Memorial Day
-
“Happy Memorial Day “ seems to be all you hear in the week prior to
Memorial Day. When the very definition of memorial is to remember, it seems
odd to say ...
9 years ago
- L S. "Spencer" Olsen
- I don't really care if you agree or not. Just saying what I think.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Economic downfall of the American Society is sooooo funny. HAHAHAHAHA!!!
Almost as funny as this:
But not quite as funny as this:
Friday, March 20, 2009
Saw this on Engadget this morning. Here is the original link.
DVD region code blocks British Prime Minister from enjoying Obama's gift
"Oh, bollocks." No, we can't definitively prove that Gordon Brown said that after witnessing a "Wrong Region" code when inserting a DVD given to him by Barack Obama, but we're sure something of the sort was uttered. You see, the ridiculous DVD region coding system recently prevented the British Prime Minister from viewing a set of 25 "American classics" on DVD, all of which were bestowed upon him by President Obama during a recent visit to Washington, D.C.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
I have recently been perusing the politico.com website. For those of you not familiar with this website, it is a non-partisan fact-checking website that has been hailed as the "snopes" of politics. But I have to take them to task today for branding a statement by Mitch McConnell - the Republican Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McConnell said the following:
"In just one month, the Democrats have spent more than President Bush spent in seven years on the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan and Hurricane Katrina combined."
Politico has labeled this as false. The article goes on to explain why this is false. Let me break it down for you.
From the Article (FTA)
"Asked to back up the claim, McConnell spokesman Josh Holmes pinned the Democrats' spending in one month at $818 billion. That's the $31 billion expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program passed in January plus the $787 billion stimulus bill passed in February.
That $818 billion exceeds the $655 billion the Defense Department spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through 2008, plus the $132 billion the government spent responding to Hurricane Katrina, Holmes said. He cited this Government Accountability Office report as the source of the war-spending figure, and the Congressional Research Service for the Katrina figure."
For those who can't or don't want to do math, let me score this for you:
Bush Administration Obama Administration
$787B $818B
So - how does the Politico justify this as a lie? Well, they use what I like to call "Political-Math". Lemme Splain. In math, you might see a linear equation that looks like this:
a + b = c
or
2 + 3 = 5
In "Political-Math" you might see the same equation expressed like this:
a + b -c + c = d
or
2 + 3 - 4 + 4= 1
You will no doubt notice that the "Political Math" (PM) doesn't add up. So let's take a look at the Politico's PM equation.
FTA
"First, about $326 billion of the $787 billion cost of the stimulus is from tax cuts, according to this report by Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation. That is not generally considered "spending""
Oh Really? So now, all of the sudden, tax cuts are not spending? Well, I have news for you, tax cuts are only tax cuts if they effect people actually paying taxes. Logic dictates that if you are giving tax money to a group of people who are already not paying taxes, then this becomes an expense. I break even just about every year. That means that I end up getting back everything that I have given to the Government. Usually, I get a little more. I would consider anything above what I contributed that I receive back as an expense because it does not wash.
Now let's consider that there are some people (like single people or couples with no kids who are renting) who will be affected by this tax cut. Then it ceases to be an expense. Without further, in-depth analysis, there is no way to determine how much of this $326 billion is actually an expense. So in my opinion, labeling this statement as False is inaccurate. At best, it should be labeled "Half True" or "Mostly True" by the Truth-o-Meter.
What bothers me about this whole thing, is that at this rate, even with the $326 billion subtracted form Obama's $818 billion - the Dems are spending at a rate of $164 billion per month. Bush only spent at a rate of $10 billion per month. Besides, I remember a certain surplus back in 2000 that was "Spent" on tax cuts...
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
First
Dear AIG,
I understand that you have a business to run. And I understand that you want to keep good employees employed in order to grow (or in your case - survive). I think that giving money to you executives is a grand idea. It shows that you believe in their work and it also shows that you have a positive outlook on recovery. It shows that you are confident that AIG will rise above the ashes as the great phoenix and become a great business once again.
