oh...wait...wait.  You gave us Enron and WorldCom and turned a blind eye while the business "executives" got million-dollar bonuses. 

Which reminds me.  Stan Sigman, who recently retired not all that long ago, "earned" a $20 MILLION BONUS when his company Cingular bought AT&T.  $20 MILLION, folks.  $20 MILLION.  When I worked at Cingular, the managers were quick to write you up for the slightest "violation" and seemed to think that their poo (a la Mike Rowe of Dirty Jobs) smelled sweeter than anybody else's.  How do I know?  One of their "managers" tried to write me up for telling her that I disagreed with her.  Since we were covered by the Communications Workers of America, I demanded a Union Steward be there during the "writeup."  Which, oddly enough, when the Steward arrived, the "manager" completely changed her tune and there was no writeup.  You should've seen her face when I demanded the Steward.  If looks could kill, I would've died on the spot.  She was not happy.  Now ask me if I care.

But I digress.  Again.  So now you politicians want us to trust you again?!?  I'd rather shoot myself first.

Which reminds me.  One week ago...ONE WEEK AGO, your "bailout" plan was all of three pages.  THREE.  NOW IT'S 42!!!


So tell me, you worthless, corrupt politicians...when do we get to see what other filth you've hidden in there for your lobbyists?

If you're as angry as I am ... call your worthless, bloated politician and tell them

(202) 224-3121.  That's the number for the "capital" switchboard (aka: the phonebank for the morally deficient politicians.)

Friday, September 26, 2008

Still More Chinese Fakery?

First, a link to the article:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/3082804/China-fakes-reports-from-space.html

I need to point out that I'm not sure if this is yet another report of ChiCom fakery, or if it is in reference to the earlier report. 

But in this report, they apparently faked reports from their first night in space even before they'd blasted off.

You'll remember that the earlier fakery was when the described the launch even before they'd lifted off.

Can we say "oops?"  But since this might be the second report of fakery about their space shot, perhaps we should say what Lt. Cmdr Data said in "Star Trek: Insurrection."  You know, when he said "Ohhhhh, sh*t."

"The Xinhua agency, which has sometimes been accused of carrying state propaganda, took down the story and blamed it on a "technical error"."

Well, let's take a look at this.  A State-run "News" agency, in a totalitarian regime, which also happens to be Communist.  Since we know that they routinely "disappear" their critics and murder some of them, do you really think that they'd be anything less than a standard-bearer for anything the regime wants to put out?  And yes, I'd call that state propaganda. 

The Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism) describes a totalitarian regime as "...a concept used to describe political systems where a state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life."  Indeed, among the examples they cite, they list "...modern China."

But that brings up a question I've long had.  In the book "True Stories of Great Escapes" they give an example of somebody crossing into East Germany in order to effect the escape of somebody else.  On one of the East German signs was the proclamation "You are now leaving the Democratic sector."  And Cambodia under Pol Pot had their name as "Democratic Kampuchea."  And their party during those dark years?  The Communist Party of Kampuchea. 

Here, then, is the question:  Why do Communists refer to themselves as Democratic?  Not all of them do it, to be certain.  But we now know of at least two instances where they have.  So why?

But to get back to the topic of this article, did the photograph that the ChiComs provided depict what really happened, or was it too staged (ie: faked?) 

ChiComs?  Anybody?

Point One Leads to Point Two Leads to the Obamessiah

"Ads are not an endorsement by the blog author."  No kidding.  YECH.

Ok....I just blogged about ACORN, their radical anti-capitalist agenda, and I've already blogged about the Obamessiah's ties to Weatherman (the radical group) William Ayers.

Add to that, the Obamessiah's ties to the radical Reverends Wright and Pleger.  Time to connect the dots, folks.

ACORN + William Ayers + Rev. Wright + Rev. Pleger = Obamessiah

Is this the man you want in the White House?  The man with these ties??  Granted, I can't vote for Juan McAmnesty either.  But I CERTAINLY can't vote for the Obamessiah.  Has he been radicalized?  He did sit in Rev. Wright's church for 20 years.  Add to that the fact that we still don't know if he's even eligible to be President!!

I agree, we do need change in Wa$hington, the Di$trict of Corruption.  But we don't need people with radical preachers and ties to radical organizations, some of which have anti-capitalist (Socialist!) views!!!

And for those who are saying that I'm a racist for not being willing to vote for the Obamessiah, I say this:  Get a life.  I've given you my reasons.  You need to close your mouths, open your eyes and ears and take a good unvarnished look at what's around you.  Take your rose-coloured glasses off, and you'll see a lot better.  Granted, Juan McAmnesty has the La Raza stooge Juan Hernandez, and he doesn't seem to be keen at all about securing (REALLY securing) our borders.

Oh, and to those who say we can't possibly deport all 12 million illegal aliens?

Remember, Google is your friend.  How then, do you explain that we've already deported at least that same number of illegal aliens in the 1980's?!?

Remember, Google is your friend.

Perhaps I'm not the one out of touch.  While I'll admit I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box, I'm not quite that dull, thank you very much.

I just took my third standardized IQ test (all within a twelve-month period.)  The average of the three was 127.  Here's the scale:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_reference_chart

Thursday, September 25, 2008

The Bailout - More Baloney

First, a link to the article:  http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/crl-testimony-acorns-voter-fraud/story.aspx?guid=%7B573B31D0-6AB7-4353-B8E7-91300F4DFF81%7D&dist=hppr

"James Terry, Chief Public Advocate for the Consumers Rights League, today testified at a joint House Administration and House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on “Federal, State and Local Efforts to Prepare for the General 2008 Election,” where he highlighted “corruption at every level of ACORN including embezzlement, cover-ups, misuse of taxpayer funds and voter fraud.” An excerpt of his testimony follows:

James Terry, Chief Public Advocate, Consumers Rights League:

“ACORN routinely says it will clean up its act. Yet, given its decade-long history of voter fraud, embezzlement, and misuses of taxpayer funds, ACORN’s pattern of fraud can no longer be dismissed as a series of ‘unfortunate events.’"

