Worthless Cause's blog

Tripped

So Thursday morning, President Obama desperately tried to get in front of the immigration debate - and got run over by a float he made of platitudes.

So let's get this straight: According to the President, America is the land of opportunity, and people come here because it's a great country.

Yeah, thanks for that.

We've heard it before- it's the vanilla filling in every single immigration speech Twinkie.

Of course, he brings up the "two poles" of the "contentious" debate (in that disapproving voice of his), saying this issue often divides, inflames and demonizes people. He calls it an emotional issue, while not-so-subtly accusing those he disagrees with of dividing, inflaming and demonizing!

So I think I finally got his definition of demagoguery: It's only demagogic if it points a way forward, and makes him look dumb.

So what's his solution? Well, in a swipe at Arizona, he said we can't enforce the law that aren't enforceable. Which means, "I got nothing."

The American people are saying seal the border first, then let's have reform. Because you can't do the reverse. It's like pouring tequila into a sieve instead of a shot glass. Logically, it's possible - but reeks of failure and stains your pants.

The bottom line: everyone in America should send Arizona a six pack of beer. When Obama said we finally need an accountable immigration system, he did so because AZ forced his hand. He's not leading the country, the country's leading him. That may be better than the reverse.

Writers, Soldiers, and Dirt

So, in that Rolling Stone piece that brought down General McCrystal, the writer spent three weeks with the troops.

What did he find?

Trash talk directed at bureaucrats.

Yeah, I know...  big surprise.

Here's a fact: if someone followed me around for three weeks, they'd find far more worse.

The storage container underneath my bed could put me in prison for life.

Fact is, writers like me, and even moreso those at Rolling Stone, are so seedy we could never survive the scrutiny we apply on others.

Simply put: Soldiers are better people than those who write stories about them.

But this writer followed the troops, who might as well be on Mars. That's what Afghanistan is. A weird, scary place without cable.  They don't have time to worry about some slimy dickwad writer trying to ingratiate himself into their fold in order to get a damaging tidbit upon which to build a career.

These soldiers deal with death. And that's the irony. While those troops work like hell - in hell - to protect that writer from his own demise, he's busy orchestrating theirs. How screwed up is that?

And what did the writer find?  Banter.  Normal give and take between men.  The kind of stuff you find between cops, troops, and yeah: editors. Everyone bad mouths the boss.

But, I guess the left hates manly conversation almost as much as they hate the military. They just don't get it. And so, they use it to form their lazy narrative: that we've got another Vietnam on our hands. Of course we do, when we have so many writers saying we've got another Vietnam on our hands.

They said the same thing about Iraq (we won), the Gulf War (we won), and if they had a time machine, they'd go back and say the same thing about WW2 (which, we won, I think).

And that leave us with Rolling Stone.

The only thing it hates more than war, is winning one.

They altered history last week - but not in the way they intended. That is: an end of courageous restraint.

Rolling Stone's gotta hate this: we may win this war, all because they wanted to lose it.

MCDONALDS & MOLESTORS

So last month I told you about The Center for Science in the Public Interest - the soulless scolds who believe all food should taste like pottery. Today, they're threatening to sue McDonalds for enticing kids with toys. They call the restaurant's toy promotions creepy- as if nutrition activists aren't.

Point of fact: they are.

They're smelly, ugly and miserable.

Seriously -Have you been to a health food store lately? Ask yourself - how can A place be so healthy, if the workers resemble bags of soggy lawn trimmings?

Anyway, here's what chafes my thighs. It's this quote from the CSPI litigator, Stephen Gardner. He says,

"McDonald's is the stranger in the playground handing out candy to children."

Okay. So, in effect, this jackass has compared the production of fast food with child molestation - branding over 1.5 million McDonalds employees as pedophiles.

You know that number's way off.

Now I know how McDonald's handles these things. They'll respond that they offer healthy alternatives.

Like carrot sticks.

And, carrot sticks.

