This blog established long ago that leftists do not really believe in free speech, except for leftists. Therefore, I will merely note that leftists have proven this again with Michael Savage, without belaboring the point much.
In case you had not heard, Michael Savage has been "banned" from the U.K. (Britain) because of his "extremist" views. Savage is (rightly) calling for a boycott of travel to Britain for this flagrant violation of the principle of free speech. And it is clear Britain is as leftist as they come, and merely doing what leftists here would do if they had the opportunity.
I have criticized Michael Savage myself for lack of perspective and rational thought. It should tell you something that I have called Andrea Mitchell a whore (entry entitled: "Andrea Mitchell is a whore"). If even I think Savage is too "extreme", you can probably assume he is. The difference is that my whole entry made a clear exactly what I meant by calling Andrea Mitchell a whore (obviously not that she is actually a prostitute), while Michael Savage makes to many irrational attacks--seemingly with personal hatred. Doesn't matter. Unless you are a leftist, Savage is entitled to free speech in a free society.
To leftists, people like Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh (not on the level of Savage in personal vitriol, despite what the left thinks) are much more the "enemy" than Islamic terrorists or the Comunist Party (even back when the Communist Party was an agent of a foreign power trying to overthrow the government of the United States by violent means, as shown by KGB records revealed after the fall of the Soviet Union). To leftists, suppressing "conservatives" is a Good Thing, while anti-American forces are merely misunderstood (or precipitated by us, as the primary source of evil in the world).
Why else do you think that the Obama head of Homeland Security identified "rightist extremists" as the danger (more than Ilsamic terrorists or leftist extremists following in the footsteps of Obama crony William Ayers) to specifically warn about in a report to law enforcement? As I said, leftists do not really believe in free speech, and regard suppressing conservatives as merely the right thing to do--whether the leftists are in Britain or here.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
"Observe and Report": Movie Review
There was a reason for me to review "One Night of Love" (see previous entry), beyond taking a slam at opera. It is an easy way to segue into a slam at modern Hollywood, and especialy the "gross" elements that have beocme part of essentially ALL "modern" Hollywood comedies (hose made for adults, anyway). This is true from "Get Smart" to "American Pie" (yes, a movie I moderately liked, as I sort of liked "Porky's", but those movies have left a terrible legacy in the movies that have tried to imitate them).
Crude is now "in". Pleasant, like "one Night of Love" (not really a comedy, but not heavy drama either--while clearly intended for adults, as indicated by at least one scene with Grace Moore in her underwear), is way "out" in modern Hollywood. "Funny" is also way "out". Despite what Hollywood seems to think, "crude" is NOT automatically funny. It is actually an obstqacle to "funny", as illustrated byt he very few Hollywood movies that are now funny. Andy Hardy, along with Ozzie and Harriet, were a lot funnier, and infinitely more pleasant to watch. NO modern Hollywood comedy even comes close to "The Lady Eve", or the other "screwball" comedies of the Golden Age of Hollywood.
Yep. I have now arrived at "Observe and Report". Rating: 1 (out of 100). I apologize for this rating. I am morally certain that I have OVERRATED this movie. It is one TERRIBLE, unfunny, movie, where crudity and mindless violence take the place of any real wit. Worse, I saw the previews of no less than 5 "comedies" scheduled for this summer, and they ALL looked hopelessly unfunny--with only the Sandra Bullock movie showing any promise at all, and that one not much. These trailers are supposed to show the BEST of upcoming movies. Don't look for any actually funny movies from Hollywood this summer.
"Observe and Report" is "about" a "mall cop" wanting to be a real cop. Of course, as with the Grace Moore movie, the plot is just an excuse. However, in this case, the plot is just an excuse for mindless crudity. The "1" rating comes only from the moderately surprising scene near the very end involving a gunshot. Crude scene. Immoral scene. But moderately effective in the "Porky's" vein.
The violence in this movie is continuous and vicious, as is the crudity. The "mall cop" spreads mayhem about him. Sure, it is "cartoon" violence, but with real people and real pain--presented with no moral conscience at all. "Dirty Harry" (rating 99) was never this bad!!!
