Judicious Search


Advanced search

Asinine Stats

Total entries: 3358
Comments:
65688

Most Popular Entries

Another problem with Islam in the modern world (11415)
Kerry's big speech on National Security (10464)
Kerry picks Edwards (10446)
With Friends Like These (8207)
Those missing weapons of mass destruction (7709)
2003 Weblog Awards (7247)

Archives

January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003

Syndicate RSS

Judicious Asininity blog, news, views, opinions

News Links

ABC News
American Daily
American Enterprise Institute
boortz.com
Capitalism Magazine
Chicago Tribune
Chicago Sun-Times
CNEWS - Canada
CNSNews.com
Commentators
City Journal
CNN
Canadian TV
Daily News
DEBKAfile
Drudge Report
FOXnews
Google News
Insight Mag
Jerusalem Post
Journal News
LA Times
Lucianne.com
MarkSteynOnline
Mercury News

Miami Herald
MSN Slate Magazine

National Review Online
Media Research

MEMRI
Middle East Newsline
Moreover
MSNBC
Muslim News
NATIONAL POST Canada
The Nation
New York Times

NY Daily News
NYPOST.COM
Newsday
NewsMax
NRO
Opinion Journal
Reductio ad Absurdum
Pakistan Daily Times
RealClear Politics

Reuters
Roll Call
Saudi-Online
Sky News
Slate
Sydney Morning Herald
The Observer
The Scotsman
The Union Leader
TIME
Times of India
Town Hall
UPI
U.S. Politics Today
US News and World Report
USA Today
Washington Times
Weekly Standard
Worldnetdaily
Yahoo! News

Contact Form

Your Email
Subject
Message

This is the Archive Page.
Click Here for Main Page

Fri Nov 28, 2008

The Mumbai massacres remind us that war is still raging

Official condemnation from the White House and the President-Elect will not stop them

MataHarley at Flopping Aces gets it in one:

What they are is yet another band of the Islamic jihad movement that wages war on land they wish to claim for their own Caliphate. Whether they wear an AQ badge, or carry membership cards doled out by Osama Bin Laden matters not one bit. They are part and parcel of the same universal enemy that is a rose by any other name.
The correct US response is to bomb the crap out of any entity that supports the goals of radical Islam. Destroying Iran's nuclear program would be a good place to start. After all, in WW2, the first American land operation after Pearl Harbor was an attack on the Vichy French in North Africa. The Japs and the Nazi-loving Frogs had less in common than the Mad Mullahs and Al Qaeda, but the US whacked them anyway.

We need to resurrect the WW2 spirit, the D-Day spirit, the spirit that made America the greatest force for good in the world, and use it to crush the evil of radical Islam in all its incarnations. And it is time to ask the so called moderate Muslims to make a choice - join civilization and fight the evil, or be condemned to join the Jihadists in hell. The Iraqi people have made that choice. They chose wisely.

President Obama can use the Mumbai massacre to good effect if he vows revenge and takes strong action. Hint to Obama: A UN Security Council Resolution condemning the attack does not count. A few daisy cutters in Al Qaida/Taliban strongholds would be nice. Destroying Iran's nuclear infrastructure, while oil prices are so low, would send exactly the right message to our friends, our allies, our troops and our enemies.

Herschel Smith at Captain's Journal writes:
There are certainly unintended consequences to American imperialism, and the practice of fighting wars on soil other than our own is a costly affair, both monetarily and in terms of the human sacrifice. But there are also unintended consequences to isolationism too, and one such consequence might very well be that the sacrifice is even more costly when the fight is in one’s own back yard.
Especially if it's an Iranian EMP attack launched from an innocent looking freighter off the Eastern seaboard.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 28, 08 | 10:58 pm |
| [0] comments (92 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Mon Nov 24, 2008

Final D-Day Message to Western Naval Task Force

Inspirational words from Rear Admiral A. G. Kirk, U.S.N.

ALLIED EXPEDITIONARY FORCE
WESTERN NAVAL TASK FORCE
U.S..S. Augusta Flagship
27 May 1944.
SECRET

From Naval Commander, Western Task Force.
To: ALL HANDS
Subject: Coming Events

1. We of the Western Naval Task Force are going to land the American Army in France.

2. From battleships to landing craft ours is, in the main, an American Force. Beside us will be a mainly British Force, landing the British and Canadian troops. Overhead will fly the Allied Expeditionary Air Force. We all have the same mission – to smash our way onto the beaches, and through the coastal defenses, into the heart of the enemy’s fortress.

