December 31, 2011

O.W.S.er burns American flag

Because, y'know, they're all patriotic and stuff:

[Alex] Tyler said late Friday that he regrets any trouble the flag-burning protest may have brought to the movement, the newspaper reported, but he stands by the protest.

"I've seen this group lose its activism and become lazy," Tyler said, adding that he and the other men wanted to "give Occupy Charlotte a wake-up call."

Of course, flag burning is not illegal; that doesn't mean, however, that we can't refer to Tyler and his pals as big douches.


Posted by Hube at 11:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

A.P.'s glowing tribute to Kim Jung Il

"Kim Jong Il's presence is felt in series of images" is the title of the article by Jean H. Lee, and it's a ridiculously blathering tribute to one of the most heinous dictators of the modern era.

Unreal.


Posted by Hube at 11:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 30, 2011

Marvel wins Ghost Rider lawsuit

It's called, I believe, "work for hire":

Comic book publisher Marvel Entertainment owns the rights to the Ghost Rider character in the fiery form that originated in the early 1970s, a federal judge ruled Wednesday as she rejected the claims of a former Marvel writer seeking to cash in on lucrative movie rights.

U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest tossed out 4-year-old claims brought by Gary Friedrich, who said he created the motorcycle-driving Ghost Rider with the skeletal head that sometimes had fire blazing from it. A Ghost Rider of the 1950s and '60s was a Western character who rode a horse.

The judge said Friedrich gave up all ownership rights when he signed checks containing language relinquishing all rights to the predecessor companies of Marvel Entertainment LLC.

"The law is clear that when an individual endorses a check subject to a condition, he accepts that condition," the judge wrote.

He (Friedrich) said he thought he had given Marvel the rights to use Ghost Rider in comic books, but that he retained the rights for movies and anything else.

"Was that understanding ever reduced to writing? Marvel attorney David Fleischer asked.

"No," Friedrich answered. (Link)

I know many a comic creator has [some] regrets about the 'ol "work for hire" stuff; this changed largely beginning in the 80s when writers/artists began staking out legal ways to get better compensation for characters they originated. For example, Delawarean David Michelinie apparently negotiated a way to get a small royalty from Marvel for anything sold related to the popular character Venom. Alas, as noted, Friedrich did his Ghost Rider work in the 1970s.


Posted by Hube at 10:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was Victor Davis Hanson with A Vandalized Valley. Full results are here.


Posted by Hube at 07:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 29, 2011

Uh oh

Via Dave Burris on Twitter: Wilmington, Salisbury, Camden, Chester all make Top 10 in this "Top 100 Most Dangerous Cities" list.

Wilmington (DE) disgustingly breaks the top 10 at number nine, but "at least" all the other nearby burgs beat it: Camden at #6, Salisbury at #4, and [not-so-shockingly] Chester at #2. (Saginaw, Michigan came in at #1, in case you care.)


Posted by Hube at 07:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Civilization continues to crumble

It just doesn't stop. In Houston, some local "activists" want Michael Jordan and Nike to be "part of the solution" to the problem of violence surrounding their sneakers:

Local Activists Call for Air Jordan Changes: MyFoxHOUSTON.com

Yep, that was the execrable Quanell X saying that the sale of sneakers -- SNEAKERS!! -- is a "public safety issue" ... with [at least part of the] responsibility being Jordan's and Nike's. Y'know, because sneakers are like ... drugs, tobacco and alcohol. Or something.

Still more inanity:

Outside Greenspoint Mall on Wednesday activist Quanell X and ministers called on Jordan and Nike founder Phil Knight to lower the price of the shoes and meet customer demand.

Basic economics, idiots: Demand is being met and then some at the current price. Nevertheless, what is this -- a call for "sneaker welfare?" Ye gad.

"The people that can least afford these shoes are buying them, and what happens as a result of that? Well there's more crime," said Ben Mendez, a Hispanic business leader.

Yeah, since a couple hundred was just shelled out on some Jordans, looks like people'll have to steal to eat that week. Or something.

Ah, but all is not lost, thankfully. At the bottom of the article we read this:

"I don't think it's their (Jordan's, Nike's) responsibility. I think honestly it starts at home with the parents," said Steven Lozano.

'YA THINK????????


Posted by Hube at 06:06 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Why not just teach astrology?

Saw this professor's curriculum vitae via Phi Beta Cons, and sadly, nothing so embodies the contemporary politically correct academy -- and useless studies -- more:

Her research and scholarship diverge from and call into question the universalistic view of science. This perspective of science includes beliefs that the validity of a scientific account is objective and resides in the physical world itself; factors like power, culture, race, gender and ethnicity of the participants involved in and learners of science are irrelevant. In addition to investigating learning contexts with respect to culture and race, she employs constructs and findings from research on the education of Blacks. Specifically, she introduced a comprehensive framework that synthesizes and adds to the theoretical models used by a small cadre of science education researchers interested in the influences of social context upon the science educative experiences of groups marginalized in science.

In other words (since educationists absolutely love edu-jargon), she calls into question the basic objectivity of the scientific method and believes that science depends on the "context" by which it is derived -- the aforementioned "power, culture, race, gender and ethnicity." Somehow, apparently, something like the mass of an electron may vary depending on one's "cultural/racial perspective" ... and Einstein's Theory of Relativity is "oppressive" because it was conceived of by a[n] old, white male. (Einstein being Jewish doesn't matter for, like contemporary Asians, they're not considered "minorities" by the academy.)


Posted by Hube at 02:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Let them eat cake

The Messiah, once again demonstrating his complete obliviousness to the plight of Joe Six Pack: Obamas enjoy multi-course tasting menu.

President Obama enjoyed a five-to-seven course tasting menu Wednesday night at a dinner in Honolulu with first lady Michelle Obama and 10 friends.

The Obamas were part of a group of ten, which included the president’s sister, and the party ordered off a special tasting menu – a multi-course meal designed specifically by the chef.

“The Obama party had a special 5-course tasting menu for $75 a person, $105 per person with wine pairings for each course," according to the pool report. "Highlights include "Sassey Salad" and bacon wrapped pork loin,” according to CNN’s Peter Morris, who the pool report said was at the restaurant when the president arrived.

The article also notes The Messiah spent seven hours on the golf course beforehand ... playing with long-time friend Robert Titcomb, "who earlier this year plead no contest to soliciting a prostitute in Honolulu." Nice. Either the course was very crowded (unlikely, since the prez was playing) or Obama and his chums royally suck at the game. And nice idea, Barry, playing with a convicted criminal.


"Progressives" are fond of pointing out how much, for example, George W. Bush went on "vacation;" however, he virtually always did so at his own ranch. He wasn't [at least seen] splurging on a multi-course meal in a notoriously expensive area of the country. And even if he was, the economy wasn't nearly as bad as it is now, so the perception wouldn't be as bad.

This is just yet another example of how "Hope and Change" was nothing but a massive fraud perpetrated upon the American populace. The list is endless: Phony stimulus spending "results," hypocrisy on measures in the War on Terror, backtracking on Gitmo and Patriot Act provisions, outright lies about "transparency," hypocrisy about appointments, hypocrisy about spending, hypocrisy about the debt and deficit ... the list is interminable.


Posted by Hube at 10:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sounds good to me!

After once considering ditching the role due to interminable delays on the next film, Daniel Craig is reported to have been offered a contract to make him the longest-serving James Bond ever, surpassing [the lame] Roger Moore.

Oh, and maybe this explains why Quantum of Solace was significantly below the standard set by Casino Royale: Daniel Craig: 'I wrote 'Quantum Of Solace' script myself.'


Posted by Hube at 09:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 28, 2011

Civilization continues to crumble

It had to happen: The Jordan sneaker mayhem "explained."

Best line in the article:

"We're adults, it's nothing for us (to get shoes)," Johnson said. "We're not standing in line and waiting for them. We'll get online and do our thing. But these kids that are just standing in line, that's authentic."

"Authentic." Gotcha.


Posted by Hube at 05:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

O.W.S. entitlement thinking via the holiday season

Check out the following actual tweets by these ... "people" disgruntled at the gifts they received (or didn't receive). Language warning.


And there's plenty more here.

UPDATE: Paul Smith Jr. did some investigating and at least two of the Tweets in question were claimed to be jokes, while a third is an active duty soldier overseas who claims he bought the items for himself. Just an FYI.

Posted by Hube at 10:33 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Diversity conundrum

Via Tongue Tied comes word of a BBC soccer commentator who's now under fire for using the term "colored" (or, in UK English, "coloured"):

Alan Hansen has issued an apology after being dragged into the football racism row by referring to black players as ‘coloured’ on Match of the Day.

In a discussion of the controversies surrounding England captain John Terry and Liverpool striker Luis Suarez, Hansen used the word as he praised the achievements of black players in the Premier League.

But many viewers objected to the term – considered offensive because it dismisses everyone who is not white as the same – and the Corporation yesterday received more than 100 complaints.

Which then begs the question, why hasn't the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (mentioned in the article, by the way) -- the NAACP -- changed its moniker to suit the contemporary standards of "politically correct decency," hmm?


Posted by Hube at 10:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

News Journal promotes inefficient, taxpayer-paid "green" house

Rooftop turbines put Camden house among the greenest is the lead headline this morning at the News Journal online. Nice picture to go along with it, too.

But, as they say, "the devil is in the details." And it's not until page two that we read the following:

To offset the cost of installation, [Delaware Dept. of Natural Resources' Jessica] Quinn's office is awarding the Wygants a $10,000 grant from the state's Green Energy Fund -- money that comes from a fee tacked onto Delawareans' monthly electric bills.

In other words, WE'RE paying for this guy's turbines. But will that even cover the total cost? It's not until the third page that we get a hint -- and that hint says "no":

Though he declined to reveal the final price tag for the whole system, Wygant said he installed two turbines for less than a specialist contractor wanted to charge for a single unit.

"There's a company in New Jersey that gave me a quote to put one of these up on a pole in my backyard, and they quoted me $57,000," he said.

