Saturday, June 26, 2010

Liberal Politicians Shoot Their Constituents in the Foot!

The liberal Contra Costa Times published this article on June 22. They called it “who pays/who receives”. The bottom line of the article was this. The wealthier liberal counties along the coast send more money to Sacramento than do the poorer conservative counties of the central valley (well da!). The liberal tax and spend politicians in Sack of tomatoes then redistribute the tax dollars and send a disproportionally large amount back to the poorer conservative counties.
For example, Marin County sends $4,793 per capita to Sacramento each year and gets back only $606 (13%); while Solano County sends $1444 per capita and receives back $1,334 (92%). As a result of these wack job liberal policies the state spends $703 on every Medi-Cal resident in Lake County but only$257 on every Medi-Cal resident in San Mateo County. Although this article does not deal with the national scene, I expect the liberals in Washington DC are sending the hard earned tax dollars of their constituents in the blue states to the welfare queens who live in the more conservative and poorer red states.
At first glance an article like this should have us conservatives jumping with joy. Liberals screwing liberals, what a deal! Unfortunately, the author of this piece missed the point, missed it by a mile. The fact is that the majority of the liberal politician’s constituents do not work and certainly do not pay taxes, except when they use their welfare checks to buy cigarettes, liquor and junk food. In this respect, it makes little difference where you live in the state of California, or what state you live in, the workers are the only ones paying taxes and a disproportionally high percentage of the workers are conservative Republicans.
When it comes down to the nuts and bolts of the issue, no matter how you look at it, the liberal politicians are still using your tax dollars to buy votes and keep themselves in power. How they distribute the monies they steal from us seems to me to be less important than their initial act of thievery. However, there is another message in this article; if you are a freeloader in San Francisco you certainly should give some consideration to a move to the central valley where “the pickens are really good” and the vote, or votes, you have to sell are worth more.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Illegal Immigrants: why do they come?

We could put an end to illegal immigration and all the problems associated with the illegal infestation of our country tomorrow morning if there was the political will to do so. I think we can all agree on that. Simply send the National Guard to the boarders to prevent more of them from coming in and round up those that are here and send them home. However, in this blog I want address another issue: why do the illegals from Mexico and the other South American Countries come here in the first place?

We are told that they come here to work and that this is OK because Mexicans do work that Americans will not touch with a ten foot pole. I agree that our worthless welfare loving minorities and poor white trash refuse to work; however, I do not believe that the illegals come here to work. Undoubtedly there was a time when this was true and there can be no doubt that a percentage, abet small, of those that are crossing our boarders today come here looking for work.

However, it seems likely that an increasingly large number of Spanish speaking illegals come here for one reason and for one reason only. They come here because they do not have to work! Yes it is exactly the opposite of what is taught in our schools; what is written in the liberal press; and what the communists running our government want us to believe. These people are not stupid! They know that if they can once get into the welfare system they will never have to work another day in their life. Rather, they will have it made in the shade just like the rest of our minority population who figured this out a long time ago, admittedly with a little help from the demorats who have figured out how to buy their votes.

Now think about this for a second or two. We have been in a deep recession now, for at least two years. During this period Jobs have literally dried up. As anyone can see, there are fewer loiterers of South American decent at home Depot looking for work than there were a year or two ago. However, are there fewer Spanish only speaking children in our schools? Are there fewer Mexican felons in our prisons? Are there fewer Mexican illegals on food stamps? Are there fewer illegals clogging up our emergency rooms? Of course, in California and most states, the answer to each one of these questions is a resounding no!

If they come here for work why is this? It stands to reason that if the illegals primarily were coming here for work they would go home when the work dried up, dose it not? At the very least, the numbers of illegals crossing our southern border would be decreasing if the word got out that there was no work for them to do once they got here. From what I read, the numbers of illegals crossing our boarders has not decreased significantly, if at all. The truth is that no one knows how many are actually crossing at any given time, or if they do know they are not telling us.
In any case, if there is no work why are the still coming? The answer is quite simple; these people are not coming here primarily to work. They are coming here, first and foremost, to take advantage of our welfare state; our free system of public education; and our free medical care, all of which they are legible for the second they set foot in our country. Legal or illegal, it makes not the slightest bit of difference one way or the other.

The ability to find work is a very secondary issue. If they are lucky enough to find a day or two of work every once in a while, all the better, but it is not the reason they pay big bucks to get here and risk their necks in the process of doing so.

Wake up America, you can’t be that damn dumb! Or can you? By the way, how much did we spend on that state dinner for Calderon? God, what a waste of good food and wine!

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Torture: it works every time it's tried!

