Recent Articles
Obamazombies and us (Living with the Left)
by Blake on Jun 19, 2009 at 10:10 Posted in Political 27 Comments
Well, it’s now been around 160 or so days since our Esteamed Lowliness has been installed, and we have been slowly been having to become accustomed to the new phenomenon known as Obamazombies. These are the people who have had their brains eaten, (especially the logic centers), and now seek to transform the rest of us into, well, them. A horrifying thought, I know- having these creatures seeking real brains is somewhat unsettling- for them a mental time- out is forever, and they just keep mindlessly coming, senselessly groping for meaning in their lives.
In truth, zombies should be boring. There are only so many things you can do with them, narratively speaking. They can’t charm you, like vampires, or make you pity them as they relate their torment while in human form, like werewolves. They clumsily lope after you, hoping to feast on your flesh, and they have almost no personality as individuals. Instead, zombie mobs are just an undifferentiated mass of malevolence. What’s remarkable is that a villain with such little complexity has thrived for so long.
prospect.org
In the movies, the characters who still have brains and want to keep them must shoot the zombies in the head, which makes little sense, but that’s the movies- in real life, we must suffer these mindless fools as they try to subvert common sense and the Constitution (Apparently they have a taste for old documents that speak of personal freedoms). It seems when someone mentions “rights” that single word attracts these rigid, humorless government- control freaks as they try to destroy the logic others espouse.
It’s true that fighting off the zombie horde requires plentiful firearms, no doubt pleasing Second Amendment advocates. And in a zombie movie, government tends to be either ineffectual or completely absent. On the other hand, when the zombie apocalypse comes, capitalism breaks down, too — people aren’t going to be exchanging money for goods and services; they’re just going to break into the hardware store and grab what they need (and if you think your private health insurer is going to be paying claims for treatment of zombie bites, you’re living in a dream world).
prospect.org
We are just going to have to keep up the good fight against these Obamazombies- they are legion, and they are hungry for our brains. This is obvious from the actions they have taken in government lately, We, as the only people left unaffected by this disease, have an obligation to try and find a cure for this inhuman form of possession- nearly 20% of the population has been affected totally, and there’s some others that have begun to succumb.
There is good news- we do not have to shoot these zombies in the head- there’s a better way. Elections in 2010 can begin to turn the tide against this horrifying trend of brainless, soul- sucking people.
We can do it- for the good of this country, we must turn the tide of zombie-ism.
Tags: government control ♦ progressives ♦ zombies
Unions Are Getting Payback
by Blake on Jun 19, 2009 at 08:40 Posted in Political 23 Comments
In all this discussion of Health care and ways to “improve” the level of health care, there have been many ideas floated around, one of which is to tax the benefits of the health care after it reaches a certain level economically, something that has not been done up til now- but then, there are a LOT of things being done now that have never been done before. With unions, under the plan being floated by Sen. Max Baucus- D, the unions would be exempt from these taxes in a blatant display of favoritism. This is in addition to the Employer Free Choice Act, or as it is otherwise known, Card Check.
Organized labor’s highest legislative priority is the misnamed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). EFCA would replace traditional secret-ballot elections, where workers decide on joining a union in the privacy of a voting booth, with “card check”–where workers publicly sign union cards, often in full view of union organizers. EFCA also authorizes the government to write and impose the terms of collective-bargaining agreements on workers and businesses at newly organized companies.
Labor unions publicly argue for congressional passage of EFCA by maintaining that the current organizing system is broken. They claim that most American workers want to join a union but employer campaigns of “coercion, intimidation, and retaliation” deter workers from voting for the union representation they desire.[1] Unions allege that during pre-election campaigns employees are routinely “harassed, intimidated, spied on, threatened and fired.”[2] They argue that this creates a climate of fear that terrifies workers into voting against the union in the private voting booth. Labor unions contend that Congress should eliminate secret ballot elections in order to protect workers from this alleged intimidation.
This argument makes little sense, of course. Secret ballots specifically protect privacy so that voters can express their views without fear of retaliation. Union membership has fallen not because of widespread intimidation, but because unions do not fit into the modern economy well and most non-union workers simply do not want to organize: A recent Rasmussen poll found that only 9 percent of non-union workers want to join a union.[3]
heritage.org
The unions love this idea, because, except for those “captive” employers who cannot relocate, the unions have driven out almost all manufacturing in the United States through their “Legacy” concessions, where retired union people get preferred health care, and pensions that are the envy of the world. That would be fine if the companies had been able to stay viable, but in the Global Marketplace there is stiff competition for workers who do not have the baggage of legacy constraints.
And then there is the basic dishonesty of the unions and how they deal with the companies they seek to unionize. The unions already have a playing field that is tilted heavily in their favor.
Several studies analyzing data from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have shown that the union movement heavily inflates charges of employer misconduct. These studies find that employers illegally fire workers in at most 3 to 4 percent of organizing campaigns.[4] These numbers make sense: Employers who want to defeat a union campaign must persuade their workers that they deserve their trust. Threatening workers demonstrates supervisors’ untrustworthiness and can make workers more likely to turn to the union for protection. Unions win more elections if employers harass and discipline union activists than when they do not.[5]
Now a new study commissioned by the labor movement confirms the results of these other studies. The labor movement’s own figures show that employers rarely threaten to fire workers who want to join unions.
This recent study is “No Holds Barred: The Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing,” by Kate Bronfenbrenner, a former union organizer and now a professor at Cornell University.[6] The Economic Policy Institute, a union-funded think tank and American Rights at Work, a union-backed organization established for the purpose of advocating the passage of EFCA, jointly released Bronfenbrenner’s study. It has the labor movement’s full endorsement.
