Friday, December 30, 2011


I read a lot.

I usually start my day reading things like The Huffington Post, Media Matters, a couple of liberal blogs, Hot Air, CNS News, The Drudge Report, The American Thinker and then I watch some stuff on the Blaze.

Some of the stuff I remember, some of it I don't.

I also don't always remember which place I got what information, because I read so many article in so many places.

Nevertheless, I AM able to gather the principles presented in those resources and arrange them in my mind for personal analysis and interpretation.

Steven Wright (my favorite stand-up comedian) says, "Stealing an idea from one person is called plagiarism. Stealing ideas from a bunch of people is called research."

I do a lot of research.

Then I write MY conclusions on my blog.

Some of my commenters get upset with me because I don't "document" everything I write, as though failure to document somehow affects it veracity.

Of course, that is utter nonsense.

If Harry Reid said something, he said it whether or not I note the source where I first read about it.

So, I don't document everything I write about.

If you are a liberal and you don't like that...get over it.

This is my blog where I write about what interests me...period.

I don't even care whether or not you believe what I write.

I don't write anything I haven't first documented in my own mind, and that's the only mind that matters to me.

There are some special places I go to read blogs that I really love.

Geeeeez! is one of those places.  So is Important Stuff--Or Not.

The are a lot of others, so if I left you out (which I obviously did, since I only mentioned two), please forgive me.

If it is listed on my side bar, I read it almost daily.

I particularly like LR's 25 Immutable Truths About Liberals and his Talking Points.

The thing about research is that its interpretation depends on whether you approach it from a liberal or a conservative point of view.

The same set of facts might well lead to quite different conclusions from a liberal than they do from a conservative.

I'm a conservative.


1. Respect for The Constitution
2. Respect for Life
3. The Smallest Possible Government
4. Individual Responsibility

This blog is about my philosophy of government, which is a very conservative philosophy.

You are not required to agree with me (although you would be better off if you did).

I am biased toward conservatism, and make no apologies for that.

Freedom means not being controlled by the government, that being the very reason we declared our independence from Great Britain.

Government's job is not to provide things for people, but to provide the opportunity for people to pursue the things they want via the vehicles of freedom and responsibility.

So there you have it.

The next time you decide to castigate me for not "documenting" what I write, remember this: I am not your student and you are not my professor. This is not a term paper, nor is it a research paper.

This is my blog.

These are my ideas, quirky though they may or may not be.

You neither have to read it or comment on it, though you are welcome to do either or both.

Just keep it clean and relevant to the topic at hand...or else the dreaded "delete" button will be exercised.

Tuesday, December 27, 2011


He was pushing for his 1.9% surtax on the wealthy when Harry Reid said this:

"Millionaire job creators are like unicorns. They’re impossible to find, and they don’t exist…Only a tiny fraction of people making more than a million dollars, probably less than 1 percent, are small business owners. And only a tiny fraction of that tiny fraction are traditional job creators…Most of these businesses are hedge fund managers or wealthy lawyers. They don’t do much hiring and they don’t need tax breaks."

(From Reid's December 12th speech)

A little shaky on the facts, but who cares? He is a liberal and if a liberal says it, it is true, just because the liberal said it, whether it is factual or not.

Fact: According to IRS’s Table 1.4 ‘Sources of income, adjustments, and tax size of adjusted gross income, 2009,’ there are 236,883 tax filers with incomes of a million dollars or more.

Using Reid's accounting, only 118 rich people create jobs.

There are exactly 0 unicorns in the world, so right off the bat Reid is wrong.

Nevertheless, there are 236,765 millionaires who collectively earn about a quarter trillion dollars.

According to Reid, only about 118 of them ever hire anybody.

They manage to do this without hiring anyone. These millionaires do their own typing, selling, drafting. public relations, building, and manufacturing. Not one of them needs employees!

Not only that, but they got to be millionaires by "winning life's lottery!"

Hard work, risk taking, paying others to sell their products, etc., had nothing to do with it...right?

They are simply leeches on society, draining us of our ability to give OWSers what they think they are entitled to.

