April, 2008... I remember it like it was yesterday!
We had our biggest month ever here on the bund, with 109 posts covering every topic under the sun. Religion, politics, morals, ethics, even a little sports...
And now?
The last day of the month, and we have a total of 11 posts.
Welcome to a post-Obama Bund, America...
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Mean and vindictive
Well I am reading here that B. Hussein Obama realeased secret documents to the public about the treatment of terrorists and interrogation techniques used by the CIA under the Bush administration.
What is the point? Why would you do that? This guy is going out of his way to make people look bad even if the end result is not bad at all. I'm just so confused, I thought the POTUS was supposed to look out for our best interest?
Oh ya, this bullshit about veterans being possible right wing extremists. WTF is that woman thinking? One asshole blows up a building years ago and we are all domestic terrorists now. She needs to be fired!!!
just my 2 cents
What is the point? Why would you do that? This guy is going out of his way to make people look bad even if the end result is not bad at all. I'm just so confused, I thought the POTUS was supposed to look out for our best interest?
Oh ya, this bullshit about veterans being possible right wing extremists. WTF is that woman thinking? One asshole blows up a building years ago and we are all domestic terrorists now. She needs to be fired!!!
just my 2 cents
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
A father's pride...
So it's spring break here in Southern Mississippi and I've got the kids the first half of this week. Yesterday was bad weather and lots of time at various stores getting this and that. Today was supposed to be a beach day but instead everyone voted on going to Mobile, AL and visit the USS Alabama, BB60, and the USS Drum, WWII submarine.
Driving the hour down I-10 conversation drifted a little to the rescue of the captain of the Mersk (sp) Alabama and the pirates. My oldest, from the backseat, immediately says, "What's going to happen when we shut down Gitmo if we're having this kind of trouble now?"
Later, same child points to the A-4 in the Aircraft Pavillion and says, "Wow, Dad! That's John McCain's plane!"
In Turret Two there's a big dent in the floor from where a 2700 lbs shell slipped off the track and fell. My oldest points to the middle child and says, "Look at that. How far did it fall to make that dent? A foot maybe, if it were hanging from that track?"
Later she says, "Dad, you know they're shooting a VW Bug a really long way, right?"
My eyes were so full of tears I could barely make it down the ladders!
I will say this in a mild criticism for the Alabama... They've closed off more and more of it. I don't think it's simple construction either... Parts of both ships I remember being able to access are no longer open to the public. It's too bad, really. Hope it's temporary.
Driving the hour down I-10 conversation drifted a little to the rescue of the captain of the Mersk (sp) Alabama and the pirates. My oldest, from the backseat, immediately says, "What's going to happen when we shut down Gitmo if we're having this kind of trouble now?"
Later, same child points to the A-4 in the Aircraft Pavillion and says, "Wow, Dad! That's John McCain's plane!"
In Turret Two there's a big dent in the floor from where a 2700 lbs shell slipped off the track and fell. My oldest points to the middle child and says, "Look at that. How far did it fall to make that dent? A foot maybe, if it were hanging from that track?"
Later she says, "Dad, you know they're shooting a VW Bug a really long way, right?"
My eyes were so full of tears I could barely make it down the ladders!
I will say this in a mild criticism for the Alabama... They've closed off more and more of it. I don't think it's simple construction either... Parts of both ships I remember being able to access are no longer open to the public. It's too bad, really. Hope it's temporary.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
An historical perspective...
That is what Obama and the liberal left running Congress are lacking, more than anything else... a lack of historical perspective.
So, I'm reading (re-reading, actually) a book about the reign of Edward VI, and I am amazed at the parallels to today's America. Let me explain...
1547. Henry VIII is dead, and the Crown passes to his only male heir, Edward VI... who was only 10 years old at the time. Henry's will stipulates that Edward will have a "council" if sixteen of the most powerful men in the kingdom until he is 18. England is very nearly broke after the spending-spree that Henry had embarked upon after his separation from the Church in Rome, and Edward and his advisers need to drum up some money. So, they finish the job Henry started by seizing all the remaining monastic properties that haven't been seized by his father. This seizure constituted a net gain of nearly 30% of ALL non-Crown lands suddenly becoming the King's personal property (and thus, the property of the State).
