Free Republic

BFL

It is so infuriating to me that nobody in the opposition party will stand up and denounce this.

What has happened to these politicians, to this legislature, to this country?

How does the head of the Executive Branch “veto that vote”, when “that vote” is something done by the Legislative Branch?

I thought they leaked a lot of fuel...I remember seeing all the drums underneath them when they were tied down on the fantail. I always thought it was for JP5 leaks! Guess I was never curious enough to go peek inside...

The Hornet may be better designed, it may cost less to fly, and who knows what else...

But I have always thought it was the most beautiful jet fighter to take to the air.

And when they did supersonic fly-bys...they looked like alien spaceships. Weirdly seeming to come at an odd angle, and no sound!

I loved watching them fly. And I got caught behind a JBD one time when I wasn’t paying attention and a Tomcat went off in AB. That truly sucked.

I remember trying to get really small in the main mount wheel well, pulling my white turtleneck flight deck jersey up over my mouth and nose, trying to breathe, getting roasted.

I just hadn’t been paying attention for a few seconds. A flight deck is not a good place to lose your concentration.

Hey-I was a plane captain in VA-46 1975-1979...:)

Pukin Dog, we need ya!

I understand what you mean, but I think one of the differentiating hallmarks of conservatism is a healthy understanding of the fallibilities of human nature. There are a lot of imperfect people on this site,and while we don’t excuse them for their behavior, I think it’s important to recognize that we certainly are human, and flawed.

Not like a lot of liberals, who all think they are God’s gift to intelligence, efficiency, or something else… :-)

True, I have seen it here. I have seen it everywhere, as a matter of fact.

That said, I think it is one thing to use those tactics as a result of personal failing and weakness, and quite another to hold them up as something to aspire to use deliberately to reach a desired goal.

"...George W. Bush was a Texan with an accent and without a cosmopolitan affectation, who was prone to mispronouncing words, jumbling sentences, and being less-than-elite in his off-the-cuff remarks. Progressives still put insist that President Bush was just a dummy more than one full presidential term after he left office. Slate's Jacob Weisberg made a regular habit of discussing Bush's perceived mental inadequacies. And lest we think this was indeed a reaction to the actual policies of the Bush Administration, attacks on his intellectual capabilities were a feature of the Gore campaign against Bush in 2000. And there was a famous internet hoax that purported to have academics "prove" that President Bush had the lowest IQ of any president ever..."

If you read the pap put forth by the media, you would be able to definitively answer this question: Who was the last intelligent Republican President?

Answer: It might possibly have been Richard Nixon, but he was totally evil instead.

Ann Coulter has touched accurately on this in her writing: Republicans are either stupid or evil. There is no middle ground.

But Obama, Clinton, Carter and LBJ, well...they were all smart.

The thing about it is the book not only advocates, but admiringly promotes despicable human behavior, all the dishonorable things in life that moral parents teach their children to avoid doing.

It disgusted me. There is only one other work I have ever read that made me struggle with the value of reading it, even though I forced myself to finish it: “Dreams of My Father”.

That is precisely what hit me the hardest. A man who openly admitted to admiring a piece of human refuse in Alinsky, was elected President.

Still stunning.

Up until a couple of years ago, I had been trying to figure out a way to obtain a copy of “Rules for Radicals” because it is the bible followed by Obama and his associates. I had been trying to get it without paying for it, and the copies at the library were backordered for months. To my surprise, one finally came in after about a six month delay.

When I was about a third of the way through “Rules for Radicals”, I concluded that reading it tells volumes about the people who profess to following it as a bible, especially the ones pushing the legislation we have seen in the last two years.

The book explains a lot. And none of it is good.

I was going to dictate the entire thing and make an audiobook out of it to give to my close associates, who, like me, don’t want a single red cent to go to anyone associated with writing, printing or distributing that hideous work. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I couldn’t stomach hearing myself read it in a way that would make it easier on the ears to listen to (To put the inflection in the right places means you have to read it as if you believe it, and I gave up after one chapter.)

It is probably one of the most amoral, twisted works I have ever read. Given that Alinsky wrote a dedication to Lucifer, I shouldn’t be surprised. The dedication was taken out of later editions so as not to offend the clergy he was attempting to recruit, but the version I read had it. Apparently, it was a copy from the 1980's, and they figured it was safe to put it back in.

