Have you ever run across someone who claims to be a "student of history" who makes stupid claims? The example of Dan Brown in his novels comes to mind. Not only are his contentions ridiculous, his history is awful. The most cursory study of the Knights Templar will show that the Templars were real Christian knights and not adherents of Gnostic "wisdom" or that the Italian sculptor Bernini could not have been a member of the Illuminati because he was long dead by the time Adam Weisphat concocted his scam.
Our Dear Leader (the One, the Anointed, the O), has several times in the past claimed to be a "student of history". One example that comes to mind is his claim that the automobile was invented in the United States. As any car head can accurately state, the automobile, as we know it, was invented in Germany by a man named Daimler (he also invented the motorcycle). The O also spoke, in a praising manner, about the Model T Ford as if the solution to America's energy and pollution problems lies with the Model T. Truth to tell, the Model T was, for its engine size, a gas hog, gross polluter and so unsafe in its construction and features as to be considered more a dangerous toy than a mode of transportation.
The One, in his bum kissing Cairo speech, spoke again as a student of history. And he either lied or showed his ignorance of history:
Pajamas Media » Obama Flunks History at Cairo U
And add to the false claims of the Muslim world the fact that chess was not invented in Iran or the Arab world. It was invented in India.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
The Difference Between Then and Now
There was a time when actors, singers and such behaved with a modicum of class and politeness. Now it seems that now the sign of affection to the public by a professional performer is to give it the finger. Instead of the public giving the finger back by not buying the product by the performer it seems to crave a big "F--- you" from their favorite star.
What the heck happened? The actor, the singer, the performer, is coming to the public with a begging bowl held out. In a logical world the performer would be performing on a street corner or in a park and would pass the hat to get the reward for their labor. Instead, the performer feels owed and the public is insulted. The world has truly been turned upside down.
Consider this article about times past and times now:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Hollywood, Music, and the Death of Class
What the heck happened? The actor, the singer, the performer, is coming to the public with a begging bowl held out. In a logical world the performer would be performing on a street corner or in a park and would pass the hat to get the reward for their labor. Instead, the performer feels owed and the public is insulted. The world has truly been turned upside down.
Consider this article about times past and times now:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Hollywood, Music, and the Death of Class
Saturday, May 30, 2009
What a Refreshing Ex-Athlete!
How many times have you read stories about ex-sports stars doing something really, really stupid? The answer is, too many times. Once out of their particular sport they seem to think that they are still, at the age of 40, the stars they were at the age of 24. For some reason their famous touchdown, goal, home run, et al is supposed to give them a cache to behave badly when they are middle aged men or women. One thinks of John D. MacDonald's charter, the Arkansas Tiger, who, after a pro sports career, carried on a 24 hour a day, 7 day a week party on his boat at the Bahia Marina in Florida.
Here's a story of an exception, and an exceptional woman:
Former Tennis Player Andrea Jaeger Shows Compassion to Cancer-Stricken Children - washingtonpost.com
Here's a story of an exception, and an exceptional woman:
Former Tennis Player Andrea Jaeger Shows Compassion to Cancer-Stricken Children - washingtonpost.com
Men in Hats -- Panama Edition
Above we have a photo of Sean Connery wearing a Panama hat.. Connery, in his films, was never known as a hat wearer except for those awful narrow brimmed atrocities he wore in the first two Jame Bond Movies. By the time the above photo was taken the great Scot came to his senses and bought a decent hat with a decent width brim.
For an older and more classic example of the Panama hat we have a still from the old movie Macao starring Robert Mitchum and the ever-breath-taking Jane Russell. Mitchum, coming from a generation of American hat wearers, wears his hat more naturally and casually than does Connery; it's tilted up, it's tilted down. It shades his eyes when needed and acts as an exclamation point when needed. Mitchum, coming from the last of the hat wearing generation, regards the hats as part of him. The hat IS him.Now that Summer is near and the weather is warming it is time to bring out the straw hat, whether Panama, boater or cowboy and coolly pass the time in the shade and put the old fedora or homburg in mothballs.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
You Owe Us and We Own You
As all who are regular readers of this journal are well aware, we at Bloody Nib Manor live pretty simply. Some would say on the edge. We've not managed to come up with the cash to clean out the moat for several years and the results is the growth of all sorts of noxious plants far too close to the house. And we've been forced to use standard-bred horses for our foxhunting instead of lurchers and thoroughbreds. Never mind the dogs. It was difficult to give up our kennel of proper English Foxhounds in favor of Shih-Tzus and mongrels. But, in the current economic climate sacrifices must be made.
The late Baron Nib, a great man in every way, and the still living Baroness Nib, always made it a point to impress upon their scions that to be in debt was to be in a form of slavery. In other words, if you owe a person money you are at their beck and call until you re-pay the debt.
We have, as far as practicable, worked to keep out of debt. Whenever possible we pay cash because we do not want some busybody from American Express or the bank telling us that we are living in a manner that they do not approve. We, the ever lovely Lady Nib and myself, desire freedom more than luxury. We try to be, a much as possible, self-sufficient and self-responsible. We are, in that sense, rather old-fashioned, despite the fact that we just had our Wolsley sedan re-painted with a rather shocking hot pink paint job.
The Baron's comment concerning debt has been proven true recently. Some American banks which had received TARP (in other words, bail-out loans) from the United States government have stated that they have the cash, right now, to pay off their loans. They have told the government that they want to pay off the loans. And the government has told the banks, "Don't bother. We'd rather control you and set your policies and salaries."
There are two things wrong here.
The first is that the government wants to control private institutions. The last time this writer checked, there was no such thing as a national bank outside of the Federal Reserve. Now we find that the federal government wants to run as much of the banking system as it can; not for the protection of the bank customer, but for the idea of controlling the economy because the federal government "knows best." It's a frightening thought and a frightening reality.
The second matter of concern is that the federal government would rather not be repaid a debt in favor of control of the banks. In other words, instead of the money that was loaned to the banks being repaid to the taxpayer and the treasury, the federal government would rather spend your money to control something that really means nothing to you. The idea of control goes beyond the idea of being responsible to the customer (the taxpayer).
He who owns the debt owns he who is in debt. There is something almost Mafia-like about the whole thing.
On a second front, consider this: Michelle paints herself as the queen of arts - Times Online.
We here at the Manor have always been leery about government supported arts programs simply because such programs put the impretuer of official approval on said art. What business does the government have approving one type of art over another or on artist over another? The answer is, in the United States, none. There is no,and should not be, any official art,whether graphic, theatrical, literary or spoken word. The very idea of a national poet laureate is loathsome. The only art that the federal or state governments should even be remotely involved in is the architecture of government buildings and monuments. Consider the fact that even during the age of kings in Europe the said kings used their own money for art projects. Not that of their subjects.
But now we have an administration that seems to hold to the Stalinist theory of art. In other words, the government says what is art and anything outside of that is trash.
Get ready for the new opera, The East is Obama.
