Friday, November 30, 2007
Population of USA (July 1, 2006): 299,398,484
Population of Iowa: 2,982,085
Population of New Hampshire: 1,314,895
The states of Iowa and New Hampshire have a combined population of 4,296,980, that is about 1.4% of the total US population. Yet every four years, these two states are effectively permitted to decide who will be the presidential nominees for both the Republican and Democrat parties. What about the other 98.6% of us?
I apologize for belaboring this point, as I have posted on it before, but no one in either party seems to be the slightest bit concerned about this arrangement. Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous?
I have been voting in presidential elections since 1980. In every case, the nominee of both parties was effectively decided by the time they got to the state I was living in, and I have lived in three different states during that time.
In 1996, I was eager to see Phil Gramm run as the Republican nominee. But I never got a chance to vote for him in a primary. He dropped out after faring poorly in Iowa. The nominee that year was Bob Dole, and he waged a very ineffective campaign, losing to Clinton.
We should do one of two things:
(1) Have a nationwide primary some time in the spring, or
(2) Pick the order of how the states will vote with some random method.
If you are an American and are reading this, there is a 98.6% chance that you *don't* live in Iowa or New Hampshire and you are getting the fuzzy end of the lollipop, just like me.
Now we hear that the Treasury Department is intervening on behalf of those who default on their mortgage loans
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration and major financial institutions are close to agreeing on a plan that would temporarily freeze interest rates on certain troubled subprime home loans, according to people familiar with the negotiations.
An accord could reassure investors and strapped homeowners, both of whom are anxious as interest rates on more than two million adjustable mortgages are scheduled to jump over the next two years. It could also give a boost to the Bush administration, which is facing criticism for inaction amid the recent housing turmoil.
The plan is being negotiated between regulators including the Treasury Department and a coalition of mortgage-related companies including Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., Washington Mutual Inc. and Countrywide Financial Corp. People familiar with the talks say the individual members have agreed to follow any agreement reached by the coalition, which is called the Hope Now Alliance.
Details of the plan, which could be announced as early as next week, are still being worked out. In general, the government and the coalition have largely agreed to extend the lower introductory rate on home loans for certain borrowers who will have trouble making payments once their mortgages increase.
Is this a good idea? It is certainly good for the borrowers who are in default. But if you were to ask me if it is good for the country as a whole, there are several reasons why it may not be:
(1) The subprime borrowers are in effect being bailed out by the influence of the government. They put themselves into this mess by agreeing to a loan contract that they could not afford. Will the bailout give them the confidence to enter into future contracts that they cannot afford, thinking that the government will bail them out again? There is a significant probability of a moral hazard problem.
(2) Some say that they were induced to sign loan contracts that they did not understand! How ridiculous is this? No one should EVER enter into any type of financial contract they do not understand.
(3) The lenders and investors who made the mortgage loans did so under the expectation that the interest rates would automatically increase. Now there will be a freeze on the rates. Thus, the investors cannot rely on the basic premise that their contracts will be enforced as written. Many investors will desert the mortgage loan market, making it more difficult for future homebuyers to get a mortgage loan.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Islam, that wonderful religion that lefties here and in Europe love to praise, is demanding the death of British schoolteacher Gillian Gibbons for naming a teddy bear "Muhammed"
Trucks protected by armed police transported Gillian Gibbons from her cell at the CID headquarters in Khartoum where she had been kept in custody following her arrest on Sunday for allowing pupils to name a school teddy bear Mohammed.
Security was also tight at the city's court building as fears that extremists might stage a kidnap attempt ran high.
Mrs Gibbons, looking tired and distressed and wearing a dark blue jacket and blue dress, was not handcuffed.
One of Khartoum's biggest papers, the pro-government Akhir Lahza - Last Moment - said Hassan Al Turabi, once seen as the Islamic ideologue behind the government, should be called as an expert witness in the case to stress how offensive the teacher's action had been.
