About Me

Name: lge
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Search

Blog Roll

"Giant Sucking Sound" Becomes Audible To Politicians

Posted by lge on Saturday, October 11, 2008 7:46:20 AM
Boy, did the politicos ridicule Ross Perot, when he warned that it was a bad idea to allow all our manufacturing jobs to be relocated to third-world (cheap-labor) countries! Why, that bat-eared looney -- he was behind the times! Didn't he know, we were entering the "information age," the "service economy," when everybody would make a living shuffling paper and taking in one another's laundry? We no longer needed to make things, to produce goods! We could depend on the rest of the world to make what we need! We'll just lie here, like a giant helpless slug or queen bee, allowing the worker bees of the world to come and feed us!

Well, that idiotic notion of economics, and of life, has finally fallen through so completely that even our politicians can see there's a problem with it. But like the natural-born jackasses they are, they attribute it all to "a lack of regulations and oversight," or possibly to "affirmative-action mortgage lending" (true enough, as far as it goes).

Our politicians have destroyed the very foundation of our economy, our prosperity, and out strength -- our manufacturing, productive base. What those retarded jackasses call "free trade" is actually disinvestment -- the loss of our productive investment capital, which has been off-shored to China (who holds our fate in her hands). Is it any wonder our investment banks are in crisis, when all our investment capital is in China and Mexico?

Our "leaders" have thrown away the foundation of our economy, built up overt two centuries of toil and struggle. Like a malicious idiot child, they considered it of no importance, and sent it all to China. God help us in the future! 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Affirmative-Action Lending Doesn't Work

Posted by lge on Monday, September 29, 2008 9:21:59 PM
Affirmative action -- the last refuge of scoundrels. Barney Frank and a few other degenerate morons in Congress have no claim to admiration; nothing to recommend them; no positive attributes, no admirable qualities.

SO, they compensate by being "white knights"; by riding to the rescue of poor, downtrodden blacks who are "red-lined" and discriminated against by white fat-cat lenders. That's Frank's view -- the view, frankly, of a bigot against bankers and financiers and Republicans.

We see the results of affirmative action in mortgage lending -- collapse. The results of affirmative action in schools and other places is that mediocrities crowd out gifted, capable people. It's a travesty and a crime against this country.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The economy's broken and Harry Reid's clueless

Posted by lge on Friday, September 19, 2008 7:12:11 PM

Disaster after disaster afflicts our economy:
  • The "sub-prime mortgage" debacle
  • Gasoline prices & the energy "crisis" (which our "leaders" should have been working on since about 1978)
  • Lehman, Merrill Lynch, AIG, other financial industry problem companies
  • A sick auto industry, with GM maybe failing
And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said yesterday,  “no one knows what to do” at the moment. As Gomer Pyle would have said (but in a manlier voice), "Surprise, surprise!"

The problem is not the financial industry. It's not the huge sums of money Mexicans are sending out of the country. It's not bad mortgage loans made to poor people. The reason our economy is sinking is that the entire foundation of our economy is being destroyed by Congress, by off-shoring laws like NAFTA.

The basis of all prosperity, that is, the basis of "the wealth of nations," as Adam Smith pointed out, is PRODUCTION. Production must be greater than consumption, and the amount of capital invested in increasing production must continue and increase.

A positive balance of production over consumption, leaving plenty of productive capital to invest, is essential. That's the whole point of Wealth of Nations. Harry Reid and his ilk think it's fine to invest our productive capital in China, so as to increase their "wealth of nations."  What we in the U.S. get is "poverty of nations" and "debt of nations." All because Reid, et al., have a monkey's understanding of Wealth of Nations and of the meaning of "free trade."

On our behalf, our "leaders" have chosen not to live by producing. We live by consuming, by depending on China to produce, and by going into debt to purchase cheap goods from the producing nations. We're in debt up to our eyeballs. We've thrown away our manufacturing capacity, the basis of our prosperity which has been built up by hard work over the two centuries of our history.

In addition, we're giving China advanced technology, allowing them to riddle this country with spies, educating their students, and allowing them to produce highly-sensitive military and technical goods. And people still continue to say we're the "strongest nation on Earth"! Our rulers are throwing it all away.

The problem isn't the financial industry -- that's superstructure. It just reflects the deeper rottenness in our economy. You have to have something to manage, to be a financial manager; and all we have is a determination to live off cheap goods and debt, rather than to "protect" our economy.

To return to Casper the Smarmy Ghost, that is, Harry Reid. Harry, here's what to do:
When in danger, or in doubt,
Run in circles, scream and shout.
In other words: Business As Usual.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Obama Would Agree to Some Drilling" -- IT'S BIG OF HIM

Posted by lge on Saturday, August 02, 2008 11:37:34 PM
The New York Times has a headline, "Obama Says He Would Agree to Some Drilling."

That is big of him. He -- and Congress too --will allow our people to try to supply some of our needs. They'll let us try to get some of the oil we need.

