Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Define "working"

See? This is what happens when you hand over power to a petulant Marxist boy king:

White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley took heat from business executives Thursday for the Obama administration’s regulatory expansions. Daley also said he didn’t have any good answers for some of what President Obama is doing and expressed frustration about the “bureaucratic stuff that’s hard to defend.”

“Sometimes you can’t defend the indefensible,” Daley said at a National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) meeting.

Daley couldn’t answer basic questions and continually faced criticism from the executives in the room. The business leaders even applauded each other’s criticism of the administration. “At one point, the room erupted in applause when Massachusetts utility executive Doug Starrett, his voice shaking with emotion, accused the administration of blocking construction on one of his facilities to protect fish, saying government ‘throws sand into the gears of progress,’” wrote Peter Wallsten and Jia Lynn Yang in the Washington Post.

Americans for Limited Government Communications Director and former Labor Department Public Affairs Chief of Staff Rick Manning told The Daily Caller that Daley’s inability to defend Obama’s regulations is an indication that the administration’s plans aren’t working. Manning also points out that Daley’s meeting may have large political implications.

“Business community to William Daley, your Jedi tricks don’t work on us,” Manning said in an email. “The chickens are coming home to roost from the wholesale assault by Obama on the free enterprise system and the private job creators who make it run. The meeting itself is incredible in that it demonstrates just how vulnerable Obama feels in 2012.”

Right and wrong. Yes, Obama is vulnerable — in fact, were the election held today, before Obama can unleash his billion dollar propaganda effort to run away from his record and attack the GOP candidate, whomever that turns out to be, I suspect he’d lose in one of the most enormous landslides in American history.

Where Manning is wrong, however — and where Daley is confused — is that the administration’s plans ARE working: the goal is to weaken the private sector considerably, expand the public sector, expand reliance on government, and create a number of crises to which the government will respond in ways that further solidifies its power and rewards its sponsors and cronies.

James Carville has spoken openly of the prospect of job riots next summer in the streets of major cities. Imagine, Obama with his own Kent State, only he’s on the side of the union “working people”. It’s like a lifelong dream for this “good man.”

No. Obama is getting precisely what he wants. He’s failing as a US president, but his real goal — to be an effective ideologue for socialism as a way to “transform” the country — he is more than succeeding at. Given how feckless the GOP is, and how unwilling they’ve been to beat back the creeping social democraticization of the country, Obama might just come to represent the most important President in US history, representing the biggest of our great leaps forward toward total transformation, where we’ll eventually be swallowed up by transnational progressivism.

Could happen.

(h/t Dave O’C)

58 Replies to “Define "working"”

  1. happyfeet says:

    for reals Americans are still standing up to their dirty union whore president Mr. Jeff

    Even as the nation’s main union for retail workers acknowledged that it lost a unionization vote on Friday at a Target store in Valley Stream, N.Y., it demanded a new election and accused the company of illegally intimidating workers.

    even in New York.

  2. Joe says:

    This is where Medved (and other CINOs) do not seem to get it.

    Medved argues Obama wants the country to succeed. Medved got his start in conservative radio from Rush Limbaugh. If it is a choice between what Michael thinks and what Rush thinks, Rush is generally going to be more correct. If it is a choice between what Paterico thinks and Levin thinks…well you get the point. Medved argues that politically we hurt ourselves making this personal. Really? Like Obama did not win election making things personal with McCain and Palin? We hurt ourselves by avoiding making this personal.

    Subjectively it may be true that Obama wants the country to succeed, but you have to define “succeed.” Obama’s vision of the future of the United States is very different that most of us would like to see. And most conservatives recognize that future is not a good one. Not if you believe in liberty and American Exceptionalism. And to the extent Obama is moving things in the direction he wants to go, Obama is succeeding as a president–and why you are getting push back from the Tea Party and others.

    Because we do not want to go where this bus is heading, so we are not inclined to describe the driver as a “good man.”

  3. Joe says:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57251.html

    Bobby I do not hate Barack Obama personally, I hate his policies and politics. I am sure he is perfectly fun to play a round of golf with.

    I did sort of hate your shitty post SOTU appearance though. What about you? Acutally I did not hate it, it just bored the shit out of me and I turned it off.

  4. Jeff G. says:

    Why on earth would we avoid going after Obama personally? He’s arrogant, petulant, lazy, ill-informed (why has the media not spent at least a week dissecting his ATM boner?), and, to the cause of liberty and individual freedom, which proceeds from a free market and private property rights, his is intentionally hostile.