Mr. Reid (and your liberal cohorts), let me inform you, if only from pure linear logic, that is impossible!

They could not have become millionaires in a vacuum. They became millionaires by earning their way, and by paying others to help them get there.

The truth is the opposite of what Reid said. Only about 118 of them did NOT earn their way there.

It seems that truth from a liberal is like a unicorn. It does not exist.

Monday, December 26, 2011


Maybe you can suggest some other differences between "reality" and the "culture."

Friday, December 23, 2011


The following portion of the interveiw on CBS was conveniently left out.

Do you wonder why?

In case you missed it, here's another take on it:

Some people would call this arrogance.

I call it


Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Tuesday, December 20, 2011


"Christ" is the English term for the Greek Χριστός (Khristós) meaning "the anointed one". It is a translation of the Hebrew מָשִׁיחַ (Māšîaḥ), usually transliterated Messiah.

"mas" is from the word "Mass" as in feast or celebration.

Therefore, "Christmas" is a celebration (and/or feast) of the Messiah's birth.

That's what Christmas is about. It is not about reindeer (red-nosed or not), Santa Claus, getting presents or any secular or other "inclusive" holiday.

Now we learn that the official Christmas tree at the White House has no reference to Christmas or Christ or Jesus or the Nativity.

It does, however, pay homage to President BO (the child president).

It has an ornament in his honor.

And liberals thought we were insulting him by referring to him as The One.

He is not insulted by that. He really thinks he IS The One.

I just find it interesting that a holiday (holy-day...get it?) that has its meaning right in its name is so ignored by our government.

It has not been so in the past.

But with "Hope and Change," Christmas will be changed, and when it is, all hope is gone.

Merry Christmas, everybody.

(And if you don't believe "Merry Christmas" is politically correct, then go ahead...have a lousy Christmas).

Monday, December 19, 2011


Kim Jung-Il is dead.

His death was announced in an emotional statement read out on national television.

The announcer, wearing black, said he had died on Saturday of physical and mental over-work.

The BBC’s Lucy Williamson in Seoul says his death will cause huge shock waves across North Korea.

To commemorate his life, and to show solidarity over his death, North Korea launched a test of a missile designed to carry nuclear weapons.

I know, his death saddens you deeply, but take heart. The pain of his passing will pass.

This wonderful world leader, charismatic, creative, honest, statuesque, kind, altruistic, honored and loved leader will be missed.

Yeah. I once had a wart on my had. It's gone, now. It is missed in the same way KJI is going to be missed.

To be sure, he had his supporters in the U.S.

Left wing numb-skulls, communist sympathizers along with their hero-leader, President BO (the child president) will all mourn his passing.

Now the question is: Who will replace him?

Some say it will be (or already is) Kim Jung-un, his young son.

That should give you renewed confidence in the role of North Korea in world events.

You remember those troops we just brought back from Iraq?

My advice would be to make sure they are still at the ready.

Saturday, December 17, 2011


A quote from The Blaze via a Gallup poll:

"...a plurality of Democrats believe that big government is more threatening than big business."

Here's the chart of the results of the poll:

So what's with that stupid claim by OWS that they somehow represent 99% of the people?

Friday, December 16, 2011


"Even after the Super Bowl victory of the New Orleans Saints, I have noticed a large number of people, implying with bad jokes, that Cajuns aren't smart. I would like to state for the record that I disagree with that assessment. Anybody who would build a city 5 feet below sea level in a hurricane zone and fill it with Democrats who can't swim is a genius".

Wednesday, December 14, 2011


On of the chants heard over and over in this video is: "This is what democracy looks like."

That's right.

And that's why we don't live in a democracy.

Mob rule is the ultimate result of EVERY democracy and that's a BAD thing.

We live in a constitutional republic.

That's the way it was designed and that's the only way it will survive.

Now liberals, don't go off commenting on the right or wrong of OWS, try to stay focused on the actual point of the post: Democracy is a BAD way to run a country and that's why in 1776 we chose NOT to establish one.

Instead, we live in, as Ben Franklin said, "...a republic, if we can keep it."