The late Baron Nib, a great man in every way, and the still living Baroness Nib, always made it a point to impress upon their scions that to be in debt was to be in a form of slavery. In other words, if you owe a person money you are at their beck and call until you re-pay the debt.
We have, as far as practicable, worked to keep out of debt. Whenever possible we pay cash because we do not want some busybody from American Express or the bank telling us that we are living in a manner that they do not approve. We, the ever lovely Lady Nib and myself, desire freedom more than luxury. We try to be, a much as possible, self-sufficient and self-responsible. We are, in that sense, rather old-fashioned, despite the fact that we just had our Wolsley sedan re-painted with a rather shocking hot pink paint job.
The Baron's comment concerning debt has been proven true recently. Some American banks which had received TARP (in other words, bail-out loans) from the United States government have stated that they have the cash, right now, to pay off their loans. They have told the government that they want to pay off the loans. And the government has told the banks, "Don't bother. We'd rather control you and set your policies and salaries."
There are two things wrong here.
The first is that the government wants to control private institutions. The last time this writer checked, there was no such thing as a national bank outside of the Federal Reserve. Now we find that the federal government wants to run as much of the banking system as it can; not for the protection of the bank customer, but for the idea of controlling the economy because the federal government "knows best." It's a frightening thought and a frightening reality.
The second matter of concern is that the federal government would rather not be repaid a debt in favor of control of the banks. In other words, instead of the money that was loaned to the banks being repaid to the taxpayer and the treasury, the federal government would rather spend your money to control something that really means nothing to you. The idea of control goes beyond the idea of being responsible to the customer (the taxpayer).
He who owns the debt owns he who is in debt. There is something almost Mafia-like about the whole thing.
On a second front, consider this: Michelle paints herself as the queen of arts - Times Online.
We here at the Manor have always been leery about government supported arts programs simply because such programs put the impretuer of official approval on said art. What business does the government have approving one type of art over another or on artist over another? The answer is, in the United States, none. There is no,and should not be, any official art,whether graphic, theatrical, literary or spoken word. The very idea of a national poet laureate is loathsome. The only art that the federal or state governments should even be remotely involved in is the architecture of government buildings and monuments. Consider the fact that even during the age of kings in Europe the said kings used their own money for art projects. Not that of their subjects.
But now we have an administration that seems to hold to the Stalinist theory of art. In other words, the government says what is art and anything outside of that is trash.
Get ready for the new opera, The East is Obama.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Dick Cheney. Private Dick?
Those who may be unfortunate enough to be readers of this blog may be old enough to recall the great age of the Private Detective novel or Private Detective television series. Such names as Mike Hammer, Shell Scott, Lew Archer, Phillip Marlowe, Peter Gunn, Jim Rockford, Richie Brockleman, or Magnum, may tug at one's heart strings in mourning for the days when the P.I. was the example of traditional American enterprise and "get it done-ness".
The P.I. was an example of what America was all about. The P.I. was an entrepenteur, an independent operator, and a man suspicious of the the government. He was a cynical man. He was cynical of the stated mores of society and of the government. He searched for truth and justice; not the niceties of law. Often, during his search for justice he found that the law was inadequate regarding justice. And while he searched, and suffered, during his search for justice and right, he often showed his flaws and sins. His life seemed to be have been made up of nothing more than booze, babes and bullets. His needs were simple. His life was simple. He looked at a world he thought cracked and crazy and saw himself as a normal man; not a man in the throes of angst. His personal life was private except for the occasional fling with a female client, female suspect, or his secretary. His weaknesses were for a shot of rye and a well-turned ankle (actually, more often a heaving full bosom). Introspection and self-flagellation was for the client; not him. He was a man comfortable in his skin. And because he was comfortable in his skin he was able to focus his attention on the problem. He always found the root of the problem despite the fact that his reward was a few hundred bucks, a shot of leg, a shot of bourbon and a Lucky Strike. He got spat upon, beat up, drunk, screwed (in more ways than one). And he worked for himself and his client in the search of justice (not government justice, but real justice).
The P.I. was, in fiction, the knight errant. He was a man looking for a cause despite his own flaws and sins. And he did so despite rotten pay and a lot of beatings. His cause was justice. And when the law conflicted with justice he chose justice.
Things have changed.
Now look at modern crime fiction and crime related television. Almost every one features a cop working for a government of some sort: CSI: Whatever, NCIS, Law and Order: Whatever, Without a Trace. Each television program shares a common thing: they all represent government agencies. They, along with all too many current crime novels, appeal to the government for justice and righteousness. In other words, the government says what is right and wrong instead of the moral right and wrong. The idea behind the programs and novels is that the government knows what is best, and that one should rely on the government to right legal wrongs. Forget about moral justice. The government knows all and if your adult sister is missing, and there is no legally found evidence that she is working in a Nevada brothel against her will , there is nothing the government sanctioned cops will do about it to rescue her. The law trumps all. The law is codified. It's a blueprint and it gives the CSI, Law and Order crowd indications of what to do and takes the burden of defining justice off their shoulders. And despite not having the burden of defining justice, the characters in current cop novels and series are so psychologically screwed up that it's a wonder that they can function. They drink too much occasionally and feel guilty about it. They bed a co-worker and feel guilty about it. They don't spend enough time with their wife and kids and feel guilty about it. They do the jobs for which the state has hired them and they feel conflicted about it. And when they perform acts of justice in favor of acts of law they do not only not celebrate the triumph of right over wrong, they crawl under the covers of their beds and fight through depression.
How times have changed. The great fictional French police detective, Jules Maigret, was a simple man with simple tastes (a good beer and a good meal), who sought justice and right and wrong and never lost a wink of sleep over it. Even the Swedish police detective, Martin Beck, probably the first of the depressed detectives and the precursor of what we have now, was more interested in justice than his own problems or the niceties of the law. Both detectives occasionally worked outside the system and felt no guilt about it. The only suffering that either character experienced from drinking too much were hangovers. Most of their suffering, in the trade, was based on dealing with the governments the worked for.
What we have come to is the dearth of the P.I. or cowboy in favor of the government paid salary man. Every damn thing is based on what the government says is right instead of what is right. The search for justice has become a slogan among government officials. The searchers for "truth" are expected to have more empathy for the perpetrator than the victim. One's inner demons are things to be embraced in the name of being "genuine." Instead of listening to jazz and watching the ponies run at the track, today's crime fighter watches Oprah and drinks Evian water. Perhaps that's the problem. The modern government sanctioned crime fighter drinks so much water that he or she has become diluted in every way.
The only characters in modern fiction approaching the classic private detective are historical detectives such as Ellis Peters' Brother Cadfael, Elizabeth Peters' Victorian Egyptologist mysteries and Lindsey Davis' Marcus Dido Falco series of detective novels. The P.I. has become passe', a museum piece.
It's enough to gag a maggot. And this maggot is gagging. Hard.
