Working to Put More Teeth in that Marine Corps Mouth...

Yup, spending my time building software systems for the Corps.
Always with the goal to put more POGs to the front.

In actuality, the optimization in rear guard support staff was the only positive from the Clinton Legacy Era. The Marine Corps did get leaner - and thanks to General Krulak meaner and better. The Corps is more in-sync with the military and political and social realities of the world than it was in 1992. This occurred because of strong Marine Corps leadership.

I offer no props to the Clinton Legacy Minders. I lived that dream and I aint talkin' it up as some Diamond Dude in front of some ignorant throng of Libs (Thong, or whatever they wear under their burlap sacks). The props go to the Corps and their ability to survive the Clinton Legacy. Imagine a Corps of the mid-90's with a Shenseki as Commandant.

As proof, note the Army of 2001.
They were not ready to fight.
45% Reservist, 55% Acitve
Sorry, but true.

Now, however, the Army is ready and does fight!!!

Go Rumsfeld.
Go Shoomaker

As an aside to the depressed out there. Remember one thing. While you might dwell on the problems you know - or think you know - the other side of the battlefield has problems of their own. And, personally, I would not want to be in their shoes. While I am not overly positive on Israel's Clintonesque action in Lebanon remember that for Iran and Syria and Hezbollah to succeed they will have to be viewed as the benefactors of the rebuilding process. This will draw increasing resources from each point in this terror triangle. It will not be good enough for Hezbollah (and, thus, Iran and Syria) to wander around the neighborhood spreading petrol dollars. They are going to have to provide labor, organization, and competence toward a rapid rebuild of damage incurred during fighting for their cause. Every misstep will aggravate the populace.

Hezbollah, enjoy your very own Katrina affect!!!

How much heavy machinery does Hezbollah have on site???

American Political Trends - Where are we going...

Re(1): 'National Journal's 2005 Congressional Vote Ratings', National Journal
Re(2): 'American Conservative Union Ratings of Congress', American Conservative Union

Howling from the left, howling from the right. The Republicans are going to lose seats. They will lose control of the House and Senate. There will be investigations of a President during wartime. The end is near.

The Eye of Sauron gazes upon us!!!

Get that damn ring off and have a beer or two. Mellow out dude. Its August...

Think of it this way:

When you are on the basketball court and the other team has to change its lineup and game plan who do you think is winning. The radio announcers may claim to respect the coaches ability to change up and adjust, but who is winning the game

In the context of this report, what are the long term political trends, and what does it mean to us?

I reviewed Senatorial voting patterns using two fact sets. First, the lifetime voting rating provided by the American Conservative Union. Then the 2005 voting rating provided by the National Journal. The obvious weakness in this review is the fact that I am using National Journal numbers for one year - not a lifetime rating. That said, the numbers from National Journal gel with those of the ACU. Additionally, I don't even play a statistician on the radio - so any advice is well appreciated.

Republican Senators by Initial Election Year:

Election Year	ACU	NJ Economics	NJ Social	NJ Foreign	NJ Conservative%
1968-76	69.00	65.50	57.50	74.00	70.60
1976-80	82.75	69.50	62.00	65.50	70.15
1980-92	81.78	74.89	66.11	62.67	72.27
1992-00	83.73	72.50	63.45	61.77	70.16
2000-06	90.83	69.06	70.33	68.61	75.53
Average	84.77	71.49	65.47	64.64	72.03

Democrat Senators by Initial Election Year:

Election Year	ACU	NJ Economics	NJ Social	NJ Foreign	NJ Conservative%
1968-76	5.00	17.50	13.50	14.00	16.90
1976-80	7.00	21.33	22.67	15.00	25.33
1980-92	12.17	19.00	19.83	23.35	22.43
1992-00	12.43	21.14	19.57	17.00	21.09
2000-06	19.73	25.91	20.45	29.36	27.12
Average	11.26	20.98	19.20	19.74	22.57

The simple implication is that the newest Democratic Senators are - in a significant way - transitioning conservative from their long term mean. New Democratic Senators are:

• 8.5 points higher on the American Conservative Unions lifetime voting record
• And, a whopping 14.26 points higher than the Liberal Ancient Regime!

And, in 2005 Democratic Senators elected from 2000 onward were:

• 4.93% more conservative on Economic votes than previous classes
• 1.25% more liberal on Social votes
• 9.62% more conservative on Foreign Affairs votes
• 4.53% more conservative overall.
• and, a whopping 15% more conservative on Foreign Affairs votes than the Ancients

In the meantime, the Republicans seem more at ease with their deals. Republican Senators elected for the first time in 2000 or later are:

• 6 points higher on the American Conservative Unions lifetime voting record

And, in 2005 Republican Senators elected from 2000 onward were:

• 2.43% less conservative on Economic votes than previous classes
• 4.86% more conservative on Social votes
• 3.97% more conservative on Foreign Affairs votes
• and, 3.50% more conservative overall.

Folks, for all the hue and cry, it is not the growing Republican majority that is changing its principles and game plan - it is the Democrats. We are about to see that Party fragment. The younger, more conservative studs will want - ney, need - to take control of that Party. Listen to the screaming about voting Pelosi out if she doesn't gain a majority. Reid will be gone. The American public - taken as a whole - does not respond well electorally to someone that has a single digit ACU rating. They are unelectable - and getting more so. These bubbas can be elected locally, but who wants them running a national effort. By their very nature they are out of the mainstream.

This recent conservative shift started in 2000 and will continue through at least 2012. It will take years for the Democrats to sort themselves out - and the little Lamont temper tantrum ain't helping things. Right now, the only folks who could save the Democratic Party (Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, and Ken Salazar) will not clear the Idiotarian Party primaries. There is nobody in the wings palatable to the general public.

Finally, I think this explains the consternation regarding President Bush. If I were to put him on the ACU scale (by twitching my nose somewhat scientifically) he would be right around Senator Norm Coleman of Minisota. The American public is now demanding someone in the Frist to Allen range. It is not President Bush that is changing, it is us...

That is a very good thing...

Democrats Voting Power over Principle!

Re(1): ‘Connecticut Feels Strain of a Rematch at the Polls’, NYT, Nicholas Confessore
Re(2): www.ElectionProjection.com

Can anything express the values difference between Conservative thought and Liberal thought than this graph from the NYT:

Peter Gray wrestled long and hard over how to vote in Tuesday’s Democratic
primary in Connecticut before deciding to go with Senator Joseph I. Lieberman over his challenger, Ned Lamont. And he is not exactly looking forward to doing it all over again.

“I’m very conflicted,” said Mr. Gray, 32, of Stamford. “I feel like he turned his back on the party, but I don’t like a brand-new senator who doesn’t have power.”

But like most of the Lieberman supporters interviewed during the past two days, Mr. Gray said he would probably stick with Mr. Lieberman in the general election on Nov. 7, when the senator will be on his own ballot line as he tries to keep his seat.
“Joe’s still the man for the job,” Mr. Gray said. “He’s used his power to do a lot of positive things.”

