Does anyone else find it painfully ironic that Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) is giving another person -- W's attorney general nominee Mike Mukasey -- grief about a procedure involving WATER??? I wonder what Mary Jo Kopechne thinks about waterboarding...Wait...she's dead. She can't comment on the procedure, thanks to Kennedy's cowardly actions that night at Chappaquiddick. I wonder if waterboarding is like laying unconscious in a car filling with water while your rich and connected boyfriend escapes and saves his own life, leaving you to die while his family plans the cover-up? If there's any politician who should keep his besotted mouth shut on the subject of H2O, it's this liberal gasbag. In any case, Kennedy should at least wait ten hours after Mukasey's confirmation to voice his opposition, which wold keep his standards in line with his past behavior. Ted, you're not fooling me or anyone else who's paying attention here.
By the way, the liberal Democrats are more interested in semantics than the results of interrogations that could provide information critical to stopping potential terror operations against the U.S. "Oh, no...Achmed may suffer a bit of discomfort during the interview process!" Here's my spin on waterboarding: if a suspect is waterboarded and we get information that saves American lives, then it's not torture. If interrogators don't get anything useful, then it's just another fun party game to share with your friends during halftime of the Super Bowl.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires
Last week, disguised as a malcontented youth, Global Warming confessed to starting the fires which made more people homeless and scorched more earth than all of the Hummers produced to date. Global Warming's identity, held secret by authorities because of his age, was released into the custody of his parents -- Mother Earth & Father Time ?? -- and told not to engage in any other malicious mischief or he would get a "really stern talking to" by the members of the Sierra Club.
One club member was overheard commenting on how angry she was that her GMC Yukon was "covered in ash while I was attending my yoga class in Fallbrook."
In other news, San Diegoans managed not to vandalize any portion of The Murph while living there during their brief evacuation. Fearing another New Orleans Superdome debacle, local government leaders were astounded at the evacuees' orderly entrance and exit. "It's almost as if they actually cared about the stadium and each other, " one official anonomously commented.
Thankfully, there was minimal loss of life, despite the tremendous damage done to all of the homes and businesses. The firefighters and rescue workers deserve our thanks for a great job done in the worst of circumstances.
One club member was overheard commenting on how angry she was that her GMC Yukon was "covered in ash while I was attending my yoga class in Fallbrook."
In other news, San Diegoans managed not to vandalize any portion of The Murph while living there during their brief evacuation. Fearing another New Orleans Superdome debacle, local government leaders were astounded at the evacuees' orderly entrance and exit. "It's almost as if they actually cared about the stadium and each other, " one official anonomously commented.
Thankfully, there was minimal loss of life, despite the tremendous damage done to all of the homes and businesses. The firefighters and rescue workers deserve our thanks for a great job done in the worst of circumstances.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Fuzzy Math and Killer Technology
Greetings, readers. Please enjoy some random observations from your friendly blogger regarding recent news items....
Everyone not living in a cave the last month is probably aware of the timely demise of Saddam Hussein, the world's favorite dictator and a cause celebre for the political left. Given a long drop with a short stop while wearing a rope necklace, he departed this world to enjoy his 72 virgins, although I suspect it will be difficult to enjoy himself in the 15,000 degree Fahrenheit environs of his particular paradise.
Having a somewhat morbid curiosity on the technical details of death by hanging, I did some research and discovered the actual manual designed by the U. S. Army to execute condemned prisoners by this method. Isn't Google awesome? Taking into account the design of the gallows and the convict's height and weight, executioners use a mathematical formula to make the hanging as "efficient" as possible. Some guys goofing off in their college physics class had too much time on their hands. Regardless, I suppose those who've benefited from this precise math probably are grateful for the precise calculations. Well, at least briefly grateful.
Hussein's other co-defendants were also hanged the other day. Barzan Ibrahim, Saddam's half-brother would not be counted among the aforementioned grateful condemned. Someone on the execution team must have made a slight (??) error in his "death calculation." As a result, when Barzan's trip south suddenly stopped, he must have traveled too far and was unfortunately decapitated. Ouch...that's going to leave a bruise. Evidently, if the drop is too short, the poor victim can suffocate slowly. A drop that's too long can behead the person being hanged. It's good to see the math checks on this one. I remember the kidnap victims in the past brutally beheaded with swords by terrorists. They didn't have the luxury of a miscalculated drop. Let's not forget with whom we're dealing.