Torture is against everything Americans stands for, or is it? Certainly if we were fighting a convention war torture would be intolerable under almost any circumstance. Unfortunately we are engaged in a war to the death with a group of religious fanatics whose only weapon is terrorism. Except for the fact that they are radicals of the Muslim faith we know little about them. These people are very fertile (breed like flies) and their numbers are increasing almost exponentially. At this point there are large enclaves of Muslims is almost every city of any size in every country in the world.
The primary problem, of course, is that the radicals in the group masquerade as law abiding moderates until they strike. At which point, of course, it is to late to do anything to stop them. The latest attempts by the underwear bomber to blow up an airliner and the most recent effort to detonate a bomb in Times Square, show, without a doubt, that our present tactics, whatever they are, are not working. Rather, to date we have just been incredibly lucky to escape further loss of American life. No one in their right mind can believe that our luck will continue indefinitely. In this respect, the Fort Hood massacre should serve as a wake up call for all concerned.
If we are to have any chance of avoiding future 9/11s we must do everything possible to learn what the terrorists are up to before hand so that we can take appropriate measures to curtail their attacks. Since they are an amorphous group who are not easily identified we must be able to employ every single method at our disposal to gain any information that could be used to thwart their efforts to kill us. One such method is torture!
The mindless liberals scream and holler that torture is barbaric and inhuman, which of course it is. This hate America crowd believes that all of our problems on the terrorism front can be solved if we just stop throwing our weight around. These cretins need a good dose of reality, force fed if necessary! I would lock these fools up in a room and make them watch the videos of those poor soles jumping to their deaths from the twin towers on 9/11 until they screamed for mercy or died from starvation, which ever came first.
During this reeducation session they would not be allowed to eat or drink anything, not even cool aid! Along these same lines the liberals who run our pathetic system of public education should be forced to start each school day (well maybe not in kindergarten but certainly by the time they start teaching sex education) by showing this “jumping to their death” video. This would give the required pledge of elegance a whole new meaning to the kids, would it not?
Now the liberals will immediately counter this argument by claiming that even if torture could be justified it should not be used because it doesn’t work. I have heard the liberal pundits claim over and over again that torture of any kind only produces erroneous information, not worth the paper it is written on. This, of course, is true in one circumstance and in one circumstance only.
It is true that a terrorist, or anyone else being tortured, will make things up, say anything, to stop the pain being inflicted on him by the torturer if he knows nothing that is of any value to the interrogator. That is the key here; you can not get blood from a turnip no matter what you do to the turnip. That, of course, does not mean you shouldn’t try.
More importantly, I’m finally getting to the point; torture always works if the one being tortured knows something that is useful to the interrogator. Yes, torture works every time it is tried. In this respect, the rag heads that we water boarded in Guantanamo were a treasure trove of valuable information. The Lord only knows how many American lives were saved by the information gleamed from these rats after they were water boarded. But I digress again; the point is that these religious fanatics knew a great deal about the Muslin terrorist communities from which they came and they sang like canaries at the first sign of torture. Yes, torture works, sometimes beyond our wildest dreams.
Now, I am sure that some of the information obtained at Guantanamo was erroneous and could have been misleading if we allowed it to be. Fortunately, we have intelligence agencies, or we are lead to believe that we do. These individuals may not be as good as their counterparts in Israel, but I am sure that they are capable of sifting through the information produced by the interrogators to determine if it was useful or not.
In summary, we are fighting an unconventional war to the death with radical Islamic fundamentalists. This war will not be won unless we employ every method possible to determine where these people are and what they are up to at all times. Torture has and should continue to play a role in this fight for our very survival.
Now, before bringing this blog to a close I want to deal with the issue, no the insanity, of closing Guantanamo The liberals, who will not rest until we give up one of our most valuable recourse's in the war against terrorism, believe that we can not win this war unless we turn around world opinion. Basically, this large group of mental midgets are convinced that the world hates America and that if we are just play nice everyone will love us and we will live in divine bliss forever.
Well, in the first place, the rag heads in Guantanamo never had it so good! My guess is that the majority of this motley crowd have no desire to return to the countries of their birth. Anyway we should try them, convict them and kill them (not necessarily in that order) so that there will be room for the next group of terrorist that we capture on the battle field or arrest during their aborted attempts to kill our civilians. No, Guantanamo is where they belong.
The insanity of trying foreign tourists in American courts will be the subject of a future blog.

Monday, June 14, 2010

Great hamburger recipe!

As American as baseball, apple pie and Chevrolet they used to say. Well, we still have Chevrolets although “they now be government made” and something similar to the baseball of old. However, I reckon that a large percentage of young Americans have never had a piece of real homemade apple pie. In fact at this point, hamburgers seem to have replaced apple pie as America’s favorite dish. Anyway, as with any good American male, I have been trying to prefect the hamburger for years. For whatever its worth, here’s the recipe I have settled on. As with the bread recipe, this is dead simple and I know you will enjoy these conservative hamburgers even though they have a little liberal fat in them.
Unlike the bread recipe, I never bother to measure the ingredients when I make hamburgers; thus, consider these measurements as guidelines only. Start off with about 1.5 pounds of 80/20 hamburger. 90/10 hamburger is to dry for my taste although it is probably better for you. In any case, this will make about 4 to 5 good sized hamburgers.
• Add ½ of a large onion (I prefer red) chopped rather coarsely.
• Add about 1/3 cup of either Worcestershire sauce or A1 steak sauce.
• Add kosher salt and coarsely ground pepper to taste.
Mix the ingredients by hand and make 4 to five reasonably large patties.
Grill over high heat until done, use the finger test (the second one not the one you give liberals) to determine when the hamburgers are just right. The key here is not to overcook the patties so that they will come out nice and juicy.
Have a great Fourth of July; it may very well be our last!

Going to war.

