Archive for the ‘Bush’ Category

Pelosi aids Al Qaeda

February 22, 2007

Hi Brit,

Guess who is once more has her knickers in a knot?  Nanny Pelosi of course.  This time, she may even have good reason.  Our Vice President, Dick Cheney, made a speech in Tokyo where he said, “I think if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we will do is validate the Al Qaeda strategy.  The Al Qaeda strategy is to break the will of the American people … try to persuade us to throw in the towel and come home, and then they win because we quit.”   This is what has her all in a huff, even though it’s a true and fair assessment by the VP.  However, why I think she has reason to be miffed is that she was not able to reach the President to complain.  Sorry Bush, while one can hardly fault you for not wanting to talk to our vapid leader of the House, it’s part of your job; it’s why you get paid the not really so big bucks.  So, next time, suck it up and put her on the Speaker phone.

the Grit

Advertisements

Pelosi smiles while Democrats spit on our troops!

February 17, 2007

Hi Brit,

In a replay of the last war the Democrats lost for us, Nanny Pelosi has engineered a spineless vote in Congress to pass a “non-binding” resolution against President Bush’s running of the war in Iraq.  While this vile spit-in-the-face attempt to spit in the face of our troops, who, while risking their lives in service to their country, are totally committed to the war, failed to make it through the Senate, it still serves to prove how cowardly and anti-American the liberals are.  Just take a glance at this, Pelosi smiles at Bush, and know that she is really smiling at a partial political victory at the expense of the men and women who defend our country.  Of course, if Pelosi and her liberal gang had any stones, and I’m surprised that Nanny P. doesn’t, they would have put their cards on the table and tried to actually cut funding for the war.  However, as usual, symbolism is just as good to liberals as substance, and they are just beside themselves at this at this partially successful mocking of everything America used to hold dear. 

the Grit

Who do you love?

February 5, 2007

Hi Brit,

Joy, oh joy!  It’s Federal Budget time!  Let’s see who the Government loves:

(as proposed by President Bush)

Health and Human Services: $699 billion
Social Security: $655.6 billion
Defense: $624.6 billion
Treasury: $525.9 billion
Other agencies: $148.7 billion
Agriculture: $90.9 billion
Veterans: $84.4 billion
Transportation: $67.4 billion
Education: $62.6 billion
Labor: $50.4 billion
State: $37.4 billion
Housing and Urban Development: $36.2 billion
Homeland Security: $34.6 billion
Justice: $23.3 billion
Energy: $21.7 billion
National Aeronautics and Space Administration: $17.3 billion
Interior: $10.1 billion
Environmental Protection Agency: $7.1 billion
Commerce: $6.7 billion
Judiciary: $6.7 billion
Legislative branch: $4.8 billion
Corps of Engineers: $4.8 billion
 
For a total of a bit over 2.9 TRILLION DOLLARS!  This is right at $10,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country.

After taking a few minutes to let that sink in, you may be wondering just what these departments are going to spend their share of the loot on, so (from their sites) here’s what they think they do:

Health and Human Services: $699 billion

THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES is the United States government’s principal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.

THE DEPARTMENT INCLUDES MORE THAN 300 PROGRAMS, covering a wide spectrum of activities. Some highlights include:

  • Health and social science research
  • Preventing disease, including immunization services
  • Assuring food and drug safety
  • Medicare (health insurance for elderly and disabled Americans) and Medicaid (health insurance for low-income people)
  • Health information technology
  • Financial assistance and services for low-income families
  • Improving maternal and infant health
  • Head Start (pre-school education and services)
  • Faith-based and community initiatives
  • Preventing child abuse and domestic violence
  • Substance abuse treatment and prevention
  • Services for older Americans, including home-delivered meals
  • Comprehensive health services for Native Americans
  • Medical preparedness for emergencies, including potential terrorism.


