Monday, May 30, 2011

The Green Thing

Got this from a friend of mine-
I remember all of this!

In the line at the store, the cashier told the older woman that she should bring her own grocery bag because plastic bags weren't good for the environment.
The woman apologized to him and explained, “We didn't have the Green thing back in my day.”
The clerk responded, "That's our problem today. The former generation did not care enough to  save our environment."

He was right, that generation didn't have the green thing in its day...

Back then, they returned their milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store.
The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over.
So they really were recycled.
But they didn't have the green thing back in that customer's day.

In her day, they walked up stairs, because they didn't have an escalator in every store and office building.
They walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300- horsepower machine every time they had to go two blocks.
But she was right.
They didn't have the green thing in her day.

Back then, they washed the baby's diapers because they didn't have the throw-away kind.
They dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts, wind and solar power really did dry the clothes.
Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.
But that old lady is right, they didn't have the green thing back in her day.

Back then, they had one TV, or radio, in the house – not a TV in every room.
And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief, not a screen the size of the state of Connecticut.
In the kitchen, they blended and stirred by hand because they didn’t have electric machines to do everything for you.
When they packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, they used a wadded up old newspaper to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.
Back then, they didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn..
They used a push mower that ran on human power.
They exercised by working so they didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.
But she's right, they didn't have the green thing back then…

They drank from a fountain when they were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time they had a drink of water.
They refilled their writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and they replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.
But they didn't have the green thing back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or rode the school bus instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service.
They had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances.
And they didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.

But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful the old folks were just because they didn't have the green thing back then?

By the way,
Back when I was a kid – mid 50’s, whenever I went fishing or hunting, I took a paper grocery bag with me (this was pre-plastic bags), so I could pick up other people’s trash and bring it home with me to help clean up the environment. The “environmental movement” was still years into the future. Amazing what a little common sense does, huh.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Memorial Day

On Memorial day, remember those who died, so you could be free! A few of my favorite Memorial Day links, especially the third one, which gives me goose bumps and brings tears to my eyes every time I watch it. These are America's real heroes. They put their life on the line for their country. I find it amazing that the current Administration, and their Liberal cohorts in Congress and the lame stream media, have no respect for our military. How much longer are we going to put up with those UnAmerican idiots?

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Demonization 101

      Medicare is broke and going bankrupt. It needs to be fixed, so Republican Congressman Paul Ryan proposed a solution for the problem. Now, in a civilized society, the other side, if they did not agree would say "We don't agree, but let's sit down and discuss it, and see if we can't come up with a solution".
But, what do we get? The Progressive, Liberal, Left wing Democrats (but I repeat myself), don't propose any solution of their own. They just start demonizing. Don't believe me? Check out the following ad brought to you by some Leftie organization.

That kind of stuff is really going to solve the problem isn't it?
       These people don't give a damn about the country. The only thing they want is power, and they will do anything to get it and keep it!
      The 2012 elections are coming. If we want to fix the problems in this country and restore it to what it used to be, then the Democrats must be defeated. Good Conservative Republicans need to be elected. No RINO's (Republicans in name only) need apply. We need to win a filibuster proof majority in the U.S. Senate and vote Uncle Barack out of office. If we don't, we will be rapidly heading to becoming a Third World Banana Republic run by a tyrannical, central planning government.
      It's time to rid ourselves of these whiny, little tantrum throwers and get some real adults in Washington. There was an article in "The Onion", that reported that the United States is down to it's last 100 mature adults and they may all be gone in fifty years. Sounds about right to me.

12 Reasons People Vote for Democrats

I suppose this was originally intended as a joke, but the more I sit here and read it the more I realize it is really "right on" correct.

When your friends cannot explain why they voted for Democrats,
give them this. They can then pick their reasons from this "TOP 12
1. I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of
4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same
gallon of gas at 15% isn't.

2. I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a
better job of spending the money I earn than I would so I want to pay more taxes.

3. I voted Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as
nobody is offended by it.

4. I voted Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a
gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from
murderers and thieves.

5. I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell
us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will
melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.

6. I voted Democrat because I'm not concerned about millions of
babies being born out of wedlock, marriage is only important for gays.