Gee, less than $57K? But how much less? Let's grant, say, $10K less. Coupled with the $10K grant that we're paying for, that still makes it $37K. Can YOU afford $37,000 right now?

Then, there's this:

The turbines will function in winds of just 8 mph, but they require a steady 22 mph to power the whole house.

22 miles per hour? How often does that wind speed actually materialize down there in Camden, pray tell? A subsequent paragraph states that the average wind speed at turbine height is around 12-13 mph, or just a tad over half the power needed. And then there's the predictable conditional clause fave term "if, if, if":

Wygant said the system is expected to reach the break-even mark in three or four years, depending on electricity prices and the strength of the breeze in Camden.

Yeah, that's what I want -- hoping there's sufficient power if the winds in Camden decide to pull a Sargasso Sea act. Great.

Look, to each his own. I actually wish this guy's plans pan out. But the ridiculously politically correct News Journal really isn't doing anyone a public service (really no surprise there, eh?) by highlighting this anecdote because your basic, average joe can't even begin to afford the cost of this; 2) the reliability of the whole deal is suspect, and 3) you and I help to pay for people to do this, whether we want to or not.

RELATED: Wind farm project off Delaware shore essentially "dead."


Posted by Hube at 09:42 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

No more Girl Scout cookies for me

They're in league with, of all things, Media Matters??

Ugh.


Posted by Hube at 08:55 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Laugher of the Day

Via Matt Welch on Twitter: In The Nation, Mikhail Gorbachev writes "Is the World Really Safer Without the Soviet Union?"

What's next -- Augusto Pinochet writing in the American Spectator "Is the World Better of With a Democratic Chile?" (And yes, I know he's dead ... just go with it.)


Posted by Hube at 08:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 27, 2011

One "little" detail left out

Via MSNBC: Santa Claus killings: Financially strapped dad planned family massacre, Texas police say.

The killer was Aziz "Bob" Yazdanpanah. "Last year, a bank foreclosed on Yazdanpanah's house, and he separated from his wife in the spring." In other words, these had to be the prime motives for his murderous outburst. Anything else to mention? No hints at all about what was to come? Let's see:

Neighbors say the family seemed tight-knit, and Aziz Yazdanpanah seemed protective of his children.

"He was pretty outgoing," said neighbor Fred Ditmars. "If you saw him, he'd say 'hi' to you and everything."

"It seemed like their whole existence was about family, so it's utterly shocking to me," said another neighbor, Terri Baum, whose daughter attended school with his daughter.

"Bob loved his kids. And I can't even fathom that that's what happened," Baum said.

Really? Except that, maybe you could -- if NBC did a thorough job in its reporting ... like the Dallas Morning News (via Jihad Watch) did:

But a more ominous portrait emerged of Yazdanpanah in interviews with some of his daughter’s other classmates.

“She would come to school crying and telling us her dad was crazy,” said Lacie Reed, 18. “He wouldn’t let her wear certain things. He was always taking her phone away, checking her call history and checking her text messages.”

Friends said Nona’s father had installed cameras all around the home so he could watch the family’s comings and goings. Others said he nailed her bedroom window shut so she could not sneak out at night and see her boyfriend.

“She couldn’t date at all until she was a certain age, but when he was going to let her date she couldn’t date anyone outside of their race or religion,” Reed said.

Always remember, folks. It's official policy at most MSM outlets these days, spoken or unspoken. And a total, absolute joke to anyone with a brain.


Posted by Hube at 05:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Civilization continues to crumble

Huge melee at the Mall of America:

Don't blame them, though -- there was a rumor that rappers Lil’ Wayne and Drake were going to make an appearance. So, naturally, when that did not happen, what does one expect, right?


Posted by Hube at 07:41 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Diversity conundrum

Unintentionally hilarious bit over at Powerline a few days back, perfectly demonstrating the conundrum that comes about when "diversity" meets ... well, see for yourself:

In the Telegraph, Damian Thompson has an interesting short piece titled “When Islam met the diversity industry.” He notes the incongruous compatibility between British Muslims and the heretofore aggressively secular diversity industry.

Thompson focuses on the Islamic Diversity Centre in Newcastle. Much could be said about this group’s activities, but I want to make just one observation. The IDC’s stated purpose is challenging stereotypes of Islam. It is therefore rather stunning that when the group introduces its staff to readers of its web site, the most persistent stereotypes are abundantly confirmed.

Indeed -- check out the photo of come of the center's staff:

That’s right: the men are identified and individually pictured, but for each female staff member there is a photo of a woman wearing a burqa, so that only her eyes are showing. Not only that, it is the same photo in each case; not a picture of the female staff member at all, but a generic image of a woman wearing a burqa.

How 'bout that DIVERSITY, eh? How about that "valuing" of women!

As I said, hilarious.


Posted by Hube at 07:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 26, 2011

The 99% of cultural waste

Two females go at it at Occupy Nashville, one of them pregnant:

Word is Occupy Nashville will be redubbed "Occupy Jerry Springer."


Posted by Hube at 07:46 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Private property, charity need "revision"

That's what Rev. Michael Ellick of "Occupy Faith NYC" says in the video below. "Let me equally as clear -- private space is one of those things I think we need to revision ... charity is not gonna cut it. Charity keeps the poor poor and the rich rich."

I'm bummed no one asked the rev. just how private space should be "revisioned," and/or how charity should be "revised." If he's of the mindset of other OWSers/radical leftists/Marxist/communists (and he most probably is), I think we all can guess what his answer would be.

(h/t: JWF)


Posted by Hube at 11:12 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 24, 2011

Hube's Cover Song of the Week

Katy Perry gets a lot of grief, but this cover of "Head Over Heels" by Tears for Fears simply kicks ass! I love it!!

Here's the original, so as to compare:


Posted by Hube at 01:08 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Tweet of the Day

POTUS says Christmas is only about giving of ourselves. That must be his reason for the $4M vacay - taxpayers are giving of ourselves.

Link.

Posted by Hube at 11:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Predictable

The Philly Inquirer predictably opines against being required to show an ID in order to vote (despite some 70% of the American public supporting such measures, including substantial percentages of the very minorities these laws supposedly "hurt"), stating

Proponents of photo ID argue that people already show a driver's license to pass airport security or to cash a check, so why not flash a photo ID at the polling place? That argument misrepresents the meaning of the right to vote.

Cashing a check or flying on a jet is not a basic American right secured by blood and struggle. Voting is an inalienable right which enables all citizens to participate in their governance.

To which a thoughtful Inky commenter replies:

One needs to produce ID in order to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights and purchase a firearm. Does the Inky also view these requirements as 'Trojan Horses'? If not, why?

Indeed. The fact of the matter is, Inquirer idiots, ALL rights are not absolute. Common sense restrictions and requirements have routinely been constitutionally permitted.

And perhaps the Inquirer idiots should have a look at this, which determines that voter ID measures do NOT have an impact on minority voting.

And don't forget Duffy's pic from a few days ago!


Posted by Hube at 10:56 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Barack W. Bush

And the Left/Democrats are silent. Because, like much of their agenda, it has "good intentions."

Obama Challenges Provisions in Budget Bill (via signing statements).


Posted by Hube at 09:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 23, 2011

Guffaws across the board

Via Doug Ross @ Journal:

A spokesman for President Obama‘s re-election campaign blasted Mr. Romney and questioned whether he had something to hide in his finances.

“Why does Governor Romney feel like he can play by a different set of rules?” said Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for the Obama campaign. “What is it that he doesn’t want the American people to see? Governor Romney, who has favored secrecy over openness time after time, should live up to the same standard of disclosure his father and others set.”

Uh huh:

1. Occidental College records and transcripts -- Not released
2. Columbia University records and transcripts -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- 'not available'
4. Harvard University records and transcripts -- Not released
5. Medical records -- Not released
6. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
7. Illinois State Senate records -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of Original Birth certificate -- Not released
10. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
11. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
12. Record of Baptism -- Not released or 'not available'

Now, I've made it plain in posts and comments that the birth certificate stuff is a non-issue. But the academic, health, legal, and Illinois Senate records? WTF is up with all those? Please, please, PLEASE Romney campaign -- hit this idiot back ... and hard.


Posted by Hube at 10:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

And civilization continues to crumble

Do I really need to comment on this absolute insanity?

Race for New Air Jordan Sneakers Turns Ugly: MyFoxATLANTA.com


Posted by Hube at 10:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

"Prometheus" trailer

Most definitely count me IN!!


Posted by Hube at 09:33 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council results

The non-Council winner was Sultan Knish with Mr. Islam’s Blindfold and Machete. Full results are here.


Posted by Hube at 08:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 22, 2011

Moonbats Inc.

If you've ever wondered if the idiots at Delaware Liberal (aka The Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers or LGOMB) were really normal, sane individuals outside of their blogging guise, guess again. We've already shown that Jason "Trust Fund" Scott and Delaware Douche are batsh** insane cretins. The former is already on record as saying "reasonable people" can disagree whether George W. Bush knew in advance about the 9/11 attacks; he's being more explicit now:

The 9-11 attacks changed this country in many ways. That’s why Bush allowed them to happen.

So, just keep that in mind the next time you read some of their posts about "wingnut/crazy Republicans." Or denunciations of Birthers. Or criticism of any right-wing conspiracy theory, for that matter.

(h/t to DE Politics.)

RELATED (12/23): Those (like the LGOMB) who screamed and hollered about Bush's "transgressions" against the Constitution are strangely silent about stuff like this.

Hypocritical a-holes, all.


Posted by Hube at 03:01 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

About that photo ID thing...

boeing_id_union_vote.jpg


Posted by Duffy at 11:26 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

December 21, 2011

An Obvious Compromise

Many Republicans are pushing for laws that would require voters to show photo IDs proving they are who they claim to be before they are allowed to vote. Democrats claim this is racist since they apparently believe minorities aren't smart enough to know to get photo IDs. (Republicans disagree.)

