An idiot liberal (sorry for the redundancy) called Rush Limbaugh today to tell him that one of Limbaugh's own had expressed a contrary view on taxes, or health care, or something, so of course, that guy was right, and Limbaugh and every other conservative who believes that Bobo and the Crats are criminals are wrong.
I couldn't see Rush's reaction, but I can tell you that I was listening with my jaw on the floor. Have you noticed how quick liberals are to cite any dissenting so-called conservative as an authority? Now I get where this comes from because first off, I was surprised when I finally realized that there are virtually no Republicans who are conservative - which explains why the tea party guys rate higher than the GOP does.
But even more than that, have you also noticed that liberals never seem to have to deal with differences of opinion among their own? They think it's because their ideology and programs and proposals stemming therefrom are "settled." The fact is though - it's because they're all morons. Every last one.
And I've got another Snowy response that proves it once and for all.
I haven't addressed it yet because it's literally the stupidest thing I've ever seen from him, and you know that's saying something, but I promise that when I can get in a proper frame of mind, I'll post it along with my comments. I don't know whether you'll be amused - because I wasn't. I was stunned that a supposedly thinking being could say what he did. But I promise to do my best to make your experience in reading it more pleasant than mine was.
I'll conclude by restating that no liberal position can stand up to scrutiny, and I'd add that we should stop calling them liberals... they don't seem to like it, and neither do I - they are simply communists.
Meanwhile, I'm still looking for a rational liberal...
]]>No, it wasn't the Top Ten Dogs of 2009. It was Barbara Walters' world - the one in her head. Snowy's there!
And in it, Big Mama Bama is the most fascinating person of this past year, although I use the term "person" in the loosest sense with respect to her... and out of respect to her.
Now I'm proud to say that I was, shall we say, "put off" by Mickey before she ever opened her enormous yap, primarily because she was so coarse. So you can imagine how I reacted the first time I heard someone call her beautiful. I immediately hearkened back to my college days when my friend Bob and I used to sit in the cafeteria and sort out which girls we'd date and which we'd offer free bags as a service to both them and us. I was always amazed at the girls Bob found attractive, and I have no doubt that he was envious of me because my choices were actual women.
Then one day Ron was with us, and the ugliest girl in the world was approaching. I looked at Ron and said, How about her? The girl was right on top of him as Ron turned to look... and exclaim: "OH JESUS CHRIST!"
I don't think she made the connection, and it was not my intent to embarrass or hurt her, merely to exploit her for comedic purposes, and to that end, my timing was perfect. But the point is, I screamed the same words Ron did the first time I heard the "Mickey is beautiful" mantra. No one really believes that, it's just a figurative bone some toss her way. Me? I'd toss her a chew toy, but I know she'd shred it faster than a Pit Bull would.
Here's how bad it is - Hillary is more attractive - RIGHT NOW! But I can't prove MoBo is as hideous as I think she is because Bob's not around to confirm it. I lost track of him just after I threw up in his girlfriend's sweater.
Don't worry, she wasn't in it at the time.
]]>Cheer up, you could have been British!
The Great One reports on:
Great Moments in Socialized Medicine
"British health care is little better than that of former Communist countries, which spend a fraction of the billions poured into the NHS"--the National Health Service--reports London's Daily Mail:British cancer and heart attack victims are more likely to die than almost anywhere in the developed world;
Asthma and diabetes patients are more than three times as likely to end up in hospital as their neighbours in Germany;
Life expectancy in Britain--79 years and six months for a man--is far worse than in France, where men expect to live until 81. The deficit is similar for women.
Britain performed only marginally better than former Communist states whose governments spend only half as much on healthcare.
But there is also good news for Brits, courtesy of former Enron adviser Paul Krugman: "In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We've all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false."
]]>
Remember when Barack Obama was a brilliant and inspiring young leader who was going to revive an America that had gotten dangerously off track? To be honest, neither do we, but we were reliably informed of it at the time. Now, however, that talk of hope and change has given way to a familiar litany of failure.
"Obama used his speech rolling out a stimulus-style jobs program Tuesday to point the finger at Republicans for allegedly facilitating the economic crisis and then foisting it off on his administration to solve," FoxNews.com reports:
While praising his own team for pioneering "ambitious" financial reform and "sweeping" economic recovery initiatives, the president took some pointed shots at Republicans who are now blasting the latest package as a spend-crazy "stimulus two" that will drill deeper into the deficit.
"We were forced to take those steps (to jump-start the economy) largely without the help of an opposition party which, unfortunately, after having presided over the decision-making that had led to the crisis, decided to hand it over to others to solve," Obama said, starting his address with a history lesson on the roots of the recession.
