Lies Lies Lies.

I didn't think the Nobel Prize committee could cheapen their awards any more than they did after giving it to Al Gore for making a so-called documentary whose most accurate fact was that the earth has a climate.

That was until this past week when they gave the Peace Prize to Barrack Obama for all his accomplishments.

What accomplishments? The deadline for submitting entries was only one week after he assumed office. Obama doesn't even qualify (hmmm, again?) for the Peace Prize according to the criteria the applicants are supposed to meet. Not that following neither the spirit nor the letter of the law has been a big concern for Obama's supporters but geeze whiz, this just looks stupid.

With regards to the Peace Prize, and according to Alfred Nobel's will, the Peace Prize was for:

“

during the preceding year [...] shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.[1]

”

Poseur.

Zombie UPdate

I see the DeadJournal is updating again! Cool!

Speaking of Zombies, #1 son and I saw Zombie Land opening day. Take it in the spirit it was intended, and your only complaint will be that the movie is too short. Bill Murray's cameo alone made it worth the price of admission.

We also saw Pandorum this week, and I think it (inadvertently) falls into the 'zombie movie' genre too. Way more suspenseful than Zombie Land, it does a far far better job of playing with your fear of the unknown than, say, Event Horizon. (Which is still a classic!)

Marketing 101

Here's a few logos I'd like to see more of in popular culture:




Here's why:

Where did Spink go?

Just throwing this out there:

The blogger Spink, and his blogs, "spink about it" and "101 people who are messing up Canada" are now missing in action. Known for his right-of-centre viewpoint (can you say, "common-sense point of view?") his material is worth reading, if only to counter the CBC-promoted myth that there is no legitimate every-man Canadian viewpoint on the right side of the political spectrum too.

Spink's 101 people list and the reason they're listed should be read by every Junior-High social studies student in the country.

A quick google search and I find only a post on the Daily Gleaner from april 21st, 2009,

"With that said, I am walking away from blogging at least for now."

Oh Spink. Say it isn't so...

Swine Influsteria part 2

I was right to worry.

Tamiflu strains o f the swine flu have now appeared here, in Alberta. Bloomberg is reporting that it isn't as easily spread as the original strain, but...

Swine InFlusteria

At first I thought the stupidest things tick me off. But I think this may be serious.

One of my favorite web cartoonists, PVP author Scott Kurtz posted on his site Thursday that he and other guests have come down with the Flu after shaking thousands of hands at PAX, the Penny Arcade Expo in Seattle this week. There has been at least one confirmed case of swine flu at that event.

• On his website, Scott said,

"So when I took a turn for the worse yesterday, and then Kris and Mike started to feel sick, I took a trip to the clinic and tested positive for the flu. The doctor doesn’t think it’s the swine flu but either way the treatment is the same: Tamaflu, bed rest, fluids and NO FLYING."

Not the first time I've heard that. That's what's bugging me. Overuse.

Now I'm glad Scott's getting treatment. I really like his stuff. I can see using using Tamaflu for the weak, sickly, very young and very old. But On the surface, Scott Kurtz appears to be a young, healthy guy who's been successfully losing weight and working at improving his health.

Damn near every time the subject of the flu has come up in the news this year the doctors have been using Tamaflu. Fucking overuse if you ask me. Especially for a strain of Flu that this year has had only a fraction of the lethality of our regular flu seasons in the past. The medical profession appears to be determined to ruin the effectiveness of Tamaflu through overuse just like they've done with damn near every antibiotic in the past half century.

A Fake Crisis

Came across this gem of information after SondraK pointed the way:

The Obamunists are claiming that there's 12 or 24 or even 40 million Americans who desperately need socialized medical coverage. They're using these numbers to justify the creation of what will surely be the latest (if not the biggest) real life exercise that proves socialism doesn't work.

But While channel surfing this week, I heard Glen Beck, give a much more realistic breakdown of the actual number of un-covered Amercians. He also pointed out that if Obama really wanted to get them coverage it would be cheaper to simply buy them coverage than to set up a nationalized government health care system [complete with the requisite perpetually self-bloating civil service bureaucracy to run it, like Canada has.] (my words)

Here's the breakdown, according to Karl Rove in today's Wall Street Journal:




So, buying them coverage (5 million uncovered Americans) at say, $100 to $500 per month each, works out to between six and thirty billion a year. Damn.

That's gotta be cheaper than building a whole new Health Care bureaucracy complete with waiting lists and all the other weaknesses of rationed health care.

Zombie blog update

Just a little bit of sleuthing, and I've found that the contributors to the zombie blog, 'the dead journal' are all members of the Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association. The PFOA has a very good website, with information, news, forums and the kind of information you should read if you're concerned at all about gun safety and activism.