Did you catch that?  "...given its decade-long history of voter fraud..."  OK.  So according to the testimony ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) has a TEN YEAR history of fraud, embezzlement and misuses of taxpayer funds (that's the tax money that you and I pay.)

Well, guess what's hidden in the mother of all bailouts?  Another $100 MILLION OF YOUR MONEY!!!  Yes, it's to be given to an organization with a TEN YEAR RECORD of fraud, embezzlement and misuses of taxpayer funds!  A TEN YEAR RECORD, folks!!

ACORN, of course, says these are a series of "...unfortunate events."  A TEN YEAR RECORD?  I'd call that a PATTERN.

Oh, and what else was in there??  "...corruption at every level of ACORN..."

No wonder the politicians want to give them more money.  They're as corrupt as the government is!

Do you really need more proof that the politicians plan to screw you over yet again with this massive bailout?

And, of course, the media won't touch the Obamessiah's "...intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn), the largest radical group in America." (emphasis added)

Here's a link to THAT bomb-shell that the media won't touch.  http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI=

Feel the love, yet?

"Sol Stern explains that Acorn is the key modern successor of the radical 1960’s “New Left,” with a “1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism” to match." (emphasis added)

How about now?  To really understand the group, you'll need to read the entire article.  And I do apologize, but it is LONG.  Still, to fully understand this radical group's agenda and their ties to the Obamessiah, you need to read the whole thing.  It's worth the time it'll take, I promise.

And yet the government, their lobbyists and their friends want to give this radical group with an anti-capitalist (aka - Socialist) agenda $100 MILLION more of your money.

How many other pork-barrel attachments are in the mother of all bailouts??

How many more additions for the fat politicians, their fat lobbyists, and the fat business types that really don't care that American jobs are being "outsourced" overseas? 


The title?  "FT.com / World - US 'will lose financial superpower status' "

Well, duh. 

At this point, I need to point out, yet again, that I am not a conspiracy theororist.  Yet Alex Jones has been forecasting that just such a thing would happen. 

Again, do you really think the government cares about you?  The only thing that the vast bulk of politicians care about is 1) their jobs 2) their pensions 3) their lobbyists 4) their paycheques.  And you and I?  We're the people they screw to get what they want.

Time to stand up to the politicians, folks.  Otherwise, it's B.O.H.I.C.A.


More Chinese Fakery

"Ads are not an endorsement by the blog author." 

Boy, can you ever say that again.  Yech.

Anyway.  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/ap_on_re_as/as_china_space_article_1

The ChiComs (Chinese Communists) have posted an article about their space shot to the web.  It included detailed conversation between the astronauts and ground control.

There was just one slight problem.

The rocket hadn't taken off yet.


Let's see ... we've had the Fauxlympics and now the Fauxlaunch.  Hey, you know, this COULD give momentum to the "truthers" who are saying that the Apollo 11 astronauts never walked on the moon. 

Bear with me here.  Here we have the ChiComs (and believe me, they do have their banner-carriers right here in the US) who have told us that their rocket lifted off and have given us detailed conversations between their astronauts and ground control.

Why, the ChiComs absolutely cannot be questioned!  (Code Pink, try your anti-government protests in China.) 

Remember, their rocket hadn't lifted off yet!!!

Is it, therefore, just barely possible that some of the Chinese athletes weren't eligible to compete?  IOC?  Anybody?

Bail-Out Fiasco

Well, just how political is the bailout programme?

Harry Reid (a Democrat) is trying to sneak an oil-shale ban into the bailout bill. 

Politics as usual.

Oh, and I was "treated" to one of Obama's adverts last night.  And I find it very odd seeing as how I'm "treated" to THREE Obama adverts and not one single McCain advert.  Is this yet another example of how the media wants Obama to win?

Anyway, in Obama's advert, I hear the word "change" SEVEN TIMES during the thirty second spot.  I see the word "change" once, for a total of EIGHT times in 30 seconds.

But I'm given no specifics.  Mr Obama, if you're listening ... I need specifics.  I need specifics from you too, Mr McCain. 

From everything that's been going on, it's politics as usual.  They're (all the politicians) going to screw us over with the "bailout."

Congrats.  But turning a blind eye, we're going to have to fork over over 700 BILLION.  And for what?  So the money-hungry business types and the money AND power-hungry polls can keep on doing what they've been doing.

B.O.H.I.C.A.  (Bend Over Here It Comes Again.)  And this time, you have to enjoy it.  The politicians have said so.

Code Pink Gives Up on Berkeley USMC Office

The link, the Code Pink diatribe, and Protest Shooter's dissection of it.  http://protestshooter.com/20080924USMC/

But for those who at past "rallys" have worn Che shirts and Communist other stuff, ain't it great to live in the USA? 

Try your type of protest in the Cold War-era Soviet Union.  We'd never see nor hear from you again.

Try your type of protest during the Che years in Cuba.  Try it in Cuba today. 

Try your type of protest where Hugo Chavez and his goons are.  Any takers?

How about in Iran, where their "president" the wacko Mahmy (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) has the reins. 

How about in Iraq under Saddam? 

But I do need to ask one thing...where is your figure of 1.2 million Iraqis killed coming from?  Where exactly?  I, like Protest Shooter, have also been doing some digging.  The figure I keep coming up with is less than half.

And I'll agree that while it's far less than yours, it's still far too high.  But how many people did Saddam kill?


(Since it's so small, the person at the podium is Saddam.)

Oh, and let's not forget the "Oil for Food" programme, which, according to the UN's own documents, was ripe with fraud.


By "your type of protest" I mean anti-government protest.  That distinction must be drawn because those wackjobs I just named would, of course, welcome an anti-US rally.  But try an anti Hugo Chavez rally in his country.  Try holding an anti Soviet rally in the old Soviet Union.

Hey, Code Pinkers ... ain't it great to live in the USA where you're free to peddle your crap? 

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The Feds Bailout Programme

In the dark of night over the weekend when most people were snoozing, the Treasury dramatically expanded its bailout plan to include buying student loans, car loans, credit card debt and any other “troubled” assets held by banks.

