Wednesday, November 29, 2006


I see President Shorty of Iran has been reading the Democratic talking points again.

Monday, November 27, 2006

Racists everywhere and all of them are liberals

The daughter of one of my inlaws recently posted an email to the family in which she lamented the presence of evil white men and the regrettable life of women, in general, and black women in particular.

Nevermind that she is white, and all of the men, save one, on that particular board are white men, and all of the women, without exception, are white but not all of them are in terrible straits.

Now, it happens that this troubled young girl posted this email just about the time that Seinfeld's Kramer went off on an allegedly racist rant.

It got me to thinking. What white man in his right mind would, in 2006, ever, ever say anything negative about a black person in public? Nevermind the use of the word "nigger" -- what white man would say anything bad about a black person in public for any reason? It just doesn't happen.

So why did Kramer think it was okay to do it?

Because he's a liberal and he thinks it is obvious to everyone that he is therefore not a racist.

Like all liberals, everything he says has an invisible asterisk at the end. Just like my inlaw who says all white men are evil.*

*Except her liberal white male father, of course, and all the liberal white males who are the exception to this statement. And, of course, she is an exception to every invective hurled against whites not just because she is a woman but also because ISN'T IT OBVIOUS? She is a liberal and liberals can't be racist.

This is why OJ Simpson rocked liberals to the core and was responsible for the last truly liberal thought I ever had. Because, isn't it obvious? He murdered his liberal wife and she deserved justice because she was liberal. It wasn't like she was Michelle Malkin, for God's sake. NICOLE WASN'T A RACIST AND SHE DESERVED JUSTICE!

But, interestingly, I noticed that the blacks on that jury didn't care what Nicole believed or who she was. Like all racists, the blacks on that jury were looking at skin. They were going to save black skin.

Bulletin white folks: Your fine white liberal sensibilities won't help you; won't rescue you. Better watch what you say. Better make sure you don't let yourself get in the hands of blacks on a jury. Better not think you are safe on a stage.

It occurs to me that if you look around the world today you'll see lots of racists, but all of them in the public eye are liberals. And most of them are black.

White racism is damn near unheard of. So rare that one silly comedian with too much liberal confidence can make the news as a racist. And, of course, it is killing him. He spent his life being liberal and now, in just one moment, his skin condemned him. Bad white man. Not liberal enough. There's a racist in there somewhere.

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

If only a human looked like an elephant

One part of the human war on humans is the conviction that killing unborn humans is sacred, but killing unborn animals is wrong somehow. I think they are both wrong, so I am a bad soldier in the war on humans.

Monday, November 20, 2006

Those cute little Iranians!

Meet the Press featured Tim Russert chatting with Ted Koppel and Robin Perky of the Washington Post about those adorable little Iranians.

In this program we learned that Ted, whose special is called "Iran: The most dangerous country," doesn't really think Iranians are dangerous. Indeed, he heard a lot of people chanting Death to America, but Ted and Tim agreed that the chant wasn't sincere and just sounded "robotic." Apparently, in order to be sincere, they have to hum a few bars.

Talk about patronizing. My God. Teddy and Timmy actually chuckled throughout the interview about the cute little Iranians. Can't believe a word they say, apparently. The school kids are taught that America is the great Satan and the like, but those kids aren't really listening! They are yawning! This from two people whose party took control of the public schools and were able to make three generations of children HATE their own country. They ought to know education works.

Also, another thing that Teddy learned in Iran was that Iran wants to be a modern country with nuclear energy (something Teddy and his boys don't want for the U.S. -- you do the math.) They really, really don't want to make a bomb. Of course, if they do want to make a bomb, they really want it just because it will give them stature in the world. A farmer in a field told him that so Ted believed him. Not that he would believe one word such a lowlife would utter from a field in OUR country.

You know, I really hope these dopes are correct. Because if they aren't, those cute little Iranians might do just exactly what they say they are going to do. And that would be kind of scary!

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

A new direction means what?

From the great and powerful Fish-2, this terrific point:

A New Direction For America -- Vote DEMOCRATIC!" Let's analyze this empty and misleading promise.

The stock market is at a new all-time high and America's 401K's are back. A new direction from there means what?