I'd like to suggest a simple compromise: rather than asking people for photo IDs, ask them if they like John Wayne movies. If they say no, they're obviously not Americans and shouldn't be allowed to vote anyway.

So simple.


Posted by PaulSmithJr at 06:31 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Bear Raid

There's some speculation that the latest stock market crash was the result of a "Bear raid".  That is, a bunch of either investors or traders colluded to crash a particular stock.  They do this by taking short positions. (Selling borrowed stock that they hope will fall in value before margin call which allows them to keep the difference in value from the initial price.)  This is a very risky proposition.  If the stock does not fall and in fact, increases, you must make up the difference in value.  For example, if ABC corp. stock is valued at $100 when you take a short position and it is valued at $90 by margin call (closing bell) you have made $10.  If the value at the close is $110 you now owe $10.  

To make real money on this type of deal bear raiders will either try to leverage negative information about a company (missing earnings targets) before the information is public.  They can also leak negative information (whether true or untrue) to try and make the value drop.  Once the drop starts, the other players take huge short positions which triggers other traders to get out of their current positions in the stock to prevent further loss.  This is also amplified by the trading programs which have triggers built in to dump stocks based on market conditions.  That is, the software used by a bank or trading company has logic built in that if ABC corp. goes below $89, sell all shares as fast as possible.   Those two things combined could conceivably make a stock tank in very short order.  The really brave bear raiders will then wait until the stock bottoms out and take long positions expecting the value to rebound.  (Imagine the $100 stock falling to $25 which they then buy and when it goes back up to $50 they'll sell again.  That way they make money on the negative slide and the recovery.)

This is all illegal and just the type of thing the SEC is supposed to be investigating.   The attached document is interesting and appears to me to be statistically correct but the attempt to link this to either a bear raid or the lack of an uptick rule is reaching.  Market behavior is certainly changing as data models, risk models and automated trading are getting ever more complicated.  (I was going to say sophisticated but that's assuming there's elegance involved and that I can't say for certain)   The speed of trades is also causing distortions.  Look at the virtual death of currency arbitrage markets.  The speed of trades is so fast now that you need to execute trillions of trades to make any money.  The margins just aren't there.  The upside to that speed is the relative stability of prices is achieved very quickly if not painlessly.  

The SEC has a monumental task.  Some think it has an impossible task.  Mabye.  That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist.  They should be more oriented toward fraud investigations and market making than filling out forms and ticking of boxes.  


Posted by Duffy at 03:29 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Another win for the culture war

Football Is Better Than Soccer

In its energy and complexity, football captures the spirit of America better than any other cultural creation on this continent, and I don't mean because it features long breaks in which advertisers get to sell beer and treatments for erectile dysfunction. It sits at the intersection of pioneering aggression and impossibly complex strategic planning. It is a collision of Hobbes and Locke; violent, primal force tempered by the most complex set of rules, regulations, procedures and systems ever conceived in an athletic framework. Soccer is called the beautiful game. But football is chess, played with real pieces that try to knock each other's brains out. It doesn't get any more beautiful than that.

It's a thing of beauty when a European finally awakens to reality.   I love me some soccer but football is quintessentially American.


Posted by Duffy at 01:16 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Media bias made plain

There is often hue and cry from the right that the MSM is biased towards the left (or against the right) and I tend to agree. Most of the bias is typically one of opinion and can often be excused.  For example, Democrats were wowed by John Kerry's nomination speech and to me it fell completely flat.  The wonks on the left were crowing that he nailed it and I was left wondering if we had watched the same thing.  I don't get excited about differences like that.  Rather, check this paragraph from the Guardian about Valclav Havel:

Havel's anti-communist critique contained little if any acknowledgement of the positive achievements of the regimes of eastern Europe in the fields of employment, welfare provision, education and women's rights. Or the fact that communism, for all its faults, was still a system which put the economic needs of the majority first.

So you can't let an article slide without heaping praise on the most murderous political philosopy of the modern era? Really? Perhaps Havel's "critique" of communism came from being on the business end of it.


Posted by Duffy at 12:52 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Reckless and irresponsible blogging

I've always had a soft spot for Kavips. I don't know why. I think because he started as the voice of reason from the Left in the DE blogosphere. Somewhere along the way he went bonkers. I don't why or exactly when but he's become a parody of himself. Read the whole thing

I made a comment there that I'll expand on here.

He starts off with the old saw of "you are taking money out of my pocket" and we're off to a good start. I think Americans are egregiously overtaxed and any relief is a good thing. He then tells us the tax is a bad idea because those funds are earmarked for Social Security so the system will somehow go bankrupt due to the decrease in tax receipts.

Social Security has been broke for ages so a few billion in deferred revenue isn't going to make a difference.

That said, why is he angry? If this tax is necessary, he's the one being selfish for not putting the good of the nation ahead of his own selfish needs. That's the hue and cry I hear from the left on a daily basis. I'm greedy because I don't want to give away so much of my money to taxes. I'm told my money funds "schools, roads, and hospitals". That may be true but it also funds other absurd ventures like $930 million on unnecessary printing

(As a libertarian I can also retort that even those vital schools, roads and hospitals are all things that are better when run by private enterprise. Indeed both Christiana Care and AI DuPont are private entities. Similarly the best primary and secondary schools that are the best in the state are private. As far as I know we don't have any private roads but I have hope.)

So they decided not to vote on the measure. They are following the rules as laid down by law and are operating well within those guidelines. What is the proper remedy for this?

The next time someone you know (or don’t), says anything about how millionaires should keep their tax cuts and the poor should pay, nod your head in agreement, smile a little bit, then hit them as hard as you can in their mouth, I mean as hard as you can! Put them flat on the ground holding their jaw… Then loudly say, “Don’t every talk that stupid way to me again!” Who knows, if 99% or all 303,930,000 would respond that way to our fellow congressional delegates, and the other 3.9 million of their like who advocate such madness, we might actually get the very progress we need, not because of intimidation, but because such policy is right….

Emphasis mine.

So violence is right and good because of the rightness of their cause. Is that the road you really want to go down? That is not unAmerican? We've had peaceful transition of power for 200 years and now we're to throw that away over $1000 a year?

I used to think he was being hyperbolic about the violence thing but it's been mentioned more than once and this time there's not so much as a hint that this is in jest. This from the crowd that complains about "incivility".

For those who argue expression of violence is un-American, I’ll remind them that tonight, is ‘John Wayne Night’ on AMC: view it!… I argue that such action is VERY American and perhaps it has been the lack of such spontaneous expressions of frustration, that has caused the logjam where nothing gets done because of one holdout, who thinks he can sway the world to his opinion and face no consequences… …

Actually if I think of one man who thinks he can sway the world to his opinion and face no consequences it would be the President. He is completely tone deaf and economically ignorant. His stimulus did nothing and went nowhere. He was so desperate for a health care bill the Speaker of his own party literally said she didn't know what was in it but we should pass it anyway.

That epic level of stupidity and cynicism are not worthy of ire let alone political violence. Nope. Nothing to see here, move along.

Giving banks a trillion dollar bailout while they throw people out of their homes because of bad loans they made may raise the hackles but again, nothing much to see.

Ignoring the campaign pledge of the fierce moral urgency of closing Guantanamo Bay and ending the use of black sites within the first 100 days, nothing.

Is political violence always wrong?

No.

If you live in a place where human rights are routinely ignored. Where secret police drag people away in the middle of the night for execution and torture. Where trials are done in secret or as farce then yes.

If the people of North Korea rose up tomorrow to overthrow the newest tin pot dictator they have I'd be only too happy.

Losing $83 per month out of my paycheck is not enough for me to advocate the brutal assault of my neighbors.


Posted by Duffy at 12:37 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 20, 2011

Dumbest thing I think I've ever heard from a comic creator

Marvel bigwig Tom Brevoort on the "average joe" in the Marvel Universe:

QUESTION: Exactly how much interacting do people have with aliens on earth in marvel U and can we as humans use alien tech? X-men use it all the time, yet Iron Man is told he is not allowed to use it. can people set up contact with aliens if they want?

BREVOORT: Most folks within the Marvel Universe tend to think of any of the alien stuff that’s gone on as a hoax, or as just superhumans gone wild. There isn’t a widespread belief in the existence of aliens, no more so than in our world.

Got that? The general public in the Marvel Universe doesn't believe in aliens anymore than you or I in the real world. Even though there have been virtually uncountable alien attacks and invasions in the last 50 [Marvel] years, not to mention mere visits. Remember Galactus? How many times has he attempted to scarf down 'ol ma Earth? The Skrulls? The Kree?

Thanks for the laugh there, Tom.


Posted by Hube at 06:13 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Hold your ears everyone

Occupy Delaware is all set to go Christmas caroling ... but with a "twist":

Delaware Occupiers are getting into the holiday spirit Wednesday as they ask they preparing for some “Fractured Holiday Caroling” at various Wilmington locations.

The protesters will be singing familiar Christmas tunes, but with politically relevant messages. They’re calling it Occu-Caroling!

As you might text, "OMG." At any rate, we've been lucky enough to come across some of the carols these dolts will be singing:

  • "Frosty on Wall Street."
  • "Trash the Halls."
  • "Hark! The Herald Anarchists Scream."
  • "God Kill Ye Greedy Gentlemen."
  • "It Came Upon the Protest Clear."
  • "Leftist, the Red-Cloaked Commie."
  • "The Twelve Days of Whining."
  • "We Wish You Would Donate Soap to Us."


Posted by Hube at 05:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Where I give Joe Biden the benefit of the doubt

There's a lot of chatter about the following quote from Joe Biden:

Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy. That’s critical. There is not a single statement that the president has ever made in any of our policy assertions that the Taliban is our enemy because it threatens U.S. interests.