So we come to Dick Cheney versus Barack Obama.
Dick Cheney is the P.I. Dick Cheney is a hard man in search of justice and he is willing to twist an arm to get it. Dick Cheney sees the world as a cracked and crazy place and the survival of the American experiment depends on seeing those you would do us harm as the Other; the dangerous Other. He regards those who would attack the U.S. as rabid dogs to be put down. Mr.Cheney is close to the old Patriots -- suspicious of those values and traditions that are not American. And in this way he is like the P.I. who saw a black and white and called things black and white.
Barack Obama, on the other hand, is the Without a Trace government guy. Mr. Obama is conflicted about his identity. Is he a citizen of the United States or is he a citizen of the world? Do the laws of the United States trump those of the World Court? Is there such a thing as justice? Is the idea of buying the world a Coke imperialist? Mr. Obama seems to think that naivete in the matters of dealing with those who would do us harm a good thing. The excuse, when something bad happens will probably be something like, "They (the perpetrators) were true to their values, which are not our values, but are still valid nonetheless." One wonders if a crime were perpetrated against him or his family if his empathy would be the same. Mr. Obama seems to take Stalin's view: One death is a tragedy; a thousand deaths are a statistic.
Who do you want to help you when things get tough? A guy interested in justice or a guy interested in the niceties of law?
There is a right and a wrong, and the codified law of the United States has nothing to do with it.
If, during a Thanksgiving supper, would you rely on the cranky uncle (Dick Cheney) or the smart-assed nephew (Obama) as to what action to take against your asshole neighbor? Who would you rather try to find your missing sister? Mike Hammer? Or the CSI crew?
The P.I. was an example of what America was all about. The P.I. was an entrepenteur, an independent operator, and a man suspicious of the the government. He was a cynical man. He was cynical of the stated mores of society and of the government. He searched for truth and justice; not the niceties of law. Often, during his search for justice he found that the law was inadequate regarding justice. And while he searched, and suffered, during his search for justice and right, he often showed his flaws and sins. His life seemed to be have been made up of nothing more than booze, babes and bullets. His needs were simple. His life was simple. He looked at a world he thought cracked and crazy and saw himself as a normal man; not a man in the throes of angst. His personal life was private except for the occasional fling with a female client, female suspect, or his secretary. His weaknesses were for a shot of rye and a well-turned ankle (actually, more often a heaving full bosom). Introspection and self-flagellation was for the client; not him. He was a man comfortable in his skin. And because he was comfortable in his skin he was able to focus his attention on the problem. He always found the root of the problem despite the fact that his reward was a few hundred bucks, a shot of leg, a shot of bourbon and a Lucky Strike. He got spat upon, beat up, drunk, screwed (in more ways than one). And he worked for himself and his client in the search of justice (not government justice, but real justice).
The P.I. was, in fiction, the knight errant. He was a man looking for a cause despite his own flaws and sins. And he did so despite rotten pay and a lot of beatings. His cause was justice. And when the law conflicted with justice he chose justice.
Things have changed.
Now look at modern crime fiction and crime related television. Almost every one features a cop working for a government of some sort: CSI: Whatever, NCIS, Law and Order: Whatever, Without a Trace. Each television program shares a common thing: they all represent government agencies. They, along with all too many current crime novels, appeal to the government for justice and righteousness. In other words, the government says what is right and wrong instead of the moral right and wrong. The idea behind the programs and novels is that the government knows what is best, and that one should rely on the government to right legal wrongs. Forget about moral justice. The government knows all and if your adult sister is missing, and there is no legally found evidence that she is working in a Nevada brothel against her will , there is nothing the government sanctioned cops will do about it to rescue her. The law trumps all. The law is codified. It's a blueprint and it gives the CSI, Law and Order crowd indications of what to do and takes the burden of defining justice off their shoulders. And despite not having the burden of defining justice, the characters in current cop novels and series are so psychologically screwed up that it's a wonder that they can function. They drink too much occasionally and feel guilty about it. They bed a co-worker and feel guilty about it. They don't spend enough time with their wife and kids and feel guilty about it. They do the jobs for which the state has hired them and they feel conflicted about it. And when they perform acts of justice in favor of acts of law they do not only not celebrate the triumph of right over wrong, they crawl under the covers of their beds and fight through depression.
How times have changed. The great fictional French police detective, Jules Maigret, was a simple man with simple tastes (a good beer and a good meal), who sought justice and right and wrong and never lost a wink of sleep over it. Even the Swedish police detective, Martin Beck, probably the first of the depressed detectives and the precursor of what we have now, was more interested in justice than his own problems or the niceties of the law. Both detectives occasionally worked outside the system and felt no guilt about it. The only suffering that either character experienced from drinking too much were hangovers. Most of their suffering, in the trade, was based on dealing with the governments the worked for.
What we have come to is the dearth of the P.I. or cowboy in favor of the government paid salary man. Every damn thing is based on what the government says is right instead of what is right. The search for justice has become a slogan among government officials. The searchers for "truth" are expected to have more empathy for the perpetrator than the victim. One's inner demons are things to be embraced in the name of being "genuine." Instead of listening to jazz and watching the ponies run at the track, today's crime fighter watches Oprah and drinks Evian water. Perhaps that's the problem. The modern government sanctioned crime fighter drinks so much water that he or she has become diluted in every way.
The only characters in modern fiction approaching the classic private detective are historical detectives such as Ellis Peters' Brother Cadfael, Elizabeth Peters' Victorian Egyptologist mysteries and Lindsey Davis' Marcus Dido Falco series of detective novels. The P.I. has become passe', a museum piece.
It's enough to gag a maggot. And this maggot is gagging. Hard.
So we come to Dick Cheney versus Barack Obama.
Dick Cheney is the P.I. Dick Cheney is a hard man in search of justice and he is willing to twist an arm to get it. Dick Cheney sees the world as a cracked and crazy place and the survival of the American experiment depends on seeing those you would do us harm as the Other; the dangerous Other. He regards those who would attack the U.S. as rabid dogs to be put down. Mr.Cheney is close to the old Patriots -- suspicious of those values and traditions that are not American. And in this way he is like the P.I. who saw a black and white and called things black and white.
Barack Obama, on the other hand, is the Without a Trace government guy. Mr. Obama is conflicted about his identity. Is he a citizen of the United States or is he a citizen of the world? Do the laws of the United States trump those of the World Court? Is there such a thing as justice? Is the idea of buying the world a Coke imperialist? Mr. Obama seems to think that naivete in the matters of dealing with those who would do us harm a good thing. The excuse, when something bad happens will probably be something like, "They (the perpetrators) were true to their values, which are not our values, but are still valid nonetheless." One wonders if a crime were perpetrated against him or his family if his empathy would be the same. Mr. Obama seems to take Stalin's view: One death is a tragedy; a thousand deaths are a statistic.
Who do you want to help you when things get tough? A guy interested in justice or a guy interested in the niceties of law?