Consider this fact for a moment or two and then go puke. We have not won a war of any consequence in over 65 years! The once invincible United States of America has become a toothless tiger and the laughing stock of every tin pot despot from here to tim buck two. We have gone from speaking softly and carrying a big stick to having the biggest stick in the world and crying from the roof tops that we will never use it, no matter what. It amazes me that no political cartoonist, not a single one, has depicted Obama getting off Air Force One with a giant umbrella over his shoulder with his tail between his legs. Well, our cartoonists are not what they used to be either!
But I digress, as usual. The point is that, incredibly as it may sound, a decisive victory at war, no longer seems to be an option. Apparently, the whole concept of beating our enemies into submission, as we did in WW2, simply is to politically incorrect to consider. The consequences of this no win foreign policy has been disastrous for America, to say the least! Tens of thousands of our military personal have been unnecessarily killed and hundreds of thousands needlessly physically and mentally wounded because we insist on fighting with both hands tied behind our back. All of this at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars with no end in sight.
The only thing (yes I think thing is the right word here) that has benefited from this policy of appeasement is the Veterans Administration, for which I worked for nearly 30 years. Prior to 9/11 and the second Iraq war the VA was slowly but surely becoming a thing of the past as the WW2 and Korean war vets died off. Thanks to the casualties generated by the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts the VA will go on for the foreseeable future.
In any case, we should not go to war unless we intend to win it! We should avoid, at all cost, getting involved in foreign conflicts that do not directly affect our national security. In this respect, history has shown unequivocally that to win a major conflict you have to break a lot of things and kill a lot of people. Depending on your enemy this means killing hundreds of thousands, and in some cases millions, of people. More to the point, if you are going to bring an enemy to its knees as quickly and economically as possible, large numbers of civilians will have to be killed as well as their uniformed and none uniformed military personal. We might still be fighting the Second World War if our leaders did not understand this simple principal.
This simple concept is the basis for the first and most important rule of war: do not go to war unless you are willing to kill a lot of the enemy and in particular do not go to war unless you are willing to kill a lot of the enemies’ civilians! The converse of this rule is just as important. If the issue in dispute does not unequivocally justify the killing of large numbers of civilians, stay out of it.
For example, we did not have a dog in the fight before we let ourselves get dragged into the war in Kosovo. The combatants on either side had done us no harm and there certainly was no justification for us to kill large numbers of the combatants, or their civilians; thus, we should have stayed out of that fracas.
The 9/11 attach on the world trade center, on the other hand, did justify the immediate destruction of Mecca as I discuss at some detain in the chapter on this event. We are still paying for our failure to respond with overwhelming force to the terrorist attach of the World Trade Center and we will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
The second rule of war is this. Use your technological superiority to end the conflict as soon as possible with a minimal loss of your troops. Under no circumstances should we allow the third world rag heads to drag us into a door to door street fight wherein our technical superiority is negated to the point of being nonexistent. The lives of our American troops are our greatest treasure and we should not fritter them away simply because our enemies do not have modern military equipment. This politically correct nonsense should be brought to an immediate end.
A perfect example of the politically correct insanity which has resulted in the unnecessary loss of American lives is the battle we fought to control Sadr City. We elected to go door to door to root out followers of the defiant mullah Sadr at the cost of hundreds of American casualties. The alternative would have been to wipe out this rats nest with smart bombs (I will have more to say about these thins shortly) without the loss of a single American life.
However all may not be lost! Apparently we are now using drones which can be controlled by military personal located thousands of miles away to destroy Taliban strongholds. It is not clear to me why the same goals could not be accomplished by conventional aircraft which are capable of dropping bombs from 30, 000 feet. However, the concept is correct in that our military is using our superior technology rather than ground troops to destroy our enemy. We can only hope and pray that this military tactic will continue.
Another example of the insanity of our politically correct politicians is our agreement to the international ban on the deployment of land mines. This rivals, in scope, the insanity of banning the use of DDT in third world countries where hundreds of thousands of people, most often children, die each year from malaria (another example of a liberal policy that has gone badly amuck). In any case, how many thousands of American’s best died needlessly or were maimed by roadside bombs in the Iraq war as they made their way to and from the Bagdad Airport and along the other highways in Iraq? The judicious placement of land mines would have prevented this carnage, would it not? It makes you wonder whose side our leaders are on, doesn’t it? One thing’s for sure they don’t give a damn about the welfare of our ground troops.
One final thought before I wrap this chapter up. I have always maintained that smart bombs were in fact actually dumb bombs! As everyone knows smart bombs are designed to surgically remove a target while leaving adjacent areas relatively intact. This, of course, is exactly the opposite effect we should be attempting to achieve when we go to war. To win a war as quickly and cheaply as possible, with respect to the loss of American life and treasure, our bombs should be deigned to break things and kill people, the more of each the better! As such these so called smart bombs are in reality liberal dumb bombs and they have little or no place in our war against the Muslim terrorists or anyone else for that matter.

Thursday, June 10, 2010

The 9/11 massacre: the only reasonable resopnse!