I also found this poster:



My guess is the blog is a promotional thing for this event. That said, if you haven't checked it out, do so. It's a pretty damn good read.

Obama seeks Power to Rule the Internet

Earlier this month, Fox news reported that anyone who went to the USG's Cash for clunkers website was inadvertently granting the US Government all rights to access your computer for any reason, now and in the future.

Today Cnet reports that a recently revised Senate Bill S.773 would grant the president sweeping powers in the event of a 'cyber emergency.' Going far beyond protecting utilities and other government type services this bill could give the President control of private I.T. companies hiring practices, require hiring of specially certified government approved 'supervisors' (can you say, "Political Officer" tovarisch?) and force private I.T. companies to take orders from the government to do whatever the President deems necessary to combat the 'cyber-emergency.'

This of course reminds me of how Adolf Hitler and other dictators in history have used real (and staged) emergencies to grant themselves extraordinary powers that were ultimately abused to circumvent their nation's checks and balances, and ultimately cement their position and power.

The U.S. has had strong presidents who were given extraordinary powers during times of crisis. I'm think of Abraham Lincoln, and more recently George W Bush. Yes, W. As disappointing as George was in the latter part of his administration I still include him with Lincoln, as men with sufficient integrity and character to give up those powers when the crisis ended.

Sadly, I fear Obama has not shown yet that he has the integrity and character to match those examples.

(thanks to www.daybydaycartoon.com for the opening image)

Zombies?

Came across this while browsing David Markowitz's "Blog o Stuff." The Blog is called the Dead Journal, and is a series of daily posts beginning just this past August 19th. The anonymous blogger appears to be relating his family's survival during what appears to be a terrorist-caused zombie attack.

Sounds goofy unless you're into zombie movies and such. As my 17 year old son and I have been avidly playing Valve's "Left 4 Dead" online for the past three months, this weblog is merely fuel for the fire... (grin)

Ted is dead

Ted is dead. I couldn't write anything about it until now, as I was already sick to death of the oh-so-predictable outpouring of flattery from the media about what such a loss this is to the United States and to blah blah blah blah...

I've already written some less than nice things in the past about this apostate Catholic, unwanted member of the Knights of Columbus, and of course, much-too-long serving Democratic U.S. senator for Massachusetts. I didn't want to be too negative but this thought, however, has been with me all day:

"I can see him now, standing in front of the Pearly Gates
being asked if he knew how many full-term babies died
with surgical scissors jammed into the backs of their skulls,
because he (Ted) had championed the legality of
Partial Birth Abortions?"

So I don't want to slam him any more than I already have, he's not having too good a time right now as it is...

Like his better brothers, I'm chosing to remember this Kennedy as he was when he was younger, and still full of promise. Before he proved himself a hypocrite he did publicly take a pro-life, pro-family stance. I particularly liked this 1971 letter, in which he responded to a pro-abortionist:

“While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized — the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

On the question of the individual’s freedom of choice there are easily available birth control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. But once life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire.

I share the confidence of those who feel that America is willing to care for its unwanted as well as wanted children, protecting particularly those who cannot protect themselves. i also share the opinions of those who do not accept abortion as a response to our society’s problems — an inadequate welfare system, unsatisfactory job training programs, and insufficient financial support for all its citizens.

When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.

Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy

Bye Ted. You could have been Good.

Spread it around

Found this while surfing. Spread it around.

Guess who knows how to make Cars WITHOUT Obama

From Day-One I've doubted that Obama's Trillion dollar bailout was little more than a Trillion Dollar National Socialization scheme that would give the Government greater and greater control over more and more aspects of American Society.
Here's an example, FORD, the only big three auto manufacturer to reject a government takeove- I mean, bailout, posted a 2.3 Billion dollar profit in the 2nd Quarter of this year.

My Grandfather owned the FIRST Oldsmobile dealership in my hometown, and I've been a GM buyer since my first car. But to buy my next car from Government Motors? No way.

101 People Screwing up Canada

Kudos to SPINK for creating the list, "101 People who are Screwing up Canada, and 10 who aren't."

Like Spink, I had read Bernard Goldberg's "100 people who are Screwing up America," picking it up on sale for $2 or $4 after Chapters/Indigo dumped it's copies into the discount bins (probably for not being Anti-American enough -it didn't quite fit in with the other books on the 'Anti-American Table' that usually has a prominent place in my local Chapters). I found the Goldberg book hugely entertaining. I'm really pleased Spink was able to compile his own list, and amply justify his choices, without turning it into one of those lame, 'Canadian-Version' sort of things we wince at and have come to expect from the CBC and the rest of the 'government-sponsored Canadian-Culture industry.

Unlike Spink, I didn't think to make a Canadian list. It was a good idea, that was well executed and worth your time to read.

