Saturday, December 31, 2016

The Obama Legacy: Swapping Hope and Change For Irony and Hypocrisy

In just under three weeks Barack Hussein Obama will hand over the proverbial keys to the White House to Donald J. Trump. Have no fear if you are worried about missing Obama and his winsome advice delivered with a scowl and wagging finger to the peasantry of the United States, there is no chance we won't be hearing from him on a regular basis. The unspoken general practice of former Presidents not criticizing the current President is going to get tossed out of the window because what he has to say on every single issue is just that important. After all, we are entering a period of hopelessness and what is a better antidote to that than hearing from President Narcissus on a daily basis?

Anyway, President Obama has managed to add a hefty sum to the national debt in his 8 years, just as his predecessor did but to an even greater extent. Bush added $5.849 trillion to the debt and Obama added another $7.917 trillion to the debt. Let me spell that out for you, just for effect....


That is a lot of clams.

According to the U.S. Debt Clock, as of right this second the total national debt (not the annual deficit which is what we always hear about) is at....


or about $61,351 per U.S. citizen/$166,760 per U.S. taxpayer. More than a third of that comes from the Obama years so if you are a tax-payer that is around $55,000 of new debt that you are responsible for somehow paying back after just 8 years. The clock went up over a million bucks just while I was typing this, if watching that number race ever upward for a few minutes doesn't make you ill, you aren't paying attention. Between Bush and Obama you can  attribute some $13,766,000,000,000 of new debt to deficit spending in just 16 years. With Trump coming into office right about the same time the debt breaks the $20 trillion mark and apparently not super concerned about deficit spending either, I shudder to think what the debt will be by 2020.

See, the debt used to be down there but now it is up here

What a change a few years makes. As Breitbart points out, in July of 2008 candidate Obama had this to say about President Bush and deficit spending:

The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents — 43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome. So we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.

He was right at the time but since then he has added more debt than any other U.S. President in history. That $30,000 we have to pay back for every man, woman and child is now over $60,000. Someone ought to point this out to President Obama but on the other hand I am not sure he understands the concepts of irony and hypocrisy.

If it is irresponsible and unpatriotic to add $4 trillion in debt, what is it when you add over $7 trillion more in debt?

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

I Ain't Skeered Of No ChiComs: One Versus Ten Is Rarely Reason To Be Scared

Our frenemies the Chinese have announced that their next step to world domination is complete and invite us to witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational aircraft carrier!

I will wait a moment while you recover from the panic that has no doubt gripped you in an unbreakable hold. Take your time.

I think we are supposed to be super concerned that China has their very own aircraft carrier, complete with the "ski jump" at the end of the deck to help planes get airborne. It apparently can carry around 36 aircraft. On the other hand, the U.S. already has at least 10 aircraft carriers active according to the official Navy list and 2 more soon to be commissioned, the Gerald Ford (2017) and the John F. Kennedy (2020). According to Wikipedia the Ford will carry over 75 aircraft and the Kennedy over 80. In fact we have 3 or 4 times as many carriers as the Chinese do in long term inactive storage at the Naval Inactive Ship Maintenance Facility in Bremerton, Washington. Granted those are not in immediate combat shape, or I assume they are not, but the fact remains that we have so many aircraft carriers that we essentially mothball several of them because it is too much of a hassle to dismantle them. In total the U.S. Navy has over 323,000 active duty personnel, another 100,000 on "ready reserve", 273 "deployable battle force ships", of which less than a third are out to sea and over 3700 aircraft. In contrast China supposedly has over 490 ships but the list includes mostly a bunch of amphibious landing ships, missile boats, over 100 "submarine chasers".

As I pointed out in 2010, the military is the number one sacred cow of Republicans when it comes to government spending and is pretty high on the list for Democrats too when it impacts their own state or district. Back then I wrote:

We have 11 aircraft carriers that are far superior to anything else on the ocean and which allows the U.S. to project power anywhere in the world. The Russian Navy has all of 1 aircraft carrier and even back in the Soviet days never had more than 5-6. The Chinese don’t have a single carrier. India has 1. The British have 1 active aircraft carrier that is thirty years old and two new ones that are not going to be ready for a long time. The French have 1 carrier. The Germans have none. The Japanese have a couple of helicopter carriers which obviously are not a threat to one of our carriers, same with the Australians. So unless some country I am not thinking of has a carrier, we have 11 aircraft carriers and the rest of the world has 4 and half of those are run by our allies. I am going to go on a limb and say that none of the existing aircraft carriers in the world could take on one of ours. So we have an enormous advantage over the rest of the world in terms of numbers of ships (especially carriers which are the most important) and quality of ships.