Social Security: $655.6 billion

We pay retirement, disability and survivors benefits to workers and their families and administer the Supplemental Security Income program. We also issue Social Security numbers. 
Defense: $624.6 billion

With our military units tracing their roots to pre-Revolutionary times, you might say that we are America’s oldest company. And if you look at us in business terms, many would say we are not only America’s largest company, but its busiest and most successful. 
Treasury: $525.9 billion

The mission of the Department of the Treasury is to promote the conditions for prosperity and stability in the United States and encourage prosperity and stability in the rest of the world.
Other agencies: $148.7 billion

These are all the other agencies and departments that didn’t get enough funding to make the big list. 
Agriculture: $90.9 billion

 We provide leadership on food, agriculture, natural resources, and related issues based on sound public policy, the best available science, and efficient management.
Veterans: $84.4 billion

 Our goal is to provide excellence in patient care, veterans’ benefits and customer satisfaction. We have reformed our department internally and are striving for high quality, prompt and seamless service to veterans. Our department’s employees continue to offer their dedication and commitment to help veterans get the services they have earned. Our nation’s veterans deserve no less.
Transportation: $67.4 billion

 Serve the United States by ensuring a fast, safe, efficient, accessible and convenient transportation system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people, today and into the future.
Education: $62.6 billion

ED was created in 1980 by combining offices from several federal agencies. Its original directive remains its mission today — to ensure equal access to education and to promote educational excellence throughout the nation. ED’s 4,500 employees and $71.5 billion budget are dedicated to:

• Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
• Collecting data on America’s schools and disseminating research.
• Focusing national attention on key educational issues.
• Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education.
Labor: $50.4 billion

The Department of Labor fosters and promotes the welfare of the job seekers, wage earners, and retirees of the United States by improving their working conditions, advancing their opportunities for profitable employment, protecting their retirement and health care benefits, helping employers find workers, strengthening free collective bargaining, and tracking changes in employment, prices, and other national economic measurements. In carrying out this mission, the Department administers a variety of Federal labor laws including those that guarantee workers’ rights to safe and healthful working conditions; a minimum hourly wage and overtime pay; freedom from employment discrimination; unemployment insurance; and other income support.
State: $37.4 billion

 Create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.
Housing and Urban Development: $36.2 billion

 HUD’s mission is to increase homeownership, support community development and increase access to affordable housing free from discrimination. To fulfill this mission, HUD will embrace high standards of ethics, management and accountability and forge new partnerships–particularly with faith-based and community organizations–that leverage resources and improve HUD’s ability to be effective on the community level.
Homeland Security: $34.6 billion

 We will lead the unified national effort to secure America. We will prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation. We will ensure safe and secure borders, welcome lawful immigrants and visitors, and promote the free-flow of commerce.
Justice: $23.3 billion

 

To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.

Energy: $21.7 billion

Discovering the solutions to power and secure America’s future
 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration: $17.3 billion

We explore and discover
Interior: $10.1 billion

The Mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities.
Environmental Protection Agency: $7.1 billion

 The mission of the Environmental Protection Agency is to protect human health and the environment. Since 1970, EPA has been working for a cleaner, healthier environment for the American people.
Commerce: $6.7 billion

 The historic mission of the Department is “to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce” of the United States. This has evolved, as a result of legislative and administrative additions, to encompass broadly the responsibility to foster, serve, and promote the Nation’s economic development and technological advancement. The Department fulfills this mission by:

a. Participating with other Government agencies in the creation of national policy, through the President’s Cabinet and its subdivisions.

b. Promoting and assisting international trade.

c. Strengthening the international economic position of the United States.

d. Promoting progressive domestic business policies and growth.

e. Improving comprehension and uses of the physical environment and its oceanic life.

f. Ensuring effective use and growth of the Nation’s scientific and technical resources.

g. Acquiring, analyzing, and disseminating information regarding the Nation and the economy to help achieve increased social and economic benefit.

h. Assisting states, communities, and individuals with economic progress.
Judiciary: $6.7 billion

Funds the Federal Courts.
Legislative branch: $4.8 billion

Funds the Congress. 
Corps of Engineers: $4.8 billion
 

Our mission is to provide quality, responsive engineering services to the nation including: 

  • Planning, designing, building and operating water resources and other civil works projects (Navigation, Flood Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, etc.)
  • Designing and managing the construction of military facilities for the Army and Air Force. (Military Construction)
  • Providing design and construction management support for other Defense and federal agencies. (Interagency and International Services)

Today, as always, we stand ready… engineers, scientists, real estate specialists and administrators alike to meet national security, emergency and other national requirements.