But here's something with which we can agree:
Obama said the crisis was caused not just by economic weakness but the "weakness in our political system"--one corroded by the "bitterness of partisanship," and the "endless campaigns focused on scoring points instead of meeting our common challenges."
"We've seen the consequences of this failure of responsibility. The American people have paid a heavy price," Obama said, calling the nation's unemployment a "human tragedy."
The president, of course, is engaging in psychological projection. The primary political responsibility for the country's problems has belonged to Obama for a year, and to his party in Congress for three years, because the voters deemed the GOP unworthy of it.
WARNING: The following makes too much sense
More from Taranto...
]]>But there is something Obama could do that would likely help the economy: call a moratorium on so-called health-care reform. Just tell Congress to put the effort on the shelf until after next year's election.
The threat of a government takeover of the health industry, which would impose enormous new costs on businesses, has got to be a drag on the economy. In part this reflects a fear of the unknown, a tendency to hold off on major economic decisions as long as it is unclear what if any legislation will pass. But from all we've heard about the so-called reform bills under consideration, there will be plenty to fear once it's known, too.
ObamaCare looks like a political disaster as well as an economic one. It is increasingly unpopular in its own right, and if it is a drag on the economy, that doesn't enhance the prospects of the party in power come next November. Obama needn't give up on the idea of health-care reform. All we're suggesting is that he call a halt to it for the next year, on the grounds that the economic crisis makes the timing bad, and that he has listened to the concerns of voters who don't want to see such a sweeping measure rammed through on a partisan vote.
Everyone would understand that if Democrats do well, that is a signal of approval for ObamaCare-like policies, whereas if it's a good Republican year, they want a different approach--one that Obama could make his own, just as Bill Clinton embraced some Republican ideas after the GOP took Congress in 1994. Under this scenario, the extreme left would have every reason to get out and vote Democratic, and congressmen who think socialized medicine is good policy and good politics could put that belief to the test.
An ObamaCare moratorium would counter the emerging stereotype of Obama as arrogant and out of touch. Will he do it? Probably not. After all, that stereotype is true, isn't it?
Over Thanksgiving, you may have read that the naturally disfigured racist, Helen Thomas, said she was thankful this year for a black President?
Well, that got me to thinking - he had no experience and no resume, he's proven himself to be incompetent and merely marginally intelligent, he's created a larger deficit in less than a year than his predecessor had in eight years which has resulted in 10% unemployment, he wants to impose health and climate regulations that will bankrupt those he doesn't kill first, and now he has the lowest approval rating of any President at the same stage of his tenure...
And Helen is thankful for all that?
So with Christmas almost here, I felt a song coming on...
I'm dreaming of a white...
President.
Just like the ones
I used to know.
Where our enemies listen
And children are christened
While profits are the only thing we know.
I'm dreaming of a white
President
With every blog post
That I write
May your days
Overflow with human rights
And may all your Presidents...
Be white!
When I read this just now immediately after having read Snowy's latest bit of idiocy directed at me, I couldn't help thinking that what follows is the sort of thing Snowy would do if he were a learned liberal lunatic (LLL)...
Mr. James Taranto:
]]>The latest global-warmist email is revealed not by the East Anglia whistle-blower but by Steven Hayward (who by the way has a fine overview of the climate-science scandal in The Weekly Standard).
The email's author, Michael Schlesinger an atmospheric scientist at the University of Illinois, was so proud of what he had to say to New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin that he decided to send a copy to Hayward--and, one supposes, to Schlesinger's entire email list:
Andy:
Copenhagen prostitutes?
Climate prostitutes?
Shame on you for this gutter reportage.
This is the second time this week I have written you thereon, the first about giving space in your blog to the Pielkes.
The vibe that I am getting from here, there and everywhere is that your reportage is very worrisome to most climate scientists.
Of course, your blog is your blog.
But, I sense that you are about to experience the 'Big Cutoff' from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.
Copenhagen prostitutes?
Unbelievable and unacceptable.
What are you doing and why?
Michael
So Revkin accused climate scientists of prostituting themselves to a political agenda in order to get grant money? No, he did not.
He merely made a passing mention of actual prostitutes. In the blog post, Revkin quoted from his own Twitter feed, which in turn linked to a story from Der Spiegel:
Copenhagen Mayor Ritt Bjerregaard sent postcards to city hotels warning summit guests not to patronize Danish sex workers during the upcoming conference. Now, the prostitutes have struck back, offering free sex to anyone who produces one of the warnings.
Schlesinger is all het up over that? As Mark Steyn notes, "Even by the standards of fanatical ideologues, these guys seem humorless plonkers." You thought they were telling you to "save the earth." Actually, it's "save the mirth."