The religious and Islamist political leader is thought to have been instrumental in institutionalising Sharia law in the north of the country.
He personally invited Osama bin Laden to Sudan and the Al Qaeda leader based his operations there from around 1990 to 1996.
Why are we putting up with this crap?
Update: Gillian was sentenced to 15 days in prison for "insulting islam".
I think I will buy a potbellied pig and name him mohammed the prophet.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Not content to have violated almost every campaign finance law on the books in their 1992 and 1996 runs for the whitehouse, as well as the PIAPS' 2000 and 2006 runs for the senate. Now they are doing some 'creative' fundraising in Ireland, to enable Hillary to squeeze her fat thighs back through the front door of the white house in 2008:
Former US president Bill Clinton will help raise up to$300,000 for his wife’s presidential election campaign when he addresses a fundraising dinner in Dublin this Saturday.The event, organised by the ‘Irish America for Hillary’ group, will take place in the Ballsbridge home of Dublin barrister Brian Farren and his wife Linda O’Shea-Farren. Between 120 and 150 people are expected to attend.Under US election rules, because the event is being held outside the US, it must be financially supported by American citizens or green card holders, and can only be held in the home of someone who holds a green card or is a US citizen.A large number of Americans living in Ireland have paid around $2,000 per person to invite guests. The guest list remains a closely guarded secret, but includes a range of Irish business people, public figures and Americans based here. O’Shea-Farren is from Limerick and graduated from University College Cork with a BCL degree in 1981.
Oh really? Do we know for sure that the source of funds are Americans living in Ireland, or are they just 'donating' the money on behalf of Irish donors? It is illegal to accept campaign contributions from foreigners and it is also illegal to give or accept campaign contributions made by one person on behalf of another person.
The problem is, the Clintons have gotten away with these multiple violations of the law so many times, they feel quite confident about breaking the law again. There is no one in Washington who has the guts to stand up against these scumbags. They have no business being in public office whatsoever.
The state of North Carolina, that has already made quite a name for itself by falsely prosecuting three men for a crime that never happened, has decided to aid the cause of lawbreaking by granting admission to illegal aliens
RALEIGH --North Carolina's community college system has ordered the state's 58 campuses to admit illegal immigrants, overturning a policy of letting the heavily enrolled schools set their own rules for handling undocumented applicants.
David Sullivan, the system's top lawyer, dispatched a memo this month telling the community colleges that state regulations require the schools to admit illegal immigrants who meet the schools' basic requirements of being either a high school graduate or an adult in need of skills training.
I have a better idea. When an illegal immigrant shows up to enroll, call the Border Patrol.
Monday, November 26, 2007
The Baron, at Gates of Vienna has written an interesting essay about the ludicrous claim that the Right are fascists:
Are you tired of looking under Vlaams Belang’s bed for neo-Nazis?
When you open the Sweden Democrats’ closet, are the skeletons that fall out less than satisfyingly fascist?
Do you want to know where the real Nazis are in Europe?
I’ll tell you where they are: they’re on the Left, the same place they’ve always been.
Ever since Rosa Luxemburg’s bully boys were beating up on Ernst Röhm’s bully boys on the streets of Berlin in the early ’20s, the thugs of the Left have been the champions of coercive force and the strong-arm methods. When the swastika-clad crowds roared their “Sieg Heil!” at Nürnberg, the forces of thuggish Socialism were in the ascendant. The only argument back then was between those who wanted their Socialism national, and those who preferred it international.
The single greatest success of the Left over the last seventy years has been to convince a gullible public that fascism and Nazism were of the Right. It was the great victory of Socialism.