I remember exactly the time, 9:13 AM, and precisely what I was doing when the radio program I was listening that morning was disrupted to tell us that the first of what were to be three planes had struck the World Trade Center in New York. We were at our summer place on the Klamath River and I was laying a course of bricks around the entrance to a humongous wood fired bread oven that I was constructing and had been working on for the past three summers. I never fail to point out the brick I was inserting into the front of the over at that moment to anyone who visits us at the Klamath because I believe 9/11, and our pathetic response to this treacherous act, was the most significant event in my lifetime. I also believe that it was the beginning of the end of the once great country I was fortunate enough to have been born in.
In any case, it was crystal clear to me what our response should have been to this brazen attempt to disrupt the western civilized world and I believe the correct response would have changed the course of history; saved the United States hundreds of trillions of dollars; and saved many thousands of American lives now and in the future. The pain and suffering inflicted on our military families, of course, also could have been avoided.
But I digress, when I went into house to inform Tina, my wife, of what had happened she was still in bed (after all we were on vacation) oblivious as to what had occurred three thousand miles away. After bringing her up to date on the most recent attach on our country, I made this statement.
Where can be only one response to this latest terrorist attack by the Radical Muslims and we must do it now (no there was never any doubt who did it). First, we must, with no advanced warning, destroy Mecca within the next 24 hours. Utterly wipe this den of vipers off the face of the earth, preferably with a nuclear attack that destroys everything and every living human being within 10 miles of the place. This must be done from the air and care must be taken that not one American life is lost in the process. Not a single one!
Second, the president should have announced that any retaliation by the Muslim world or any future terrorist attack on any United States interest, anywhere in the world, would be met with by a similar swift and certain response. In this respect, the president should have provided a comprehensive list of Muslim religious centers throughout the world that would be the target, or targets, of future attaches by the United States of America. Most importantly, the president should have made it clear that our retaliatory attacks would be somewhat random in nature. The Muslim world should have been made to understand that our future punitive attaches would be directed at targets that would have the greatest dilatory effect on the Muslim world as a whole, not necessarily at the Muslim country wherein the attack originated. In this respect, the Muslim world would not know which of their “Holy Shrines” would be targeted next. In short, no Muslim religious center would be exempt from our swift and certain revenge for any terrorist attack on American soil or American interest abroad.
As I stated previously, I believe without any doubt that this policy would have put a swift and certain end to Muslim Terrorism and saved, in the long run, hundreds of thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars in American treasure. I also believed then, as I do now, that George Bush and our politicians did not then and do not now have the balls or good sense to initiate and carry out such a foreign policy. We no longer walk softly and carry a big stick: rather we carry an umbrella.
My proposed response to the 9/11 Muslim terrorist attack on the United States is based on several rock solid fundamental considerations or beliefs if you will.
First and most importantly, our foreign policy with respect to terrorism is based on the faulty premise that the Muslim religion is, except for a radical fringe, a religion of piece. This is, of course, utter nonsense! The Koran can be summed up in one sentence. Convert or we will kill you! That was the way it was in the time of Mohammad and that is the way it is today. Americans and the rest of the free world must wake up to this simple fact, and do so quickly, if we are to have any chance of surviving the present third world war against the Muslim nation. It seems that no US president, or any other leader in the western world except one, understands this simple fact. The exception, of course, is the present leader of the Jewish state of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Thoughtless liberal intellectuals, and others of their ilk, will immediately cry foul claiming that the vast majority of American Muslims are piece loving law abiding people who have no ill will against anyone or any other religion. This line of thought, do not confuse it with reasoning, flies in the face of everything we know about the American Muslim religious sect. We know, for example, that Muslim clerics in the USA are responsible for the conversion of an unknown number of Americans, usually youngsters from ultra liberal families and imprisoned black prisoners, who are disillusioned with American society, to radical Islam. In fact, several of these clerics have left the country, when it became too hot for them here, and became the leaders of terrorist cells in Europe and other foreign countries.
We also know that the Muslim leaders in the United States, with rare exception, refused to denounce the first or second attack on the world Trade Center or, for that matter, any other of the attacks throughout the world on American interests. How can this be if these piece loving people have the best interests of America at heart? The answer is, as it was in Reverend Wright’s church, that they do not! Along these same lines, how much of the money collected from American Muslim Mosques is funneled to Muslim terrorist groups outside the United States? Our pathetic politically correct ultra liberal government clearly doesn’t want to know the answer to this question, you bet your last dollar on that!
I believe, without a doubt that if we lose this war against Muslim terrorism the vast majority of American Muslims will immediately forgo any pretences that they may have had with respect to moderation. Rather, they will welcome their radical brethren and embrace the fundamentalist tenets of the Koran. Take my word for this, I was raised in by a fundamentalist religious group and I know how these people think. Given half the chance, the Muslims will be stoning their daughters to death if they are raped by their male relatives and they will be stoning you to death if you don’t convert! Don’t doubt me on this.
Even if I am wrong about American Muslims, it doesn’t make a significant difference one way or the other. The fact is that the vast majority of the two billion Muslims with whom we are at war live in third world countries that have little or no concept of western civilization. Except for the role we allow political correctness to adversely influence our internal political decisions, it doesn’t make a hill of beans difference whether the local crowd are for us or against us, in the larger war against radical Muslim terrorism.
The third reason that we should have responded to 9/11 with overwhelming force is this. While the clerics who lead the radical Muslims preach about the benefits of martyrdom (the 72 virgin thing and all of the other clap trap) you can be sure that these rag heads do not believe it for a minute, or want it for themselves. In this way they are like liberals who want you to ride around in a tin can beetle bus while they take a state owned limousine. Thus, if you kill a few hundred of them at Mecca, it is less likely that their brethren throughout the Moslem world would have continued their anti American rhetoric. Even if they did it will have been worth the try. In any case, history has shown that to be successful in war you must kill a lot of civilians, and the sooner you do it the better!
Now I ask you my fellow Americans, where would we be today if the policy I proposed, now almost 10 years ago, had been followed? Would we still be bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan? Would we, and our grandmothers, still be taking off our shoes at the airport when we fly anywhere, even to local cities a few hundred miles away? Would Iran still be attempting to develop a nuclear device? Would the cretin in North Korea still be thumbing his nose at us and our allies? Would we be more hated by the world at large? If so who cares? What we need is respect not love by the weak sisters that populate most of the free world. Finally, would we be hundreds of trillions of dollars in debt to China and our grand and great grandchildren if we had nipped this war in the bud??
Have a good day!

