Thursday, April 30, 2009


Although there are relatively few cases of swine flu around the world, WHO (the World Health Organization, not the rock band) has proclaimed it to be a pandemic.

Here is the breakdown of swine flu cases as of April 29, 2009:

Australia 17 Suspected cases
Austria 1
Brazil 1 possible
Britain 5
Canada 13
Chile 8 Suspected cases
Colombia 9 Suspected cases
Denmark 5 Suspected cases
France 1 suspected case.
Germany 4 cases
Ireland 3 Suspected cases
Israel 2
Mexico 2,498 (152 deaths)
New Zealand 15
South Korea 1 suspected
Spain 4 confirmed cases
Sweden 5 suspected
Switzerland 5 suspected
United Kingdom 2 possible

USA 91 cases - 1 death - As of April 29, 2009
Arizona 1 case
California 14 cases
Indiana 1 case
Kansas 2 cases
Massachusetts 2 cases
Michigan 2 cases
Nevada 1 case
New York City 51 cases
Ohio 1 case
Texas 16 cases 1 Death.

Here's a website to help you keep up: SwineFluMap

The majority of these cases involve people who have visited Mexico, or who have come in contact with people who have visited Mexico.

The one U.S. death was a Mexican child who had come to the U.S. for treatment, but, sadly, too late.

Only around Mexico City is the number of epidemic proportions.

It is interesting that New Zealand has so many cases (54 by some counts).

There seemingly are ties to travel to Mexico in almost all of the cases worldwide.

There is a sort of health panic being generated by the disease.

Some interesting pictures:

Here are some travelers wearing masks to protect them from getting swine flu.

Here are a Mexican and a Spaniard protecting themselves from swine flu with masks.

Here is a visitor to New York wearing a mask to protect him from swine flu.

Here a mother protects herself, but not her children from swine flu.

In this picture a mask protects a statue from swine flu.

This pig has not heard of swine flu and is not wearing a mask.

The Russians have stopped importing pork from several countries, including the United States. But swine flu never has, does not now and never will come from eating pork, cooked or raw.

Swine flu is unpleasant. In some situations it can be deadly.

We must feel great sympathy for the families of the Mexicans who have died from the swine flu.

But human beings tend to act irrationally when news of these things gets spread around.

The biggest spreader of panic is the MainStream Press, who just will not give all of the facts at one time.

The truth is, those masks will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to protect anybody from swine flu, as the virus can go right through them.

No antibiotic can touch the flu, which is caused by a virus, not bacteria. Tamiflu and one other drug, Relenza are somewhat effective in treating swine flu.

The best protection is to regularly wash your hands, keep your hand off of surfaces that are in places where many people may have touched them, wash your hands, avoid crowded places (no doubt a factor in the Mexican deaths) when possible, wash your hands, and if you are feeling flu-ish (fever, weakness, shaking, sore throat, and maybe vomiting and diarrhea and generally miserable), STAY HOME and wash your hands!

Tuesday, April 28, 2009


President Barack H. Obama completes his first 100 days in office today.

The biggest surprise is that he made it this far.

Now, don't go all x-stal on me. I don't think anything dire should have happened by now.

What I mean is, whatever else he may be, he is the most energetic, tripple-A type personality to have taken the White House in my lifetime.

When it comes to energy, this guy could end our dependence on foreign oil all by himself if we could find a way to harness it.

The purpose of this post, however, is to take a look at some of the significant milestones in his War on Achievement and my evaluation of them.

January 22: he issued an Executive Order to close Guantanamo detention center within a year and declared that the U.S. will not "torture" prisoners. Mistake.

January 23: he Lifted ban on federal funding for international organizations that perform or provide information on abortions. Mistake.

January 27: he gave the first formal television interview as president to Arab television station, telling Muslims, "Americans are not your enemy." Mistake.

January 29: signed his first bill into law, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, making it easier for workers to sue for pay discrimination. Mistake.

February 17: Signed The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, promising that it would create or save 3.5 million jobs. Mistake.

February 25: Moved to fill out his cabinet, nominating former Washington Governor Gary Locke for Commerce Secretary after New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson withdraws over campaign contribution controversy. Mistake.

February 26: Unveiled a $3.6 trillion federal budget for 2010 and estimates the federal deficit for 2009 will balloon to $1.75 trillion. Mistake.

February 27: Announced the withdrawal of all American combat forces from Iraq by August 2010, but says the U.S. will leave tens of thousands of support troops behind. Mistake.

March 2: Nominates Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services after former Sen. Tom Daschle withdraws over income tax controversy. Mistake.

March 3: Released $28 billion in stimulus funds to states and cities to build and repair highways, roads and bridges. Uhh - good for states; bad for tax payer - Mistake.

March 9: Reversed President George W. Bush's ban on federally funded embryonic stem cell research, and declares that all federal scientific research will be walled off from political influences. Not one benefit has come out of EMBRYONIC stem cell research. Both umbilical and adult stem cell research have actually achieved results. Mistake. (The underlined part sounds good but is absolute fantasy.)

March 19: In an interview with Jay Leno on the "Tonight" shows, he criticized the bonuses paid to AIG executives. Not the government's business. Mistake.

March 24: Responded to drug cartel violence along the Mexico border, committing $700 million to law enforcement and promising to work to reduce U.S. demand for illegal drugs. Not a totally bad idea, but probably will result in money being spent with no results. Mistake.

March 30: Asserted unprecedented government control over the auto industry, rejecting turnaround plans by General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, and engineering the ouster of GM's chief executive, Rick Wagoner. Not the government's business. Mistake.

March 30: Signed Omnibus Public Lands Management Act. Included in the law is protection for 256,000 acres in southwestern Utah. Check out those 256,000 acres...what do you suppose is prevented by "protecting" that land? Mistake.