No, no, NO!  Don't you idiots get it?  You were the ones that gave us this mess!  What in the HELL makes you think I'm going to trust you to clean it up?!?  I wouldn't trust you with cleaning up an outhouse!  Hell, at this point, I doubt you'd be able to find your way out of one, but that's another matter.

Let's look at it this way:  I have no student loans.  My car is paid off.  I do have credit card debt, but I'm responsible for that.  Note that I said that I'm responsible for it.  ME.  Not my neighbour, not the couple living two streets over, me.  I am responsible for it.  What part of that don't you idiots understand?!?

How is this fair to me and the millions like me?!?  You're going to burden us to pay off the sins of others??

Don't you understand yet that throwing money at a problem doesn't solve the problem??  All it does is allow the behaviour that caused the problem to continue!!  Tell me ONE case JUST ONE where throwing money at the problem and doing nothing else solved it.  Just one.

I'm waiting.

At this point, I think we'd be better if we just took a really big rocket, rounded up all the politicians (ALL OF THEM (and by ALL I MEAN EVERY POLITICIAN EVERYWHERE just in case that's a concept you don't understand ... ALL OF THEM) and stick them into the ship and fire the ship into the sun.  Period.

What in the HELL do student loans, car loans and credit card debt have to do with this?!? 

I'll tell you ... NOT ONE DAMN THING.

I'm so tired of these politicians.  I really am.  Not only tired, but now I'm angry.

VERY angry.  You should be, too.

You've been sold out by the politicians and the money-hungry "business executives" that you, through your inaction, allowed to flourish.

Feel the love yet?  They've been screwing us over all these years and we've been letting them.  They rake in the multi-million dollar bonuses and we've been letting them.

We now have two choices as a people.  1)  We either bend over (again) and let them screw us worse than we've ever been screwed before, or 2) we stand up and tell them NO MORE.  And then we mean it.  We pay attention and we STAND UP AND TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK FROM THE CORRUPT POLITICIANS AND THE CORRUPT BUSINESSPEOPLE.

Hell.  I'd better be prepared to shoot myself first.

People will make their brave little noises, then they'll hit the snooze alarm and roll over again.

Just like we did after 9/11.

"Is there anything else you need?"

"Yeah.  A shot of whiskey, a gun, and two bullets."

Just shoot me now and get it over with.  People don't change.  I don't know why I expected (or hoped) they would.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

I Miss My Cat

One of the worst things I've ever done was to marry my ex-wife.  Another of the stupidest things I've done was to give in to her request that I leave my cat, Cairo, behind so that her cat, Bunches, wouldn't be lonely.

We found Cairo outside, one of a litter of kittens of "Momma Cat" as we called her.  Cai's eyes were closed due to an eye infection, and she was weak and very thin.

We brought her inside (making Momma Cat really angry in the process) and cleaned the goop out of her eyes.  But a day or two later, the eyes had closed again.

We brought her in again and again cleaned out the goop.  It was then that we made the decision to keep her.  She agreed to my suggestion of "Cairo" as the cat's name, and we took her to the animal hospital to get the eye infection taken care of.

It was then at the vet told us the chilling news.  A few more days at most, and Cairo would have died. 

But to get back to the original story, my ex convinced me to leave Cairo behind so that Bunches wouldn't be lonely.  True, that wasn't the only reason.  Cai really didn't like to travel in vehicles.  She didn't.  In fact, she downright hated it.  If I had taken her when I was kicked out (this was after she filed for divorce) I would have had to have Cai sedated at the animal hospital.  Like I said, she really hated traveling in vehicles. 

But Cairo was a daddy's girl and she loved her daddy.  And I loved her right back.  Add another to the pile of regrets that I've accumulated over the years ... leaving Cairo behind. 

I remember one 'incident' that happened after I found out that my then-wife wanted a divorce (which she had the audacity to tell me about in a counseling session ... one of the very very few she attended.  Marital councelling works best when both parties in the marriage go ... but I digress.)  Stacey (my ex-wife) was stroking Cairo and Cai was making it clear that she wasn't happy about it.  Her tail thumped the couch so hard that you could hear it 'thump ... thump ... thump'.  Then, Cai turned her head and nipped Stacey's hand.  She said one of "those" words, and stalked off.

I picked up Cairo and kissed her on her nose.  I told her she was a good girl, and I had no problems kissing her on her nose or in picking her up.  True, she wasn't purring, but I still had no problems.

I miss Cairo.  I think about her almost every day.  True, I could get another cat, but it wouldn't be Cairo.  I think she was one of those once-in-a-lifetime cats (or dogs) that you're sometimes graced with.

Cairo, like all cats, is inquisitive.  Here she is, wanting to get inside the monitor.  (Yes, that is Age of Empires II that we're playing.)

Cute, isn't she?  Like I said, she's (at least she was) a daddy's girl.  So her favourite spot tended to be my computer chair

And when she wasn't sleeping in it, she was sitting in it or on the back.

Like Commander Uhura said to Admiral Kirk in Star Trek IV, "I should never have left her."  OK...somebody's going to tell me that that's not what she said to Admiral Kirk, and they're right.  She was talking about Pavel Chekov and her exact words were "Admiral, I should never have left him."

But the regret is the same.  Except in my case it's real.  I should never had left her.

I hope that when I die and she passes we meet again in Heaven.  I hope she'll forgive me.

Cai, if you can 'feel' thoughts and or emotions from a distance, I love you.  I miss you terribly.

Monday, September 22, 2008

Stupid Is ...

... junk email.  Also known as spam, we all tend to get tonnes of it.

I just now got one from mickeymouse33 @ dizneyroad4 . com (spaces added so the blog doesn't make a link out of it) informing me that I'd won a trip to Disney World.

Slight problem, the site dizneyroad4 . com went active on 17-SEPT-2008 and was registered through Go Daddy.com, according to ARIN WHOIS.  I also did an InterNIC search.  They both confirmed it. 

Can we say spam?  Can we also say possible identity theft? 

No thanks, "Sue Madden" from "Travel Getaways, Inc."