Some final thoughts on a story I saw yesterday. Some pitiful shlub set himself on fire in his hotel room because his cell phone malfunctioned. Sustaining second- and third-degree burns to his body, the man is fortunately in stable condition following the incident. Compounding the injuries was the fact that the victim was wearing nylon and polyester clothing. A uniform of some type, one would hope. Or perhaps he was attending a leisure suit reunion party. Whatever the reason for this sartorial disaster, his room sustained $75,000 in damages. The good news -- both his and the hotel's insurance will cover the losses. The bad news -- he still has to pay the $175 early termination fee. You just can't win anymore these days. I hope he has a full and speedy recovery.
Everyone not living in a cave the last month is probably aware of the timely demise of Saddam Hussein, the world's favorite dictator and a cause celebre for the political left. Given a long drop with a short stop while wearing a rope necklace, he departed this world to enjoy his 72 virgins, although I suspect it will be difficult to enjoy himself in the 15,000 degree Fahrenheit environs of his particular paradise.
Having a somewhat morbid curiosity on the technical details of death by hanging, I did some research and discovered the actual manual designed by the U. S. Army to execute condemned prisoners by this method. Isn't Google awesome? Taking into account the design of the gallows and the convict's height and weight, executioners use a mathematical formula to make the hanging as "efficient" as possible. Some guys goofing off in their college physics class had too much time on their hands. Regardless, I suppose those who've benefited from this precise math probably are grateful for the precise calculations. Well, at least briefly grateful.
Hussein's other co-defendants were also hanged the other day. Barzan Ibrahim, Saddam's half-brother would not be counted among the aforementioned grateful condemned. Someone on the execution team must have made a slight (??) error in his "death calculation." As a result, when Barzan's trip south suddenly stopped, he must have traveled too far and was unfortunately decapitated. Ouch...that's going to leave a bruise. Evidently, if the drop is too short, the poor victim can suffocate slowly. A drop that's too long can behead the person being hanged. It's good to see the math checks on this one. I remember the kidnap victims in the past brutally beheaded with swords by terrorists. They didn't have the luxury of a miscalculated drop. Let's not forget with whom we're dealing.
Some final thoughts on a story I saw yesterday. Some pitiful shlub set himself on fire in his hotel room because his cell phone malfunctioned. Sustaining second- and third-degree burns to his body, the man is fortunately in stable condition following the incident. Compounding the injuries was the fact that the victim was wearing nylon and polyester clothing. A uniform of some type, one would hope. Or perhaps he was attending a leisure suit reunion party. Whatever the reason for this sartorial disaster, his room sustained $75,000 in damages. The good news -- both his and the hotel's insurance will cover the losses. The bad news -- he still has to pay the $175 early termination fee. You just can't win anymore these days. I hope he has a full and speedy recovery.
Friday, December 15, 2006
The Courts Get One Right
In what has to be one of the soundest decisions from the judicial system in recent months, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that descendents of slaves do not deserve reparations from U.S. companies, including banks, insurers, and transportation firms. This case should have been dismissed in its infancy on the lack of merit alone, but thankfully, the lower court and the appeals court both agreed the plaintiffs had no standing to sue any of the defendants.
The reparations argument has existed for years, with descendents claiming injury from products and services made by companies that had any interest in slavery or had previously benefited from it in the past. This is an absurd contention. Any injuries suffered by these individuals were figments of their own greedy imaginations. This is no different from sham mass tort litigation. Citing expired statues of limitations, the lower court correctly held reparations to be a political issue rather than a legal one, and subsequently the judge dismissed all claims. On appeal, the plaintiffs’ claims were again bounced out based on the same conclusions.
Reparations claims are nothing more than an attempt to rip off companies based on some ridiculous historical basis. So what if JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, and Aetna profited from slavery? It’s been 140 years since the end of the Civil War. If slaves’ families wanted redress, the time to sue and recover from any company earning profits from slavery related operations was in 1865. Allowing nearly a century and a half to pass before deciding to seek legal recourse effectively barred these descendents from pursuing their cases, and the courts agreed. “Statutes of limitations would be toothless if descendents could collect damages for wrongs against their ancestors,” cited Judge Posner of the 7th Circuit. No honest descendent of a slave could look me in the eye and expect me to believe they’ve suffered some wrong requiring repayment and maintain any credibility whatsoever. Reparations are just an extension of government-sponsored entitlement programs taken to the absurd while trying to extort funds from reputable corporations.
Kudos to the courts for showing what reparations really are – fraud, pure and simple, and hooray for the companies who decided to fight rather than settle, which is most likely what the plaintiffs’ lawyers were hoping for when they took these cases. Pending another appeal, all that’s left now is for the Supreme Court to deny writ of certiorari, and we can put this issue in the trash bin of history where it belongs.