However, you took money from the US Government. Did you think that they would actually let you get away with making your own decisions? Did you actually think that by accepting the bail-out that you would be allowed to operate in the free-market system? Did you really believe that the money was free? Well, it wasn't. It's the US Government. You sold your soul to this guy:
So don't be surprised, AIG when Barney Frank and the rest of the Democratically controlled legislature decide that capitalism is not right for you. They own you and it is your own fault.
Sincerely,
L S. Olsen
Smartest non-left-handed straight non-jew
Second
Dear US Government,
I understand that you are busy pouring lighter fluid on the Constitution, and I know that you are even more busy pushing the throttle up and the stick forward on this country. I know that you think that the money that AIG is paying its executives is excessive. You have a good heart and want to see that money in the hands of the poor lowly employees that spend all day working hard at AIG. It shows that you care about the people who are the gears and cogs of AIG - the people who actually write the loans and collect the payments. It shows that you believe that with your help that this economy will rise from the ashes like a phoenix - and then just when the phoenix has risen and hovers above the ashes, you will be standing there with a shovel. A golden shovel that you will swing straight and true, catching the phoenix with a full body blow and sending it back into the fire.
However, you bought a crappy financial company. I understand that you think you know what's best for any company. You guys have had great success with running business - like that restaurant you used to own. So naturally, buying and running banks made real sense to you because afterall, the Federal Government has beed doing a great job so far with housing, lending, and financial institutions. But did you really think that things would go well if you propped up the worst of the worst. Of course they are not going to do what you want them to do. They couldn't even do what their customers wanted to do. You bought these guys:
So don't be surprised if they want to give a bunch of money to themselves. And also, don't be surprised if they don't want you telling them what to do. You own them, and it's your own fault.
Sincerely,
L S. Olsen
Smartest Capitalist
Friday, March 13, 2009
Great news story today that dropped on us like a sack of anvils. Apparrently the NAACP is suing big lending corporations for giving subprime loans to African-Americans. This is another darned if you do and darned if you don't moment.
The article says that Blacks were forced into sub-prime loans while white people were practically given their homes.
Ah yes. I remember when I was given my home. As a white person - I was given a home with a -5% interest rate and on top of that - The house was made cheaper so I could afford it.
REALLY!!?!?!?!??! I didn't know that credit bureaus were keeping your race on file. Oh well.
What this really boils down to is that now that foreclosures are at an all time high, the NAACP wants a piece of that sweet, sweet bail-out money that the banks have. Never mind that back in 1999 - the NAACP partnered with Fannie Mae to make sure that all these African-Americans who couldn't afford a home got one. (source) Now that they all got one - it's criminal.
You know. I get really tired of the hyprocricy. It's all about keeping in favor with your base and somehow these groups like the NAACP, ACLU, CONGRESS, POTUS - all seem to think that if they keep turning into the wind we will all forget that 5 minutes ago they were facing the other direction.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
"... a wave of energy companies has in the last few months announced plans to move to Switzerland -- mainly for its appeal as a low-tax corporate domicile that looks relatively likely to stay out of reach of Barak Obama's tax-seeking administration."
From Reuters today - American companies have started the exodus to countries with lower taxes. That'll help create jobs over here. Good Job, current administration and past administration. I guess Heilbroner and Gwartney were right about that whole "incentinve thing." By the way - Heilbroner is a socialist and even he got it right.
I also wanted to present a list of gifts that Obama could have given to Brown that were more thoughtful than a pack of crappy DVD's
- Free dental care. (He's British, of course he has bad teeth)
- A gift certificate to any non-English food restaraunt.
- Hair pick.
- A reset button. (click the link)
- A 6-pack of Colt .45.
- Free Eyeglasses.
- Forgiveness for all his sins.
And now a list of what was wrong with that gift.
