Liberal Democats: Welcome to the Conservative Republican World

Reading the Washington Post article started with a certain giddy delight. That feeling turned into pure unadulterated schadenfreude when I read this:

That’s how it goes in the Heath home, and how it has always gone. It’s a household that explains much about Palin, 44, and how she acquired her set-jawed, swaggering demeanor, one that her mother first noticed “about the time she started to walk.” Above all, the house suggests how she came by her dissident, out-of-category feminism, a code by which she tackles old-boy networks relentlessly, while remaining blank if not unsympathetic on traditional women’s issues with a capital W, such as sexism in the workplace.

“I’m a little absent from that discussion, because I’ve never thought of gender as an issue,” she told Alaska Business Monthly after being elected governor in 2006.

All of which reminds me of a favorite Ann Coulter quote which I’m likely paraphrasing: “When we solve a problem, we lose an issue.” All of which may explain why professional grievance-mongers can convince the droves of voters with short memories to vote them back in to deal with problems they caused in the first place.

Welcome to our world, leftists of all kinds. You work feverishly to solve a problem, then along comes another generation of voters who didn’t grow up with the problem and—voilà!—everything that was traditional is radical again. Such as the hard-working professional woman who dreams of the day that her husband makes enough money that she can stay home and raise their children. “Blasphemy!” they shrieked.

Women have had, and still do have, legitimate grievances that need to be addressed, but not so many as feminists have frantically tried to have us believe. For instance, the average woman’s attitude about the right to be drafted and sent into a combat zone consists mostly of: Would you butch bitches please stop helping us? In the 60s and early 70s I lost count of the number of women who said that, other than equal-pay-for-equal-work, feminism offered nothing that they wanted.

I’ve pondered the issue for years and I think that, for the majority of real-world women, feminism should be a process of “adding to” as opposed to the elitist feminists “substituting for”. That means that many women wish to keep what they’ve traditionally had as women while adding to it certain things which were unfairly denied. The sisters of the latter-day feminist movement have insisted on a throw-out-the-baby-with-the-bath-water approach. Then they affect amazement and hurt when most women balk at the idea of being penisless men.

The Left may succeed in destroying Sarah Palin. I hope they don’t, purely on the basis that the words “President Obama” frighten any rational person to the point of incontinence. But it is possible they can destroy her— temporarily. The plucky gal didn’t have much time to prepare for this ordeal, but her razor sharp mind can absorb a lot in 4 to 8 years. Then we’ll be treated to the sight of Katie Couric running from the interview room in tears.

Step Up and Meet Henry A. #2: Master Logician and Keen Military Mind

Next on the Henry A. hit parade is a brief conversation that occurred while on the bus coming home from the work site. The topic? Our shiny new president, Ronald Reagan, and the policies he was implementing

Henry, of course, was convinced that the bowels of Hell had rent asunder and vomited Reagan out upon an unsuspecting Earth. He very likely would have said that Reagan was the very quintessence of evil, if Henry had know what the word quintessence meant.

Henry was heartsick about the welfare reforms that were going down. Mr. A. is one of those tragic folks that doesn’t realize that the phrase “vital social programs” is oxymoronic. President Reagan was killing that stuff, Henry insisted, “Just as it was starting to work.” And no, Henry didn’t see the irony of mega-expensive programs that had been in place for over 50 years just beginning to work. Which we all know that they weren’t, but that’s beside the point.

I reasonably pointed out that we could no longer afford to waste money on programs that either did nothing to solve the problem, or actually made it worse. Henry protested that those programs could easily be funded by eliminating or reducing unnecessary government expenditures. His top candidate? The military, whose funding he proposed reducing by 99%. All of which led to the following exchange:

Me: But we would be attacked by our enemies.

Henry (rolling eyes): Ain’t nobody gonna attack us.

Me: Why wouldn’t they.

Henry: ‘Cuz we got the biggest military.

Me: But you just reduced it by 99%!

Henry: “Cuz we didn’t need it.

Me: Why didn’t we need it?

Henry: Ain’t nobody gonna attack us.

Me: Why not?

Henry: “Cuz we got the biggest military.

It actually continued on for several more cycles, but I won’t inflict that on you. Just know that after I jumped off the merry-go-round. I criticized his logic, for which comment I was informed, “White people just don’t get it.”

My point? This is an example of what lies behind the multicultural BS that’s killing us. This is a man from a culture that is notorious for exalting “passion” over logic and reason. A culture that has failed dismally and yet is still regarded as superior by those born into it. A culture that honestly believes that the only reason they can’t have two mutually exclusive states existing side-by-side is the “Man’s” narrow-minded thinking or outright oppression of them.