March 31: Begins his first European tour as president, which, over several days includes a G20 summit to deal with the recession, meetings with Russian President Dmitriy A. Medvedev and Chinese President Hu Jintao, to discuss the economy and reducing military arsenals, and a NATO summit. Embarrasses his own country by apologizing for its evilness. Mistake.

April 7: Paid a surprise visit to Iraq, met with Iraqi leaders and gets a less than ecstatic reception from U.S. soldiers. Basically a good idea, but ended up being pretty flat. Check out: The Unseen Blogger .

April 10: Nominates BYU law professor Larry EchoHawk to head the Bureau of Indian Affairs. EchoHawk opposed having Indian casinos in Idaho, but when it was discovered that Idaho had a law allowing casinos, he helped the state negotiate a loophole that would create a state statute to oppose Tribal Gaming. Plus, he has experience in leadership on Pawnee land less than 1,000 acres. How can he know what the issues are on Native American reservations? Mistake.

April 12: Authorized use of lethal force to rescue cargo ship captain held hostage by Somali pirates. Good move...even though he should not get excessive credit for what the Navy Seals, themselves, accomplished.

April 13: Removed family travel and remittance restrictions with Cuba. OK...I'm ambivalent on this one. Good for Cuban Americans who want to go home, bad in the long run until Raul Castro changes his ways.

April 16: Visited Mexico City and President Felipe Calderon. The leaders agreed to cooperate on combating drug violence along the U.S.-Mexico border. Mistake...nothing will be accomplished and he probably brought swine flu back to us. (OK...that last part was a joke...lighten up, for goodness sake!)

April 16: Released memos from Bush administration authorizing harsh interrogation techniques but says no CIA employees who followed the memos will be prosecuted. Mistake. Would have been a mistake even if he hadn't changed his position later (see below).

April 17: Travels to Trinidad and Tobago for the 34-nation Summit of the Americas and declares that he "seeks a new beginning with Cuba." At the summit, Obama shakes hands with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, the leftist, anti-American leader who had called Bush a devil. More apologizing for America. Stupid Mistake.

April 20: First Cabinet meeting. Gave cabinet members 90 days to cut government spending by $100 million. OK...cutting is good. But 100 million is a minuscule amount. Mistake. Good for posturing only.

April 21 - 23: Leaves the door open for prosecution of federal lawyers who wrote harsh interrogation memos during Bush administration and says if there's an investigation, it should be done by an independent commission. Two days later, he tells congressional leaders he will not support creation of an independent commission to investigate the Bush administration's harsh interrogation techniques. Mistake. (See April 16 above)

April 27: Says the government is concerned about the spreading swine flu virus but there's not yet "a cause for alarm." Allows DHS Director Janet Napolitano to declare a health emergency. Mistake.

If you are a liberal, I'm quite certain you disagree with my assessments.

If that is the case, feel free to offer a reason for your disagreement.

However, if you just call me or any of my other commenters silly, of stupid, or some other disparaging name, your comment will be deleted.

State your case reasonably, logically and stick to the topic of this post, which is not how some previous president(s) did in THEIR first 100 days, but how President BO has done.


Structure of the influenza virion. The hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) proteins are shown on the surface of the particle. The viral RNAs that make up the genome are shown as red coils inside the particle and bound to Ribonuclear Proteins (RNPs).

I'm not a doctor.

I don't even play one on TV.

But I have a good computer and can find lots of information about lots of things.

That's a 3-D representation of a flu virus.

You may not understand all of the terminology, but suffice to say it is a complicated organism over which there is controversy as to its nature.

We hear a lot about a particular strain of the flu virus which is (as of this writing) affecting about 50 people in the United States.

We hear the term "pandemic" tossed around. I wonder whether we know what it means.

How does it differ from an "epidemic," which we almost never hear any more?

Here are the definitions.

Epidemic: a widespread outbreak of an infectious disease; many people are infected at the same time. A disease or anything resembling a disease; attacking or affecting many individuals in a community or a population.

Pandemic: An epidemic over a wide geographical area; "a pandemic outbreak of malaria."
An epidemic that is geographically widespread; occurring throughout a region or even throughout the world.

The flu virus attaches itself to a normal, healthy cell in the body and renders it unhealthy.

It also replicates itself and attaches to many other cells.

When enough viruses attach themselves to enough otherwise healthy cells, symptoms occur which we refer to as "the flu."

Here's what a virus attacking an otherwise healthy cell looks like:

That's pretty impressive, don't you think?

I was on a web site yesterday (I visit so many that I have forgotten which one) at which there was a comment about President BO's lackadaisical attitude toward this so-called pandemic of swine flu.

President BO responded by reassuring Americans it was "not a cause for alarm," even as the government began urgent steps to respond to the small-but-rising number of cases.

Another commenter then chimed in, saying something like, "Well, its ONLY 20 cases...what do you want him to do?"

(Now it's up to about 50 cases...still not a great percentage of 360,000,000 people.)

By the afternoon, Janet Napolitano, the ever vigilant Director of Homeland Security, was out front on the government's response to the outbreak. Besides fighting terrorism, overseeing epidemics is also part of her job.

This brings up the question of the task of Charles E. Johnson, Acting Secretary of Health and Human Services, who leads the Nation’s efforts in protecting the health of all Americans.

So who is in charge of the "pandemic," Janet Napolitano or Charles E. Johnson?"

It seems that Janet has been put in charge.

Sunday she declared a public health emergency to deal with the emerging new swine flu, much like the government does to prepare for approaching hurricanes.

So the swine flu is "not a cause for alarm," but it is "a public health emergency."

At best, that seems inconsistent to me.

Is this a real confidence builder?

Does this increase your sense of trust in this sophomoricly run government?

At this point, please imagine me giving out with a heavy "SIGH!"

Monday, April 27, 2009


Is there no end to the rank stupidity?

