Cry Baby

by IrritablePundit 14. September 2009 05:00

 Brushfire of Freedom

The Irritable Pundit

President Obama says he has seen “a coarsening of our political dialogue” and Obama the Petulant Prince cries at the unfairness of it all.

Yes well, what is fair?

How about allowing your backers to fling unfounded cries of racism before, during and after the election? (spare me Maureen Dowd, spare me) Is that fair? How about your media friends purposely downplaying anything inconvenient?  Like the NYT claiming "tens of thousands" of protestors in Washington on 9/12, where other publications outside the US claim 500,000 to 2,000,000?  Is that fair? Or...or...  Oh heavens. What's the use?  We've known all along what a charlatan he is, and how biased the media are, so why does his complaining irritate me so? 

I guess it is the extended lower lip and whining tone that just gets to me.  Kvetching? I could handle.  Pouting? Not so much.

How many times do we have to hear Obama or his various mouthpieces claiming, in seriously aggrieved tones, that "the message just hasn't been heard yet"? We are not all on board because we simply haven't heard the message?  Really?  As if nearly every station and talking head isn't in the tank for Obama already? As if Obama himself hasn't been on TV just about every night since his election? He has been indignant and morose in front of any camera that will even vaguely point in his direction.  Fading B list actors promoting B list movies at 3:00 am seem less cheap. It is as if Obama is so desperate for universal love and acclaim that his ego can accept nothing less.  

"But, but... you have to like anything I do! I am Obama!"

Guess what sport? We conservatives don't like you or your socialist message and knew you were an empty suit from the start. Meanwhile your independent supporters have started to catch on to who you really are and they have a major case of buyers remorse.  You could deal with it (you know, man up) or you could just keep being what you are.

 

I know what my money is on.

As always, please feel free to cross-post the image if you want to, with a link-back and on your bandwidth. And I personally and deeply apologize for the mental anguish some may experience with Nancy Pelosi in a vaguely sexual position.  Yes, I realize that is an awful image to have in ones head, but the original movie-poster had it and... well, I am just very, very sorry.

I am also in need of mind bleach, and no small amount of therapy now.  

/shudder

Contact The Irritable Pundit   Brushfire Home

 

Copyright 2009.  The published content is the sole property of the author.  Any copy, use, or redistribution of any portion of the material without the written consent of the owner is a violation of international copyright laws.  

Labor Day Message

by IrritablePundit 7. September 2009 08:12

 Brushfire of Freedom

The Irritable Pundit

Hello all,

 


It is Labor day.  Go and enjoy the grill, the friends and the adult soda pops. I will return to irritating next week. 


Love,

Your own turkey brat eating, dark beer drinking and  mid-day sleeping Irritable Pundit. 

 

 

 

 

Last Dance With Mary Jane

by IrritablePundit 31. August 2009 05:00

 Brushfire of Freedom

The Irritable Pundit

Well, here we go.  Let's have the second installment of "things we have to let go" as conservatives if...Whoa! Is that Iron Chef America? Coconuts? This is going to rule!

Ummm, sorry.  Anyway, as I was saying... If we want to regain power, we need to concentrate on the big deals and let the distractions go.  Dude! Are those cheetos?

...

Ah, the wonders of weed!   Now, to be clear, I am not a user though I have tried it in the past. I will not repeat the famous Clinton lie however -- I did inhale.  After which I coughed, choked, and became significantly less Interested in things that could not be considered "pizza".

But my choice not to be a weed user was based on preference, as opposed to morality or legality. You see, back then I needed a much stronger drug. I needed something 10 times more dangerous, more destructive, and more deadly to lives and families than "Mary Jane" could ever be at her worst.  I chose something entirely legal.  I chose alcohol.

Now, you will argue, what about Marijuana's effect on crime? Well consider this.... In prohibition, there were a lot of alcohol related crimes. We got rid of prohibition, we got rid of the majority of the crimes.  Do you think Elliot Ness would have been in favor of jailing millions of young men for having a half shot of bourbon in their pockets?  That's what we've done.  An entire generation of young fathers in prison, while we kvetch about the death of the family.  All because of a drug that is demonstrably less dangerous than the round of margaritas you passed out at your last cookout.

To the new voters, those that came out in droves for Obama, we are knowingly or not, hypocrite drug pushers.

They are right.

Contact The Irritable Pundit   Brushfire Home

 

Copyright 2009.  The published content is the sole property of the author.  Any copy, use, or redistribution of any portion of the material without the written consent of the owner is a violation of international copyright laws.

That's NONE of Your #$&% Business - Part 1

by IrritablePundit 24. August 2009 05:00

 Brushfire of Freedom

The Irritable Pundit

Hello all,

Chances are this weeks post will irritate you more than normal, the next couple of posts following will continue to do so, perhaps even more. Hopefully, by the time I am finished you (and my fellow BOF bloggers) will forgive me. But isn't it about time we win?