Another point: There is no point trying to bring people like this on board. When they get to this point, they either save themselves or they don’t get saved at all. When a human being makes it all the way to adulthood with beliefs like these festering in his brain, he is pretty much beyond redemption. I grieve for all the time, effort, and money wasted trying to redeem the irredeemable, as you should.

Step Up and Meet Henry A: Purveyor of Fine Racist Bile

Many years ago, in my hardhat-wearing days, I had the opportunity to meet one of the finest examples of a hate-mongering minority racist. I was glad to have met him, even though an hour of talking to him was like a year in some kind of intellectual Hell. I was glad because I learned things from him that more taciturn and thoughtful minority racists would never say to a WASPy blue-eyed devil such as me. He was not my usual partner, but because we usually worked in isolated two-man teams and I worked for that company for six years, I can honestly say that I had to spend literally weeks of my life with the man. He would often be friendly, but stated explicitly that we weren’t friends and that he held my race, my culture, my nation, and my religion in the utmost contempt.

I’ll just shorten his name to Henry A.

Henry was a Mexican, not a Mexican-American, by his own declared convictions. As deplorable as all good Americans find the dreaded hyphenated American, Henry was worse. He didn’t want the good name of Mexico sullied in such an association. Even though his family had lived in the US for generations.

Henry had an ex-wife he liked to badmouth. She was a black woman of similar attitude and they produced one child who looked just like the curly-headed kid in the old Oscar Meyer commercials (“My bologna has a first name…..”) After a session of particularly vitriolic denunciations of her, I asked him how the hell two such incompatible people had ever gotten together in the first place. He looked at me as if I had lost my mind and told me they had plenty in common. Naturally, I asked what, to which he replied condescendingly, “We both hate white people.” Of course, if I applied that logic to my life my dating pool would be restricted to the Aryan Nations or some such unsavory racist groups. Logic was not Henry’s strong suit, and he considered consistency to be a tool of white oppression.

Even I, however, never fully grasped the depths of illogic and unreason that lurk in the minority racist’s mind and soul until Henry showed them to me. One day Henry was “treating” me to a diatribe about the injustice of American society that compelled him to live an impoverished lifestyle in the scummiest part of town. Then, to my shock and horror, he invoked me as an exemplar of that injustice. Of course, I demanded to know what he based that on. My offense, as it turns out was that I owned my own home (and I had since I was 19), lived in a good neighborhood by the river and the biggest park in town, and worst of all I drove a new car. Henry, on the other hand lived in the slummiest neighborhood in town with a sky-high crime rate, few amenities, and he drove a 10-year old car. Since we both worked the same job at the same rate of pay for the same number of hours and lived such disparate lifestyles, he proclaimed that disparity as ironclad proof of the viciously unfair nature of American society.

I probably just should have pointed out that dozens of Latinos at the company lived as well or better than I did and dropped the issue. But no, I had to try to help the guy out. It was obvious to me; Henry had no clue about the real reason that he was poor. So I started asking him questions.

I asked him if he and his woman drank, then smoked cigarettes, then snuff, then smoked marijuana, used other drugs, and if they gambled. All of which questions were answered in the affirmative along with angry demands to know why the questions were relevant. Henry daily drank beer, tequila, and whiskey. He smoked multiple packs of cigarettes a day and “dipped” snuff as well. He and his wife smoke numerous ounces of marijuana per week, along with other drugs as availability permitted. He also enjoy losing a few bucks at the card table.

I had Henry right where I wanted him, I thought. I was sure my logic would show him the error of his ways and he would either change, or at least stop being such an insufferable bigot. I questioned him about the price associated with each of his “hobbies” and he reluctantly gave them to me. When he was done, I added them all up and came up with a figure I was certain would prove my point. The combined costs of his and his woman’s vices alone were higher than my first and second mortgages, car payments, all utilities, and food and gas costs—combined. I happily announced that he could live as well as I did in my neighborhood if he quite drinking, doping, smoking, dipping, and gambling as I had done. What did I get for my efforts? The following statement:

“That’s just like you peckerwoods. Always trying to tell us people of color how to live.”

Naturally, Henry doesn’t speak for his entire demographic group. Doubtless, not even the majority of it. But he does hold and speak the thoughts of millions of people that live in this country. It is bad enough when we have people who can’t understand that having your cake and eating it too are mutually exclusive. It is worse when we have people like Henry who believe, and demand, that he have his cake and eat it too. Also, that you make the cake, deliver it to him, feed it to him, and then apologize because the cake wasn’t chocolate. My point? Once again it is simply this:

I’ve put forward this example, and will put forth others, to illustrate that America’s false reverence for compromise and accomodation need to end. Certainly we should try to come to a mutually beneficial agreement (not compromise or appeasement) whenever possible. If, however, it isn’t possible then you must strive to win the conflict, or you’re an idiot. Six years of reasoning with Henry A. never availed me of anything, except unnecessary stress. In the end, his heart and mind were as rotten with hate as when I started. Henry A., and others of his ilk, can only be beaten. If we don’t fight them now, we’ll be obeying them later.

