Peace, Love, and the 2nd Amendment,
St00bert
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
Chairman Oba-Mao At It Again
So our peerless leader has decided that being just like everyone else is OK now.
W. did it 170 times, Slick Willy did it over 140 times; recess appointments. Recess appointments are a cowardly way to get appointees to certain positions in government through, without congressional approval. George W and Willy did it mostly with low importance positions, though. Chairman Oba-Mao has done it in a much more blatant (big surprise), and underhanded way, ignoring at least two huge elephants in the room.
First and foremost; doesn't appointing TWO UNION LAWYERS to the National Labor Relations Board sound alot like conflict of interest? Nothing like making absolutely sure unions get the upper hand in every aspect of negotiation, election, and organization. The problem here is that unions no longer serve a valid purpose. The one and only goal of forming and maintaining a union nowdays, is to get more for less; more money and benefits, for less work. Unfortunately, stupid union people don't get that if the companies they work for keep giving and giving and giving, there will soon be no company to work for... GET IT MORONS? Maybe if we still had child labor problems and sweat shops & slave labor were still running amok, we could use the unions; but they have become nothing more than greed machines.
Second, the Chairman made many promises about doing things differently. Change You Can Believe In, wasn't it? Yet, back-alley deals, old British Parliamentary tricks, and "Congress is away so I can play" are the only ways all of this socialism can get forced down our throats. Doesn't sound like ANYTHING I believe in. Mr. Oba-Mao can pretend that the Republicans are blocking his nominees out of spite, or grandstanding, or whatever; but the fact is that none of his nominees so far has been palatable to the American public... Sorta like his health care plan. So maybe these nominees are being blocked because they are bad choices... Sorta like his health care plan. Less partisan politics? Nope, he and Comrade Pelosi - even with a super majority - had to resort to thumbing their noses at the Repubs and some of their own to get Commie-Care through. The article I linked to above is about the fourth I've seen recently that has mentioned the Chairman "Scolding the GOP". Doesn't sound very nonpartisan, does it?
There are three houses of our government for a reason; so that no one of those can become too powerful. Yet somehow, the Chairman has UNILATERALLY passed health care reform we didn't want, put in place appointees we didn't want, passed a meaningless jobs bill (bet ya missed that one), and bailed out a bunch of companies we didn't want to bail out. Oh, don't let me forget taking over GM & Chrysler, and GIVING them to the union (UAW)... Illegally, by the way - as was the passage of the health care bill (10th Amendment, anyone?)
It's so funny that Oba-Mao got elected partly because many morons believed the "George W is trampling all over your rights" line that was sold by the Dems and media. Now, you are losing them at an alarming rate. Individuality is being systematically extinguished. The free market, and therefore innovation and entreprenurialism, are being wiped out with each stroke of the Chairman's 42 pens; of course, regardless of the Constitution, whether there are enough votes for it, or if anyone even wants it.
Look back through history people.Lenin, Castro, Tito, and the Ayatollahs all came to power promising "Power to the People", and "Take from the rich, to give to the poor". They all started out taking small bites out of their peoples' freedoms; "We have to take this from you for the good of all..." Sound familiar? They all ended up as Police-States, where only the elite and "Good Party Members" had anything resembling a decent life. Oh, and other than the Ayatollahs (who have oil), they have all ended up FLAT BROKE.
Look where Socialism has taken other countries, if you want to see where we are headed... It ain't pretty.
Peace, Love, and The Siberian Express
St00bert
W. did it 170 times, Slick Willy did it over 140 times; recess appointments. Recess appointments are a cowardly way to get appointees to certain positions in government through, without congressional approval. George W and Willy did it mostly with low importance positions, though. Chairman Oba-Mao has done it in a much more blatant (big surprise), and underhanded way, ignoring at least two huge elephants in the room.
First and foremost; doesn't appointing TWO UNION LAWYERS to the National Labor Relations Board sound alot like conflict of interest? Nothing like making absolutely sure unions get the upper hand in every aspect of negotiation, election, and organization. The problem here is that unions no longer serve a valid purpose. The one and only goal of forming and maintaining a union nowdays, is to get more for less; more money and benefits, for less work. Unfortunately, stupid union people don't get that if the companies they work for keep giving and giving and giving, there will soon be no company to work for... GET IT MORONS? Maybe if we still had child labor problems and sweat shops & slave labor were still running amok, we could use the unions; but they have become nothing more than greed machines.