    He dismissed legal advice from his own DOJ over his Libya adventure. He has ignored federal rulings, his administration found in contempt, to stop drilling. His EPA is going forward with plans they KNOW and ADMIT will kill hundreds of thousands of jobs and drive up the cost of electricity by, in some estimates, 60% — at a time when many Americans are out of work, or are living paycheck to paycheck.

    He is insisting on this course of action, knowing as he does that the economy is tanked and that unemployment is dismal. He’s doing this knowing the American people don’t want it. He can read the polls (the real ones, too, not the spun shit put out by his media enablers and the true believers). And that’s because HE has a vision, and HE is going to see it through. HE is right, and we are all wrong. HE knows what an America his wife can be proud of looks like — and that’s one wherein HIS “kind” can rule over and manage the drones, where HIS “kind” can pick the winners and losers, where HIS “kind” gets to determine what is truth and what is falsity.

    Fuck HIM.

    Medved and his ilk of sickly, bent-over squishes need to get out of the way. Some of us simply don’t wish to be managed — either by the progressive socialists, or the “pragmatic” Republicans.

  5. Jeff G. says:

    Jindal needs to shut it, too. Trotting out the “a pox on both their houses” — precisely the kind of superficial, lazy, canned “thinking” that allows Hamas, et al., to get away with rank terrorism and Israel to come under international pressure to give in — is intellectually puerile: just because the left and the right have both criticized Presidents in a similar way doesn’t make them equal. Because there is the question of right and wrong. The left was wrong to suggest that Bush was acting like an imperial President. We are NOT wrong to note that about Obama. We are NOT wrong that his agenda is an alien one, that it is, in a very strict sense, anti-American. Therefore we are NOT wrong to question the patriotism of a man who has made public his suggestion that the US is not particularly exceptional, and that he’s prefer us be just one nation among many, part of the transnational progressive crowd.

    I never thought he’d go all pussy, Jindal. But there it is.

  6. happyfeet says:

    personally I think Obama’s a dirty ghetto trash union slut what hates America. Team R has to send a pussy like Boehner to golf with jackoff cause Rs with any sense, class or leadership skills wouldn’t see the value in frittering away a Saturday prancing around a golf course with a cowardly dirty socialist cocksucker.

    But I have no idea what Kasich is thinking maybe Boehner has dirty weinertweets from him? But Jindal clearly has a tiny jealous indian hardon for a round of homo golf and he should’ve taken Kasich’s place I think and spared Kasich his dignity.

  7. Joe says:

    Obama likens himself to some sort of philosopher king. And the few examples of that in the 20th century have just turned out fabulous! If you dig things like the Cultural Revolution, North Korea prosperity, and Pol Pot’s support of civil rights.

    I am sure Bush is somehow to blame for this too.

  8. happyfeet says:

    Obama might just come to represent the most important President in US history, representing the biggest of our great leaps forward toward total transformation

    he already earned this title when he rammed three (3) trillion-plus annual deficits up America’s ass I think

    he’s ensured the only way forward for Americans is for them to inflate their currency like Zimbabwe and perforce die in squalid dirty socialist government hospital

    When interest rates tick up, the American house of cards will spectacularly collapse.

    This is the bomb Obama has planted in the heart of our little country.

    fist bump, yawls

  9. happyfeet says:

    *hospitals* I mean

  10. sdferr says:

    …will spectacularly collapse.

    And when that happens, he thinks no-one will seek him out for to take their revenge? Then he is delusional for certain.

  11. happyfeet says:

    I see him being conveniently out of the country for an extended period of time Mr. sferr.

  12. sdferr says:

    Allowing some width to my suggestion, I don’t think historians, for instance, give two shits where he may be, or for that matter already underground even, he will be gotten in any event.

  13. happyfeet says:

    history belongs to the victors though and it’s a lot looking like He Won

  14. sdferr says:

    Ha! You don’t really think I believe in that history belongs to the victors stuff do you, leastwise under any definition leaving some part of those defeated alive to object?

  15. Curmudgeon Geographer says:

    GOP candidates need to build plans anticipating unions manufacturing job-related disruptions and riots this election season and the likely collusion with Democrats and these coming union-organized events. Anticipate the media running cover for these events. Anticipate academia spewing justifications for the riots and justifications for state intervention via seizing more private assets and imposing regulations as the remedy.