The second half of that statement is really reaching. The Taliban are inextricably linked to Al-Qaeda so he's trying to drive a wedge between them. In fact, I submit that he's trying to extend a hand to the Taliban to bring them into the political process. If you keep them excluded forever you'll have war with them forever. Let's look at the second half of his quote:

If, in fact, the Taliban is able to collapse the existing government, which is cooperating with us in keeping the bad guys from being able to do damage to us, then that becomes a problem for us. So there’s a dual track here:

One, continue to keep the pressure on al Qaeda and continue to diminish them. Two, put the government in a position where they can be strong enough that they can negotiate with and not be overthrown by the Taliban. And at the same time try to get the Taliban to move in the direction to see to it that they, through reconciliation, commit not to be engaged with al Qaeda or any other organization that they would harbor to do damage to us and our allies.

He's right. He's taking a beating for overreach on the "not our enemy" part and rightly so. Unfortunately it means his central point is buried.


Posted by Duffy at 10:13 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 19, 2011

This is O.W.S. thinking at its finest (worst)

Over the weekend I saw the damnest thing on the local ABC Philly affilliate, channel 6. Some social scene "reporter" was discussing economic hard times during this holiday season (or something similar) and the subject of tipping came up. Being that through high school and college I was a waiter and bartender, my ears perked right up. And then I let out one of the biggest "WTFs" I've ever bellowed in my life. This moron of a reporter actually said, if you're financially strapped (due to the poor economy) and cannot leave a good tip, just leave a note explaining that.

'Ya got that? There was no question as to WHY THE F*** YOU'RE EATING OUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, only that it is somehow OK to screw over your waitperson. The entitlement mentality at its finest, people. You're now entitled to eat out at restaurants, and entitled to forget about a necessary cost of that action, aka THE TIP.

Here's REALITY for you, since politically-correct total buffoons in the media won't tell you, OK?

1) If you're too strapped to leave a standard tip (meaning, minimum of 15%) at a restaurant, go to f***ing McDonald's.

2) Waitpeople RELY on tips for a living. They get paid BELOW minimum wage precisely because they make tips. If you insist upon being one of the losers who that idiot channel 6 reporter was addressing, you're screwing someone out of their livelihood.

3) It is extremely rare that service is SO terrible at a restaurant that less than a 15% gratuity (that's a tip, natch) is warranted. 20% is my usual norm, more if the service is especially courteous and thoughtful. If the service is slow, that frequently is not the server's fault. (It's usually the kitchen's because they're backed up with orders.) If your server seemingly doesn't care and/or is rude, tell the manager -- and then feel free to tip less than 15%. There's no excuse for waitstaff being uncaring and rude, especially because they need the tips. But, again, I've found that this is a rare occurence. So leave a decent tip, OK?

4) If you leave an especially shi**y tip (or none at all), don't act surprised if your server says something (and not especially nice) to you. Because there's simply no excuse for what you just did. I actually witnessed just this at a local restaurant a few weeks ago. It was delicious. A young couple exited the place right behind my girlfriend and I, whereupon the waiter (a very friendly chap, too, as he had served me my beer that evening when our waitress was busy elsewhere) came through the door and said, "Excuse me -- you didn't leave a tip for me." I found it incredibly refreshing that this guy actually had the cojones to do that in the first place, and I wanted to start clapping right then and there. And his words worked: The couple was shamed into pulling out their wallets and pulling out some cash. Not to mention they were embarrassingly apologetic. As they should have been.

In conclusion: Media -- stop being wishy-washy pu**ies. People -- don't listen to the wishy-washy media and tip your servers well.


Posted by Hube at 09:02 PM | Comments (33) | TrackBack

Disturbing

Barney Frank needs a freakin' bra, for heaven's sake:

(h/t: Right Truth)


Posted by Hube at 08:22 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

December 18, 2011

Dopey WNJ Letter of the Week

Presented without comment, another obviously anti-Semitic historical revisionist in action.

Posted by Hube at 11:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 17, 2011

Just plain stupid

Today is the "Gun Buyback Day" in Wilmington -- the biggest waste of time, money and energy one can imagine. Even the city's police chief admits it's useless:

"We're not naive in thinking crime weapons are going be turned in," said Wilmington Police Chief Michael Szczerba. "There will be very few crime guns turned in, if any at all."

And this whole endeavor is taxpayer funded. Which won't make that much of a difference if no one gets paid for turning in a gun, but there is the matter of setting the whole shindig up, not to mention manpower. But still ...

... let's face it: These efforts are a silly, politically correct bit of nonsense. You think criminals who rely on their [illegal] weapons will seriously turn them in? And if they do turn one in, they'll most likely take the cash and go buy a better gun!

As I heard WDEL's Rick Jensen opine yesterday, why not take the cash set aside for this ridiculousness and give it to the local food bank?

UPDATE (12/18 at 11:21): As you'd expect, the politically correct peons at the News Journal claim that the buy-back "is a worthy incremental investment in wrestling avoidable urban crimes to defeat." Well, I guess they'd back whatever they could -- even this outright nonsense -- because they sure don't help when it comes to defeating urban crime. Else, they'd publish in-depth and accurate crime reports instead of the politically correct-edited nonsense they waste paper on.


Posted by Hube at 09:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 16, 2011

QotD

Who is your preferred presidential candidate for 2012?

Do not be confined to those who are currently running. I'll take nominations for anyone legally eligible.


Posted by Duffy at 03:21 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

Youtube of the day

You say you don't like women's sports? They're boring? Watch this:


Posted by Duffy at 02:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The cost of regulation

It has been the complaint of the Right in this country that the Left uses judicial fiat to make law by decree rather than diplomatic process. Increasingly they have shifted away from law and into regulation. Many regulations do not provide for a remedy via the courts for disputes. Quite the opposite. You are at the mercy of an often unelected bureaucrat and their whims.

The case started four years ago when a married couple named Mike and Chantell Sackett received an EPA compliance order instructing them to stop construction on what was supposed to be their dream home near Priest Lake, Idaho. The government claimed their .63-acre lot was a federally-protected wetland, but that was news to the Sacketts, who had procured all the necessary local permits. Their lot, which is bordered by two roads and several other residential lots, was in fact zoned for residential use.

The Sacketts contend that the compliance order was issued erroneously and they would like the opportunity to make their case in court. Yet according to the terms of the Clean Water Act, they may not challenge the order until the EPA first seeks judicial enforcement of it, a process that could take years. In the meantime, the Sacketts risk $32,500 in fines per day if they fail to comply. And complying doesn’t just mean they have to stop building; they must also return the lot to its original condition at their own expense. Moreover, if they did eventually prevail under the current law, the Sacketts would then need to start construction all over again. By that point they would have paid all of the necessary compliance costs plus double many of their original building expenses. And who knows how much time would have been lost. Where’s the due process in that? The Sacketts understandably want the right to challenge the government’s actions now, not after it’s become too late or too expensive for them to put their property to its intended use. For its part, the EPA argues that old-fashioned judicial review would simply get in the way. As the agency states in the brief it submitted to the Supreme Court, “A rule that broadly authorized immediate judicial review of such agency communications would ultimately disserve the interests of both the government and regulated parties, by discouraging interactive processes that can obviate the need for judicial action.”

This is just one small example of the way the government can squash you and you do not have a legal remedy. I believe that as Americans we should always have redress available via the courts especially where the government is concerned. It's another reason I prefer law to regulation for many matters. Laws, by their very nature, are reviewed by proponents and opponents (at least they should be) whereas regulations can come from a singular source.

I've been having a running discussion with Kavips about the role of regulators and business and such.

He calls himself a conservative as he is longing for the days of Clinton. To me, this does not a conservative make. I've yet to see a single policy idea of his that does not advocate the increase in the power and scope of government. The post linked above starts out as a question about the best way to protect small bookstores against Amazon. His answer is, of course, punish Amazon to prop up small booksellers because they're nice or something. He isn't really clear in his argument other than that Amazon is a BIG CORPORATION and therefore scary and must be punished.

The is a recurring theme with Liberals. They see themselves as Champions of the Oppressed and Supporter Of The Little Guy. They believe that the only way to save the little guy is to force people to make the "correct" choice.

To wit:

Unlimited Freedom is bad, very bad. It hinges on the necessity of people being counted on to police themselves. We know they can’t. There has to be structure. There have to be rules. There have to be those who enforce rules.

Emphasis added. That's the crux of the argument. He believes people can't be trusted. Never mind what they want, they're making the wrong choice. Who chooses? The government. More likely he's thinking Democrats.

I doubt he'd be so sanguine about government deciding how one runs their business if some Godbotherer like Santorum takes office. What happens when he decides that birth control should be more tightly regulated due to failure rates or health concerns? What if they were made available only through certain doctors? He's be wailing about the infringment of his rights and he'd be correct. I just wish he could understand that this is no different.


Posted by Duffy at 02:46 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Ah yes, the numbers were fudged

If you weren't even a bit skeptical of the recent NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) recommendations for ditching ALL cell phone use while driving, well, you should've been. Most controversial of its "advice" was even banning hands-free cell phone use. For example, the Editor over at First Street Journal opines,

But a ban on using hands-free devices is ridiculous and overly-intrusive. Talking on a hands-free cell phone is little different from talking to a passenger. And considering that people talking in the car frequently look at the people with whom they are conversing, talking in the car makes it more probable that the driver will take his eyes off the road than using a hands free cell phone. It should be safer to be talking on a hands-free cell device than talking to a passenger.

Indeed. In other words, this NTSB recommendation is just plain stupid. Yet another reason to distrust government, really.

Now, of course, texting while driving is just plain crackers. I think we all can agree with that one. Talking on a [non-hands-free] cell is debatable. Here in Delaware, state law mandates hands-free cell devices in cars. But the NTSB would ban even that. But ... was the Board's science actually accurate? "No," writes Mona Charen:

But Ms. Hersman is engaging in some numbers fudging. The almost identical article, posted online, contained this sentence in which she clearly claimed that texting caused 3000 deaths last year:

And it was over just like that. It happened so quickly. And, that’s what happened at Gray Summit. Two lives lost in the blink of an eye. And, it’s what happened to more than 3,000 people last year. Lives lost. In the blink of an eye. In the typing of a text. In the push of a send button.