State Interference in Church Blatant attempt to Circumvent U.S. Constitution

Doubtless encouraged by the Obamanation's so far successful efforts to ignore the constitution, other dark forces were prompted this month to try to sneak past the U.S. Constitution's separation of Church and State provisions. I haven't heard bugger all about this in the International midstream media, I first had to read it on Michael Savage's website, and then later on the Knights of Columbus website.

I'm referring to the Connecticut state legislature's raised bill 1098, which would have stripped the Catholic Church's bishops and priests (and only the Catholic Church's) of all authority over the administration of their parishes and dioceses, and arbitrarily hand that authority over to elected boards. In effect, the nationalization of the Catholic Church in Connecticut. Such a bill wouldn't stand up to an HONEST constitutional challenge because of it's blatant violation of the 1st amendment prohibiting the passing of any law regarding state control of any church.

Note I emphasized the word honest. Anything is possible in today's Obamanation. I recall from my history lessons (which I doubt are taught anywhere in North America anymore) how the Soviet Union's constitution had many provisons guaranteeing personal freedoms, yet that State pretty well ignored them all. I also remember how Adolf Hitler took over control of Germany's churches as a part of his planned consolidation of his control over German society, prior to WWII. Now in Barrack Obama's America, the Obamanation, a trial balloon for state control over the Church.

Thankfully, the legislature abandoned this flawed legislation after it's attempt to sneak it onto the books was exposed and protest rallies organized.
Earlier this week, 5,000 people showed up at the legislature to protest the proposed bill.

Ironic isn't it, that the ACLU has been silent on this matter. Naw, not really. It's common knowlege that they're a pack of Christian-hating hypocritcal bastards anyway.

The great Bailout Swindle

One of my favorite authors, Dr. Jerry Pournelle, made an interesting observation last week. He was musing about how Pretender Barrack Obama's Trillion-dollar bailout related to the actual losses in the sub-prime mortgage crisis. They don't appear to be very closely related at all.

Consider:" Assume 3 million real estate loans in default. Assume an average of $3000 a month for payments. That's nine billion dollars a month. Call it ten billion a month. That adds up to $120 billion a year, a healthy sum, but had that been paid, there would have been no collapse due to "toxic" mortgages and mortgage based securities. "


Assuming the government took over ownership of the affected homes and rented them back to their former owners the net cost could be as low as 70 billion a year. That's a far far cry from Obama's Trillion dollar political-pork solution.

Why wasn't this idea used?

Read the rest.

Debt and Stimulation - or destruction?

Many people have commented on the oh-so-ludicrous Barrack Obama "Ruin the Economy" spending bill. It's my own opinion that Barrack, a self-confessed Marxist, intends to use the impending fiscal crisis, which he helped create, to transform the greatest free market economy in the world into a marxist-style command economy. Yes, I know, every nation that has tried marxism has failed miserably, spreading misery, corruption, and destitution far and wide. Someone should tell Barry.



Please note that I also said 'impending crisis'. If you think we're already in the crisis, you ain't seen nuthin yet. The Obama must first discredit the current system, thus his plan to create an even bigger Fiscal Crisis than we're currently looking at. The biggist spending bill in American history, Obama's stimulus bill is 93% pork and only 7% stimulus. That's right, only seven percent. This is more money than any country has ever borrowed before, yet his worship the President says it's NECESSARY, and has been pushing for it's quick passage in order to prevent detailed critical review.

Sadly, Pork-barrel politics as usual reigns in Washington and the politicos don't see the landmine they're so happily stepping on.

The only hope for America is a taxpayers revolt, I think. Will it happen? CNN reports that the phone lines to the Capitol are jammed with voters calling in to complain.

Allriiight Already

Unless you live in a shoe you probably couldn't escape the news about Obama's coronation today. ...or yesterday. ...or on Sunday. ...even in Canada.

I was in classes all day yesterday, and as I took a short break for supper before going on to work, I turned on the Tv. If you were watching CBC's newsworld you'd swear there was no news yesterday because it was mostly wall to wall CBC reporting about the preparations for Obama's inauguration. The CBC's obsession with Obama was of course predictable, he's a marxist-leaning politician who consorts with unrepentant terrorists. While I'm not surprised that the CBC's reporters are living up to there low-water 21st century standard, "How did you feel When you heard about the news?" I was surprised by the CBC radio One host who held a online poll to come up with the best Canadian songs to put on a 'gift CD for Obama.'

Can we get back real life now?

The Best description of the Vietnam War I've read yet.

Found this on Dr. Jerry Pournelle's website, Chaos Manor. He was commenting on a book review where he suggests the reviewer missed the point of the book. lol. I've had those days. I'm pasting his entire comment on this subject below.
Jerry is one of my favorite authors; take the time to check out his entire website.