But not two years later, England was broke again... after burning through all the land, wealth and produce gained from the monasteries. So, what do they do? They more than DOUBLE the amount of coin minted in the country. The English "silver penny" was the hallmark of western European currency prior to this, and had been since 980... but Edward didn't have any more silver. So, to fix that, he decided to add red copper to the coins... some mints using as much as 55% copper in their mix. This devalued the currency so badly that the phrase "a penny so cheap it blushes" is still understood today to mean "debased coin". Edward doubled the amount of pennies in circulation in only two years... but it took four to six times as many pennies to buy what Henry's pennies had bought only three years before.
It wasn't long before England was back to broke. Now, Edward and his cronies decided to "cut costs" and reduce the size of government... but cutting the military. Especially the Navy that his father had spent millions of pounds to build up to one of the most formidable forces on the oceans. The number of functional British naval vessels was reduced by more than 60% in the six years that Edward reigned, and as the military reduced in size, you had more and more unemployed soldiers and sailors, paid off in coin that was very near worthless, with no prospect of civilian employment and no "welfare" to draw on because the monasteries that had provided comfort and succor to the poor, sick and indigent were rotting, broken hulks now sheltering nothing but flocks of sheep.
So, in 1553, when Edward took ill and never recovered, it is little wonder that so much of the country flocked to the banner of Mary, his older half-sister, who promised to return England to Catholicism, strength and prosperity. However, she fought a long and bloody "holy war" against the Protestants that further drove the country into the depths of despair, depression (economic and emotional), and military weakness.
Is everyone with me here? Does everyone see the parallel I am making? Good... let's continue:
Then, Mary grows a tumor in her abdomen roughly the size of a modern basketball and weighing just under 18 lbs, which kills her in the end. England is ravaged by religious hatred, economic failure, military weakness and the threat of foreign invasion... and the Crown passes to the younger daughter of Henry, Elizabeth.
During the long and very fruitful reign of Elizabeth, England finds renewed military prestige, a stable domestic economic policy, and even a degree of religious peace (mainly because she simply outlawed the practice of the Catholic faith). How did she do this?
Until such time as England could replace lost naval ships (at least those belonging to the Crown, or "ships of the line"), she offered "letters of marque" to those men that owned ships and could offer a degree of security to the state through the harassment of Spanish, French and Dutch interests at sea.
She also offered HUGE tracts of land and very lucrative terms to those men that chose to settle in the New World. As long as the Crown received its 3/8ths share of all profits derived from the new "planting" (or the Colony of Virginia), she allowed its leaders and residents to do pretty much as they pleased.
By remaining a "virgin Queen" and not marrying, she was able to bargain from a position of strength and power for very nearly her entire reign, and when the threat of invasion from France was eliminated with the death of Mary (her cousin and the Queen of Scotland AND the wife of the Dauphin de France, and the threat of conquest from Spain eliminated with the defeat of the Spanish Armada... England's military supremacy of the Atlantic and most of Western Europe was unquestioned.
Do you see my point? Of all the failings and mistakes made during the reign of Edward, Elizabeth made them all back through (using modern terms) policies geared to reduce control and regulation of commerce and trade by the Government, re-investing gains and revenue into a strong and very mobile (for the age) military, and a degree of individual freedom and autonomy nearly unheard of in England for the better part of 500 years.
Obama should PAY me for this kind of insight...
So, I'm reading (re-reading, actually) a book about the reign of Edward VI, and I am amazed at the parallels to today's America. Let me explain...
1547. Henry VIII is dead, and the Crown passes to his only male heir, Edward VI... who was only 10 years old at the time. Henry's will stipulates that Edward will have a "council" if sixteen of the most powerful men in the kingdom until he is 18. England is very nearly broke after the spending-spree that Henry had embarked upon after his separation from the Church in Rome, and Edward and his advisers need to drum up some money. So, they finish the job Henry started by seizing all the remaining monastic properties that haven't been seized by his father. This seizure constituted a net gain of nearly 30% of ALL non-Crown lands suddenly becoming the King's personal property (and thus, the property of the State).