When I phoned the agency yesterday to ask where the 3000 figure came from — and whether it included all distractions (including rubbernecking, eating, adjusting the CD player, etc). An agency public affairs person said it did.

Well, in that case, Hersman was misrepresenting the numbers. I had looked at the NTSB’s data on distracted driving, which is where you’ll find the 3000 figure, and learned that of the distracted driving deaths, only 995 were attributable to cell phone use.

Sadly hilarious. Or, as Charen writes, "The NTSB is attempting to 'save' us from a wildly exaggerated threat at the price of incredible convenience and efficiency." And, in addition, it proves that bored bureaucrats too often feel they have to justify their positions, high salaries and bennies by coming up with ridiculous "recommendations" based on their intense and in-depth (but ultimately shoddy) "research."


Posted by Hube at 08:47 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was Barry Rubin with Middle East: We’re Going to Have a Revolution and We Can Do it the Hard Way or the Easy Way.

Full results are here.


Posted by Hube at 07:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 15, 2011

Libs are beyond pathetic, now

"Progressive" Bill Press on Tim Tebow:

Imagine if Tebow was Muslim or Jewish. Think Press would say what he did?


Posted by Hube at 07:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 14, 2011

December 13, 2011

Hey! Marvel brings Dark Phoenix back -- yet again!

Via FCMM: It'll be the X-Men against the Avengers for the fate of the Phoenix!

Cyclops, Wolverine, Magneto and the other X-Men want to protect her and prepare her if she's to be the new Phoenix. Captain America, Iron Man, Spider-Man and their fellow Avengers want her handed over to them so they can figure out what to do with her and keep the world safe from a potentially fiery fate.

Suffice it to say, tensions — and fisticuffs — arise.

Boy, how original. In other words, let's drag out the basic plot of 1980's X-Men #137 through a twelve issue mini-series, with the Avengers in the place of the Shi'ar Imperial Guard. Please. At least back then, Marvel Editor-in-Chief Jim Shooter realized that the Phoenix force was way too powerful for a human (even a super-powered mutant) to contain, and thus overrode creators Chris Claremont and John Byrne who had desired a plot similar to the one noted above. Shooter demanded that Phoenix be executed for her crimes (she had destroyed a star system in the Shi'ar Empire) rather than be rehabilitated.

*Sigh* Yet another reason I do not purchase comics anymore.


Posted by Hube at 06:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

When will the Philly Inquirer advocate for relaxation of medicine rules in schools?

Students in schools, after all, need parental permission to take pills (and this is in the nurse's office, mind you) such as ibuprofen, acetominophen and the like. PARENTAL PERMISSION. But the big brains at the Philly Inquirer believe that minor females should be allowed to purchase, without parental permission, the "morning after" pill:

It's hard to see how politics played no role in the Obama administration's decision not to let teenage girls buy the emergency-contraception, morning-after pill known as Plan B.

With the White House's first reversal of a Food and Drug Administration decision, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has set a dangerous precedent. But give FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg credit for publicly defending her position in a rare public split with the Obama administration.

Sebelius expressed concern that girls as young as 11 might not use Plan B properly. Her decision last week means Plan B will be available without a prescription only to women who can prove that they are at least 17.

President Obama said he supported Sebelius' decision, citing his personal concern as a father of two young daughters. "I think it is important for us to make sure that we apply some common sense to various rules when it comes to over-the-counter medicine," he said.

Obama has been a strong advocate of reproductive rights, which made his position more disappointing. Critics voiced concern that, going into an election year, he decided to take a conservative position on the controversial morning-after pill.

So, it's a "conservative" position to not allow a female younger than seventeen to purchase a very strong drug? Again, if young teens should be permitted to buy the pill (I guess that makes this the "liberal" position), then it makes absolutely no sense to require parental permission to take "everyday" drugs such as Tylenol or Advil at schools. None. I await the Inquirer's op-ed on that.


Posted by Hube at 06:01 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Dopey Philly.com Letter of the Week

It comes from Wendell W. Young, IV, President of the United Food and Commercial Workers Local regarding the possible privatization of Pennsylvania's "state stores" -- those that sell wine and liquor:

Turzai's original bill, HB 11, would eliminate the shops in one step. But the committee is considering other provisions that would lead to the slow destruction of thousands of jobs and the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in state revenue. These steps would greatly increase the number of stores and destroy an important and unmatched system of preventing sales to minors.

Where we now have some 620 stores, with the proposed changes to HB 11 we would have more than 10,000 sales outlets.

This system of selling wine and liquor in PA is so ridiculous -- as ridiculous as Wendell's letter. He says there will be the loss of thousands of jobs ... yet, how does a huge increase in the number of stores from 620 to over 10,000 result in a net job loss?? Not to mention, how will this massive increase in store numbers lead to a loss in state revenue?

A few weeks ago I traveled to western PA and happened to check out the front of a state store in a small burg there. They're hard to spot, by the way, if you don't know where to look. At any rate, the place was open only four days a week, and the hours it was open were hardly convenient for the average consumer. If I recall correctly, there weren't any night hours at all! No night hours -- for a liquor store?? "Silly" doesn't begin to describe such.

The real reason Mr. Young is opposed to privatization is because, if that town's state store was any indication, they have incredibly cushy jobs -- with cushy hours and with commensurate cushy pay and benefits. But Joe Consumer knows that, like any other monopoly, the service sucks, the employees are rude and incompetent, and product prices are high. (Anyone remember when AT&T was the only long distance carrier around? Anyone in northern Delaware remember when Rollins Cablevision was the only alternative to an antenna? f so, you know what I mean.)


Posted by Hube at 05:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Yet another reason people despise atheists

Check out this moron's comment regarding Tim Tebow:

“He has the right constitutionally to do it (pray),’’ said David Silverman, a Marblehead native who is president of American Atheists. “Having said that, it’s inappropriate. People don’t watch football to watch someone pray.’’

Oh, NO!! The "inappropriateness" of a professional athlete ... praying! As opposed to the usual NFL antics of trying to hurt one another, hot-dogging after virtually every play, and foul-mouthed antics on (and off) the field.

But wait -- there's still more:

Those who believe in separation of football and faith say that Tebow should only take a knee to run out the clock. “How are the Patriots fans supposed to feel if the Broncos score and he thanks God for it?’’ mused Silverman. “Are they supposed to think that God somehow is a Broncos fan? He’s not. That’s ridiculous.’’

No, you friggin' idiot -- you're supposed to think that Tebow thanks God for him and his team being able to make the most out of their God-given abilities. If the other team wins and/or scores, this also doesn't mean God is pissed off at Tebow for his overt demonstrations of faith. Any rational Christian knows that things don't always go one's way, and that bad things happen. That is life -- or, as a Christian might view it, that's just "God's will."

If ever the phrase "Get a life" was meant for somebody, it was meant for Mr. Silverman.

UPDATE: This guy is an even bigger dope. He thinks a Tebow Super Bowl victory will lead to "burning mosques, bashing gays and indiscriminately banishing immigrants." Ye gad.


Posted by Hube at 05:54 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

December 12, 2011

Rick Perry's proposed constitutional amendments -- the good and the not-so-good

As reported by Ace, TX Governor Rick Perry has proposed as many as eight constitutional amendments he'd like to see ratified if he becomes president. Some are good ideas, some aren't so good. Let's take a gander and judge ...

Organized Prayer in Public Schools Amendment. The first question is, "organized by whom?" If it's school officials, forget it. As it is currently, schools are permitted to have Bible study groups with school official sponsors, provided they meet after school hours. And students (and staff) are permitted to pray already -- silently -- and many districts allow for an "official" moment of silence to do said praying if one so chooses. In today's vastly diverse America, "officially" sanctioned prayer is a terrible idea. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.

Pro-Life Amendment. While I respect (and even agree) with Perry's sentiments on this, I thought conservatives were all about federalism. One of the major complaints about Roe v. Wade is that it took the decision about abortion away from the individual states, allowing for abortion across the land (with certain restrictions). I'd also want to see what, if any, exceptions would be made under the amendment. Rape? Incest? Life of mother? HUBE-O-METER SAYS: UNDECIDED.

Pro-Marriage Amendment. Again, what's the big deal about letting states decide how they'll treat marriage? Not allowing such is something that conservatives should abhor. In this respect, social conservatives aren't much different than liberals in extending federal reach into areas where it ain't wanted. Admittedly, of course, the former's method is more representative and more difficult a process; however, the results end up the same. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.

Balanced Budget Amendment. "Bring it on," is all I can say here. Anything that mandates that we get our fiscal house in order should be OK with everyone. Most versions of such an amendment usually have emergency measure exemptions; I assume Perry's would too. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: BRILLIANT.

Repeal of 16th Amendment. Again, a hearty "Bring it on!!" The Founders, in their infinite wisdom, knew such a tax was an abomination; apparently, our politicians in the early part of the last century thought (wrongly) that they were wiser. The dreaded 16th Amendment gave rise to the United States' own version of the KGB (the IRS), and philosophically it runs afoul of the 13th Amendment in that it mandates uncompensated servitude (employers doing the work for government withholding taxes -- yeah, I know that's a very libertarian argument, but it's a damn good one). It also was ratified under very suspicious circumstances (see: The Law That Never Was). Of course, it'll take a good plan to replace the federal income tax; I've always been in favor of a national sales tax as a replacement, as it would give consumers the choice as to when, where and how to pay their taxes (i.e. for things they want). But that doesn't seem to be Perry's idea. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: BRILLIANT.

Repeal of 17th Amendment. This site gives a very detailed examination of the pros and cons of the 17th Amendment -- direct election of senators -- and at least in this realm, Perry's penchant for minimal [federal] government power seems consistent with conservatism. However, in my view, more democracy is better in this area, and if you think we have gridlock in Washington now, imagine what it'll be like when state legislatures refuse to choose US senators due to in-fighting, leading to numerous vacancies in the federal Senate. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.