Friday, September 12, 2008

Move Along, No Liberal Bias Here

First, a link to the article:  http://www.upi.com/news/issueoftheday/2008/09/12/ABCs_Gibson_grilled_Palin_hard_but_it_may_backfire/UPI-81241221234472/

"Gibson was out to embarrass Palin and expose her presumed ignorance from the word go. By contrast, when Obama referred to his "Muslim faith" on Sunday and did not correct himself, Stephanopoulos rushed in at once to help him and emphasize that the senator had really meant to say his Christian faith."

Wow.  That's in the third paragraph, but the article gets even more critical.  I was suprised to be reading this, given that it doesn't appear to be an Op-Ed page.

But remember, there's no liberal bias in the newsmedia.  How do we know?  The liberal newsmedia tells us.

And if you believe everything they tell you, I have a bridge to sell you.

The writer of the article even brings up Rev. Wright, and calls him "...notoriously racist..."  I about fell over.

But that also is something that's been bothering me for quite some time.  Mr Obama was a member of that church for 20 years by his own admission, yet he didn't know of the Reverend's racist views?  That really stretches the bounds of credulity.  Really.

Granted, according to my ex-wife, I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box, but still.  I really don't think I'm missing that much. 

No liberal bias here. 

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Scientists Have a Sense of Humour?

Short answer, YES.

Check out the URL.  If you can't read it (and it is hard to read since it's so small,) it reads http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/

By breaking those down to American English words, we get "Has The LHC [Large Hadron Collider] Destroyed The Earth"

I expect that this site will be updated periodically.  Except, of course, in case the world actually does end and there's nobody around to maintain it. 



Wait...wait.  I'm still here.  Are you?  Yes?

Just in case you missed it, the LHC was (indeed!) turned on this morning at 9:30 (local time.)  And, just for the record, we're still here.  For those who know what this photograph shows, here is proof of the event:


That was a picture taken by a camera.  Here's the screenshot:


I had five bets (one bet with five different people) that the LHC would be turned on and that nothing horrible would happen.

I'm now owed a grand total of $.05 (US cents)  That, and a good laugh, might get me the wrapper from a stick of chewing gum.  In plainer words, I didn't expect anything bad would happen.

But there are those doom-sayers who thought that the LHC would create a black hole, or worse, a strangelet.  I've written about this twice before, so I won't go into it here.  Suffice it to say that even if it were to create a black hole or a strangelet, they likely wouldn't last long enough to do any damage.

You'll notice that I said "...they likely wouldn't last long enough..."  You'll note I didn't say that they wouldn't.  And that is because, while the odds of something horrible happening are about 1 in 50 million, that is still a not-quite-zero chance.  Yes, it is possible.  But I've other things to spend my time worrying about.

For instance, a 50m (metre) asteroid slamming into the Earth, or worse, air-bursting over a major city.  These are called "once-in-a-century" asteroids because they come along in the order of once each century.

The last time this happened was in 1908 when an asteroid broke up over Tunguska.  A link to the article is here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunguska_event  Had that hit, it would've wiped out a city.  As it happened, it air burst over forest.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_burst

As I said, this is a once-in-a-century* asteroid, so we're about due.  The really really bad part is that since they're so small, our telescopes won't see them (either coming or going**) 

Imagine this happening in today's geo-political climate.  A NEO (Near-Earth Object) that is 51m across is coming towards the Earth.  Since it's so small and so dim, both radio and 'normal' telescopes miss it.

At 06:21 local time, the object breaks up (air bursts) over New York City.  In a flash, New York City is gone.  Gone, folks.  As in not there anymore

What do you do?  Our leaders would be looking for somebody to shoot at.  "We were attacked, we have to do something!"  Who are you going to shoot at?  You've got to shoot at somebody, right?

Now imagine our hypothetical asteroid air bursting over Tehran, Iran.  They, (if there were any of them left) and the rest of the Arab world would blame either Israel or the US.  It wouldn't matter that it was a NEO.

Again, since these are once-in-a-century asteroids, we're about due. 

What do you do?

* - Source:  Dr. Daniel Durda, PhD

** - Source:  Dr. Peter Ward, PhD

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Large Hadron Collider

If you were reading this Journal/blog back then, you'll know that I wrote about the LHC some time ago.  Here's that link:  http://journals.aol.com/gregb1967/my-journey-my-journal/?page=9#Entry1315 

I gave the reasons why the LHC was unlikely to produce a strangelet.  Well, now the LHC is about to be turned on (tomorrow) after years of debate.

Here's a link to the article I'll be referencing:  http://news.yahoo.com/story//nf/20080908/tc_nf/61725

"The anti-LHC hysteria was started by Walter L. Wagner and Luis Sancho, who filed suit in U.S. and European courts to stop the LHC."

OK...I know Mr Wagner's qualifications, he was a nuclear safety officer.  But Mr Sancho?  I can't seem to find information about him.

But here's the thing:  " ""Any miniature black hole created at rest in a collider would essentially be trapped in Earth's gravitational field and over seconds to hours, slowly interact and acquire more mass," Wagner says on his LHCDefense.org Web site. "

(Another quote with links removed.)  My reply?  Bull.

Mr Wagner was a nuclear safety officer; yet apparently he hasn't heard of the weak nuclear force*, since it is the force that will be governing interactions at that distance.  The Earth's gravitational field will have a miniscule impact on any particles that get created.  The particle's mass will see to that.

For the Earth's gravitational field to have any discernable effect on the particles, they'd have to weigh in at about a microgram.  They're going to weigh far far less, unless Mr Wagner is aware of some kind of physics that none of the rest of us are aware of?

Mr Wagner?

To be fair, there is a not-quite-zero chance that the LHC could create a black hole* or strangelet* that would end up destroying the Earth.  It could also create a magnetic monopole*.  Possible?  Yes, it is possible.  It's just not very likely that they'd last long enough to do any damage to anything.  Also, to be fair, a strangelet-like particle has already been created.  It's called, of course, the Lambda Particle*. 

Also, for the record, the Earth didn't get destroyed.  At least not that I'm aware of.