A thought: Where does that desire for naked political power find itself within the conservative election time thought process?

It is there – but is it job 1 for Conservatives.

It appears so for Liberals.


Some Stats on the US Senate:

Both Parties now are actually about as radical:

• The average rating for a Democratic Senator is 14.
• The average rating for a Republican Senator 85
  
  That is, both Parties average scores are centered 15 points off their extremes

There is very little difference in average age of Senators by Party.

• The average date of birth for a Democratic Senator is 9/16/1943.
• The average date of birth for a Republican Senator 10/20/1944

Here is a more substantial difference:

• The average election year for a Democratic Senator is 1989.
• The average election year for a Republican Senator 1994

In contrast, here are juicy tidbits:

• Newer Senators in the Democratic Party are more conservative
• 58% of the Democratic Party is of the pre-Baby Boom generation
• There is a growing divide between the aging bulls and the new Senators
  
• Newer Senators in the Republican Party are a bit more conservative
• 51% of the Republican Party is of the pre-Baby Boom generation
• There is minimal cultural divide between the aging bulls and the new Senators
  
• Out of the septuagenarians in the Senate, two of the Democrats are leaving public service while a third wanted to. None of the Republicans of that age group elected to leave public service.
  
• Another interesting tidbit, Joseph Lieberman falls dead center with liberal rating of 17. The fact that he was deposed means that the Party activists are shifting hard to the left. With the above trends, this does not bode well in general elections – how could Lamont possibly move to the center of an ever more conservative Democratic Party. His survival requires Connecticut to be an island in a sea of change – and it might be, see the ElectionProjection web site.

So, where is the country headed?

Do you want to hitch your wagon to Lamont’s star?

What are the odds that we will have a more cohesive Senate soon?

The Sound and Fury of Idiots :-&

Re(1): ‘What Is Being Left - The Ugly Ass With Attitude...’, MySandmen, Mr. Atos

Mr. Atos, in the comments to his post ‘What Is Being Left - The Ugly Ass With Attitude...’, added within the comments section:

The Democrats have ensured themselves irrelevence. They are the Macbeth party.....

"that struts and frets [its] hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more: [Theirs] is a tale [now] told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

He links to the front page of the DailyKOS – confident in their continuing idiocy.

Get this, he links to the starting page of a daily blog.

So confident is he!!!

Little did Mr. Atos know, but the ‘idiots’ in question posted the following the very next day. On a day when the civilized world beat back terrorism. On a day when the very tools these idiots rail against on a daily basis played the major factor in denying Osama his joy.

Playing politics with terror
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 05:23:16 PM PDT
This brilliant post culls unnamed anonymous sources from the world over to denigrate the President and to slight the take down of terror. Intercepting a terror plot is all about calling Democrats Ninnies or something. Well, that shoe looks like it might just fit - give it another try!

CT-Sen: Lieberman election-day traffic spike
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 05:18:58 PM PDT
Wow, the DailyKOS had a traffic spike. Is it a slow news day?

First post-Tuesday congressional poll
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 04:35:29 PM PDT
Wow, some poll in early August is showing gains for Libs. Is it a slow news day?

Terror Plot Thwarted By British
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 02:18:40 PM PDT
We caught the Terror Turds before they crapped on the civilized world again, but Hunter has this to say:

At the same time, our human intelligence efforts are nearly nil, port security continues to be ignored, our military services are tossing out fluent Arabic translators for the transgression of being gay, and the funding of meaningful "homeland security" efforts is being treated like it was a carnival game by the Republican congress, which cannot fundamentally distinguish between security efforts and required "pork" patronage.

I don't feel safer, today. And I didn't need the color-coded Rainbow of Terror, which has been even further debased by being hauled out like the world's most transparent political fear-o-meter during every election season, to tell me that.

I think Hunter would be more comfortable with the 'Rainbow Coalition' fighting the good fight, eh...

Run from Bush, run far, far away!
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 12:32:31 PM PDT
Obviously, a slow news day!

2006: Sabato's latest predictions
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 12:32:31 PM PDT
So what, obviously, a slow news day!

That old GOP playbook ain't working no more
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 11:47:40 AM PDT
Yup thats right, a culture of fear and corruption or something...

Republican Party puts Hitler mustache on Dean
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 10:58:41 AM PDT
So subtle, I can’t even see the supposed mustache.

MO-Sen: Why is Talent (R) afraid to say he's a Republican?
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 10:10:35 AM PDT
Yup, most certainly. Is there anything else to talk about.

CT-Sen: Joe's hometown paper wants him out
Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 10:06:41 AM PDT
Oooo, weee, the Tuckwilla Times want Lieberman to acquiesce to the NedRoots.

Mr. Atos, The Prognosticator

Such Talent

Then, again, maybe he could count on the DailyKOS. They are idiots after all...

Are there any 9/11 Republicans out there...

Re(1): 'Time for a Divorce', The Irish Trojan Blog, Brandon Loy
Re(2): 'My Mom is Quitting the Democratic Party Too', The Irish Trojan Blog, Brandon Loy
Re(3): 'Let's See if I got this Right', InstaLawyer, Douglas C. Weinstein

HT: InstaPundit, Glenn Reynolds

UPDATED 2006/08/1921

Pink Floyd:

Is there anybody out there?
Is there anybody out there?
Is there anybody out there? Anybody at all…

For the six folks who read my blog, I want to admit something...

I voted for Jesse Jackson in 1992. I don't even want to tell you who I voted for in 1988. That tells you something, eh… Hint, I voted for the person in the last political ad I watched – and he was in the slam. It wasn’t till 1996 that I voted for a Republican as President. Reading this site – who would have known. But, that should tell the Democratic Party something. Folks like me have only switched over the last ten years – and millions more switched on a certain Tuesday on a certain September day on a certain day this millennium.

However, I am asking the question: Are there any 9/11 Republicans out there…

I just found a couple more 9/11 Democrats:

1. Brandon Loy – All excited about getting InstaLaunched…
2. Brandon Loy's Mom - She is liberal, but not a nut single issue nut...
3. Douglas Weinstein – the InstaLawyer… He just got Instalaunched – and his server is still up…

I can’t say it isn’t a bit exciting getting launched. Michelle Malkin found a post on my site and launched hundreds of readers to view my pap. Louri Byrd (then of PoliPundit) launched hundreds more on two different entries.

It is a bit exciting.

Personally, it is the Belmont Club, MySandmen, SecurityWatchTower, CouterTerrorismBlog, and LGF readers that seem to motor over after I comment that excite me. It is neat to have a few readers here and there to get a bit disappointed when I don’t create daily entries.

Kinda ramblin’… But, what can you expect when I am partaking in Adult Libations (very sorry, note the plural) – in this case Samuel Smith’s Imperial Stout. A very invigorating libation for we NeoCons, eh…

Oh, well… Does this count as a post… I know it isn’t one of my best… I also know it will probably go into as special link list of its own. Is it really a flameout? Nope. But, it is a drunken sot of a post.