From what I can see, reading that book enables one to understand what makes Obama (and his devoted followers) tick.

The very FIRST paragraph exposes very clearly what they are all about:
"What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. 'The Prince' was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. 'Rules for Radicals' is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away."

It is unrestricted class warfare, pure and simple. And it is the bible of Obama and his like-minded followers.

As for the tribute to Lucifer: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer, I had trouble believing it until I got a copy of the book that actually had the dedication, so I took a picture:

I understand what you are saying, but that wasn’t the point I was making. My point didn’t have anything to do with class.

It had to do with grouping obesity (which is almost completely non-voluntary) in with strictly voluntary activities such as smoking, tattooing and piercing.

I liken it to lumping someone who has a large birthmark on their face in with someone who paid money to get a tattoo on their face.

And, as I inferred, I do see there is a common ground between smoking, obesity and alcoholism, as they may all have a compelling psychological/physical fusion, but I just don’t see it in tattoos and piercing.

Hehehe...I didn’t get a class ring, but when I got out of Boot Camp, I got a Navy ring that looked just like a class ring, and gave it to a girl I had the hots for...

Never knew what became of that gal, or the ring...:)

Just another love-struck squid...

I would not make that connection, lumping in overweight people with smokers and tattooed/pierced/smokers.

However, as a precursor to what I am about to say, I do believe everyone has a right (or at least should have a right) to do what they want if it doesn’t hurt anyone else.

I don’t mind a tattoo or two on men, arm, leg, chest, etc.

And I don’t find a small tattoo on a woman in an unobtrusive place to be unattractive.

And the fact that I find piercings completely repulsive (and a lot of intrusive tattoos to be quite unattractive) should not have any weight in what someone else does with their body. (I will say that sitting across the dinner table from someone with those damned pieces of metal coming down out of their nostrils is nauseating, but I can live with it as long as eating across from them isn’t a long term proposition.)

But to lump overweight people in with people who smoke, get tattoos, or piercings is not right.

People who are overweight do not deliberately choose to be that way, and in many cases, desperately would like to change.

Some smokers, too, would like to change (and I can give some of them the benefit of being addicted, which would make them more like an overweight person) but that cannot be said of someone with piercings or tattoos which are totally and completely 100% voluntary and intentional.

I have a kind of funny story along those lines. My wife and I went to a movie a few years ago, and the line was moving slowly to the ticket booth. As we got closer, I could see it was what looked like a thin, 16 year old boy with acne and glasses, but he also had what appeared to be a prosthetic on his lip or mouth, probably for some kind of cancer surgery. As we got closer, I was filled with pity for him, because going through adolescence is tough enough, never mind having some kind of physical deformity.

Then, when I got up there, I realized it wasn’t a prosthetic, but a series of about 20 metal rings on the left side of his upper lip, and another 20 rings on the lower lip. Looking back, the way I felt was humorous to me in retrospect, but at the time, I was so irritated I nearly spit. Here I was, feeling bad for this kid because I thought he had a deformity, and it was 100% intentional. I felt like I wasted valuable emotional capital on him!

Now, if I get a job interviewee, and they show up like that, they aren’t getting the job. I don’t care how well they do it, I am not hiring them, period. Same with someone with tattoos on the neck, face, and such. I work in a setting with patients, and I just won’t do it.

I won’t pass judgement on anyone for their God-given physical appearance, but if someone intentionally does that to themselves, I don’t have a problem being judgmental. If I worked in a different setting, it might not matter. But I am not going to have someone like that occupying a receptionist position and greeting patients, no matter what Hollywood would like us to think is common practice.

If that makes me a bad person, I will have to live with that, because I am not going to change.

I recently read “Feminist Fantasies” by Phyllyis Schlafly, and she expounds brilliantly on why the ERA was a bad thing for women, and why it was defeated and never ratified.

Basically,in one aspect, feminists want to do away with many of the societal protections codified in law to protect women from unscrupulous men, and doing this under the aegis of equality. (One example is in the context of women who have children in a relationship where a man is not fulfilling his responsibilities)

“Lemay” was a great book!