The only way I can illustrate to you how terrible this movie really is--unfunny and immoral--is to talk about the "controversial" "date rape" scene. The "mall cop" has a "yen" for a slutty mall girl. Well, she gets drunk and demands that he give her medication on top of her booze. Then, while she is apparently almost comatose, although making a "comment" that indicates she was still somewhat aware of what was happening, the girl has sex with the mall cop (sown hujmping the virtually comatose girl).
To leftist feminists, and I guess my older daughter (with whom I saw this movie), this is "date rape". It is the main objectionable secen, to them, in this movie (although my daughter though the movie was unfunny, while her boyfriend professed to like it).
I don't even consider this "date rape" (feminsts blurring the meaning of rape). The girl demanded the drugs and alcohol. They were not pushed on her, or deceptively slipped into her drink.
Doesn't matter. Is "date rape" really worse than swinging a skateboard into the face of a teenager skateborading in the mall parking lot? Almost EVERY scene in this movie glorifies crudity and mindless violence. To key your objection to this movie on "date rape" just--to me--exposes your politically correct politics and moral insensitivity (to everything but leftist, feminist, "hot button" issues).
Did I mentioin that the "mall cop" appears to be clinically insane--on anti-psychotic medication? This is supposed to be FUNNY? Have we really sunk this far as a society?
Maybe so. It is not for nothing that this blog has declared it OVER for the USA, as we re-enact the fall of the Roman Empire by betralying every value we ever had--including the values that made us a great country.
Crude is now "in". Pleasant, like "one Night of Love" (not really a comedy, but not heavy drama either--while clearly intended for adults, as indicated by at least one scene with Grace Moore in her underwear), is way "out" in modern Hollywood. "Funny" is also way "out". Despite what Hollywood seems to think, "crude" is NOT automatically funny. It is actually an obstqacle to "funny", as illustrated byt he very few Hollywood movies that are now funny. Andy Hardy, along with Ozzie and Harriet, were a lot funnier, and infinitely more pleasant to watch. NO modern Hollywood comedy even comes close to "The Lady Eve", or the other "screwball" comedies of the Golden Age of Hollywood.
Yep. I have now arrived at "Observe and Report". Rating: 1 (out of 100). I apologize for this rating. I am morally certain that I have OVERRATED this movie. It is one TERRIBLE, unfunny, movie, where crudity and mindless violence take the place of any real wit. Worse, I saw the previews of no less than 5 "comedies" scheduled for this summer, and they ALL looked hopelessly unfunny--with only the Sandra Bullock movie showing any promise at all, and that one not much. These trailers are supposed to show the BEST of upcoming movies. Don't look for any actually funny movies from Hollywood this summer.
"Observe and Report" is "about" a "mall cop" wanting to be a real cop. Of course, as with the Grace Moore movie, the plot is just an excuse. However, in this case, the plot is just an excuse for mindless crudity. The "1" rating comes only from the moderately surprising scene near the very end involving a gunshot. Crude scene. Immoral scene. But moderately effective in the "Porky's" vein.
The violence in this movie is continuous and vicious, as is the crudity. The "mall cop" spreads mayhem about him. Sure, it is "cartoon" violence, but with real people and real pain--presented with no moral conscience at all. "Dirty Harry" (rating 99) was never this bad!!!
The only way I can illustrate to you how terrible this movie really is--unfunny and immoral--is to talk about the "controversial" "date rape" scene. The "mall cop" has a "yen" for a slutty mall girl. Well, she gets drunk and demands that he give her medication on top of her booze. Then, while she is apparently almost comatose, although making a "comment" that indicates she was still somewhat aware of what was happening, the girl has sex with the mall cop (sown hujmping the virtually comatose girl).
To leftist feminists, and I guess my older daughter (with whom I saw this movie), this is "date rape". It is the main objectionable secen, to them, in this movie (although my daughter though the movie was unfunny, while her boyfriend professed to like it).
I don't even consider this "date rape" (feminsts blurring the meaning of rape). The girl demanded the drugs and alcohol. They were not pushed on her, or deceptively slipped into her drink.
Doesn't matter. Is "date rape" really worse than swinging a skateboard into the face of a teenager skateborading in the mall parking lot? Almost EVERY scene in this movie glorifies crudity and mindless violence. To key your objection to this movie on "date rape" just--to me--exposes your politically correct politics and moral insensitivity (to everything but leftist, feminist, "hot button" issues).
Did I mentioin that the "mall cop" appears to be clinically insane--on anti-psychotic medication? This is supposed to be FUNNY? Have we really sunk this far as a society?