Abolition of Lifetime Tenure for Judges. I happen to agree with the philosophy that appointment of judges (and lifetime tenure), rather than the election of them, serves to make judges less political. But whether this philosophy actually holds true is another matter. I tend to doubt it. We all know how the US Supreme Court will decide on most issues, because it has a clear conservative and liberal bloc. These justices' appointment and lifetime tenure hasn't made them any less political. Thus, all that being said, I don't see a hassle with a definitive time limit on the tenure of federal judges, some or all of them. Perry's idea is for an 18-year limit, staggered so that every two years a certain number's terms are done. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: BRILLIANT.

Congressional Veto Over SCOTUS Decisions Amendment. Again, those very wise Founders devised a way by which Congress can thwart a [lousy] Supreme Court decision: the constitutional amendment. (Y'know, the very thing Rick Perry likes proposing!) Perry's amendment would allow a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate to nullify a SCOTUS decision, thus making the [amendment] process considerably streamlined -- no three-quarters of state legislatures needed. I agree with Perry himself that this "risks increased politicization of judicial decisions," and besides, you wouldn't really need this amendment if the lifetime tenure of judges is abolished. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.


Posted by Hube at 04:39 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

Hube's Monday sports round-up

National League MVP Ryan Braun's testosterone level was "insanely high" according to reports. The chance of a "false positive" (Braun's defense) is "almost impossible. If the results hold up, Braun should lose his MVP honors even though the Baseball Writers Association of America refuses to do that. (He already faces a 50 game suspension next season.)

Elsewhere, idiot Manny Ramirez believes he and his baseball-playing brethren are "the working class."

The Steelers' James Harrison is in hot water -- again -- for an illegal hit on Cleveland's quarterback Thursday night. While it's certainly a good point that Harrison is a dirty player, the "pussyfication" of the NFL rolls on. Apparently the league (and its geriatric officials) forget that football is a contact sport. And certain players seem to be the beneficiary of this a lot more than others -- like Tom Brady, for instance. What would Art Donovan say?

Tim Tebow did it again yesterday, this time leading his Broncos to a very improbable win over the Chicago Bears. I never understood the hassle Tebow has gotten; wait, yes I do -- it's because he's a Christian and he has no problem saying so and acting like one. This is very upsetting to people like the usual cultural/political idiots, and that's just too damn bad. I suggest people read this about the Denver QB about "being real" when it comes to discussing him.

In golf, number one ranked player Luke Donald said that Rory McIlroy is "more talented than Tiger Woods." Sorry, dude, but just because Tiger has had his share of personal missteps the last few years doesn't mean that some new hotshot is "more talented" than him. Woods is still very much on track for breaking Jack Nicklaus's Majors record (18), a number that is, basically, insane to accomplish. If McIlroy can get to half of Woods' Major titles, then talk to me. Oh, and I'm still wondering how McIlroy's name is so freakin' similar to Roy "Tin Cup" McAvoy's.

Oh, the NBA season is back on, albeit shortened. Who the f*** cares.

Lastly, 'ya just gotta love the animated .gif of the Redskins' Jabar Gafney jumping into the stands ... but no one catches him:


Posted by Hube at 04:29 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

Today in moonbat-ville

If there ever was a single statement that proves moonbats are, well, just that, this might be the one, courtesy of the Local Gaggle of Moobat Bloggers' (LGOMB) Jason "Trust Fund" Scott:

Anyway, the left has virtually nothing. No candidates, no money, no cable TV news networks. All we have is youtube and daily kos. Is that enough?

Uh huh. Let's see, aside from

  • MSNBC
  • PBS
  • NPR
  • ABC
  • CBS
  • NBC
  • CNN
  • Virtually every big city newspaper
  • Vast majority of Hollywood films
  • Vast majority of TV shows

... "Trust Fund" might have a point!

Idiot.


Posted by Hube at 04:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Link latte

I have little love for the OWS crowd which I see as a group of people with grievances that are at best ill defined or misdirected.

They are middle class, educated kids with enough time and money to spend days on end protesting. If they spent half as much

effort on finding a job they'd have one. Not The Job That I Deserve but rather, the job that probably sucks but is a step towards

something better. That said, they are not completely wrong about everything. (Aside from Don Viti, who is?)

There is some agreement between the OWS and The Tea Party. Both groups were opposed to the bailout. The OWS crowd rightly states

that these same banks have been privatizing gains and publicizing losses. The Tea Party agrees but sees the problem more in terms

of government intervention in the free market and, as a matter of principle, you gotta stand or fall on your own.

Second, both think that corporations have too much influence in government. The Tea Party, however recognizes that this is

largely due to Congress having too much influence over business. Sadly, it is all but necessary to puchase (or at least rent)

politicians to prevent them from regulating your business to death or squashing you in favor or another one of their donors or friends.

Third, OWS complains about banks predations on the poor. The Tea Party may not agree but here's exhibit one;

In less than two weeks, without making any purchases or withdrawals, her son's $4.85 savings account had turned into a $229.10 debt

The fact that this is even legal is insane. When the housing crisis erupted in 2007 and the idea of a bailout was being floated I suggested that the government, rather than just give money to the banks they would be better served by retiring $1 trillion

worth of distressed real estate. Establish some sort of parameters. You have to be currently living in the same residence without interruption. You have been attempting to meet your obligations etc. That way, the banks would still get their money and we would have had something to show for it.

Similarly, in the wake of such a bailout they should have brought consumer issues to the fore and made moves like the one above

flatly illegal. (This is all very unlibertarian of me but I'm speaking here as if I were a political adviser to Chairman Zero)

Let a thousand nations bloom

Can Honduras outstrip Hong Kong as bastion of free markets? It looks like they're going to give it a try. This is all in the nascent stages but if it is approved and they can manage to keep the transparency and the autonomy it is going to get very interesting. I can see the flag for the Technical Republic of Microsoft and the Dominion of Cupertino as neighbors.


P.J. O'Rourke celebrates unfairness.

Yes, it's upsetting that some people have so much while other people have so little. It isn't fair. But I accept this unfairness.

Indeed, I treasure it. That's because I have a 13-year-old daughter And that's all I hear, "That's not fair," she says. "That's not fair! That's not fair!" And one day I snapped, and I said, "Honey, you're cute, that's not fair. Your family is pretty well off, that's not fair. You were born in America, that's not fair. Darling, you had better get down on your knees and pray that things don't start getting fair for you."

Indeed. Things are not great economically but take a look around the globe and thank Gaia that you were born here. Go on Netflix and watch the Vice Guide to Travel. Especially the one about Liberia. I was nearly suicidal by the end of that episode.


In praise of coaches who keep things in perspective:

There was a brawl after a basketball game and the coach had some words about the game:

There is no excuse for that in basketball. You got to learn how to win on one side, you got to learn how to lose on the other side. All these kids all need to realize they are here to get an education.

These guys, very few of them are ever going to make a dollar playing basketball. They are here to get an education at two great universities and they need to appreciate that. The world don’t revolve around them, around basketball. They need to learn how to act, they need to have respect for the fact they are on a scholarship, that people come to see them play. That’s just the facts of college athletics.

Too much glorification of all of sports in our society. The fact is, guys are here to get an education. They represent institutions of higher learning. Xavier has been a great school for years. We are trying to cure cancer at Cincinnati. I got to school at a place where they discovered the vaccine for polio and created Benadryl. I think that’s more important than who wins a basketball game. And our guys need to have appreciation for the fact they are there on a full scholarship. And they’re there to represent institutions with class and integrity. That’s that.

My players don’t act the right way they will never play another game at Cincinnati. Right now, I just told my guys, I will meet with my AD and my president and I’m going to decide who is on the team going forward. That is what the University of Cincinnati is about. Period.

I’ve never been this embarrassed. I’m hoping President Williams doesn’t ask me to resign after that. We represent an institution of higher learning, it’s way more important than basketball games. Whoever puts that jersey back on – I made everybody take their jersey off and they will not put it on again until they have a full understanding of where they go to school and what the university stands for and how lucky they are to even be there, let alone have a scholarship, because there’s a whole lot of kids that can’t pay for college. And don’t get to go to school. My mom didn’t get to go to UC, she grew up on campus. They couldn’t afford it.

It’s a complete embarrassment. No matter who started what. Just the whole thing, it’s a complete embarrassment. We talk all the time, toughness is doing the right thing in life. That is what we talk about. If that is the case, you are being provoked, this or that, true toughness, you walk away from it. You take your ass whipping and you go home. You get better.

Guys, there’s thousands of people in our country – watch 60 minutes – half of Orlando is homeless. You are not that important.

None of us. Have some class. Represent your university and I am talking about everybody involved. Everybody involved. Let’s be honest, guys, come on. It’s a basketball game.

Represent our university. That is what I was hired to do six years ago. That’s what will happen as long as I’m the coach. Whether we have five guys on the team on Monday or 10 or 13. There is enough guys out there that would appreciate the scholarship. I don’t care how good you are. That whole scene is just an embarrassment. Guys think they are way too important in the scope of what is going on in the world. It’s not professional sports.

I think I might just start a petition to bring him to my alma mater.


Posted by Duffy at 03:35 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 11, 2011

Most people don't have $10,000 to bet

Bad move by Mitt Romney. And Rick Perry should've used the title of this post as his retort:


Posted by Hube at 09:38 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 10, 2011

And on the other side ...

WTF is Glenn Beck's problem now? He thinks that supporting Newt means ... you're racist??

“If you have a big government progressive, or a big government progressive in Obama… ask yourself this, Tea Party: is it about Obama’s race? Because that’s what it appears to be to me. If you’re against him but you’re for this guy (Gingrich), it must be about race. I mean, what else is it? It’s the policies that matter.”

Yeah, it is the policies that matter. And if you think Gingrich is another Obama, then you've got a big screw loose. YEESH.

Elsewhere, a group called The Florida Family Association is urging advertisers to pull spots from the new reality show “All-American Muslim":

“’All-American Muslim’ is propaganda clearly designed to counter legitimate and present-day concerns about many Muslims who are advancing Islamic fundamentalism and Sharia law,” the Florida group asserts in a letter it asks members to send to TLC advertisers.