7. I voted Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right
to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.

8. I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not
be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and
give the rest away to the government for redistribution as my Party's Members in Congress see fit.

9. I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to
rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who
would never get their agendas past the voters.

10. I voted Democrat because I think that it's better to pay
billions to people who hate us for their oil, but not drill our own
because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.

11. I voted Democrat because while we live in the greatest, most
wonderful country in the world, I was promised "HOPE AND CHANGE".

12. I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my
butt, it's unlikely that I'll ever have another point of view.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Those Evil Rich Again.

 Several days ago, I put up a post entitled "Envy" in which I tried to explain why it is wrong to raise taxes on the achievers, the "evil" rich. Here's another take on it by one of the most brilliant economists in the United States today.
Walter E. Williams Walter E. Williams
Dr. Williams serves on the faculty of George Mason University as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics and is the author of More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well.

The liberal vision of government is easily understood and makes perfect sense if one acknowledges their misunderstanding and implied assumptions about the sources of income. Their vision helps explain the language they use and policies they support, such as income redistribution and calls for the rich to give something back.
Suppose the true source of income was a gigantic pile of money meant to be shared equally amongst Americans. The reason some people have more money than others is because they got to the pile first and greedily took an unfair share. That being the case, justice requires that the rich give something back, and if they won't do so voluntarily, Congress should confiscate their ill-gotten gains and return them to their rightful owners.
A competing liberal implied assumption about the sources of income is that income is distributed, as in distribution of income. There might be a dealer of dollars. The reason why some people have more dollars than others is because the dollar dealer is a racist, a sexist, a multinationalist or a conservative. The only right thing to do, for those to whom the dollar dealer unfairly dealt too many dollars, is to give back their ill-gotten gains. If they refuse to do so, then it's the job of Congress to use their agents at the IRS to confiscate their ill-gotten gains and return them to their rightful owners. In a word, there must be a re-dealing of the dollars or what some people call income redistribution.
The sane among us recognize that in a free society, income is neither taken nor distributed; for the most part, it is earned. Income is earned by pleasing one's fellow man. The greater one's ability to please his fellow man, the greater is his claim on what his fellow man produces. Those claims are represented by the number of dollars received from his fellow man.
Say I mow your lawn. For doing so, you pay me $20. I go to my grocer and demand, "Give me 2 pounds of steak and a six-pack of beer that my fellow man produced." In effect, the grocer asks, "Williams, you're asking your fellow man to serve you. Did you serve him?" I reply, "Yes." The grocer says, "Prove it."
That's when I pull out the $20 I earned from serving my fellow man. We can think of that $20 as "certificates of performance." They stand as proof that I served my fellow man. It would be no different if I were an orthopedic doctor, with a large clientele, earning $500,000 per year by serving my fellow man. By the way, having mowed my fellow man's lawn or set his fractured fibula, what else do I owe him or anyone else? What's the case for being forced to give anything back? If one wishes to be charitable, that's an entirely different matter.
Contrast the morality of having to serve one's fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces with congressional handouts. In effect, Congress says, "You don't have to serve your fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces. We'll take what he produces and give it to you. Just vote for me."
Who should give back? Sam Walton founded Wal-Mart, Bill Gates founded Microsoft, Steve Jobs founded Apple Computer. Which one of these billionaires acquired their wealth by coercing us to purchase their product? Which has taken the property of anyone?
Each of these examples, and thousands more, is a person who served his fellow men by producing products and services that made life easier. What else do they owe? They've already given.
If anyone is obliged to give something back, they are the thieves and recipients of legalized theft, namely people who've used Congress, including America's corporate welfare queens, to live at the expense of others. When a nation vilifies the productive and makes mascots of the unproductive, it doesn't bode well for its future.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Destruction of the U.S. Constitution Continues:

      The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (part of the Bill of Rights) states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

       On  Thursday, May 12 the Indiana State Supreme Court, in a ruling that overturned common law dating to the Magna Carta of 1215 in England, and flew right in the face of the 4th Amendment, stated that people cannot resist any entry by police into their home, whether they have a warrant or not. They have to allow police into their homes for any reason whatsoever at any time.

       How is it again you spell Gestapo or KGB?