3. In two ways the coming battle differs from any that we have undertaken before: it demands more seamanship, and more fighting. We must operate in the waters of the English Channel and the French coast, in strong currents and twenty-foot tides. We must destroy an enemy defensive system which has been four years in the making, and our mission is one against which the enemy will throw his whole remaining strength. These are not beaches held by apathetic Italians or defended by hasty fortifications. These are prepared position, held by Germans who have learned from their past failures. They have coastal batteries and mine-fields; they have bombers and E-boats and submarines. They will try to use them all. We are getting into a fight.

4. But it is not we who have to fear the outcome. As the Germans learned from failure, we have learned from success. To this battle we bring our tested methods, with many new weapons, and overwhelming strength. Tides and current present a challenge which, forewarned, we know how to meet. And it will take more than the last convulsive effort of the beaten "master race" to match the fighting spirit of the American Navy. It is the enemy who is afraid.

5. In this force there are battleships, cruisers, and destroyers. There are hundreds of landing ships and craft, scores of patrol and escort vessels, dozens of special assault craft, Every man in every ship has his job. And these tens of thousands of men and jobs add up to one task only – to land and support and supply and reinforce the finest Army ever sent to battle by the United States. In that task we shall not fail. I await with confidence the further proof, in this greatest battle of them all, that American sailors are seamen and fighting men second to none.

6. Captains will please publish this letter at quarters on the day that ships are sealed; then post on bulletin boards; and remove and burn prior to sailing.

Signed by A.G. Kirk.
Rear Admiral A. G. Kirk, U.S.N. commanded the Western Naval Task Force. His forces assaulted UTAH and OMAHA. My father-in-law skippered an LCT onto Utah beach on D-Day. He did not burn his copies of this letter.

What strikes me about this letter is the forthright honesty of the commander. He says:
These are not beaches held by apathetic Italians or defended by hasty fortifications. These are prepared position, held by Germans who have learned from their past failures. They have coastal batteries and mine-fields; they have bombers and E-boats and submarines. They will try to use them all. We are getting into a fight.
But then he delivers the counter:
But it is not we who have to fear the outcome. As the Germans learned from failure, we have learned from success. To this battle we bring our tested methods, with many new weapons, and overwhelming strength.

I will be posting some more D-Day material over the next few weeks.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 24, 08 | 11:09 pm |
| [0] comments (115 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Thu Nov 20, 2008

I want a Pelosi GTxi SS/Rt Sport Edition

Like a hole in my head

Classic Iowahak truth-telling. Here's your automotive future:

All new for 2012, the Pelosi GTxi SS/Rt Sport Edition is the mandatory American car so advanced it took $100 billion and an entire Congress to design it. We started with same reliable 7-way hybrid ethanol-biodeisel-electric-clean coal-wind-solar-pedal power plant behind the base model Pelosi, but packed it with extra oomph and the sassy styling pizazz that tells the world that 1974 Detroit is back again -- with a vengeance.

We've subsidized the features you want and taxed away the rest. With its advanced Al Gore-designed V-3 under the hood pumping out 22.5 thumping, carbon-neutral ponies of Detroit muscle, you'll never be late for the Disco or the Day Labor Shelter. Engage the pedal drive or strap on the optional jumbo mizzenmast, and the GTxi SS/Rt Sport Edition easily exceeds 2016 CAFE mileage standards. At an estimated 268 MPG, that's a savings of nearly $1800 per week in fuel cost over the 2011 Pelosi.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 20, 08 | 11:39 pm |
| [1] comments (112 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Why is Obama recycling Clintonistas?

Would you rather he recycled Carterites?

