Thursday, November 30, 2006
Ana Nicolaci da Costa of Reuters has blessed us with a socialist brainfart: Gifts from rich highlight plight of world's poor . Here are just a few of the gems she lays on us:
Analysts say the huge numbers of workers coming into the market through globalization in China and India have driven down wages in rich countries by making their workforce compete with much cheaper labor elsewhere.
At the same time, the upside for wages in poor countries is capped by an infinite pool of labor to choose from.
This helps explain the numbers in the 2005 U.N. Human Development Report, which show the richest 50 individuals in the world have a combined income greater than that of the poorest 416 million and that the unequal distribution of income worsened within many countries in the last 20 years.
First of all Ana, how does driving down wages in rich countries while simultaneously hiring "huge number of workers" in China and India cause the distribution of income to be more unequal? And second of all, where do you get the idea that there is some "cap" on wages in poor countries? Have a look at the Deloitte research report referenced in this article: Rising wages likely to blunt India's BPO edge: Deloitte .
And Ana, in her socialist brilliance, says that economic growth is to blame for the poverty:
Analysts have also said an overriding concern with raw economic growth measures, at the heart of widely accepted business-friendly economic policies, risked widening wealth gaps.
So you think that if we put a brake on economic growth, that will help the poor, right Ana?
The main thing that is holding back the poor of the world are stupid raving moonbats like you, Ana.
Monday, November 27, 2006
My house sits on 11 acres about halfway between Edmond and Guthrie. My Ulster Scot friend Amy suggested that I call the place Rossdhu of Guthrie.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
The word "Liberal" used to mean someone who favored individual liberty and a minimum of government intrusion into people's lives. Now it means someone who favors government control of the economy, restrictions on freedom of speech and religion, government-mandated racial and gender discrimination, and eminent domain expropriation of private property.
Hillary Clinton, Michael Moore, Al Gore, and other moonbats consider themselves "liberals" even though they are about as liberal as the National Socialist German Workers Party. Their use of the word is similar to their use of other Orwellian phrases like "affirmative action".
It's time that those of us who truly believe in liberty take our word back.
The name of the group "People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals" sounds really nice, but like many names it is misleading. PETA are a group of terrorists with ties to even more radical groups including the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). The raving moonbats made another appearance in the news today by threatening a church in Alaska.
Here are just a few of the things that PETA want to do:
(1) Outlaw all medical experimentation and testing of lifesaving drugs on animals
(2) Outlaw keeping animals as pets
(3) Outlaw all fur and leather clothing
(4) Outlaw all hunting and fishing
(5) Outlaw all animal husbandry and consumption of meat
And their ultimate in lunacy came when their president Ingrid Newkirk said she wanted a foot and mouth epidemic here in the USA.
I wonder how many member of PETA are Republicans?
Thursday, November 23, 2006
U.S. Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-Florida) will soon be appointed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to chair the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Hastings was a U.S. District Court judge, nominated by Jimmy Carter. He solicited bribes from mafia hoods in exchange for light sentences. He was impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate in 1988 by near unanimous votes.
For the Democrats to put Hastings in such a sensitive, important position would be perfectly in character for them. The jackass will probably sell intelligence information to the highest bidder, even if it meant the death of U.S. servicemen or civilians.
The Democrats have been claiming that they will fight corruption in Washington, but their track record on the subject is dismal. Remember Whitewater, Hillary's cattle futures trading, the numerous violations of the campaign finance laws, and the sale of pardons? Democrats are only interested in fighting corruption if it concerns Republicans. It's ok if they do it.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Marc Chandler, who claims to be global head of currency strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman and associate professor at NYU, advocates appeasement of the islamofascists in his article An Islamic bond would be a golden opportunity for the US, in yesterday's Financial Times:
The US Treasury should consider issuing a dollar-denominated Islamic bond or sukuk - an act that would signal respect for Islamic law and people and implicitly acknowledge the limitations of military and political strategies.
And here is some of this weasel's rationale behind this ludicrous proposal:
Fund managers in the growing socially responsible investment arena may also be attracted to the high ethical standards that sharia requires.
High ethical standards of sharia? You mean like when they throw a woman in prison or stone her to death because she has been raped? Or when they cut off a baby girl's clitoris with scissors? Or when they ban the practice all other religions, as they do in Saudi Arabia? I would hate to see what this loser Chandler thinks constitute LOW ethical standards.
And by the way, Mark, what about the highest law of the land here in the USA?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Wouldn't this suckup,....er, sukuk be in violation of the First Amendment? Or is sharia more important to you?