The end.
Side note -
In case you haven't noticed, sometimes I make abscure or technical references on my blog. When I do, I try to link that reference to a source. You will notice that some text is a different color and/or underlined. You also might notice that when you put your mouse pointer over it, you mouse pointer changes. This is a link that most likely explains what I am talking about. If you click on this text, you will be taken to a link that explains the reference. Just so you know.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
I would like to thank all of the members of my family who have suggested that I watch "Life on Mars" on TV. So I have gone to the Internet and began to catch up. As soon as I got to episode 3, I wanted to claw my eyes out. I learned something about tolerance tonight as I watched this show. I would like to share.
1. Hippies who spit on soldiers were just patriotic Americans expressing their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech by harassing and humiliating those who served this country with honor in the Vietnam War.
2. One day we will all realize that intolerance is responsible for everything including getting into wars for reasons more "flimsy" than Vietnam - Am I right???
3. Brokeback Mountain.
You are now asking yourself about number 3.
"Lemme splain"
In this episode a war vet is found beaten to death. Turns out he was gay. And married. With a kid. But that's ok, because he was brave. Let me define brave for you.
Bravery - Cheating on your spouse with whom you have a kid with other members of the same sex.
NOTHING ABOUT ADULTERY IS BRAVE. It is cowardice compounded by lies. I am so completely tired of Hollywood telling us that anytime a man decides to be gay while he is married, that his adulterous affair is brave. It's not. Suck it, Hollywood. Adultery is still adultery and there are always victims. Being adulterous AND gay does not make it ok.
So thank you all for recommending this show to me. I am just giddy over the whole "Intolerant 70's" routine.
Thanks alot.
Jerks.
You know what? I want reparations. That's right! Reparations!!! I want my 45 minutes back. There are 4 of you - Bo, Korynn, Danny and Merilee. That's 11 minutes and 15 seconds each. I will think of something and then when I next come to visit, you'll be picking lint from between my toes or shaving my back for 11 and a quarter minutes! Get ready.
P.S.
The Graduate? Really? E.T? That's what you give to visiting foreign dignitaries? Okay. Way to screw that one up, 'Bama. You suck.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Bob Woodward wrote a book back in 2002 called "Bush at War" where he lambasted the Bush adminsitration for their handling of national security and the war on terror. The big press "pick-up" was that Bush is quoted in this book as saying that the attacks were "a great opporunity". Dr. David Ray Griffin a philisopher (read: deadbeat liberal elitist edu-crat) wrote an article cashing in on this quote as well as several like it by members of Bush's adminsitration by targeting Bush as an opportunist with selfish goals no matter what the cost. In fact, you'd think that Bush was some kind of "war-vampire" craving this opportunity to feast on the misery of others. Some of the most notable articles came from places like counterpunch.org and ThinkProgress.org.
But today, Obama gives his weekly radio address and proclaims that the financial crisis is "a great opportunity." And what does he get for it?
This.
"The echoes of history emerge often as Obama seeks a balance between the practical language of governing and the oratory meant to keep people inspired." - Ben Feller, Washington AP
Wait for it and mark my words, in the next few weeks when you watch the news, pick up a paper, or check online you will see more of this butt-kissing from the left and the press based on this statement. Just watch, you'll see.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Obama is in Ohio talking to 25 new police cadets.
"These 25 officers stand for more than just law and order," Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman said. "This is our nation's stimulus package at work ... and it's working right here in the city of Columbus."
Obama told the Cadets, "Because of this plan, stories like the one we're celebrating here in Columbus will soon take place all across this nation,"
But Obama can't do math apparrently. But never fear, I can help...
25 New Police Jobs in Ohio + 651,000 Jobs lost across the US in February = (626,000) Jobs.
For those of you who have never done accounting, when you put parenthesis around a number that means it is negative.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Some more Clarity and the "Wait, What?" moment of the day
0 comments Posted by L S. "Spencer" Olsen at 9:53 PMIf we have to pass a spending bill to give money to the corporations and rich people so that their companies will survive - why are we funding this bill by taxing those same people? Seems counter-intuitive, no? I guess you could call it iterative stimulation.