What We Need in Every Political Office

      I have been asked to pass along this link and am proud to do so. Daria Novak is a staunch conservative. She believes in the Constitution, a small Federal government, and free markets. She was a candidate for the 2nd Congressional district in 2010, but the Connecticut Republican Establishment (a bunch of RINO's) decided to choose a political novice who was far from a Tea Party candidate, Janet Peckinpaugh. Daria could probably have beaten Joe Courtney. Janet got clobbered. Daria is a candidate for the office again in 2012. Maybe the "establishment" will pay attention this time, but I'm sure they can come up with another RINO if they try. She has my backing 100%.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Comparison - Health Care vs. Grocery shopping.

      I just finished reading Glenn Beck's book, "Broke". It's a fascinating read, and makes a lot of common sense. I was particularly intrigued by a side bar he used to compare health care costs with grocery shopping. Right now, there is very little free market competition among health care providers (doctors. imaging centers, diagnostic labs, hospitals, etc). Despite what the government says, most people in this country are covered by some sort of medical insurance, either private insurance through their employer, medicare, or medicaid. Other than paying your premium you have no "skin in the game". You go to the healthcare provider, get your treatment, test, scan, whatever, and you don't care what it costs, because someone else is paying for it.  That is the problem! If you had to pay, healthcare providers would suddenly have to compete for your dollar, and they would all be trying to provide the best quality for the lowest price. Get the government totally out of health care, and prices will plummet. Don't believe me? Check out Glenn's side bar below and decide for yourself.

       Free market competition ALWAYS works, regardless of what those Progressives in the Government tells you.

Another Idiot Letter to the Editor and My Reply

These people have no common sense, they are driven by a left wing agenda that is full of outright lies, and they have no intention of stopping until we agree with them 100%.

Common sense has place in the debate over climate change

I propose a simple new argument for man's contribution to global warming that James Barrante, PhD, claims has not yet been proved by science (May 8 letter, "Before offering thoughts on climate, use scientific method").

Over the last 125 years, we've released enormous amounts of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere by burning coal, oil and gasoline, the latter derived from oil. Coal and oil lay sequestered in the earth for hundreds of millions of years. Common sense alone, without scientific proof, must tell us we can't dump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere in a relative instant of geologic time without measurable consequences to the earth's ecological balance.

Dr. Barrante claims human activities have nothing to do with the natural cycling of the earth's atmospheric temperature. He asks that we cite one personal example we can claim is convincing evidence of man's contribution to global warming. This surprises me. As a scientist, he knows one example is highly subjective and statistically insignificant.

While Pascal's wager may be naive with respect to religion, it is valid for the argument that we must bet on the side of the majority of scientists. We have nothing to lose if they're wrong, but we have everything to lose if they are correct and we ignore them.

Winston Churchill said, "True genius resides in the capacity for evaluation of uncertain, hazardous, and conflicting information."

Jack Lander


U.S. society has much to lose if warmists get power they seek

In reference to Jack Lander's May 10 letter, "Common sense has place in the debate over climate change," I agree we have released enormous amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere during the last 125 years, but is it still there — or could it have been absorbed by the oceans and is now sitting on the ocean floor in the shells of small marine animals? Maybe it was absorbed by the rain forests, resulting in much more lush growth, which in turn absorbs even more carbon dioxide. The earth has been shown over geologic time to be extremely resilient.

The shrine of global-warming activists is the University of East Anglia in Great Britain. Over the past couple of years, researchers there have shown they are quite capable of fudging or ignoring facts that doesn't match their agenda. These are the scientists we are supposed to believe? Most scientists 600 years ago thought the world was flat. We all know how that turned out.

Mr. Lander says, "We have nothing to lose if they are wrong." Suppose the climate-change activists got everything they wanted. Energy costs would skyrocket because no fossil fuels could be used to generate electricity. Transportation and power usage, generated only by wind and solar, would be extremely limited. How would the electricity be generated to charge all those electric cars? Some bureaucrat in Washington, or worse, at the United Nations, would tell you how you could heat your home. A central government planning center would decide the setting of your thermostat, the car you drive and the type of light bulbs you could use (if you have any power). It would ban ice makers in refrigerators, the eating of meat because cow flatulence gives off climate-changing methane, and gasoline-powered lawn mowers, leaf blowers and snow blowers.