Please excuse me, I need to run to the restroom before I vomit all over my keyboard.
Now that the socialists are back in power, we hear that one of the first things they want to do is raise the minimum wage. If some people don't earn enough, all we have to do is have the government force their employers to raise their wages, and voila, no more poverty, right?
The beautiful country of Denmark has one of the highest minimum wages in the world at close to $12 per hour. One of their most popular exports are the Legos toys, which many of us had great fun with in our early years. And now Legos is moving all of their manufacturing to the Czech Republic and Mexico.
So, go ahead Democrats. Raise the minimum wage here in the USA. Raise it high enough, and more American jobs will be outsourced to the third world. Or, more illegal aliens will be hired here in the USA. People who are often willing to work off the books for cash, at wages below the minimum.
But why stop at $12 per hour? Why not make it $100?
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Last week, the voters of Michigan overwhelmingly passed a measure to ban the racist and sexist so-called "affirmative action" programs. And now, of course, the racist scumbags who opposed the measure are trying to get around it, showing once more that the left does NOT believe in democracy.They believe that the opinion of some unelected, racist judges should predominate over the will of the people.
Friday, November 17, 2006
My recent posts about Friedman and Hayek have led me to think again about just how precious and fleeting freedom really is. I am very fortunate to have been born in the USA and to be the benefactor of the genius of the founding fathers in establishing a sound democracy based upon capitalism and individualism.
And we are also fortunate to live in one of the very few countries that does not have a government-run health care system (for the most part). Of course the socialists believe that is a terrible thing but they don't bother to look at one simple fact: Many people throughout the world are trying to move here, and very few Americans want to leave. I recall when the PIAPS tried to institute a national socialist health care system in the USA. Many of the cowards and idiots in Washington were afraid to stand up to her at first, except for Phil Gramm and Richard Armey. But when it became obvious that her plan was completely ludicrous, even her own party rejected it. The Democrats controlled both houses of Congress in 1993 but they never even brought her proposal to a vote. I can just picture one of the first things that will happen if we ever do adopt a socialist health care system. Minorities will be given preference and white men will be pushed to the end of the line.
We must continue to be vigilant, for there are many both inside and outside of the country who want to take our freedoms away. Freedom is like a beautiful, delicate woman who must be protected and cherished at all costs. We must not allow ourselves to be intimidated by the islamofascists. We cannot allow the socialists to wreak their havoc on our economy. We must fight the PC crowd who want to place restrictions on our freedom of expression.
These thoughts remind me of a tribute that Ayn Rand, the novelist-philosopher, made to the USA in her excellent book, Atlas Shrugged
From its start, this country was a threat to the ancient rule of mystics. In the brilliant rocket-explosion of its youth, this country displayed to an incredulous world what greatness was possible to man, what happiness was possible on earth. p. 1061.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Surely that is one answer to the perennial mystery of why collectivism, with its demonstrated record of producing tyranny and misery, is so widely regarded as superior to individualism, with its demonstrated record of producing freedom and plenty. The argument for collectivism is simple if false; it is an immediate emotional argument. The argument for individualism is subtle and sophisticated; it is an indirect rational argument. And the emotional faculties are more highly developed in most men than the rational, paradoxically or especially even in those who regard themselves as intellectuals.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
We can rely on voluntary agreement to guide the actions of the state only so long as it is confined to spheres where agreement exists. But not only when the state undertakes direct control in fields where there is no such agreement is it bound to suppress individual freedom. We can unfortunately not indefinitely extend the sphere of common action and still leave the individual free in his own sphere. Once the communal sector, in which the state controls all the means, exceeds a certain proportion of the whole, the effects of its actions dominate the whole system.
It is the price of democracy that the possibilities of conscious control are restricted to the fields where true agreement exists and that in some fields things must be left to chance. But in a society which for its functioning depends on central planning this control cannot be made dependent on a majority's being able to agree; it will often be necessary that the will of a small minority be imposed upon the people, because this minority will be the largest group able to agree amoung themselves on the question at issue. Democratic government has worked successfully where, and so long as, the functions of government were, by a widely accepted creed, restricted to fields where agreement among a majority could be achieved by free discussion; and it is the great merit of the liberal creed that it reduced the range of subjects on which agreement was necessary to one on which it was likely to exist in a society of free men. It is now often said the democracy will not tolerate "capitalism". If "capitalism" means here a competitive system based on free disposal over private property, it is far more important to realize that only within this system is democracy possible. When it becomes dominated by a collectivist creed, democracy will inevitably destroy itself.
p. 77 - 78
To which I say Amen.