Remember the Melting Pot?

I heard somebody on the radio, I think it was Gary McNamara,say something brilliant and succinct, two things that don’t always go together. Paraphrasing: Don’t feel pride because of what you are. Feel pride because of what you accomplish.Think about it, if the source of your pride is race or ethnicity then your crowning achievement is the mere fact of your birth. If that is so, then after your umbilical cord was snipped your life has been all down hill.

Hillary Unspun

Memorandum

From: The Memo Writer
Topic: Hillary Clinton vs. Women (and Decency)

The sustained slamming of Hillary Clinton in the previous post felt so good—almost orgasmicly good—management has decided it deserves some pure self-indulgence.

Item One: Hillary is the worst enemy a woman could ever have, or at least she and people like her. Women have legitimate grievances, none of which Hillary gives a damn about. On the issue of Women’s Rights, or the more accurate term of Women’s Well-being, Hillary couldn’t care less. She is an generic exploiter, not even extraordinary at that endeavor. She finds a legitimate issue or cause and latches onto it like a lamprey latches on to some hapless fish. Her motivation is not the cause, but pure naked self-interest.

Item Two: Despite mocking homemakers and mothers, and deriding Tammy Wynette’s devotion to her husband, Hillary has taken the most basic of the cynical gold digger’s roads to success. She hitched her wagon to a man’s rising star. Then she subordinated her ambitions to his in anticipation of a big and easier pay off later.

Item Three: Hillary is an enabler of staggering magnitude. Bill Clinton has subjected her to a lifetime of disrespect and countless humiliations with his myriad (and none too skillfully concealed) infidelities. She is known to have reacted with anger at the Fornicator in Chief, but when the time comes for action she lashes out viciously, not at him, but at the women. Even those who weren’t willing. Strangely, especially those who weren’t willing.

Item Four: She has to be the crappiest mother that ever existed. With the examples she has set for her daughter I suspect that Chelsea employs a full-time staff of counselors.

Item Five: Hillary and others of her ilk use their seething misandry to pump life into the moribund feminist movement. They then use that movement to gain favor with bubble-bound university types, inside-the-beltway refugees from reality, and frothing-at-the-mouth lesbians. The end result is girls who grow up unable to respect their fathers, brothers, husbands, or even their own male children. A situation guaranteed to perpetuate female misery.

Item Six: Hillary is a woman who is known to scream and curse at and demean her own staff, as well as those who are there to keep her alive. This is a woman who felt justified in vandalism and taking national heirlooms as souvenirs when they left the White House. Be honest with yourself; how do you really think she feels about the single mother working at a below-the-poverty-level job and living in a single-wide because she can’t afford anything else. The truth is worse than you can imagine. She doesn’t think or feel anything about it. Those people are of an entirely different species and beneath her notice—unless mom doesn’t pay her taxes.

You Just Might Be a Feminist If…

1. …your favorite video game is a first-person shooter in which you toast embryos with a laser.
2. …you’ve kicked a man in the groin because he found you attractive.
3. …you’ve stalked a heterosexual woman because she didn’t.
4. …you’re raising your only child on lawsuit money you got from your abortion clinic.
5. …you once got the president of a major university fired for saying the sky is blue.
6. …you believe that the vote should be restricted to childless lesbian Democrats.
7. …you’re plotting against your own uterus.
8. …you believe that your menstrual cycle is proof that God exists, he’s male, and a sexist.
9. …you got a breast reduction even though you were a natural AA cup.
10. …you’ve ever drop-kicked a doctor for refusing to give your male foster child a sex change operation.

The Poor Don’t Pay Squat

Every attempt at tax reform results in liberals shrieking hysterically about “tax cuts for the rich” and how it will be done “on the backs of the poor”. They usually say that tax cuts, if any, should be given to the working class, by which they mean virtually destitute working people and not successful working people. The problem is that you can’t give tax cuts to those people because they don’t pay squat.

The graphic below illustrates the situation. It’s been around for a while and was found on Rush Limbaugh’s home page. As you can see the bottom 50% of wage earners pay virtually nothing in taxes. Also bear in mind that the people at the very bottom don’t pay taxes at all, they receive taxes in the form of transfer payments, the Earned Income Tax Credit for example. These so-called taxpayers are, in fact, tax freeloaders.