So, to my friends out there…

Sod Off Swampy

UPDATE (2006/08/1921):
I think Jeff Goldstein has been imbibing on a few himself, eh:

“TOCK, baby! The new word is TOCK! ‘Tic’ is through. ‘Tic’ represents capitulation to the Man’s predominant narrative. Whereas TOCK is the advent, brothers and sisters —the dawning of a new age of progressive political and social awakening that begins and ends with the power of the people powered people’s peopling and as such cannot be contained, constrained, or compartmentalized. It just is. Yes, TOCK is here to stay! And those who refuse to heed TOCK will soon be relegated to the ash heap of --”

I think I understand this passage!!!

Questions to the Media...

Re(1): 'Know Thy Enemy', Me
Re(2): 'A still small voice', Belmont Club, Wretchard T.C.

Why should we trust you?

What have you done that warrants such trust?

Here is an earlier compilation against trusting you and/or your editorial judgment.

Now,

Listen...

Listen...

Listen...

After the earthquake a fire passed; but Yahweh was not in the fire: and after
the fire a still small voice. It was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped
his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entrance of the cave.
Behold, a voice came to him, and said, "What are you doing here, Elijah?"

That still small voice is asking an important question:

Untrusted, who will act as the distributors of information - the fundamental of truth?

Untrusted, are we a step closer to accepting despotism?

If you are not able to hear the still small voice through the Sturm und Drang of conflict and war and dissention, than hear this clear and loud voice carrying through fire and earthquakes:

Earn your damn trust back!

Score Another Run for Charles Johnson...

Re(1): 'Reutergate: "Picture kill", MichellMalkin.com, Michelle Malkin
Re(2): 'Corrupting our sight 2', Belmont Club, Wretchard T.C.
Re(3): 'Know Thy Enemy', Me

HT: The Drudge Report

While BDS inflicted investor Warren Buffet watches billions flow out the door - kinda like the vaunted government watchdogs we call the President, the Senate, and the House - the Anti-Idiotarian Charles Johnson is fitting his cap for another feather...

Here is the unadorned image from the camera REUTERS/Adnan Hajj:















And now, to symbolize the mass murdering, carpet bombing, war crimes committing, gas chamber lighting, Gestapo marching Jooos, we doctor the photo for distribution as such:


The black jackbooted plumes of Halliburton oil fires stream into the air from a mass area bombing.

Carpet Bombing.

Indiscriminate.

Devastation.




So, the sod REUTERS/Adnan Hajj gets 'suspended' from al-Reuters.

But...

He posts another photo with his last gasp of his judgement.

A photo of Halliburton oil fires streaming from an apartment building.

A photo the fine editors of al-Reuters decide to publish. The artistic balance. The news balance. The memories of Haifa Street in Baghdad!


Soon, we shall certainly be able to answer the following:

Where is the Green Helmet Man???

Where is White T-Shirt Man???

Who voted for Hezbollah???

This photo may or may not have been doctored.
However, even an undoctored and an unstaged photo can lie.

Score Another ‘Wolf’ for Warren Buffet!!!

Re(1): ‘Why I'm not buying the U.S. dollar’, Fortune, Warren Buffet, 2003/10/26
Re(2): ‘Giving more than Buffett and Gates combined’, MarketWatch, 2006/07/25
Re(3): ‘Berkshire Profit Rises 62%; Buffett Cuts Currency Bet’, Bloomberg, 2006/08/05

Oh, woest me…

The epitome of value investing loses a cool billion speculating in the currency markets!!!

I was waiting for this. I was flabbergasted in 2003 when I read Warren Buffet was going to short the dollar inside his Berkshire Hathaway investment fund. He was the stable voice in a market of bombastic Dot.Com morons throughout the late 90’s. But, his BDS got the best of him and the drool on his balance sheets smudged the vitality of the American economy. His smoke tarnished glasses glistened at the vigor of the French and German economies…

Let us look at his reasoning and prognostication - oh my, we have had quite a few brilliant psychic seers recently, haven’t we!.

Obviously, one has to simplify a vast, dynamic, and growing economy to really study it – so let us use the Communist zero sum macro-economics model:

A perpetuation of this transfer will lead to major trouble. To understand why, take a wildly fanciful trip with me to two isolated, side-by-side islands of equal size, Squanderville and Thriftville. Land is the only capital asset on these islands, and their communities are primitive, needing only food and producing only food. Working eight hours a day, in fact, each inhabitant can produce enough food to sustain himself or herself. And for a long time that's how things go along. On each island everybody works the prescribed eight hours a day, which means that each society is self-sufficient.

Ah, that simplifies the equation. There are no goods other than land and food. There are no requirements for services such as blacksmithing or oil exploration or software development. We can narrow a 13.5 Trillion dollar economy to land and food!

And, after Thriftville starts selling surplus food to the LOPs (Low Output People) in Squanderville an imbalance occurs – resulting in Thriftville citizens actually owning hard assets in Squanderville! And, now:

At that point, the Squanders are forced to deal with an ugly equation: They must now not only return to working eight hours a day in order to eat -- they have nothing left to trade -- but must also work additional hours to service their debt and pay Thriftville rent on the land so imprudently sold. In effect, Squanderville has been colonized by purchase rather than conquest.

In effect, Mr. Buffet invested in the Euro. He invested in the dynamic French and German economies. He invested billions and billions against America and against the Dollar just when his Value Investment strategy would have netted him billions. Just when the Evil BusHitler’s tax policies revitalized the concept of value investing (see tax treatment of dividends) the key proponent of value investing started dabbling in futures and options. Missed it by t-h-a-t much…

He was right about one thing though:

I will close by reminding you again that I cried wolf once before. In general, the batting average of doomsayers in the U.S. is terrible. Our country has consistently made fools of those who were skeptical about either our economic potential or our resiliency. Many pessimistic seers simply underestimated the dynamism that has allowed us to overcome problems that once seemed ominous. We still have a truly remarkable country and economy.

It was probably wise for him to donate much of his life savings to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donor-advised charity fund. His remaining assets can thus be invested conservatively using value funds and bonds – and, thus, be saved from the grasping claws of a BDS infected currency speculator!!!

But, BDS strikes when he invests other people’s money… He is one citizen of Squanderville who is wisely purchasing assets in Thriftville:

Buffett, the company's 75-year-old chairman and the world's second-richest man after Microsoft Corp.'s Bill Gates, acquired his first company outside the U.S. in July with the $4 billion purchase of an 80 percent stake in Israel-based toolmaker Iscar Metalworking Cos. As Hezbollah fighters launch rockets within range of Iscar's plant in Tefen, Berkshire faces new risks.

"Berkshire is subject to increased risks from unstable political conditions and civil unrest in international markets,'' the company said in the filing. With the Middle East
in new turmoil, "business operations could be adversely affected directly through the loss of human resources and destruction of production facilities.''