Wait for it...

There is a stubborn streak in the American psyche.  It is wide, deep, and easily irritated.  Underlying American history, even back to the original colonies, has been a single thread that begins with "What's it to you?" and ends with "That's NONE of your #$&% business!".

Which of course explains the absolutely visceral reaction to what the Democrats have been doing on health care.  The plans are bad, the socialist underpinnings are infuriating and the cost is ruinous, but the real emotional kicker is that:

1) no one asked these busy-bodies to do a single thing (What's it to you?) and

2) the busy-bodies are giving us what they think we need, without once asking if we want it or even want them involved. (That's NONE of your #$&% business!)

Americans have started to make their voices heard.  They are asking questions like "Why are you doing this?" and " Who asked you to do it at all?" at various town hall meetings.   "Milk carton" missing Dems hide from their constituents while others desperately change the subject.  All together, their silence speaks volumes about what these busy bodies think of our opinions.  Maybe an illustration will help?

(Usual repost permissions apply: Give a link back to BOF and please host the image on your own bandwidth. Love ya! IP)

All that being said, I am going to change the subject away from healthcare now, yet stay on the overall theme.

Yes, this is where you may start to get irritated.

Liberals understand the "That's NONE of your #$% business" underpinning of the American mindset, perhaps better than we do.  Don't get me wrong, they could care less about our rights, but they do realize that stubborn streak is there, and they use it brutally.  Do you think it is a coincidence that they have framed the abortion debate in those very terms?  "Hands off my womb!", "My Body My Choice!" and so on?  Not a chance. They do it for that distinctly American "mind your own beeswax" reaction, and it is primarily aimed at independents.

Independents are, by definition, exactly that -- independent.  But in reality they stay somewhere in the middle of our left/right polar extremes out of self-defense as much as anything else.  It is true (as El Rushbo states) that moderates in Congress often do not stand for anything, but a deeper truth is that the great majority of independents simply do not care too much about what is going on, so long as they are not actively being annoyed.  The economy, the country, the future itself, generally runs along just fine for the most part.  

Sure, you can call that intellectual laziness if you want to, but politics simply isn't interesting to most folks the way it is to you and I.  Which is why, as a block, the independent swing voters will vote for whomever will run things well-enough while leaving them alone as much as possible.  I should also point out that the great number of people who never "pull the lever" are non-political because they do not care to become so, but have more in common with independent swing voters than the far right or left.  If a person or a party becomes irritating enough even they will get involved eventually (Reagan's landslide).

So why have conservatives allowed ourselves to fall into the busy-body-trap so counter to a major driver within the American spirit?

Oh yes, dear friends, do not even try to argue the point.  We have, and it has cost us dearly. We should be concentrating on freedom, on limiting government, on life and and on the work ethic that made this country great.  But we allow ourselves to become distracted, and inadvertently make mountains out of molehills.  This has allowed the Liberals to do a spectacular job of making us look like fussy "in your business" fools to the independent swing types. 

Over the next few weeks I am going to be writing about things that conservatives have to let go if we truly want to hit home runs in 2010 and (more importantly) 2012. Prepare to become VERY irritated.  This is only the first.  Keep in mind that I am no squishy RINO, but a serious conservative.  You will get mad over the course of this series anyway, but keep it in mind. What the heck. This weeks "let it go already" is... 


"Gays in the military."

Listen up: They always have been, always will be.  

Ta Da!  That was easy!

Gays are already in the military (oh, and they are), yet military cohesion is excellent.  Therefore the presence of gays obviously does not harm that cohesion. So save that tired argument.  Public displays of affection are already Verboten, so don't stress.  We won't have staff sergeant couples walking along snogging and there will be no remakes of Attica's shower scenes. 

I repeat, they are already there, and these things are not happening.  They will not suddenly start happening by simply admitting the reality that there are gays in the military. Get it?  All we are doing is drumming out military heros, those who have served their country honorably -- bringing death to the enemy, saving the lives of their fellow soldiers and sometimes paying for their freedoms with their own lives. Why exactly would you want them to be discharged?  Just because they aren't as stunned as you are by Mrs. Irritable Pundit when she walks into a room?  Does the idea of their living their own lives differently than yours really bother you?  If so, let me state clearly, What's it to you?  

Think about it.  You would deny a man's right to die for YOUR freedoms (after we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to train him to fly a jet) because you don't approve of what he does on his own time and who he is doing it with?  If so, let me state clearly, that's NONE of your #$% business!