Maybe so. It is not for nothing that this blog has declared it OVER for the USA, as we re-enact the fall of the Roman Empire by betralying every value we ever had--including the values that made us a great country.
Grace Moore: The Opera Ain't Over Till the Fat Lady Sings; But Are All Opera Singers Really "Fat"?
I don't like opera. Further, I am willing to defend the position that opera is pretty much a uselessly stylized, bastard art form unsuccessfully mating a "story" with costumes and a very artificial kind of singing ("artificial" in the sense that it relies more on using the extreme ranges of the human voice in a "classical" manner, rather than on the more "natural" singing style of the American musical). Yes, opera seems absolutely made for snobs, and mainly snobs seem to like it. Sorry. I call them the way I see them. Still, there is no doubt the SINGING can be very impressive. I just see no purpose to the surrounding trappings of a full opera. Why not just have a singer singing? People like me are less bored by that than by sitting through a "story" we have no chance of undrestanding--and which I don't think you can understand even if you know the language, unlesss you have a really good ability to "hear" and interpret songs.
See the recent entry about Yogi Berra's (attributed to him, anyway) famous statement, applying opera to baseball: "The game ain't over till the fat lady sings.". Yogi obviously shares my irreverent attitude toward opera.
But are all female opera divas "fat"? Nope. This entry is actaully a discussion of Grace Moore, and specifically "One Night of Love" (movie rating 71 out of 100). Grace Moore was an opera singer, circal 1930, who became a movie star. She was not fat. She, in fact, was pretty gorgeous--as you would expect of a movie star. But she could definitely sing opera, and "One Night of Love" is filled with her songs (real opera songs, and NOT an opera star "slumming" with pop music, even if the opera world DID think she was slumming).
Rober Osborne (TCM) describe "One Night of Love" as a "terrific movie". Not so. It is only a "terrific movie" if you love opera singing. The story line (old one of student falling in love with her master teacher, and vice versa) is very simple, and only competently acted. The "story" is reallly little more than an excuse for Grace Moore to sing opera, which she does very well (to my untrained ear).
However, the movie is well worth seeing, even if you don't much like opera (my attitude). The simple story is pleasant, and the singing is impressive (without having to sit through an entire opera). It is sort of the painless (relatively), Cliff Notes way of being exposed to opera.
Plus, of course, you get to see real live evidence that a female opera singer doe not HAVE to be "built like a tank". How do you know that people other than cretins like Yogi (who may like opera, for all I know) and me have an image of female opra singers as "fat"? Well, "One Night of Love", made in the 1930's, TELLS you exactly that, as the "maestro" comments that he is glad to have found such an impressive female voice, for a change, not in a female form "built like a tank".
I invite anyone who LIKES opera to comment and explain why I am totally wrong about it. In the meantime, you can be assured that "One Night of Love" is a movie most of you will at least mildly enjoy, so long as you can take "classic", black and white movies without today's gross crudity. Further, Grace Moore is pleasant on the eyes, and lacks the haughty manner (on screen, anyway) associated with most opera divas. The movie is pleasant all around, if not "terrific". LYes, Robert Obsborne is a little bit of a snobbish, stuffed shirt (not too annoying in the small doses you get of him on TCM).
See the recent entry about Yogi Berra's (attributed to him, anyway) famous statement, applying opera to baseball: "The game ain't over till the fat lady sings.". Yogi obviously shares my irreverent attitude toward opera.
But are all female opera divas "fat"? Nope. This entry is actaully a discussion of Grace Moore, and specifically "One Night of Love" (movie rating 71 out of 100). Grace Moore was an opera singer, circal 1930, who became a movie star. She was not fat. She, in fact, was pretty gorgeous--as you would expect of a movie star. But she could definitely sing opera, and "One Night of Love" is filled with her songs (real opera songs, and NOT an opera star "slumming" with pop music, even if the opera world DID think she was slumming).
Rober Osborne (TCM) describe "One Night of Love" as a "terrific movie". Not so. It is only a "terrific movie" if you love opera singing. The story line (old one of student falling in love with her master teacher, and vice versa) is very simple, and only competently acted. The "story" is reallly little more than an excuse for Grace Moore to sing opera, which she does very well (to my untrained ear).