At the sub-atomic scale things aren't deterministic, they're probablistic.  They don't say "This will happen with a 70 per cent chance of this outcome, and a 30 per cent chance of this outcome."  They say "This might happen..."  This, of course, is due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle* as well as Superpositioning* (aka Super State.)

Serious physicists are giving the odds of the Earth being destroyed at 1 in 50 million.  I'd go further, having studied theoretical physics myself.  I'd give it 1 in 55 or 1 in 60 million. 

"At the same time, the public's willingness to believe left-field doomsday theories reveals a fundamental weakness in the scientific community's outreach efforts. "Sub-atomic physics isn't the easiest subject to discuss (let alone understand), but in order for people to appreciate the importance of science, they first need to understand how it will potentially improve their lives," King said. "

Amen.  To be honest, sub-atomic physics is hard to understand.  I don't understand all of it myself, nor do I claim to.  Theoretical physics is even harder to understand and is not for the faint of heart.  If you really do want to give yourself nightmares, study Bose-Einstein Condensates*. 

Personally, I plan to make myself homemade beef-tips and noodles and then have a good night's sleep.  I won't be losing any sleep about the LHC being turned on.

* strangelet - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strangelet

* Lambda Particle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda_particle

* Weak Nuclear Force - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_nuclear_force

* Black Hole - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

* Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenberg_uncertainty_principle

* SuperPosition - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition

* Magnetic Monopole - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_monopole

* Bose-Einstein Condensates - http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/bec/ (This is easy to understand for non-physicists and explains what these condensates are in plain, simple English.  For non-physicists, I strongly recommend this page first.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose-Einstein_Condensate  (This one gets highly technical.  If you're a non-physicist and/or want to give yourself nightmares, go here.  Just remember, I did warn you.)

We Did, and He Did

(The following is an email I just sent to Us Weekly.  Unfortunately, my neighbour's daughter did not recharge the camera's batteries, so there are no photographs.  We'll be sure that doesn't happen next time.)

Dear Us Weekly;

       I am not a subscriber.  Nonetheless, I did purchase this particular magazine in order to better determine for myself exactly what the fuss was all about, and, if necessary, to teach my neighbour's puppy Bruno to pee on it (if it was as bad as I'd heard.)

       You'll be pleased to know that nine-month old Bruno took a liking to your magazine, for he happily urinated and then deficated on it.  Unfortunately, Lisa (my neighbour's daughter) neglected to recharge the batteries in the digital camera, so there are no photographs of the event.

       But it did take place this afternoon at 16:57hrs local time.

       This is what your 'product' has become.  The job of a reporter is to report the news fairly, impartially, and without political bias.  With your smear issue against Gov Palin and her family, you have crossed that line.

       Frankly, if I were in charge there, I would hand all of you your walking papers and escort you out.

       Let us not forget how Rolling Stone, another Jann Wenner publication, attempted to deify Mr Obama recently.  And the other Wenner publications also cast Obama in a very favourable light.

       Your job, if you were unbiased, would have been to attempt to balance the article(s) about both of them.  Again, you have failed.

       I am not a subscriber, nor do I wish to become one.  Yet if you were to throw five free issues my way, feel free.  I would make quite certain that Lisa (my neighbour's daughter) had fully recharged the camera's batteries to ensure that we could photograph Bruno as he again deficated and urinated upon them.

       I would tell you to provide unbiased coverage, but you would not.  I have already contacted your subscribers, but fear that they don't want to lose the cash cow that your products are. 

       So, I do the only thing I can - I speak out against you.

       Don't bother replying.  Your address (and domain name) has been added to AOL's and Astaro's spam filters.

Oh...and what's on Us Weekly's site right now?


OK...remember, I'm not too bright according to my ex-wife.  But what, exactly, do Gov Palin's glasses have to do with what kind of Vice President she'd make??

Or did I miss something again?

Monday, September 8, 2008

Liberal Media Misses This One...

...not that I expected them to get it.  In my opinion, the media wants BHO to win.  Again, that's my opinion and I could be wrong. 

But then we have the MTV's awards host Russell Brand:

"Some people, I think they're called racists, say America is not ready for a black president.

"But I know America to be a forward thinking country because otherwise why would you have let that retard and cowboy fella be president for eight years?"  A link is here:   http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article4703539.ece

Ok.....I've said this before, too:  I would have no problem with an African-American being the President.  But General Powell isn't running.  Neither is Dr. Rice.  The liberal media seems to be saying that if we don't pick Obama that we're racists.  I'm not a racist, I just don't want Obama to be the President.  It really is that simple.

For me, it's not about race or gender.  It's about their stance on the issues and whether or not I agree with them.  And, for the record, I don't agree with Obama.

But then we come to this, courtesy of the Northeast Intelligence Network:  http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/node/1437

The title?  I'm glad you asked:  "ISNA's Illegal Endorsement of Obama and Obama's Illegal Campaign Presence at ISNA's National Convention." 

What is the ISNA that they're referring to?  Islamic Society of North America.  Of course, the liberal mainstream media won't touch this one.  And they still haven't addressed the question of whether or not Obama is even eligible.  Here's that link again:  http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/20080823O

These questions need to be answered.  Is Barack Obama eligible to be President?  What, exactly, are his ties to the Islamic Society of North America and what is ISNA's exact relationship with CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations)?

Intrigued?  I know I am.

There's also this.  This link leads to ANTI-CAIR, a website that presents another, quite different view of CAIR.

This particular link leads to the announcement that CAIR's lawsuit against ANTI-CAIR had been dismissed by the Court with prejudice.*

Here's the link:  http://www.anti-cair-net.org/Dismissed

It should be noted that the statements made about CAIR on the website are what triggered the lawsuit.  The lawsuit, again, was dismissed with prejudice* and the statements remain.

* with prejudice - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_prejudice  "This directly differs from a dismissal with prejudice, in which the right of the claimant to file another case on the claim is barred."

In plainer words, CAIR cannot sue ANTI-CAIR again for the statements on its website ... if I'm understanding it correctly.