This is stupid. No one goes to McDonalds for carrot sticks - they go there to get AWAY from carrot sticks.

And to eat the world's greatest food.

TRUE, an hour later, you feel like someone shot a snake up your butt - but that's just a reflection of the love put into each Big Mac.

If I were McDonalds, I'd flip the tables - demand an apology from CSPI for calling their workers kiddy fiddlers.

And then dare these tools to come up with a better way than McDonalds to feed billions of people cheaply.

Truth is, these losers offer no solutions - they're just misery engines bent on destroying the achievements of others.

Let's hope their wheat germ gives them intestinal parasites.

Then, finally, they won't be alone on Saturday night.

If you disagree, you're probably a racist who works at Arby's.

GULF WAR 3

Thank goodness, the president has directed BP to order up some new tackle and connect it to the thingummy next to the whachamacallit.

I believe it was Jean Giraudoux who first said, “Only the mediocre are always at their best.”

Barack Obama was supposed to be the best, the very best, and yet he is always, reliably, consistently mediocre. His speech on oil was no better or worse than his speech on race. Yet the Obammyboppers who once squealed with delight are weary of last year’s boy band. At the end of the big Oval Office address, Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, and the rest of the MSNBC gang jeered the president. For a bewildered Obama, it must have felt like his Ceausescu balcony moment. Had they caught up with him in the White House parking lot, they’d have put him up against the wall and clubbed him to a pulp with Matthews’s no longer tingling leg.

For the first time I felt a wee bit sorry for the poor fellow. What had he done to so enrage his full supporting chorus? In the Washington Post, the reaction of longtime Obammysoxer Eugene Robinson was headlined “Obama Disappoints From The Beginning Of His Speech.”

So what? He always “disappoints.” What would have been startling would have been if he hadn’t “disappointed.”

His eve-of-election rally for Martha Coakley “disappointed” the Massachusetts electorate so much they gave Ted Kennedy’s seat to a Republican.

His speech for Chicago’s Olympic bid “disappointed” the Oslo committee so much they gave the games to Pyongyang, or Ouagadougou, or any city offering to build a stadium with electrical outlets incompatible with Obama’s teleprompter.

Be honest, guys, his inaugural address “disappointed,” too, didn’t it?

Oh, in those days you still did your best to make the case for it. “He carries us from meditative bead to meditative bead, and invites us to contemplate,” wrote Stanley Fish in the New York Times. “There is a technical term for this kind of writing — parataxis, defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘the placing of propositions or clauses one after the other without indicating . . . the relation of co-ordination or subordination between them.’”

Gotcha.

To a fool, His Majesty’s new clothes appear absolutely invisible. But, to a wise man, the placing of buttons and pockets without indicating the relation of co-ordination is a fascinating exercise in parataxical couture.

And so Obama bounded out to knock ’em dead with another chorus of “I’ll be down to get you in a parataxis, honey,” only to find himself pelted with dead fish rather than Stanley Fish. The Times’s Maureen Dowd deplored his “bloodless quality” and “emotional detachment.”

This is the same Maureen Dowd who in 2009 hailed the new presidency with a column titled “Spock At The Bridge” — and she meant it as a compliment. Back then, this administration was supposed to be the new technocracy — cool, calm, and credentialed chaps who would sit down, use their mighty intellects to provide a rigorous, post-partisan, forensic analysis of the problem - and then break for their Vanity Fair photo shoot.

What was it all the smart set said about Bush? Lazy and uncurious?

I would describe the current president as “the very model of a modern major generalist,”

For example, he could have demonstrated, as he and his energy secretary (whoops, Nobel Prize–winning energy secretary) have so signally failed to do, an understanding of what is actually happening 5,000 feet underwater and why it’s hard to stop.

Instead, lazy and uncurious, this is what the Technocratic Mastermind offered: “Just after the rig sank, I assembled a team of our nation’s best scientists and engineers to tackle this challenge — a team led by Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize–winning physicist and our nation’s secretary of energy. Scientists at our national labs and experts from academia and other oil companies have also provided ideas and advice.