I would have to amend that now to point out that the Chinese finally have an aircraft carrier and that the single Russian carrier is prone to breaking down and having half of the toilets on board freeze up.

The point is that when Donald Trump has part of his "First 100 Days" plan stuff like this (emphasis mine):

9. Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values.

It is clearly nonsense. Rebuild our military? Rebuild it to what? For what? The more reasonable step if we truly care about "national security" would be to reduce our deficit spending on the military, pull most of our foreign based troops home and stop interfering where we have no clue what we are doing and we aren't wanted anyway.

The Chinese with one aircraft carrier that is a joke and a couple of missile batteries on a couple of artificial islands are not a threat to the U.S. and not a threat anytime soon to U.S. dominance of the Pacific. If our allies like Japan, South Korea and Australia are concerned about Chinese military encroachment, maybe they can spend some of their money and build their own navy instead of letting America spend ourselves into bankruptcy to do so. The same goes for our NATO allies who are concerned about the Russian carrier Kuznetsov "Old Smokey" as I call it. Let them spend some of their money to defend their waters. We have enough problems and enough debt of our own already.

Let's hope the celebrity and snowflake generated hysteria abates a little bit once Trump takes office so the actual adults can pay attention to what Trump is actually doing and oppose it where necessary.

Monday, December 26, 2016

Ah, He *USED TO BE* Pretentious

Boy, good thing he got over that personality quirk.....

Sunday, December 18, 2016

The End Of The Most Painful Post-Election Period Ever (Hopefully)

No, not THAT kind of college....
Tomorrow will see the "official" meeting of the electors of the electoral college who will confirm the results of the 2016 Presidential election as lawfully provided for in our Constitution and thus Donald J. Trump will take one more critical step toward assuming the Presidency, the latest in our rather impressive string of peaceful transitions of power in America. For a nice summary of the process tomorrow check out How the Electoral College voting will unfold on Monday.

While I expect the Obama self-congratulation/mourning media tour to continue unabated and the "Russkies hacked da election!" nonsense to continue unabated, I am still hopeful that with the Electoral College voting completed the nation can move away from the on-going fight over the election which threatens to never end. It is over, Trump won in the only way that matters and Hillary lost. The question is what to do now.

There are many, many people like me who did not vote for Donald Trump because he seemed, and this seems confirmed since the election, temperamentally not a great fit for the Oval Office but we also were very concerned by some of his policies. His foreign policy is a mess. While I approve of any recognition of the free people of Taiwan a lot of his other policies seem to be a little hard to understand. Having John Bolton as Deputy Secretary of State is an amusing thumb in the eye to the Left but his appointment is also a dream come true for the very worst interventionist elements in the neo-con wing of the Republican party. He is also talking about enormous deficit spending on "infrastructure" but then is going to nominate a budget hawk like Mick Mulvaney as his budget director which seems to send conflicting messages. His judicial picks will need careful scrutiny to ensure he keeps his word on the kind of picks he makes. Lots of stuff needs to be carefully watched but ironically the histrionics from the snowflake Left and the more insidious serious Leftist partisans has meant that instead of thinking about real issues we are arguing about Russian hacking, the Electoral College, a slew of fake "hate crimes", etc. In other words they are providing cover for Trump as he prepares to take office. Ironic but maybe not.

Tomorrow our nation follows the method chosen very specifically and intentionally by men far wiser than most of those in power today to elect a new President. Let's celebrate that the system works and we don't have violent coups that change our government like so many other nations.

Saturday, December 17, 2016

A Country Without Obama Is Apparently A Hopeless Place To Be Ashamed Of

Remember back in 2008 when now First Lady and soon to be (not soon enough) former First Lady said that she was finally proud of her country.....

"For the first time in my adult lifetime I'm proud of my country."

Sure she said that it wasn't just because Barack Obama was running for President and doing well...but it was just because Barack Obama was running for President and doing well.

Then this week Mrs. Obama will be on prime time with Oprah and will tell America that we are without hope....cuz Barack Obama won't be President.

"See now we are feeling what not having hope feels like." It must be true because Oprah is nodding her head as earnestly as she can, hopefully she didn't pull a muscle nodding so hard. Weird, I didn't vote for Trump but I am far more hopeful now than I was after either election Obama won. I must be a fascist or a racist or some combination thereof.

Notice that to Michelle, Americans are the toddlers who bumped their heads and are looking to mommy, a "grown-up in the White House". I guess according to Mrs. Obama we all feel like our lives are in vain without Big Poppy Obama in the White House, the "grown-up" who has spent 8 years acting like a spoiled brat whenever he didn't get his way.