    But we should all anticipate GOP candidates being caught off guard—”unexpectedly!”—by the same Democrat/media/academia playbook yet again, like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football.

  16. happyfeet says:

    I guess not, but still. For a long time the historians will be foraging in the woods for edible roots and grubs with the rest of us.

  17. Republican on Acid says:

    I wonder how many of those executives voted for the asshole to begin with?

  18. sdferr says:

    There will be woods? Not for long there won’t. ‘Course, we’re gonna have to relearn how to use two-man saws and axes, since without gasoline all those nice Husqvarnas and Stihls will be quite worthless, save perhaps as canoe anchors.

  19. happyfeet says:

    I weep for the ravaged forest and the despair of the woodland creatures.

  20. happyfeet says:

    But still… back in the here and now. People were beginning to understand that Obama was a useless golf and spend piece of shit. Why does Boehnerpussy want to legitimize the golfings as an appropriate activity?

    It makes no sense. Boehner is to leadership what an autism service horse is to herding cattle.

  21. newrouter says:

    “despair of the woodland creatures.”

    mr. huckabee knows how to fry squirrels

  22. Crawford says:

    why has the media not spent at least a week dissecting his ATM boner?

    Because journalism majors are as ignorant as he is. They think he’s right.

  23. geoffb says:

    is that the administration’s plans ARE working:

    Yes, but they may have let too much of their butt-crack showing to get away as Progressives have in the past.

  24. Wm T Sherman says:

    The Obama blank screen is partially obscured, if not broken. Intrusive, harsh day-to-day realities are breaking the spell; Presidenting has forced Obama to crystallize into a definite entity. He can no longer be perceived as whatever people want him to be. Too many people are directly affected now by who he actually is.

    So times have changed, electioneering-wise. 2008 and 2010 are not useful guides to just how far they will be willing to go in 2012. The economy will continue to crumble by design, and the envelope of lawbreaking will continue to be pushed further and further. The leftists who supported him feel betrayed because they believe he did not govern remotely far enough to the left (!). The Democrats will soon be seeking to reassure and motivate this demographic, for whatever residual utility can be extracted from them.

    It’s like a brushfire. Until it actually starts burning over your property, you can’t imagine it.

    This is so god damned creepy. Shades of that Stephen King novel The Stand. Granted, the author is a moonbat, but he has a certain flair for putting that particular ache of existential dread into your throat.

  25. Roddy Boyd says:

    Looks like the worm is turning for the Dems and the hard work of the Clinton years is falling by the wayside.

    An example: for years, whenever I interviewed senior execs of businesses (both on and off wall Street) it was the rare occasion that I found a committed liberal, or even old line conservative one. Starting in 2004, I started seeing a whole lot of Wall Streeters begin to doubt Bush, largely over his lack of financial discipline and the then poor conduct of the Iraq war. This wasn’t the case with corporate execs, however, who though even more baffled by Bush than the Wall Street set, remained largely GOP. In 2006-2008, I began to see the wholesale abandonment of the GOP by business types who weren’t otherwise partisan (I’d note that with certain caveats, the GOP is largely dead among Silicon Valley.)

    Its the opposite now. You cannot find but a handful of the richest of the Wall Street set who are firmly committed to Obama. Everyone else might still give him some cash–thought of as a hedge–but no one, even his supporters, thinks he is anything like what they voted for in 2008. That these fissuers are appearing so publicly now is problematic for them; rank-and-file execs in highly regulated industries like utilities going on the record with bitter criticism of a POTUS as clueless?

    Things are bad.

  26. dicentra says:

    And that’s because HE has a vision, and HE is going to see it through. HE is right, and we are all wrong. HE knows what an America his wife can be proud of looks like — and that’s one wherein HIS “kind” can rule over and manage the drones, where HIS “kind” can pick the winners and losers, where HIS “kind” gets to determine what is truth and what is falsity.

    This.

    I’d only pick a nit here: “HIS “kind” gets to determine what is truth and what is falsity.”

    They get to determine what can and cannot be said, what can and cannot be asserted, by severely penalizing anyone who dares utter forbidden things.

    Truth and falsity are moot categories with HIS “kind,” so there’s no use employing them when describing their worldview.

    Having eliminated “truth” and “false” from their conceptual toolbag, there’s room only for raw power and the will to acquire it.

  27. sdferr says:

    Things are bad.