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Racism: maybe not such a bad idea after all!

Before I set down to write this book, which has now morphed into a blog, I never seriously considered the possibility that I was a raciest. Undoubtedly others did, but I didn’t. In any case, putting your thoughts down on paper, or in this case the computer, always has a way of clarifying any issue that you are thinking about and it certainly came through in spades this time. I now know, without a shadow of a doubt, that I am a flaming raciest, always have been always will be! I am sure that if you went through my closet you would find a white hood in there somewhere and maybe even a noose or two.
I have come to this conclusion because everything I have believed in over the years, all my core beliefs, are in fact based on some form of racism. For example, I always have felt that we Americans were better than everyone else in the world. Still do for that matter, although we are not nearly as superior as we once were thanks to the dumbing down of America’s youth over the past 40 or 50 years by the liberals running our education system. In any case, this superiority complex certainly nails me for a raciest of the worst kind! In fact I should spend the rest of my days in a re-indoctrination camp.
But this American superiority thing is only the tip of the iceberg where my racism is concerned. I have opposed affirmative action from its inception. In this respect, I do not believe blacks who can barely read or write should be taking up a slot at Cal, or any other institution of higher learning for that matter, just because they make the campus more racially diverse or because they happen to have the potential to be the fastest tailback in history. This, of course, is an extremely raciest point of view. Back to the re-indoctrination camp (well, actually, I never left it)!
Similarly, I have always been a strong proponent of racial profiling, the more the better! In fact, if we don’t wake up soon to the fact that the radical Muslims who are out to kill us are all young males of Middle Eastern decent and not 90 year old white grandmas, we are doomed. Along these same lines, it’s not too difficult to differentiate between American citizens and the illegal’s that hang around Home Depot. Wouldn’t life be a lot simpler if we just opened our eyes and forgot the liberal clap trap that is unnecessarily complicating the lives of hard working law abiding Americans? Anyway you cut it, this is an extremely raciest point of view and I plead guilty as charged! Lock me up and throw the key away but spare me the re-indoctrination camp.
Another nail in my raciest coffin results from the fact that I have always railed against the busing of school children to diversify our public schools. Only a pure unadulterated raciest could have opposed such a grand scheme. The fact that busing turned out to be a total unmitigated disaster is beside the point, so don’t bother to bring that up. The important point is that I opposed this attempt at racial diversity and I should be given raciest points for being on the wrong side of the issue from the get go.
One more example before I get to the meat of this blog. I am adamantly opposed to our progressive system of taxation, always have been. This, as Howard Dean says, in nothing more than a redistribution of wealth scheme designed to take my money, and yours, and give it to minorities who refuse to work. My opposition to this form of thievery is, of course extremely raciest, no one could possibly argue that point!
Well, I could go on like this until the cows come home; however, by now you must be convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that I am a raciest. More importantly, I hope that you might be willing to consider the possibility that a good dose of racism might be just what the doctor ordered at this point in our history.
In this respect, why is racism such a great thing for the Mexican riffraff that have invaded our country, legal and illegal alike, but not for freedom loving Americans? Why should we just have to sit back and let the illiterate La Raza pathetico Mexican Nationals systematically invade and destroy our country and everything we hold dear in it. A good dose of American racism may be the only thing that will stop this invasion.