By the way, if you strenuously disagree with me, yet loved the movie "300",  its heroism and bold last-stands, the fledgling democracies and freedoms that those brave men died for... well, you probably don't want to read the real story of Sparta.  Believe me when I tell you that Spartan society was not so concerned about what Leonidas was up to in his spare time. They simply stood up for a fallen hero and changed the course of History.  In fact, the very concept we hold of freedom in America has its roots in that moment (minus the hollywood special effects).  So, to be perfectly frank about it, you owe your freedoms to... gays in the military.

That's gotta hurt.

What hurts more is the flogging we all receive in the eyes of the independents.  We look like bigots and homophobes, and we deserve every lash. Not so much for the subject itself, but for allowing liberals to turn the debate away from the big issues to what is really a non-issue.  Gays are already in the military, remember? Us standing around with our fingers in our ears "La la la, I can't hear you" isn't fooling anyone. To this day I am amazed the Log Cabin Republicans can stand us. Their very existence is proof of the strength within our core ideals, as apparently "Freedom, liberty, & life" are powerful enough even to put up with our silliness.  

But the Log Cabin Republicans are the politically motivated, what about the independents?  They just want us to shut up about it, and we should.  But believe it or not, for an entirely different reason than anything mentioned above. You see, the single greatest disservice we are doing is to the men and women of our military. We are buying (and selling) the line that somehow, the presence of gays will harm them.  That it will destroy their ability to function.  That somehow, they are not as capable of handling a gay coworker as you or I.  

What utter nonsense.  Not only are they capable of it, they have been doing so for a long time under conditions a thousand times more strenuous and dangerous than anything most of us will ever have to encounter .  From Leonidas shouting "ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!" (Come and take them!") to the moment we were told "Lets roll" toward the battlefields of Iraq, our men and women in uniform have already handled the issue of gays, just as they have in the past handled the issue of minorities and every other issue we get our collective noses out of joint over.  Yes, dear friends, they have handled it in the only way appropriate, with a resounding, "Who cares?"  After which they pick up their rifles and go back to protecting our freedoms and saving our lives.  Our nonsense demeans them and their service to freedom.  They aren't less capable than us, they are more capable than us.  The least we can do is change, "Don't ask, Don't tell" to, "Don't care, Oh well" and stop embarrassing them and ourselves.

By the way, for those who can't let it go because of "where this could lead".  Look, I get it.  "We are here and we're queer!" is irritating.  We should say back "You are there, and who cares?".  You don't like it.  I understand.  You are not gay.  It bugs you.  But no one is asking you to like it or to be gay. Just to ignore it rather than pretend it does not exist (two very different things). And for those who are totally freaked out, trust me, homosexuals are not really interested in hitting on you, so let that worry go.  To paraphrase a well-said variation on the theme, "Middle-aged straight guys aren't their cup of chamomile tea."  It's ok, really.  

And for those who will doubtless write emails questioning my orientation because of this. No, I'm not. But out of solidarity to our Log Cabin brethren and in deference to our soldiers and their excellent handling of this issue (while we fret like idiots) let me state once more for the record, "What's it to you?" and "That's NONE of your #$% business"

See you next week for part II, when I will unveil another thing we need to let go.

Contact The Irritable Pundit   Brushfire Home

 

Copyright 2009.  The published content is the sole property of the author.  Any copy, use, or redistribution of any portion of the material without the written consent of the owner is a violation of international copyright laws.  

Understanding Without Numbers

by IrritablePundit 17. August 2009 05:00

 Brushfire of Freedom

The Irritable Pundit

Hello all!

The current and planned level of government spend is going to hurt -- and hurt bad.  In fact, "stimulus spending" is going to hurt worse long-term than the recession will short-term. These are facts, indisputable and bare, yet rarely understood.

I've explained why multiple times, but the numbers are too large and when they get beyond a certain scale they are hard to intuitively grasp (as in a previous post on swine flu ). So, I must reduce the discussion to something more easily grasped.  Oddly enough, reducing the complex to the simple is more difficult, but for the edification of all I will attempt to do so, as we can not afford to let time and bitter experience be our guides. To quote Louis Hector Berlioz, "Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils."

First, a guide and basic education as to the method used in this attempt, "colorful bars without pesky numbers".  The reason I am doing so is because the TV talking heads do not understand half of it on a good day, and the economists who do understand rarely are able to explain in the 15 second alloted sound-bite. In fact the constant noise and arguing of this percentage or that percentage frankly turns off most people and confuses the rest until no one has a clue what is actually going on.  This allows for a potential BS factor that is staggering.  The critical numerical needle slips by you in a haystack of shouted derivatives and potential future indexes. 

Quickly though, a few caveats:

1) Yes, the below bar charts are a gross, almost criminal, simplification (though if described as percentages they are not terribly far off))

2) I am well aware that the %s change year to year, and that consumer confidence plays a factor but that you have to use an assumption set that... blah blah blah. 