MSNBC (again)

Well.  What to say about this one?  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090800008_pf.html

MSNBC has dropped Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as anchors.  I had to read that twice to believe it. 

The network has moved to the left, of that I don't think there can be any doubt.  This is particularly worrisome since networks are supposed to be unbiased and balanced.  However, MSNBC is getting a show from Air America Radio personality Rachel Maddow ... this after they cancelled Tucker Carlson's show and diminished his role at the network.

No liberal bias at MSNBC?  One of the anchors on Morning Joe said that 95 per cent of reporters would vote for Obama and one of the other ones didn't see a problem with it.  No liberal bias in the media?

Here's another link:  http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlhzoRPoTjgeV9vNrGXaMN2AUGLwD932BSU00

"Olbermann began to have difficulty keeping his opinions in check, or simply stopped trying."

I've said this before, but apparently, reporters don't get it.  There is indeed a place for opinions.  The Op-Ed pages in papers and the Op-Ed section on websites.  Op-Ed, of course, means Opinion-Editorial.  Journals (personal journals) are also good places for opinions.  I post my opinions here frequently.  Usually, I'll say "in my opinion" or something similar. 

But now?  MSNBC?  My goodness. 

Friday, September 5, 2008

The Obamessiah Speaks about Palin ... Sort of

Ok...first, a few links.  This link leads right back to my journal/blog and my writing about Us Weekly's smear campaign against Gov Palinhttp://journals.aol.com/gregb1967/my-journey-my-journal/#Entry1556

OK....now another link, this one leads to the A$$ociated Pre$$:  http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080905/D9308NOG2.html

Before I quote, I do need to give Mr Obama a few points.  He said that Ms Palin's family should be off-limits and that he would fire any staffer who talked about it.

For that, I admire Mr Obama.  I'm very glad he did this.  He's already said that his family should be off-limits, and the media complied, and now he's saying that Ms Palin's family should be off-limits as well.  For the record, I'm very very glad he took that stance.  I truly am.  I only wish the media and the liberal bloggers would listen.

But.....  (and you knew this was coming, I think)  there is this:

In this article, they mention that the Obama-Biden Democrats had been vicious in their attacks.  That's not quite a direct quote, but it's pretty darn close!  Note that they don't say the campaign itself, they said the "Obama-Biden Democrats."  By this, I'm assuming that they mean the Democrats who are in the Obamessiah's camp.  (In plainer American English, they meant (I think) those Democrats who are going to vote for the Obama-Biden ticket.  I think.)

When asked, the McCain-Palin campaign said that it wasn't the (opposition) campaign putting out the lies and smears.  In fact, answering to a direct question whether or not Biden and Obama were responsible, Maria Comella said "No."  In fact, they specifically name the Daily Kos.  Let me repeat that:  They specifically name the Daily Kos as being one of the sources of the smears and lies.

OK...NO.  That means, at least in American English, that Biden and Obama were not responsible for the lies and smears.  In fact, that Us Weekly smear said that it was the liberal bloggers.  Well, the article doesn't say that, but their mouthpeice does.

So what does the Obamessiah's campaign have to say about it?  "Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said "the only 'flat-out lie' is this ridiculous claim, and it proves that John McCain has wasted no time in teaching Sarah Palin the ways of the Washington he's inhabited for the last 26 years." "

What ridiculous claim?  They said that liberal bloggers and the Daily Kos were the sources of some of the smears and lies.  What part of American English do you people not understand??  Again, answering a direct question as to if the Obamessiah's campaign were responsible for the smears and lies, the answer was "no."  Not "I'm not sure," or "For some of them, yes and for others no" but a flat out "no."

Obamessiah?  Liberal press?  Liberal bloggers? 

Why are you people on the left so deathly afraid of Gov Palin?  Is it because she resembles so much of what so many American women actually ARE??  She's a mother (five times over!), a devoted wife, with a devoted husband, is NOT in the Wa$hington elite and has a teen daughter that is pregnant. 

Oh, and she did NOT have an abortion, instead, she had Trig ... her latest child.  Is it because she's not liberal and not a Democrat?  Are you that petty?

Again, I ask.  Why are you people on the left (including you in the liberal media) so deathly afraid of Gov Sarah Palin?

Oprah Says 'No' to Gov. Palin

Well, it's official, folks.  Oprah has said that she won't have Gov Palin on her show.  A link (Current as of 12:52hrs on 5-SEPT-2008) is here:  http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3os.htm  (NOTE that this link is on the Drudge Report, were links to flash stories can and frequently DO change.  Therefore, when you try to link follow it, it might lead somewhere else.)

Oprah, a BIG Barack Obama supporter (and donor) said this about why she won't have Gov. Palin on her show:  "At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates."

You don't say.  How then, do you explain the picture from the Drudge Report that shows Oprah talking to Barack Obama?!?  I apologize to the Drudge Report, but just in case that link is dead by the time somebody here tries to follow, here is the picture from the Drudge Report:


Thursday, September 4, 2008

I hadn't expected this

(Entry added at 20:15hrs on 4-SEPT-2008 to include link to UCLA study about liberal bias in the media.)


Folks, please put down whatever (if anything) that you're eating or drinking.

"The findings, nevertheless, are troublesome for the embattled news industry and parallel what voters said in surveys earlier this summer. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of voters now believe most reporters try to help the candidate they want to win, and 49% believe reporters are trying to help Obama this year. Only 14% think they are trying to help McCain. In another survey, 55% said media bias is a bigger problem for the electoral process than large campaign donations. "

There's the entire quote, complete with their (NOT MINE!) hyperlinks.  Let me distill these numbers down:

68% think most reporters try to help "their" candidate. (Yes, a 'duh' moment.)

49% believe that reporters are trying to help Obama!!!  THAT'S NEARLY HALF!!!

55% believe that liberal media bias is a bigger problem campaign contributions.

51% believe that reporters are trying to hurt Sarah Palin!!!!  THAT IS OVER HALF!!