Earlier today (Monday, April 27, 2009) New Yorkers were "treated" to a 747 flying low over New York City and Jersey City.

From the ground it appeared that two F-16 fighters were chasing it.

Understandably, people were taken aback at best.

One witness reported that at one time it looked as though the plane was headed straight for the building he was working in.

Even you, dear liberal reader, can understand the sudden shot of adrenaline that would have coursed through that man's body straight to his heart, can't you?

According to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, nobody in New York City government was informed that what turned out to be an photo-op exercise was going to take place.

At 4:39 p.m. Monday, the White House issued an apology for the flyover. Louis E. Caldera, director of the White House Military Office, who served in the Clinton administration as secretary of the Army, said in a statement:

"Last week, I approved a mission over New York.

"I take responsibility for that decision.

"While federal authorities took the proper steps to notify state and local authorities in New York and New Jersey, it’s clear that the mission created confusion and disruption.

"I apologize and take responsibility for any distress that flight caused."

Here's another case of a President BO appointment gone bad.

It seems that his appointee, Louis E. Caldera, was unable to foresee the possible pandemonium such an exercise could cause.

Perhaps he does not remember that there used to be two large buildings that are no longer there because they were crashed into by two large airplanes.

Maybe he could not connect the dots that would lead to the citizens from the almost 3,000 people who were mercilessly killed in those buildings.

It could be that the date 9/11 just doesn't mean anything to Mr. Caldera or to President BO.

"I take responsibility for that decision," he said.

No he doesn't.

Responsibility always comes with a price (think speeding ticket...the responsible person pays for it).

There will be no price paid by Louis Caldera. This will be treated as a non event.

Please don't come to this blog with excuses for this episode or trying to explain it away.

Don't try to equate this with something President Bush, or President Reagan did.

They are not the subject here.

President BO and his appointees' inane behavior is the subject.

It was an egregious (for you public school graduates, that means: conspicuously and outrageously bad or reprehensible) action and cannot be mitigated (moderated in force or intensity).

The people in this administration do not know what they are doing, but seem determined to do it anyway.

How you, Mr. Average American, can stand by and let these things go on is beyond my ability to intellectualize.

When...oh when will you get out of the way and let us return to being what America should be being?

When will your stupidity end?

Here's another look at what people saw:


House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 10, 2003:

Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): I worry, frankly, that there's a tension here. The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. . . .

Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.),
speaking to Housing and Urban Development Secretary Mel Martinez:

Secretary Martinez, if it ain't broke, why do you want to fix it? Have the GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises] ever missed their housing goals?

House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:

Rep. Frank:
I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. . . .

House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:

Rep. Gregory Meeks, (D., N.Y.):
. . . I am just pissed off at Ofheo [Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight] because if it wasn't for you I don't think that we would be here in the first place.

And Freddie Mac, who on its own, you know, came out front and indicated it is wrong, and now the problem that we have and that we are faced with is maybe some individuals who wanted to do away with GSEs in the first place, you have given them an excuse to try to have this forum so that we can talk about it and maybe change the direction and the mission of what the GSEs had, which they have done a tremendous job. . .

Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Director Armando Falcon Jr.: Congressman, Ofheo did not improperly apply accounting rules; Freddie Mac did. Ofheo did not try to manage earnings improperly; Freddie Mac did. So this isn't about the agency's engagement in improper conduct, it is about Freddie Mac. Let me just correct the record on that. . . . I have been asking for these additional authorities for four years now. I have been asking for additional resources, the independent appropriations assessment powers.

This is not a matter of the agency engaging in any misconduct. . . .

Rep. Waters: However, I have sat through nearly a dozen hearings where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke. Housing is the economic engine of our economy, and in no community does this engine need to work more than in mine. With last week's hurricane and the drain on the economy from the war in Iraq, we should do no harm to these GSEs. We should be enhancing regulation, not making fundamental change.

Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines. Everything in the 1992 act has worked just fine. In fact, the GSEs have exceeded their housing goals. . . .

Rep. Frank: Let me ask [George] Gould and [Franklin] Raines on behalf of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, do you feel that over the past years you have been substantially under-regulated?
Mr. Raines?

Mr. Raines: No, sir.

Mr. Frank: Mr. Gould?

Mr. Gould: No, sir. . . .

Mr. Frank: OK. Then I am not entirely sure why we are here. . . .

Rep. Frank: I believe there has been more alarm raised about potential unsafety and unsoundness than, in fact, exists.

Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 16, 2003:

Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.):
And my worry is that we're using the recent safety and soundness concerns, particularly with Freddie, and with a poor regulator, as a straw man to curtail Fannie and Freddie's mission. And I don't think there is any doubt that there are some in the administration who don't believe in Fannie and Freddie altogether, say let the private sector do it. That would be sort of an ideological position.
Mr. Raines: But more importantly, banks are in a far more risky business than we are.

Senate Banking Committee, Feb. 24-25, 2004:

Sen. Thomas Carper (D., Del.):
What is the wrong that we're trying to right here? What is the potential harm that we're trying to avert?

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: Well, I think that that is a very good question, senator.

What we're trying to avert is we have in our financial system right now two very large and growing financial institutions which are very effective and are essentially capable of gaining market shares in a very major market to a large extent as a consequence of what is perceived to be a subsidy that prevents the markets from adjusting appropriately, prevents competition and the normal adjustment processes that we see on a day-by-day basis from functioning in a way that creates stability. . . . And so what we have is a structure here in which a very rapidly growing organization, holding assets and financing them by subsidized debt, is growing in a manner which really does not in and of itself contribute to either home ownership or necessarily liquidity or other aspects of the financial markets. . . .

Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.): [T]he federal government has [an] ambiguous relationship with the GSEs. And how do we actually get rid of that ambiguity is a complicated, tricky thing. I don't know how we do it.