Scientific War and History

Those interested in modern warfare might want to read

http://blog.wired.com/defense/
2009/01/how-tech-change.html which is a review of a book I haven't read and probably won't read, although it's possible that the reviewer simply didn't understand it, despite the reviewer's extensive and impressive credentials (and apparent access to the author). As an example, the reviewer says "...it identifies some important distinctions and helps explain things like the failure of Vietnam - Robert MacNamara’s pervasive quantification didn’t do much, in the end, to convince the Viet Cong that they were facing defeat."

This tells me that the reviewer hasn't a clue as to what happened in Viet Nam, or even why we were there. Viet Nam was a campaign of attrition in the Cold War. The United State decided early on that the proper strategy for the Cold War was containment: that if the USSR were left to stew in its own juices and not allowed to expand, so that war could not feed war, the corruption and mismanagement that inevitably accompanied a command economy would bring about collapse, while our free enterprise economy would bring about economic growth. The essence of containment was that the enemy had to be contained. The USSR already had North Viet Nam, obtained when the French withdrew from their protectorate and Viet Nam (an artificial entity in the first place) was partitioned. Kennedy and then Johnson decided that Containment was the proper strategy, and committed the US to the defense of the South. That wasn't done well, but it was done, and after the Viet Cong committed suicide in the Tet Offensive the war became one of attrition against the North.

By 1972 the war was won. In Spring of 1972 the North sent 150,000 men, all equipped with imported modern weapons including tanks and trucks, into the south in a straight up invasion without any pretense that this was any kind of "insurgency". Colonel Harry Summers put it this way:

"On 29 March 1972 North Vietnam launched what was to become known as the Eastertide Offensive. Leaving two divisions in Laos and one as a strategic reserve, North Vietnam committed some 12 divisions -- a total of about 150,000 men -- to the attack on South Vietnam. Supported by tanks, heavy artillery, and mobile antiaircraft units, they had some initial success. But they had severely miscalculated both the fighting ability of the South Vietnamese Army and the ability of the United States to react... By July 1972 the North Vietnamese had reverted to the tactical defensive."

North Viet Nam took about 100,000 casualties in 1972. The total number of US killed in that year was 641. The Second Viet Nam War had been won decisively.

In 1975 the Third Viet Nam War began, and this time the US did not provide support. The USSR had rebuilt the army destroyed in 1972 and presented the North with a brand new modern armored army, while the United States Congress voted to support the Army of the Republic of Viet Nam with 20 cartridges and two hand grenades per man. Viet Nam accordingly fell; but to characterize this as saying that MacNamara had not convinced the Viet Cong that they were facing defeat is at best absurd. By 1975 the Viet Cong no longer existed. The only insurgency in South Viet Nam was North Viet Nam regulars infiltrated into the South who were able to take advantage of the Sanctuary Areas of Laos, Cambodia, and the DMZ; and the only reason North Viet Nam won in 1975 was that the Congress of the United States, inspired by Watergate, would not support our ally; and the reasons North Viet Nam invaded were (1) they had a new army equipped by their allies, and (2) they had good reason to believe that the United States would not respond in 1975 as we responded in 1972.

There are many lessons to be learned from the Viet Nam experience, but in my judgment anyone who sums up that war with statements like "...it identifies some important distinctions and helps explain things like the failure of Vietnam - Robert MacNamara’s pervasive quantification didn’t do much, in the end, to convince the Viet Cong that they were facing defeat," probably doesn't have a lot to teach us.

===========================

do not call lists

Since joining the CRTC's federal do not call list last September, the number of calls I receive has increased. The big difference however is they are all originating from the United States, where the CRTC has no jurisdiction.

I am especially offended by they way they try to pretend that I am already a customer or am somehow already associated with them, and their telemarketing call is a legitimate form of contact. They all include a notice to press a number (like zero) if you do not want to be contacted again. I have done this, and yet the calls persist. Clearly, pressing the indicated number to be automatically removed from their call list does not guarantee they'll stop calling you.

It's frustrating, so now I never push the number. The bastards are going to phone anyway. Instead, I push the number to speak to a live agent. If they can call and interrupt my day, one of their employees is damn well going to get his/her day interrupted back. Like Today. I just received a call from OHIO and I pressed the number to speak to a live agent.

Then when the live person comes on, I say I'm on the do-not-call list, and tell them to FUCK OFF.

The cathartic effect on my emotional state is amazing. I mean, how often can you tell someone to fuck off and it has a chance of bettering our society? It's my deepest heartfelt hope that the unlucky employee I spoke with will quit their job and the telemarketer will have trouble filling the position.

(happy grin)