At least he knows when to cut his losses:

Berkshire cut its currency contracts by $4.2 billion during the quarter to $1.2
billion even as the U.S. Dollar Index, used to measure its value against six
major currencies, fell the most in 18 months. Buffett, who had as much as $21.8
billion in contracts in 2005, told investors in March he would acquire interests
in companies outside the U.S. instead.

Mr. Buffet, if I may be of some assistance… I am not a doctor of finance but I play one at the workplace! Invest conservatively in value and safety. Stop seeking speculative returns. End your search for greener and safer pastures – cast your eyes instead upon the ground on which you stand. Take off those smokey glasses and mop the sweat off your brow. BusHitler will be gone in less than three years!!! Take the long view.

There is hope.
In the end, it was tidy of Mr. Buffet to cut his losses just before the Billion mark.
We will call that a moral victory of the sort being won by al-Qaeda and Hezbollah!!!

Yuk, yuk…

Schadenfreude…

Oh, how the mighty have fallen!

Now, can we have a peek inside George Sorros’ balance sheets?

Democrat Leadership in Kuwait

Re(1): 'Govt slammed for postponing acceptance of job applications; ‘Write off all consumer loans’ ', Arab Times, 2006/08/05
Re(2): 'Hezb caught in 'quagmire'', Arab Times, 2006/07/27

Yup, the Democratic Party is giving up on America and focusing like a laser beam on the bluest of the blues - Kuwait. Separate the 3rd World pap of MP Ali Al-Deqbasi from the 1st World pap of Senator Ted Kennedy if you can:

KUWAIT CITY (Agencies): “If the government cannot solve the unemployment crisis at a time when there is a huge budgetary surplus and extraordinary revenues, we don’t know when it can find job opportunities for citizens,” says MP Ali Al-Deqbasi. He criticized the government for postponing acceptance of employment applications from August to October 2006, saying: “we were optimistic when the government recently pledged to create new opportunities to lessen the unemployment problem. But after this decision we are very disappointed and wondering when the government can find jobs for citizens.”

Guess what Sherlock al-Deqbasi and Sherlock Kennedy, a real and vibrant economy is not saddled by expansive government jobs programs. Such programs may be necessary to get things done or to spark an economy in the short run - but they are drags on the economy in the long haul. How many government oil tick clerks does Kuwait really need. Open up the economy, free your citizens to think, dream, and confront you and your economy will roar. I know your advisors from the US Democratic Party are telling you otherwise - but please open your eyes (and don't read any more Paul Krugman articles).

By the way, I think many elements of the 'Right Wing Conspiracy' would be willing to hold a fundraiser to permanently station members of the Democratic Party as advisors to Kuwait - kinda like the start of the Vietnam War, eh...

What a quagmire!!!

Seeking the Weave...

I am compiling a long entry on the 'Unimpeachable Sources' used by the media.

Here is a list of my favorites:

• Larry C. Johnson
• Paul Pillar
• Ray McGovern
• Joseph Wilson
• Richard Clark
• Russell D. Tice
• Sibel Edmonds
• Mary O’McCarthy
• Rand Beers
• Sandy Berger
• Madeleine Albright
• John D. Rockerfeller

They seem to spin and weave on one another. Very complicated. Very odd.

Some seem to have once been reasonable, but are having a hard time of it when the accusing finger of history points in their direction. Some seem to think the intelligence and security and policy organizations they worked for are conspiring to murder Americans. Most seem to want to recast history in a new, more palatable, light. Some are protecting an earlier Administration and a legacy and a belief structure - that is, a religion under siege.

All seem to accuse President Bush of not detecting and destroying al-Qaeda in the 8 months he had as President before 9/11. Most point to assessments from the mid-90's demonstrating the importance of fighting terror - without defending the five years of inaction that ensued under their watch. Most want a kinder, gentler response and interaction with organized terror.

Of all Mrs. Sibel Edmonds is the oddest case in the group. Where does she stand? She is very angry that the FBI dragged its feet before 9/11 regarding Islamic terror activity within the U.S.. In this, she seems to have many facts on her side but she quickly twisted inaction, incompetence, and stupidity into a great and grand conspiracy theory. She is suing everyone. She is a 'whistleblower' extraordinaire.

Odd, very odd…

The Wheel weaves as the Wheel wills...

The March of the NeoCons...

Kinda dumb, but kinda fun!!!

Here is a very odd thought.

The rocket scientists we call Hezbollah are also part of the Iranian/Syrian deterrence force. And, they are blowing their military assets in a kabuki dance while yelling Allah Akhbar at the top of their lungs. And, these rocketeers aren’t even tipping their missiles with WMD.

Time to recall the theater ‘general’ and remind him that there is a real war on. His theater of action was supposed to fix the enemy in place – not bring the enemy closer to the heart of a major combatant. Do you think Syria wants Israel roiling about on its borders until its ready? Do you think Syria wants these violent and useless turds floating around in their cities and population centers – getting bored, getting fanatical, getting frustrated, getting pissed at Assad? And, the battlefield will not be ready till Iran has multiple nuclear weapons – including some that demonstrate their capability with above ground tests…

This is odd, very odd.

I have more confidence in Bush/Blair than Olmert. If the strategy is to force or coerce Hezbollah to blow their assets and capability before they could actually cause damage than we have a very deep strategy – and one that points to a regional escalation of the conflict on our terms sooner rather than later. Don’t forget that mighty Iran will soon be on half rations for their refined fuel requirements. The beauty of subsidies and socialism. They seem to have forgotten that gasoline is far more expensive than oil. Yuk, yuk…

Oooo, aaaaaahhhh that PNAC thang!!!
The Great Right Wing Conspiracy!!!
The shadow government!!!
Skull and Crossbones!!!

Prescient Moonbat - NYT OpEd shows his credentials

Re(1): 'The Declining Terrorist Threat', NYT OpEd, 2001/07/10, Larry C. Johnson
Re(2): 'The Declining Terrorist Threat', OpEd reprinted in full
Re(3): 'Stay on Guard Against Terrorism', NYT Reader Response, Joseph Muckerman
Re(4): 'Mr. Counterterrorism Guru', National Review, Byron York

HT: 'Your a Dead Man', Confederate Yankee

UPDATED: Oh, dear god!!!

Larry Johnson proved Moonbat Prescient when he put his heart, soul, and reputation on the line writing a NYT OpEd titled ‘The Declining Terrorist Threat’ on July 10, 2001.

If you are silly enough to pay for pap and drivel in the NYT Select read his OpEd here.

Otherwise, here is this fine example of his prescient prognostication

An excerpt:

The greatest risk is clear: if you are drilling for oil in Colombia — or in nations like Ecuador, Nigeria or Indonesia — you should take appropriate precautions; otherwise Americans have little to fear.

Although high-profile incidents have fostered the perception that terrorism is becoming more lethal, the numbers say otherwise, and early signs suggest that the decade beginning in 2000 will continue the downward trend. A major reason for the decline is the current reluctance of countries like Iraq, Syria and Libya, which once eagerly backed terrorist groups, to provide safe havens, funding and training.

...