The reparations argument has existed for years, with descendents claiming injury from products and services made by companies that had any interest in slavery or had previously benefited from it in the past. This is an absurd contention. Any injuries suffered by these individuals were figments of their own greedy imaginations. This is no different from sham mass tort litigation. Citing expired statues of limitations, the lower court correctly held reparations to be a political issue rather than a legal one, and subsequently the judge dismissed all claims. On appeal, the plaintiffs’ claims were again bounced out based on the same conclusions.
Reparations claims are nothing more than an attempt to rip off companies based on some ridiculous historical basis. So what if JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, and Aetna profited from slavery? It’s been 140 years since the end of the Civil War. If slaves’ families wanted redress, the time to sue and recover from any company earning profits from slavery related operations was in 1865. Allowing nearly a century and a half to pass before deciding to seek legal recourse effectively barred these descendents from pursuing their cases, and the courts agreed. “Statutes of limitations would be toothless if descendents could collect damages for wrongs against their ancestors,” cited Judge Posner of the 7th Circuit. No honest descendent of a slave could look me in the eye and expect me to believe they’ve suffered some wrong requiring repayment and maintain any credibility whatsoever. Reparations are just an extension of government-sponsored entitlement programs taken to the absurd while trying to extort funds from reputable corporations.
Kudos to the courts for showing what reparations really are – fraud, pure and simple, and hooray for the companies who decided to fight rather than settle, which is most likely what the plaintiffs’ lawyers were hoping for when they took these cases. Pending another appeal, all that’s left now is for the Supreme Court to deny writ of certiorari, and we can put this issue in the trash bin of history where it belongs.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Our Own Neville Chamberlain
Once again, Sen. John Kerry is leading the appeasement lobby for the Middle East. According to the failed presidential candidate, "I think it's important to talk...but you don't give up your principles and you don't make deals that are against your larger interest." The talk in this instance is referring to those most pro-American of countries, Syria and Iran. Yes, Iran -- the same Iran who'd rather lob a nuke at Israel than sit down and "talk" with Jews. What exactly is he proposing we discuss with Mr. Whackjob? How the U.S. could completely sell out our only true ally in the region, or how about preventing Israel from participating in the Iraq Study Group's recommendations? Wow, those both seem like great suggestions to me. What I don’t hear is anything substantive coming from Senator Kerry, but then again, that’s no different from the entire 2004 presidential campaign. Democrats are quick to criticize, yet scared or unable to provide any concrete plans, other than say we need a new direction. Is the situation in Iraq a losing cause? It is if the administration fails to implement strategies leading to victory but instead opts for short-term solutions.
Kerry’s remarks come on the heels of Kofi Annan’s comments echoing the same sentiments. "Bush should talk to these two [Iraq and Syria] countries," the UN chief said to France Radio International (anyone else snickering now?), "but I have no idea about what form the discussion will take." That’s akin to a marriage counselor accepting a warring couple as clients, then telling them they’ll have to choose how they want to communicate during therapy. It’s amazing the UN accomplished anything productive the last 10 years with that kind of decisive leadership. Kind of leaves you scratching your head, doesn’t it? Given the UN’s track record in recent years, there’s nowhere to go but up with the new Secretary-General.
All this posturing lends credence to the liberals’ theory that the word is always mightier than the sword. I’m not advocating another Operation Rolling Thunder, but I think it’s pretty clear that America is not going to be able to talk its way out of the Iraq "situation." Trying to negotiate with opponents who are either overt (Iran) or covert (Syria) antagonists is not going to work. The U.S. is the Great Satan to these people. Read the Koran; it’s convert or die, and there is no middle ground. The appeasers from the American left are consistent in their assumption that we bring our own woes upon us and it’s up to the government to show the world we can change, admit our faults, and play nice. The machismo inherent in Islam regards weakness as behavior to be reviled. They understand strength, and expect as much in confrontations. With a new political party in power, I hope the Democrats recognize the same and move to protect America’s interests. Theodore Roosevelt’s big stick and soft speech would serve well in these times.
Kerry’s remarks come on the heels of Kofi Annan’s comments echoing the same sentiments. "Bush should talk to these two [Iraq and Syria] countries," the UN chief said to France Radio International (anyone else snickering now?), "but I have no idea about what form the discussion will take." That’s akin to a marriage counselor accepting a warring couple as clients, then telling them they’ll have to choose how they want to communicate during therapy. It’s amazing the UN accomplished anything productive the last 10 years with that kind of decisive leadership. Kind of leaves you scratching your head, doesn’t it? Given the UN’s track record in recent years, there’s nowhere to go but up with the new Secretary-General.