However, the movie is well worth seeing, even if you don't much like opera (my attitude). The simple story is pleasant, and the singing is impressive (without having to sit through an entire opera). It is sort of the painless (relatively), Cliff Notes way of being exposed to opera.
Plus, of course, you get to see real live evidence that a female opera singer doe not HAVE to be "built like a tank". How do you know that people other than cretins like Yogi (who may like opera, for all I know) and me have an image of female opra singers as "fat"? Well, "One Night of Love", made in the 1930's, TELLS you exactly that, as the "maestro" comments that he is glad to have found such an impressive female voice, for a change, not in a female form "built like a tank".
I invite anyone who LIKES opera to comment and explain why I am totally wrong about it. In the meantime, you can be assured that "One Night of Love" is a movie most of you will at least mildly enjoy, so long as you can take "classic", black and white movies without today's gross crudity. Further, Grace Moore is pleasant on the eyes, and lacks the haughty manner (on screen, anyway) associated with most opera divas. The movie is pleasant all around, if not "terrific". LYes, Robert Obsborne is a little bit of a snobbish, stuffed shirt (not too annoying in the small doses you get of him on TCM).
Monday, May 4, 2009
Term Limits: Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely; Just Look at the Republicans
I favor a 12 year term limit for ALL Federal Government positions--12 years in the same job. That inclues Congress, federal judges at all levels, the FBI director, the Secretary of Defense--all means all (except President, where I think 8 years is enough for the power of that position). Yes, it will take a Constitutional Amendment, but I have never even seen anyone TRY to argue the merits of this position. That is because it can't be done. "Power corrupts', and absolute power corrupts absolutely." We all know that, and there is not even any disagreement. So people "oppose" term limits by simply ignoring the issue, as some sort of "social taboo" designed to keep worthy people from building the power empires they deserve (or staying as Supreme court Justices or Senators until they die at age 95 or 100).
The reason I bring this up again is that I am starting to hear REPUBLICANS again start to push this issue. Problem: The REPUBLICAN PARTY (as on illegal immigration, "global warming", homosexual marriage, affirmative action--"reverse discrimination"--and so many other things, including government spending and expansion of government) cannot push this issue without exposing itself as almost as big a bunch of hypocrites as most leftists.
Yes, I am cursed with a good memory, and a belief that it is more important to be honest in my beliefs and political allegiances than to shift with the political winds. That means that I remember that "term limits" (for Congress anyway) were part of the "Contract with Ammerica" upon which Republicans won Congress in 1994. They promptly exposed themselves as hypocrites then by abandoning the idea as nothing but political expediency once they got in power. "Now that WE are in power, and the corrupt, entrenched Democrats are out, it would betray our principles to make good people leave." Even Rush Limbuagh (wrong again) went along with the idea that the whole purpose of "term limits" was to throw Democrats out, and not to prevent the corruption of power held for too long. Republicans, of course, promptly showed they were just as subject to corruption as Democrats, and were punished for that in 2006 and 2008--as they abandoned principle for power in many more areas than term limits.
Now Republicans are starting to make noises again about the corruption of power, and the need for term limits. Sorry. Won't wash a second time. Republicans are NOT going to be able to ride this horse to victory a second time.
As I state above, term limits are a great idea--an idea so good that no one even tries to argue the point (Republicans did not once they got power--they just adopted the attitude that no one should throw out good people once they are in, to the extent they could not get away with ignoring the issue altogether).
But neither political party has any credibility no this issue now. That means the only way to get term limits is for the PUBLIC to demand them (by voting out people in there too long, and DEMANDING that such limits be passed by people already in office).
A "promise" by the Republican Party on the issue now means absolutely nothing, and voters will rightly consider such a promise for what it is worth.
P.S.: I am perfectly aware that Republicans only promised a VOTE on term limits in the "Contract with America", and that they held that vote. Doesn't matter. Republicans failed utterly to push the issue once they were in power, and several betrayed specific promises to honor term limits themselves. The above entry is dead on right. Republicans will merely appear as hypocrites of the most cynical sort to push term limits as a political issue now that they are back out of power. Sure, Republicans running for office should support term limits, because that is the RIGHT policy, but they should not expect to WIN on the issue until they ACT to enact the principle as the policy of our country.