“As a result of these efforts, we’ve directed BP to mobilize additional equipment and technology.”

Excellent!

The president directed his Nobel Prize–winning Head of Meetings to assemble a meeting to tackle the challenge of mobilizing the assembling of the tackling of the challenge of mobilization, at the end of which they directed BP to order up some new tackle and connect it to the thingummy next to the whachamacallit.

Thank you, Mr. President.

That and $4.95 will get you a venti oleaginato at Starbucks.

...

The boring technocrat stuff out of the way, he then did his usual shtick. In the race speech, invited to address specific points about his pastor’s two-decade pattern of ugly anti-American rhetoric and his opportunist peddling of paranoid conspiracies to his gullible congregants about AIDS being invented by the U.S. government to wipe them out, Obama preferred to talk about race in general — you know, blacks, whites, that sort of thing; lot of it about.

The media loved it.

This time round, invited to address specific points about an unstoppable spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Obama retreated to more generalities — the environment, land, air, that sort of thing; lot of it about. “President Obama said he is going to use the Gulf disaster to push a new energy bill through Congress,” observed Jay Leno. “How about using the Gulf disaster to fix the Gulf disaster?”

When he did get specific, he sounded faintly surreal. “As we speak, old factories are reopening to produce wind turbines, people are going back to work installing energy-efficient windows.”

Energy-efficient windows?

That’s a great line — if Obama’s auditioning to play himself on Saturday Night Live parodies.

And hang on, isn’t this the same guy who was promising to start “kicking ass” just a few days ago? You may find yourself recalling the moment in the film In and Out when Kevin Kline is trying to master the How to Be Manly audiotape and accidentally says, “What an interesting window treatment.”

But, as Rahm Emmanuel shrewdly noted, never let a crisis go to waste, not when you can get a new window treatment out of it.

So the president has now declared war on the great BP spill — Gulf War 3! — and in this epic conflict the speechgiver-in-chief will surely be his own unmanned drone:

“I fired off a speech
But the British kept a-spillin’
Twice as many barrels as there was a month ago,
I fired off a speech
But the British kept a-spillin’
Up the Mississippi from the Gulf of Mexico . . .”

Chris Matthews and the other leg-tinglers invented an Obama that doesn’t exist. Unfortunately, they’re stuck with the one that does, and it will be interesting to see whether he’s capable of plugging the leak in his own support. If not, who knows what the tide might wash up?

 

Memo to Secretary Rodham Clinton: Do you find yourself of a quiet evening with a strange craving for chicken dinners and county fairs in Iowa and New Hampshire, maybe next summer? Need one of those relaunch books to explain why you’re getting back in the game in your country’s hour of need?

 

“It Takes a Spillage.”

ChatRoulette

So, as you know, ChatRoulette is a website that instantly hooks up strangers for online yakfests. Visitors - which there are millions, daily - come there to talk about crap, and then bolt when they lose interest. This amazing new site has wowed investors, and it could make its young Russian inventor rich beyond his wildest dreams.

If it were not for the penises.

Yep: People are fleeing the site, as more and more men are showing up only to flash their shortcomings to shocked and sickened strangers.

Chatroulette has become a lazy perverts dream: you can nauseate thousands of people, without ever leaving your basement.  (Just like Media Matters.)

Anyway, this disturbing story illustrates two supreme truths:

-that whereever there is new, exciting technology, sex will crash the party. I'm sure moments after Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin, he tried to have sex on it. I can't say I blame him.

Those cotton gins are sexy.

-more important, people these days are more inclined to pay attention to perfect strangers than their own imperfect family. The reason: the attention they pay, is simply payment for attention in return.

Chatroullette is just another part of the "look at me" obsession that permeates this generation - a phenomenon that isn't any more appealing than the pervs who hijacked it. I mean - weird men furiously pleasuring themselves to strangers is creepy, but sitting in front of your computer talking blindly to anyone who pops up aint much better. Especially, when mom or dad are alone in the next room.