I mean, you've alluded to it a little bit, but how do we define the relationship? It's important, is it not?

Mr. Greenspan: Yes. Of all the issues that have been discussed today, I think that is the most difficult one. Because you cannot have, in a rational government or a rational society, two fundamentally different views as to what will happen under a certain event. Because it invites crisis, and it invites instability. . .

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.): I, just briefly will say, Mr. Chairman, obviously, like most of us here, this is one of the great success stories of all time. And we don't want to lose sight of that and [what] has been pointed out by all of our witnesses here, obviously, the 70% of Americans who own their own homes today, in no small measure, due because of the work that's been done here. And that shouldn't be lost in this debate and discussion. . . .

Senate Banking Committee, April 6, 2005:

Sen. Schumer: I'll lay my marker down right now, Mr. Chairman. I think Fannie and Freddie need some changes, but I don't think they need dramatic restructuring in terms of their mission, in terms of their role in the secondary mortgage market, et cetera. Change some of the accounting and regulatory issues, yes, but don't undo Fannie and Freddie.

Senate Banking Committee, June 15, 2006:

Sen. Robert Bennett (R., Utah):
I think we do need a strong regulator. I think we do need a piece of legislation. But I think we do need also to be careful that we don't overreact.

I know the press, particularly, keeps saying this is another Enron, which it clearly is not. Fannie Mae has taken its lumps. Fannie Mae is paying a very large fine. Fannie Mae is under a very, very strong microscope, which it needs to be. . . . So let's not do nothing, and at the same time, let's not overreact. . .

Sen. Jack Reed (D., R.I.): I think a lot of people are being opportunistic, . . . throwing out the baby with the bathwater, saying, "Let's dramatically restructure Fannie and Freddie," when that is not what's called for as a result of what's happened here. . . .

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R., Neb.): Mr. Chairman, what we're dealing with is an astounding failure of management and board responsibility, driven clearly by self interest and greed. And when we reference this issue in the context of -- the best we can say is, "It's no Enron." Now, that's a hell of a high standard.

Are liberals really unable to see what was going on here and how it led to the crash of the housing "bubble?"

Was this about corporate greed or Congressional (Republican and Democrat) malfeasance?

Is it really a good thing that these people are still in charge?


Saturday, April 25, 2009


To say that President BO has had a few troubles with those he has chosen to serve him would be an understatement.

Those he has put in charge of money matters, even the IRS, itself, have had more than a little trouble with their federal income taxes.

But some are constantly demonstrating that they are just plain ignorant of what is happening IN THE VERY FIELD THEY HAVE BEEN CHOSEN TO HEAD!

Already, you have read here that Janet Napolitano has lumped ALL conservatives who are "anti-abortion," anti-big government, and so on into one basket and declared them a threat to Homeland Security.

It seems that she, who is in charge of Homeland Security, has little knowledge of the laws she is supposed to enforce.

Venerable CNN interviewer, John King, spoke with Napolitano about her take on illegal immigration.

During the interview Director Napolitano said:

“What we have to do is target the real evil-doers in this business, the employers who consistently hire illegal labor, the human traffickers who are exploiting human misery.

And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well.”

If I were choosing someone to head up an agency as important as Homeland Security, I might select a person who is better informed about the law as it pertains to the job.

As it turns out, crossing the border illegally is, indeed, a criminal offense, not a civil one.

The applicable statute reads: “Any alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers . . . shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both.”

OK, so one mistake is perhaps understandable.

But there is evidence that the problem with the DHS is, to use a word bounced around a lot these days, systemic. Perhaps symptomatic would fit better.

During an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Janet Napolitano discussed the Canadian/US border.

Neil MacDonald said, "...there's going to be 10-mile-long traffic jams, especially at the big crossings where a lot of trucks go through, that a lot of Americans don't carry passports, that the countries are going to be taken by surprise, that it's going to be very costly and very snarled.

Janet Napolitano answered, "Well, I certainly hope that doesn't come into play...

I mean, I understand how important borders are. I'm a former border state governor myself, and you need to keep those lines short and moving...

Canada is not Mexico, it doesn't have a drug war going on, it didn't have 6,000 homicides that were drug-related last year...

Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country or suspected or known terrorists have entered our country across a border, it's been across the Canadian border. There are real issues there."

Neil MacDonald asked, "Are you talking about the 9/11 perpetrators?"

Janet Napolitano responded, "Not just those but others as well. So again, every country is entitled to have a border. It's part of sovereignty. It's part of knowing who's in the country."

So, if I understand the conversation correctly, Director Napolitano believes that the 9/11 perps came into the U.S. from Canada?

And she's one of President BO's better choices.

You can read more about this at:

Let me ask you liberals: Does this level of intellect and knowledge bother you in the least? Why or why not?

Given her lack of accurate information, should Janet Napolitano be the Director of DHS?

Friday, April 24, 2009


Those of you who come by regularly bear with me for a moment.

I feel the need to explain again to my liberal readers what this blog is about.

They're a bit slow and it takes a lot of explanation to get through to them.

First of all, this is my blog.

It is not your blog, and you don't get to make the rules here.

My rules of engagement are very clearly stated on the right. Read them and live by them or go away.

Secondly, there is no First Amendment right on this blog.

The First Amendment pertains to federal government interference with freedom of speech ("Congress shall make no law...), and I'm not the federal government. (If nominated, I will not run. If elected, I will not serve.)

I welcome rational, well thought out comments, even if they don't agree with me.

The trouble is, very few liberals are intellectually capable of making a comment without using pejoratives (for you libs, that means Disparaging; belittling), foul or vulgar language or swearing.

Let me explain why certain words, other than those commonly referred to as swear words, are not allowed here.

Hell is a real place, with eternal consequences, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth forever. It was created for Satan and his angels, and the only way you can get there is to reject the real Messiah (not President BO). I do not use the name "Hell" lightly, nor do I allow it on my blog as an expletive.