Now, if a good dose of American racism is what we need to straighten this country out, as I believe it is, we are going to have to change the way we think about terms like racism and racial profiling. We must wake up to the fact that the liberals have used the charge of racism and racial profiling at every opportunity to shape the debate on almost any issue you can think of for the past 50 years.. The charge of racism and or racial profiling is the biggest club they have in their liberal bag of tricks.
In fact, the shakedown artists, the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton, have made career, as well as a small fortune, beatings us over the head with this racism club and it is unlikely that liberalism in general could have survived so successfully without it. The liberal press, of course, is the primary reason the communists have been able to get away with this method of crowd control. However, we conservatives share a great deal of the blame because we run for cover anytime there is the slightest suggestion that any of our policies are racist.
Things have got so bad that pedophile priests are more acceptable to the general public than is someone who believes in racial profiling. This nonsense, of course, must come to a grinding halt if we are to have any chance of surviving as anything but a third world nation with a few elites at the top and the rest of us peasants living in cardboard shacks and walking barefoot to work, if there is any work.
I hope by now that, if you have stayed with me this far, you are becoming a little more accepting and less squeamish with respect to the terms racist, racism and racial profiling. To survive in this struggle to the death with liberalism, no let’s call it what it is communism, we are going to have to change our timid and self-destructive ways and stand up for what we believe in, irrespective of what they call us.
When you stop to think about it, what difference does it make what the liberals call us? If called a racist epitaph we should consider it to be a badge of honor. Rather than hide from the truth we should wear tea shirts proclaiming our racism and Americanism! When one or both of the reverends come to town on one of their shake down ventures we should tar and feather them and ride them out of town on a rail. Whatever happened to this good old American practice?
In any case, we can start our revolution by refusing to back off from the inevitable charges of racial profiling when we insist the airport screeners spend their time looking into the backgrounds of young middle eastern males who pay cash for their airline tickets rather than harassing elderly white women whose only crime is that they want to travel on an airplane to visit their grandchildren. In this respect, these liberal fools can keep their hands off my shoes too! They can begin to treat me as a possible terrorist the first time a 73 year old white guy with little hair attempts to blow up an airplane!
We can continue our racial revolution by heading down to the nearest public school and rounding up any child that doesn’t speak English. These children and their illegal parents should be deported immediately. No hearings no nothing, just drive them to the boarder and turn them loose. The civil rights attorneys; the communists; and the press, of course, will be screaming bloody murder. Well let them scream, we need to take our country back. At the same time the illegal’s in our school are being rounded up and deported, we should make similar sweeps though the parking lots at Home Depot and deport any loiterer who appears to be of Mexican decent and does not have a drivers license or other means of identification.
You, of course, do not have to target very public school in the country or, for that matter, every Home Depot. Once the word gets out that we are serious about the enforcement of our immigration laws the problem with illegal’s will miraculously disappear, you can bet your last dollar on that! In any case, racial profiling is the key to the problem of illegal immigration just as it is one of the primary tools in our war against the Muslim extremists who are out to kill us. Actually, if you stop to think about it, with respect to illegal immigration, this new kick them out policy would be a win win situation for everyone. Americans would get their schools, prisons and hospitals back and the illegals would be able to celebrate their next Cinco de Mayo in their beloved Mexico.
Go Arizona! We are behind you all the way. God don’t you wish they had the balls to cut off the electricity to LA? 8:

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Rush's Wedding.

Rush always has been an idol of mine so it is with reluctance that I sit down to write this blog.
This is Rush’s fourth marriage as I am sure that you are well aware. That means that he has been divorced four times. This is not a record by a long shot and I doubt that he will ever catch-up with Larry King no matter how hard he tries, but it certainly shows a great deal of persistence on his part. It also has made three lucky gals very wealthy women, which brings me at last to the point.
The sport that Larry King and Rush indulge in can only be played by extremely wealthy men, or women the likes of Elizabeth Taylor. The rest of us smucks are stuck with our mates come hell or high water, assuming we have two nickels to rub together. There is something very elitist about this situation that sticks in my craw.
But what really surprises me is the fact that the liberals have not tumbled to the unfairness of the whole thing, after all fairness is everything to these people. You would have thought that they would have come up with something like an multiple marriage unfairness tax in which wealthy individuals who wanted to marry more than a couple of times would have to pay ten to twenty million a pot for the privilege. Alternately, and an even more fair solution to the problem, would be some type of tax credit or tax refund for those of us who are not wealthy so that we also could benefit and enjoy the benefits of multiple marriages without suffering the consequences of the inevitable divorces inherent in the process.
Now let me address a more serious ramification of Rush’s latest union. As some of you know I spent a significant amount of my medical career treating impotent men, so I know something about male and female sexuality. Let me put this to you as simply as I can. There is no way that a 59 year old male, overweight or not, is going to be able to keep up with a 33 year old female who is just reaching her prime, with respect to sexual activity. No, unfortunately, not even a train load of Viagra is not going to solve this problem. More importantly, there is a medical risk inherent to a long term relationships of this kind. In this respect, not an insignificant number of the men in which I implanted penile prosthesis died, in the saddle so to speak, while attempting to keep their younger, and sometimes older, wives happy. We can only hope that there is a chauffeur, tennis instructor or maybe a golf instructor somewhere who can shoulder some of the load for Rush, because over the long haul this thing is not doable.
Finally, I was nearly dumb founded to learn that the flaming liberal Elton John had been paid a million bucks to perform at the wedding. The fact that this guy had been allowed within 100 miles of the wedding floored me. Certainly, there must have been a conservative performer somewhere that could have entertained this crowd. In my opinion, Rush made a statement here and it was the wrong one! My mother always used to say that you would be known by the company you kept. Well true conservatives don’t invite flaming liberals to perform at their wedding and certainly don’t pay them big bucks to do so! Well, there I have said it. It’s good to get that off my chest. By the way I am changing my will and am not leaving Rush a dime!
And what about Elton John? I am sure he didn’t need the money. How could this liberal icon agree to perform at the wedding of the most conservative ant-liberal, anti-communist in the entire world? Clearly he has a lot of “splaining” to do! I suggest, as a token of restitution, that he donate his million dollar fee to endow the new Helen Thomas chair at the Harvard School of Journalism. Alternately, he could contribute he money to the group who want to build the Helen Thomas Tower at UC Santa Cruz, or was that at UC Davis? I am always getting these two liberal indoctrination centers confused.