Arguing those points is why people tune out, and we can't afford that any longer.  Think of this as the big picture, OK champ? But if you still want to argue:

1) drink a gallon of gatorade

2) think about waterfalls for an hour

3) hang a rope from the ceiling and empty your bladder  

4) note: the preferred direction is up

You are cordially invited to give it your best shot every-time you feel like arguing some minor mathematical median. 

Why yes, I do live up to my blogging name! How nice of you to notice!  

So, lets take a question that is asked every now and then by astute observers just to get used to the process. "How did the US economy grow past and lap the once-leading Europeans?" Simple, in the US, the government was not sucking all the available cash from private enterprise.  This allowed a greater percentage of capital to be put towards risk, which allows for growth (government spending does not create growth).  So lets look at the GDP of the US and the EU and the effects of government spending on each.  For those unsure about the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) think of it as wealth/value output, created or generated, in any given year.  In other words, while it isn't all liquid (cash), think of GDP as the annual salary of a nation.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3 

Figure 4

Now, without a single number used, can you grasp why the US economy outpaced the European? You can? Well done!

Let me be clear (sorry, couldn't resist), wealth is not a zero-sum game (outside of socialist dogma), there is only so much produced in any given year (think: cash flow). However, the private sector has reserves saved from previous years.  This is critical as that wealth is consolidated in order to fund growth via loaning and guaranteeing larger sums than would otherwise be available in any single given year. This dear friends is a bank, or investment firm.  But the key point here is that lendable money is static to the point at which you borrow -- in other words, there is only so much available at any one time.

So what happens when a government spends billions more than it has, but is either temporarily in a cash-crunch or wants to hide the impact from current (and perhaps retributive) voters? Simple, deficit spending, also known as "Buy it now! Pay later!"  

Now to be fair, borrowing money to pay for things you can not afford in cash is fine so long as: 

1) you have a reasonable expectation that you WILL be able to afford it long term 

2) the interest is something you can handle, and 

3) so long as you do not borrow too much, and can still pay day-to-day living expenses and the like.  

Nothing wrong with it, you bought your house like that after all. 

But what happens if you borrow too much? Well, banks won't give you a low-interest loan anymore will they? Hmmm, Nope.  And the credit cards in your wallet suddenly change to very high interest rates.  What if you then max those cards anyway?  Long term you are in a world of hurt as you may never get out of debt. What if you were insane and still wanted to borrow more? Not much left other than IOUs to loan sharks. Eventually even they will refuse and demand the money ...NOW.  Just so you know, at a government level, such borrowing is done via treasury bonds and debt obligations of various forms.  

On to the present situation.  What Obama has done is spend so massively (unfunded/unpaid for), with money we do not have and truthfully do not expect to have anytime in the near or distant future, that there is no way to pay for it short of massive taxation for decades.  The interest rate will be so high and sums borrowed are so massive that paying the interest alone each month will be devastating.

That black line is the amount your children and grandchildren will have to pay for the pork we are getting today, and it will get bigger and bigger each year. For the record, America's loan shark is known as China. Sleep well.

"But wait IP!  Can't we, you know, grow our way out of this?"

The only way to grow enough to do so would be to increase the capital actually available for growth.  That is, to increase the amount of cash in the hands of citizens so they, the engine of growth, can risk and win gains (please refer to the first few graphs).  That would require us to cut taxes. But that is the exact opposite of Obama's plans.  As taxes have to be raised (on our children) to pay for the stimulus and all of his spending increases.  Hence the point about the stimulus being more devastating to us in the long-run than it could possibly be helpful in the short-term (even if it were not just pork).  I should also point out that, as the long term capital markets have only a limited amount of cash to loan at any one time, the government taking more out limits the amount available for private enterprise to pay for new factories and jobs.  You know, slowing that whole pesky "growth" thing yet again.

Now, does everyone get it? Do you understand the basic problem? 

Good! My work here is done, for another week anyway.

By the way, because of the cash taken out of the capital markets, the plans for Cap and trade and the government take-over of healthcare will be as lethal to long-term growth as Obama's plans are for seniors.  If you read and grasped the above you should now understand why without another graph. But just in case:

I could of course mathematically breakdown the amount we are screwed (# of promises x (BS⌃n/copulation index) *(√ amount stolen)), but I promised no numbers. 

Cheers!

 

Contact The Irritable Pundit   Brushfire Home

 

Copyright 2009.  The published content is the sole property of the author.  Any copy, use, or redistribution of any portion of the material without the written consent of the owner is a violation of international copyright laws.  

Recent Comments

Comment RSS
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in anyway.

© Copyright 2010 Brushfire Sparks