Neo-Neocon explains why Obama has to choose from a limited pool and provides excellent historical context. She writes:

The Clinton administration was the most recent Democrat presidency. To go back and try to find non-Clinton Democrats with experience in a previous administration, Obama would had to have reached back to the 70s and Carter. I for one am highly relieved that he has not done so—not only because many of those people would be ancient (or dead), but because I think that for the most part Carter’s policies were more disastrous than Clinton’s. But these two administrations—Clinton’s and Carter’s—are pretty much the only games in town for Obama if he wants Democrats with previous experience at that level.
If Obama sticks with Gates for SOD, I'd be relieved. It would mean that he has thrown all his code-Pink campaign rhetoric under the bus. He's been good at throwing harmful associates and supporters under the bus.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 20, 08 | 9:46 pm |
| [0] comments (113 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Tue Nov 18, 2008

Card Check and the UAW

Who'd want to join a union after seeing what the UAW did to Detroit?

Powerline has a chart showing the pre-tax operating profit per vehicle for the real Big 3 (Honda, Nissan and Toyota) and the Detroit Big 3. Honda makes about $1500 per vehicle. GM loses almost as much. That $3000 difference is the cost of meeting the retirement and health care entitlements that GM provides UAW workers and retirees. The UAW won those benefits by threatening to strike if the Big 3 did not agree to their terms. The result is that the American auto industry is virtually bankrupt. Something has to give and it will be UAW jobs and benefits.

So, when the union thugs come to your workplace asking you to sign their cards, take a look at what the UAW did to Detroit.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 18, 08 | 12:17 pm |
| [0] comments (121 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Sun Nov 16, 2008

How to beat the Fairness Doctrine

Boycott the advertisers of weak MSM outlets

The New York Times just hit junk bond status. What would be the impact if a few thousand conservatives wrote to the NYT's major advertisers and threatened a boycott of their products until they stop advertising in the NYT? What would be the impact if sales actually dropped? Ditto MSNBC.

Such a campaign should operate like a wolf pack. Pick off the weakest. The rest will feel safe. For a while. Keep up the campaign until no advertiser supported liberal media remains, except Air America. The beauty is that you don't need a majority to prevail. All you have to do is have a negative impact on the advertisers' sales.

Just a thought, like Schumer's thought that conservative speech is like pornography.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 16, 08 | 10:30 pm |
| [1] comments (121 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Fri Nov 14, 2008

So what if GM goes under?

It won't cause the next depression

Car buyers will find the range of brands they can buy reduced but they will still buy something. The likelihood is that it will be a built-in-America car, be it Ford, Honda, or Toyota. The suppliers that supplied GM may also be supplying the other manufacturers. If the GM-only suppliers go out of business, then the other suppliers will gain business. The market will adjust to the new realities. Some regions will lose jobs; some will gain.

The real victory will be that that UAW will be destroyed. With GM gone, Ford can play tough. The UAW can't leverage deals with Chrysler to pressure Ford. That game is gone.

I think GM has some reasonable products in its line-up. I'd actually think about getting into a Cadillac CTS ahead of a V6 Honda Accord. But, if that product disappears, no one will be much worse off.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 14, 08 | 12:23 am |
| [0] comments (131 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Thu Nov 13, 2008

WW2 War Bond Poster politically incorrect

Pity we can't have a modern day equivalent

We found this great poster amongst some old family papers.

image

Can you imagine the US government advertising "This is Give them their 72 virgins week" to raise money for the war on radical Islam?

Posted by: Pat on Nov 13, 08 | 9:37 pm |
| [0] comments (124 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Mon Nov 10, 2008

Should Washington bail-out Detroit?

We know they will, but should they?

Back in the post-war period, Britain had a thriving car industry. Some of it was owned by GM (Vauxhall), Ford (Ford), and Chrysler (Rootes Group). The domestic part was British Motors Corporation (BMC). It owned the brands Austin, Morris, Riley, MG (aka Morris Garages), Riley, and Worsley. It sort of expired in 1975 when it was nationalized.

British Motors Corporation (BMC) faded away. Britain still has a thriving auto industry. It's mostly foreign owned and Britain is better off for it.

The US has a thriving auto industry, too. Honda, Toyota, Mercedes, Nissan, BMW and Hyundai all outsourced much of their US market manufacturing and design to the US. The thriving part is not constrained by the US way of doing business.