There is a right and a wrong, and the codified law of the United States has nothing to do with it.
If, during a Thanksgiving supper, would you rely on the cranky uncle (Dick Cheney) or the smart-assed nephew (Obama) as to what action to take against your asshole neighbor? Who would you rather try to find your missing sister? Mike Hammer? Or the CSI crew?
Sunday, May 17, 2009
It's For the Children!
How many times in your life have you heard the cry by a politician, union official, or general busybody that the passage of a certain law (usually involving a tax raise) or spending measure (usually involving a tax raise) that the bill or measure was, "for the children." The issues that "are for the children" range from free medical care, government paid pre-school, midnight basketball, computers for schools and on and on and on ad infinitum.
The current administrations of both the United States and the State of California are pulling out the "for the children" card in a big way. And if one were to look closely at the matter, what both those entities are creating for the children is a big. big debt. Some one has to pay for these programs and there is just not enough money flowing now to pay for them. The result is that the payments for programs "for the children" will be paid for by the children and their children and perhaps their children.
In California, because of the budget deficit, there is a movement afoot to raise taxes to pay for educational programs and give teachers (California teachers are the highest paid in the nation) a pay raise. They seem to get a pay raise every year while people in the private sector are now lucky to get one every two or three years. In Los Angeles a number of teachers mounted a demonstration protesting projected lay-offs by the school district crying that the demonstrations were "for the children." It should be noted that the demonstration was organized by the Los Angeles teachers' union (United Teachers of Los Angeles). In other words, the action as a union action and not a grassroots action.
Years ago the president of the Associated Federation of Teachers (a nation-wide umbrella union for teacher), Albert Shanker, said that everything he did and every action he organized was not for the children. It was for union members. He said, "I'll start representing the concerns of students when students start paying union dues."
Remember that. Remember it well and expand the thought. Most of the cries of programs and concerns "for the children" are really actions benefiting those who work with children.
In Japan the cost of educating students is much less than it is in the lowest spending district in the US, but the Japanese educational system produces a better product than the average American school district. If the rulers of this nation had any damn sense at all they would outsource education to Japan instead of putting up with the nonsense that the airy-fairy pedagogues that determine educational policy here.
When you hear the cry, "It's for the children!" just reply, "Who cares? It's not my kid. I take care of my kid and don't expect the stated to do it."
The current administrations of both the United States and the State of California are pulling out the "for the children" card in a big way. And if one were to look closely at the matter, what both those entities are creating for the children is a big. big debt. Some one has to pay for these programs and there is just not enough money flowing now to pay for them. The result is that the payments for programs "for the children" will be paid for by the children and their children and perhaps their children.
In California, because of the budget deficit, there is a movement afoot to raise taxes to pay for educational programs and give teachers (California teachers are the highest paid in the nation) a pay raise. They seem to get a pay raise every year while people in the private sector are now lucky to get one every two or three years. In Los Angeles a number of teachers mounted a demonstration protesting projected lay-offs by the school district crying that the demonstrations were "for the children." It should be noted that the demonstration was organized by the Los Angeles teachers' union (United Teachers of Los Angeles). In other words, the action as a union action and not a grassroots action.
Years ago the president of the Associated Federation of Teachers (a nation-wide umbrella union for teacher), Albert Shanker, said that everything he did and every action he organized was not for the children. It was for union members. He said, "I'll start representing the concerns of students when students start paying union dues."
Remember that. Remember it well and expand the thought. Most of the cries of programs and concerns "for the children" are really actions benefiting those who work with children.
In Japan the cost of educating students is much less than it is in the lowest spending district in the US, but the Japanese educational system produces a better product than the average American school district. If the rulers of this nation had any damn sense at all they would outsource education to Japan instead of putting up with the nonsense that the airy-fairy pedagogues that determine educational policy here.
When you hear the cry, "It's for the children!" just reply, "Who cares? It's not my kid. I take care of my kid and don't expect the stated to do it."
Men in Hats
It's been a while since this writer has offered a new edition of the Men in Hats feature. To make up for the neglect of this feature, he offers two photos of men from the Old West wearing hats.
The first image is of Wild Bill Hickcock -- scout, Indian fighter, lawman, gun fighter, gambler and some one you really wouldn't want your daughter to marry. He was killed by being shot in the back while playing poker. The poker hand he held at the time he was shot was Aces and eights; since known at the Deadman's Hand. The hat he wears in the photo is of the old sombrero type cowboy hat with a flat crown and very broad brim; a good hat to wear in the sun, though of questionable value in high winds.
The second photo is of the great William F. Cody i.e., Buffalo Bill Cody. Cody was an Indian fighter, buffalo hunter, scout and showman. With his Wild West shows he brought the Wild West to the East and Europe complete with Indians, cattle stampedes and shooting exhibitions. He, unlike Hickcock, died well-off and peacefully. The hat he wears in this photo is more of a dress/dude type of hat with the right side of the brim tilted up like an Aussie digger hat. It's not a bad hat, but the tilted brim makes it not much good for being in the sun. It does give clearance for the carrying of a rifle at shoulder arms, though.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Your Tax Dollars at Work
Your faithful correspondent takes no back seat to anyone in his love and desire for Asian women. After all, the every lovely Lady Nib was born and partially raise in Yokohama.
But this is really going too far: CNSNews.com - U.S. Will Pay $2.6 Million to Train Chinese Prostitutes to Drink Responsibly on the Job
But this is really going too far: CNSNews.com - U.S. Will Pay $2.6 Million to Train Chinese Prostitutes to Drink Responsibly on the Job
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Just links. No Comments
Consider this:
It's time lily-livered Europe stood up to Muslim bigots | Opinion | The First Post
And this:
The Spectator
And finally, this:
Cheney: Obama endangers the nation - Washington Times
It's time lily-livered Europe stood up to Muslim bigots | Opinion | The First Post
And this:
The Spectator
And finally, this:
Cheney: Obama endangers the nation - Washington Times
Sunday, May 03, 2009
Men in Hats
It's been a while since your faithful correspondent has offered a Men in Hats post. So please consider the following. the above is of the popular Buffalo Bill (the lower photo). Note the rakish tilt of the brim. And if anyone should make a denigration of Mr. Cody, please remember that Mr. Cody was not only a buffalo hunter, but also an Indian fighter.
The top photo is Wild Bill Hickock. A killer, to be sure, but a killer of the right sort. He wears a broad brimmed sombrero proudly as a man should wear his hat. It's just too bad that he didn't die in bed instead of on a bar room floor.
Life just isn't fair sometimes.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
This and That
When this writer was a sprite people (usually men) who wrote news stories for newspapers or reported the news on television and the radio were called either "newspaper men" or "news reporters." The word journalist was reserved for writers who had done a bit of research after an event and generally took the long view of a story or issue. Newspaper men wrote the first version of a story. Journalists usually looked at the story after the dust had settled.