Larry C. Johnson is a former State Department counterterrorism specialist

In contrast, the famous Mr. Muckerman replied to Mr. Johnson's expert analysis on July 14, 2001 in 'Stay on Guard Against Terrorism'.

To the Editor:

Re ''The Declining Terrorist Threat'' (Op-Ed, July 10):

Larry C. Johnson contends that it is time ''to take a deep breath and reflect on why we are so fearful'' of the terrorist threat. He states that of the 423 terrorist incidents reported last year, only 153 were judged to be ''significant'' and only 17 involved American citizens or businesses.

What he does not say is that weapons of mass destruction and disruption continue to proliferate and continue to be acquired by so-called rogue states and organizations, many of whom have declared war on our nation. They can target our cities and infrastructure with missiles or hand-delivered terror weapons.

The attack on Pearl Harbor was successful because we, as a nation, had not crossed a mental threshold that admitted that our territory could be attacked. Let us not make that mistake again.

JOSEPH E. MUCKERMAN Alexandria, Va., July 10, 2001 The writer was director of emergency planning for the Pentagon from 1986 to 1992.

Can the MSM please offer a talking head position to Mr. Muckerman. This may surprise the editors of the NYT, but Mr. Muckerman was right. He also wrote an article I bet is rather intriguing: “Rethink the Nuclear Threat.” Orbis, Winter 1994, v. 38, no. 1, p. 99-

Personally, I have heard enough from Mr. Johnson.

More from Mr. Muckerman:

‘An Army at the Ready’ – NYT, September 6, 2000
‘Lesson of Pearl Harbor’ – NYT, December 16, 1999
‘Add Civil Defense’ – NYT, January 30, 1997

The fool Larry C. Johnson grabbed a pen and wrote himself into history...

But, at least when not being pumped up by the media as the expert of all terrorism experts he has a streak of honesty:

Of course, he didn’t give an inch, either. “I stand by everything I said in that piece,” Johnson says. “Go through it in detail. Put it into the right context. . . . Nowhere in that article did I say we needed to ignore Islamic terrorism.” Mark that up as another bold statement.

On the issue of his credentials, Johnson says he received commendations for his work at the CIA, but he takes a more modest tone than one might expect. “I don’t represent myself to be Mr. Counterterrorism Guru,” he says. “I get introduced as the deputy director of counterterrorism at the State Department. But my full title was deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations. In Washington, the longer your title, the less important you are, and I had a really long title.”

As for his connections — how he knows enough to speak about the CIA after 17
years away — well, that’s where the openness ends. “I’m not going to get into
the specifics of how I know what I know,” Johnson says. And that’s that.

Update (2006/07/26 2013 PST)

Dear god, there is a Guckert/Gannon angle to this...

If we get Johnson, Wilson, Plame, Momma Moonbat, Heltzik, Leopold, Greenwald, Frisch and all their assorted sock puppets together we can mix them all up for another 15 minutes of fame.

See You on the Other Side of Hell!!!

And, perhaps, the isolationist Left shall give us Total War...

We will know in a few weeks…

Gee, thanks...

The Left’s love and concern and correctness and decency in this lawless land leave them - and us - one solution since they cannot stomach the other. Their lack of willpower in standing against the Reich at the Rhineland may lead all of us to stand on the beaches of Normandy. Waiting. Killing. Mechanized. It may yet come to that.

But, we still have a few weeks.

The 2nd Conjecture may yet have some life.

Total War will be fought symmetrically by us and asymmetrically by the other side.

We will lose thousands to millions in shopping malls and sporting events and indefensible gathering places. The main target will be the glorious - and apostate - underbelly of Western Europe. The only thing that will save them is the ruthlessness they still have within them - special note: their police are not like our police. But, so soft, so near, so apostate. Even more so than the Great Satan. To reach out and touch them. A dream. A dream of others before.

They will lose millions to hundreds of millions when the next Bomber Harris takes command. Their infrastructure, their cities, and their military are unprotected. Our culture will forever change. We are still challenged with Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Tokyo, Dresden, and Monte Carlo. Those necessities will be a very distant memory. The only targets they have worth hitting are population centers.

At least we are talking about a 3rd Conjecture solution without 3rd Conjecture weapons.

There were options, there were ifs...

Sturm und Drang..

Time, Still...

After the earthquake a fire passed; but Yahweh was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. It was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entrance of the cave. Behold, a voice came to him, and said, "What are you doing here, Elijah?"

The Deterrent Never Discussed…

There has been much bloviation regarding WMD and how Valerie Plame single-handedly destroyed the Iraqi WMD capability during Clinton’s era of ‘Peace and Prosperity’.

However, one lesson that was loud and clear to terrorist regimes has been lost in the shuffle. Namely, that American and coalition forces did invade a state that was known to have indigenously built and used WMD of various and lethal forms.

One result of that salient fact occurred when the valiant Moammar Khadafi, the el Presidente of Libya, unilaterally declared his WMD program following said invasion. A program as of yet unknown to the UN WMD sleuths – a couple of years before another unknown unknowable became known with regards to Iran.

Now, with the Libs railing that BusHitler knew there was no WMD prior to invasion; but instead instigated a very complex ruse based on Jewish CIA suicide operatives crashing planes (or shooting missiles if you are really serious about this) into really big and important buildings in an effort to make a grab for Middle-East oil.

Get it…

Libs, you may have blown the only deterrent available…

You see, America didn’t really invade a nation in the teeth of WMD…

They must still be the weak horse. They value life more than we value death.

Will the next WMD armed thug be deterred by our actions…

These folks (Ahmadinejad, Jong-Il, and Assad) are rather stupid, rather barbaric, and rather brazen.

So, the answer is – as I think is being made clearer by the day – Nope…

Bush and Rumsfeld let Osama Go!!!

How many times must one hear this ignorant rant:

Bush should have sent 50,000 paratroops into Afghanistan to deal with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and not count on indigenous support.

Constantly ranting ‘Bush letting Osama go’ in Tora Bora.
Wailing about this, crying about that.
It never ends.

So, let us start with a map:

Q1: Are you going to parachute your 50,000 airborne infantry into one area or spread them around. If you are going to spread them around how was that going to help in the capture and trial of bin Laden? If brilliantly dropping in on one spot, which spot? Why? If Tora Bora is your landing zone why wouldn’t al-Qaeda just traipse west into Iran or north into Turkmenistan or east into Pakistan? When al-Qaeda defines their movements are you simply going to airdrop more thousands to attack them in transition – into other countries.

Q2: Do you actually think we had 50,000 paratroops immediately available with the capability to airlift them promptly into Afghanistan? What kind of weapons do you think paratroops carry? Remember, we had President Clinton’s ‘Peace Dividend’ to spend! Are you really talking about changing the American military force structure before we were to strike al-Qaeda and the Taliban (like Shinkeki's 400,000 comment implied)? How many years did you want to expend in the effort to build that capability – and therefore, how long were you going to permit al-Qaeda to run free?