No liberal bias?!?  !!!!  OK, Yes, I am dense in some areas and I admit that.  But come on already.  Go read the UCLA study I referenced in an earlier post.  http://journals.aol.com/gregb1967/my-journey-my-journal/?page=10#Entry1288

But here's the point I'm not sure I agree with:  "Voters are more ambivalent about whether the media coverage of Palin and her family reflects a double standard that treats women worse than men. Forty-six percent (46%) say it does, but 35% disagree."

Um.... let's see.  Remember, I'm not too sharp here, so bear with me.

46 - 35 = um....wait.....11?

An 11 point spread, folks.  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ambivalent  It means "uncertainty" in case you were wondering.

An 11 point spread does not "ambivalent" make, folks.  While it's not a slam dunk or a 'duh' moment, that's well outside the margin of error.

And the poll that they cite is the Rasmussen Reports poll.  They are one of the standards by which the others are judged.


STOP THE PRESSES!!!!  http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/04/obama-surge-succeeded-beyond-wildest-dreams/

The title says it all.  the Obamessiah has conceded that the surge has worked beyond anybody's wildest dreams.  I AM going to faint.  ::THUNK::

But, to be fair, he did also say that the Iraqis hadn't yet taken responsibility for their own country.  (Yes, this is another of those 'duh' moments.)  But there's a problem here.  A liberal using the word "responsibility?!?"  I thought that word was politically incorrect????

I really really am missing something, aren't I?

Why oh WHY?!?

Why oh WHY did I ever think that Us Weekly would give fair and unbiased coverage?  Why did I think that?  SOMEBODY WHACK ME OVER THE HEAD!!!

Why did I just go to their website to read the latest piece of trash from such a "magazine?"  As I said, I still need to purchase this particular issue so we (my neighbours and I) can teach their puppy to pee on it.  Again, in my opinion, that's all it's worth.

Why did I read the next smear about Gov. Palin?  I'm not a masochist.  I thought, perhaps, that Us Weekly might actually check their facts.

I shouldn't have bothered.  No liberal bias at that magazine?  How then, do we explain that one of their owners happens to be a staunch Obama supporter?

Here we go:  http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/512gfsvi.asp

And here I need to apologize, I should have warned you not to be eating or drinking anything.  I hope a monitor didn't get spit upon somewhere.

"It's ironic, of course, that the same establishment news organizations consumed by such tabloid issues not long ago refused to investigate reports that John Edwards was having an affair and had a child out of wedlock." (emphasis added)

"And, perhaps as important, Edwards was running for the Democratic nomination for president, with an agenda favored by the liberal media establishment." (emphasis added) 

WOAH!!!  Liberal media establishment!!!  Say it ain't so!  I'm gonna faint.

Oh, and as it turns out ... the Palin smear never did mention liberal bloggers.  Go read the filth for yourself at their site, if you can stand it.

Jann Wenner contributed to the Obamessiah's campaign ... $5,300 since 2007.  But the magazine won't say that.

Tsk, tsk.

'Us Weekley' Smear Campaign

First, a link to the YouTube video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjQhiarIQaw

It features Megyn Kelley and Bradley Jacobs, the Senior Editor of the smea ... Oh, I'm sorry.  The 'magazine.'  Yes, the magazine.  Continue, please.

Does anybody remember the cover that they ran about Gov. Palin?  Here it is:

So now we go to the interview with Mr Jacobs who admits that the lies told about the Gov. are actually those told by the liberal bloggers.  Here are his exact words, starting at 55 seconds:

"Actually the lies, we point out, are some of the liberal bloggers who were speculating that the daughter was actually, had given birth.  That there was a cover-up there."

I didn't get that from reading the cover, as Mr Jacobs goes on to insinuate during the interview.  I guess I missed it.  But then, according to my now-ex-wife, I miss quite a few things.

Am I the only one?  I sure took the cover to mean that the Gov. had been telling lies, not that the title meant that it was about the liberal bloggers who are smearing her.  And then, the magazine's stooge deliberately evades that same question! 

They bring up a DUI arrest, but somehow neglect to mention that it was in ...

1986.  Seriously.  The magazine brings up that the Mr Palin had a DUI arrest, but somehow fails to mention that it was TWENTY TWO years ago.

This 'magazine' misses quite a few things.

Do a Google search for "us weekly" and then click on images.  You'll get an image (please pardon the pun) of what the 'magazine' considers important:

More sex.
Even more sex.
Still more sex.
And now, it turns out, half-truths and unspoken truths.

I think I'm going to purchase this particular magazine and then give it to my neighbour so that they can teach their puppy to pee on it.

If you ask me, that's all it's worth.

They bring up the allegation that Ms. Palin had ties to a group that wanted had announced their plans for Alaska to announce its secession from the United States, but (again!) somehow misses the fact that this allegation had been completely (COMPLETELY) disproven, had in fact, been proven completely fabricated. 

Oh, and when Ms. Kelley points out in the interview that they somehow missed covering the actual facts, the stooge had this to say, starting at 2:27:

"We didn't have time to get into everything that you have mentioned.  This story was breaking over the weekend, everyone was talking about it, and Us Magazine has a very distinctive voice and we cover the news."

Too bad you don't report the facts.  That would be a start.

But I expect too much from the American media. 

Here's more food for thought.  This is from the Sun:  http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/fergus_shanahan/article1647092.ece

"Democrats and their Lefty media backers had been sneering that she was a small town nobody, a hick from the Alaskan sticks put into a job way beyond an inexperienced woman." (emphasis added)

"...Lefty media backers..."  If the Brits can see it, given that they're drowning in Political Correctness over there, surely we can see it as well.  Lefty media backers.  I've already called 'em lapdogs.

Let's consider another article:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4674411.ece

This one, also from the UK, is about a Soldier who, after showing his ID, was refused a room because he was military.  I'm going to focus on what the Solder's Mum had to say about it:

"“I’m very, very angry. It’s discrimination. They would never get away with it if it was against someone of ethnic origin, she said." (emphasis added)

Boy, can you ever say that again.  If it had been against somebody of ethnic origin, you can rest assured they'd have been arrested and tried with a hate crime.  Am I the only one that listened to the interview the other day about a London-area woman, who after spending several years in the United States, returns home and no longer recognizes it?  How it was "...drowned in pc [politically correct] politeness and sensitivity?"