Second, the Chairman made many promises about doing things differently. Change You Can Believe In, wasn't it? Yet, back-alley deals, old British Parliamentary tricks, and "Congress is away so I can play" are the only ways all of this socialism can get forced down our throats. Doesn't sound like ANYTHING I believe in. Mr. Oba-Mao can pretend that the Republicans are blocking his nominees out of spite, or grandstanding, or whatever; but the fact is that none of his nominees so far has been palatable to the American public... Sorta like his health care plan. So maybe these nominees are being blocked because they are bad choices... Sorta like his health care plan. Less partisan politics? Nope, he and Comrade Pelosi - even with a super majority - had to resort to thumbing their noses at the Repubs and some of their own to get Commie-Care through. The article I linked to above is about the fourth I've seen recently that has mentioned the Chairman "Scolding the GOP". Doesn't sound very nonpartisan, does it?
There are three houses of our government for a reason; so that no one of those can become too powerful. Yet somehow, the Chairman has UNILATERALLY passed health care reform we didn't want, put in place appointees we didn't want, passed a meaningless jobs bill (bet ya missed that one), and bailed out a bunch of companies we didn't want to bail out. Oh, don't let me forget taking over GM & Chrysler, and GIVING them to the union (UAW)... Illegally, by the way - as was the passage of the health care bill (10th Amendment, anyone?)
It's so funny that Oba-Mao got elected partly because many morons believed the "George W is trampling all over your rights" line that was sold by the Dems and media. Now, you are losing them at an alarming rate. Individuality is being systematically extinguished. The free market, and therefore innovation and entreprenurialism, are being wiped out with each stroke of the Chairman's 42 pens; of course, regardless of the Constitution, whether there are enough votes for it, or if anyone even wants it.
Look back through history people.Lenin, Castro, Tito, and the Ayatollahs all came to power promising "Power to the People", and "Take from the rich, to give to the poor". They all started out taking small bites out of their peoples' freedoms; "We have to take this from you for the good of all..." Sound familiar? They all ended up as Police-States, where only the elite and "Good Party Members" had anything resembling a decent life. Oh, and other than the Ayatollahs (who have oil), they have all ended up FLAT BROKE.
Look where Socialism has taken other countries, if you want to see where we are headed... It ain't pretty.
Peace, Love, and The Siberian Express
St00bert
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
OH, GOODY...
Well, I hope all you liberal - "Change You Can Believe In" - fruitcakes are happy.
Oh goody - ANOTHER TRILLION DOLLARS to programs I pay for, and don't get to use, because I WORK for a living. That, of course, is on top of the 4 Trillion in bank and GM/Chrysler bailouts... The latter of which by the way, were both illegal.
Oh goody - Another beat-down of the Constitution by the "Commie-Care at any cost" Dems. Ummm... The STATES - BY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - are the governing bodies that are supposed to administer any government run/funded health care programs; look it up. The Dems' "Interstate Commerce" umbrella is plain and simple horse-crap. Do you go to a doctor or hospital out-of-state? MAYYYYYBE if you are on vacation or a business trip, otherwise you do just like me, and go to the Doc right down the street. This is why many State DA's are considering suing the Federal Government to stop Commie-Care from taking hold in their states.
Oh goody - more bullsh!# about how this will lower my premiums. Ummm... Look at auto insurance rates after states started mandating that type of coverage (which BTW, is legal, get it?). Also, when my boss has to start paying WAY higher taxes, and insurance rates; do you think he will just eat those costs? Uhhh... Hell No?
Oh goody - Even more bullsh!# about how my taxes won't go up. Ummm... Rich folks are rich for a reason... They know all the loopholes, and tricks of the trade to NOT pay higher taxes. So when that money never starts rolling in, who is gonna end up paying? Oh yeah... Me again.
Oh goody - our "Representatives" have turned into our masters. Yes, lets use long-thought-dead parliamentary tricks from the days of British Rule to pass wildly unpopular legislation. Why? Because they do not wish to represent, they wish to rule. And must our rulers live by the same code? Nope. They opted THEMSELVES out of this plan... Hmmm, why would they do that? Oh yeah, because they're perfectly happy to let US pay for THEIR Cadillac health plan, but if your boss offers you one, they're gonna tax the Hell out of it. Some underhandedness to go with your hypocrisy, Madam Speaker?