So, liberals, stop this nonsense of referring to the USA as a democracy. We're not one, never have been, should not be one now and must never become one.

A constitutional republic retains some aspects of a democracy, but keeps it within the framework of representativeness, constitutionalism and the appropriate application of law.

As has happened with OWS, democracy boils down to a complete waste of time and resources, hurts more people than it helps and ultimately leads to total anarchy.

God help us retain and maintain our republic.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011


In the coming New Year (2012) both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union address will occur on the same day.

This is an ironic juxtaposition of events.

One involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to an insignificant creature of little intelligence for prognostication.

The other involves a groundhog .

Monday, December 12, 2011

Saturday, December 10, 2011


President BO (the child president) is so inept, so brain-dead, so amateurish that he can't even get the holidays right.

As our friend over at The Malcontent says, "It Seems As If Muslims Just Don't Understand How To Do Jewish Holidays Right!"

President BO (the child president) decided to show how supportive he is of Israel (despite all of his actions to the contrary) by "celebrating" the Jewish holiday of Hanukkah.

Only he did it two weeks early (it starts on December 20).

And he did it wrong, by lighting all of the candles on the Menorah at once, instead of one each day as the festival dictates.

He also misconstrued the basic significance of the celebration by proclaiming in some kind of misguided, but meaningful sounding phrase that the Hanukkah story was about "right over might, faith over doubt."

Interested in knowing what it's really all about? Check here.

But how would a follower of Jeremiah Wright know any better?

Friday, December 9, 2011


Yesterday I wrote what seemed to the brain dead readers among you to be just a bunch of personal stuff, some of which was true and some of which was not-so-true or just plain false.

One of those brain dead readers even wrote a comment about how disinterested he was in my personal life and whether or not any of those events really happened.

Before I get to deep into the "hidden" meaning(s) of it all, let me expose my truths and my lies.

Paragraph one was 100% true. So were paragraphs two and most of three. I have never hunted with bow and arrow.

Paragraph four was mostly true, except that I have never walked in or backpacked in the Withlacoochee Forrest.

I HAVE always love alligators and have fished for alligators just as described.

The entire story of me saving a man from a threatening alligator was false (Good job, Ducky, on seeing through that one).

The picture IS of me holding a live alligator, but not the one I did not save the man from. It was taken at a meeting featuring the head of a local animal advocate group. Everybody there got to hold the gator and have his/her picture taken.

So, what's this all about, anyway?

As far as I know, not a single one of my regular readers or commenters actually knows me or anything about me other than what they've read in my blog(s).

So, there would be know way for anyone to actually know what is true and what is not true about what I wrote.

The picture seemed to some to add credibility to the gist of the "save the man" story,  or at least to something to do with alligators, but it was really not related to anything else in the post (unless you count my love for alligators).

The true parts of the post were true, even though there is no documentation to verify them. The false parts were false, even though there is no documentation to disprove them.

What happened, happened and what did not happen did not happen, no matter what you may believe or disbelieve about either case.

That which seems to verify a "fact" in one person's mind, is not convincing to another person, and vice-versa.

Most liberals are not the least bit interested in documentation provided by a conservative, because in their minds, all documentation offered by a conservative is tainted by some clandestine agenda.

Similarly, most conservatives do not trust the "documentation" offered by a liberal because in their minds, all documentation offered by a liberal is tainted by some liberal agenda.

So we are faced with a delima: How do we sift through the agendas to arrive at the truth?

Judge Judy often says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

Only what "makes sense" to one person, does not make sense to another.

To begin with, "truth" is what actually happened and is not dependent on whatever "spin" one group or another puts on the event in question.

Sometimes there are facts presented that do not lead to the truth of what actually went on.

For example, suppose two people witness an automobile accident.

We all are aware that there are likely to be at least two versions of what happened, neither of which is likely to be entirely true.

"The driver of the Buick ran his car into the side of the Honda" might be factual, but it may not be the whole truth.

It is possible that the driver of the Buick had a seizure and had no control of his vehicle at the time of the crash.

It is also possible that the Honda driver was on his/her cell phone and drove out in front of the oncoming Buick.