    Yes, yea there are, and potentially may become much worse.

    So, let’s see . . . how will “Things are bad” fit together with “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for!”?

    Were they waiting for themselves to come along to make things bad?

    Hmmm, odd as it sounds, not a few people may just be inclined to give that a thought.

  28. dicentra says:

    Obama likens himself to some sort of philosopher king. And the few examples of that in the 20th century have just turned out fabulous!

    Don’t forget our first academic president, Woodrow Wilson, he who segregated the armed forces, ran the “inferior” blacks out of D.C., and set black progress back to before the Civil War, only without actual slavery.

    It was the progressive, Wilsonian notion of eugenics that set in motion the Jim Crow laws, all of which were based on a notion of preventing whites from getting black “cooties.” Stay away from “our” swimming pools, “our” drinking fountains, “our” lunch counters, “our” hotel beds, “our” bus seats.

    Wilson’s favorite novel was Philip Dru: Administrator: a Story of Tomorrow, which depicted a technocrat whose was able to properly order society according to his administrative genius.

    Put the smart people in charge and all our problems are solved.

    But here are two examples to show what happens when you exert control over that which thrives best uncontrolled: Biosphere 2 and the monkeying around with Yellowstone’s ecosystem.

    I don’t know why people thought Biosphere 2 would work: what, they’re trying to reproduce earth’s entire ecosystem in a tiny space? WTF? Unless you can reproduce earth’s oceans, including their massive volume, forget it.

    And everything they did to “fix” Yellowstone–exterminate pesky predators, turn the bears loose at the garbage dumps for the tourons’ amusement, fire suppression–only has made things worse.

    Any lefty understands that nature is best left to its own devices: so too the free market and human society.

    You want complete control over a system? Buy a terrarium.

  29. newrouter says:

    this is interesting:

    Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of the best and most important decisions ever on federalism. The Court unanimously held that not just states but individuals have standing to challenge federal laws as violations of state sovereignty under the 10th Amendment. This decision is as radical in the direction of liberty as the New Deal was radical in the direction of socialism.

    In short, freedom advocates like us just got a green light from the USSC to bring more cases under the 10th Amendment. This will have huge—positive—implications for freedom so long as the current constitution of the court holds.

    Here is our favorite passage: “Federalism secures the freedom of the individual. It allows States to respond, through the enactment of positive law, to the initiative of those who seek a voice in shaping the destiny of their own times without having to rely solely upon the political processes that control a remote central power.” We will put this precedent to work immediately when we file our opening brief in the Obamacare lawsuit Monday, and also in our defense of Save Our Secret Ballot against the NLRB challenge, and many more cases to come.

    One other important note: Sometimes little cases make big constitutional law. This case involved a woman who was prosecuted under federal law for harassing her husband’s girlfriend—not the set of facts ordinarily creating an important precedent. Some of our cases, too, are seemingly “little” but with big principles at stake.

    link

  30. dicentra says:

    And when that happens, he thinks no-one will seek him out for to take their revenge? Then he is delusional for certain.

    He and his kind will do what aspiring tyrants always do: blame the capitalists and the productive class. “Wall Street! Bankers! Rich people! (except Oprah).” All of which are emblematized by the Joooos. Don’t think they won’t go there. They’re already halfway to the gas chambers.

    And when people get hungry and their money can’t buy food, the agitator/goon squads who belong to the dozens of Soros-funded institutions will make sure that anyone who blames the wrong people gets punished.

    “Nice store, nice house: shame it burned to the ground like that.”

    And we’ll beg for them to impose order to stop the madness.

    Unless…

    Unless we act like Americans, tell them to eff off, and keep the gubmint off our lawn, out of our cities, and away from our stuff.

    Because we can do this ourselves, thank you very much. We’re not so far gone we can’t do that.

  31. Entropy says:

    anticipating unions manufacturing job-related disruptions and riots this election season

    Vigilance applauded. Here’s the thing dude. Unions are like 8% of the private sector labor force.

    Half of all union members in this country work for public unions.

    All the rest of it, you’ve got a lot that are oddball, like nurses unions. Select industries, like big 3 auto makers.

    But you know, Subaru is non uion, Toyota is non union. Walmart and Target aren’t union. Except for where there are government monopolies, there’s competition. Construction unions have got people laid off left and right. I’ve heard rumors from a union carpenter that the hall is basically telling them to go scab for a while off the books. They got no work.