My feelings exactly, Baron. The main reason for the Big Lie is to impress the idea on people that socialism is inevitable. If we don't have some National Socialist Health Care plan, then we will end up throwing innocent people into gas chambers and making lampshades out of their skin.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
I just read a very interesting and accurate essay by Bruce Walker
The Nazis were Marxists, no matter what our tainted academia and corrupt media wishes us to believe. Nazis, Bolsheviks, the Ku Klux Klan, Maoists, radical Islam and Facists -- all are on the Left, something that should be increasingly apparent to decent, honorable people in our times. The Big Lie which places Nazis on some mythical Far Right was created specifically so that there would be a bogeyman manacled on the wrists of those who wish us to move "too far" in the direction of Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater.
Walker gives considerable support to his thesis:
The Nazis on October 16, 1934 raised the highest income tax rate from 40% to 50%, and on February 17, 1939 raised that highest rate again to 55%. A decree of September 9, 1939 again increased income taxes, but exempted incomes of 2,400 Reichmarks a year or less. Comparative Major European Governments, a 1937 book, notes that through several new laws on December 4, 1934 banking, credits, and stock exchanges passed under complete government control and that the Loan-Stock Law limited stock company dividends to six percent in some cases and to eight percent in others, with profits over that required to be transferred to the Gold Discount Bank, which was in turn required to invest them in government loans or municipal debt service bonds.
Nazi hostility to individual wealth was matched by its hostility to big business. The same act of October 16, 1934 removed the exemption on business taxes for many types of businesses and it increased the progressivity of the business taxes; an act of August 27, 1936 raised the general business tax rate from 20% to 25% and to 30% for each year thereafter; then on July 25, 1938 corporate profits of more than 100,000 Reichmarks per year were subjected to an additional tax of 35% with that rising to 40% for each year thereafter; and on March 20, 1939, the Nazis imposed an excess profits tax. In four years, Nazis had raised taxes to approximately one fourth of the national income.
I wish I had a pfennig for every time I have heard some idiot on the left claim that the Nazis were capitalists. For some reason the simpletons think that just because the Soviets fought against the Nazis (only after Hitler doublecrossed Stalin while they were allies) that makes Marxism the antithesis of Nazism. The history of all forms of totalitarianism are one big game of 'king of the hill': Stalin vs. Trotsky, Stalin vs. Mao, Stalin vs. Hitler, etc.
Friday, November 23, 2007
Warning: Reading this will really make your blood boil
It's about a couple named Don and Susie Kirlin. They moved to the city in 1980. A few years later, the Kirlins purchased a plot of land near their residence, hoping to someday build a "dream home."
Despite owning the land, despite living only 200 yards from the property, despite hiking past it every week with their three dogs, despite spraying for weeds and fixing fences, despite paying homeowner association dues and property taxes each year, someone else had taken a shine to it. Someone powerful.
Former Boulder District Judge, Boulder Mayor, RTD board member - among other elected positions - Richard McLean and his wife, attorney Edith Stevens, used an arcane common law called "adverse possession" to claim the land for their own.
All McLean needed was to develop an
"attachment" to it.
Undoubtedly, his city connections couldn't have hurt, either.
In the court papers, McLean and his family admit to regularly trespassing on the Kirlins' property.
They created paths. They said they put on a political fundraiser and parties on it (though not a single photograph of these events surfaced in court documents).
This habit of trespassing developed into an affection.
If we take McLean at his word, he should have been treated appropriately: like a common criminal. Instead, the former judge demanded a chunk of the land for himself - and implausibly he got it.
The idea of adverse possession dates back to the frontier days. When a farmer on the frontier squatted on some land and farmed it and built improvements, he could gain title to the land. It is an outdated legal concept that has no relevance to today and should be wiped out, just like the practice of using eminent domain to seize someone else's property.
Richard McLean's address and phone:
2059 Hardscrabble Drive
Boulder, CO 80305
Call him and let him know what you think.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
According to the Oinkubus, deficits are increasing:
Here are the federal budget deficits for the last four fiscal years. Source is National Economic Trends, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, p. 16.