I hope all you Obamaniacal fruitcakes are reading carefully; YOU WILL REGRET NOVEMBER 4, 2008. When you are paying 40% or higher income tax (thats just the Feds), and waiting so long to see a mediocre physician, that whatever you had or did, is gone or permanently screwed, and fumbling all over looking for your National ID card, or... I could go on, but I'll leave you with this:
Instead of believing everything Katie Couric and Brian Williams tell you, do some research. Look back in History; find the periods of greatest governmental involvement in our lives. Find the periods with the largest government programs and tax increases. I could tell you that you will find them to be the most socio-economically challenging periods in our history, but that would just be me saying it. Look for yourself, if you think you can handle what truly is, instead of what "Mr. Hope" sold you a couple years ago.
Peace, Love, and Cold Hard Facts
St00bert
Oh goody - ANOTHER TRILLION DOLLARS to programs I pay for, and don't get to use, because I WORK for a living. That, of course, is on top of the 4 Trillion in bank and GM/Chrysler bailouts... The latter of which by the way, were both illegal.
Oh goody - Another beat-down of the Constitution by the "Commie-Care at any cost" Dems. Ummm... The STATES - BY CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - are the governing bodies that are supposed to administer any government run/funded health care programs; look it up. The Dems' "Interstate Commerce" umbrella is plain and simple horse-crap. Do you go to a doctor or hospital out-of-state? MAYYYYYBE if you are on vacation or a business trip, otherwise you do just like me, and go to the Doc right down the street. This is why many State DA's are considering suing the Federal Government to stop Commie-Care from taking hold in their states.
Oh goody - more bullsh!# about how this will lower my premiums. Ummm... Look at auto insurance rates after states started mandating that type of coverage (which BTW, is legal, get it?). Also, when my boss has to start paying WAY higher taxes, and insurance rates; do you think he will just eat those costs? Uhhh... Hell No?
Oh goody - Even more bullsh!# about how my taxes won't go up. Ummm... Rich folks are rich for a reason... They know all the loopholes, and tricks of the trade to NOT pay higher taxes. So when that money never starts rolling in, who is gonna end up paying? Oh yeah... Me again.
Oh goody - our "Representatives" have turned into our masters. Yes, lets use long-thought-dead parliamentary tricks from the days of British Rule to pass wildly unpopular legislation. Why? Because they do not wish to represent, they wish to rule. And must our rulers live by the same code? Nope. They opted THEMSELVES out of this plan... Hmmm, why would they do that? Oh yeah, because they're perfectly happy to let US pay for THEIR Cadillac health plan, but if your boss offers you one, they're gonna tax the Hell out of it. Some underhandedness to go with your hypocrisy, Madam Speaker?
I hope all you Obamaniacal fruitcakes are reading carefully; YOU WILL REGRET NOVEMBER 4, 2008. When you are paying 40% or higher income tax (thats just the Feds), and waiting so long to see a mediocre physician, that whatever you had or did, is gone or permanently screwed, and fumbling all over looking for your National ID card, or... I could go on, but I'll leave you with this:
Instead of believing everything Katie Couric and Brian Williams tell you, do some research. Look back in History; find the periods of greatest governmental involvement in our lives. Find the periods with the largest government programs and tax increases. I could tell you that you will find them to be the most socio-economically challenging periods in our history, but that would just be me saying it. Look for yourself, if you think you can handle what truly is, instead of what "Mr. Hope" sold you a couple years ago.
Peace, Love, and Cold Hard Facts
St00bert
Monday, February 08, 2010
Where the Hell are my pants..?
No deep political views here... Just my guess as to the most spoken phrase on the morning of February 8, 2010, in New Orleans Louisiana.
Who Dat Nation, enjoy.
Peace, Love, and "What's a Southern Hurricane..?"
St00bert
Who Dat Nation, enjoy.
Peace, Love, and "What's a Southern Hurricane..?"
St00bert
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
What Are You Afraid Of?
I want to start this out with a little secret about me... I love women. I know, shocking. But I do not mean I love women as in "I still have the 1970s Farrah poster..." - I respond better to women at work, at home, out on the town, where and whenever. Most of my friends are women, mostly because most of my friends are my wife's friends... I am a Badger, transplanted to the Flatlands you know.