While I have different concepts of the true purpose of some of these Departments and Agencies, that will have to wait until another day.  Now, don’t you feel better knowing a tiny bit about where your tax dollars are going?

the Grit

Queen Pelosi?

February 2, 2007

Hi Brit,

I knew when the election results came in last year the Pelosi would be a constant source of inspiration.  I didn’t think it would be this good though, Speaker pursues military flights.  The key to this story is not that Queen Pelosi wants free rides in military planes, being secure and staying in contact with Washington is part of her job as Speaker.  However, she is also demanding, “regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation.”  Sorry, Nanny Pelosi.  You’re are Speaker of the House, not royalty.  Family and friends have to fly commercial.  That’s the price you pay for the new ethics rules.  Besides, you shouldn’t be flying anyway.  Don’t you believe in Global Warming?  Aren’t you concerned about the size of your carbon footprint?  Oh, I forgot.  All that stuff only applies to us peasants.

the Grit

Damn this good economy!

January 31, 2007

Hi Brit,

Sorry to swear, but our insanely good economy, Economy Grows 3.5 Percent in 4th Quarter, is causing lots of problems over here.  The people are not happy:

“An AP-Ipsos poll in early January found that 55 percent of Americans disapproved of the president’s handling of the economy, while 43 percent approved.”

 Obviously, we miss the recession at the end of the Clinton Administration.  It’s Bush’s fault, his and the evil Republicans.  They were warned that the American people wouldn’t stand for having the strongest economy in the world, strong growth in personal income, lower taxes, and almost complete employment, but they went ahead and pushed it on us anyway!  I say it’s time for a good riot in the streets!  Down with Bush!  Down with the economy! 

the Grit

Finally, the yoke gets lighter.

January 30, 2007

Hi Brit,

This item, Bush Directive Increases Sway on Regulation, should give you a bit of an insight into US politics and how our Government works.  As you may know, our Federal Government has blessed us with gigantic agencies and departments, crammed full of careerer bureaucrats, that exist for the sole purpose of attempting to regulate every tiny detail of everything that happens, or can happen, in America.  Now, a moments thought, will expose the trouble of this system, that being that there is no conceivable way for legislation to be passed with enough detail to cover all this.  Thus, over the years, Congress, realizing in their wisdom that millions might die from RRDS (Rules & Regulations Deficit Syndrome) without a constant flow of new and ever more complex and comprehensive instructions from Washington, solved the problem by delegating their Constitutional duty to the unelected employees of the various nanny agencies. 

President Bush has, with the stroke of a Constitutionally authorized pen, slapped the new Power in town back down to size.  The best part of the article is a response from a leading, and very liberal, Democrat:

Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California and chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said: “The executive order allows the political staff at the White House to dictate decisions on health and safety issues, even if the government’s own impartial experts disagree. This is a terrible way to govern, but great news for special interests.”

Yes, Mr. Waxman, I know how you feel.  It is certainly a shame that we have to bother with involving elected officials in the process.  Oh, the trouble caused by this thing we call democracy.

the Grit

Bat out of hell, bite me world!

January 29, 2007

Hi Brit,

I was in a bit of a nostalgic mood this afternoon, so I put “Bat Out of Hell” on and cranked it up.  Man, what perfect timing!  Global Warming, extremest Muslim terrorists, liberals, Jane Fonda, Britney’s beaver, Big Brother racism, Hillary Clinton, the United Nations, President Bush, AlGore, Iraq, Iran, nuclear bombs, blood in the streets, and the end of the world; screw it all!  So, take a few minutes, put the CD on, crank it up and sing along!