Other than losing most of our freedoms and our standard of living, and being totally controlled from a central tyrannical government, I suppose "we have nothing to lose."

When I see scientific proof global warming is human-caused and will result in disaster, I'll be first in line to help do something about it. Until then, keep up the research and leave me alone!

Jon Quint


Tuesday, May 10, 2011


      Webster's American Dictionary defines this word as:
"1. discontent and ill will over another's advantages, possessions, etc. 2. desire for something belonging to another".

Envy is exactly what the 10th commandment says you should not do -

“You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.”

       Yet, under the guise of "social justice" and being "fair", this is exactly what the Left is constantly preaching. They always propose increasing taxes on the "rich", because they are not paying their "fair share", although based on 2008 IRS figures (the latest available) the top 10% of income earners paid 70% of all income taxes collected, but I have never heard anyone give an exact figure as to what their "fair share" is. Is it 80%, 90%, or 100%? The bottom 45% pay no taxes at all and some of those receive refunds although they paid no taxes.
       This is the Left's message, used  to play on the emotions of the American people, commonly referred to as "class warfare" and it works, because most people always want more, and seeing people with "more" causes them "envy", but like "jealousy", envy will eat you alive. If the "rich" pay more in taxes it will not help anyone else. All it will do is bring the top towards the bottom, not the other way around. It will damage the economy and will make everyone worse off, but that is exactly what the Left wants - everyone more dependent on a centralized, overbearing government, with it's resulting loss of freedoms. Why should hard working Americans pay for some people to sit on their butts and live off government handouts. That is not the America envisioned by our Founding Fathers, it is the America envisioned by the current crop of Leftie, Socialist creeps who want to control how you live. I am all in favor of helping people who are truly down and out, but that is not the case today. There are too many people who won't take a job because it doesn't pay them $100,000 a year with full medical benefits and a good pension plan. They would rather sit around and collect their government check, paid for by people who are too proud to do that, and go out and support themselves and the goof offs. That has to stop.
       There is absolutely nothing preventing anyone from achieving the American Dream. It has been done time after time by ordinary people. All it takes is an idea, and hard work. There is nothing stopping you. You too, can be among the "rich", if you are willing to work for it.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Is This the One?

      Most people probably haven't heard much of this guy unless you're a political junkie like me. He has never held political office, but " is an American newspaper columnist, businessman, political activist, and radio talk-show host from Georgia. He is best known as the former chairman and CEO of Godfather's Pizza. He is a former deputy chairman (1992–94) and chairman (1995–96) of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (quote courtesy of Wikipedia)".
      Herman Cain is a guy with a lot of common sense, and knows what it will take to get the United States back on track to becoming, again, the great country we had been before the Liberal, Progressive, Marxist administrations we've had pretty much ever since the Woodrow Wilson administration in the early 20th century. Harding, Coolidge, and Reagan Administrations were the exceptions. Check out the videos, and see if you don't agree with me. If you do, pass this link on so he gets as much exposure as possible. If you're a Leftie, he'll just be the antithesis of everything you stand for, and will drive you to talking to yourself, which is what Lefties do best anyway, because if anyone has a grain of common sense they won't listen to you anyway.

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Kudos to Uncle Barack

      Obama pulled the trigger (sorry for the pun), and Bin Laden is dead. Good riddance. They should have wrapped him in bacon before they dumped him to the sharks.

      How was it done?
      The Obama administration used enhanced interrogation techniques (hated by Obama, the lame stream media, and the Left), on detainees at Guantanamo (hated by Obama, the lame stream media, and the Left). Techniques developed by the CIA (hated by Obama, the lame stream media, and the Left), and the operation carried out by Navy Seals (hated by Obama, the lame stream media, and the Left) and our military (hated by Obama, the lame stream media, and the Left). The entire structure was set up by the previous Administration. Thank you, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld (despised by Obama, the lame stream media, and the Left), for setting up the entire structure used by the current bunch of military, war, intelligence haters to take out Bin Laden, and now they are taking all the credit.
Typical leftie crap!