Q3: Assuming we have those 50,000 paratroops to spare (and I don’t think we had 50,000 jump qualified personnel in 2001 – period), can generate the necessary airlift capability, and figure out exactly where to drop them – how do you supply these guys?

The answers to the first two questions by these Armchair Generals imply that, at best, they can assume the nickname “General Maintenance”. The type of leaders and military strategists that ensure the base is clean and painted and the grass is cut – but can’t lead or implement change worth a damn. However, these bloviations are only hints of foolishness.

The proof is in the answer to Question 3. Supply and support of large military expeditions separate General Maintenance from General Patton. How do you supply a land locked nation like Afghanistan through the air? Whose airspace do you use? Do you have any idea of the material requirements for a force that large? How permanent were those ‘good will’ agreements you site so often (ah, the old ‘we blew all that post 9/11 goodwill’ argument) with nations such as Iran, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan?

If you contend we could have airdropped tens of thousands of paratroopers onto the precise spot to fix and destroy al-Qaeda and the Taliban without a buy-in from the indigenous peoples then you are a fool…

And, a fool is forever…

Keep Your Eyes on the Prize…

Re(1): ‘F-16 Fighting Falcon’, FAS Military Analysis Network
Re(2): ‘Extending the F-16 range’, Defense Update
Re(3): ‘Iran Special Weapons Facilities’, GlobalSecurity.org
Re(4): 'CIA Factbook - The Middle East Map', CIA Factbook

Israel may strike Syria with ground forces - and hold ground.

Why?

The Osirak reactor was about 1,200 km from Israel..

That, in 1981, was the absolute outer limit of the bombing range of an F-16. There have been numerous improvements to the range and lethality of the F-16. This includes an extension to the combat range of the current variant – as described by ‘Extending the F-16 range’ in Defense Update. Per this article, Israel purchased these enhancements on or before 2004.

Now let us fast forward to Summer 2006…

Iran is sponsoring terror at Israel’s southern border

Syria is sponsoring terror at Israel’s northern border

Iran is ranting about obliterating Israel from the face of the earth.

But, Iraq – and thus American airspace – lies between Israel and Iran. It is very problematic to expect American armed forces to permit an Israeli air strike through their airspace – such permission would more than imply a coordinated effort. Would America accede to that? Personally, I think not.

Thus, the Iranian WMD sites are most likely beyond Israeli F-16 range as currently deployed. Even with American cooperation - which is problematic.

Let us assume that Israel has a few options to deal with Hezbollah and Hamas. Why chose an option that includes a significant ground campaign and an attack on an ‘innocent’ nation – ie. Syria.

Why…

One reason becomes clear when you look at a map.



Because the eastern portion of Syria is within F-16 combat range of the vast majority of Iranian WMD facilities and missile launch sites.

Thus, feint to Lebanon, strike Damascus, set up a combat airfield on that eastern appendage, and fly through an unpopulated portion of Turkish airspace to hit Iran's WMD development and deployment sites.

A New Favorite - Goldstein Fried Frisch

Re(1): 'Protein Wisdom', Jeff Goldstein
Re(2): 'Althouse.... The Stupidity Rays... Are Overwhelming...', Brad DeLong
Re(3): 'Excremental Sighting at University of Arizona', Me

Got a bit caught up in a dust up or two this week.

1. I have a new Frisch Face on my BlogRoll... Yuk, yuk... I have spent more time on Jeff Goldstein's Protein Wisdom since the Learned Professor jumped his child and wife. Tell me you don't smile when reading:

Watership Up?

From the August/September Reason (print edition):

Doctors at the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest University report success in regrowing healthy cells for diseased rabbit penises.

Researchers say the process could pave the way for treating impotence in human beings.—Which, while swell news for impotent males, is nevertheless a bummer for the French, who have long considered diseased rabbit penises something of a delicacy.

Or am I’m thinking of snails? Or the Koreans?

update: IS THERE A MULTICULTURALIST IN THE HOUSE?

I'm telling you, that is a funny post...

And, this is almost as telling as Dan Rather waiving the magic National Guard Papers:

Uh, wow.

And people wonder why some of us mistrust the traditional media.

I left my response in the comments at the TC site.

It’s my own fault, really. In fact, my grandmother always used to say, “never trust a female Tuscon Citizen reporter with a hyphenated last name; she’ll screw you like she was putting together shelving”—but did I listen?

No. No I did not.

Apologies, Grams. Your wisdom knows no bounds.

So, to Frischen things up a bit, I hereby and there-to-fore add Goldstein's Protein Wisdom to my blog roll.


2. Regretfully, I can't take Bradly DeLong's semi-coherent lefty rant site - did you know he was President Clinton's Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury - off my blog roll because he never was on it. I enjoyed schooling his little ones in the comments section of 'Althouse.... The Stupidity Rays... Are Overwhelming...'. It was sad when he excommunicated me and deleted all my posts. If Brad actually reads this I would like to challenge him to post those comments and have others determine whether or not I am a troll. Hey, Brad, keep it in context though...


3. I called Deborah Frisch a turd on her site. I think I'll stick with that... Concise... Clear... To the point... Clarity over Agreement!

And, now banned :-{

Re(1): 'Brad DeLong', Wikipedia
Re(1): 'Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal', Brad DeLong
Re(2): 'Althouse.... The Stupidity Rays... Are Overwhelming...', Brad DeLong

Brad DeLong, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Clinton, banned me from his site. He worked for Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin - a person who I have deep respect for...

I got banned for commenting at the 'Althouse.... The Stupidity Rays... Are Overwhelming...' post. You can see my name burning in effigy throughout the comments.

I have asked Mr. DeLong to email me my comments stream. None of them were factually defeated by the commenters.

But I was told I was a troll - one who developed and wrote large, content driven, and primary sourced posts...

Here is a favorite response (part of a comment of mine italicized):

Boghie:

"What does this stat really mean? It means that to get ahead you have to take a
supervisory position. Your experience and skillset should progress to the point
that you should be able to attain a supervisory position."

When we're all--all 100% of us---suitably ensconced in supervisory positions, who will be the 'worker bees' whom we shall supervise?

Are you suggesting the reintroduction of slavery? Feudalism?

You are, aren't you? Not that we'd call it by those nasty names, naturally.

This is how you see the immigration problem, I presume. As a source of slaves and vassals.

How wonderfully fucking enlightened of you. Some of your rightwing buddies want to gas them, or at least shoot them on the barbed wire fence.