Nowadays every damn one who can wield a pencil, pound a keyboard or text-message and get their scribblings published on paper, broadcast over the air or appear on an Internet site thinks that they are a journalist and are cultural descendants of Richard Harding Davis, Jack London or Heywood Broun. Of course they are not. They are akin to people who perform in pornographic films and then call themselves "actors." And the present day "journalist" sees him or her self as brave courageous and true and consider themselves akin to Ambrose Bierce covering the Mexican Revolution or Ernie Pyle covering the Battle of Saipan i.e., telling the truth in spite of danger for the sake of getting the story out to the reader. But when push comes to shove, the present day scribes are really not as brave or heroic as they claim they are. Is there really anything brave about questioning the President's statements or positions. It's not like the Secret Service is going to arrest the scribe for asking the One about why he didn't adopt a shelter mutt instead of getting a purebred as a gift from that paragon of morality Ted Kennedy (more on him later).
Most journalists claiming to try to get the scoop from closed societies end up modelling Walter Duranty, who spent the 1930s reporting from the Soviet Union that Stalin was a pussycat and that the average worker in Russia was living better than the average worker in the US. For an example of the children of Duranty just read any mainstream media story about Cuba, Vietnam or Mainland China. If the stories were printed in Excelsior in Mexico City or La Opinion in Los Angeles there would not be an illegal alien problem in the Southwest. All the wetbacks would be running to Cuba, Vietnam or China.
Recently three journalist with more ambition than sense have found themselves under arrest and, in one case, convicted of espionage while attempting to report from nations that are hostile, not only to the Western way of life, but to almost everyone except themselves:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Why is Hollywood Silent on Roxana Saberi?
US journalists to face criminal trial in North Korea | World news | guardian.co.uk
All three women involved probably got into the situations they find themselves in for what they saw as the best of journalistic intentions; they wanted to report a truth from Iran or North Korea and they seem to have thought that their jobs as journalists would protect them from the bad intentions of the nations they hoped to write about. They forgot that in some nations a card stuck in the hatband of a fedora reading "Press" means to some people that they will report what the host country wants. Wielding a pen and notepad doesn't do much when one is in handcuffs. Refugees from Korea and Iran have told many stories about life in those two nations and none of them have been good. One wonders why these reporters decided that it would be a good idea to run to a place that other people risk their lives to escape. They did not seem to realize that not all oppressive governments are as friendly as Cuba.
But the lack of wisdom on the part of the three reporters is no reason for arrest and/or conviction. The reporters are now being used as tools by the Norks and the Iranians. And the only comment that your faithful correspondent has heard from the Obama administration concerned the case of Roxana Saberi ; "This is troubling." That's all. No outrage. No statements about the sanctity of the free press. No loud protests about the illegal arrests of American citizens. The lack of a strong stand on the part of the administration is troubling and makes one more convinced that our Chief Executive is a soft man willing to ditch three reporters in an attempt to make nice with our enemies. Even more troubling is the lack of coverage of the stories by the mainstream press. But the press has, for years, shown themselves to be the whore that we all knew they were.
The other day our Dear Leader declared that from now on September 11 will be federally recognized as a National Day of Service and that the signing of the proclamation would be known as the Edward Kennedy Act. The idea behind the proclamation is that every September 11 all citizens should volunteer to do something to make life better for the nation, whether it be cleaning a vacant lot, feeding the homeless, painting over graffiti, et al. It's a nice little bubblegum factory thought arrived at by a nice little bubblegum mindset. The problem is that the declaration of a National Day of Service come damn close to a mandatory volunteerism (an oxymoron if ever there was one) burdened upon the citizens of the United States. And the declaration shows a great lack of understanding of what the United States and the Constitution is all about. Historically, the citizens of this great nation have not been loath to volunteer to help their neighbors or the nation. But this volunteerism has been voluntary. It has not been mandatory. No one, in the past, held the threat of jail or a fine over some one's head to make them shore up a levee or work in a soup kitchen. Volunteerism is a matter of conscience, not law. Or at least it used to be. We are entering a new world with newspeak.
For some reason the One named the volunteer act after Edward Kennedy. Those of us of a certain age know that Mr. Kennedy is not exactly a paragon of virtue or morality. He has been in the past at least partially responsible for the death of a youth woman he is suspected of having an affair with, a drunk, a liar an, adulterer, a spender of other peoples' money while he sits on his own, a hypocrite and a bad Catholic pretending to be a good Catholic. Ted Kennedy is a living example that if one has the right name and lives long enough a scoundrel can become a saint in the public eye. One wonders how Errol Flynn would have been regarded if he had lived into his seventies. So, if you plan to live a long life and behave badly, don't bother to reform. You'll become known as a sweet old man or old woman with a past, and thus a colorful character like Charles Bukowski. Or Ted Kennedy.
This writer is a man and is able to write only from a male point of view, so if any women are unable to relate to the following he apologizes in advance.
Have you ever been walking or driving down the street and seen a pretty young woman walking down the street? In your dotage you say to yourself something like, "What a lovely young woman." Then she reaches into her back pocket or purse, pulls out a cellular phone and starts yakking on the damn thing, either receiving or making a phone call. For your faithful correspondent this particular action turns a lovely young woman into a yakker. Even worse is when she starts texting. And the reason is that such actions show that the young woman has no interior life. She is a person who feels the need to be "connected"n with her friends to such an extent that she is unable to go more than a couple of hours without telling her pals something like: "M @ Nordies lking @ shus" or hearing that her friend is at the library studying Pride and Prejudice. Can you imagine being married to such a woman? She feels that she has to share everything with her friends and share everything from her friends. God help the man who marries this woman. One can almost read the text message to her friends on the wedding night: "Had sex w/ Brad. Premature ejaculation! Again! LOL!"
Nowadays every damn one who can wield a pencil, pound a keyboard or text-message and get their scribblings published on paper, broadcast over the air or appear on an Internet site thinks that they are a journalist and are cultural descendants of Richard Harding Davis, Jack London or Heywood Broun. Of course they are not. They are akin to people who perform in pornographic films and then call themselves "actors." And the present day "journalist" sees him or her self as brave courageous and true and consider themselves akin to Ambrose Bierce covering the Mexican Revolution or Ernie Pyle covering the Battle of Saipan i.e., telling the truth in spite of danger for the sake of getting the story out to the reader. But when push comes to shove, the present day scribes are really not as brave or heroic as they claim they are. Is there really anything brave about questioning the President's statements or positions. It's not like the Secret Service is going to arrest the scribe for asking the One about why he didn't adopt a shelter mutt instead of getting a purebred as a gift from that paragon of morality Ted Kennedy (more on him later).
Most journalists claiming to try to get the scoop from closed societies end up modelling Walter Duranty, who spent the 1930s reporting from the Soviet Union that Stalin was a pussycat and that the average worker in Russia was living better than the average worker in the US. For an example of the children of Duranty just read any mainstream media story about Cuba, Vietnam or Mainland China. If the stories were printed in Excelsior in Mexico City or La Opinion in Los Angeles there would not be an illegal alien problem in the Southwest. All the wetbacks would be running to Cuba, Vietnam or China.