Don't get me wrong, if a woman is a bitch, I do not like her. If she's a cheatin' Ho-Bag who treats a good man like dirt, I could probably watch as she got run down by a bus... But I digress.
So it pains me greatly to see a good woman, especially a friend, hurting because she can't find a man who can - or will - put as much into a relationship (or an attempt at a relationship) as she does.
I have such a friend. She is beautiful, smart, funny, adventurous, and when she loves someone, she does so without limitation. She will put everything out there, on her sleeve, even though it exposes her to being hurt. The unforunate thing is, her men have been happy to let her do all the emotional work, without acceptable return on investment.
I don't get it guys... What are you afraid of? It has to be fear. In her current Beau's case, I have to surmise that he is a "Bro"... Not the '70s slang for an African American male friend, but the popped collar, Birkenstocks and khaki cargo shorts, upside-down and backwards visor, Natty Ice-Drinkin' Bro. She says no, but I think he (being in his 30s now) has gone Bro-in-Cognito. Still too concerned about hangin' with his group of Bros, he fears putting out too much emotional investment will make him look weak to the guys. Also, my friend is in her early 40s, so I am pretty sure he fears missing out on a younger, seemingly hotter chick. Listen Chief, if you haven't sowed all those wild oats by 30 or so, you have deeper issues than I care to get into.
Other guys may be afraid they can't keep up that kind of emotional end-of-the-bargain. Then you're just lazy, all she needs is 100%. You don't have to manufacture any, just give what you got. You don't have to act, jump through hoops, or hold back... What's so tough?
The old "fear of commitment" thing is just a guy's way of saying: "It's all about me, and my quest for Halle Berry". Well, Halle's busy, and self-important people get what's coming to them; just ask Bernie Madhoff, or Charlie Sheen.
I know, you're afraid of rejection. You go ahead and put out your fair share of emotional investment, and it doesn't work out... WELL, BOO-FRICKETY-HOO. Sometimes that happens... As a matter of fact, it probably WILL happen. So saving it up is doing you no good; you're gonna get hurt, tough guy... Deal with it.
Some - even other women - will say my friend should hold back, not leave herself open like that.
WHY SHOULD SHE? Why should anyone have to supress the single greatest thing we have to offer one another? Maybe all you closed-off, hearts-in-shackles cynics should let go once in a while. Let yourself feel that Puppy-Love rush; whatsamatter, are you too "grown-up" to feel like that anymore?
Maybe some of you are latent homosexuals... My friend is not hard on the eyes, and she likes the physical part of love, too... But you'd rather stay home - alone - WATCHING SNL? You sir, are either ultimately stupid, or you have a vast array of Judy Garland collectibles and dust ruffles. Which is it..? Well, we're waiting...
Here is my advice to all my brothers and sisters - Don't look for a woman/man who you think will make you happy; look for the woman/man who you want to make happy, because it makes you happy to see her/him happy... Get it? It's a good kind of vicious cycle.
And guys, if you meet my friend, and the sparks start to fly - prepare to be blown away, and don't be afraid to return the favor.
Peace, Love, and... Well... Love
St00bert
Don't get me wrong, if a woman is a bitch, I do not like her. If she's a cheatin' Ho-Bag who treats a good man like dirt, I could probably watch as she got run down by a bus... But I digress.
So it pains me greatly to see a good woman, especially a friend, hurting because she can't find a man who can - or will - put as much into a relationship (or an attempt at a relationship) as she does.
I have such a friend. She is beautiful, smart, funny, adventurous, and when she loves someone, she does so without limitation. She will put everything out there, on her sleeve, even though it exposes her to being hurt. The unforunate thing is, her men have been happy to let her do all the emotional work, without acceptable return on investment.
I don't get it guys... What are you afraid of? It has to be fear. In her current Beau's case, I have to surmise that he is a "Bro"... Not the '70s slang for an African American male friend, but the popped collar, Birkenstocks and khaki cargo shorts, upside-down and backwards visor, Natty Ice-Drinkin' Bro. She says no, but I think he (being in his 30s now) has gone Bro-in-Cognito. Still too concerned about hangin' with his group of Bros, he fears putting out too much emotional investment will make him look weak to the guys. Also, my friend is in her early 40s, so I am pretty sure he fears missing out on a younger, seemingly hotter chick. Listen Chief, if you haven't sowed all those wild oats by 30 or so, you have deeper issues than I care to get into.