To damn somebody is to wish for them to spend an eternity in Hell, which I do not wish on anybody and for the life of me can't understand why a liberal, who loves everybody, would do so.

The so-called "S" word is not allowed here because it refers to the product of a bodily function that is vile smelling, full of dangerous bacteria (you DO wash after using the toilet, don't you?)and not fit for polite conversation.

The "B" word is most exceedingly disrespectful of women, which I think is deplorable. Women are to be respected and, yes, paid the same as men for the same job (I have thought that since I was in sixth grade).

The "F" word is a reference to the highest gift God has given to mankind and lowers it to the level of the lowest common denominator of society and vulgarity.

Thirdly, you must treat other commenters with dignity and respect.

Humor is good, but unkind humor aimed at me or my other commenters is not.

Caveat: Since this is my blog, I get to disparage whomever I want.

If you make personal attacks against me, or my other commenters, I will respond in kind and DELETE your comment. (Oooo, the "D" word!...that is not only allowed here, it is practiced here.)

"Well I don't like your rules," I hear you saying.

Tough bananas.

If you work for Janet Napolitano, feel free to come after me, only do it in person, not on this blog.
I am a very conservative person...get used to it. Because of that, the views expressed in my posts are conservative in nature. Don't expect otherwise, or you will be disappointed.

I am a registered Republican, though I am very, very angry with every republican in office right now and will work to replace them, since they have lost their way and their voice (being unwilling to get angry with what's going on and unwilling to use the same kinds of procedural tactics the Dems used when THEY were in the minority).

So there you have it.

Enjoy reading my blog to your heart's content (or not). Comment if you like, but follow the rules.

Liberals: try to make a case for your positions. Don't just say, "Bush was no good," or "You right wingers are all alike." Try to sound like you were not educated in today's government school system.

Thursday, April 23, 2009


I do not know Larry Sparks. All I know about him is that he lives in Hoover, Alabama, the whereabouts of which I know not either.

But I got this email with an article or letter that he wrote and I have to say that I couldn't have said it better myself, so I will share it with you.

I noted today that Senator McCain and numerous other elected officials, both Democrats and Republicans, called upon America to unite behind President-Elect Obama.

Well, I want to make it clear to all who will listen that I AM NOT uniting behind Obama! I will respect the Office which he holds, and I will acknowledge his abilities as an orator and wordsmith, BUT that is it.

I have begun today to see what I can do to make sure that he is a one-term President!

Why am I doing this?

It is because I do not share Obama's vision for America; I do not share his Pro-Choice beliefs; I do not share his radical Marxist's concept of redistributing wealth; I do not share his stated views on raising taxes on those who make $150,000+ (the ceiling has been changed three times since August); I do not share his view that the military should be reduced by 25%; I do not share his views on homosexuality and his definition of marriage; I do not share his spiritual beliefs (at least the ones he has made public); I do not share his beliefs on how to re-work the health care system in America; I do not share his Strategic views of the Middle East, and certainly do not share his plan to sit down with terrorist regimes such as Iran.

Bottom line, my America is vastly different from Mr. Obama's, and I have a higher obligation to my Country and my God to do what is Right!

For eight (8) years, the Liberals in our Society, led by numerous entertainers who would have no platform and no real credibility but for their celebrity status, have attacked President Bush, his family, and his spiritual beliefs!

They have not moved toward the center in their beliefs and their philosophies, and they never came together nor compromised their personal beliefs for the betterment of our Country!

They have portrayed my America as a land where everything is tolerated except being intolerant! They have been a vocal and irreverent minority for years; they have mocked and attacked the very core values so important to the founding and growth of our Country!

They have made every effort to remove the name of God or Jesus Christ from our Society!

They have challenged capital punishment, the right to bear firearms, and the most basic principles of our criminal code; they have attacked one of the most fundamental of all Freedoms, the right of free speech!

Unite behind Obama? Never! I am sure many of you who read this think that I am going overboard, but I refuse to retreat one more inch in favor of those whom I believe are the embodiment of Evil!

President Bush made many mistakes during his Presidency, and I am not sure how history will judge him. However, I believe that he weighed his decisions in light of the long established Judeo-Christian principles of our Founding Fathers!!!

Majority rules in America, and I will honor the concept; however, I will fight with all of my power to be a voice in opposition to Obama and "his goals for America."

I am going to be a thorn in the side of those who, if left unchecked, will destroy our Country!! Any more compromise is more defeat!

I pray that the results of this election will wake up many Christians who have sat on the sidelines and allowed the Socialist-Marxist anti-God crowd to slowly change so much of what has been good in America! Please join with me in this fight!

"Error of Opinion may be tolerated where Reason is left free to combat it." - Thomas Jefferson

"Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's Will is -His good, pleasing and perfect Will." The Holy Bible, (NIV), Romans 12:2 God bless you and God bless our Country!!!

Larry, thank you for so eloquently stating my thoughts.

I sincerely hope that those of you who do not support President BO's ideas and ideals will understand that you may respect the office of the presidency without respecting the person who holds that office.

Many of you did just that with regard to Presidents Reagan and Bush, as I did with Presidents Carter and Clinton.

This is not the time to support President BO's move toward Socialism, but to resist with every fiber of our being, so that we may return to a deomcratic, representative republic.

That's the America I want.

I hope you do, too.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009


Carrie Prejean, Miss California and Miss USA runner-up, says she has no regrets about answering the question regarding "gay marriage" honestly.

Good for you, Carrie!

It took courage to give that answer.

She had to know that there would be those who would not agree with her stand...of course she did.

But take a stand she did.

There are those who are calling her all sorts of names for what she said. Just read the liberal blogs.