Recently three journalist with more ambition than sense have found themselves under arrest and, in one case, convicted of espionage while attempting to report from nations that are hostile, not only to the Western way of life, but to almost everyone except themselves:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Why is Hollywood Silent on Roxana Saberi?
US journalists to face criminal trial in North Korea | World news | guardian.co.uk
All three women involved probably got into the situations they find themselves in for what they saw as the best of journalistic intentions; they wanted to report a truth from Iran or North Korea and they seem to have thought that their jobs as journalists would protect them from the bad intentions of the nations they hoped to write about. They forgot that in some nations a card stuck in the hatband of a fedora reading "Press" means to some people that they will report what the host country wants. Wielding a pen and notepad doesn't do much when one is in handcuffs. Refugees from Korea and Iran have told many stories about life in those two nations and none of them have been good. One wonders why these reporters decided that it would be a good idea to run to a place that other people risk their lives to escape. They did not seem to realize that not all oppressive governments are as friendly as Cuba.
But the lack of wisdom on the part of the three reporters is no reason for arrest and/or conviction. The reporters are now being used as tools by the Norks and the Iranians. And the only comment that your faithful correspondent has heard from the Obama administration concerned the case of Roxana Saberi ; "This is troubling." That's all. No outrage. No statements about the sanctity of the free press. No loud protests about the illegal arrests of American citizens. The lack of a strong stand on the part of the administration is troubling and makes one more convinced that our Chief Executive is a soft man willing to ditch three reporters in an attempt to make nice with our enemies. Even more troubling is the lack of coverage of the stories by the mainstream press. But the press has, for years, shown themselves to be the whore that we all knew they were.
The other day our Dear Leader declared that from now on September 11 will be federally recognized as a National Day of Service and that the signing of the proclamation would be known as the Edward Kennedy Act. The idea behind the proclamation is that every September 11 all citizens should volunteer to do something to make life better for the nation, whether it be cleaning a vacant lot, feeding the homeless, painting over graffiti, et al. It's a nice little bubblegum factory thought arrived at by a nice little bubblegum mindset. The problem is that the declaration of a National Day of Service come damn close to a mandatory volunteerism (an oxymoron if ever there was one) burdened upon the citizens of the United States. And the declaration shows a great lack of understanding of what the United States and the Constitution is all about. Historically, the citizens of this great nation have not been loath to volunteer to help their neighbors or the nation. But this volunteerism has been voluntary. It has not been mandatory. No one, in the past, held the threat of jail or a fine over some one's head to make them shore up a levee or work in a soup kitchen. Volunteerism is a matter of conscience, not law. Or at least it used to be. We are entering a new world with newspeak.
For some reason the One named the volunteer act after Edward Kennedy. Those of us of a certain age know that Mr. Kennedy is not exactly a paragon of virtue or morality. He has been in the past at least partially responsible for the death of a youth woman he is suspected of having an affair with, a drunk, a liar an, adulterer, a spender of other peoples' money while he sits on his own, a hypocrite and a bad Catholic pretending to be a good Catholic. Ted Kennedy is a living example that if one has the right name and lives long enough a scoundrel can become a saint in the public eye. One wonders how Errol Flynn would have been regarded if he had lived into his seventies. So, if you plan to live a long life and behave badly, don't bother to reform. You'll become known as a sweet old man or old woman with a past, and thus a colorful character like Charles Bukowski. Or Ted Kennedy.
This writer is a man and is able to write only from a male point of view, so if any women are unable to relate to the following he apologizes in advance.
Have you ever been walking or driving down the street and seen a pretty young woman walking down the street? In your dotage you say to yourself something like, "What a lovely young woman." Then she reaches into her back pocket or purse, pulls out a cellular phone and starts yakking on the damn thing, either receiving or making a phone call. For your faithful correspondent this particular action turns a lovely young woman into a yakker. Even worse is when she starts texting. And the reason is that such actions show that the young woman has no interior life. She is a person who feels the need to be "connected"n with her friends to such an extent that she is unable to go more than a couple of hours without telling her pals something like: "M @ Nordies lking @ shus" or hearing that her friend is at the library studying Pride and Prejudice. Can you imagine being married to such a woman? She feels that she has to share everything with her friends and share everything from her friends. God help the man who marries this woman. One can almost read the text message to her friends on the wedding night: "Had sex w/ Brad. Premature ejaculation! Again! LOL!"
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Grumpasauris
Have you ever awoken one day in a bad mood and the bad mood seems to go on from day to day to day? After awhile the people you live with and work with start commenting that you are a grump and that you willfully refuse to see the good side of anything.
Let's face it. No one wants to be known as a grump or a curmudgeon for more than five minutes because to exceed the five minute limit is to pretty much close one out from invitations to lawn bowling parties, quiz nights at the local pub, and the attentions of young lovelies wearing tight sweaters and tight skirts (the latter does not apply in France where the young have been indoctrinated into Sartrean Existentialism, and thus a state of depression lasting from the ages of eighteen to twenty-eight). One finds one's self sitting in the corner of the local King's Head with other grumps and joykillers, both male and female, in an aura of too many too strong beers and pipe tobacco smoke talking to one another like the Finnish Debating Society i.e., "The world is going to hell." "Uhm." "Ah." "Ja."
No one wants to spend time with a grump, especially jeune filles wearing tight sweaters and tight skirts, and it ends up for the grump being a pretty lonely life filled with the conversations of other grumps. One becomes known as a "character" or an "eccentric." Truth to be told, one would probably be much happier and more appreciated by the public at large (especially by the local jung freulien wearing a tight sweater and tight skirt) if one decided to try to spool knit the longest spool knitting piece ever known to man or if one donned tan tights and leotard with brown hood and cape and called oneself Captain Beano: Super Hero.
It must be admitted by this writer that some thirty years ago he woke up one day in a bad mood and it has since that day thirty years of grumpiness. It hasn't been easy being the wet towel on the party, but, after so many years of the disease, this writer has finally realized that there is a value to being a grump. That value is a damping of irrational exuberance. Exuberance is fine when the dawn arrives with rosy fingers promising a fine day, but more often than not there are storm clouds that the optimist refuses to see. It's not the grump's fault that the optimist is soaking wet and cold by noon. The grump gave his warning. The grump realizes that in front of every silver lining is a cloud.
Burt Prelutsky, a writer this correspondent has read on and off for many years, seems to appreciate the value and the state of being a grump much better than the average Pollyanna:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » We Should All Be a Little Cranky
And if any lassies who like wearing tight sweaters and tight skirts and who ride Raleigh 3-Speed bicycles should read this entry, please do not hesitate to ride by the Manor to comfort an old grump. The fragrance of lilac or lavender on a woman has always managed to soften this writer's sharp edges.