My comment dealt with a fact extrapolated from the starting and ending average wage for each President since LBJ - inflation adjusted to 2005 dollars. I would like to thank JLR for that information. Since Brad seems to be a happy hacker, here is the info:

Stunster-

The Bureau of Labor Statistics average hourly earning page does make for interesting reading. Just for fun I converted the average hourly earnings of all the available years for all private nonsupervisory positoins to 2005 dollars. Here are the numbers for the starting year and ending year of the presidents from 1964 on:

President(years) start/end (2005 dollars)

LBJ (1964/1968): 15.94/16.94
Nixon (1968/1974): 16.94/17.54
Ford (1974/1976): 17.54/17.36
Carter (1976/1980): 17.36/16.21
Reagan (1980/1988): 16.21/15.56
Bush I (1988/1992): 15.56/14.96
Clinton (1992/2000): 14.96/15.82
Bush II (2000/2005): 15.82/16.11

Here is an ordered list of these presidents with their fractional change per year of office

LBJ +1.6%
Clinton +0.72%
Nixon +0.59%
Bush II +0.37%
Reagan -0.50%
Ford -0.51%
Bush I -0.96%
Carter -1.66%

Not very scientific, but interesting to look at.
-JLR

Using JLR's inflation adjusted information I found that the average wage earners made (take home pay only reflects Federal taxes, not Social Security, Medicare, and State Tax):

Clinton:

Gross Income: $31,640
Taxable Income: 31,640 - 7,500 (Standard Deduction) = $24,140
Income Tax: $3,621
Annual Take Home: $28,019
Monthly Take Home: $2,335
Hourly Take Home: $14.01 off a gross salary of $15.82 per hour

Bush:

Gross Income: $32,220
Taxable Income: 31,640 - 10,000 (Standard Deduction) = $22,220
Income Tax: $2,578
Annual Take Home: $29,642
Monthly Take Home: $2,470
Hourly Take Home: $14.82 off a gross salary of $16.11 per hour

I simply asked this Stunster dude and his friend Anne (is that the PoliPundit troll of old) if they would rather have $29,642 take home pay or $28,019. It was an easy question. No tricks. I guess Brad did not like the fact that Bush gave this chap in the lowest income tax bracket an $0.81 per hour pay raise.

A hidden one, no doubt. And, one the President doesn't brag enough about.

But a pay raise no politico or company can take from him/her.

Love and Kisses Brad - kinda sad that the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury did not stoop low enough to contest these and other facts. I could have flaws in my computations, thinking, or general algorithm. A nice factual return by you or a top commenter would have been appreciated. That is something I get routinely at The Belmont Club and SecurityWatchTower. That is the least I could expect from a fine SESer such as yourself.

Enjoy the 'Fair, Balanced, and Reality-Based' community you created over there!!!

NYT Surprised by 2nd Annual Jump In Revenues since Tax Cuts...

Re(1): 'Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Is Curbing Deficit', NYT, Edmund J. Andrews
Re(2): 'Budget Deficit Estimation...', BoghieOnYourSix, Me
Re(3): 'Response to 'Liberal and Loving It' - Ranking the American Presidents', Me
Re(4): 'Fiscal Flameout???', BoghieOnYourSix, Me
Re(5): 'Bush's Promise - To cut the deficit in half by FY2009', BoghieOnYourSix, Me
Re(6): 'Pull This Finger, Will You', BoghieOnYourSix, Me
Re(7): 'Eeyore Covers the Budget', PowerLineBlog, John Hinderaker

UPDATE: Brad DeLong removes a comment by me from his Blog
Re(8): 'Althouse.... The Stupidity Rays... Are Overwhelming...', Brad DeLong

Nice Try NYT!!!

You get a Smiley Face

So evil corporate income tax has almost tripled during the Bush Economic Blight, and individual income tax revenue has grown substantially. And, the deficit is shrinking rather dramatically in this era of war and corruption. That is something you have to admit – but great grudge work and slight of hand.

So your fine article deserves a Fisking!!!

Here is the Gist of your Argument – as mouthpiece for the Loony Left:

Democrats and many independent budget analysts note that overall revenues have barely climbed back to the levels reached in 2000, and that the government has borrowed trillions of dollars against Social Security surpluses just as the first of the nation's baby boomers are nearing retirement.

For most of the article the NYT uses numbers from FY2001 (the last Clinton budget – a point never made), but here they choose to use FY2000 numbers. Why??? Because in the context of later discussions the NYT denigrates the revenue increase as being the result of rich people selling stocks and bonds – that is, investment taxes. Thus, doom is around the corner.

But, hey look at this hand will you… Not that hand stupid… Over here we are talking about the last Great Man’s personal income tax revenues coming in at a mite over 1 Trillion dollars. And while we are talking about a huge increase in FY2006 revenues we shall pull the FY2005 revenues out of the hat over here. See, that Monkey of a President only yanked $927 Billion out of your wallet. Quiet about the earlier comment we had to make about the growth in all forms of revenue since last year… Stop looking at the Monkey bringing in over $1 Trillion this year – it must be a clerical mistake.

When will you audiences suspend disbelief and just watch the show. We had to tell you about evil corporations paying three times as much tax than they did in FY2001. Look at FY2000 where they were forced to redistribute $207 Billion. Shut up about projections of Halliburton et al greasing the skids to the tune of $350 Billion for FY2006. Look at this hand, please…

Over here, President BusHitler hasn’t even come to Clinton’s second to final numbers. This chump only brought in $927 Billion last year in individual income taxes and an obvious one-off of $278 Billion from Halliburton’s war profiteering.

Let us continue:

"The fact is that revenues are way below what the administration said they would be a few years ago," said Thomas S. Kahn, staff director for Democrats on the House Budget Committee. "The long-term prognosis is still very, very bleak, and the administration doesn't have any kind of long-term plan."

One reason the run-up in taxes looks good is because the past five years looked so bad. Revenues are up, but they have lagged well behind economic growth.

The surge could also evaporate as quickly as it appeared. Over the past decade, tax
revenues have become much more volatile, alternately soaring and plunging in the
wake of swings in the stock market and repeatedly defying government projections.

Mr. Kahn et al, please take in this set of numbers (and we even forget about the subsequent damage caused by 9/11 and Katrina – I can’t figure out why the numbers looked so bad after 9/11 and pre-2003 tax changes):

FY2001 (President Clinton’s last budget, in billions)

GDP: 10,128

Individual Income Tax: 994
Corporate Income Tax: 151
Total Revenues: 1,990
DOD Expenditures: 290
Social Security Expenditures: 489
Deficit: +127 (surplus)

FY2006 estimate (current budget, in billions)

GDP: 13,100
Individual Income Tax: 1,027
Corporate Income Tax: 352
Total Revenues: 2,375
DOD Expenditures: 512
Social Security Expenditures: 603
Deficit: -280(deficit)

Note the growth in GDP, Individual Income Tax, Corporate Income Tax, DOD expenditures, and Social Security expenditures.

Here is something to think about. Let us balance the budget! First, index Social Security Benefits to inflation rather than wages and bring them to balance with receipts and investment growth. Then cut our Defense budget in half. That will fix it. What, you will not talk about Social Security and you cannot politically cut the DOD budget. Then what are you going to do? Don’t know.

My guess is that President Bush figures 9/11 and Katrina are rare events. So, President Bush is figuring that if the economy grows at the steady and sustainable rate his administration is promoting - while spending is being brought steadily and sustainably under control - than the deficit will shrink. Not a bad idea – where is yours?