Oh, and how did this magazine cover the Obamessiah?

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

I Haven't Commented on This...

If you've been watching the news, you'll know that Don LaFontaine, the man known for the cliche "In a world..." has died.

He was 68.  Variously known as "The Voice of God," and "Thunder Throat," Mr LaFontaine died due to complications from pneumothorax.  He is survived by his wife and three children.

He did many commercials and many trailers for movies.  He also did the opening narration for Amerca's Most Wanted.  I think my all-time favourite GEICO commercial was the one with him (Honestly.)  I'm ashamed to admit it, but until that point, I'd never known his name.  I recognized the voice instantly, but I'd never known his name.  He even parodied himself! 

"When the storm hit, both our cars were totally under water."

"In a world where both our cars were totally under water."

And then to learn that he died.  I couldn't believe it. 

But that brings up something else that, when I read about it, hurt.  It hurt deeply. 

I first read about Dr Randy Pausch on Michelle Malkin's site.  I downloaded and watched The Last Lecture, followed by his lecture on Time Management.  I watched his testimony before a Congre$$ional Committe about aditional funding for pancreatic cancer research.

"But I want you to understand that pancreatic cancer is one of those unusual diseases.  The statistics are pretty clear.

If you get it, you're dead within a year with a 75 per cent chance.  When you talk about survival, four per cent of people make it to five years.

When I presented first with symptoms, we thought I had hepatitis.  When we got the diagnosis, my wife [Jai (pronounced Jay)] said 'Gee, I guess you'd trade for hepatitis.'  And I said 'Honey, I'd trade for AIDS.' "

And then, the part of his testimony that really shook me when I saw his face.

"Part of my job is to put a face on the disease [pancreatic cancer].  At the risk of being a little bit overly dramatic, I want to show you a picture.  This is my family. 

This is Dylan.  He's six years old.  He loves dinosaurs.

This is Logan.  He's four.  He's 'Super Logan.'  He has a cape, he runs around the house, saving everyone.

This is Chloe.  In May [2008], she turns two.

And this is my widow. 

That's not a grammatical construction you get to use everyday.  But there's not many diseases where you know it'll be fatal.  And I have metastasized* to the liver and spleen, which means that I have a 100 per cent chance of dying, and there isn't anybody in the medical community who won't bet that I won't be dead by the end of the year.

And this woman is gonna raise these three children by herself, very bravely, because I won't be there to help her."

When I heard that he'd died, part of me was left wondering.  Why him?  "Only the good die young," and he died at 47. 

And he thought he'd done everything right.  He didn't smoke, didn't drink, he tried to eat right and he exercised.  But he still got it.  Why him?


I'd never met him in person, never spoken with him, had only learned about him on Michelle Malkin's site in October of 2007.  Yet, when he died, part of me felt empty. 

I'd been watching his site (http://download.srv.cs.cmu.edu/~pausch/news/index.html) for quite a while after learning about him.  I read about the ups and downs, the setbacks, and the joy of his living to see Christmas [2007] and spend it with his family.

And then came the post of 26-JUN-2008.  His tumour marker was now 1,400.  Seeing that number skyrocket meant that he was in deep trouble.  Those of us watching his site already knew that, but to see that number so high meant that the end was near.

And then no more posts until 24-JUL-2008.  At that point, given the message of the post, I thought to myself 'This is it, then.'

He died the next day.

It's taken me this long to be able to write about it.  The world is a lesser place without him.

Rest in peace, Randy

* - Metastasized:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastasized


Leave The Family Alone

Remember when BHO said that his children were off-limits to reporters?  That reporters couldn't touch them.  OK...the media, of course, complied.

But now, they're talking about Ms. Palin's children.  Obama, to his credit, did speak out against this.  For that, I do give him points. 

But it seems the other Dems, the folks at the Daily Kos, and their lapdogs in the press, don't care.

Dispicable.  But what I've come to expect from the Democratic lapdogs in the mainstream media.

Gov. Palin's Information Released by Dems

First, a link:  http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/sep/02/breaking-democrats-release-sarah-palins-soc/

That's right.  The wackjobs on the left have released Gov. Sarah Palin's Social Security Number minus the last four digits to the press in opposition research.  Since SSNs are nine digits long, this is really worrying. 

I guess they've never heard of ... oh ... identity theft?!?  For example:  The Woolworth SSN:  Here it is - 078-75-1120.  (Don't try using it.  It's been flagged as fake.)

The point is that the Dems took the number and published it, like this - 078-75-xxxx.  As if that weren't bad or disgusting enough, they also published her ADDRESS.

Let's take a step back.  Remember when Michelle Malkin published the Berkeley protesters information?  It was the same information they had already published on their site.  Let me say that again:  She posted information that the protestors had already published on their web site.

The lefties went nuts.  They went completely nuts.  Some of them at the Daily Kos in returned published her private information, including her address (which she had NOT published anywhere.)

She had to move.  But here's the point:  The lefties don't play by the rules they expect us to play by.  If we publish information that they've published, we get death threats (which she did.)  If THEY publish PRIVATE information, well, that's OK, right?

The mainstream media, of course, won't be touching this.  You could call them the Obamedia (a portmanteau of 'Obama' and 'media'.)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmanteau_word  They seem to be acting as Obama's media, wouldn't you say?

Remember me posting about the number of headlines for Obama and the number for McCain?  What was it, 6 to 1?  I'm not looking at it right now.  Or was it 3 to 1 in favour of Obama?

No liberal bias in the media?  The Dems play dirty tricks and nothing is said.  Could you imagine the firestorm that would've happened (and you know it would have happened) had Ms. Palin been a Democrat and her information had been released by a Republican?  All the talking heads would be on the air, pontificating about the "evil Republicans" and the "...vast right-wing conspiracy" just like Hillary did when her husband was lying to the Grand Jury.

No liberal bias?  Obama's media won't touch this one.

Hey, BHO, are you going to distance yourself from this?  You need to.  Otherwise your "change" will be nothing but a slogan.