Bronfenbrenner analyzed two data sets to determine how frequently employers break the law during union campaigns. First, Bronfenbrenner re-analyzed data from a previously published survey of lead union organizers in 1,004 organizing campaigns between 1999 and 2003. She asked the lead organizer of each campaign whether employers used various tactics to defeat the organizing drives.[7] Second, Bronfenbrenner requested data under the Freedom of Information Act on any Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) charges filed with the NLRB during those campaigns and their ultimate disposition.[8]
The study relies heavily on the self-reported survey of union organizers–data that suffers from many biases. Most important, union organizers do not directly observe what happens in the workplace. They only hear second- and third-hand reports. They do not know if an employer laid off an employee because he supported the union or because of chronic tardiness. They do not know if an employer “interrogated” employees or had a conversation in which an employee mentioned his views on unionizing. They do not know if employers “threatened” workers or simply explained that in collective bargaining everything is on the table and workers’ compensation can go both up and down–a fact that union organizers avoid mentioning, and a statement that is permissible within the boundaries of the National Labor Relations Act.
heritage.org
So it might appear that much of the “employee harassment” unions complain about is second or third hand gossip they use to serve their purposes. This becomes a blatant power grab, when their membership is down so much in recent years. It’s all about money here- that’s no surprise, but the unions are not the good guys here, and shouldn’t be getting more benefits in this environment. If the rest of the people are getting taxed on their health care benefits, so should the unions.
After all, they have been given not one, but two auto companies they can play with. They should be satisfied with those for awhile, until they run those into the ground like they have managed to do with everything else they touch.
Until then, perhaps they should “feel the pain” like everyone else in this country.
No Fly Zone
by Big Dog on Jun 19, 2009 at 08:03 Posted in Political 75 Comments
Barack Obama was being interviewed when a fly kept buzzing around him. He tried to shoo it away several times but it kept returning. When it landed on his hand or sleeve he swatted and killed it. I was having breakfast on a business trip with several co-workers when we saw the video and I remarked that some group would protest the killing of the fly.
People for The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has expressed its displeasure at the killing of the fly. The organization is sending Obama some kind of insect trap that allows them to be caught and released. I wonder how long it would have taken to get the fly to go into it?
This is a fly, a pest, an insect, a nuisance, a vector, a disease carrying creature and it was killed. It is not like Obama’s dog ran in and he beat it to death. He killed a fly.
I am willing to bet the White House has all kinds of things that kill insects and other unwanted visitors (not Republicans, other unwanted visitors). They use pesticide and they might have bug zappers around. I don’t think Obama or anyone else has time to capture these things and release them into the wild…
Then again, maybe Obama can appoint an insect czar.
The guy killed a bug. There is no crime against humanity or nature in doing that. PETA should worry about its own history of animal abuses and leave Obama alone. He killed a fly.
Even for people who believe that animals have rights, this has to beyond belief. I don’t think we should be cruel to animals and mistreat them but this was a FLY.
Besides, Obama might have caught and released it only to have a bat or frog eat it. Then he would be in trouble with some other group.
I just hope Obama is ready to treat the North Korean missile like the fly…
Actually Senator, Ma’am Is Fine
by Big Dog on Jun 18, 2009 at 18:58 Posted in Political 57 Comments
Senator Boxer was questioning a General today and he kept answering her by using the word ma’am just liked he answered the males sir. Boxer did not like that and asked the General to call her Senator because she worked hard to get that title. Talk about petty little things and power complexes. The General was displaying courtesy and he was not inappropriate. Reminds me of COL Jessup in A Few Good Men. Address me as Colonel or Sir, I think I earned that.
“Could you say ’senator’ instead of ‘ma’am? It’s just a thing. I worked so hard to get that title. I’d appreciate it.”
The general’s response? “Yes, Senator.” Politics Daily
She might prefer to be called Senator but the General did nothing wrong. The Army Training and Doctrine Command states that Sir or Ma’am is an appropriate form of address for a Senator:
How do I verbally address a Senator or Congressman or a Congressional staff member?
“Sir” or “Ma’am” works for most everyone, but more specifically –
House: Congressman or Congresswoman; Representative; Mr. or Ms., Sir or Ma’am
Senate: Senator, Sir, or Ma’am…
So it must have been an ego thing where Boxer had to let the General know who was in charge. Inside I know he had to be laughing at what must have appeared as a bloviating fool.
Someone commented that they should take that soundbite and use it in the commercial for whomever runs against her. They can ask questions and each time have her saying ‘call me Senator, I earned it.’
This was a prime display of an elitist mentality. It was also a display by a person who needs to be replaced.
Tags: ego ♦ ma'am ♦ senator boxer
ABC Is The Barack Network
by Big Dog on Jun 17, 2009 at 22:05 Posted in Political 57 Comments
Looks like now that ABC news has become the official government mouthpiece it is refusing to take ads that oppose the infomercial that it will host for Barack Obama.
Statement from Rick Scott, chairman of Conservatives for Patients Rights:
“It is unfortunate – and unusual – that ABC is refusing to accept paid advertising that would present an alternative viewpoint for the White House health care event. Health care is an issue that touches every American and all potential pieces of legislation have carried a pricetag in excess of $1 trillion of taxpayers’ money. The American people deserve a healthy, robust debate on this issue and ABC’s decision – as of now – to exclude even paid advertisements that present an alternative view does a disservice to the public. Our organization is more than willing to purchase ad time on ABC to present an alternative viewpoint and our hope is that ABC will reconsider having such viewpoints be part of this crucial debate for the American people. We were surprised to hear that paid advertisements would not be accepted when we inquired and we would certainly be open to purchasing time if ABC would reconsider.” Drudge
ABC – All Barack Communism Network
Loading ...
Loading... 