What would happen if GM went bankrupt? It could still continue in business while it reorganized itself. Some brands would be closed down or sold off. Hummer is the obvious candidate. Maybe Buick could be split off and sold to a Chinese company - Buick sells well there. Cadillac might be attractive to Honda; Acura has not been a great success in the near-luxury market, and Cadillac might add the missing magic. The losers would be shareholder and GM employees. The fat union contracts that the big three signed with the UAW will be rewritten.

Washington should say no more bail-outs. Go broke; you deserve it. Of course, with the Dem's in power, that ain't gonna fly. Or maybe Obama will surprise us.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 10, 08 | 9:42 pm |
| [0] comments (113 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Obama's cabinet takes shape

Here's hoping the rumors aren't true, for Obama's sake

John Kerry for Secretary of State? What's he done except slime America's military while still serving, and lose an election Obama would have won in a landslide. Few other politicians, with the possible exception of Joe Biden, can talk so much and say so little.

Jamie Gorelick for Attorney General? Doug Ross calls her the "Mistress of Disaster", with good cause. First the "wall", that blinded America to the 9/11 plotters, and then her stint at Fannie Mae.

Either appointment would signal that Obama doesn't have a clue, let alone America's best interests at heart.


Posted by: Pat on Nov 10, 08 | 8:31 pm |
| [0] comments (130 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Sat Nov 08, 2008

"Change" swings both ways

US lurches left, tiny New Zealand lurches right

According to the Sydney Morning Herald:

New Zealand's incoming prime minister John Key says his party's decisive win over the ruling Labour Party shows his nation has voted for change.

Key's centre-right National Party defeated the Labour Party, winning more than 45 per cent of the primary vote, enough to govern with the support of minor parties.

"In their hundreds of thousands across the country they have voted for change," Key told supporters at a function in Auckland.

Key, 47, promised a government he led would herald a more ambitious future for the country, which is in a recession and has rising unemployment.

"We need everybody pulling in the same direction. If we do that. If we work hard and if we remain determined we will make New Zealand as prosperous as we all know it can be," Key said.

"It will be a government that values individual achievement. It will be a government that supports those that cannot support themselves. And it will be a government we can all be part of," he said.

Key's defeat of the Labour government led by Prime Minister Helen Clark ends her nine-year reign as New Zealand's leader.
Change sure is a powerful slogan. I suppose it beats "Fix what's broken, keep what's working, and scratch where it itches." (inspired by Eleanor Roosevelt's quip on sex: "Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it itches.")

New Zealand has had an interesting political history over the last forty years. The National Party is the right of center party; Labour the left. During the 60's and 70's, the National Party, under Robert Muldoon, acted like protectionist Democrats, or worse, North Korea's leadership. The slogan was Think Big; the results poor:
the government borrowed heavily and pumped the funds into large-scale industrial projects, would create trickle-down benefits in the form of jobs and revenue. This never happened: most of the Think Big projects yielded minimal profit whilst Muldoon was still Prime Minister and many were hampered by industrial disputes
Perhaps the contemporary US equivalent is pumping tax-payer money into the Big 3.

In 1984, the National government got thrown out, replace by a Labor government with a commitment to free markets that rivaled Thatcher's. Under the leadership of finance minster Roger Douglas:
Political commentator Bruce Jesson argued that Douglas acted fast to achieve a complete economic revolution within one parliamentary term, in case he did not get a second chance.[5] The reforms can be summarised as the dismantling of the Australasian model of state development that had existed for the previous 90 years, and its replacement by the Anglo-American neoliberal orthodoxy based on the monetarist policies of Milton Friedman and the Chicago School.[1] The financial market was deregulated and controls on foreign exchange removed. Subsidies to many industries, notably agriculture, were removed or significantly reduced, as was tariff protection. The marginal tax rate was halved over a number of years from 66% to 33%; this was paid for by the introduction of a tax on goods and services (GST) initially at 10%, later 12.5%, and a surtax on superannuation, which had been made universal from age 60 by the previous government.
Douglas' policies didn't go down too well with generations of New Zealanders brought up on Swedish style social welfare. Labor lost power to National, which continued Douglas' policies until 1993.