Let's face it. No one wants to be known as a grump or a curmudgeon for more than five minutes because to exceed the five minute limit is to pretty much close one out from invitations to lawn bowling parties, quiz nights at the local pub, and the attentions of young lovelies wearing tight sweaters and tight skirts (the latter does not apply in France where the young have been indoctrinated into Sartrean Existentialism, and thus a state of depression lasting from the ages of eighteen to twenty-eight). One finds one's self sitting in the corner of the local King's Head with other grumps and joykillers, both male and female, in an aura of too many too strong beers and pipe tobacco smoke talking to one another like the Finnish Debating Society i.e., "The world is going to hell." "Uhm." "Ah." "Ja."
No one wants to spend time with a grump, especially jeune filles wearing tight sweaters and tight skirts, and it ends up for the grump being a pretty lonely life filled with the conversations of other grumps. One becomes known as a "character" or an "eccentric." Truth to be told, one would probably be much happier and more appreciated by the public at large (especially by the local jung freulien wearing a tight sweater and tight skirt) if one decided to try to spool knit the longest spool knitting piece ever known to man or if one donned tan tights and leotard with brown hood and cape and called oneself Captain Beano: Super Hero.
It must be admitted by this writer that some thirty years ago he woke up one day in a bad mood and it has since that day thirty years of grumpiness. It hasn't been easy being the wet towel on the party, but, after so many years of the disease, this writer has finally realized that there is a value to being a grump. That value is a damping of irrational exuberance. Exuberance is fine when the dawn arrives with rosy fingers promising a fine day, but more often than not there are storm clouds that the optimist refuses to see. It's not the grump's fault that the optimist is soaking wet and cold by noon. The grump gave his warning. The grump realizes that in front of every silver lining is a cloud.
Burt Prelutsky, a writer this correspondent has read on and off for many years, seems to appreciate the value and the state of being a grump much better than the average Pollyanna:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » We Should All Be a Little Cranky
And if any lassies who like wearing tight sweaters and tight skirts and who ride Raleigh 3-Speed bicycles should read this entry, please do not hesitate to ride by the Manor to comfort an old grump. The fragrance of lilac or lavender on a woman has always managed to soften this writer's sharp edges.
Sunday, April 05, 2009
Links Galore!
Here are some links from people how know more than your faithful correspondent does:
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » You’ve Been Warned
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Apocalypse Near? Liberal Actresses Line Up to Star in ‘Atlas Shrugged’
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Are We a Nation of Serfs?
Regarding the second link, this writer's grandfather, Baron Bill of Talequa, was a man who liked women. He was a shameless flirt and asked every waitress. nurse or shopgirl he ever met for a date even after he was married, though it has been assumed that he was faithful to his wife. He just liked women and enjoyed talking to women. But one type of woman he had no use for was actresses. He liked movies and liked looking at actresses on the screen, but he had a low opinion of the species. When asked why he had such a low view of female thespians his reply was, "Because they're whores. They care for nothing but money."
Baron Bill was not an educated man, but he knew the score.
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » You’ve Been Warned
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Apocalypse Near? Liberal Actresses Line Up to Star in ‘Atlas Shrugged’
Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Are We a Nation of Serfs?
Regarding the second link, this writer's grandfather, Baron Bill of Talequa, was a man who liked women. He was a shameless flirt and asked every waitress. nurse or shopgirl he ever met for a date even after he was married, though it has been assumed that he was faithful to his wife. He just liked women and enjoyed talking to women. But one type of woman he had no use for was actresses. He liked movies and liked looking at actresses on the screen, but he had a low opinion of the species. When asked why he had such a low view of female thespians his reply was, "Because they're whores. They care for nothing but money."
Baron Bill was not an educated man, but he knew the score.
Marooned Without a Hope (But Lots of Change)
In the 1930s the character actor made a couple of films that took place during the Age of Sail.
The most famous film was Treasure Island co-starring Jackie Cooper as Jim Hawkins in which Beery played the part of pirate/mutineer Long John Silver. The second film was called Slave Ship co-starring Mickey Rooney.
In one of the films the character played by Beery, in describing when he and several other sailors were castaway or marooned, said, "All they left us was a bag of salt and a little black boy."
It is the opinion of this writer that, since the inauguration, we, the working citizen of this great Republic, have been left with a bag of salt and a little black boy. To make matters worse, our elected leaders have deigned to tax away our bag of salt and the little black boy has somehow taken command of the lifeboat.
As you faithful correspondent has written previously, we are a nation now led by children. Do you remember the student council elections in grade school. During those elections the students running for student body president promised that, if elected, they would have Kool-Aid squirting out of the drinking fountains. Our Dear Leader came close to promising the same thing and the result was that the voting population drank the Kool-Aid a'la Jonestown. Why wait for the Second Coming of Christ when we have the first coming of The One? What the Hell? We might as well party like it's 1999 and let our kids and grand kids pick up the tab.
Now O has decided that the nation is ready for "mandatory volunteerism". If the preceding phrase seems an oxymoron consider the fact that modern politics is a concrete oxymoron. Just prepare yourself for the sight of thousands of brown-shirted youth (more likely rainbow-shirted youth) coming into your neighborhood insisting that they help you even if you don't want the help. And all the time they will be chanting something to the effect of, "We're from the government and we're here to help you by the kindness of the Messiah whether you want it or not."
You have two choices: Build a deep moat and fill it with piranhas or pretend that you're not home when they knock on your door. There is one other option, if you're not willing to submit to the benevolent dictatorship of President Hopeandchange. Buy a sailboat and head to the Marquesa Islands.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
The most famous film was Treasure Island co-starring Jackie Cooper as Jim Hawkins in which Beery played the part of pirate/mutineer Long John Silver. The second film was called Slave Ship co-starring Mickey Rooney.
In one of the films the character played by Beery, in describing when he and several other sailors were castaway or marooned, said, "All they left us was a bag of salt and a little black boy."
It is the opinion of this writer that, since the inauguration, we, the working citizen of this great Republic, have been left with a bag of salt and a little black boy. To make matters worse, our elected leaders have deigned to tax away our bag of salt and the little black boy has somehow taken command of the lifeboat.
As you faithful correspondent has written previously, we are a nation now led by children. Do you remember the student council elections in grade school. During those elections the students running for student body president promised that, if elected, they would have Kool-Aid squirting out of the drinking fountains. Our Dear Leader came close to promising the same thing and the result was that the voting population drank the Kool-Aid a'la Jonestown. Why wait for the Second Coming of Christ when we have the first coming of The One? What the Hell? We might as well party like it's 1999 and let our kids and grand kids pick up the tab.
Now O has decided that the nation is ready for "mandatory volunteerism". If the preceding phrase seems an oxymoron consider the fact that modern politics is a concrete oxymoron. Just prepare yourself for the sight of thousands of brown-shirted youth (more likely rainbow-shirted youth) coming into your neighborhood insisting that they help you even if you don't want the help. And all the time they will be chanting something to the effect of, "We're from the government and we're here to help you by the kindness of the Messiah whether you want it or not."