The reason I bring this up again is that I am starting to hear REPUBLICANS again start to push this issue. Problem: The REPUBLICAN PARTY (as on illegal immigration, "global warming", homosexual marriage, affirmative action--"reverse discrimination"--and so many other things, including government spending and expansion of government) cannot push this issue without exposing itself as almost as big a bunch of hypocrites as most leftists.
Yes, I am cursed with a good memory, and a belief that it is more important to be honest in my beliefs and political allegiances than to shift with the political winds. That means that I remember that "term limits" (for Congress anyway) were part of the "Contract with Ammerica" upon which Republicans won Congress in 1994. They promptly exposed themselves as hypocrites then by abandoning the idea as nothing but political expediency once they got in power. "Now that WE are in power, and the corrupt, entrenched Democrats are out, it would betray our principles to make good people leave." Even Rush Limbuagh (wrong again) went along with the idea that the whole purpose of "term limits" was to throw Democrats out, and not to prevent the corruption of power held for too long. Republicans, of course, promptly showed they were just as subject to corruption as Democrats, and were punished for that in 2006 and 2008--as they abandoned principle for power in many more areas than term limits.
Now Republicans are starting to make noises again about the corruption of power, and the need for term limits. Sorry. Won't wash a second time. Republicans are NOT going to be able to ride this horse to victory a second time.
As I state above, term limits are a great idea--an idea so good that no one even tries to argue the point (Republicans did not once they got power--they just adopted the attitude that no one should throw out good people once they are in, to the extent they could not get away with ignoring the issue altogether).
But neither political party has any credibility no this issue now. That means the only way to get term limits is for the PUBLIC to demand them (by voting out people in there too long, and DEMANDING that such limits be passed by people already in office).
A "promise" by the Republican Party on the issue now means absolutely nothing, and voters will rightly consider such a promise for what it is worth.
P.S.: I am perfectly aware that Republicans only promised a VOTE on term limits in the "Contract with America", and that they held that vote. Doesn't matter. Republicans failed utterly to push the issue once they were in power, and several betrayed specific promises to honor term limits themselves. The above entry is dead on right. Republicans will merely appear as hypocrites of the most cynical sort to push term limits as a political issue now that they are back out of power. Sure, Republicans running for office should support term limits, because that is the RIGHT policy, but they should not expect to WIN on the issue until they ACT to enact the principle as the policy of our country.
Swine Flu: This Blog PROVEN Correct Yet Again (DUH!!!!!)
The audited accuracy rating of this blog has risen to 99.7 %, even as the entries have been reduced because of lack of interest. "Truth" is a disadvantage in America in the Age of Obama.
Yes, I am talking about the swine flu. As usual, this blog has already been vindicated in my stated view that there is NOEVIDENCE that the swine flu is any different from a normal flu outbreak. Yes, I will go so far as to say I have been vindicated in my view that, in a totally just world, any "journalist" (or public official, or any other person) who uttered the word "pandemic" should have been SHOT (without due process or trial). It goes without saying that my views on Governor Perry of Texas (my governor is, indeed, a total idiot) have been vindicated.
Paraphrasing the current headline on Drudge: "Experts: Swine Flu Virus No More Severe Than Normal Flu Virus".
As usual, the entries on this blog were in FORESIGHT, and NOT hindsight.
Next FORESIGHT prediction: Wall Street people are again proving themselves the Stupidest People on Earth by this momentum trading pushing the stock market too high, too fast 9without economic fundamentals to back it up). This blog, of course, has already been PROVEN more accurate than Rush Limbuagh by my FORESIGHT about how STUPID Limbaugh was, and other conservative talk radio people were, to concentrate on stock market performance (the Stupidest People on Earth, remember) in making their case against President Obama.
Yes, I am talking about the swine flu. As usual, this blog has already been vindicated in my stated view that there is NOEVIDENCE that the swine flu is any different from a normal flu outbreak. Yes, I will go so far as to say I have been vindicated in my view that, in a totally just world, any "journalist" (or public official, or any other person) who uttered the word "pandemic" should have been SHOT (without due process or trial). It goes without saying that my views on Governor Perry of Texas (my governor is, indeed, a total idiot) have been vindicated.
Paraphrasing the current headline on Drudge: "Experts: Swine Flu Virus No More Severe Than Normal Flu Virus".
As usual, the entries on this blog were in FORESIGHT, and NOT hindsight.