Probably they'll let us try to grow some of the food we need, too -- if we behave ourselves. And they'll let us make clothing for ourselves, or at least, buy it from China. Our keepers are relenting a little. But when it comes to growing food, watch out! If we try to plant too much, Nancy "Tweety-Bird" Pelosi will yell, "We can't grow our way out of famine! If we plant now, we won't get any food for three months! Give up! It's hopeless!"

That's what our country has been reduced to -- being ruled by bird-brains.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Press-Release Prayer

Posted by lge on Thursday, July 31, 2008 1:13:42 AM

I wonder: when Obama invents a prayer for public consumption -- a press-release prayer, if you will -- does his regular speech-writer write it? Or does he have a special prayer-writer to handle such tasks?

This guy is one creepy weasel. A seriously creepy weasel. A Clinton-class creepy weasel.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama's Core Demographic

Posted by lge on Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:08:02 PM
    Obama's Core Demographic:


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Court, The Times, and Guns

Posted by lge on Friday, June 27, 2008 3:31:30 PM
The New York Times is not amused at the Supreme Court's decision upholding the Second Amendment:
The Supreme Court on Thursday all but ensured that even more Americans will die senselessly with its wrongheaded and dangerous ruling striking down key parts of the District of Columbia's gun-control law.
I kinda agree. Guns can be destructive, just as crack and other illicit drugs can be destructive. We should ban guns, just like we banned crack, and then we won't have any more trouble with those two things.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Supreme Court -- Right By Mistake?

Posted by lge on Friday, June 27, 2008 3:01:08 PM
On the matter of "no death penalty for child rapists" -- I have had qualms about that penalty also, though of course, not on the same grounds as the Supreme Court, whose reasoning is like no earthly creature's.

My idea of justice comes from the Old Testament, the foundation of Western civilization and our ideas of justice. And that Book says, we shall exact "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, life for life...."  But notice -- a life for a life, and no more.  A child rapist doesn't kill the child (at least not literally), so it seems hard to get around the conclusion that no life should be required where there was no loss of life.

By the same token, I have had a problem with multiple death penalties where only one victim was killed. If a mob or gang kills one guy, it seems wrong to sentence more than one member of the gang to death. "A life for a life" -- not two for one. Kill the most guilty, and send the rest to jail.

Contrariwise, I show my own inconsistency by saying, I think we should have the death penalty for people who physically mutilate their victims. People who dismember, chop off parts, mutilate their victims without killing -- they're beyond the pale. It would be best if we could similarly mutilate them, but that's barbaric, cruel and unusual. So I would support the death penalty for such heinousness.

But as for the child rapists, the Court just ruled on the basis that "We don't like it." Then they made up some sophistry or specious line of double-talk, to give a pretense of making a legal argument. That's what they always do -- which is why they're our rulers, our keepers, the real Ayatolla-like power behind our ostensibly democratic  government.
 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama quotes racist attack he just invented

Posted by lge on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:20:29 AM
Obama is a classic example of projection, or passive-aggressive behavior. He's making up attacks on him that haven't been made yet, in order to show how evil his opponents are.

It's not enough for him to fight straw men -- he has to fight fictional, visitor-from-the-future straw men.

He tells us all what those rascally Republicans are bound to say in the future:
“It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy. We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run. They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?"
 Here's an idea: wait until they run their campaign, and then respond to it. Wait until they make their arguments, and then answer those -- not some made-up arguments in your own deluded mind that nobody has advanced.

Why did he make up those particular straw men? To continue the main theme of his campaign: If you Whiteys don't vote for me, it's because you're racist. All your criticism of me is really racism.

That was the idea behind his "post-racial" rhetoric. That was his way of saying, Go ahead and vote for me, Whitey -- we're post-racial now. And all you home boys, I KNOW I got your vote.

This is the slickest, most deceitful, most hypocritical and sanctimonious, slimiest politician we've seen in a long time.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Zimbabwe : "No justice, no peace!"

Posted by lge on Friday, June 13, 2008 10:44:57 PM
From Yahoo News:

Zimbabwe leader warns of violence if he loses vote
Fri Jun 13, 2:42 PM ET

HARARE, Zimbabwe - President Robert Mugabe said Friday that his supporters are ready to fight if the opposition wins an upcoming presidential runoff election, hardening the rhetoric of a campaign that already has seen widespread violence against government opponents.
I'm even prepared to join the fight," the 84-year-old Mugabe told a conference of his party's youth wing.
Mugabe said the veterans of the war of independence in 1980 had approached him after the first round of voting in March and threatened to take up arms again if opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai wins the June 27 runoff.
Then Mugabe led the crown in shouts of "No justice, No peace!"

Jesse Jackson announced he would be flying to Zimbabwe because of reports that blacks were being disenfranchised. Jackson said he knew the election was being stolen from Mugabe. He demanded a recount and vowed to hang every white person named Chad.

It's deja vu all over again.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fuel Cells And Environmentalists

Posted by lge on Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:10:58 PM

 The Say Anything blog reports this story:

        Honda has announced that the company’s new hydrogen fuel cell vehicle, the FCX Clarity is now available for lease to customers . . . in the Torrance, Santa Monica, or Irvine areas of southern California. . .