Tax Burden 2001

All too many of you will retort with something like, “So what? The rich should pay more.” Unfortunately, you’re rich. “What? I’m just getting by!” many will bluster. Yeah, I know what you mean, I’m just barely getting by too. What you’ll find in the same article, based on GAO figures is that that top 50% includes people earning as little as $26,000 a year. If I only earned $26K a year I would lose my house and probably my car as well.

An excerpt for Rush’s article on the subject illustrates the problem:

Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like “thousandaires.” The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives – and those who don’t want to, aren’t. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:

Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes (Down from 2000 figure: 56.47%). The top 10% pay 64.89% (Down from 2000 figure: 67.33%). The top 25% pay 82.9% (Down from 2000 figure: 84.01%). The top 50% pay 96.03% (Down from 2000 figure: 96.09%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 17.53 (2000: 20.81%) of all income. The top 5% earns 31.99 (2000: 35.30%). The top 10% earns 43.11% (2000: 46.01%); the top 25% earns 65.23% (2000: 67.15%), and the top 50% earns 86.19% (2000: 87.01%) of all the income.

The problem is that virtually no one thinks they’re rich. I’ve met people with six figure incomes who bitched and moaned about how the were just squeaking by and believe me it was hard for me to by sympathetic when I was living in a $30,000 house in a neighborhood that was rapidly going to seed. One of my favorite example was an interview with a French woman after Francois Mitterand’s socialist government came to power. She said that she voted for him because he said he was going to make the rich pay, but as soon as he came to power the government informed her that she was rich.

Despite all of this I’m encouraged by all the renewed buzz about a flat tax or a national sales tax, though I would prefer the national sales tax because it would catch much of the revenue lost to the underground economy. What could be more fair? Everybody pays a simple percentage. The person that makes $200,000 a year would pay 10 times as much as the person that makes $20,000 a year. Ten times the income pays ten times the taxes. It’s simple, logical, and fair. Best of all, it’s enforceable.

Now I’m sure the next shriek of protest from the professional hand-wringers will be that it will cause disruption in the lives of those paying little or no taxes. In the long term this wouldn’t be a problem because the wage structure would adjust under market forces. In the short term any hardship could be virtually eliminated by a gradual phase-in.

Something like this has to be done eventually. Preferably sooner than later. It’s a common economic principle that if you want less of something you tax it, and if you want more of it you subsidize it. The present tax structure penalizes success and rewards failure. We need to break that precedent and break it now.

Jump Starting Your Life as a Maverick 2

Memorandum

From: Memo Writer
Topic: Behavioral Primer Applied to the Workplace

Item 1: Dilbert is not a comic strip. It is a graphic business textbook. You can disagree with this is you want to, but that still means your work for your uncle.

Item 2: The Pointy-haired Boss is not hyperbole. He is the literal truth and 95% of bosses you work for will be just like him—or dumber.

Item 3: You will encounter all of the too-bizarre-to-be-real personality types of Dilbert eventually in your working life. I’m a cross between Wally and Alice. If you touch my coffee cup, I’ll likely smash you in the face.

Item 4: While not explicitly stated, there are both de facto minimum and maximum levels of work permitted just about anywhere. Doing less than the minimum gets you fired. Doing the average keep you employed at a static level. Doing slightly more than average gets you noticed and possibly promoted. Doing a great deal more than the average annoys your co-workers because it makes them look bad and scares the hell out of your boss who thinks you’re gunning for his job; this gets you framed or set-up to be fired.

Item 4: People who are getting by on their looks don’t know and will never suspect that they’re getting by on their looks. This is similar to the old saying, “People born rich and good-looking are born on third base and think they hit a triple.” Your drop dead gorgeous co-workers are merely born on second base and think they hit a double. Doors that are welded shut for other people instantly pop open for them, so you would think they would have a little humility. Instead, they attribute the disparity to their “talent, hard work, and determination.” Don’t try to argue with them, you’re just being jealous.

An important sub-category of Item 4 is women who are getting by on the size of their breasts, this is one of the few cases where a plain or unattractive woman can compete with her size 0 peers. Ironically, these women not only don’t know they are getting by on the size of their breasts but actually think they are holding them back. “Because of these things!” she whines, gesturing towards them with disgust. “No one takes me seriously.” Tragically, in more than half the cases, if it weren’t for her endowments, no one would take her at all.

Item 5: When your boss says he expects top quality work he means get big numbers by whatever means necessary and don’t leave a paper trail.

Item 6: None of the previous items should be construed as an endorsement of slacking-off. I just want people who revere logic and reason not to be made miserable by spending 30 years trying to make sense of the senseless, like I did. Of course you should try to do well, its the American way—and there aren’t many of us left.