It seems that "freedom of speech " in this country applies to vile, vulgar people who like to swear and use pejoratives when referring to Carrie and other Americans, but not to Carrie, herself, if her opinions differ from theirs.

The source of the word, "hypocrite" comes from the Greek word "hypocrites" - One who plays a part. It is the classical Athenian word for an actor.

Thus, a "hypocrite" is one who pretends to be something he/she is not.

Liberals pretend to be open minded and for "freedom of speech."

But to them, open mindedness only works one way.

Their open mindedness includes using "Jesus Christ" as a swear word, even in public, but not as a serious religious reference, especially in public.

To a liberal, the simple act of disagreeing with them constitutes closed mindedness.

So if you believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, you are, by default, closed minded, but if you think marriage can be between two men or two women, you are open minded.

In general (please note the use of that word), liberals are the personification of the word, "hypocrite."

For them, the goose/gander standard does not exist.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009









Monday, April 20, 2009


A local radio talk show host(ess), Mandy Connell has come up with what I think is a great idea.

As you know, we conservatives have been lumped together as right wing extremists by Janet Napolitano, Director of the Department of Homeland Security.

Interestingly, while she apologized for including veterans in our unseemly group, she has not apologized for lumping the rest of us together.

Now, the venerable Napolitano has provided a toll free number with which people can REPORT the Right Wing Extremist with whom you come in contact...even if it is you!

Sooooo, with that in mind, Mandy Connell suggests that we all just call in and report ourselves to DHS.

Imagine hundreds of phone calls flooding the DHS switchboard (do switchboards still exist?) with self described right wing extremists reporting in.

Well, if you want to get involved, and report yourself, here is the number:


Sunday, April 19, 2009


Just some videos of the Fort Myers Tea Party at Centenial Park...some good video, some shaky, but maybe they capture the essence of what was going on.

See whether you agree with the media that there were hundreds there...or does it look to you like there were more like thousands.

Saturday, April 18, 2009


The Tea Parties are over.

Their numbers are not final as of this writing, but they are a LOT larger than has been reported thus far by the always dependable MainStream Media.

Janeane Garofalo called Party-goers "a bunch of tea bagging rednecks," adding "this is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up."

Either she did not bother to go to or watch one of the tea parties, or she is just plain lying through her teeth.

I suspect the latter.

Not one TV report or video that I saw of ANY of the tea parties that even MENTIONED the race of the president, or of any body else for that matter, so that comment is just plain ignornant.

CNN's Anderson Cooper repeated the offensive sexual term “tea bagging,” on several occasions.

MSNBC used the term, too, as David Shuster remarked, "...while the parties are officially toothless, the tea baggers are full-throated about their goals." He also said, “…if you are planning simultaneous tea bagging all across the country, you’re going to need a Dick Armey.”

What a guy.

Are you smart enough to see a shared response here?

Of course, it was those brilliant liberals who used the vulgar phrase "tea bagging," not the organizers or attenders of the Tea Parties.

(They're the same bunch that call Pro-Lifers "Anti-Choice" or "Anti-Abortion.")

Dan Harris of ABC asserted: “But critics on the left say this is not a real grassroots phenomenon at all, that it's actually largely orchestrated by people fronting for corporate interests.”

Where did he get THAT idea?

He obviously did not research the origins of the Tea Parties...either that or he was deliberately lying...just like Garofalo.

CBS's Dean Reynolds maintained, “a fistful of rightward leaning Web sites and commentators helped promote the parties."

(I think he might have been referring to Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and others, but he didn't really say.)

Lee Cowan of NBC reported: “organizers insist today's 'tea parties' were organic uprisings of like-minded taxpayers from both parties,” but “some observers suggest not all of it was as home-grown as it may seem.”

Turns out that "some observers" were (was?) only one: NBC News White House reporter Chuck Todd, who said, “A lot of the sentiment is about organizing anti-Obama rallies, getting conservatives excited about the conservative movement again.”

CNN's Susan Roesgen called the Tea Party in Chicago "Obama bashing." She "interviewed" several people and did not let a single one of them finish their statements, interrupting and moving on to the next person.

Roesgen claimed the Tea Party was, “Anti-government, anti-CNN since this is highly promoted by the right-wing conservative network Fox."

Fact is, Fox reported that the Tea Parties were in the works and what happened at them, while CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and MSNBC treated them either as non-stories or as laughable events.

Seems the MSM treats liberal protests that involve the destruction of property and filthy language with more dignity and respect than they do peaceful protests that disagree with their agenda.

There were four Tea Parties in Southwest Florida that I know of, one in Fort Myers, one in Cape Coral, one in Lehigh Acres and one in Naples.

The Tea Party in Cape Coral was held in spite of the fact that the City Council had "outlawed" it as a security risk.

Fort Myers' Centenial Park holds events regularly, most with vendors using tents and kitchens for "Taste of the Town" parties. They have six or seven thousand at some of those events, even with the vendors' equipment in the way.

Wednesday there were no vendors and there was little room to move around at the Party, which means there were more than six or seven thousand there.

The media reported hundreds in attendance...true only if you mean several tens of hundreds.

Whether national or local, the MainStream Media has abdicated their roles as journalists and shown once again that they are ignorant, socially uneducated, biased SLAVES TO THE PARTY LINE, that of rank liberalism.

Too bad. We really need a watchdog press once again.

ADDENDUM: There's a URL to a really GREAT video at GeeeeeZ


The following comment was left on my post about Janet Napolitano by Lone Ranger, whose blog is called: Important Stuff--Or Not .

I thought it was right on, so I am reproducing it here for all to read.

Those right-wing terrorists are scary, alright. Because a lot of them got bomb-making experience in the military -- like Timothy McVeigh. That's actually what Janet Napolitano said on Fox and Friends Thursday.

Last I heard, gunners aren't taught how to make explosives. But let's assume Napolitano's paranoid fears are correct. I have some questions.