I wouldn’t think it would be dishonorable...it didn’t hit me that way.

Hahahaha...now THAT made me laugh!

Train ticket to Chicago from Great Lakes: $5.00

Drinks for everyone in the Chicago bar: $186.23

Cab fare from Chicago back to Great Lakes because you were drunk and missed train: $98.00

Seeing a sailor in the fleet two years out of Boot Camp with his Boot Camp Company tattooed on his bicep: Priceless!

Hahahaha...that’s what I thought too...

“What the HELL is that???? OMG...it is...HUGE, and SCARY, it might EAT me, and...”

LICK BREAK.
“Lick, Lick, Lick. Ah. Where was I? Hm. OMG...it is...HUGE, and SCARY, it might EAT me, and...”

LOL, typical cat behavior...:)

Which makes it even more infuriating.

That is a positive outlook...it would be nice to see.

Thorium reactors are a GREAT concept, but the problem is, the environazis and liberals, who are immune to logic, business acumen, common sense, and, ironically enough, REAL environmentalism, will fight them every single inch of the way.

Just because the word “reactor” is in the description and the key ingredient ends with “ium”.

Emotionalism trumps all for them, and they have power now.

What will likely happen is the Chinese or the Russians will make huge strides in them and deploy them, and we will buy from them out of shame.

Michael Conner Humphreys: Providing Entertainment and Security for Americans since 1994.

Love it!

Numbers do mean something. If is a single incident, I will always take the side that there has to be convincing evidence.

When 30+ unrelated women from all walks of life accuse someone like him, it is more than just a dollar bill being dragged through a trailer park or gold diggers coming out of the woodwork.

I used to like him in movies years ago, but the sight of him makes me steer clear. JA is right.

True.

Many of these people had violently unhappy family lives, and so wish to destroy the family structure.

Yep.

I was lucky. I got to take advantage of learning things about life and personal conduct while I served, and and didn’t have to have a strong possibility of losing life or limb in the process if I did my job correctly and didn’t screw around.

There are a lot of people like me who were able to reap the benefit of the experience without being put in a position to get reaped by it.

For that, I am happy and grateful...:)

All of that is completely true.

But I think people are conflating what I am saying to mean we could have lost the war in the Pacific with saying there is a possibility we might not have won. Those aren’t the same thing.

in 2015 (heck, even in 1950) it is easy for people to accept the outcome of WWII as a predestined result, and it wasn’t. It had to be fought hard, with much expenditure of blood and money.

But that expenditure takes national will, and it is never a given that a national will is up the the challenge. One has only to look at the American Revolution. The British did not have the national will to continue and win the war. Many of us look at and think “Of course we won! What other outcome could there have been?”

I am currently reading the Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant, and he mentions at one point he thought it was a very real possibility that the North, after three hard years of fighting with the South, could have gone along with partitioning the country and being done with the war if a particular battle had not been won.

A lot of things can happen on the road to winning a war. Human beings have to prosecute a war, money, machines and industrial might cannot do it, only people can do it. And that requires will.

And will sometimes weakens.

Well, it wasn’t much in doubt after 1943, it was a matter of time.

But the battle in the Solomons, which was one the largest air, sea, and ground battles of the war, was fought on equal footing with the Japanese. We were in no way superior to them at that time, and certainly not in combat experience. We had a lot to learn at that point that we all take for granted now.

Most people don’t realize that in the Solomons naval casualties outnumbered land casualties by a factor of four to one. Hundreds of men at a time were butchered in naval battles fought with guns between cruisers, battleships, and destroyers. We were going toe to toe with them and losing ship for ship. Men in the water on a large scale being ravaged by sharks.

But for the unbelievable toughness of the US Marines on Guadalcanal, that could have gone the other way. It was not a given at that time even though many see it that way now.

Not revisionist at all. You are aware of the desperate battles around Guadalcanal, aren’t you?

In the Pacific in the Solomon Islands in 1942, when we were at less than military parity with Japan, it was touch and go from December 1941 to December 1942.

The US and Japan had their hands on each other’s throats, and neither side was strong enough to put the other side away.