Since then, New Zealand has tried to regain its socialist past. Under leftist Labor leader Helen Clark, it hasn't worked. Roger Douglas knows why:
The patient's diagnosis is quite clear. Government spending is now $15 billion per annum above the baseline trajectory that had been operating prior to Labour taking office. In 1999 tax revenue was $32 billion. Only 8 years later it's $52 billion, instead of $37 billion. Excessive spending has built a hot house environment with inflationary pressures that flow into every corner of the economy. Wages, prices, house costs, rents, mortgage rates and electricity all feel the relentless push from government overspending. Productivity has slowed to a crawl, while the rise in the standard of living, allowing for inflation, gradually subsides for most people, especially traditional Labour voters. It's a replay of Robert Muldoon. Thanks to excessive state spending and overuse of credit cards we import more and more. The government's spendthrift nature infects individual behaviour right across the country. High domestic interest rates are only one of the sideline results of excessive spending, like diabetes resulting from over-eating. The dollar soars because overseas investors are looking for a quick buck. They won't invest long-term in an economic graveyard.

Overspending governments often choose to regulate, rather than deal with the base cause of the disease. Few doctors admit mistakes. We now have 24,000 more people on the state's payroll than in 1999, steadily reaching double the number running the country eight years ago. Their remuneration races ahead of the private sector, and helps drive Wellington house prices and the inflationary environment many are allegedly there to control. Commissions and regulators spring up as ministers try to bandage the inflationary balloon to stop it exploding. Remember that awful movie of Evelyn Waugh's, "The Loved One"? It centred around the American funeral industry with a vast Mrs Joyboys in bed gorging herself until she burst? Labour is moving relentlessly down that road as ministers inflate spending and meddle in things beyond their expertise, completely confident they know better than the market place. Any wonder that an upwardly mobile one million Kiwis now live overseas, escaping the huge gap that has opened up between wages at home and those elsewhere?
Disclosure: I'm one of that one million.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 08, 08 | 8:01 pm |
| [0] comments (113 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Will military morale plummet under Obama?

Anecdotal evidence suggest it already has

Talked to a running friend this morning, whose boyfriend is serving in Afghanistan. He flies combat helicopters. She said that he, and many of his military friends, were disgusted with the election result, and will not re up.

The one thing the two wars have given America is a military that can fight and win against asymmetric forces. It would be tragic to lose that. Obama needs to do something to reassure the military that he is not Jimmy Carter redux. My suggestion is that he works with Bush to launch a surprise attack on Iran's nuclear and military capabilities on his Inauguration day. Boy, would that would send a message. Chances of it happening? Zero.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 08, 08 | 7:43 pm |
| [1] comments (127 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Fri Nov 07, 2008

Obama has a chance to capture the political center

If he succeeds he will win in 2012

All he has to do is satisfy a few benchmarks:

1. Dow Jones Industrial Average beats Bush's best
2. Unemployment beats Bush's worst
3. Inflation stays under control
4. Hard-left agenda items, like Card-Check and Fairness doctrine, get forgotten
5. Iraq is left as a stable American ally
6. Afghanistan is "won"; the Taliban coughing up OBL and the rest of his merry crew counts as winning
7. Health care stays private (He should work with McCain on this; it's about the only good idea McCain had)

Now it gets harder:

1. Iran ceases to be a threat to Israel, directly, or indirectly.
2. Russia gets stopped before Ukraine goes under
3. Missile defense becomes a real deterrent (we're getting close)

And harder again:

1. Stop Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi from screwing up his reelection chances. Where they aren't, the electorate is.

My advice to Obama:

Study why Jimmy Carter failed and Ronald Reagan succeeded.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 07, 08 | 1:37 am |
| [0] comments (114 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Thu Nov 06, 2008

Bashing Sarah

Not wise, sore losers

We've been seeing stories and leaks about Sarah being a Diva, Sarah being a spendthrift, Sarah going off-message, and Sarah losing the election for McCain.

So, how come she outdrew McCain and Biden and even Obama at her rallies? How come her addition to the ticket brought in a lot of extra money to GOP coffers? We were determined not to contribute to the GOP or McCain. We supported individual candidates, but not the RNC or McCain. When he selected Sarah, we started contributing.

The real problem is that the McCain camp saddled her with all the McCain positions that cost him so much support within the GOP camp. She sure didn't look comfortable spewing global warming and cap-and-trade nonsense. I doubt she was on-board with the bail-out.