Bat Out Of Hell lyrics

The sirens are screaming and the fires are howling

Way down in the valley tonight
There’s a man in the shadows with a gun in his eye
And a blade shining oh so bright
There’s evil in the air and there’s thunder in the sky
And a killer’s on the bloodshot streets
And down in the tunnel where the deadly are rising
Oh I swear I saw a young boy
Down in the gutter
He was starting to foam in the heat
Oh Baby you’re the only thing in this whole world
that’s pure and good and right
And wherever you are and wherever you go
There’s always gonna be some light
But i gotta get out
I gotta break it out now
Before the final crack of dawn
So we gotta make the most of our one night together
When it’s over you know
We’ll both be so alone
Like a bat out of hell
I’ll be gone when the morning comes
When the night is over
Like a bat out of hell I’ll be gone gone gone
Like a bat out of hell I’ll be gone when the morning comes
But when the day is done
And the sun goes down
And the moonlight’s shining through

Then like a sinner before the gates of heaven

I’ll come crawling on back to you
I’m gonna hit the highway like a battering ram

On a silver black phantom bike

When the metal is hot and the engine is hungry

And we’re all about to see the light

Nothing ever grows in this rotten old hole

Everything is stunted and lost

And nothing really rocks

And nothing really rolls

And nothing’s ever worth the cost

And I know that I’m damned if I never get out

And maybe I’m damned if I do

But with every other beat I got left in my heart

You know I’d rather be damned with you

If I gotta be damned you know I wanna be damned

Dancing through the night with you

If I gotta be damned you know I wanna be damned

Gotta be damned you know I wanna be damned

If Gotta be damned you know I wanna be damned

Dancing through the night

Dancing through the night

Dancing through the night with you
Oh Baby you’re the only thing in this whole world

     that’s pure and good and right

And wherever you are and wherever you go

There’s always gonna be some light

But I gotta get out

I gotta break it out now

Before the final crack of dawn

So we gotta make the most of our one night together

When it’s over you know

We’ll both be so alone

Like a bat out of hell

I’ll be gone when the morning comes

When the night is over

Like a bat out of hell I’ll be gone gone gone

Like a bat out of hell I’ll be gone when the morning comes

But when the day is done

And the sun goes down

And the moonlight’s shining through

Then like a sinner before the gates of heaven

I’ll come crawling on back to you

Then like a sinner before the gates of heaven

I’ll come crawling on back to you

I can see myself tearing up the road

Faster than any other boy has ever gone

And my skin is raw but my soul is ripe

And no one’s gonna stop me now

I gotta make my escape

But I can’t stop thinking of you

And I never see the sudden curve until it’s way too late

I never see the sudden curve till it’s way too late

Then I’m dying on the bottom of a pit in the blazing sun

Torn and twisted at the foot of a burning bike

And I think somebody somewhere is tolling a bell

And the last thing I see is my heart

Still beating

Breaking out of my body

And flying away

Like a bat out of hell

Then I’m dying at the bottom of a pit in the blazing sun

Torn and twisted at the foot of a burning bike

And I think somebody somewhere must be tolling a bell

And the last thing I see is my heart

Still beating

Still beating

Breaking out of my body and flying away

Like a bat out of hell

Thanks Jim; thanks Meat!  Still love it; still a fan.

the Grit

Die Global Warming! Die!

January 28, 2007

Hi Brit,

This is even cooler than giant robots or rail guns!  US answer to global warming: smoke and giant space mirrors  Hot dang, giant space mirrors!  I don’t even care what they’re for, just the idea of giant space mirrors is great. 

Of course, if you read the article, it points out a big heap of things wrong with the IPCC (you remember, the UN’s Global Warming lap dogs,) including a mention that:

“The US has also attempted to steer the UN report, prepared by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), away from conclusions that would support a new worldwide climate treaty based on binding targets to reduce emissions – as sought by Tony Blair. It has demanded a draft of the report be changed to emphasise the benefits of voluntary agreements and to include criticisms of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing treaty which the US administration opposes.”