    Private unions can’t do dick like that they are dying. If there is to be a riot, it’ll be a fricken riot of schoolteachers and county courthouse office clerks.

    The only thing they can cripple is government services. Everywhere else they ARE cripple. Police and firefighters unions, teachers unions, public workers unions, sewer works, road construction, whatever.

    Not. Gonna. Be. Popular. For. Democrats.

    I mean who else besides – this isn’t 1943? Riot and workstoppage of commercial airline pilots??? That’s the sort and makeup of their presence in the private sector.

    It’s gotten so bloated most of the people they have, to send out to protests and such, work for the damn union. It’s union management. They don’t have a real union for that one yet – the Union Labor Manager’s Union. To unionize the labor of managing labor management.

    Proffessional Union Labor Protestor’s Union. Rule 1784.b, if your placard has more than then 2 letters mis-spelled you are required to contact a Local #394 (or ‘as per NLRBA ASSOC. s.17893-003 2009 certified and approved’) Union’s Protest Placard Typographist printer to issue correction.

  32. dicentra says:

    history belongs to the victors though

    We outlasted the Soviet Union, and yet all our histories whitewash progressive history and promote leftist thought. Guess that should be “history belongs to the media gatekeepers.”

    leastwise under any definition leaving some part of those defeated alive to object?

    Can we count on that? Solzhenitsyn lived to tell his tale, as did many others, and STILL the lefty shills have credibility.

    GOP candidates need to build plans anticipating unions manufacturing job-related disruptions and riots this election season.

    Men make plans; the gods laugh.

    It’s true they need to plan for it, but like all politicians, they’ll plan for it badly and allow themselves to be cowed by loudly shouted lies. Except Bachmann and Palin, though. Some women just don’t care to be “team players” or be accepted by the old boys’ club.

    I’d note that with certain caveats, the GOP is largely dead among Silicon Valley.

    Of course it is: some megabusinesses have caught on to the fact that megagubmint makes a dandy business partner, and Dems are all too willing to use the levers of power to help megabusinesses crush their smaller competitors.

    But I don’t know how to root out this kind of top-down corruption without going all French Revolution, and that only swaps out one set of tyrants for another, while losing a lot of good, bright people to war.

  33. dicentra says:

    If there is to be a riot, it’ll be a fricken riot of schoolteachers and county courthouse office clerks.

    Didn’t Insty link to an article awhile back that observes that yesterday’s union thugs were miners and steelworkers–people who by nature can bust your skull open–whereas today’s union thugs are paper-pushing pantywaists?

    They’re not afraid to say horrible things via email, Twitter, or snailmail, but if a well-regulated citizen militia were to stare them down…

    What are they going to do? Red-tape us to death?

  34. dicentra says:

    If there is to be a riot, it’ll be a fricken riot of schoolteachers and county courthouse office clerks.

    Didn’t Insty link to an article awhile back that observes that yesterday’s union thugs were miners and steelworkers–people who by nature can bust your skull open–whereas today’s union thugs are paper-pushing pantywaists?

    They’re not afraid to say horrible things via email, Twitter, or snailmail, but if a well-regulated citizen militia were to stare them down…

    What are they going to do? Red-tape us to death?

  35. sdferr says:

    Sous le point de vue politique, il est également évident que la notion fondamentale du progrès social a dû devenir à la fois beaucoup plus nette et plus ferme, et finalement bien plus prépondérante pour Condorcet, qu’elle n’avait pu l’être pour Montesquieu.

    August Comte, 1839

    From the political point of view, it is also evident that the fundamental notion of the social progress had to become at once much clearer and firmer, and finally more dominating for Condorcet, than it could have come into being for Montesquieu.

  36. geoffb says:

    Food prices have been rising both here and abroad. So what to do? What will “work”? Oh, yeah. A seamless fit with everything else they do.

  37. geoffb says:

    There is so much that is wrong with that sentence sdferr.

  38. Nolanimrod says:

    Bismarck said that if he really wanted to punish a province he would set an intellectual over them as a ruler.

  39. sdferr says:

    It’s not a bad example though, I think — as a sum of what has happened to the one-time unity of view of the intentions of the founders of the United States. They, the progressives understand, have been eclipsed, or say transcended rather, as was their teacher Montesquieu, through no fault of his or their own. Poor dears, they were fatally time-stuck.