But not two years later, England was broke again... after burning through all the land, wealth and produce gained from the monasteries. So, what do they do? They more than DOUBLE the amount of coin minted in the country. The English "silver penny" was the hallmark of western European currency prior to this, and had been since 980... but Edward didn't have any more silver. So, to fix that, he decided to add red copper to the coins... some mints using as much as 55% copper in their mix. This devalued the currency so badly that the phrase "a penny so cheap it blushes" is still understood today to mean "debased coin". Edward doubled the amount of pennies in circulation in only two years... but it took four to six times as many pennies to buy what Henry's pennies had bought only three years before.
It wasn't long before England was back to broke. Now, Edward and his cronies decided to "cut costs" and reduce the size of government... but cutting the military. Especially the Navy that his father had spent millions of pounds to build up to one of the most formidable forces on the oceans. The number of functional British naval vessels was reduced by more than 60% in the six years that Edward reigned, and as the military reduced in size, you had more and more unemployed soldiers and sailors, paid off in coin that was very near worthless, with no prospect of civilian employment and no "welfare" to draw on because the monasteries that had provided comfort and succor to the poor, sick and indigent were rotting, broken hulks now sheltering nothing but flocks of sheep.
So, in 1553, when Edward took ill and never recovered, it is little wonder that so much of the country flocked to the banner of Mary, his older half-sister, who promised to return England to Catholicism, strength and prosperity. However, she fought a long and bloody "holy war" against the Protestants that further drove the country into the depths of despair, depression (economic and emotional), and military weakness.
Is everyone with me here? Does everyone see the parallel I am making? Good... let's continue:
Then, Mary grows a tumor in her abdomen roughly the size of a modern basketball and weighing just under 18 lbs, which kills her in the end. England is ravaged by religious hatred, economic failure, military weakness and the threat of foreign invasion... and the Crown passes to the younger daughter of Henry, Elizabeth.
During the long and very fruitful reign of Elizabeth, England finds renewed military prestige, a stable domestic economic policy, and even a degree of religious peace (mainly because she simply outlawed the practice of the Catholic faith). How did she do this?
Until such time as England could replace lost naval ships (at least those belonging to the Crown, or "ships of the line"), she offered "letters of marque" to those men that owned ships and could offer a degree of security to the state through the harassment of Spanish, French and Dutch interests at sea.
She also offered HUGE tracts of land and very lucrative terms to those men that chose to settle in the New World. As long as the Crown received its 3/8ths share of all profits derived from the new "planting" (or the Colony of Virginia), she allowed its leaders and residents to do pretty much as they pleased.
By remaining a "virgin Queen" and not marrying, she was able to bargain from a position of strength and power for very nearly her entire reign, and when the threat of invasion from France was eliminated with the death of Mary (her cousin and the Queen of Scotland AND the wife of the Dauphin de France, and the threat of conquest from Spain eliminated with the defeat of the Spanish Armada... England's military supremacy of the Atlantic and most of Western Europe was unquestioned.
Do you see my point? Of all the failings and mistakes made during the reign of Edward, Elizabeth made them all back through (using modern terms) policies geared to reduce control and regulation of commerce and trade by the Government, re-investing gains and revenue into a strong and very mobile (for the age) military, and a degree of individual freedom and autonomy nearly unheard of in England for the better part of 500 years.
Obama should PAY me for this kind of insight...
Saturday, April 11, 2009
More Tea Parties...
Right before I left last night, I found out that the Company I work for is so enthusiastic about the Tea Party rage, they are paying for buses to take those that wish to attend OTHER Tea Parties in the region to places such as New York, Philly, Harrisburg and Trenton. The one in New York City (at City Hall Park) is expecting to draw as many as 10,000 people, and has Newt Gingrich booked to speak. The one I am attending is hoping for as many as 1,500 to 2,000... but Scranton is pretty "blue" right now, even with two top-notch Catholic Universities in the city. We'll hear from the Archbishop of Philadelphia, the local GOP leadership (including former Governor Schweiker (sp?)... and last election's GOP candidate, Lynn Swan.
Still, there are enough traditional Italian, Irish and Polish neighborhoods still in Scranton that we could see quite a few "blue dog" Democrats out and about, too. Lest we forget, Obama still isn't the popular "jock" here that he is elsewhere... NEPA is "Hillary" territory, and the DNP election still rankles in Scranton.