Where did Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and the other members of their Weathermen terrorist organization get their bomb-making training (well, except for the three who blew themselves up)?

Where did the leftist Unabomber, who was influenced by Al Gore, get his bomb-making training?

Where did the members of the eco-terrorist organizations Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front get their bomb-making training?

And, why aren't any of THESE people mentioned in that report?

In fact, why isn't the government itself in that report? I seem to recall another manly woman named Janet who terrorized 79 men, women and children to DEATH in Waco.

Oh, and Napolitano admitted that she didn't actually READ this report, she was BRIEFED on it before she authorized its release. So, our country is run by lawmakers who don't read the bills they pass and unelected bureaucrats who don't read the reports and regulations they shove down our throats.

Now THAT is scary!

Friday, April 17, 2009


"The ‘tea parties’ being held today by groups of right-wing activists, and fueled by FOX News Channel, are an effort to mislead the public about the Obama economic plan that cuts taxes for 95 percent of Americans and creates 3.5 million jobs.

"It’s despicable that right-wing Republicans would attempt to cheapen a significant, honorable moment of American history with a shameful political stunt."

So said Representative Jan Schakowsky (D - IL) yesterday.

Let's see if I understand this thought process.

In 2003 two large protests that occurred in New York and San Francisco, between 222,282 and 333,839 Americans demonstrated for peace.

I wonder, Representative Schakowsky, were those demonstrations despicable?

Since the beginning of the Republic, the American village common has been the gathering place for Americans to share views, debate, muster militia, celebrate, and protest. The Mall between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial provides a dramatic backdrop for America's Common. Washington has been the scene for many major national gatherings since the end of the Civil War.

I wonder, Representative Schakowsky, were those demonstrations despicable?

The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

I wonder, Representative Schakowsky, is that a despicable amendment?

Of course truth means nothing to Democrats.

They routinely lie to make their points.

They even lied about former president, George Bush lying, and did it so often that many Americans began to believe it.

So when Representative Schakowsky says that the demonstrations were fueled by Fox News, the fact that this is a lie makes no difference at all.

See, for many of our Democrat politicians, something is true simply because it comes out of their mouths, whether or not it actually happened.

The fact that President BO's "plan" to cut taxes on 95% of Americans can't work because the numbers don't add up doesn't matter, because it came from his mouth, and THAT is what makes it true.

The "(cheapening) of a significant, honorable moment of American history with a shameful political stunt" is no doubt a reference to the original Boston Tea Party.

So, a demonstration today is a hateful cheapening event, no matter that it was undertaken by Americans who are concerned about the direction our country is taking?

Let me clear this all up.

Representative Jan Schakowsky, you and your ilk are despicable. You are cheap and insignificant. You are a shameful political stunt.

Get out of the way and let real Americans express themselves in a way that is fully in the spirit of the Constitution of the United States of America.

If you don't like my comments, Representative Jan Schakowsky, maybe you can call your friend, Janet Napolitano and have DHS come and get me.

Bring it on!

Thursday, April 16, 2009


I saw this video in a post called, "Income Redistribution Day," over at The Right Is Right .

It is a PERFECT example of how the left thinks. Just PERFECT.

Not a one of them can think any better than Harry Reid.

Watch him as he very seriously tries to convince us that paying income taxes in America is VOLUNTARY.

Just to be clear, in MY mind, if something is VOLUNTARY, that means you volunteer to do it, not that you HAVE to do it, but that you do it because you CHOOSE to do it.

Am I missing something?

And he doesn't even seem to realize how utterly foolish he sounds.

He seems to think he is making PERFECT sense and is VERY convincing.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009



Tuesday, April 14, 2009


Janet Napolitano was sworn in on January 21, 2009 as the third Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

That's her picture.

Really. That's the best picture of her I've seen.

I looked for something that would make her look better than that picture does, but I couldn't find it.

Just to be fair, She's not the only one who has a struggle with her picture making her look good.

For the sake of balance, I have included a picture of myself, in a vain attempt to make me look better in my picture than she does in hers.

For clarity, I'm the one standing.

As you can tell from my picture, I am a kind of citified, country, redneck sophisticate.

I love alligators, and have spent many a day outdoors chasing them in my canoe, or walking among them fishing or just admiring their pre-historistity.

The picture also confirms that I am an extreme right-wing radical in my world view and my behavior.

As it turns out, Janet and her menionic office subjugates don't like the likes of me.

In fact, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued a warning to the rest of the country that people like me are to be viewed with suspicion and from a secure distance.

According to their own report:

The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

Let me ask you: Have your fears been played on by me?

What fears did you have that I played on?

Where did you get those fears?

Are you normally a fearful person, or are these fears a special case?

I have a pretty wild heart condition and a right leg that is in constant pain.

You can no doubt run a lot faster than I, even if I decided to try running at all.

Are you still afraid?

Do you think that your fear is rational?

Do you know what irrational fear is called?


Do you know (or care) what I think?

I think the DHS, under the leadership of Janet Napolitano, has become paranoid...afraid, not of foreign invaders or terrorists, but of the likes of little old me.

Imagine that.

OK...OK I're dying to know the story of the gator I'm holding, so here it is.

I was driving from my home in Lehigh Acres to the school where I was Head Master in Immokolee, Florida.

On the way I saw a homeless man walking slowly along the side of the road.

Behind him, gaining fast, was this fierce alligator (see the picture above), obviously intent on catching up to him and eating him alive.

I lept from my car onto the back of the gator and wrestled with him for hours, finally subduing him.

After getting him under control, I taped his mouth shut, gathered him up and showed him off at a meeting toward which I was headed.

Full disclosure demands that I tell you that certain parts of the above story are not exactly fact none of it is.

Nevertheless, it would be one explanation of how I came to be holding such an awesome creature in my fearless arms.