Next FORESIGHT prediction: Wall Street people are again proving themselves the Stupidest People on Earth by this momentum trading pushing the stock market too high, too fast 9without economic fundamentals to back it up). This blog, of course, has already been PROVEN more accurate than Rush Limbuagh by my FORESIGHT about how STUPID Limbaugh was, and other conservative talk radio people were, to concentrate on stock market performance (the Stupidest People on Earth, remember) in making their case against President Obama.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Swine Flu: Precautions?
Extra precautioins I am taking/took because of swine flu: NONE. Extra precautons ANYONE should take/have taken because of swine flu (unless, perhaps, in Mexico): NONE.
See previous two entries.
See previous two entries.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Swine Flu: "The Game Ain't Over Till the Fat Lady Sings", But Has the Fat Lady Sung for the USA?
The Decline and Fall of the USA.
In the past few days, in Texas alone, the idiot (I say that knowing I am insulting idiots) Republican governor--who NO ONE should even consider dupporting for President of the United States--has declared a "disaster" because of 16 (lol--Governor P{erry, BITE ME) cases of swine flu (no politically correct name change in this blog--sorry pork industry). And the UIL (University Intersholastic League--controlling all school sporting events) has CANCELLED all school sporting events in Texas until at least May 11.
Some of you probably though I was exaggerating in my previous entry bashing this country because of overreaction to the swine flu. Again, I have been PROVEN right, as the overreaction has gone nuclear. You even have Joe Biden (lol atutomatically) betraying the leftist ideololgy by saying that people should be avoiding public transportation (in favor of private cars? "global warming" anyone?).
Nope. Q.E.D. It is established that this country is no longer capable of dealing with adversity. We can't even handle a MILD flu outbreak (albeit a "new" strain).
The title reference is attributed to the immortal Yogi Berra, who supposedly was referring to baseball--while rightly ridiculing opera--when he is said to have said: "The game ain't over till the fat lady sings."
Well, I am sorry to say it, but for the USA the gave is over. The fat laldy has sung. We are no longer capable of handling the "problems" opf daily living without destroying our way of life. We are in the last stages of "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". Too bad. It was a great run while it lassted.
I have already mentioned that 43,000 people die EACH YEAR in this country in traffic accidents. There would be MORE justification in cancelling athletic events because people DIE in traffic getting to fand from those events (often using alcohol to excess because of the athletic events).
Then there is AIDS. Unlike swine flu (despite the lol attempt to say that the oridinary citizen has to modify his conduct because of swine flu), AIDS is primarily a CONDUCT related disease. I repeat (for you leftists out there, and establishment, politically correct Republicans, who are intelligence challenged): AIDS IS ALMOST TOTALLY A CONDUCT RELATED DISEASE--EVEN A CONDUCT CAUSED DISEASE. AIDS was/is also a PANDEMIC that KILLED milliions of people worldwide, and thousands in this country.
Did you hear LECTURES no conduct about AIDS? Did you hear serious talk of QUARANTINE? Did you see action in the U.S. to closes those public bath houses that were a breeding ground of promiscous homosexual sex in the U.S., and therefore of AIDS?
Nope. That is because leftists, and other "politically correct" people, HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. These killers did not want to confront the conduct that created the AIDS pandemic, and they did not. Now the WHO is "worrying" that a "combination" of the swine flu virus and the HIV virus might be a really dangerous thing. Well, we never really confronted the AIDS virus seriously, did we? Where were the speeches about MODIFYING CONDUCT to stop the spread of the HJIV virus?
Nope again. The day of the United States as the leader of the world is OVER (at least for the short and intermediate term). It is not just the swine flu overreaction that proves this, of course, but it is one of the clear indications. We--who took on Hitler, Imperial Japan, and the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union--are no longer able to handle adversity, or to think staight. We have adopeted the opposite of the FDR advice: "The only thing we have to fear is NOT panicking." Whether it is economic recession or the swine flu, we now deal totally in emotion instead of thinking. We certainly let "fear" cause us to abandon every principle of freedm we ever held dear. God only knows how we would now react to a disease like smallpox, or the Black Death (plague that killed 1 out of every 3, ore even one out of every two, people in Europe in the Middle Ages).