Unemployment is at 25 year lows. A new direction from there means what?

Oil prices are plummeting. A new direction from there means what?

Taxes are at 20 year lows. A new direction from there means what?

Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs. A new direction from there means what?

The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last year.
A new direction from there means what?

Read the rest here.

The twisted dogma of the Church of England

It shouldn't surprise anyone that the Church of England now finds it charitable to kill handicapped babies.

But the question we have to ask is: Would the Church of England approve of killing handicapped babies if it could be proved the babies were gay?

A question for our time.

Friday, November 10, 2006

Kevin Willis on the sudden accuracy
of voting machines

Kevin Willis posted this in blog comments but it was so good I wanted to put it here:

Elections going to the left are seen as evidence that democracy is "working". Elections going to the right are a priori evidence of fraud. I yaked about that before in Democracy Still Works! Thanks,! One of the significant differences (that has both good and bad parts for both sides) between the left and the right is that the Republicans and conservatives don't have the same feeling of entitlement to power that the left does. We don't immediately assume that losing at the ballot box means that there were voter machine problems and fraud, and that a lawsuit is the answer. We generally take responsibility for our losses and sometimes even go overboard blaming ourselves (or our conservative ideology, which I think is wrong, wrong, wrong). But what were major Republicans and conservative pundits doing after Democrats won big? "We lost our way," they said. "We clearly made mistakes." "It's obviously time to re-think our strategies." "We're too disparate, not speaking with a unified voice." And on and on and on.

What were the big Democrats saying after the last several elections in which Dem's repeatedly lost? "Voters were disenfranchised" "The election was rigged" "Voter machines malfunction" "Voter intimidation blamed" "A victory for the Republican noise machine, or just exploiting America's homophobia?" "Republicans are crooks and criminals" and so on. On the plus side, for Dems, any vandalism of campaign headquarters? Any Republican places getting set on fire or having bullets fired in to it, or tire-slashing the day before the election? If not, maybe there's a New Tone in Washington, after all.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Photo from vacation from hell

Here's a shot of Mark Wayne on our vacation from hell. We spent one afternoon at Biltmore in Asheville North Carolina, in the mountains. We spent a lovely day with Mark's cousin Joanne and Jed, the best guitar player, according to Mark. Unfortunately business problems made it somewhat hellish for me, but it was great seeing them anyway.

I say let them try

Frankly, I'm just exhausted after six years of constant complaining from the Democrats, coupled with the most petulant, anti-Christian, anti-American, anti-Western propaganda campaign since the real Reds (the Democrat's communist buds) took on the U.S. after WW2.

It has been the era of the sore loser.

If we have just been foolishly afraid of terrorists behind every rock, as they say, well then let's just hug the little darlings, sing Kumbaya, and hope they play nice. If all we need to do is talk nice to muslims, as the Democrats say, then let's try it.

One good thing about bringing muslims into the political process, is that -- SURPRISE -- Muslims think a lot like I do: They believe in God; don't think obscenity is your absolute right; don't like abortion; and lots of other real conservative things. Like for example, they also believe in capital punishment -- except they want it for homosexuals and rape victims. I wouldn't go that far.The homosexuals might think I, as a rightwing Christian, am their blood enemy, but, hey, it's not me and the Lutherans who want them executed.

But if we were right and the Muslims have started a world war, it seems the only way to get the Democrats to fight back is to let the Democrats decide to do it themselves. This will require some more of our blood but it seems that is the offering the Democrats demand.

In any case, it might well be the only way to unite the country against the new enemy.

In the meantime, the Nation is calling on the Democrat Congress to "Starve the War Beast" and you think the soldiers didn't get enough body armor when the Republicans were in, they'll be fighting with sticks and stones by the time that mob is through with them.

Yes, we suspect that the Democrats will be poor stewards of the country because they don't like the country (always a bad qualification for stewardship.) But -- SHEESH -- I am just really sick of hearing them whine.

I hope they do a good job.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

'You done voted!'

Proof that there is no literacy test for running polling places.

Mark Wayne and I got to the polls earlyish. There was no line. We showed our ids. And there on the voter list was my name with the pronouncement that I voted Absentee.

"You done voted!" proclaimed the genius running the polls.