Oh well, I guess I have no choice but to join in.

It beats standing behind the Applebees dumpster in my overcoat.

A Nation of Hall Monitors

So, as usual, I was at the gym straddling the stairclimber (his name is Sven, he's Dutch) and watching CNN against my choice, when the network reported some seemingly positive news: apparently the U.S. just saw the biggest gain in employment in a decade!

Break out the champagne! Do a little dance! Make a little love! Throw another houseboy on the rotating action pit!

Yep, thanks to President Obama, this month the economy added 431,000 jobs, the biggest monthly gain since March of 2000. But of those new jobs, 390,000 were government. Private sector jobs actually came crashing down from 218 thousand in April, to just 41,000.

Eh.

So the gain CNN was championing, it turns out, was made up of census jobs. Which, to me, is cheating. It's kinda like saying you won the lottery, and proving it by flashing a large wad of Monopoly money.

That's how I feel about census jobs. they're phony.

But they're also bribes. They are jobs created by a Democrats to keep Democrats in power. They've created a whole dependent class of government workers who will continue to vote for them, in order to stay employed. It's a ponzi scheme, with the bottom floor maintaining the jerks at the top. Everyone in the middle gets screwed.

We had census jobs in grade school. They were called hall monitors. They were designed specifically to occupy the kids who couldn't do much else. This kind of meaningless make-work keeps them from eating snot and pooping in gym class.

And it worked. I almost stopped completely by seventh grade.

And if you disagree with me, you're a racist homophobe who works for BP and lives in Arizona.

Hall monitor

Rich Enough to be Stupid

Two years since the market corrections of 2008 we’re a lot less rich. In fact, many Western nations are, in any objective sense, completely insolvent.  Hence the decision by the EU to toss a trillion dollars into the great sucking maw of Greece’s public-sector kleptocracy. It no longer matters whether you’re intellectually in favor of European-style social democracy: simply as a practical matter, it’s unaffordable.

How did the Western world reach this point? Well, we assumed that we were rich enough that we could afford to be stupid.  In any advanced society, there will be a certain number of dysfunctional citizens either unable or unwilling to do what is necessary to support themselves and their dependents.  What to do about such people?

Ignore the problem?  Attempt to fix it?

The former nags at the liberal guilt complex, while the latter is way too much like hard work: the modern progressive has no urge to emulate those Victorian social reformers who tramped the streets of English provincial cities looking for fallen women to rescue.  All he wants to do is ensure that the fallen women don’t fall anywhere near him.

So the easiest “solution” to the problem is to throw public money at it.  You know how it is when you’re at the mall and someone rattles a collection box under your nose and you’re not sure where it’s going but it’s probably for Darfur or Rwanda or Hoogivsastan.

Whatever.

You’re actually just dropping a buck or two in the tin for the privilege of not having to think about it.  For the more ideologically committed, there’s always the awareness-raising rock concert: it’s something to do with Bono and debt forgiveness, whatever that means, but let’s face it, going to the park for eight hours of celebrity caterwauling beats having to wrap your head around Afro-Marxist economics.  The modern welfare state operates on the same principle: since the Second World War, the hard-working middle classes have transferred historically unprecedented amounts of money to the unproductive sector in order not to have to think about it.  But so what?  We were rich enough that we could afford to be stupid.

That works for a while.  In the economic expansion of the late 20th century, citizens of Western democracies paid more in taxes but lived better than their parents and grandparents.  They weren’t exactly rich, but they got richer.  They also got more stupid.  When William Beveridge laid out his blueprint for the modern British welfare state in 1942, his goal was the “abolition of want.”  Sir William and his colleagues on both sides of the Atlantic succeeded beyond their wildest dreams: to be “poor” in the 21st-century West is not to be hungry and emaciated but to be obese, with your kids suffering from childhood diabetes.