Now, at first that may sound odd or, to some, evil – a politician trying to tamper with a scientific report.  However, if you read the fine print of the existing IPCC reports, the ones that riled up all the worry about Global Warming, it turns out that (and you will hear rare mention of this by the liberal press) the final report(s) is subject to editing by politicians from several governments!  Obviously, this has to cast doubt on, not only these reports, but on Global Warming itself.  Thus, I suggest we cancel the UN, forget about Global Warming, and spend the money saved building giant space mirrors.  Oh, and we could make some of them fun-house mirrors, the ones that distort your reflection to make you look weird.  That way, the whole world could have a good laugh.

the Grit

2008 Elections

January 28, 2007

Hi Grit

Thanks for the information on your 2008 Presidential elections. As Solomon once said (although I hasten to add this is heresay as I wasn’t there at the time), those who give wisdom empower others. However, in this instance, as the UK papers have passed little comment about any of the potential candidates apart from Hilary Clinton, I am of course little the wiser. No doubt more will become clear as the months move on.

I was pleased to note that some of the normal traditions of the Presidency race are being kept. Naturally, the exhorbitant funding levels will be maintain as candidates attempt to buy the office. The one tradition that caught my eye though, was the area of candidate scandals. I notice that this is already moving into full swing as people look to dig the dirt. A number of candidates are already revealing themselves in this area as I found at this address.

Sometimes nothing changes.

the Brit

The Great Race of 2008

January 27, 2007

Hi Brit,

As promised, here is a more in depth look at the Presidential race for 2008.  I would have got this to you sooner, but, there for awhile, people were entering faster than I could type.

First, a bit of background on how our elections work.  We have, basically, a two party system.  While other parties or even individuals can run, our laws make it exceedingly difficult for them to get on the ballot in enough states to have a serious chance.  Inside the two main parties, Republican and Democrat, they select one candidate to represent that party in the election.  This is done by a system of primary elections, where only the registered members of that party can vote.  These are done on a state by state basis, and state keep changing their laws trying to be one to hold an early primary.  That’s because the first few primaries get lots of attention from the candidates, and lots of money from political ads.  Most candidates will drop out after the initial handful of state races if they do poorly.  Once selected as the party’s choice, the candidate will choose a Vice Presidential partner and start trying to undo the damage done during the primaries.  This damage occurs, usually, because of nasty campaign tactics by other party members and, as only party members can vote, the candidates often have to take more extreme stands to please them.  One more thing, Federal law require that to start raising money, a candidate must either actually declare they are running (by filling out some paper work and paying a small fee) or start a committee to “investigate” the possibility of running, called an exploratory committee.

Off we go then:

Official Candidates:

      Republican:

          Sam Brownback

          John Cox

          Duncan Hunter

      Democrat:

          Christopher Dodd

          John Edwards

          Mike Gravel

          Dennis Kucinich

          Tom Vilsack

      Other:

          Don’t care

Semi-Official Candidates (started exploratory committee):

      Republican:

          Jim Gilmore

          Rudy Giuliani

          John McCain

          Ron Paul

          Mitt Romney

          Tom Tancredo

          Tommy Thompson

      Democrat:

          Joe Biden

          Hillary Rodham Clinton

          Barack Oboma

          Bill Richardson

      Other:

          Don’t care

Probable Candidates:

      Republican:

          Newt Gingrich

          Chuck Hagel

          Mike Huckabee

          George Pataki

         Mike Pence

      Democrat:

          Wesley Clark

          Al Sharpton

      Other:

          Don’t care

Keep in mind that more may have entered the race while I was typing this.  As to why there are so many, this is an unusual election.  Normally, either the setting President or Vice President will run and be the obvious choice for one party.  This also, depending on the popularity of that candidate, limits the number of people from the other side of the isle who think they can win.  Next year, Bush can’t, by law, run again and Cheney isn’t running, leaving things wide open in both parties.  I’ll fill in more about each later.

the Grit

We’ve been greened!