But, remember one must look at my right hand when I gesture with it – don’t look at my left hand. My right hand is showing increasing government spending while my left hand illustrates a shrinking deficit – both in real terms and as a ratio. I can’t see the pattern. I am lost. I am thinking like Bill Keller and the rest of the word smiths and Congressional Intelligencia – that is, I ain’t got no idea what numbers and trends mean.

So, for the John Kerry’s of the world here is a nice little chart:

Fiscal Year	GDP	Tax Revenue	Deficit	% of GDP	% of Tax Revenue
FY2004	11,743	1,798	412	3.51%	22.91%
FY2005	12,479	2,053	318	2.55%	15.49%
FY2006	13,400	2,285	286	2.13%	12.52%

That chart implies that economic and revenue growth is expanding faster that even drunken Republicans can spend it. And, let us not forget Senator Landrieu’s demand for more Katrina relief – remember she wanted $200 Billion more than she got. So where would we be if the other drunks were in power?

I guess this about sums up the MediaCrat opinion:

Tax receipts amounted to about 17.5 percent of the nation's gross domestic product in 2005, far below the level five years ago and still slightly below the average of 18 percent since World War II. Spending, by contrast, is running at about 20 percent of gross domestic product .

The recent average for tax receipts is 18 percent – so 17.5 percent is a significant cut to the NYT (please refer to NYT stock price). And, what about Clinton’s sustainable DotCom boom ratio of 20.6 percent. That is certainly sustainable – especially when it is almost 3 percent over norm and there are no wars, no massive natural disasters, and no recession.

And we will be at war forever, and have cities wiped off the map every year, and economic doom is just around the corner.

Makes sense to me!!!

But, then again, we might draw down our troops in Iraq, the weather might be balmy and sweet, and the recent downturn in the stock market might point to those rich bastards (and me) selling appreciated stock and paying those damn capital gains taxes…

And, then I ran across this telling chart at PowerLine:

That makes even more sense to me!!!

Note:
One last comment, the shrinking deficit and growing revenues are not surprising. My numbers for FY2006 are from February and I easily predicted the actual deficit numbers for FY2005. Mr. Andrews should take some time out of his CommonDreams and DailyKOS reads and check out some primary sources. I am eternally grateful to Jayson (formerly of PoliPundit) for directing me to the primary data in his 'Hooverville' posts.

UPDATE: (2006/07/09 2151)
I just had the honor of haveng a version of the above removed as a comment in a Brad DeLong's blog post titled 'Althouse.... The Stupidity Rays... Are Overwhelming...'. The honor of it all... But, I put some time in it. Guess he didn't like the fact that I called him on some opinion or another - but I definitely didn't Frisch him. The only time that has ever happened to me in the past was when the Huffington Post ran an article about the rich using loopholes to avoid taxes. I had to post a comment with a link to her public tax records (she was running for Governor of California the year before) and mention that while she had 4.5 million in income she paid $700 in taxes - like a pig at the trough. To her credit, the post was restored. Kinda sneaky about it...

Excremental Sighting at University of Arizona

Re(1): 'Protein Wisdom', Jeff Goldstein
Re(2): 'A New Low for the 'Progressives'', LittleGreenFootballs, Charles Johnson
Re(3): 'white flag', South(west)paw, Deborah Frisch
Re(4): 'A Psychologist's Defense of Ward Churchill', CounterPunch, Deborah Frisch
Re(5): 'On Blogosphere Manners - BRING IT ON', Left2Right, Comment by Deborah Frisch
Re(6): 'UCLA Faculty Diversity: Updated',ProfessorBainbridge, Can be titled: 'When Deb's Attack'
Re(7): 'Dang, will Deb pick on me now?', Deinonychus Antirrhopus, Deb Comments - Toughly!
Re(8): And, now the 'Maoist Internationalist Movement References our fine Professor...
Re(9): 'An Abbeyfest dispatch from Why, Arizona', Tuscon Weekly, Frish going to AbbeyFest

Deborah Frisch
Former Psychology Professor
University of Arizona

Ooo, a special note on bottom - AbbeyFest!!!









This Tepid Turd (a Progressive - most certainly) makes the following mea culpa:

July 08, 2006
white flag

I wrote some inflammatory comments at a blog by a guy named Jeff Goldstein called protein wisdom that infuriated many bloggers and commenters. Many of these bloggers emailed my boss at the University of Arizona to tell on me.

In hindsight, the things I wrote were over the line of nastiness. I apologize to Mr. Goldstein.

I have resigned from the University of Arizona so there is no need for other enraged people to write to administrators there.

Some blogs have posted comments that I perceive to be physically threatening. I have contacted the FBI and the Pajamas Media staff to determine how to proceed with this aspect of this unbelievable experience.

My intention in this post is to de-escalate the situation. The comments that started this all were nasty, not threatening. But I feel very threatened by the response.

Jeff - I lost my job. You won. Could you call off the troops?

Here is a compilation of comments this Learned Professor excreted on the Protein Wisdom blog site:

"..I’d like to hear more about your “tyke” by the way. Girl? Boy? Toddler? Teen? Are you still married to the woman you ephed to give birth to the tyke?

Tell all, bro! as I said elsewhere, if I woke up tomorrow and learned that someone else had shot you and your “tyke” it wouldn’t slow me down one iota. You aren’t "human” to me. So if you could just tell me the AGE and SEX of your “tyke,” I’d be stoked!

Thanx!

Ooh. Two year old boy. Sounds hot. You live in Colorado, I see. Hope no one Jon-Benets your baby.

Are you still married to the woman you humped to produce the toddler? I reiterate: If some nutcase kidnapped your child tomorrow and did to her what was done to your fellow Coloradan, Jon-Benet Ramsey, I wouldn’t give a damn.

You know, Jeff, I just don’t get it. You say, and I believe you, that a human female chose to procreate with you and you have produced a 2 year old progeny.

But you live in Colorado and I really can’t believe there are women desperate and/or stupid enough to procreate with the likes of you.

What am I missing, dude?

Bring it on, hombre.

Bring it on."

My guess is that folks pulled on their basketball sneakers, yanked on a pair of shorts and a tee-shirt and brought their game to the gym.

Sounds like she lost - she didn't have much game...

And, now the Mighty Excremental melts into diarrhea – to flow ever so slowly down to the turd farm to be processed and disposed of properly. Probably a non-organic process – oh the humanity of it all.

Mrs. Frisch, I would like to remind you and all the other future and past Excrementals on the web – The Net is Forever… Your Mea Culpa and your comments will be perused for years and decades and maybe centuries.

Yeah, your 15 minutes of fame!

Google: ""Deborah Frisch" for lifelong entertainment!!!

Can we start calling this type of commenter the 'Frischy Excremental'?

Note: Special thanks to the University of Arizona for prompt and proper action!

UPDATE:

I (Professor Frisch) was going for Abbeyfest VIII--the eighth annual gathering of members of an Internet list devoted to Edward Abbey. The abbeyweb ensnares libertarians, anarchists, activists and desert rats. Although I've been a member for five years, this was my first Abbeyfest.