Right. As if there are no everyday Muslims who don't subscribe to Sharia law and fundamentalism, and who act as apple pie American as anyone else. Please. Look, I'm for being as vigilant and as non-PC about radical Islam in the US as anyone else, but this show seems completely harmless. It's a freakin' reality show, for heaven's sake. There are literally uncounted numbers of them infesting the (cable) airwaves these days. What's one more about a non-fundie American Muslim family? C'mon.


Posted by Hube at 06:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Just remember -- our president is SOOO smart

The Idiot-in-Chief's latest:

As Obama called for passage of those bills, he also responded to a recent Republican push to require him to approve the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada. "However many jobs might be generated by a Keystone pipeline," he said, "they're going to be a lot fewer than the jobs that are created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance."

Or, as Ace says, "Sums it up, doesn't it? A government program which puts people on the dole creates jobs, but a private venture to deliver energy does not."


Posted by Hube at 12:09 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

December 09, 2011

Watcher's Council results

The non-Council winner was Andrew McCarthy with Fears And Smears. Full results are here.


Posted by Hube at 05:10 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 08, 2011

Our top law enforcement officer

... says that lying depends on "one's state of mind":

Be afraid, folks. Very afraid.


Posted by Hube at 05:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Why Obama has to go, period

Because he ridiculously downplays very real threats with preposterously ridiculous euphemisms:

Sen. Susan Collins on Wednesday blasted the Defense Department for classifying the Fort Hood massacre as workplace violence and suggested political correctness is being placed above the security of the nation's Armed Forces at home.

During a joint session of the Senate and House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, the Maine Republican referenced a letter from the Defense Department depicting the Fort Hood shootings as workplace violence. She criticized the Obama administration for failing to identify the threat as radical Islam.

This is the same administration that recommends to colleges and universities to do their best to skirt the law in order to utilize racial preferences.

This is the same administration that will make sure your embellished profile on Match.com gets you labeled a felon.

This is the same administration that is attempting to revive the Fairness Doctrine.

This is the same administration that wanted to apologize to Japan for the US dropping two A-bombs on it to end World War 2.

This is the same administration that refers to FEMA as your "Federal Family."

This is the same administration that gives rich kids free lunches so poor[er] kids don't feel "stigmatized."

This is the same administration that ... well, you get the point. I could go on forever.

UPDATE: Yorkshire chimes in: "It’s official, the country is Nuckin Futs. How ANYONE can call an act of terrorism 'workplace violence' is beyond that thing we try to call SANITY."


Posted by Hube at 04:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Unbelievably, former Philly school super defends her unemployment bennies

This woman, besides being a complete and total a-hole, really thinks we're stupid:

"I'm taking something that is rightly mine," she told reporter Lu Ann Cahn from her new home in Albuquerque, which she said she was renting to be closer to her grandchildren.

Ackerman said that people who had criticized her for applying for unemployment, which could total $573 a week, didn't know her financial situation.

"I'm not a millionaire," Ackerman said, adding that she was "not living in luxury. I'm living a normal life."

She also told NBC10 that the money she would receive could not have been used instead to pay for children's educations because it comes from a special district fund set up to pay unemployment claims.

She got over a $900,000 severance package from the district!!! Her salary during her tenure was over $300,000 (with free bennies)!!!

But's she's "not a millionaire," and is just "living a normal life." Right.

Previous coverage here.


Posted by Hube at 04:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 07, 2011

Comment hassles

We're working on it ...

UPDATE: They're working again. :-)

UPDATE 2: They're back down again. Stay tuned.

UPDATE 3 (14:00 EST): Back up.

Posted by Hube at 06:41 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

It's #1 only in the editors' minds

According to Time magazine, the number one story of the year was ... the Occupy Wall Street protests. Or, as Jonah Goldberg writes today, OWS is

... bigger than the sorry economy, more significant than the eurocrisis, more momentous than killing Osama, more relevant than the GOP race or Obama’s failures, or Iran’s nuke program, or the Arab Spring, or the Japanese earthquake, etc. etc.

Uh huh. At least the Tea Party significantly affected an election. And all it got was derision from the likes of Time.


Posted by Hube at 03:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 06, 2011

Looks like U.D. still hasn't fully learned its lesson

Learned its lesson from its Residence Life Thought Control Program from a few years back, that is. UD President Pat Harker is COMMITTED to diversity -- so much so that

it's no good to bring a diverse community together if people don't talk to each [sic] and challenge each other.

In other words, if you won't talk to that fellow student who's different from you, we're gonna make you!

Yeesh. I sure wish educrats would concentrate on what they're supposed to -- educating students -- and leave the ancillary crap, especially at the college level (they're adults, after all, now) alone.

UPDATE: Of course the ever-PC News Journal has to jump into the fray on this topic. Interestingly, the article notes how UD's student and faculty population "doesn't reflect society at large" (as if that's such a big concern); however, I wonder why it doesn't ask the very same question about Delaware State University -- an Historically Black College? Does its population reflect the state's demographics?

You know the answer to that: No, it doesn't. But in the world of politically correct diversity, that isn't a concern. Diversity only is of consequence when any population is majority Caucasian.

And what is up with this from the article:

Prior to Tuesday's announcement, UD had engaged in several initiatives to improve diversity. It added a question to the forms students use to evaluate their teachers asking if their academic abilities were prejudged based on their race, ethnicity or gender.

How is this ... "an initiative to improve diversity"?? How, realistically, would college administrators take into account a student "evaluation" that answered in the positive? Knowing American universities' penchant for far-left PC, I'd wager these admins would take any such student "evaluation" at face value, and confront the "offending" professor as being "racist," "sexist" "homophobic," or whatever. Why? Because the rules of left-PC dictate that it's how someone interprets words and actions that are of paramount import. The interpretation may have absolutely no basis in reality, but this doesn't matter. Who are we to judge what someone else interprets, right? Not to mention there's the way-obvious "excuse" for students to negatively assess an instructor with such an "evaluation" merely because the student performed dismally academically. "How can I get this meanie prof back? Ah, yes -- he's racially/gender/sexual identity insensitive! Bingo!"

Then:

The university also started gathering and studying data on retention and turnover among female faculty and faculty of color, as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender faculty.

"I feel like this can be a great university," [Professor of psychology and Black American Studies and first director of the new Center for the Study of Diversity James] Jones said. "And to do that, we have to deal with issues of diversity."

Ah yes, the ever-popular director of The Completely Non-Essential Center chiming in here. I wonder if James feels similarly about Del. State -- does he feel it could "be great" if it evened out its vast racial disparities?

It's. All. A. Big. Joke.


Posted by Hube at 07:30 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

The NAACP thinks blacks and Latinos are too stupid to vote

More accurately, they think those groups are just stupid period -- because that "impediment" to voting, aka a piece of [photo] identification, is "too tough" for blacks and Hispanics (among a few other groups) to obtain. And they're appealing to the United Nations to do something about it!!

Talk about your bigotry of low expectations, not to mention asking the fox to guard the henhouse. Yeesh.


Posted by Hube at 05:37 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack

Oh golly -- there's some comics about the Occupy movement

The "big" news is that comics legend Alan Moore has now contributed to the cause -- Moore being best known for Watchmen and V for Vendetta. Now, Moore may be a literary genius, but he's plain stupid when it comes to politics and basic reality:

The famously left-wing Moore recently responded to Frank Miller’s scathing criticism of the Occupy movement, saying, “As far as I can see, the Occupy movement is just ordinary people reclaiming rights which should always have been theirs. I can’t think of any reason why as a population we should be expected to stand by and see a gross reduction in the living standards of ourselves and our kids, possibly for generations, when the people who have got us into this have been rewarded for it; they’ve certainly not been punished in any way because they’re too big to fail. I think that the Occupy movement is, in one sense, the public saying that they should be the ones to decide who’s too big to fail. It’s a completely justified howl of moral outrage and it seems to be handled in a very intelligent, non-violent way, which is probably another reason why Frank Miller would be less than pleased with it. I’m sure if it had been a bunch of young, sociopathic vigilantes with Batman make-up on their faces, he’d be more in favour of it. We would definitely have to agree to differ on that one.”

Nice cheap shot there at Frank Miller. At least Miller's grounded in reality. But let's take Moore's points one at a time:

1) Where have Americans seen a "gross reduction" in their living standards, aside from the current economic downturn? There hasn't been one. And we certainly cannot see into the future so to say that "possibly for generations" is just that -- a possibility. But there certainly will be other factors involved in such besides what the Occupiers view as culpable.

2) Once again, we see an Occupy sympathizer completely clueless as to who's really at fault for the current economic woes. It is GOVERNMENT, idiot!! Who said everything was honkey-dorey with the housing and mortgage situation? Government. Who provided insufficient oversight into the banking industry? Government. Who deemed these various industries as too big to fail? Government. Crony Capitalism is all about government ... being in bed with various industries. Industries/Corporations exist to make money. Period. It is government's job to provide oversight and regulation with regards to them ... so that the quest for the buck doesn't screw Joe Six-Pack over. It failed.

3) The Occupy movement "seems to be handled in a very intelligent, non-violent way?" If anything proves Moore is way out in left field, this does. That, or he doesn't keep up on the news whatsoever.

4) What's more, Moore is a member of the 1%, so who gives a f*** about his elitist opinion anyway? The guy's got such hard-on for himself that he refused to attach his name to the Watchmen and V for Vendetta films -- he believes his work will be "bastardized" or something. He also detests Hollywood, among other things. (Though one has to give him credit for consistency and principle, I'll grant, since he has refused royalties from the films.)

At any rate, at least the silly Occupy Comics idiocy has someone like Moore to say "Hey look! We got a 'someone' with us!" because the rest of the list is just a bunch of nobodies and wannbes.


Posted by Hube at 05:04 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

December 05, 2011

Biased? Naw ...