January 27, 2007

Hi Brit,

Well, President Bush is trying to make friends in liberal places: Executive Order: Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. Of course, the liberal press isn’t interested, since they hate Bush with an almost religious passion.  Now, if President Clinton had done this, it would be the headline on every major paper and be repeated endlessly on every news show.  Alas, now we’re not only stuck with wasting more Federal dollars on this silly attempt to go green, but Bush isn’t even going to get credit for making the effort.   Pity.

On the other hand, it is cool that the President can do things like this.  Now, if it were me, I’d assign colors to all the Federal Agencies and issue an Executive Order that all Federal Buildings be painted in the appropriate color and that the employees of that Agency dress exclusively in that color.  I might even make them dye their hair.  The IRS, by the way, would get pink as their color.  Could that be why I’m not President? 

the Grit

George Bush and the ladies triangle

January 27, 2007

Hi Grit

Although there has been no Clinton-type impropriety during George Bush’s Presidency, he must be wondering what he has done to become embroiled in a triangle on ladies.

It seems to me that this is the most important issue that George Bush has to face during the last two years of his term, namely how to deal with the ladies. In the past three months suddenly, out of seemingly nowhere, he has been placed in the middle of a triangle of female attackers.

First there is the leader of the house Ms Pelosi, who has made plain her disagreement with the way that he is conducting the Iraq war and a number of other issues. In fact, it is difficult to find an issue where there is any vestigage of agreement between the two.

Next comes Ms Merkel of the EU, seeking to promote a single US/EU marketplace. One only has to look at the imperfections of the EU’s own region wide policies to see how successful that will be. This despite the fact that there is no consensus of opinion in favour of it from the individual nations involved.

Lastly, Hilary Clinton has entered the fray. One of course has to wonder about her utterances of returning the core values back to American life, especially in view of the husbands antics whilst he was in office.

Whilst I am in no way a chauvinist, I have to wonder how Bush is going to cope with this new position he finds himself in. Having spent the last six years discussing issues with male politicians, with whom he shares a similar daily word output, how is he going to fare in a position where he has to discuss these with ladies, who researches have proven to have a word output of at least 2.5 times that of a male?

the Brit

US Presidential race – confused

January 25, 2007

Hi Grit

I may be a little dense, but I am having real trouble working out who is doing what in the race to become your next President. Firstly people seem to jumping jumping on the band wagon. As far as I can see there are now three democrats involved, including Hilary Clinton. I have yet to catch up with who is running for the other side, but no doubt that will come to me in the next few days.

Also, it appears that everyone is leading on the same home policy, home care. Assuming that the Iraq situation is over by then, won’t this be just a little confusing for the electorate?

Oh I will also be looking to see how much money is being thrown at the election campaigns as well.

the Brit

State of the Union and George Bush

January 25, 2007

Hi Grit

At the risk of getting shot down in flames, I am going to comment on George Bush’s state of the union address, over which there has been a lot of criticism. There are those who say that it was weak or that it showed a turnaround in his opinions. However, I disagree with these comments. I have been comparing his speech this year with the one he gave in 2003 and have come up with some surprising results.

Domestic affairs

I can find little difference between what George Bush said this year against what he said in 2003. He is asking for issue such as health care and immigration to be placed at the top of the list in terms of social issues that the country needs to deal with. Is that wrong? As has been mentioned in many areas of the media and other posts here, the rich do seem to have an easier and less taxed ride that the ordinary populace. Of course, that comment applies to the UK as well.

Environment

Way back in 2003 Bush recognised the need for industries such as the automobile manufacturers to address environment issues. His latest speech asks the same of them. They have the money and technology to make the changes but failed to address the issue. Today he is asking the question again.

Business

In 2003, George Bush outlined the extensive steps that the government had taken to curb the abuses of business, referring to legislation such as the Sorbanes-Oxley Act. In 2007 he is asking for business to continue to improve their social responsibility efforts.