Still, there are enough traditional Italian, Irish and Polish neighborhoods still in Scranton that we could see quite a few "blue dog" Democrats out and about, too. Lest we forget, Obama still isn't the popular "jock" here that he is elsewhere... NEPA is "Hillary" territory, and the DNP election still rankles in Scranton.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Scranton Tax Day Tea Party
I think I'm going to go. I'm going to size into Mick, too... see if he'll come with me, for the experience if nothing else.
From 12 PM till 2 PM... and only a block and a half from the Banshee, so I can expect to be a pint or two into the afternoon by 3.
Any of you going to go to a Tea Party?
From 12 PM till 2 PM... and only a block and a half from the Banshee, so I can expect to be a pint or two into the afternoon by 3.
Any of you going to go to a Tea Party?
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Bowing...
So, there are a few conservatives left in NEPA, and those that I work with are griping and bitching about Obama's "Apology Tour '09" and his bowing to the Saudi royals.
The problem isn't the bowing. Every US President or dignitary that has ever visited Japan, China or South Korea has bowed in greeting to his Far Eastern counterpart. Bowing is a sign of respect and dignity... not submission or subservience, as some would read into it.
The problem is the "Tour" itself. At every stop along the way, the man has said that "America has made mistakes", and that "America has been wrong" in the past. Is this true? Undoubtedly. Does it ever need to be expressed by a sitting US President to the leader of a nation that activily and openly gives money to communities and families that support terror against the US? Not in a million frigging years!
To think that a man who has very recently been voted into the highest and (potentially) the most powerful office in recorded human history is going to APOLOGIZE for American actions and policies to a nation where no women has EVER cast a vote in an election... that openly and without shame supports efforts to utterly destroy the strongest ally that the US has in the region... that continues to employ the same means of "aggressive interrogation" OR WORSE on its own citizens while decrying the US for using them on "enemy combatants" and avowed terrorists... that promoted and exploited HUMAN SLAVERY as recently as 1928 within the palaces of the Royal Family itself... how can this be "okay"?
When is it going to be enough? When are we going to see the media begin to show just how radically different the Obama White House is conducting its foreign policy affairs from ANYTHING we have seen in all of US history? I would have been hard-pressed to express the fear that Obama could eclipse Carter in making the US look bad (at best... flat out WEAK at the worst) just a few months ago, but Mr. Obama has done more damage in 100 days than Carter did in an entire term of office.
I don't often agree with Newt Gingrich on ANYTHING... but he said today that Obama had reversed nearly 200 years of US foreign policy with one extended diplomatic tour. Speaker Gingrich is 100% correct on this point... no question.
The problem isn't the bowing. Every US President or dignitary that has ever visited Japan, China or South Korea has bowed in greeting to his Far Eastern counterpart. Bowing is a sign of respect and dignity... not submission or subservience, as some would read into it.
The problem is the "Tour" itself. At every stop along the way, the man has said that "America has made mistakes", and that "America has been wrong" in the past. Is this true? Undoubtedly. Does it ever need to be expressed by a sitting US President to the leader of a nation that activily and openly gives money to communities and families that support terror against the US? Not in a million frigging years!
To think that a man who has very recently been voted into the highest and (potentially) the most powerful office in recorded human history is going to APOLOGIZE for American actions and policies to a nation where no women has EVER cast a vote in an election... that openly and without shame supports efforts to utterly destroy the strongest ally that the US has in the region... that continues to employ the same means of "aggressive interrogation" OR WORSE on its own citizens while decrying the US for using them on "enemy combatants" and avowed terrorists... that promoted and exploited HUMAN SLAVERY as recently as 1928 within the palaces of the Royal Family itself... how can this be "okay"?
When is it going to be enough? When are we going to see the media begin to show just how radically different the Obama White House is conducting its foreign policy affairs from ANYTHING we have seen in all of US history? I would have been hard-pressed to express the fear that Obama could eclipse Carter in making the US look bad (at best... flat out WEAK at the worst) just a few months ago, but Mr. Obama has done more damage in 100 days than Carter did in an entire term of office.
I don't often agree with Newt Gingrich on ANYTHING... but he said today that Obama had reversed nearly 200 years of US foreign policy with one extended diplomatic tour. Speaker Gingrich is 100% correct on this point... no question.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