Monday, June 7, 2010

The best bread recipe ever!

It has been suggested that I should try to “lighten up my blog a little”. Well, this is not quite as easy as it might sound since I am, by nature, not a very light hearted or humorous person, unless I have a few too many under my belt. Anyway, consider this to be a rather lame attempt to lighten up a little. I will return to my true self in my next blog which will deal with the issue of racism head on!

For now let’s deal with a problem that I have been struggling with for most of my adult life, how to make a decent loaf of bread. My mother could do this in her sleep, not that she ever got much sleep. Unfortunately, she took all of her recipes, which were in her head, to the grave with her, so she was of no help to me in this endeavor.

To make a long story a little shorter, let me say that I have tried almost everything to make a decent loaf of bread. I even built a humongous outdoor wood fired bread oven at our summer place on the Klamath. This thing took three summers to build and, for all I know, might be the largest free standing bread oven in the world. In any case, it turned out to be a great pizza oven but not a single loaf of edible bread has ever come out of it, no not a single loaf!

Everything changed, for once for the better, one morning about three years ago when my wife Tina brought to my attention a bread recipe that was published in our local liberal rag the Contra Costa Times (you’re right, I can’t keep politics out of it no matter how hard I try). In any case, this bread recipe was so simple that I almost dismissed it out of hand; however, a drowning man will grasp at any straw available to him, so I ultimately tried it. The results were nothing short of miraculous. I have dubbed this my “any fool can do it bread recipe”. I assure you this works the first time and every time, just like tax cuts stimulate the economy every time they are tried!

This bread will be gobbled up almost as fast as you can make it, so I am giving you a double recipe that will make two medium sized loaves of bread. To make this wonderful bread you will need two cast iron kettles or enamel coated iron kettles with lids in which to bake the bread. Here are the ingredients for the bread.

6 cups of bread or all purpose flour
½ teaspoon of yeast (this is not a typing error, this is all the yeast you need)
3 teaspoons of salt
3 and ¼ cups of water

Mix the dry ingredients in a bowl and stir in the water. This will produce very, very wet bread dough. Spray the dough with Pam or olive oil, cover with plastic wrap and let it sit for 18 hours. Do not manipulate the dough in any way (you couldn’t anyway because it is so wet)

Line two medium sized bowls with parchment paper. Divide the dough and place each half over the parchment paper in the bowls, punching it down as you do so. Spray with Pam or olive oil, cover with a dish towel and let it sit for another 2 to 3 hours.

Preheat the oven, kettles and lids to 500 degrees F. After the kettles and lids are at 500 degrees F remove them from the oven and remove the lids. Lift the parchment paper by its corners and place the bread dough and parchment paper in the preheated kettles. The original recipe did not employ parchment paper in the transfer process but the bread dough invariably falls when it is manipulated, if you do not use the paper. Replace the lids and bake at 500 degrees for 30 minutes. Remove the lids and bake for an additional 20 to 30 minutes at 450 degrees F or until each loaf is golden brown. Remove the loaves and let them cool on a rack. That’s all there is to it, as I said any fool, even liberals, can do this!

Now to jazz up your bread a little try this. Add ½ cup of coarsely chopped sun dried tomatoes to the dry mix and proceed as you would with the plain recipe. Or to make the best bread you have ever had in your life, add roasted ground wheat to the recipe.

Obtain a pound or so of whole wheat. Spread it out on a cookie sheet and roast at 450 degrees F until dark brown. Grind up the roasted wheat in a grain mill until it is the consistence of coffee grounds. Add ½ cup of the roasted ground wheat to the dry ingredients and proceed as before. I usually make my bread with both sun dried tomatoes and roasted wheat. If you add these additional ingredients you will have to add a little more water, just enough so you can mix the dry ingredients together easily.

You can add olives, raisins or anything else that meets your fancy to the basic recipe if you feel creative. Everything I have tried seams to work.

Please try this simple fool proof bread recipe. I know you will be delighted with the results. By the way this bread makes the best toast ever! One cautionary note, this bread recipe is not for weight watchers.

Sunday, June 6, 2010

What went wrong?