    So said the progressives originating progressivism, possibly a better quality of progressive than we have running about today. Those earlier ones, at least, didn’t have the benefit of the demonstrable failure of their ideas laid out before the world — a failure to which, we may dare say, our more modern progressives chose to blind themselves for lack of . . . what? Intelligence? Creativity? Personal virtue? Whatever it is they are missing, it is missing in spades.

  40. Roddy Boyd says:

    39. Ooooooohhhh
    That’s good. Very, very good.

    I cannot tell you how many M.A.’s in political science/International relations I knew as colleagues when I was in daily MSM
    Towards my last year or so, I simply started to laugh when they referenced this. Most knew their many thousands of dollars in tuition and grants were useless in any applicable sense.

  41. Roddy Boyd says:

    OT: FYI, a new threat detected.
    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/analysis-how-christian-militants-might-b
    I sense an intersection between these militants and their (presumptive) circumcisions. Best to ban both. Ultimately, of course, both Jesus and penises have to be reconsidered.

  42. geoffb says:

    It is my belief that for “social progress”, with the Progressives, it has become “fundamental” only as a means to the end of power. Clarity and firmness have also been sacrificed at the altar of dominance. They being found to be obstructive of the end sought.

  43. sdferr says:

    Yeah Geoff, it does look that way. Power though simply isn’t justice, which we would do well to remind both ourselves and our opponents. I mean, the preamble doesn’t say

    ” . . . in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Power, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

  44. newrouter says:

    spineless is charitable:

    NEW ORLEANS – A comedian impersonating President Obama made racially tinged jokes Saturday at the Republican Leadership Conference before being pulled off the stage by an event organizer.

    The Obama impersonator, Reggie Brown, said that while the First Lady celebrated all of Black History Month, the bi-racial president only celebrated half the month.
    Continue Reading

    Brown also said: “My mother loved a black man, and she was not a Kardashian.”

    Flashing a picture on the screen of Fred Sanford of “Sanford and Son” fame, the comedian said that’s what Obama would look like when he got older.

    Brown didn’t just limit his jokes to Obama, though. He also mocked Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith, ridiculed Newt Gingrich’s faltering campaign and suggested Tim Pawlenty needed a spinal transplant.

    As Brown was preparing to make a Michele Bachmann joke, one of the conference’s officials came out to the lectern and told the comedian to leave the stage.

    link

  45. geoffb says:

    They merely mentally add “social” as a modifier to “justice”. Through long training the addition becomes automatically implied whenever the word “justice” is seen or heard.

  46. newrouter says:

    in connection with @10:

    I’ve been saying this from the moment Sarah Palin stepped down as Governor of Alaska.

    Now you see why she did it. She knew what was coming. If she had stayed on as Governor of Alaska, the Obama administration would have elevated the systematic regulatory destruction of the Alaskan economy to a primary mission of the administration, just like they are doing to Texas. Since she stepped down as Governor, the administration has largely left Alaska alone. But don’t think for a moment that if she was still Governor, that the Obama administration wouldn’t be pulling out all the stops to force the collapse and failure of the Alaskan state economy. It would be necessary, from their point of view, to “transform” Palin into a failed governor, and I think it’s about time that Palin be given the credit for taking the big red target off the back of Alaska, at great personal cost.

    link

  47. Swen says:

    32. Entropy posted on6/18 @ 4:00 pm
    — snip —
    If there is to be a riot, it’ll be a fricken riot of schoolteachers and county courthouse office clerks.

    Now you have me worried. If it’s to be a target-rich environment I should lay in more buckshot and one of those PAST pads, the riot guns kick like a motha.

    I’m quite sure that Jeff is right about Obama’s plans to weaken the private sector and expand the public sector, but in his impatience he’s decided to finance his Big Adventure by putting it all on the credit card. What happens to all those public sector employees when he inevitably — and fairly soon at the rate he’s going — runs out of Other Peoples’ Money? There may well be Greek-style riots by the school teachers and government office clerks when their paychecks don’t arrive on time, but those riots will most likely be presaged by a taxpayer revolt as the government tries to wring the last dime out of the populace to keep the public sector on the job. No one will be in much of a mood to put up with any nonsense from the Birkenstocks-and-gray-wool-sox crowd. By the time they start getting hungry we’ll have warmed up on tax collectors.

    Say.. No point in me doing all the work. I should lay in enough double-ought for me plus a bunch to sell to all my friends. High demand means short supply, a guy who anticipates the demand could make out like a bandit!

    So, you see, in the end the private sector will survive. The public sector? It’s going to suck to be them.