No, it wasn't Palin who lost it for McCain; it was McCain who lost it for the GOP. And he lost it when he went all-in for the $700 billion dollar bail-out. Had he opposed it, he would have had Obama and the Democrats supporting Bush in saddling tax-payers with massive future liabilities.

Sarah Palin will be back. McCain won't. Good.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 06, 08 | 9:00 am |
| [0] comments (117 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Wed Nov 05, 2008

The constant drumbeat of an Obama win worked

The white vote was suppressed

American Thinker's Richard Baehr writes:

Total turnout for President came in nowhere near the record numbers some were forecasting: 140 million or more. The total vote for President might not exceed the 2004 level of 122 million by very much at all (currently 118 million with 96% of the votes counted). What that means is that with higher turnout by African Americans and Hispanics, about 2% higher as a share of the total vote in each case, that white turnout was down from 2004. Some Republicans (and Democrats and independents) stayed home. There is no other conclusion.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 05, 08 | 10:43 am |
| [1] comments (143 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Tue Nov 04, 2008

Dems destroy economy, reap electoral reward

Sort of ironic

Fannie and Freddie were Democrat fiefdoms. They created the sub prime mortgage mess yet the GOP got blamed. Of course, the GOP, starting with McCain, did nothing to separate themselves from that disaster.

Ohio just went Obama. That's the ball game. It is amazing that people are stupid enough to pick a Marxist to fix the economy. But there is one constraint on Obama and his fellow travelers. It is the Dow Jones Industrial Average Index. Obama cannot afford for the Dow to sink much further. He has to figure out how to get it back over 11,000 or he dooms the Democrats in 2010. Ditto gas prices. The people aren't going to vote Democrat if gas prices hit $5.

Meanwhile, Obama has to figure out how to stop Iran nuking Israel (or vice versa). If that happens, Democrats are doomed forever.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 04, 08 | 9:20 pm |
| [5] comments (234 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Mon Nov 03, 2008

Obama's job application

Pretty mediocre resume

Wizbang scored a copy. Check it before you vote.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 03, 08 | 9:13 pm |
| [0] comments (126 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

If Obama wins, we'll pay dearly

But will the electorate learn how bad the Democrats are?

Obama's campaign has done a good job of selling a totally inexperienced, ruthlessly ambitious Marxist as Presidential material. The MSM have been rooting so hard for Obama it is a wonder that McCain/Palin are within ten points in the polls. The unfortunate probability is that we'll wake up on November 5th with Obama as our next President.

How will he perform when the pressure is on?

Imagine a football expert from the crowd, the man who seems to know everything his team did wrong, suddenly asked to take over as head coach of team. I'm thinking of my brother-in-law being asked to take over Romeo Crennel's job in the third quarter when the Browns are trailing by 14 points. How do you think my brother-in-law would perform?

That's what the country will face when Obama takes the reins. He hasn't coached anything in his life yet he has just been given a job far tougher than any NFL coaching job.

It gets worse. Obama will be depending on his offensive coordinator (Nancy Pelosi) and defensive coordinator (Harry Reid) to push his legislative program. That pair has achieved nothing in the last two years, unless you count the financial crash precipitated by Fannie and Freddie.

Football fans get very impatient when their teams do poorly. Here's hoping the American public is just as impatient.

Posted by: Pat on Nov 03, 08 | 8:14 pm |
| [0] comments (119 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Sun Nov 02, 2008

Does McCain have any hope?

Not if you read the MSM and read the polls

But we few have some strands of hope.

My wife's hairdresser thinks there are a lot of voters who favor McCain but aren't saying anything to anybody; not friends, not neighbors and not pollsters. Who wants to be called racist, or, as my wife was called, unintelligent, for not voting Obama? Maybe this effect is the spiral of silence.

Then there are the PUMAS. I have a gut feel, from reading PUMA blogs, that a critical fraction of avowed Democrat voters are pumas in sheep's clothing, unwilling to vote for their misogynistic shepherd.


Posted by: Pat on Nov 02, 08 | 8:31 pm |
| [0] comments (105 views) |  | Permalink | [0] TrackBack |

Go to Main Page


Random Posts

Phony Foley Polling

Blood Thirsty French

Counting the sacrifices