One would think that a lady who spent the last 8 years in the lap of luxury being dressed by the finest designers and taking a pile of vacations that cost the American taxpayers over $85,000,000 would look back with some gratitude but no, we are descending back into the land of hopelessness that existed before the rise of the Messiah Barack Hussein Obama.

How in the world did America manage to survive and thrive and be a beacon to the world for the 232 years that Barack Obama wasn't out President? Oh yeah, it is all because of racism and sexism and xenophobia.

January 20th can't come soon enough.

Saturday, December 10, 2016

Race And Exit Polls

One of the big media narratives on Election night and for weeks every since was the so-called "under-educated white vote", which means basically white people without a college degree, as if that is the best determining factor for whether one is educated or not. As the exit polls reported by CNN show below, Trump did win a very substantial percentage of white voters without a college degree, 66% overall and 71% of men...

So that means Trump won because of "whitelash" but under-educated white voters, right? Well not so fast. Trump also won among college educated white voters, 48% to 45% and especially among men with 53%. So the only white voters Hillary Clinton carried were college educated white women but even there, in what should have been a strong category for her, she only got 51% to Trump's 44%. A lot of pundits have spent a lot of time and effort talking about this. What isn't talked about is the breakdown of the black vote. See below....

As is typical, Hillary won a huge percentage of the black vote, 89% overall and a whopping 94% among black women. Which raises a question, why is Trump winning an overwhelming percentage of non-college educated white men a major topic of conversation in the chattering class when a much greater percentage of black vote votes for Hillary doesn't really warrant even a mention? The simple answer is that it isn't newsworthy. The black vote always goes overwhelmingly for the Democrats. In 2008 the overall black vote went 95% for Obama and 93% in 2012, according to CNN. In essence an entire race is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat party.

Of course it is assumed that this is the case because everyone knows that black interests are only represented by Democrats. What that means in practice is that it is assumed that all black voters want more and bigger government. Maybe that is true but maybe it is not. It is the very essence of racism to assume that all blacks want more government because all blacks are convinced that they can only get ahead if someone else is giving them something "for free". This mindset is poisonous and it is far more insidious and dangerous than the alleged "alt-right" support for Trump because it is so ingrained and pervasive. To even suggest a different viewpoint than the prevailing one is to invite charges of racism if you are white or failure to be a "real" black if you are black.

In a politically charged climate where accusations of "fake news" and shadowy Russkie agents and recounts based on vague charges of hacking when no evidence exists of anything of the sort happening dominate the news and are doing a splendid job of prolonging the rancor of a particularly ugly election season, it is still worth our time to ask some of the harder and more piercing questions. As the years have gone by, the once reliable white working class, union guys and others, have moved from the Democrats to the Republicans. Sure the union leadership by and large still make the right noises about supporting Democrats but thanks to the Obama administration waging war on the sort of jobs union guys work at, this last election it didn't seem if union leaders were working very hard to elect Hillary. Meanwhile the rank and file have largely abandoned the Democrats as they have come to see that beyond the rhetoric the Democrats are largely the party of the super-rich and the dependency class and has no interest in working class people of any color other than offering them welfare and food stamps when their jobs disappear. I am hoping that more and more black Americans will likewise start to wonder just what exactly Democrats have done for blacks. I think the answer might just shock and dismay them.

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Dear Not-Going-To-Be-Vice-President Tim Kaine

Mr. Kaine

After a Muslim terrorist drove a car into a crowd at Ohio State and then chased innocent by-standers with a knife, you responded with:

Deeply saddened by the senseless act of gun violence at Ohio State this morning. Praying for the injured and the entire Buckeye community

Of course as we know, the only act of "gun violence" was an OSU cop who shot Abdul Razak Ali Artan and the actions of that officer were anything but "senseless". Some would defend your leap to conclusion by pointing out that Ohio State reported an "active shooter" situation but even then we had no facts to support any shooting and we knew nothing about what happened. That didn't stop you from tripping over yourself to slam "gun violence" before we knew if it was indeed a gun being used or, as it turned out, was instead a car and a knife. These things can be confusing, I understand. I want to help you.

Here is a quick refresher.

This is a gun

This is a car

And this is a knife

Of course all three have variations but the basic shape is similar. You might want to keep this post handy for reference before sending out future tweets.

Or a better idea might be to not seek to politicize a criminal or terrorist situation to push an agenda of disarming the populace before we know at least a handful of facts. Even better yet, don't push that agenda at all. Just a suggestion.