Other guys may be afraid they can't keep up that kind of emotional end-of-the-bargain. Then you're just lazy, all she needs is 100%. You don't have to manufacture any, just give what you got. You don't have to act, jump through hoops, or hold back... What's so tough?
The old "fear of commitment" thing is just a guy's way of saying: "It's all about me, and my quest for Halle Berry". Well, Halle's busy, and self-important people get what's coming to them; just ask Bernie Madhoff, or Charlie Sheen.
I know, you're afraid of rejection. You go ahead and put out your fair share of emotional investment, and it doesn't work out... WELL, BOO-FRICKETY-HOO. Sometimes that happens... As a matter of fact, it probably WILL happen. So saving it up is doing you no good; you're gonna get hurt, tough guy... Deal with it.
Some - even other women - will say my friend should hold back, not leave herself open like that.
WHY SHOULD SHE? Why should anyone have to supress the single greatest thing we have to offer one another? Maybe all you closed-off, hearts-in-shackles cynics should let go once in a while. Let yourself feel that Puppy-Love rush; whatsamatter, are you too "grown-up" to feel like that anymore?
Maybe some of you are latent homosexuals... My friend is not hard on the eyes, and she likes the physical part of love, too... But you'd rather stay home - alone - WATCHING SNL? You sir, are either ultimately stupid, or you have a vast array of Judy Garland collectibles and dust ruffles. Which is it..? Well, we're waiting...
Here is my advice to all my brothers and sisters - Don't look for a woman/man who you think will make you happy; look for the woman/man who you want to make happy, because it makes you happy to see her/him happy... Get it? It's a good kind of vicious cycle.
And guys, if you meet my friend, and the sparks start to fly - prepare to be blown away, and don't be afraid to return the favor.
Peace, Love, and... Well... Love
St00bert
Monday, January 04, 2010
Pop-Quiz, Hot-Shot...
OK, it's a new year, so we're going to make a new commitment to Common Freaking Sense...
First things first; a little quiz for our ever-ready TSA agents, officers, and officials:
Look at the following photos...
Which airline passenger raises the most suspicion, and should therefore be pulled aside for a thorough strip/body cavity search?
It's OK... Take your time...
Now, which of these carry-on items seems suspicious to you..?
Again, don't rush yourself... it's a toughie, I know.
Alright, no more pictures... Time to really strain the brain.
Q: To whom do we turn a watchful eye..?
a: The two upper middle-class kids coming home for winter break, wearing their {insert favorite College or University here} sweatshirts, laughing about the "Bo-bo-bo-bo bo-bo-bomb" line from "Meet the Parents"
b: The two Middle-Eastern looking 32 year old "college kids"who are wearing baggy {insert favorite camoflage style here} jackets that seem heavy in the pockets, are sweating profusely, and whisper frantically in Arabic every time you walk by
I know, this one might as well get you a free pass to join MENSA, if you get it right.
A quick scenario for Ms. Napolitano:
Say a fella calls you up and says "Hey, my kid is a whack-job. He's been spending alot of time with some people who say they are aligned with Al-Qaeda. They are apparently training him for what he calls his 'call to glory'... I really think he is a danger to others..." Let's just say this caller is a prominent man from, oh I dunno, Nigeria.
Meanwhile, other intelligence agencies are telling you about some kid from, oh I dunno, Nigeria. We'll call him "The Nigerian". This kids been seen training with some real baddies who align themselves with Al-Qaeda. This kid is all about "the cause", even has his prominent Nigerian father a little spooked...
OK Janet, I'll give you five minutes to connect as many of the dots as you can... GO!
{five minutes later}
Alright Jan, one more scenario... Maybe it won't be as confusing as the first one for you.
So, three 9/11 hijackers, "The Nigerian", Major Hasan, and Imam Anwar al Awlaki walk into a bar...
Peace, Love, and Highlights for Children,
St00bert
Saturday, January 02, 2010
In- Defense - Able Update
Mr. Capers,
Did you see how the University of Wisconsin Badger Football Team used the prevent defense when up by two scores? Then went back to pressure D when up by one score? AND WON..?
Please make note of this for future reference.
St00bert
Did you see how the University of Wisconsin Badger Football Team used the prevent defense when up by two scores? Then went back to pressure D when up by one score? AND WON..?
Please make note of this for future reference.
St00bert
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)