All this posturing lends credence to the liberals’ theory that the word is always mightier than the sword. I’m not advocating another Operation Rolling Thunder, but I think it’s pretty clear that America is not going to be able to talk its way out of the Iraq "situation." Trying to negotiate with opponents who are either overt (Iran) or covert (Syria) antagonists is not going to work. The U.S. is the Great Satan to these people. Read the Koran; it’s convert or die, and there is no middle ground. The appeasers from the American left are consistent in their assumption that we bring our own woes upon us and it’s up to the government to show the world we can change, admit our faults, and play nice. The machismo inherent in Islam regards weakness as behavior to be reviled. They understand strength, and expect as much in confrontations. With a new political party in power, I hope the Democrats recognize the same and move to protect America’s interests. Theodore Roosevelt’s big stick and soft speech would serve well in these times.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Global Warming Is Ruining Sports...
Recently, World Cup Skiing leaders and athletes have been bemoaning the cancellation of several competition events due to a lack of snow. You've read my title -- you know who their usual suspect is: global warming. Yes, this insidious geographic menace is now threatening the livelihood of the world's best snow skiers. According to SignonSanDiego.com, "The season-opening races in Soelden, Austria, in October were wiped out because of heavy rain, and the women's events set for St. Moritz, Switzerland, on Dec. 9-10 were canceled because of lack of snow and warm temperatures. The men's races in Val d'Isere, France, on the same weekend were scrapped on Wednesday." That's right, San Diego, the mecca of U.S. downhillers and giant slalom skiers. What's next, the Prague outlook for west coast surfing?
Something caused this aberrant weather. Hmmm, what could it be? My guess is that October, while perhaps a historically cold month in Europe, is a FALL month. So is December 9th, according to my calendar. Why not wait until winter? Blaming global warming for the canceled fall events would be like the New Delhi Cricket Association scheduling the championships during a monsoon month and blaming the weather for matches that get rained out. I confess this is a rather simplistic way of looking at this issue, but I have to draw the line somewhere. Besides, World Cup skiing probably has a smaller American audience than the ESPN Dominoes Championships anyway. No one watches skiing unless the Olympics are on, and that's only if the curling matches aren't televised. Also, there's no ball involved in skiing, and therefore (if I am paraphrasing George Carlin correctly), skiing isn't a sport but instead is an activity. Hey, he said it, not me.
What I don't intend to do is debate the pros and cons of global warming, or even if it actually exists. Al Gore claims it's the biggest threat to our national (ok, world) existence. His former boss echoed the same sentiment. What a convenient truth for them. Call me crazy, but I'll take World Terrorism for $400 Alex. I'm truly more afraid of some fanatic wearing a Dior dynamite vest (as opposed to a dynamite Dior vest...) ruining my day while I'm Christmas shopping at the mall than I am of an iceberg that's 6% smaller than a year ago. That's the world I live in, and Al can join me if he wants.
I just can't stand by and let the environmentalists use the global warming argument in sports as a way to make it more acceptable. I'm waiting for Yogi Berra to say something about climactic change. It's sure to be more believable than anything I've heard so far.
Something caused this aberrant weather. Hmmm, what could it be? My guess is that October, while perhaps a historically cold month in Europe, is a FALL month. So is December 9th, according to my calendar. Why not wait until winter? Blaming global warming for the canceled fall events would be like the New Delhi Cricket Association scheduling the championships during a monsoon month and blaming the weather for matches that get rained out. I confess this is a rather simplistic way of looking at this issue, but I have to draw the line somewhere. Besides, World Cup skiing probably has a smaller American audience than the ESPN Dominoes Championships anyway. No one watches skiing unless the Olympics are on, and that's only if the curling matches aren't televised. Also, there's no ball involved in skiing, and therefore (if I am paraphrasing George Carlin correctly), skiing isn't a sport but instead is an activity. Hey, he said it, not me.
What I don't intend to do is debate the pros and cons of global warming, or even if it actually exists. Al Gore claims it's the biggest threat to our national (ok, world) existence. His former boss echoed the same sentiment. What a convenient truth for them. Call me crazy, but I'll take World Terrorism for $400 Alex. I'm truly more afraid of some fanatic wearing a Dior dynamite vest (as opposed to a dynamite Dior vest...) ruining my day while I'm Christmas shopping at the mall than I am of an iceberg that's 6% smaller than a year ago. That's the world I live in, and Al can join me if he wants.