P.S. As I suggest above, I would not support Governor Rick Perry for President under any circumstances, or against ANYBODY (including Obama, next time--even a failed Obama). The man has never impressed me as anything but an establishment Republican with few real principles, and he proves me right every time he addresses any real "problem". One of the reasons I am now declaring the game OVER for the USA is that Perry is no different from basically ALL of our present "leaders". We no longer have any "leaders". That is why it is imposssible for me to see any light at the end of the tunnel which is not the hadlight of an oncmig train. That is why I say that the fat lady has sung, and that the day of the USA is over.
In the past few days, in Texas alone, the idiot (I say that knowing I am insulting idiots) Republican governor--who NO ONE should even consider dupporting for President of the United States--has declared a "disaster" because of 16 (lol--Governor P{erry, BITE ME) cases of swine flu (no politically correct name change in this blog--sorry pork industry). And the UIL (University Intersholastic League--controlling all school sporting events) has CANCELLED all school sporting events in Texas until at least May 11.
Some of you probably though I was exaggerating in my previous entry bashing this country because of overreaction to the swine flu. Again, I have been PROVEN right, as the overreaction has gone nuclear. You even have Joe Biden (lol atutomatically) betraying the leftist ideololgy by saying that people should be avoiding public transportation (in favor of private cars? "global warming" anyone?).
Nope. Q.E.D. It is established that this country is no longer capable of dealing with adversity. We can't even handle a MILD flu outbreak (albeit a "new" strain).
The title reference is attributed to the immortal Yogi Berra, who supposedly was referring to baseball--while rightly ridiculing opera--when he is said to have said: "The game ain't over till the fat lady sings."
Well, I am sorry to say it, but for the USA the gave is over. The fat laldy has sung. We are no longer capable of handling the "problems" opf daily living without destroying our way of life. We are in the last stages of "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". Too bad. It was a great run while it lassted.
I have already mentioned that 43,000 people die EACH YEAR in this country in traffic accidents. There would be MORE justification in cancelling athletic events because people DIE in traffic getting to fand from those events (often using alcohol to excess because of the athletic events).
Then there is AIDS. Unlike swine flu (despite the lol attempt to say that the oridinary citizen has to modify his conduct because of swine flu), AIDS is primarily a CONDUCT related disease. I repeat (for you leftists out there, and establishment, politically correct Republicans, who are intelligence challenged): AIDS IS ALMOST TOTALLY A CONDUCT RELATED DISEASE--EVEN A CONDUCT CAUSED DISEASE. AIDS was/is also a PANDEMIC that KILLED milliions of people worldwide, and thousands in this country.
Did you hear LECTURES no conduct about AIDS? Did you hear serious talk of QUARANTINE? Did you see action in the U.S. to closes those public bath houses that were a breeding ground of promiscous homosexual sex in the U.S., and therefore of AIDS?
Nope. That is because leftists, and other "politically correct" people, HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. These killers did not want to confront the conduct that created the AIDS pandemic, and they did not. Now the WHO is "worrying" that a "combination" of the swine flu virus and the HIV virus might be a really dangerous thing. Well, we never really confronted the AIDS virus seriously, did we? Where were the speeches about MODIFYING CONDUCT to stop the spread of the HJIV virus?
Nope again. The day of the United States as the leader of the world is OVER (at least for the short and intermediate term). It is not just the swine flu overreaction that proves this, of course, but it is one of the clear indications. We--who took on Hitler, Imperial Japan, and the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union--are no longer able to handle adversity, or to think staight. We have adopeted the opposite of the FDR advice: "The only thing we have to fear is NOT panicking." Whether it is economic recession or the swine flu, we now deal totally in emotion instead of thinking. We certainly let "fear" cause us to abandon every principle of freedm we ever held dear. God only knows how we would now react to a disease like smallpox, or the Black Death (plague that killed 1 out of every 3, ore even one out of every two, people in Europe in the Middle Ages).
P.S. As I suggest above, I would not support Governor Rick Perry for President under any circumstances, or against ANYBODY (including Obama, next time--even a failed Obama). The man has never impressed me as anything but an establishment Republican with few real principles, and he proves me right every time he addresses any real "problem". One of the reasons I am now declaring the game OVER for the USA is that Perry is no different from basically ALL of our present "leaders". We no longer have any "leaders". That is why it is imposssible for me to see any light at the end of the tunnel which is not the hadlight of an oncmig train. That is why I say that the fat lady has sung, and that the day of the USA is over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)