“There is one job we can’t afford on-the-job training for — that’s the job of our next president,” Mrs. Clinton said in Knoxville, Iowa. “That could be the costliest job training in history. Every day that’s spent learning the ropes is another day of rising costs, mounting deficits and growing anxiety for our families. And they cannot afford to keep waiting.”
2003 $372.2 billion
That doesn't look like an increase to me. But of course, we know that Hillary isn't about to let the facts get in her way.
The only thing that is mounting is your husband, Hillary. He will mount anything that walks.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Carole Simpson, former news anchor for ABC and now a professor of journalism at Emerson College, was recently criticized for openly endorsing the Oinkubus for president:
BOSTON – Carole Simpson, a former ABC news anchor who is now a journalism professor at Emerson College, is on the hot seat after endorsing Hillary Clinton for president at a New Hampshire political rally.
Simpson said she immediately regretted her actions and offered her resignation the day after the rally last month in Salem, N.H., but Emerson officials refused to accept it.
Jerry Lanson, an Emerson journalism professor who co-teaches the course with Simpson, said he immediately told Simpson her remarks were inappropriate.
“As faculty members if we’re teaching journalists, we need to model the behavior we’re teaching in the classroom,” he told the Globe.
There is nothing wrong with what Simpson did. It is a well-known fact that many journalists and college professors are on the far left of the political spectrum. They have every right to voice their opinions and I have no problem with them doing so. What I have a problem with is when they bias their coverage of political issues and simultaneously claim to be objective. If I were the president of ABC news or some other news organization, I would require all journalists working under me to disclose their political leanings.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Isn't it lovely when local governments attempt to undermine federal laws? Now we hear that Des Moines is thinking of preventing local law enforcement from enforcing immigration laws:
A proposal to prohibit local law enforcement officials from conducting raids on illegal immigrants in Des Moines was presented to at least one City Council member recently.Councilwoman Christine Hensley said Sunday that she spoke about six weeks ago with representatives of two immigration-rights groups that presented a plan that would block local city departments - including the police - from conducting raids on immigrants or inquiring about a person's immigration status.
'Immigration-rights groups'? As if those who break our laws and violate the sovereignty of our borders should have the same rights as someone who has applied for the proper visa and entered our country legally? Illegal aliens should have only one right: A one-way trip out of the country.
Hensley said the impetus for the ordinance is illegal immigrants who fear raids and do not come to work, incurring costs on their employers
I have a simpler solution. Don't hire illegal aliens in the first place.
Alex Orozco, executive director of the Iowa-based Network Against Human Trafficking who is one of the people who met with Hensley, said Sunday he is trying to set up a meeting with Des Moines Mayor Frank Cownie before the end of the year. Orozco would not name the other immigration-rights group involved in the proposal.
Orozco said media coverage of the plan while it is still in the preliminary stages would hurt its chances of passage. "We don't want anybody with hard feelings about this issue to get mad when we haven't even finalized it," he said.
Yeah, Alex. You don't want anyone to know that you wish to prevent the local police from enforcing the law, do you?
Iranian despot Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denounced the US dollar at an OPEC summit:
Hard-line Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has urged the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) to stop pricing oil in US dollars.He said that oil should not be exclusively valued against the depreciating dollar, which he derided as "a worthless piece of paper".The Iranian president's comments came at the end of a two-day Opec summit in Saudi Arabia that had shied away from condemnation of the dollar, which has been historically linked to worldwide oil prices.
Hey Mahmoud, if you don't want your worthless pieces of paper, send them to me.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
A Democrat who serves in the Louisiana legislature called a black supporter "Buckwheat" just days before the runoff election that will determine whether or not she returns to Baton Rouge.
Rep. Carla Blanchard Dartez said "Talk to you later, Buckwheat" at the end of a telephone conversation with a black woman who helped drive voters to the polls on Election Day. (Buckwheat was a character in The Little Rascals who has come to symbolize demeaning racial stereotypes.)
"I've never had no one talk to me that way and I considered it a racial slur," Hazel Boykin tells the Associated Press. "I know the meaning of it, it's just like the N-word."
Some like Dymphna at Gates of Vienna are saying they glad that a Democrat is being held to the same standards as Republicans for once. But I'm not so sure. If the perpretrator of this horrendous racist hate crime had been a Republican, the Right Revruns Jackson and Sharpton would be down there seizing their photo ops in front of the Lamestream Media.
I wonder what will happen if I refer to some white guy as "Alfalfa" or "Spanky"? Let's see....
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
I have been reading lately about the heated argument among the anti-jihad websites concerning whether or not the Flemish secessionist party Vlaams Belang is fascist or white supremacist. Blogs such as Little Green Footballs, Gates of Vienna, and Brussels Journal have really locked horns over the issue. There is no point in me repeating their arguments here. I would just like to quote something I read on Vlaams Belang's website:
Wij kiezen voor een gecorrigeerde vrije markteconomie. De geschiedenis leert ons immers dat een door de overheid gecontroleerde economie niet zo gezond is. Het is wenselijk voorrang te geven aan de marktmechanismen. Die politiek leidt tot een toename van welvaart en welzijn voor het grootste deel van de bevolking.
We desire an adjusted free market economy. History teaches us that a government-controlled economy is unhealthy. It is best to give primacy to market mechanisms. Such a policy leads to an increase in prosperity and well-being to the greatest part of the population.
That doesn't sound fascist to me. In spite of the utter nonsense we often hear from the left, a necessary condition for fascism is a government-controlled economy. That's why the Nazis were the National Socialist German Workers Party.
Whatever may have been the past of some of the members of Vlaams Belang, they certainly are not acting as fascists now. Unfortunately their critics at LGF and elsewhere have been employing the same smear tactics used for decades by the left.
My grandfather was a WWI veteran. He served in France in the army of occupation, after hostilities had ended. He returned to Texas with a tulip tatooed on his shoulder and married my grandmother. Grandad passed away in 1993 and he has been missed, as he was one of the greatest men I have ever known.
Now there are three surviving WWI veterans still alive. Richard Rubin in the New York Times writes about one of them:
A few years ago, I set out to see if I could find any living American World War I veterans. No one — not the Department of Veterans Affairs, or the Veterans of Foreign Wars, or the American Legion — knew how many there were or where they might be. As far as I could tell, no one much seemed to care, either.
Eventually, I did find some, including Frank Buckles, who was 102 when we first met. Eighty-six years earlier, he’d lied about his age to enlist. The Army sent him to England but, itching to be near the action, he managed to get himself sent on to France, though never to the trenches.
After the armistice, he was assigned to guard German prisoners waiting to be repatriated. Seeing that he was still just a boy, the prisoners adopted him, taught him their language, gave him food from their Red Cross packages, bits of their uniforms to take home as souvenirs.
It will be some time before the last WWII veteran leaves us. There is probably some man out there who was born in 1930 and in 1945 he faked his birth certificate and enlisted. He will live to be 105 or even 110. So we are looking at 2035 or possibly as late as 2040 before the last WWII veteran passes away. In fact, he might outlive me, and I was too young even for Vietnam.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Friday, November 09, 2007
Peggy Noonan has an excellent Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal:
Margaret Thatcher would no more have identified herself as a woman, or claimed special pleading that she was a mere frail girl, or asked you to sympathize with her because of her sex, than she would have called up the Kremlin and asked how quickly she could surrender.
She represented a movement. She was its head. She was great figure, a person in history, and she was a woman. She was in it for serious reasons, not to advance the claims of a gender but to reclaim for England its economic freedom, and return its political culture to common sense. Her rise wasn't symbolic but actual.
I wonder what Herself plans to do if she is elected president and some foreign thug like Ahmadinejad, Chavez, or Castro fails to bow to Her feminine sensitivities.
Margaret Thatcher would not have batted an eye, had her opponents in her own party ganged up on her like the Democrats did on the PIAPS in the recent debate. She simply would have proceeded to kick their asses.
Look back at the last five men who have been president. George W. Bush has had the mental toughness to withstand the searing criticism that every president must take. So did Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. Whoever is president must be figuratively bulletproof, and sometime literally.
On the other hand, George Bush Sr. did not have that mental toughness. He allowed the difficulties of the office to get to him. Likewise Jimmah Carter. He couldn't handle it. Is it any surprise that Bush Sr. and Carter were one-term presidents whereas Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Bush Jr. were re-elected?
Hillary does not possess the fortitude to be president. Certainly she knows how to dish it out. Consequently, some simple-minded people are fooled into thinking she is tough. But like most bullies, Herself can only play offense. She can't take it when someone gives her any trouble. For that reason and many others, she is not qualified to be president.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
There was a recent brouhaha when Heidi Cullen, a climatologist at the Weather Channel, called for decertifying global warming skeptics.
But now the very founder of Heidi's platform, meteorologist John Coleman, has called global warming the 'Greatest Scam in History'
It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an allusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.
Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild “scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmentally conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minute documentary segment.
I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it.
I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct. There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.
In time, a decade or two, the outrageous scam will be obvious. As the temperature rises, polar ice cap melting, coastal flooding and super storm pattern all fail to occur as predicted everyone will come to realize we have been duped. The sky is not falling. And, natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway. I strongly believe that the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend.
So Heidi, does that mean your entire channel needs to be decertified?
In a burst of candor, Barack says that Herself is too old
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama sparked a generational fight Wednesday by trashing White House rival Hillary Clinton for being too old to unite America, saying she and others her age have fought the same tired fights for too long.
"I think there's no doubt that we represent the kind of change that Sen. Clinton can't deliver on, and part of it is generational," Obama, 46, said on Fox News. "Sen. Clinton and others, they've been fighting some of the same fights since the '60s, and it makes it very difficult for them to bring the country together to get things done."
Very true. Herself is too ugly, too.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
I have previously posted about how convicted Irish terrorist Malachy McAllister was campaigning to be allowed to stay in the USA. Now the US Senate have foolishly granted him a reprieve from deportation:
A former republican prisoner facing deportation from the United States has won an 11th-hour reprieve.
Sunday Life can reveal a 'bill of rights' was passed by US senators on Friday allowing Malachy McAllister, along with two of his children, to remain in New Jersey.The father-of-four - who fled Belfast in 1988 after a Red Hand Commando gang came within inches of killing his family - will now have his case addressed after the American Presidential election in January, 2009.
Take one look at that photo and you can see whom Malachy hopes will be in the White House in January, 2009.
This is ridiculous that we are allowing McAllister to stay here. How would we like it if Britain gave sanctuary to Osama bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahiri? McAllister was involved in the murder of a policeman. For that he should have been executed or given life in prison. Moreover, he and his family have been living in the USA illegally for the last 10 years. He has shown no respect for the laws of the USA, just as he showed no respect for the laws of Northern Ireland.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
The opening of pheasant season could not have come too soon. Rocky, Daphne and I had a great time.
Started out on a quarter-section walk-in with a corn field to the north. Rocky and I hunted the west border without seeing anything, then we reached the northern border next to the corn field, and he got very, very birdy. He quartered back into the tall grass in the walk-in and suddenly a rooster emerged, squawking furiously and flying towards the cornfield. I had my Browning 20 gauge loaded with 3-inch #4 shot. I fired and missed with the first shot and hit with the second. The bird was dead by the time it hit the ground. Rocky was in the tall grass when the bird flushed, so he was unable to mark the fall. I handled him to the bird and he made a great retrieve.
At 9 years, Rocky is showing his age. But he is still a great hunting dog and I will continue to hunt him as long as he is able.
Next I hunted Daphne in another walk-in a few miles north, bordered by wheat stubble north of that. Daphne ran through a draw and put up a big rooster. I hit it with either my second or third shot. Once again, the dog was unable to mark the fall due to the high cover. Handling her would not have worked because she would be unable to see my signals due to the tall grass. So I walked her to the vicinity of the fallen bird and gave her the command "dead bird". She found it promptly and made an excellent retrieve.
My 20 gauge Browning semiauto is my main gun for everything except for geese and turkey. Don't let anyone tell you a 20 gauge is too small for pheasant. I like it because it is easier to carry, easier on the shoulder, and easier on the ears. I usually hunt with a light modified choke. I do have a Weatherby 12 gauge O/U as a backup gun. But the only times I need to use it are when it is so cold that my semiauto won't cycle, or sometimes it gets so windy out on the plains that dust gets in the action and stops it from cycling.
I much prefer #4 shot for pheasant. I know that many people prefer #6 but I find I get more dead birds and fewer cripples with #4. It has much greater penetrating power, especially at long distances.
Friday, November 02, 2007
James Lewis, writing in the American Thinker, talks about the left's fascination with global warming. He reminds us of how marxist economics was once considered scientific
Modern science fraud seems to come from the Left, which makes it especially weird because the Left claims to be all in favor of science. Marxism itself was a scientific fraud, of course. In 1848 Marx and Engels claimed to have a "scientific" (wissenschaftlich) theory of history. They predicted that communism would first arise in England, because it was the most advanced capitalist nation. (Not) They predicted that centralized planning would work. (Not) They predicted that the peasants and workers would dedicate their lives to the Socialist State, and stop caring about themselves and their families. (Not). They predicted that sovietization would lead to greater economic performance. (Not). And then, when seventy years of Soviet, Chinese, Eastern European, and North Korean history showed Marx's predictions to be wrong, wrong and wrong again, they still claimed to be "scientific." That's pathological science --- fraud masquerading as science.
The left have always hated capitalism, because some 'geniuses proved' that it was doomed to fail, in spite of the decades of evidence that it is the only economic system to have accomplished any growth whatsoever. Likewise, human CO2 emissions must be causing global warming. We know this because a 'broad consensus of scientists' have shown this to be 'true'. And of course the left's solution to this imminent catastrophe is to place industry under the control of government!
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Rep Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) has introduced a bill that would ban states from requiring that voters show a photo ID when voting:
So, we must ask, what is the islamofascist's true agenda? He wants to make it easy to commit voting fraud.
WASHINGTON — Requiring photo IDs to vote in federal elections would be banned under legislation introduced Wednesday by Rep. Keith Ellison, who said such requirements disenfranchise minorities, the poor, women, elderly and young people.“While photo IDs seem harmless, they are in fact the modern day poll tax,” Ellison, D-Minn., said in a statement.
Remember the Democrat party's slogan: "Vote Early and Vote Often"!
Paul Tibbets, the pilot of Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the nuclear weapon on Hiroshima, Japan in 1945, has passed away:
What Tibbets and his crew did was to save hundreds of thousands of lives. A US invasion of Japan would have been a bloodbath.
I’ve got a standard answer on that,” he informed me. “I felt nothing about it….I couldn’t worry about the people getting burned up down there on the ground. …This wasn’t anything personal as far as I’m concerned , so I had no personal part in it….It wasn’t my decision to make morally, one way or another…I did what I was told -- it was a success as far as I was concerned, and that’s where I’ve left it…I can assure you that I can sleep just as peacefully at night as anybody can sleep….”In fact, he said, President Truman had instructed him not to lose any sleep over it at a meeting at the White House after the bombing.
On many occasions, I have heard some of the liars on the left claim that Japan had already surrendered prior to the nuclear strike on Hiroshima. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Japanese proposed a cease fire, they did not offer to surrender until after we nuked both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and then only when Truman agreed to allow Japanese Emporer Hirohito to remain as emporer, albeit only as a figurehead.