The NY Times analyzes Newt Gingrich's college dissertation from ... 1971. Meanwhile, as Media Blog's Greg Pollowitz notes, it remains completely disinterested in our current president's college transcripts.

Posted by Hube at 06:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

How did we survive??

A "professor" has rewritten the story of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer because the original ... glorifies bullying (or something):

'Ya just gotta laugh, folks. It's all you can do. I mean, how did my generation (and many others) survive while watching the Three Stooges? We didn't slam each other the head with shovels, gouge each others' eyes out, or slip a stick of dynamite down a pal's shorts. Nor did we create silly contraptions like the Coyote did for the Road Runner that would lead us to hoping the law of gravity would be suspended for a few seconds (so we wouldn't fall 20 stories). We also didn't try to spin like a top and eat our way through rocks and trees in seconds like the Tasmanian Devil did when he was after Bugs Bunny.

Three words for "Professor" Giuliani: Get. A. Life.

UPDATE: Soccer Dad notes via Twitter that Sesame Street has also gone the way of PC.


Posted by Hube at 06:19 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

Earth-like planet found!

The bad news: It's 600 light years away.

This means that, even using Star Trek: Enterprise's maximum ship velocity -- warp 5 -- it'd take two and three-quarters years to get there!

In other words, we ain't goin' there anytime soon.


Posted by Hube at 05:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Man, have I had it wrong all this time (or my dad did)

Check out these Five Reasons Women Don't Like Nice Guys (h/t to Insty). Have I really had it wrong all these years?

1. It's hard for some of us to trust a Nice Guy. And why's that? Read these "reasons":

Not because they're not trustworthy -- in fact, it's quite the opposite. The more trustworthy a guy seems, the harder it may be for a woman to actually believe that they're as good as they seem. See, women get kind of jaded about the whole Nice Guy thing (after dating too many jerks), which means that it takes time for a woman to trust that a Nice Guy is, well, actually for reals.

Oh, I get it -- you like bad boys ... so much so that when finally a nice guy shows up ... you don't trust HIM. Sure makes "sense."

2. Bad Boys care about themselves -- a lot -- and it makes us think they care about us. Oh, right -- because they're narcissists, this means they'll care about you. Check. (What idiot wrote this?)

3. Nice Guys have their shit together. Bad Boys don't. Women like a challenge. Yeah -- a guy with no job, no money, no scruples ... if I was a chick I'd sure want that challenge. I also like genital herpes ...

4. Some women are afraid of intimacy. The one thing the Bad Boy rarely does is want to become intimate. Uh huh. Because this attribute in women is SO prominent ...

5. Some women suffer low self-esteem. Whaaa ...? Check it:

Women who don't feel very good about themselves may not be able to handle the Nice Guy that treats her well. The Bad Boy, however, may treat her in the way she treats herself -- badly.

Right -- so a chick who has self-esteem issues wants to feel even worse about herself ... and a bad boy will help her do just that. Who knew?

Keep in mind that that word "some" appears an inordinate number of times in these categories, so that makes these nonsense "reasons" even less useful. Not to mention -- the article concludes: Nice Guys, well, they're the way to go.

Why'd you waste my time, then? YEESH.


Posted by Hube at 03:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Should be titled "Some in la-la land ..."

Several of the Local Gaggle of Moonbat Bloggers (LGOMB) managed to get News Journal columnist Chad "I Don't Proofread My Posts" Livengood (since corrected -- he must've see my comment) to give them some time to cry and whine about local Democrats "giving in" to the GOP. Take a gander at what has these moonbats' panties all in a bunch, in an article titled "Some in Left Wing Feel Slighted":

U.S. Sen. Tom Carper believes there's billions in wasteful spending contributing to the $1.3 trillion federal deficit this year.

His fellow Delaware Democrat, U.S. Rep. John Carney, wants a constitutional amendment requiring the federal government's operating budget to be balanced every year, with some emergency exceptions.

And U.S. Sen. Chris Coons has said Democrats must be willing to compromise with Republicans on cutting long-term costs in entitlement programs to save Medicare and Social Security from insolvency.

Oh HEAVENS!! Carper thinks there's billions in wasteful spending! Carney believes the federal government should be required to balance its books! Coons thinks we ought to seriously address the entitlement issue! I FEEL SLIGHTED!!! These moonbats

... contend that introducing balanced-budget amendments and holding headline-grabbing hearings scrutinizing insignificant spending only emboldens Republicans who insist government is what ails the nation.

And why's that? Because it IS government which ails the nation, you idiots!! Whose fault is it that we're $15 trillion in debt? Whose fault is it that we have a few trillion in budget deficit? Whose fault is it that the housing/mortgage and banking industries collapsed? There's not a single thing that cannot be traced back to GOVERNMENT (specifically, the federal government) when it comes to the nation's current ills.

Any poll consistently shows that the American public knows the above. The LGOMB would, instead of attempting to demonize these sensible views by our local Democratic leaders, be better advised to concentrate on those aspects of their party's positions also viewed favorably by said public -- like a modest increase in various taxes/rates for higher income folks. But, then again, these are the same idiots who believe all Republicans should be rounded up and shot, not to mention that "reasonable people can disagree" about whether George W. Bush knew about 9/11 in advance.


Posted by Hube at 03:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 03, 2011

Obama "tosses out" Bush-era college diversity policies

This certainly comes as little surprise if you've been at all following the racialist nonsense of the current administration over the last three years. No need to dissect the contradictory inanity of it all (again), but once again just consider the following:

1) "Diversity," that ever-nebulous concept, has no proven effect on academic achievement, and

2) how ridiculous is the following in the article (ways to "legally" increase college diversity):

They could also "select high schools for partnership" based, among other things, on "racial composition of the school’s student body" and former partnerships with historically black colleges and universities"

As we've noted numerous times, if diversity is such a hallowed concept -- to be enacted at all costs -- then why do we even maintain "historically" black colleges anymore? How is it "diverse" to have a student that is predominately black?

Once again, educational "progressives" perpetually contradict themselves in their constant worship at the altar of diversity and political correctness. And if you question their beliefs, just like the heretics of old, you'll be [metaphorically] burned at the stake.


Posted by Hube at 10:54 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Laugher of the Day

Via Legal Insurrection, a real bumper sticker seen on a car:


Posted by Hube at 10:02 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

Tom Cruise on board for new scifi flick

Spinoff Online reports that the mega-star will be featured in All You Need Is Kill, based on Hiroshi Sakurazaka’s "light" novel. In it,

Cruise play[s] a new recruit in a war between humanity and invading aliens who becomes trapped in a time loop and has to relive the same battle over and over again until he discovers a way to break the cycle.

That's sounds like a very familiar concept. If anyone's a Star Trek: The Next Generation fan, the episode "Cause and Effect" should come to mind.


Posted by Hube at 09:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 02, 2011

Best news I heard today

Looks like my favorite scifi novel of all-time (original cover, at bottom) will be getting -- thankfully -- a needed reboot: Starship Troopers.

Chances are good that (like just about every other reboot out there) the new Starship Troopers movie will be sold as grittier and more grounded in tone than its cinematic predecessor. However, similar to the Total Recall and Logan’s Run “updates”, this project could be designed as a more loyal interpretation of Heinlein’s original source material – rather than a strict remake of Verhoeven’s movie (check out the Wikipedia page for a quick rundown of some of the major differences between the Starship Troopers book/film).

I've written ad nauseum about Troopers (see here, here, and here, among others), but this is terrific news. If we can get a film adaptation true to the actual novel, then we'll see:

  • A lot less soldiers as powered armor (seen, albeit low-budget, in the straight-to-DVD Starship Troopers 3: Marauder) is utilized by the troopers, and one man can take on hundreds of Bugs at a time. ST3 was subtitled "Marauder" because that is the nickname of the deadliest type of armor in the novel.

  • Weapons that actually make sense. The 1997 film is set in a future where humanity can travel the stars, build massive and elaborate space stations, but ... can only equip its soldiers with machine guns barely more sophisticated than a 20th century AK-47?? Head scratcher city.

  • Politics. Only the beginning of the original film touched on it, via Raschak (Rico's teacher) in high school. But the novel intersperses history and politics throughout the book ... right alongside the futuristic action. Paul Verhoeven ridiculously transformed Robert Heinlein's "military democracy" into a fascistic military junta-style society. If you couldn't see that in the original flick, then just take a gander at the officers' uniforms.

  • Boot camp. Verhoeven only scratched the surface on this, too, even though it plays a pivotal role in the novel. The film had all the action occuring on a base; the book has it (as it should!) on base, in the mountains, in the desert, and on the moon -- just as you'd expect from a science fiction yarn. There's definitely a Full Metal Jacket quality to the book's depiction of boot camp, sans the Private Pyle breakdown. (Although we're treated to how the future army deals with insane killers among its ranks!)


Posted by Hube at 04:47 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Play a profane tune for an invited guest, then complain because people call you names in return

Jimmy Fallon's bandleader has been the target of some very nasty Tweets since he and his co-horts played "Lyin' Ass Bitch" when Michelle Bachmann was introduced as a guest:

I've seen some really colorful epithets in the past four days, but "ni**er fuckhead ghetto stick" (spelled out in the original) is probably the one that takes the cake. I'm still trying to get my head around that one. Blocking 3,500 tea party extremists [on Twitter] in a three day period is no fun, especially when you're a drummer dangerously close to carpal tunnel. In the end, was it worth it? Absolutely not.

I'd never condone using the "N" word no matter how miffed one may get, but what the hell does this guy expect when he pulls a stunt like he did? And how the hell does he know they're Tea Partiers? He doesn't -- it's yet another cheap shot at Bachmann and her supporters.

This putz has about as much class as a razed school building -- especially since it was Bachmann who very probably saved his very job!!


Posted by Hube at 04:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Watcher's Council winners

The non-Council winner was The Passing Parade with OWS IT GOING, AND IT SHOULD GO FASTER.

Full results are here.


Posted by Hube at 05:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack