Ohh... Bamm... Ahhh!

Must. Read.

Boo Fucking Hoo Du Jour

Be still my bleeding heart:

"A whopping 582,000 direct and indirect jobs would be lost in Canada over the next five years if the ailing Big Three US auto makers shut down their Ontario operations, said a study Tuesday.

"If output is reduced by 50 percent, 296,000 jobs would be lost nationally, said the 11-page report prepared for the Ontario Manufacturing Council.

Gee, I wonder how much the Canadian government is kicking in towards the bailout. Oh, it says right here...:

"On Friday, the Canadian and Ontario governments reached a tentative deal for a 3.4-billion Canadian dollar (2.8 billion US) bailout of Chrysler, General Motors and Ford's operations in Ontario province."

Wow, $2.8 billion, out of what? $50 billion? In other words, the Canadians are basically going to contribute bus fare. Gee, thanks.

As always, I've got a better idea -- how about the so-called "Big Three" pick up and move their entire operations to Canada, along with the union bosses who want to continue living high on the hog while milking the US taxpayer to subsidize their lifestyles. Hell, the Canadians are good Socialists, they won't mind footing the bill for the good of the proletariat. Bon voyage, douchebags.

Guess The Party!

Since it's politically acceptable that Obama purchased the White House, others apparently thought it only natural that his prior office be put up for sale:

Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich and his Chief of Staff, John Harris, were arrested today by FBI agents on federal corruption charges alleging that they and others are engaging in ongoing criminal activity: conspiring to obtain personal financial benefits for Blagojevich by leveraging his sole authority to appoint a United States Senator; threatening to withhold substantial state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members sharply critical of Blagojevich; and to obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official actions -- both historically and now in a push before a new state ethics law takes effect January 1, 2009.

Oddly (no, not really...), there's no mention in the CBS article of which political party the Hon. Governor Blagojevich belongs to. So I checked the Chicago Tribune's story, and whatcha' know? No mention there, either. Ditto Sun-Times. Surely the vaunted New York Times, the old gray lady, America's newspaper of record, all the news that's shit to print... surely The Times would tell me, right? No... I must therefore conclude that he is an Independent, like all criminal politicians who are not Republicans.

Ha ha! Just kidding -- he's a DEMOCRAT! Who woulda' thunk that tidbit of information would be neglected in the reporting by certain major newspapers?

Interestingly, I never had to do a Wikipedia search to find out that Ted Stevens was a Republican. Or Larry Craig. Or Vito Fossello. Or Duke Cunningham. Why, I didn't have to read past the second paragraph to find out their party affiliation. Curious, considering there is no media bias.

Thanks, Dumbasses

I wish stupidity was painful.

Bail This.

Gee, sounds like the auto union didn't funnel quite enough cash into a certain Senator's pocket:

WASHINGTON, Nov 13 (Reuters) - A senior Democratic senator raised doubts on Thursday that an attempt to bail out U.S. automakers had enough support to clear Congress this year.

As Republicans amplified their concerns about a bailout, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd raised the biggest red flag for fellow Democrats trying to craft a $25 billion rescue and pass it during a post-election session set to start next week.

"Right now, I don't think there are the votes," Dodd of Connecticut told reporters about prospects in the Senate. "I want to be careful of bringing up a proposition that might fail," he said.

Although Dodd said "we ought to do something" and personally backed using money from the ongoing $700 billion financial services rescue program to help Detroit, he was skeptical that enough Republicans would support a bailout.

Well, too fucking bad, isn't it? Great business plan, Detroit: Run your companies into the shitter, then act surprised that your companies are in the shiter. And then, run to mommy and daddy the government to fork over other peoples' money to subsidize your failures. I've got a better idea. Umm... No.

Fuck GM. Did the government bail out Packard? No. Studebaker? No. Auburn? No. Did we survive without them? Just fine, thank you. General Motors has been building shit for decades, so good riddance. Let GM sell off what little of their assets that are of any value (perhaps the Corvette division) to Toyota or BMW, then bulldoze the rest into Lake Michigan. At least the foreign companies can build quality cars in America, with American workers, and still turn a profit -- largely because they don't have to pay shakedown protection money to organized crime the UAW, but also because they know how to build cars:

In the 1970s a survey was taken of German and American auto executives. They were asked, "What do you do?" The Americans replied, "We sell cars." The Germans answered, "We build cars." It was a difference in corporate culture. The Japanese noticed. They decided to build cars, and they succeeded. Many Americans today, brought up on Pontiacs and Fords, won't own an American car, unless it's a car made in Ohio by a foreign company. What a stunning change.

American cars suck. I learn this lesson at great expense every 10 years or so when I decided to give Detroit another chance. They never fail to disappoint. I drive a Jeep Wrangler, purchased new in 2003, and the only reason I'm somewhat happy with it is that I bought it with low expectations; when it turned out to be mediocre I felt like I got a bargain. It's got 120,000 miles and is making all sorts of funny noises, but then again it made all sorts of funny noises the day I drove it off the lot. I'll drive it until it dies then bury it in a shallow grave. It will be the last American automobile I ever buy. Does Chrysler Corporation lament this loss of future business? Fuck no... Washington's got them covered, they'll be getting my money one way or another. Sickening.

Simplistic Notions

Oh dear... now that they've taken control over all three branches of government they're not afraid to say it in plain terms that all but the most ignorant among us will understand:



Call me a simpleton, but yes... I DO believe in the "simplistic notion" that I'm entitled to keep the wealth I create and earn. And yes, I do have a seething antipathy towards those who have a more, um, "enlightened" and "nuanced" belief that they can help themselves to my shit.

It really is simple: It's NOT YOURS. It's MINE. So KEEP YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF.

And you wonder why gun sales are skyrocketing?

Messiah Update

A wrap-up of Week One A.O. (After Obama):

Yet another Obama-Lincoln comparison. I need to vomit. This part I find especially rich:

"To reach out to his critics, Lincoln even allowed a reporter from an opposition newspaper, a journalist named Henry Villard, to virtually move into his office in Springfield, Mo., to chronicle the transition."

Yes, I'm certain Obama will be opening the Oval Office to Fox News. There's plenty of precedent for that, he was always fair and open to media outlets that didn't support his candidacy.

Lincoln... LOL! While Republican talking heads were crying about Obama "already measuring the drapes in the Oval Office" a week before the election, I saw past it all and realized the truth: Obama's supporters sycophants were already measuring Mt. Rushmore. What? No room for The One? No problem, just take down Jefferson's mug - who needs him, he owned slaves, right? And while we're at it, why not a national holiday for The President who hasn't actually done anything yet? Yes We Can!

Then again, maybe the comparison isn't so crazy after all... Wasn't Lincoln's first act as President also to grant enemies of America captured illegally on the battelfield the same rights as US citizens in court, right down to government-issue ACLU attorneys. I think I remember that from history class.

So when I read shit like this...

"As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends," Obama said. "Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection."

...I have to wonder who the Obamunists think he's talking to - the Republicans, or the Jihadists? The latter, coincidentally, seem to believe that Obama is good for jihad.

"The leader of a jihadi group in Iraq argued Friday that the election of Barack Obama as president represented a victory for radical Islamic groups that had battled American forces since the invasion of Iraq."

I never thought I'd agree with terrorists, but whatcha' know? Only a week after The One is elected and I've already reached common ground with America's sworn enemies. He IS the peacemaker!!!

No. Just kidding. It really makes me ill. In fact it almost makes me nostalgic for Bill Clinton, who merely tried to "Change" the military by Presidential decree with his "don't ask, don't tell, don't drop your soap" policy on his first day on the job. Now we've got a President-elect who, if he listens to those "advisors" who pulled the strings to get him elected, may very well set captured enemy combatants free while the war is still going on... unless he first decrees the war to be over, then I guess they won't be enemies any more. Wow, in hindsight Clinton seems like a big, harmless ol' goofball, doesn't he?

Now, I don't mean to pick on our President-elect -- to do so would be racist, anyway. I'm sure terrorists are the last thing on his mind. After all, they haven't attacked America since September 11, 2001 when it became clear that Bush would be leaving office in 7 short years, and now that Bush is on the way out all the radical Islamists will throw down their arms and love America once again, much like the French. No, The One has some serious shit to deal with -- for starters, he must Rescue Human Civilization. Wow, I bet he didn't realize that was in the job description when he announced his candidacy. And what will he have to Rescue Human Civilization from? Why... the weather. More specifically the rapidly cooling...warming...cooling global temperatures, the rising...dropping sea levels, the expanding...shrinking...expanding glaciers, and the bad, bad (white, Republican, rich) humans that are causing all of this Global Warming...Global Cooling...Climate Change, as pointed out by all of...the majority of...some of the United Nation's finest scientific thinkers...politicians, a couple of whom are actual climatologists. So once Obama takes office, he must shift America's limited resources away from the so-called "War on Terror" and start fighting the real war -- The War on Weather.

After the planet is saved, The One can settle into the easy job of fixing our economy that was decimated by the Failed Economic Policies of the Bush Administration and John McCain, who refused to do anything about the impending subprime mortgage market collapse. I say the job is easy, because all you need to do is confiscate wealth from those who earn it and hand it over to those who didn't; history has proven that always works. And those middle-class tax cuts and other miracles that you were promised? Oh... heh. Just kidding. C'mon, can't you people take a joke? Besides, who needs unpatriotic tax cuts -- soon our economy will rebound to new heights and America will once again be taxed into the prosperity of the Carter years. Your dog will shit gold bullion and $100 bills (with Obama's face on them, no doubt) will grow on trees.

And just in time, too -- we've got another failing industry to bail out reward for their incompetence.

HopeChange™, you racists.

Why I Moved To Texas.

Any questions?

VDH: The End Of Journailsm

Memo to all the Obama sycophants and cheerleaders in the so-called "journalism" department of the brothel known as The American Media: The Jig Is Up (no pun intended).

"There have always been media biases and prejudices. Everyone knew that Walter Cronkite, from his gilded throne at CBS news, helped to alter the course of the Vietnam War, when, in the post-Tet depression, he prematurely declared the war unwinnible. Dan Rather's career imploded when he knowingly promulgated a forged document that impugned the service record of George W. Bush. We've known for a long time - from various polling, and records of political donations of journalists themselves, as well as surveys of public perceptions - that the vast majority of journalists identify themselves as Democratic, and liberal in particular.

Yet we have never quite seen anything like the current media infatuation with Barack Obama, and its collective desire not to raise key issues of concern to the American people.

...

The media has succeeded in shielding Barack Obama from journalistic scrutiny. It thereby irrevocably destroyed its own reputation and forfeited the trust that generations of others had so carefully acquired. And it will never again be trusted to offer candid and nonpartisan coverage of presidential candidates."

I disagree only in the details -- that is to say, journalism died a long time ago; what occurred this election was just one final putrid outgassing from the long-rotting carcass of Dead Journalism.

Let us rejoice, for now we now know it's all propaganda, as so many of us have been saying for so long. All the media did was provide the incontrovertible evidence, however unwittingly. We can now just ignore the media's charade of impartiality and choose which opinions to read without any pretense of impartiality.

BTW, I have to take a piss... where, exactly, is Journalism's grave?

Hope, Change, Justice

A preview of Progressive Social Justice, coming soon to your neighborhood:

Crime:

2 accused of hanging Obama effigy on Ky. campus
A University of Kentucky student and another man were arrested Thursday, accused of hanging a life-sized likeness of Barack Obama from a tree on the campus..."This was a serious incident. It caused a lot of wounds to be opened from racial tension," said University of Kentucky acting police chief Joe Monroe.

Not-Crime:

Effigy of Sarah Palin hanging by a noose creates uproar in West Hollywood
A West Hollywood Halloween display showing a likeness of Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin hanging by a noose has caused a furor among some residents who reported it as a hate crime, authorities said Monday. But Los Angeles County sheriff's officials said the mannequin sporting a beehive hairdo, glasses and a red coat does not rise to the level of a hate crime because it was part of a Halloween display.

HopeChange™

Judgement Day Cometh

My New Hero

Ladies and gentlemen, the brilliant and erudite Mr. Pat Condell:

But wait... there's more!

Personal Responsibility Si, Bailout NO!

Some guy (or gal) going by the handle "chredon" posted this bit of wisdom (and for once I don't say "wisdom" with derisive sarcasm; this is the real thing) in response to a Blame The Republicans screed by some shriveled up old cunt of a Democrat party hack named Marie Coco in which she called for the "conviction" of Bush, Cheney, the GOP... basically everyone but the corrupt Democrats who were up to their eyeballs in the Economic Crisis Du Jour:

It just goes to prove that no matter which side you are on, it's much easier to interpret the facts to fit your own preconceived notions of what's happened than to actually try to connect the dots and figure things out for yourself.

First, to those of you who constantly refer to the Sept 1999 NYT article about the Clinton administration pushing loans to people who normally wouldn't qualify: it might help if you read the full text of that article. You see, what Clinton proposed and Fannie implemented was a plan to INSURE (not make, but INSURE) loans made to people who were JUST UNDER the normal line of acceptability, in exchange for a one-percent increase in the FIXED INTEREST RATE on the loan for TWO YEARS. These are not the loans that are failing. The loans that are failing are the creation of banks: three, five, and seven-year balloons, two-year ARMs, no-doc loans that you don't even have to prove your employment to get, zero-interest loans. A whole raft of loans being made BY BANKS, not by Federal requirement. The definition of a sub-prime loan is one that Fannie and Freddie won't buy.

Why did banks create these risky loan types? Because changes slipped into a 1999 budget bill at the last second by Phil Gramm overturned Glass-Stegall and allowed investment houses to buy, sell, and trade mortgages like securities. This new market was totally unregulated. This led to the rise of Mortgage-backed Securities. Wall Street investment houses made tons of money buying and selling these. The would take out loans (sell commercial paper) to get the money they needed to buy them. Executives made huge bonuses on them. As a result, they were hungry to get more of them, and put pressure on banks to sell them more mortgages. This allowed banks to make riskier and riskier mortgages, since the bank never had anything at risk - they would just sell the mortgage to the investment houses. After 9/11, Allan Greenspan lowered interest rates, which made mortgages even cheaper to get into. With all these mortgages being made, the housing market got tight and prices began to rise quickly. That allowed individuals to buy homes as an investment, taking out a loan with a low introductory rate in the hopes of selling the property before the piper came to be paid.

Eventually, home prices rose to the point that no one else could get into this Ponzi scheme. And then the thing that everyone feared happened. Home prices started to re-adjust downward at the same time that ARM levels started to re-adjust upward. Suddenly, people could no longer afford their payments, couldn't unload the property for what they owed on it, and couldn't re-finance. So what did they do? They defaulted and gave the property to the banks.

Investment banks started to see a growing number of defaults. So they began to buy investment insurance from AIG and other lenders. AIG insured these Mortgage-backed securities fairly inexpensively, since mortgages had always been one of the safest investments in history. So rating agencies like Fair Isaac continued to give these investments Triple-A ratings, and AIG insured them accordingly.

And that's where we were six months ago. House prices started to fall. Home buyers started to default. Investment houses stopped buying mortgages. Investors stopped buying mortgage-backed securities. AIG stopped insuring the investments.

And then people looked around and noticed...

No one had any clear idea what these Mortgage-backed securities were worth.

AIG had insured 35 times more bad mortgages than their entire company was worth, and a large number of them were in default.

Investment banks had borrowed 50-70 times more money than they had assets to cover in order to by mortgages, and a large number of them were in default.

Banks were still holding many mortgages that the investment banks would not buy, and many of them were in default.

Freddie and Fannie had backed trillions of dollars of Triple-A rated loans, only to find they were nowhere near as solid as they had been led to believe.

All our nation's credit capital was tied up in mortgages that might not pay off.

So, everyone please note that NOWHERE IN THIS ENTIRE LITANY DID I MENTION GEORGE BUSH, BILL CLINTON, CHRIS DODD, BARNEY FRANK, JOHN McCAIN, or BARAK OBAMA.

Government did NOT cause this crisis. Reagan, Clinton, Phil Gramm, Allan Greenspan, and many, many others set up a climate wherein this crisis could happen. But it happened because investment bankers found a way to make huge sums of money buying and selling mortgages. And while many people, including both John McCain and Barak Obama, have spoken out in warning of this impending disaster, no one has done anything to avert it.

Who could have done something? It's a long list...

Ben Bernake could have raised interest rates and make mortgages less inviting as an investment.

Henry Paulson could have instituted or enforced checks and balances already on the books.

Congress could have changed the laws to regulate this behavior.

President Bush could have appointed regulators who believed in regulations, not hands-off free-market types, or taken a lot of other steps to head it off.

So while Wall Street created this mess, there were any number of government agents who could have stopped it, but did not. Some refused for ideological reasons. Some didn't have the power. Some didn't see the need. But they all failed in their duty to put the nation's best interests above their own or those of a narrow group of people.

And so here we are. And all the pointed fingers in the world won't plug the hole in this dike before it collapses and floods us. So could be concentrate on the SOLUTION please, and leave the BLAME to the historians?

Read the second-to-last paragraph again (and again, and again, until it sinks in) and answer me this: Do we really want the same government officials that allowed this mess to happen to be the ones to "solve" the problem? Sorry, my confidence level is zero.

...and thanks for all the fish.

Iraq's national security adviser said Tuesday his country will not accept any security deal with the United States unless it contains specific dates for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces.

OK... how about tomorrow?

There's a reason true conservatives (the un-compassionate variety) have long decried the concept of nation building. I was not opposed to settling our long-overdue business with Iraq (the one nation on Earth, I might remind everyone, that was shooting at American planes prior to September 11, 2001). But if these chimps are so eager to brush away the hand that tries to help them off their asses and into the 21st Century, then they are not worth another drop of American blood. Let the UN take it from here - without US finance. Let's start rebuilding our country; I believe there's a wall that needs building on the southern border. Fuck Iraq.

Same goes for Germany, Japan, Korea and every other ungrateful shithole around the globe, all of which have for too long enjoyed the benefits of our military presence, enabling them to transfer the duty and responsibility of defending their own citizens and borders to American soldiers, while they stab us in the back every time we ask for even a fraction of the help we've provided to them in spades for the past century. Good riddance to them, too..

Bonus: A special Fuck You to our Euroweenie "allies". Thanks for all your help. When you find your Socialist Eutopia on the brink of sharia law, don't call The Ugly Americans. Try the UN instead, see if they can't pass a strongly-worderd resolution or something.

Shall NOT be infringed.

Boldface mine:

Court Weighs Right to Guns, and Its Limits
LINDA GREENHOUSE | Published: March 19, 2008

WASHINGTON - A majority of the Supreme Court appeared ready on Tuesday to embrace, for the first time in the country's history, an interpretation of the Second Amendment that protects the right to own a gun for personal use.

That may be the easy part.

The harder question in the case challenging the District of Columbia's handgun ban is what kind of restrictions the government could constitutionally place, in the name of public safety, on the newly recognized right. The answer to that question, on which the outcome of the case will turn, was less clear.

Newly recognized right? "New" since, like, 1789? RTFC, asswits.

As to "what kind of restrictions the government could constitutionally place" on gun ownership, here is my proposed list of restrictions:

1. Don't shoot anyone who doesn't deserve to be shot.
2. Umm.... well, that about covers it.
   

Don't. Tread. On. Me.