There are a myriad of other possibilities.

In the end, investigators will arrive at the most likely cause of the collision, and someone will be charged with causing it.

When we post on a blog, we are usually approaching whatever subject we're addressing from a particular point of view. On a political blog, that point of view will be from some depth of liberalism or conservatism.

If I, for instance, post pictures of OWSers leaving a mess, or making a mess, or engaging in a fight or running around naked, the pictures might or might not be evidence that the whole "movement" is made up of people who would approve of such a thing.

A trip around the blogosphere or over to Google might bring up a few hundred photographs supporting the view that they all think like that.

The preponderance of the evidence  might lead one to believe that all OWSers are like that, which may or may not be the case.

On the other hand, if hundreds of pictures of Tea Party events do not show any depictions of people behaving in those same behaviors, one might conclude that no Tea Party members ever do such things.

So how do we arrive at the truth?

One way would be to examine the avowed motives of the members of each group and determine which set of motives might lead to which form of behavior.

Another could be to interview a representative sample from each group and hear what they, themselves, have to say about what they are doing and why.

Ultimately, it is up to the reader to decide what seems to make sense and is therefore closer to the truth.

The evidence seems to me to show that Tea Partiers are cleaner, more organized, more coherent, more polite and more consistent in their stated reason for being than OWSers.

That is a conclusion drawn by me based on "evidence" presented.

For someone else to opine that Tea Partiers are just like OWSers would seem to fly in the face of the "evidence."

Don't miss the point here. The point is not whether one group acts one way and the other group acts another way.

The point is that arriving at truth is the point.

There is no such thing as "your truth" vs "my truth."

Truth, truth!

True or false: There is no evidence that Earth's atmosphere is behaving any differently today than it has over the eons of its existence.

True or false: There were periods of global warming and global cooling long before the industrial revolution began "spewing pollutants" into the atmosphere.

Newsflash: Neither you, I or any living climatologist was there, so what we have to go on is the interpretation of "evidence" from ice core samples and ground core samples, all of which demonstrate periods of both warming and cooling.

Now, as to man's causation of any current changes in climate, that is conclusion drawn from the facts presented.

We can each draw our own set of conclusions from the data, but if we draw different conclusions,  we cannot both be right.

The upshot of it all is this: I write posts on my blog that represent my conclusions from things I have read and watched.

Whether I list all of my documentation or not, the purpose of my blog is not to convince you of how smart I am or how dumb you are. The purpose of my blog is to express what I think is the logical conclusion to be drawn from what I have read and watched.

In fact, if I were to present ALL of my documentation, you would not even read it, because the post would be even longer than this one.

Since liberals typically have the attention span of a 2 year old, and are mostly educated in the progressive leaning government school system, they would not spend the time required to read it any way.

So I shall go on writing what I write, without regard to whether you approve of what I write, are convinced by what I write, like what I write or believe what I write.

Out of the kindness of my heart, I shall afford you the right to read my posts, comment on my posts or completely ignore my posts.

Of this I am certain: There are far more people who will NOT read my posts than will.

And that's OK.

I'll just go back to loving my gators and enjoying my own writing.

Thursday, December 8, 2011


I've always been an outdoors man (until osteoarthritis grabbed me by the hip and knee).

In my youth, I played football, first in high school and then in back yard games and pick-up games.

Tennis and raquet ball were obsessions of mine, as was fishing and hunting with bow and arrows.

During my Youth Director years, I taught backpacking, riflery, canoeing, and other outdoor sports. I have led kids backpacking along the entire length of the Florida Trail (though not all at once), including the Ocala National Forrest and the Withlacoochie National Forrest.

But my greatest love was alligators.

I used to "fish" for alligators.

"How do you do that?" you ask.

Well, thank you for asking.

You mess around in the Florida Everglades until you find a small island with a bunch of gators on it, each competing with the others for his place in the sun.

Then you cast a plug near the island.

The gators, thinking it might be food, race each other to the plug. One of them gets there first and grabs it to keep the others from getting his morsel.