I just can't stand by and let the environmentalists use the global warming argument in sports as a way to make it more acceptable. I'm waiting for Yogi Berra to say something about climactic change. It's sure to be more believable than anything I've heard so far.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Dems Win with "We're Not Them" - A New Plan
It is amazing how a national party can capture a congressional majority with no unified platform. Does anyone know what the Democrats advocated, other than, "We hate Bush," or "Hey, we aren't the Republicans, so vote for us!"? Granted the self-professed moderates in America handed the Pelosi-ites this election after sending the majority the clear message that whatever the Republicans were doing, it wasn't effective. I can't argue with that. If a party can win with that kind of strategy, more power to them, I guess. Personally, I vote for something or someone rather than against something or someone.
Repubs in late October, sensing the ship was sinking, distanced themselves from Bush (see Charlie Crist, FL), the war, and any appearance of being labeled "right wing" and tried to hold onto their seats. Many conservative pundits rightly point out that many new congressional delegates are "right of center" or outright conservative on several key issues like abortion and gun control (Heath Shuler, NC-11). Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha's jobs now will be to make sure there are no "maverick" House Democrats so they can push ahead with their leftist agenda. If you think the coming majority is going to be centrist, you've bought the Democrats' election rhetoric or you're standing in line to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
So, what do we poor, downtrodden conservatives do now? I'd like to propose my own platform, although a few of these ideas have been around for some time:
(1) Streamline the Cabinet and Executive Branch, starting with eliminating the Department of Education. Maybe Labor too...
(2) Enact the Fair Tax. Do yourself a favor -- read this book!
(3) Enact enforceable immigration reform legislation, or enforce what we have now. No social security benefits for illegals, and no automatic citizenship for babies born to illegals. Contribute to our economy, but legally, please.
(4) Enact term limits. Half the problem are the "legislators for life" in Congress now, many believing their seat is some kind of birthright (Kennedy). Perhaps 4 to 5 terms in the House and no more than 3 terms as a Senator.
(5) Cut funding to Third World nations who don't deserve our largesse or are ungrateful for the assistance we do give them.
(6) Tell the United Nations to start looking for new real estate and force other nations to foot the bill for this ineffective institution. The U.N. has its place in the world community, it just needs to be somewhere else.
(7) Enact tort reform, and while we're at it, keep judges from legislating from the bench by prohibiting or limiting the courts' jurisdictions.
(8) Dump affirmative action. It's really discriminatory and negates the achievements of minority classes.
That's enough for now. I don't expect to actually hear some politician mouth these ideas in public, but a conservative can dream, right?
Repubs in late October, sensing the ship was sinking, distanced themselves from Bush (see Charlie Crist, FL), the war, and any appearance of being labeled "right wing" and tried to hold onto their seats. Many conservative pundits rightly point out that many new congressional delegates are "right of center" or outright conservative on several key issues like abortion and gun control (Heath Shuler, NC-11). Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha's jobs now will be to make sure there are no "maverick" House Democrats so they can push ahead with their leftist agenda. If you think the coming majority is going to be centrist, you've bought the Democrats' election rhetoric or you're standing in line to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
So, what do we poor, downtrodden conservatives do now? I'd like to propose my own platform, although a few of these ideas have been around for some time:
(1) Streamline the Cabinet and Executive Branch, starting with eliminating the Department of Education. Maybe Labor too...
(2) Enact the Fair Tax. Do yourself a favor -- read this book!
(3) Enact enforceable immigration reform legislation, or enforce what we have now. No social security benefits for illegals, and no automatic citizenship for babies born to illegals. Contribute to our economy, but legally, please.
(4) Enact term limits. Half the problem are the "legislators for life" in Congress now, many believing their seat is some kind of birthright (Kennedy). Perhaps 4 to 5 terms in the House and no more than 3 terms as a Senator.
(5) Cut funding to Third World nations who don't deserve our largesse or are ungrateful for the assistance we do give them.
(6) Tell the United Nations to start looking for new real estate and force other nations to foot the bill for this ineffective institution. The U.N. has its place in the world community, it just needs to be somewhere else.
(7) Enact tort reform, and while we're at it, keep judges from legislating from the bench by prohibiting or limiting the courts' jurisdictions.
(8) Dump affirmative action. It's really discriminatory and negates the achievements of minority classes.
That's enough for now. I don't expect to actually hear some politician mouth these ideas in public, but a conservative can dream, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)