You have two choices: Build a deep moat and fill it with piranhas or pretend that you're not home when they knock on your door. There is one other option, if you're not willing to submit to the benevolent dictatorship of President Hopeandchange. Buy a sailboat and head to the Marquesa Islands.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Growing a Spine?
For some time this writer has wondered if the term, "the village atheist" should replaced with the term "the village Christian."
While you faithful correspondent is aware that most of the population of the United States is nominally Christian, he is also aware that the media, many popular Christian leaders and many vocal Roman Catholic clerics belong to the "kumbaya" school of Christianity , i.e. widely ecumenical with a view that traditional Christianity is oppressive, non-accepting, ignorant, blah, blah blah, while Islam is misunderstood, paganism is loving and atheists are just the cat's meow because they call Baptist idiots and Catholics tools of Rome.
Finally some Christian leaders are saying, "No pasaran!"
Bishop of Rochester resigns to become defender of persecuted Christians - Telegraph
Archbishop confronts BBC Director General over its treatment of religion - Telegraph
Now, a U.S. cardinal denounces Notre Dame's Obama invite | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times
One wonders how long it will be before an archbishop or bishop or well-known priest or pastor will challenge PBS on it's religion coverage. Don't hold your breath.
While you faithful correspondent is aware that most of the population of the United States is nominally Christian, he is also aware that the media, many popular Christian leaders and many vocal Roman Catholic clerics belong to the "kumbaya" school of Christianity , i.e. widely ecumenical with a view that traditional Christianity is oppressive, non-accepting, ignorant, blah, blah blah, while Islam is misunderstood, paganism is loving and atheists are just the cat's meow because they call Baptist idiots and Catholics tools of Rome.
Finally some Christian leaders are saying, "No pasaran!"
Bishop of Rochester resigns to become defender of persecuted Christians - Telegraph
Archbishop confronts BBC Director General over its treatment of religion - Telegraph
Now, a U.S. cardinal denounces Notre Dame's Obama invite | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times
One wonders how long it will be before an archbishop or bishop or well-known priest or pastor will challenge PBS on it's religion coverage. Don't hold your breath.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
The Czechs Get It. We Don't
As you watch these three videos ask yourself if such a story would be shown on American television.
Gates of Vienna: Undercover as a Muslim in Prague
And after you've watched the videos ask yourself, "What the Hell's happened to the culture of this country?" We can't even stand up for our values and heritage without some idiot trying to make us feel guilty for what we are and hold dear.
Gates of Vienna: Undercover as a Muslim in Prague
And after you've watched the videos ask yourself, "What the Hell's happened to the culture of this country?" We can't even stand up for our values and heritage without some idiot trying to make us feel guilty for what we are and hold dear.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
The Children's Hour
Many years ago the singer/comedian/television personality Tennessee Ernie Ford used to perform a comedy routine in which he would open a road map, find the route to his destination and then attempt to properly re-fold the map. The end result of the effort was an angrily balled up sheet of paper thrown into a trash can and a forgotten journey.
Something tells me that we are about to experience the same thing as a nation because we are being governed by impatient shallow thinking children. The accomplishment of small tasks reflect the ability to accomplish large tasks.
Our Dear Leader has shown himself to be able to insult our British cousins several times and attempt to brush it off by saying that he is tired and preoccupied:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Great news: Obama fumbled Brown visit because he’s in over his head
Now, admittedly, The One cannot be expected to look after all matters of diplomatic protocol when dealing with foreign leaders. That's why he has a director of Diplomatic Protocol. But, apparently Mr. Obama hired a slacker for the job. His office's reaction to Prime Minster Brown's visit seems like an episode of King of the Hill i.e. " Peg! The Browns are coming over for supper. Rustle up some Hamburger Helper and I'll go by Wal-Mart and buy some DVDs for them and a couple of Tonka truck for their boys."
Meanwhile, our Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham-Clinton, has shown herself to be as clueless as her boss:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Hillary competes with Geithner for competence nadir
When she's not forgetting the names of world leaders or using Babble-fish instead of a proper Russian translator, she's bemoaning the lack of privacy that she's allowed herself. She's not Tallyrandian. She's Oprahatic.
And that makes this writer sleep soundly at night because the only way he can sleep well with this bunch of jokers steering the ship of state is to take sleeping pills. Lots of them.
Something tells me that we are about to experience the same thing as a nation because we are being governed by impatient shallow thinking children. The accomplishment of small tasks reflect the ability to accomplish large tasks.
Our Dear Leader has shown himself to be able to insult our British cousins several times and attempt to brush it off by saying that he is tired and preoccupied:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Great news: Obama fumbled Brown visit because he’s in over his head
Now, admittedly, The One cannot be expected to look after all matters of diplomatic protocol when dealing with foreign leaders. That's why he has a director of Diplomatic Protocol. But, apparently Mr. Obama hired a slacker for the job. His office's reaction to Prime Minster Brown's visit seems like an episode of King of the Hill i.e. " Peg! The Browns are coming over for supper. Rustle up some Hamburger Helper and I'll go by Wal-Mart and buy some DVDs for them and a couple of Tonka truck for their boys."
Meanwhile, our Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham-Clinton, has shown herself to be as clueless as her boss:
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Hillary competes with Geithner for competence nadir
When she's not forgetting the names of world leaders or using Babble-fish instead of a proper Russian translator, she's bemoaning the lack of privacy that she's allowed herself. She's not Tallyrandian. She's Oprahatic.
And that makes this writer sleep soundly at night because the only way he can sleep well with this bunch of jokers steering the ship of state is to take sleeping pills. Lots of them.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
We're free (to act badly)
Your faithful correspondent has made it a point to avoid mentioning the policies and ideas put forth by Mr. Barack Obama since his inauguration as President of the United States. The reason for this reluctance to address President Obama's silliness is the same as giving a rookie a pass in baseball early in the season.
The normal period of time for the Presidential rookie pass is 100 days. But Mr. Obama has shown himself to be such a busy termite that yours has no choice but to comment before out Dear Leader decides to take control of the Internet and blogs.
So here's the deal from Nib Manor.
In the past month Mr. Obama has done a dire dis-service to the American people. In his desire to level the playing field of life he has denied the American people the freedom of personal responsibility. He has denied them the freedom to succeed and he has denied them the freedom to fail.
What more need be said?
The normal period of time for the Presidential rookie pass is 100 days. But Mr. Obama has shown himself to be such a busy termite that yours has no choice but to comment before out Dear Leader decides to take control of the Internet and blogs.
So here's the deal from Nib Manor.
In the past month Mr. Obama has done a dire dis-service to the American people. In his desire to level the playing field of life he has denied the American people the freedom of personal responsibility. He has denied them the freedom to succeed and he has denied them the freedom to fail.
What more need be said?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)