When you stop to think about it, it is amazing that we have lasted as long as we have as a nation. Of course, I am referring to the fact that the United States of America is still somewhat intact 234 years after its founding. From a historical standpoint, that is a long time for a nation to survive let along to survive as a dominating world power. This, of course, sticks deeply in the craw of Obama and the other liberal one world trash America crowd.
Our countries longevity is particularly surprising since we were set up to fail from the get go! Yes you heard me right; our beloved founding fathers set us up to fail. In this respect, they might as well have written an expiration date into the constitution. Of course, I am referring to the one man one vote concept that has brought this once great nation to its knees. In their defense, I doubt that the founders ever visualized a time when people without property of any kind would be allowed to vote, just as they did not anticipate a time when women and blacks would have the vote. By the way, did you know that, except in the time of war, the United States of America never ran a deficit before women’s suffrage? Think of the implications of that!
In any case, the one man one vote rule will be the end of us. Actually, it already has. Another surprising aspect of this sorry state of affairs is the fact that it took liberals like Franklin Delano Roosevelt a century and a half to figure out that they could employ tax policy to buy votes. These people are inherently stupid! Unfortunately, once they did figure it out there was no way to stop them and ever since the 1930s our once great country has slowly but surely been on a slippery slide towards socialism and, guess what, we are now there!
In fact, our liberal leaders no longer attempt to hide the fact that they have won this struggle and that the United States of America in now a socialist state. In this respect it was only last week that one of the great liberals of our time (you remember the crazy one, Howard Dean) stated the obvious when he said that the redistribution of wealth was the primary purpose and goal of our present system of taxation. Our main goal at this point, he stated, was to achieve a proper balance that would be acceptable to both sides of the issue. In other words his only fear he had was that if the liberals in power get to greedy the ever shrinking working population in the private sector might revolt or in some other way refuse to participate in the scheme.
As a result of these “progress tax schemes”, we are now at the point where over 50% of the population pays no Federal income tax, not a dime! Worst yet, a fair percentage of these free loaders get a tax refund! This is where the redistribution of wealth thing kicks in big time. The tax man has now morphed into an April 15th Santa Claus for the most nonproductive members of our socialist society. This Robin Hood also is the primary reason liberal politicians are elected over and over again irrespective of the fact that “Rome is burning” right in front of their eyes.

I will address the taxation issue in some detail in another chapter; however, the 64 thousand dollar question at this point is this. Can this one man one vote disaster be reversed or modified in some fashion so that liberal politicians cannot use tax dollars to buy votes? Unfortunately, I see no possibility that those on the take can be weaned off the freebees on which they have become so dependent. Consider the situation in Greece. Socialism has bankrupted Greece and its insolvency is threatening the entire world economy. Portugal is not far behind. Despite this fact, the slightest attempt to rain in the socialist policy of this communist state is met with riots and social unrest bordering on anarchy. No, I can’t think of anything less than a political revolution of some kind that would put this communist gene back into the bottle.
Similarly, it seems unlikely that the George Millers, the Barbara Boxers and others of their socialist ilk will be willing to modify a political process that perpetually keeps them in power. No way is this going to happen Jose!

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Low Pass: affirmative action at its worst!

When I moved back to California in 1973, after 7 awful years in Minnesota (the weather not the people), I was on the Urology faculty in the Surgery Department at the University of California Davis. As a member of the surgery department, I participated in the oral examinations given to UCD’s third year medical students after they completed their surgery rotation.
To put what I am going to relate to you in perspective, before the days of affirmative action the weeding out of people who wanted to become doctors, but were not qualified, occurred before they got into medical school. In other words, it was tough to get in, but once in you were almost sure to graduate and to pass the licensure examinations thereafter. This is not to say that the training and testing of medical students was anything but rigorous, to say the least. It was just that if you could get into medical school, you were able to handle most anything that the faculty could throw at you.
This, as you may know, is the opposite of what happens in Law schools where almost anyone who can come up with the tuition can get into some school and the weeding out process occurs during the first year and later at the bar examinations.
Anyway, getting back to the story that I am about to relate, there were around 15 pairs of professors who were charged with examining the third year medical students at UCD; in my case, I was paired with a general surgeon, and we gave oral exams to about 6 to 8 individual students who had completed the surgery rotation. Each examination lasted about 15 minutes and each student was examined by 4 different pairs of examiners. Each of the students also had completed a multiple choice type of written test, although we did not know, by design, until later how they had faired on that part of the examination.
To make a long story short, all of the students that my partner and I quizzed did reasonably well and we were not able to stump several of the students no matter how difficult we made the questions. That is all but one, a black female who didn’t seem to have a clue about anything. I recall specifically that she had no idea as to the significance of red blood cells urine and was clueless with respect to the difference between a direct and indirect inguinal hernia.
We, of course, had no option but to flunk her. When the oral examinations were concluded and we all convened to determine the grades the students would receive, the other three pairs of faculty members who had examined this black female also came to the same conclusion. One examiner commented that he couldn’t believe that she had actually taken the surgery course, seemed impossible were his exact words. Considering her lack of knowledge, it was no great surprise to learn that she had also failed the written examination.
When it came time for the final vote, every single one of the 30 or so examiners, with little discussion, voted to flunk her. As it turned out, this was her second try at passing the surgery course. She had flunked the first time around and flunking again meant that she was out of medical school which should have been a blessing for everyone concerned.
What happened next took me completely by surprise. Understand that we did not have affirmative action in the University of Minnesota at that time and I, as a new member of the faculty, was nearly clueless with respect to the way things were done at UCD. In any case, the chief of surgery, Earl Wolfman (may he roast in the hottest part of hell), who had not said a word during the grading session up to that point, said the two magic words that floored me, might as well have been hit me between the eyes with a pole ax. Anyway, Dr Wolfman cleared his throat and said the two magic words that all low achievers want to hear, low pass! At that point my friends, I knew that medicine as I knew it was a thing of the past.