Terror

It appears from the 2003 speech that there was cross-party support to fight the threat of terrorism and, more importantly, the war in Iraq. Now all that appears to have changed. Has George Bush changed his stance on that? Not as far as I can see. If he is to be credited with nothing else, it appears to me that his consistancy has to be admired.  Again I would comment that the same position appears to have evolved in the UK.

Does his address this year reflect a change of emphasis? No I don’t think so, neither is it the speech of a “lame duck” President. In this speech he is reiterating many of the tasks that he set the US in 2003. The only difference is that now he is saying to the democrats “Okay, you have control, now use it to make our country better.” The problem is whether the new regime will take heed or not.

Whatever side of the US political divide people are on I personally think that they cannot label George Bush as either weak or inconsistant. However, from other political discussions that I have read, this is not a position that one can attach to all US politicians.

the Brit

Have your city and burn it too!

January 24, 2007

Hi Brit,

Guess what, there is violence in Beirut!  Why is that news, you might wonder?  I’ll tell you.  If you glance through this article, Clash Pits Hezbollah Against Rule in Lebanon, you’ll find that there is a reasonable chance for Hezbollah, a horribly brutal and violent terrorist group, to gain control of Lebanon.  Of course, they would immediately convert it to a safe haven for terrorists from around the world, like Al-Queda, and use it as a base from which to attack Israel, repeatedly, until they finally win and slaughter all the Jews.  Of course, if they do win, my guess is that the result will be even worse, because someone will cap a nuke in their ass.  It doesn’t really matter who will do it, but there are plenty of contenders. 

Israel, an obvious first choice, but they probably won’t jump to be first, although they may toss around a couple of follow up strikes just to be sure.  Considering how many countries, like France, are just itching to see their bloody demise, they can’t take the chance.

USA, might happen.  Bush has nothing to loose, the military loves him enough to maintain secrecy, and we can probably do it with little chance of getting caught. 

Russia, my bet.  Keep in mind that Russia is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, and they make a lot of money selling arms to the Arabs.  The reason the Arabs need weapons is to continue the low level conflict with Israel.  Putin can’t afford to let one side or the other win.  Boom!

Syria, another good bet.  Face it, there is massive evidence that Saddam either had a nuke or was close to getting one.  Lots and lots of stuff made the journey to Syria just before Iraq fell.  If they have a nuke, what better time to use it?  Not only do they have a great shot at blaming the incident on Israel, but they can keep Hezbollah in check, before they become a dominate force in the area and threaten the Powers That Be in Syria.

Saudi Arabia, my second place bet.  Come on, you know the Saudis must have picked up a few big bombs by now.  It’s not like they can’t afford them.  Add to that, their need to keep the attention of their citizens focused on the Evil Jews, instead of how oppressed they are by the Monarchy.  Then mix in a bit of realization that, besides a desire to kill Americans and Jews, most of the terrorist groups want to take control of the entire Middle East and return things to how they were during the Persian Empire.  Oh, with themselves in charge of course, which wouldn’t set well with the current dictators of SA.  Sprinkle a little control of Mecca on top, and the Saudi Royal Family has an excellent reason not to allow Hezbollah to gain too much power.  That reason being, keeping their heads attached to their necks.

I suggest we all spend some time cheering for the current Government of Lebanon.

the Grit

Two quick questions…

January 23, 2007

Hi Brit,

Two quick questions:

1.  Do they play the US State of the Union Speech over there?

2.  Where you going on your new bike, Britons Harvest Ship’s Bounty, From BMWs to Bibles? 😉

the Grit

Clinton and Bush – keeping it in the family

January 22, 2007

Hi Grit

I see that, after having the Bush father and son, your country is trying for a husband and wife in the hilary.jpgPresidency, with Hilary Clinton seeking to follow her rather “infamous” partner Bill into the White House. Is this a new trend with US politics, to keep it in the family? Based upon past records are we also to expect the possibility of Mother and daughter repeating the Bush and Bush trick, only this time daughter Chelsea following Hilary?

Oh and a little help if you please. I found this quote from the lady and wondered if you could interpret it for me?