If you get a chance, please tell Homeland Security that they don't have to be afraid of me.

Monday, April 13, 2009


The first thing to get my attention was the name: An American Dinosaur .

When I think of dinosaurs, I think of those scary, pre-historic beasts like the one in the picture.

They have long since faded from the face of the earth.

But Billy Budd, who is credited with posting at An American Dinosaur is anything but extinct.

As a matter of fact, I know almost nothing about him, except that when he posts to his blog, which is not as often as it used to be, he is succinct and to the point...and very good points they are.

In his March 25th post, called Ley Fuga, he outlines the irony that you and I can't buy the guns Mexican cartels own.

His post, from April 2nd is titled "The Messiah Scores!" and is a great example of his creativity and quick wit, as well as his Conservative bent.

One of the things that interests me on people's blogs is their blog roll. Billy Budd's is very interesting and pretty long. If he really does visit them all, no wonder he posts less frequently.

Anyway, I recommend that you pop over from time-to-time for a good read and perspective on important points at An American Dinosaur.

Sunday, April 12, 2009


"What a day this will be!"

He was full of energy and rarin' to go.

His voice was like a thousand fingernails on a thousand chalkboards.

"Is everything ready?"

"How about the feast? Is the feast prepared?"

"What are we having? Lamb? I will LOVE eating the lamb!"

"What about the decorations? Did we have enough?"

"Do we have ample seating? There will be billions coming!"

The sun had gone down Saturday night, but he couldn't sleep.

As Sunday, the day of the celebration drew nigh, he had the mother of all caffine jitters

"What about the throne? Is the throne in place? "

"And the crown! I'll need the crown!"

"Somebody get the crown!"

"And turn off that incessant rumbling"

"What is that rumbling?"

"Is there something wrong with the sound system?"

"Why is it so loud?"

"It's hurting my ears!"

"Uh, a thousand pardons, Your Highness. But the sound system has not yet been turned on."

"Not on? What do you mean, 'Not on?" I can hear it. Don't you think I know what I hear? See to it at once!"

"Yes, Your Lightship. At once."

"And why is the ground trembling?"

"We can't have the ground shaking during the celebration!"

"I can hardly stand!"

"Somebody see to it that the ground stops trembling before the celebration or there will be heads rolling!"

"And that noise! Stop the noise!"

"It hurts Hell!"

"Uh, master, we need to tell you something."

"Tell me what? What do you need to tell me?"

"It's the tomb, Master. Something's wrong at the tomb."

"What 'Something's wrong at the tomb?'"

"What are you talking about? Speak up, man! What's wrong at the tomb?"

"The stone, Master. The stone has been....well, the stone has been...rolled away!"

"Say what?"

"It took eight Romans to put that stone there and Caesar put his seal on it."

"The stone CAN"T be rolled away!"

"Yes, Master, of course. No one could roll away a stone that large."

"But Master, I'm afraid the stone is rolled away!"


"There must be some mistake."

"No mistake, Master. The stone is rolled away."

"Rolled away. Rolled away? ROLLED AWAY?"

"What can this mean, rolled away?"

"Could it be...nonononono. That's not possible."

Lucifer's heart was raging!


"To the tomb."

"See for myself."

"Oh no! It's gone!"

"That can only mean..."





The gates and doors were barred
And all the windows fastened down
I spent the night in sleeplessnessAnd rose at every sound
Half in hopeless sorrow
And half in fear the day
Would find the soldiers breakin' through
To drag us all away

And just before the sunrise
I heard something at the wall
The gate began to rattle
And a voice began to call
I hurried to the window
Looked down into the street
Expecting swords and torches
And the sound of soldiers' feet

But there was no one there but Mary
So I went down to let her in
John stood there beside me
As she told me where she'd been
She said they might have moved Him in the night
And none of us knows where
The stone's been rolled away
And now His body isn't there

We both ran toward the garden
Then John ran on ahead
We found the stone and empty tomb
Just the way that Mary said
But the winding sheet they wrapped Him in
Was just an empty shell
And how or where they'd taken Him
Was more than I could tell

Oh something strange had happened there
Just what I did not know
John believed a miracle
But I just turned to go
Circumstance and speculation
Couldn't lift me very high
'Cause I'd seen them crucify him
Then I saw him die

Back inside the house again
The guilt and anguish came
Everything I'd promised Him
Just added to my shame
When at last it came to choices
I denied I knew His name
And even if He was alive
It wouldn't be the same

But suddenly the air was filled
With a strange and sweet perfume
Light that came from everywhere
Drove the shadows from the room
And Jesus stood before me
With his arms held open wide
And I fell down on my knees
And I just clung to Him and cried

Then He raised me to my feet
And as I looked into His eyes
The love was shining out from Him
Like sunlight from the skies
Guilt in my confusion
Dissappeared in sweet release
And every fear I'd ever had
Just melted into peace

He's alive yes
He's alive
Yes He's alive and I'm forgiven
Heaven's gates are open wide
He's alive yes
He's alive
Oh He's alive and I'm forgiven
Heaven's gates are open wide

He's alive yes
He's alive
Hallelujah He's alive
He's alive and I'm forgiven
Heaven's gates are open wide
He's alive!

From: "He's Alive" by Don Francisco

Have a blessed Resurrection Sunday!

Saturday, April 11, 2009


I invite you
With Great Pride,
I, The Angel of Light
Invite you to
It will be a gas!
Come enjoy warmth like you've never known before
for all eternity.
It is with joy that I announce to you
Jesus is dead!
God has lost the battle!
I have won!
Just as I knew I would!
I will now be King of the Ages!
I will sit on the throne of the Most High
I will command your respect
as I give you all the things I have been
holding for you as I have awaited this
Inevitible Day!
Don't miss out!
Come bow before me!
Come collect your wages!
Signed: Lucifer
Alias: Satan