Not surprisingly, the house fell down just a few weeks after I took the first pics. When the farmers who own the land finally tear down what is left of the house and haul off the scrap lumber, I can't help but think if anyone will remember who once lived there.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Here is what Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post has to say about us:
Conservative commentators were bloodied but unbowed yesterday.
That's exactly how I feel at the moment. There's no way I'm going to sit back and let scum like Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, or Hillary Clinton turn the USA into a third world hellhole. I predict that those of us who believe in freedom, personal responsibility, a strong national defense and a government that will use it when necessary, will win in the end.
And in the unlikely event that we are defeated, I for one will never give up. I will go down fighting, kicking, and screaming to my last breath.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Mercury in Transit Across the Sun
See the little dot on this pic? That's the silhouette of the planet Mercury as its orbit took it directly between the sun and the earth earlier today. The disparity in size becomes even greater when one realizes that the sun was approximately 30 million miles further away from the earth, than Mercury was at the time.
Doing research on the planet has always been difficult for astronomers, due to Mercury's small size and proximity to the sun. This is an old map of Mercury drawn by the Italian astronomer Eugene Antoniadi, early in the 20th century. He drew the map while peering at the planet through a telescope. At that time, they thought that Mercury always kept one face to the sun at all times, just as the moon always keeps one face to the earth.
Subsequent research found that that was not true. The planet rotates on its axis three times for every two revolutions around the sun. Therefore, this map was not of much use!
In 1975, the interplanetary probe Mariner 10 flew by Mercury and took some photos. This is what it really looks like. Not too different from the moon.
Donald Rumsfeld resigned today, I think upon the request of President Bush in a concession to the Democrats. I know that many have been calling for his head for some time. Let's go over his record as defense secretary:
(1) Rumsfeld, with General Tommy Frank, commanded the military that made short work of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda no longer has a safe harbor in that country.
(2) Likewise, Rumsfeld and Frank made short work of the regime of Saddam Hussein and his sons in Iraq.
(3) The USA has had zero, as in none, zilch, nada successful terrorist attacks since 9/11.
(4) The leftoids claim that Rumsfeld's policies have increased terrorist activity in Iraq. But I see no evidence that the total number of terrorists worldwide have increased. Instead they are attracted to Iraq where our military can deal with them. Better that than having them sneak into the USA to attack civilians.
The "resignation" of Rumsfeld reminds me of when Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones fired coach Jimmy Johnson. Johnson had just brought the team from a 1 - 15 season to two consecutive superbowl victories, and he got fired!
I want to say thank you to Donald Rumsfeld. He has done a magnificent job.
There's no other way to put it. The results of yesterday's congressional elections are a victory for big government and high taxes. A victory for appeasement of terrorists. A victory for illegal aliens swarming our country in ever larger numbers. The Democrats elected Keith Ellison to the US House from Minnesota. Formerly known as Keith Ellison Muhammed, he is a muslim terrorist and former member of the nation of islam, and has called for the destruction of Israel.
But we are not like the Democrats who whined and cried and threatened to leave the country and take their toys with them when they lost in the 2004 elections. We are going to put our noses to the grindstone and get back to work fighting for what is right. We're not going to leave, nor even threaten to do so.
There were a few silver linings in the cloud. In Michigan, a referendum to ban racist and sexist "affirmative action" policies passed overwhelmingly, in spite of the fact that both the Republicans and Democrats opposed it. There were also numerous state referendums to ban the practice of legalized theft called eminent domain. Every one of these passed with flying colors.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
I wasn't the only one who noted the Europeans' stance against the death penalty for that great humanitarian, Saddam Hussein. James Lewis in "The American Thinker" has an excellent essay on the subject:
We have protected Europe for a century with our blood and treasure. Under our protection they have constructed a Disneyland for adults, one that is utterly unable to defend itself. Instead, they have imported tens of millions of ideologues who want nothing more than to take over Europe.
Yet Europe is obnoxiously ready to preach morality to the decent nations of the world who are not as deluded as they are. True to their endless imperialistic arrogance, they are now exporting yet another world-conquering ideology, a fuzzier version of communism, aiming to actively hog-tie the United States through a hundred international treaties.
It's time that we called a spade a spade and acknowledged the fact that most Europeans are not our allies. Here's a rundown of the countries in Western Europe:
UK - may be an ally. Tony Blair has been a faithful friend but there are many in Britain who feel the same way the Frogs do
Denmark - probably an ally. They have supported the liberation of Iraq and have courageously resisted the islamofascists' attempts to curtail their civil liberties.