When Michelle Obama turned up to serve food at a soup kitchen, its poverty-stricken clientele snapped pictures of her with their cellphones.  In one-sixth of British households, not a single family member works.  They are not so much without employment as without need of it.

At a certain level, your hard-working bourgeois understands that the bulk of his contribution to the treasury is entirely wasted.  It’s one of the basic rules of life: if you reward bad behavior, you get more of it.  But, in good times, who cares?

By the way, where does the government get the money to fund all these immensely useful programs?  According to a Fox News poll earlier this year, 65 per cent of Americans understand that the government gets its money from taxpayers, but 24 per cent think the government has “plenty of its own money without using taxpayer dollars.”  You can hardly blame them for getting that impression in an age in which there is almost nothing the state won’t pay for.

There was a mayor (somewhere in England, if I recall) a few years back who announced that he wanted to stop funding for the Gay Pride parade on the grounds that, if they’re so damn proud of it, why can’t they pay for it?

He was actually making a rather profound point, but, as I recall, he was soon forced to back down.  In Canada, almost every ethnocultural booster group is on the public teat.  Outside Palestine House in Toronto the other week, the young Muslim men were caught on tape making explicitly eliminationist threats about Jews, but c’mon, everything else in Canada is taxpayer-funded, why not genocidal incitement?  We’re rich enough that we can afford to be stupid.

Michelle

Helping the famished and starving poor.

 

It’s not so much the money as the stupidity, which massively expands under such generous subvention.  When it emerged that President Barack Obama had appointed a Communist as his “green jobs czar,” I carelessly assumed it was the usual youthful “idealism”: no doubt Van Jones, the Communist Obama appointee in question, had been a utopian college student caught up in the spirit of ’68 and gone along for the ride.  A passing phase.  Soon grow out of it.

But, in fact, Mr. Jones became a Communist in the mid-nineties, after the fall of the Soviet Union.  He embraced Communism after even the commies had given up on it.  Like the song says, he was commie after commie had ceased to be cool.  On Fox News, Glenn Beck made a fuss about it.  But the “mainstream” media thought this was frankly rather boorish, and something only uptight right-wing squares would do.  I mean, what’s the big deal?  True, everywhere it’s been implemented, Communism causes human misery—not to mention an estimated 150 million deaths. But it doesn’t make you persona non grata in the salons of the West. Quite the opposite. The Washington Post hailed the grizzled folkie Pete Seeger as America’s “best-loved commie”—which, unlike “America’s best-loved Nazi,” is quite a competitive title.  Even so, why would you stick a commie in the White House and put him in charge of anything to do with jobs, even “green jobs”?

Well, because “green jobs” is just another of those rich-enough-to-be-stupid scams.  The Spanish government pays over $800,000 for every “green job” on a solar-panel assembly line.  This money is taken from real workers with real jobs at real businesses whose growth is being squashed to divert funds to endeavors that have no rationale other than their government subsidies—and which would collapse as soon as the subsidies end. Yet Tim Flannery, the Aussie climate-alarmist who chaired the Copenhagen racket, says we need to redouble our efforts. “We’re trying to act as a species,” he says, “to regulate the atmosphere.”

Er, “regulate the atmosphere”?  Why not?  We’re rich enough to be stupid with the very heavens.
In his book The Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism (La tyrannie de la pénitence), the French writer Pascal Bruckner concludes by quoting Louis Bourdaloue, the celebrated Jesuit priest at the court of Louis XIV, who preached on the four kinds of conscience: 1) the good and peaceful; 2) the good and troubled; 3) the bad and troubled; 4) the bad and peaceful.  The first is to be found in Heaven, the second in Purgatory, the third in Hell, and the fourth—the bad but peaceful conscience—sounds awfully like the prevailing condition of the West at twilight.  We are remorseful to a fault—indeed, to others’ faults.