Also, in the news tonight (ABC News) we were watching a story about an Illinois sherrif who is suing Craigslist for running prostitution ad. First off - good. They need tighter controls on that stuff. But here is the kicker... as part of the story, they talked about a girl who was arrested for prostitution "after an ad ran on craigslist." Then, the girl talked about how Craigslist ruined her life. Wait, what?!?!
First - SHE PLACED THE AD!
Second - SHE SOLICITED PROSTITUTION!
Craigslist didn't ruin her life, she did!!! Even the news reporter painted her as a victim by not saying that SHE ran the ad. Their words were "after an ad ran on craigslist."
I'm done. I just can't take it anymore.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
A big part of the stimulus deals with creating incentive for lenders to lend money. But... They must lend knowing that the principle of the loan can be adjusted by the Government if it is deemed too hight for the borrower.
Not sure I get it. Cause if I lend you $20 and the Government says you only have to pay back $15, what is my motivation to lend anyone any more of my money?
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Fresh off an argument with the fine, educated folk over at Digg.com, I have pondered something that I think I will share with all of you. It has to do with reparations for slavery. Please hang with me as I roll down my own path of dimentia to get to the point.
First of all, let me state the old internet adage that says: "Arguing on the internet is like participating in the Special Olympics - Even if you win, you are still retarded".
So I was participating in the Special Olympics today because of the topic of "Birthers". For those of you who do not know what a "Birther" is, allow me to enlighten you. A "Birther" is a person who believes that President Flatus (Obama) is not a natural born US citizen. "Birthers" can usually be seen eating lots of Doritos in Mom's basement and wearing tin-foil apparel. These people also heavily support the notion that Flatus (Obama) is secretly a Muslim and/or a sleeper terrorist.
As much as I don't like the guy, I just cannot buy into the notion that Obama is a terrorist, Muslim, or Citizen of "*click* *click* ting *click* ooowah - ville" or where ever they think he is from. But I also can't sit by and listen while the wacko left defends Obama with the notion that Obama is not culpable for his parent's mistakes because after all, George W. Bush is a Nazi because Prescott Bush did business with the Nazi's after WWI.
For the last few years, I listened to every leftist, "indoctrinated free thinker" tell me that President Bush was a Fascist and a Nazi because ol' Prescott Bush did business with Germany in the 30's. Now that the tables are turned, this type of logic is divisive and damaging to the country. It's like how Limbaugh says that he hopes Obama's policies will fail and suddenly that type of talk is un-American.
You have to wonder if they have forgotten their own rhetoric from the last 8 years or if they are just that stupid! I like to believe that they are just that stupid. But for the sake of getting to my point, let me get down to the argument...
The argument for W being a secret Nazi comes from the Prescott Bush story. Phrases uttered in defense of this logic have been catalogued as follows:
- The apple doesn't fall far from the tree
- Like father like son like son
- It's in the genes
- Blood is thicker than water
Which is weird because the arguments that Hitler used for killing and enslaving Jews were:
- The apple doesn't fall far from the tree
- Like father like son like son
- It's in the genes
- Blood is thicker than water
You can clearly see the problem. The last few weeks have been rife with double-standard bingo. In fact, there was a whole article about how people should lay-off of Obama about his grammar problems because it's dividing the country. It went as far as to label the people who point out his grammatical errors as "Grammar Junkies". But back to my original point...
I got to thinking about what racism is and how it gets into your head that a group of people with the same race are all alike. And I concluded that it is because you assume that since one of them did it to you directly or indirectly that they must all be the same or that they are all responsible for the actions of a few. (do you see where I am going now?) So what does this say about people who advocate reparations for slavery?
Just something to think about.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