Now a gator's mouth is too big and too tough to be hooked by a mere fishing plug, but he will hold on to it for several minutes, death-rolling and thrashing around until he decides that it is not good to eat and lets it go...if he is lucky enough not to get it caught between his teeth.

It's great fun, doesn't hurt the gator (unless you count his being embarrassed at thinking it was good to eat), and gave me and my fishing buddy a good work out.

One day I was driving along Fla. St. Rd 82 headed for Immokalee. I saw a man walking on the side of the road. Behind him, sneaking up on him stealthily was this alligator, surely wanting to eat him for dinner.

I quickly lept from my car, fell on the gator's back, pressed his snout to the ground, whipped out my black tape, which I always carried with me, and taped his mouth shut, thus saving the man's life, for which he thanked me.

Above is the picture of me holding my captured gator.

Some of the above is true, some of it is just made up.

I'll leave it to you to figure out which parts are true and which parts are not.

The all-wise Ducky and XO should have no trouble at all separating truth from fiction.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011


The United states of America has the largest available natural gas, oil and coal resources combined in the entire world.

Yeah, Joe, you just keep making up those absurd things and don't bother to document them.'s the documentation: Institute for Energy Research.

I've been saying it for years, and have been royally castigated by very stupid liberals every time I've said it.

And guess what! Even with documentation from IER, a not-for-proft organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets, you liberals will still say I'm nuts and the source is not dependable.

That won't make it true, but you will say it anyway.

The United States has 1.4 trillion barrels of recoverable reserves of oil — or more than the entire world has used in 150 years. That’s enough to fuel the United States for the next 250 years. Add natural gas and coal resources to that and we’re good to go for all the foreseeable future. (Source)

Why, then, are we so dependent on foreign oil and other energy sources?

Well, whether deliberately or otherwise, we have a backward energy policy, based far more on how to get elected than on how to solve our energy problems.

President BO (the child president) told us that solving our energy problem is the first thing on his mind when he wakes up in the morning (as are: our children's education; the economy; creating new jobs and getting re-elected...a really big bunch of first things to think about).

So, what in the world is WRONG with him?

Why can't he see that going after those resources in our very own country would: solve our energy needs within 5 years; create tens of thousands of good paying jobs; increase our respect in the world; go a really long way toward reducing our national debt, reducing our budget deficit and reducing the price of gas at the pump...thus ADDING to the economy?

Either he is stupid, misinformed or deliberately refusing to move toward the solution.

Either way, it is sad.

I would ask: Why not use the energy resources we have to hold us until we can develop real, viable alternatives...something other than those horridly ugly windmill fields (that will kill countless thousands of birds, by the way and which no lawmaker wants in his back yard), 

or those delicate, equally ugly fields of solar panels, just waiting for the next good hurricane and so utterly devastating to the environment?

Come on people!

We don't have the alternatives yet!


We just plain and simple don't have them!

For instance, today's crop of battery operated cars are an absolute joke!

They will come!

They WILL!

( I personally think the solution is the use of hydrogen for fuel, which exhausts only water when it is used in vehicles.)

But they are not here yet! And if we chose to suffer until they get here, we will never have them!

For the future of the country's sake, and for the sake of our children and grandchildren, let's get this economy back on track by making use of the abundant resources of natural gas, oil and coal that we have!


Monday, December 5, 2011


In Alabama, an OWS member suffered a grande mal seizure while screaming opposition to Glenn Beck even being allowed to live, let alone sign books.

You would think dozens, or at least a few OWSers would have come to his aid.

Fact is, one OWS lady helped keep his head from crashing on the sidewalk, but not one other OWSer stepped up to help...not one.

You know who DID help?

Glenn Beck's entourage.

They prevented the fellow from further injury, as is common with those who suffer seizures, until EMS got there and took him to a local hospital.

After treatment at the hospital, the man DEMANDED that the hospital take him back to the protest site...something I don't think hospitals are designed to do.

Now I ask, which ones of these people were this man's neighbors, the OWSers who stood around and did nothing, or the members of the hated conservative group against whom they were railing?

If you don't know the answer, you are a useless nincompoop.