It’s not just long-ago sins like imperialism and colonialism and Eurocentric white male patriarchy and other fancies barely within living memory. Our very lifestyle demands penitence: Americans have easily accessible oil reserves, but it would be wrong to touch them, so poor old BP have to do the “environmentally responsible” thing and be out in the middle of the Gulf a mile underwater.  If you’re rich enough to be that stupid, what won’t you subsidize?  The top al-Qaeda recruiter in Britain, Abu Qatada, had 150,000 pounds in his bank account courtesy of the taxpayer before the comically misnamed Department for Work and Pensions decided to cut back his benefits.

The green jobs, the gay parades, the jihadist welfare queens, the Greek public sector unions, all have to be paid for by a shrinking base of contributing workers whose children and grandchildren will lead poorer and meaner lives because of the fecklessness of government.  The social compact of the postwar era cannot hold.  Across the developed world, a beleaguered middle class is beginning to understand that it’s no longer that rich. At some point, it will look at the sheer waste of government spending, the other shoe will drop, and it will decide that it no longer wishes to be that stupid.

SURVIING THE OBAMA ECONOMY : A HOW-TO GUIDE FOR RECENT COLLEGE GRADS

It's no secret: It sucks to be graduating from college right now and striking out to make your fortune in the ObamaEconomy. Now make no mistake ... the current economy and the current jobs situation belongs lock, stock and barrel to The Community Organizer. You can talk George Bush until we all turn to dust ... but if you can put down your "It's all George Bush's fault" script long enough to pick up a newspaper and read you will find that this is the worst economic recovery on record. Yeah .. there's growth out there, but the growth certainly isn't in the jobs sector. Why not? Because the small businessmen we depend on to created these jobs - about 80% of all new jobs - are scared to death of Barack Obama and what he is going to do to them.

Think about this: You have the money to start expanding your business. You want to be able to take advantage of the growth that comes with an economic recovery. But, on the other hand, you have a president and a congress that is hell-bent on saddling you with new taxes and new regulations. Before you can develop a plan for growing your business you really need to know the impact of the new laws passed by Obama and the Social Democrats. Just how much is ObamaCare going to cost your business? What about this financial reform act? Will you be able to borrow money at a reasonable cost to keep your expanded business going during a slowdown? And what about those new taxes? The taxes on carried interest, higher income and Medicare taxes, and how big is the Social Security hit going to be? Remember, these businessmen report their incomes on their personal income tax returns ... so these things all matter - a lot.

And then .. there's Obama's transition from a private sector economy to a government economy ... and his penchant for redistribution of the wealth.

Look at the latest statistic, which do not bode well for any college grad with ambition or an entrepreneurial spirit. Paychecks for workers in private businesses shrank to their smallest share of personal income in US history. As if that wasn't bad enough .. the moochers are fat and happy: government entitlement benefits rose to a record high during the first three months of 2010.

Are you wondering how this happened? In spite of everything that you have learned in college, you are probably wondering right about now what the hell happened to the American economy. You are wondering what happened to all of those wonderful job prospects. You want a unified theory of what happened to our economy and to your opportunities? I'll tell you. It's pretty simple. If you managed to graduate college, I think you can handle this explanation.

Many years ago .. probably before you were born! .. the political class in Washington decided that everybody, no matter how bad their credit or job history, had a right to own their own home. So lawmakers instructed the quasi-government agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and other government agencies to do pretty much anything they had to do to make sure that anyone who wanted a home could get out there and borrow the money. Things like credit ratings and job history wouldn't matter. The loans would be made by private banks and lending institutions - sometimes under pressure brought by local "activists" and the Community Reinvestment Act. Fannie and Freddie would buy those loans without any real concern about the viability of the borrowers, and package them for sale to investors. Now the loans weren't actually guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie .. but the investors who bought these packages of loans were certainly operating as if they were. So ... what we had were securities made up of packaged loans that were ticking time bombs. They were going to go bad. The question was when.