Netherlands, Italy, Portugal - maybe
France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Luxemburg, Austria, Greece, Switzerland, Ireland -- hell no. With "allies" like these, who needs enemies?
Eastern Europe -- difficult to say. Many of them supported the liberation of Iraq but since then have backtracked on the issue. These countries are still in the process of carving out their identities after leaving the Soviet sphere of influence.
Many if not most Europeans do not favor free enterprise and do not cherish civil liberties such as freedom of speech. Why should we care about their opinions? I say we do what we think is right and quit worrying about what they want. If the current trends continue, much of Western Europe will become a socialist hellhole with most citizens dependent on the government. And once their muslim populations grow to a critical mass, they will probably adopt sharia and become a third world nightmare.
Monday, November 06, 2006
I am quite proud of myself for having watched a bit of CNN this evening without losing my lunch. Their bias in favor of the Democrats knows no limits. Wolf Blitzer just came on with the headlines and went over all the Republican Senate seats that might go Democrat, but did not make any mention of the two Democrat seats that might go Republican!
CNN has devoted almost the entire evening to singing the praises of the Democrats and criticizing or ridiculing the Republicans. They had great fun with Cheney's plans to go hunting tomorrow, bringing up his hunting accident in Texas last season. They showed all kinds of cartoons making fun of Cheney and also showed a cartoon where Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice went on a hunting trip together and ended up shooting each other.
CNN is not a news organization. They are a political advocacy group.
Michael Moore Mouths Off Again
For some reason, our old friend Michael Moore has been fairly quiet lately. So has he shut up for good? No chance. His Lardassness has quit stuffing his fat face with donuts and pizza long enough to exort his troops to action for the election tomorrow. I was worried that he might become a nonfactor in the political scene after his command performance during the 2004 election.
Michael, whatever you do, please, PLEASE make a movie about whoever is the Republican nominee for President in 2008. Your selfless act of dropping your pants and showing the entire country the ugly ass of the Democrat party was one of the deciding factors of the 2004 election.
Almost two weeks ago, I made a free offer to all gun control advocates. Scroll down this page to see it. I offered to give each and every one of them a decorative sign, free of charge, so that they could show their social conscience and declare to all onlookers that their household has none of those evil guns.
To my complete astonishment, I have had no takers! Could it be that these good people just don't want to burden me with the cost of providing all the signs? Or could it be that they are merely hypocrites such as gun control advocates like columnist Carl Rowan and movie producer Spike Lee, who have been caught by the police illegally possessing a gun while they lobby the government to ban all guns? Or perhaps they are like that shapely friend of mankind, gun-hater Rosie O'Donnell, who has her children protected by armed bodyguard? Perish the thought.
Our "allies" in Europe don't want to see poor Saddam Hussein's neck get stretched. Here's what the EU said:
And even Tony Blair , who showed great political courage by backing the USA during our invasion of Iraq, is shuddering at the thought that that humanitarian Saddam should meet such an untimely end and has spoken against the execution.
"The EU opposes capital punishment in all cases and under all circumstances, and it should not be carried out in this case either," Finland, current holder of the rotating EU presidency, said in a statement.
I guess it's ok for the Europeans to coat everything with sugar and spice and everything nice, but that's because they have George Bush and the USA to do their dirty work for them. And it's quite ok for French, Germans, etc. to exclaim how outrageous it was for the USA to invade Iraq (with a little help from the Brits and a few others) because that way they get to have their cake and eat it too. Allah forbid that they should have to dirty their cultured, sophisticated hands with the terible task of making war.
But just imagine if the USA didn't exist, or if we were again in a strict isolationist mode. Would the euroweenies still find it wise to act like a herd of sheep unaware that they are about to be attacked by a pack of hungry wolves? Or would they find it necessary to fight against the islamofascists, and often take preemptive action, as we did in Iraq?
Perhaps the Europeans should just go ahead and convert to islam to appease the terrorists. At least most Americans are still in possession of their family jewels. I for one do not care to become a muslim. I prefer to see women wearing thong bikinies rather than burqas.
Saturday, November 04, 2006
The dogs and I had a gas on the first day of pheasant season. I feared that the drought of the spring was going to diminish the number of pheasants hatched, but there were quite a few birds out today. The farmers are just beginning to harvest the milo in the region I was hunting, so most of the birds are probably still in the milo fields. Here is Daphne with our first pheasant of the season.