 “I concluded, based on the work of my life time and my experience and my understanding of what our country has to confront in order to continue to make opportunity available to all of our citizens here and to restore our leadership and respect of America around the world, that I would be able to do that – to bring our country together to meet those tough challenges,”

the Brit

Even the weekends are getting warmer, Globally speaking.

January 20, 2007

Hi Brit,

I can’t even get away from Global Warming on the weekend.  Don’t politicians, scientists, and bureaucrats usually take Saturday off?  Anyway, we’ve been swamped with it this morning:

Alaska to get British-style temperatures – study

U.N. panel to step up warnings on climate

Global warming dissenters few at U.S. weather meeting

giving us a trifecta of hot stories to discuss. 

OK, the first one is actually kind of funny, in a sad clown kind of way.  First we find this, “The British experiment used computer projections to plot the global climate from 1920 to 2080 — long enough for the results to be statistically significant.”  Sorry Mister Reporter dude, but computer projections can never be statistically significant in proving Global Warming, any more than the number of news stories is evidence of anything except how hard the media is trying to push this down our throats.  Second, if we assume the computer model is less biased than the media and is actually correct, where’s the bad news?  Don’t y’all only report bad news?  Well, it seems that way.  In this case, and feel free to correct me on this Brit, I’ve been told that the climate in Britain is pretty dang nice.  It would be fantastic if Alaska turned into a giant England.  We could squeeze an extra hundred million or so people into the country.  Not to mention how much cheaper it would be to get to all the minerals and oil up there.

On to mocking the UN story.  It looks like the lab coated UN employees have had to take a step or two back.  While they have up graded the language from “likely” to “very likely” that people have caused Global Warming, that’s just a fancy way of saying they still can’t prove it.  You’ll also note that had to drop all the “end of the Earth” climate change scare tactics.  And, as seems to happen frequently with the liberal press, the story ends with an outrageous lie about President Bush, accusing him of pulling the US out of the Kyoto Treaty.  As anyone should know, the US never ratified that treaty as President Clinton didn’t bother to send it to the Senate, thus, Bush couldn’t pull us out since we were never in.  While crap reporting like this usually ticks me off to no end, this time, since it helps show the pervasive bias in the media, both generally and about global Warming in particular, I’ll say thanks to Correspondent Doyle for helping to make my case.

Finally, we come to the article about the American Meteorological Society’s annual meeting and the lack of members voicing Global Warming doubts.  You’re surprised Mr. Stoddard?  I posted a bit about threats to members of this group who don’t bow to the politically correct stance and embrace Global Warming as Devinne Truth.  What we should be looking for is honest scientific opinion, not statements made under duress.  Of course, in that atmosphere, things might not go the way desired by the liberal press.  Can’t have that, now can we?

the Grit

Who has bigger stones, Pelosi or Bush?

January 16, 2007

Hi Brit,

Since both our countries are in the Iraq war together, I thought you might be interested in this political smack down, Pelosi warns Bush shouldn’t ‘abuse power’ on troop escalation.  I know Pelosi and her pack of snarling liberal Democrats talk a good game, but one has to wonder if they’re brave enough to cut funding for troops in the field?  My guess is  that they won’t dare.  However, there are some Republicans that may take Pelosi’s side, although that may just be a ploy to lure her into a trap.  Good times; good times.

the Grit

Global Warming politics heats up.

January 13, 2007

Hi Brit,

Once again, I told you so 😉  Six senators back mandatory greenhouse gas cuts, and it’s not just liberals playing the climate crisis card, conservatives are in on this one as well.  And, of course, the liberal press won’t report just how much this is going to add to our utility bills, which are not insignificant at the moment, thank you very much.  It would also stifle attempts to expand our electric production, so California can look forward to more rolling blackouts in the future, which, I have no doubt, will be blamed on President Bush, who will deserve it if he signs any such legislation into law.  I’m going to save the list of Senators sponsoring this bill, and the list of those who vote for it, and can promise them now that my vote won’t tally under their names, unless the electronic voting machines are, as suggested, rigged.

the Grit