In the meantime, all of this "easy" money and low mortgage interest rates continued to drive up the price of homes in America. So what happened as prices rose? Finally the interest rates started to go up on these variable interest rate mortgages. People couldn't make the payments and started defaulting. Home prices started down. With decreases in value the people who thought they could just simply refinance when their interest rates went up got their own rude awakening. More defaults. More foreclosures. As a result, home prices crash. Those securities based on these worthless home loans to worthless people, they crash too. Boom. Economic recession. Caused by what? Government --- government simply cannot escape the major part of the blame here. Sure, private sector lenders contributed to the mess ... but they were enabled by government all along the way.

Despite what Democrats and the ObamaMedia would have you believe, we did not get here because of Wall Street. All of this nonsense about Wall Street being the source of all of your problems is Bravo Sierra that is fed to you by the Obama administration. Why? Because they hate Wall Street because it gets in the way of their goal, which is a government-planned economy.

Now you understand why you just spent four years earning a degree in higher education so that you can do .....? The fact is that in this Obama economy, your dreams of starting your own business or pursuing a career may have to be put on hold. But you can't just sit around and mooch off your parents. And you certainly don't want to sit around and mooch of the taxpayers. So --- as a public service - I am going to give you some tips for your first job after graduation. I hope these tips serve you well:

1. Greet the customer within 30 seconds of being seated.
2. Dark clothes, black napkin. I hate having white lint all over my clothes.
3. Don't constantly refill somebody's ice tea. They have it sweetened JUST the way they wanted it, and every time you add more to the glass I have to sit there for 5 minutes just to get it back to the way I want it again.
4. Make sure the table always has enough butter.
5. Handle the check BEFORE you clear the table. "May I have the check please?" sounds and looks a lot different that "May you please clear the table?" After I remove my ass from your restaurant, THEN you can clear the table.
6. (The final hint) Don't disappear once the meal is finished.

Now if this is not your first job after you graduate into the Obama economy, maybe some of these tips will also be useful:

1. Get one of those green Christmas tree air fresheners for your cab.
2. Get a map or a GPS so you can get your fare to their destination easily.
3. Try to keep the windows clean.

And finally ... if you have a degree in gender studies, and you haven't managed to get your university job ... practice this line over and over and you will be ready for your new career in the ObamaEconomy:

"Would you like French Fries with that?"

Success was for my generation. Your generation has a government-planned economy to establish. Your purpose is not to prosper for your own personal gain, it is to work and earn for the government. You destiny is to work to produce the wealth that will be seized by government and redistributed to those who do not have your work ethic or abilities.

There's your painful truth that nobody told you about during your commencement ceremonies.

It's not just the Catholic's, amen...

The intersection of sex and religion can get very disturbing. But if you want really disturbing, forget Catholicism — that's just old school abuse of power and guilt and ugliness, given strength by sheer numbers.

The really freaky stuff is in cults, like The Family International.

Don't click on that link unless you want to get sucked into a vortex of insanity — it's about a sex cult that used what they called "Flirty Fishing", more commonly known as prostitution, to recruit followers to Jesus and to make money, among other things.

I got that from a link to a blog by a phone sex worker, which can also draw you in.

Now that I've ruined all your productivity for the day, I'm going to put the internet aside and go get some work done.

Obama's Hot Bod

So what are the two things that we learned from Barack Obama's trip to Buffalo yesterday?  First, someone in Buffalo "needs a freakin job." At least that is what the billboard said.  Not a real shocker there.  Secondly, there is still at least one government educated bimbo out there who is sipping the Obama Kool-Aid.  Obama stopped to eat some wings where he was confronted by a woman by the name of Luann Haley.  Luann, a typical Obama supporter, told the president, "You're a hottie with a smokin' little body."

Just a guess here ... Luann is single.

That's the one demographic (other than black) that can ALWAYS be counted on to vote Democrat - single women.

Any guesses as to why that might be?  Security?  Of Course!

The single women who show a propensity for voting Democrat are single women who miss a man in their lives to take care of them.  Barack Obama fulfills that need for all too many. 

 

(It's Friday morning, I might as well start off by stirrin' the puddin')