This is how that speech would sound if delivered by Obama:

"...In my life, yesterday, December 7, 1941, a date I know which will live in infamy for me – The United States of America where I live and I am President was suddenly and deliberately attacked while I ate breakfast in my house in the country where I have lived my entire life by the naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. The United States in my mind was at peace with that nation I have often visited in my life, and at the solicitation of Japan in my understanding, was still in conversation I know with its government and its Emperor I have met many times when I have left my home many times in my life..."

It’s a bonanza out there! I have APOD as my home page, but I hadn’t read it today. My buddy called and told me about this...I just went out and stood on a snow bank in back of my house with my elbow on the roof to stabilize...just beautiful!

Then the space station went over, and boy, was it bright, North west to southeast, straight overhead, horizon to horizon in three minutes.
Then looking to the east, I think that was Jupiter, and I could see four moons at about the 6-7 o’clock position!

Woo hoo!

That may be obvious to you, but it isn’t to me. What makes you want to see a mob rip this particular woman and her husband to pieces?

Or are you lumping them in with all rich people?

And, if that is the case, where is the wealth cutoff line below which I will be safe?

Do you think that these people got it? People seem to be out to do them in, I am not sure why.

Simply because they have money? Or because they are wealthy living in the Ukraine? Or because her father-in-law is a Russian? Or because her husband is a Muslim? Or because she has a $10K falcon?

Just curious...why should they meet the same fate as the French aristocrats?

Yep.

I knew someone who was planning to buy property and build a house in Mexico.

That person was crazy. They can decide at any time just to take your property, no questions asked, particularly if you aren’t a Mexican national.

Hey Bill, explain to me again how cold temperatures don’t affect the internal air pressure of a football!

What an idiot tool. But there are people who listen to him.

I would handle this the same way we handled the NVA at Khe Sanh. B-52’s, on station, 24x7, carpet bomb in big rectangular perimeters, over and over and over until the perimeter is just bounced rubble.

BFL

What bothered me most about that was not that he was a global statist, many of our liberal politicians are, and most of the members of the media.

What bothered me was the deception, that so many Americans thought he was an American, one of us. And he wasn’t.

And he is STILL venerated, most American just don’t know what he really was.

He is an idiot, plain and simple. I read somewhere he was a member of Mensa...if there was ever an example that showed how absolutely flawed and stupid the concept of Mensa is, it is Scott Adams.

Check out his blog at: Scott Adams Blog ,P.But be sure to drill back to his older entries. It is pieces of statist crap like him that destroy freedom, when given power. The most laughable thing is he calls himself more libertarian than anything else, which would give libertarians a worse name than if they admit they worship Ron Paul.

He actually worshiped Bill Clinton, and said something to the effect that he would blindly follow any policy put forth by him because he was sure it would lead to a good result.

Scott Adams is human refuse who thinks he is smarter than everyone else. In other words, a typical liberal, statist, marxist.

I thought this was the stupidest thing I have read in forever. But it fits what I know of Scott Adams to a “T”.

I used to enjoy Dilbert, and I watched an interview with him one time, and was downright horrified.

He is a uber Leftist, a Marxist, a total a-hole. I was shocked, I had no idea.

From that day on, I simply could not enjoy his work.

I lump them all into purposefully destructive ideologues...if they aren’t that, they are the useful idiots who enable them!

I subscribe to the “Universal A**hole Theory”.

Basically, we are all a-holes at some time or another, especially when driving. We may not mean to cut someone off, and we may do it only once in every 1000 trips in our car, but when you take into account that there are millions of us on the road at any given time, either you, or some complete stranger, both of whom might be perfectly polite and competent drivers, may get a deserved middle finger.

That mindset helps me be far more tolerant on the road...:)

By all accounts, GWB, even with his well documented faults, is an extremely egalitarian,polite and considerate man.

I happen to think that most derogatory classifications and descriptions of college professors, particularly those in Philosophy, are far more accurate than those derogatory generalizations applied to wealthy people.

I think that is because you can become wealthy, but you still remain “you”, especially if you got there by hard work.

College professors, especially Philosophy professors, are indoctrinated to be skulls full of liberal mush as students, and have to believe it fully to teach it to their young students.

As you can tell, I have a lot of contempt for most of those people, and more respect for people who have made money.