A 'Profound Emergency' Not Worth Writing a Sentence About
"Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial," announces that editorial, produced by London's Guardian. "We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency. Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet" blah blah blah, etc.To put it another way, this is such a dire emergency that the editorial boards of 55 newspapers (including, in this country, the Miami Herald) cannot be troubled to write a word about it. It's the equivalent of just filling space with wire copy--and in fact, that would work just as well, since the Associated Press has its own global-warmist editorial.
The Guardian even solicits "reader leaders" (to go with the extraterritorial editorial--ha ha, what wits), although if you scroll down on the page, you will see that a good many of the submissions have been "removed by a moderator." That is what scientists call peer review.
Actually, though, one can make the case that running a prefab global-warmist editorial is a sensible cost-saving move. No one would argue that the New York Times got its money's worth when it paid someone to write this:
No one should be misled by all the noise. The [East Anglia] e-mail messages represent years' worth of exchanges among prominent American and British climatologists. Some are mean-spirited, others intemperate. But they don't change the underlying scientific facts about climate change. . . .
It is important that scientists behave professionally and openly. It is also important not to let one set of purloined e-mail messages undermine the science and the clear case for action, in Washington and in Copenhagen.
But in the very same section of the Times, "public editor" Clark Hoyt reports that science writers Andrew Revkin and John Tierney agree that "there is sharp debate over how fast the earth is warming, how much human activity is contributing and how severe the impact will be."
Oh well, at least the Times editorialists won't be subjected to the Big Cutoff.
A follow-up on a Friday item: We had faulted Politico for failing to ask Al Gore, in an interview published last Thursday, about the scientific misconduct revealed in the East Anglia emails. Mike Allen, Politico's chief political correspondent, says in an email to one of our colleagues: "Alas, we talked to him like a month before climate-gate." So instead we'll fault Politico for sitting on the interview until long after it became stale.
We Blame Global Warming
"Time to Take the Gloves Off in Pakistan"--headline, Commentary Web site, Dec. 4We Blame Rumsfeld
"Rice an Unlikely Global Warming Culprit"--headline, Agence France-Presse, Dec. 5
It's just a rumor at this point, but a headline says...
OJ Simpson beaten in prison.
I know, I know, what's the good news, you ask? Well, his throat wasn't slit to within a half inch of his spinal column^?
*May not be good news to people who resemble me.
]]>You were all furious when the auto execs flew their private jets into Washington to request bailout funds, right?
Well, here's a bonus question: Are you ready to behead those attending the Climate Criminals of Copenhagen (CCC) meeting who are arriving in private planes and limos on a scale that makes the auto execs look like pikers?
Because if you are, I'm willing to do my fair share... and yours too if you'd prefer just to watch?!?
]]>At the start of tonight's show, Filthy O'Rotly brazenly wanted to "Factor in" a "temporary" 2% national sales tax to "bring down" the deficit, making him the latest bigwig to go from stupid to dangerous.
In a remarkable display of ignorance, he added that he felt it would not affect sales of goods and services, but after being prodded by Neil Cavuto who, himself, appeared willing to consider the tax if it was put in a "lockbox," the big bag of hot air admitted "what do I know?"
Now as many know, O'Reilly is my most hated non-politician, and it's because of "nuttiness" like this - which is to say, it's not nutty at all - it's scarily real.
For the record, I don't accept any new tax or any increase in any existing one - ever!
]]>Last week, I reported on the yearly stoning festivities, in which followers of Allah try their damnedest to kill the Devil, but which inevitably results in a certain number of stoners getting trampled to death and Lucifer living to see next year's Hajj. And while "organizers" say that, owing to increased security and improvements to the stoning area, they expect a significant decrease in deaths due to trampling this hurling season, the highest concern of a group of world health organizations, coincidentally called Haj (health authority jerks) is that it's a perfect environment for the transmission of Swine Flu.
Quoting from a recent news report: "The annual Islamic pilgrimage draws 3 million visitors each year, making it the largest yearly gathering of people in the world and an ideal incubator for the H1N1 flu virus... Under a hot sun Saturday, hundreds of thousands of sweaty bodies pressed against each other toward the stoning walls. The majority did not wear masks, and many sneezed, coughed and spat and looked visibly exhausted."
Ya hate to see that... seriously. And considering that Muslamists shun pigs, there's certainly some irony involved here - with the devil in the details, I predict that instead of a few hundred people dying in a pilgrim pile-up, the actual death toll will be much higher this year - 666 to be exact, not owing to Trichinosis but to the devilish disease now called Trickinosis because that's more fun-sounding and decisive than H1N1 which, as you know, is a tie.
More from the article: "Like many here, Mikail Ocasio, a 28-year-old pilgrim from Maryland, dismissed the swine flu worries. 'No disease was going to stop me from making my Hajj,' he said. 'Allah made the call to me and made it available and nothing is going to stop me.'"
And who said Al doesn't have a sense of humor?
]]>