I don't get this enthusiasm for hydrogen fuel cells. As I understand it, the hydrogen is produced from natural gas. Well, natural gas burns. You don't need an elaborate process to turn it into fuel. Many businesses maintain fleets of natural-gas vehicles for city driving. So why bother with a technology that's not yet really economically feasible and that involves unneeded effort? Why not encourage more natural-gas vehicles? And also electric vehicles, along with many, many more nuclear power plants? And drilling for offshore oil -- before the Soviets and Mexicans and Chinese get it all?

I guess it's because of the spoiled-brat environmentalists: they always want something else; that's always their real technology of choice--  something not yet developed or not possible on a large scale. Enviros like windmills; they oppose all energy available for use now on a mass scale.

They have a puerile view of science and like the whiz-bang Buck Rogers notion of fuel-cell technology. They oppose the whole idea of burning, even if it's natural gas; it's a kind of primitive superstition with them -- more a nature-cult taboo than any calculation of the real effects of anything on the environment. And they just want to oppose development, production, economic activity of any kind. They don't want to solve our energy or economic problems; they just want to see their idiotic nature cult enacted into law. They're a pernicious influence.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Let's Fight Boycott With Boycott

Posted by lge on Friday, May 23, 2008 9:54:08 AM
It seems few people have acknowledged it plainly, but OPEC countries can make the price of oil as high as they want. They have a large enough part of the supply that, by clamping down on that supply, they can push the price up whenever and as much as they want. In addition, they're  our enemies, for two main reasons: we defend Israel to some degree, so they don't exterminate the Jews as they would like to; and, we're not Muslims. For them, that's reason enough to kill us.

If they didn't have oil money, they wouldn't be such a problem. What can we do to counter their manipulation of oil prices?

The only thing I could think of was, try to restrict them from getting something they want. Don't allow their children -- spoiled offspring of rich parents, none of them any better than mediocre intellectually -- into our universities to study. Don't allow them to emigrate here, for Heaven's sake -- why do we need a fifth column of potential murderers and agitators? Don't let them visit. Restrict all those things, the more they restrict the supply of oil.

And, restrict the supply of food. They're doing it already themselves, really -- oil is necessary for the modern, mechanized production and distribution of food. And I think making ethanol from corn -- and biodiesel from soybeans -- and ethanol from sorghum molasses -- is a good thing. Let's use nuclear power for electricity, and natural gas for fleet in-city vehicles, and electric cars for commuter vehicles, and burn less gasoline.

They don't want to produce oil? We don't want to produce food. They can drink their petroleum
 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can OFEC counter OPEC?

Posted by lge on Monday, May 19, 2008 8:00:59 PM
I'm waiting for food riots to reach Saudi Arabia. Then we can say, "You want us to produce more food? Loosen up the supply of oil. You're making it too expensive to do anything related to tractors, transportation, etc.

We need an Organization of Food Exporting Countries, an OFEC (or FooPEC -- Food Producing & Exporting Countrties)  to restrict the supply of food, as OPEC restricts the supply of oil. They have a right to sell as much or as little oil as they please? We have a right to produce and sell as much or as little food as we please.

Sell it or drink it, towel-heads!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It's Getting Crowded Under Obama's Bus

Posted by lge on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 5:13:36 PM
First he threw his grandmother under the bus -- his white racist typical-white-person grandmother.

Now it's Wright. First Obama refused to "disown" Wright. He could no more do that than he could disown his own grandmother --his own, racist, typical white person grandmother.

Then it looked like he had no alternative to ditching Wright (a lunatic white-basher), so he did. Or as Lord Byron put it,
A little still she strove, and much repented,
And whispering, "I will ne'er consent" - consented.
Obama's out for Obama, just as Hillary's out for Hillary, and neither one of those grubbing, grasping, mono-maniacal power-trippers should be trusted within a light-year of the levers of power.

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Jeremiah Wright, Malicious Birdbrain

Posted by lge on Tuesday, April 29, 2008 4:59:48 AM

After watching several of Wright's performances on TV recently, I think I have a good bead on his character: the malicious birdbrain. Racist moron. His lame-brained shuck-and-jive, his half-witticisms, his juvenile gimmicks like half-completed sentences about how he's "open to being vice-. . ." and how criticisms  of "O'Reilly are... maybe justified...." Hilarious! 

Wright reminds me of many semi-literate jerks I knew in high school. They were only funny to themselves, but they gained an audience amongst their own, like-minded group.

That's the thing about Wright: he could only get by with his moronic shtick among people who are totally on his side, totally in the bag for his own bizarre brand of paranoid hatred of white America. They're a Nuremberg-rally audience -- they're already convinced, and no logic or evidence is required.

Imagine Hitler, if he had had the same malice toward his chosen enemy, but an I.Q. of about  80; so that, instead of being a murderous dictator, all he could be was a ranting buffoon. That's a good picture of "Reverend" Wright.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789Next »