  48. David Block says:

    Social Justice is bullshit. The Democraps keep showing me why I have almost visceral hate for that party since I first voted.

    I hate copperheads.

  49. geoffb says:

    “riot guns “

    For your consideration. Kel-Tec KSG.

  50. Curmudgeon Geographer says:

    “Unions are like 8% of the private sector labor force.”

    That doesn’t mean that it will only be union members making the noise and causing problems. The unions will organize them (as always), but the drones who come to protest and cause havoc will be the same who show up at every GOP convention, G20 meeting, etc. Anarchists, progressive students and university faculty, unemployed progressives (of which there are many).

    While unions are 8%-ish of the workforce, the ranks of the unemployed in this economy are vast and dissatisfied. Wait until unemployment checks start running out on them. And there will be a racial element to them because of the huge percentages of unemployed young black males. The coming union-organized disruptions will be filled with the unemployed.

  51. cranky-d says:

    That’s a pretty nice little shotgun, geoffb, and properly scary. If you have a little more room to maneuver, and some money lying around (yeah, like who does?) I like the Benelli M2.

  52. Joe says:

    Clarence Clemens died. RIP.

  53. Jeff G. says:

    Clarence Clemens died. RIP.

    Shit. I’m gonna play a bunch of old Bruce today, then.

  54. newrouter says:

    overview of epa vs texas

    The EPA assault on Texas

  55. serr8d says:

    “Working”: States ranked by CEO’s

    By contrast, Illinois has dropped 40 places in five years and is now in a death spiral. Its bond ranking is 49th, ahead of only California. The state may play host to fugitive state senators from nearby Wisconsin and Indiana who avoid voting in their home legislatures, but businesses are heading for the exits. Doug Oberhelman, CEO of Peoria-based Caterpillar, is raising the specter of moving the heavy equipment maker out of Illinois. In a letter to Gov. Pat Quinn, he wrote, “The direction that this state is headed in is not favorable to business, and I’d like to work with you to change that.” …

    California, once a business friendly state, continues to conduct a war on its own economy. According to the Pacific Research Institute, it has the fourth largest government of all U.S. states, with spending equal to 18.3 percent of GDP. The comparable figure for Texas is 12.1 percent. Survey respondents uniformly say the state’s regulators are hostile. “No one in his right mind would start a new manufacturing concern here,” said one California CEO.

    Note the bottom five states are all (for the most part) left-liberal hells.

  56. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Yes, Obama is vulnerable — in fact, were the election held today, before Obama can unleash his billion dollar propaganda effort to run away from his record and attack the GOP candidate, whomever that turns out to be, I suspect he’d lose in one of the most enormous landslides in American history.

    I was reading somewhere, sometime last week, that, between ’98 and ’08, Barak Obama spent more time than any other politician running for higher office. Now that he’s got nothing else to run for, he’ll have to run on his record rather than on his potential, (i.e. “clean, and articulate” isn’t good enough, now that we know what “transformational” looks like). We know that he can’t run on his record (I’m assuming here that 51% of actual voters won’t be captive constituencies dependent on government –maybe that’s naive). We further know, based on his previous campaigns, that he’s heavily dependent on either smearing his opponents (Jack Ryan) or legal manuevering (that woman he challenged in the IL state senate primary) to clear his path.

    That got me thinking that if I were able to pose a question at one of those Republican debates/candidate forums, the thing I would want to know from each candidate is: assume right now that Barak Obama knows your deepest, darkest, most shameful and/or humiliating secret, and that his team will share that secret with the world at a time calculated to do maximum damage to your general election campaign. Would you care to share that information with us now, so we can decide whether or not it’s disqualifying, instead of letting Obama’s media enablers decide for us?

    And that got me further thinking that maybe, just maybe, Sarah Palin’s greatest weakness, so called, might in fact be her strongest asset. After everything that’s been thrown at her, she’s a known quality. I’d guess she’s probably innoculated from the kind of smear campaign we can expect from Obama, were she to run for and win the Republican nomination, that is.

    Just throwing that out there as a known Palin supporter. Obviously there’s going to be a fair amount of disagreement, mostly along the lines of “polls show that people don’t want her to be president –so the damage is already done.” But here’s the thing: what happens if people change their minds? After everything that’s been thrown at her, what’s Obama got left to throw to get them to change their minds back?

    Something to ponder. Or not.

Comments are closed.