"I didn't 'done vote,'" I explained, my sarcasm lost on the assembled Democrats running the polling place. "You better check your list."

While she was doing that -- an arduous process that involves reading -- the head Democrat in charge explained:

"They is coming out to fix one of the machines because some tried to vote and they was having trouble."


The assembled poll workers managed to figure out I hadn't 'done voted' and allowed me to do so. Thank God these illiterates don't actually have to count the votes.

Interestingly, the exact same thing, complete with illiterate pronouncements, happened to my coworker.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Does anyone know the name...

... of those really, really expensive sheets that cost like $2,000 a set?

Sunday, November 05, 2006


Sugar wants to come in. But I'm waaay too allergic to cats and my dogs haven't yet adjusted to a cat. In the photo at right, you see Snick taking bites out of the window in an attempt to snack on Sugar.

I've bought a heated cat mat and put it in an old dog house for Sugar and it seems to basically make the dog house heated. So I know the little fella has some place to go that is warm.

But I'm pretty sure he has another family too. Double eating is making Sugar FAT!

Friday, November 03, 2006


Now see this pisses me off. Fox Sports Network ran this profile of Reggie Miller and the show left the distinct impression that Reggie Miller was the constant target of racist, ungrateful Hoosiers who just didn't like his skin color.

For example, the show pretends that Reggie's 2 million home was burned down by "racists". Really? Now, everyone in Indiana thinks Reggie's stupid, evil wife did it. Lots of personal stuff was gone from the house when it burned down. And, somehow, the investigation just never went anywhere.

I think Marita Miller burned down Reggies new house not those fabled Indiana racists. I think Reggie knows it. I think Reggie's sister Cheryl knows it. But Cheryl and Reggie go on television and say there is something wrong with Indiana.


One other thing pisses me off: Reggie's sister Cheryl claims that she just doesn't understand why, since Reggie is such a good freaking businessman, he stayed in stupid Indiana. Bulletin Cheryl: Reggie got to be the THE star here. A legend. You maybe would have preferred that he go to Chicago and stayed under the shadow of Michael Jordan?

It wasn't all one way, sister. Indiana gave a lot to Reggie, just like Reggie gave a lot to Indiana.

You know I used to REALLY love Reggie. But this pisses me off.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

The difficult theological doctrine of the cat on the mat

By Author Unknown

How would the Church of England deal with the statement that "the cat sat on the mat" if it appeared in the Bible?

The liberal theologians would point out that such a passage did not of course mean that the cat literally sat on the mat. Also, cat and mat had different meanings in those days from today, and anyway, the text should be interpreted according to the customs and practices of the period.

This would lead to an immediate backlash from the Evangelicals. They would make it an essential condition of faith that a real physical, living cat, being a domestic pet of the species Domesticus, and having a whiskered head, a furry body, four legs and a tail, did physically place its whole body on a floor covering, designed for that purpose, and which is on the floor but not of the floor. The expression "on the floor but not of the floor" would be explained in a leaflet.

Meanwhile, the Catholics would have developed the Feast of the Sedentation of the Blessed Cat. This would teach that the cat was white, and majestically reclined on a mat of gold thread before its assumption to the Great Cat Basket of Heaven. This is commemorated by singing the "Magnificat" and "Felix namque", lighting three candles, and ringing a bell five times.

This would cause a schism with the Orthodox Church which believes tradition requires Holy Cats Days (as it is colloquially known), to be marked by lighting SIX candles and ringing the bell FOUR times. This would partly be resolved by the Cuckoo Land Declaration recognising the traditional validity of each.

Eventually the House of Bishops would issue a statement on the Doctrine of the Feline Sedentation. It would explain, traditionally the text describes a domestic feline quadruped superjacent to an unattached covering on a fundamental surface. For determining its salvific and eschatological significations, we follow the heuristic analytical principles adopted in dealing with the Canine Fenestration Question (How much is that doggie in the window?) and the Affirmative Musaceous Paradox (Yes, we have no bananas). And so on, for another 210 pages.

The General Synod would then commend this report as helpful resource material for clergy to explain to the man in the pew the difficult doctrine of the cat sat on the mat.

- Author unknown
(HT to the eminent theologian Dr. White)