GO NAVY BEAT ARMY

GO NAVY BEAT ARMY

'87 Sir

Thirty years of service ----USNA Class of 1987 '87 Sir

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Really thoughtful article

Foreign Policy Magazine is one of those sites I have a love-hate relationship with, which is probably true of most of the left-leaning foreign policy websites...and yes, I consider most of them left leaning, internationalist sorta websites.

However, Foreign Policy is better than most and recently had a very interesting article.

Eve of Disaster: Why 2013 eerily looks like the world of 1913, on the cusp of the Great War.

Since we are coming up on the 100th anniversary of World War I, I expect to see a great deal of writing on all aspects of the war...no doubt driven by social, gender and racial historians (BLECH)...more on that later.
Mr. Emmerson makes a number of outstanding points about historical analogies and the use of history as a "lessons learned" tool for policy makers, strategists, and average citizens. (although not likely your "low information" Obama voter who considers Jon Stewart a news correspondent...although compared to most of the buffoons on MSNBC, he probably compares rather well.)

Here are some of Mr. Emmerson's more salient points:

In the end, the utility of history to the decision-maker or to the policy analyst is not as a stock of neatly packaged lessons for the contemporary world, to be pulled off the shelf and applied formulaically to every situation. Rather, it is to hone a way of thinking about change and continuity, contingency and chance.
Thinking historically can remind us of the surprises that can knock states and societies off course and, at the same time, can check our enthusiasm for believing that this time is different. The world of 1913, on the threshold of the seminal catastrophe of the 20th century yet by and large not expecting it, is a case in point.
Sure, there is such a sin as misusing history -- abusing history, even. But there is a much worse mistake: imagining that we have escaped it.

That last sentence really stands out for me...many Americans, and people in general, assume we are WAY too smart to repeat the mistakes of our grand-parents or great grand-parents, or that we can just pass some laws and regulations to do away with greed, stupidity or evil. On an international scale, our current Administration or even past Administrations assume that everyone wants to be an American with democracy, women's rights, gay rights, religious tolerance and touchy-feely loviness..or that a change in President from that evil George W. Bush to the ultra-cool Barry Obama will suddenly change another country's long-term strategic interests or a terrorist group's hatred of the Christian West. History is a pesky, persistent thing, and the belief that war between nations is obsolete is as naive in 2013 as it was in 1913.

The crucial point about the world 100 years ago, then, is not that it is identical to the world today -- it isn't -- but that there was a time, in the not-so-distant past, when a globalized world, not entirely dissimilar to our own, fell apart. And it wasn't because human societies were in the grip of the uncontrollable forces of destiny or that they were particularly dumb. 
Most just didn't expect things to pan out the way they did. People actually living through the year 1913 did not experience those 12 months as the moody prelude to catastrophe. In retrospect, there were storm clouds on the horizon. 
But at the time, many people found themselves living through the best of times -- or simply had other things to think about. The world in 1913 was dynamic, modern, interconnected, smart -- just like ours.
This is probably the most interesting comparison people try to make between the early 21st century and the early 20th..."Oh, the world is just to interconnected to have another war..it would be bad for international trade and business...and we're all one big happy community on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram." Of course in 1913, the telegram, airplane, the beginning of wireless communications seemed just as revolutionary...as did the flow of international trade and commerce. Yet one year later, trenches were being dug across Belgium and northern France.

Finally Mr. Emmerson concludes with a warning of sorts:
Humanity is forever condemned to live with uncertainty about the future. But thinking historically equips us to better gauge that uncertainty, to temper biases, question assumptions, and stretch our imagination. 
By understanding the history of other countries -- particularly those that are re-emerging to global eminence now -- we might better understand their mindsets, hopes, and fears. And when we've done that, we might find we need to think again about how to build a future of our own making, rather than one decided for us by events. The world of 1913 -- brilliant, dynamic, interdependent -- offers a warning. The operating system of the world in that year was taken by many for granted. In 2013, at a time of similar global flux, the biggest mistake we could possibly make is to assume that the operating system of our own world will continue indefinitely, that all we need to do is stroll into the future, and that the future will inevitably be what we want it to be. Those comforting times are over. We need to prepare ourselves for a much rougher ride ahead.
The point he makes is that one unfortunate and unforeseen event--the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand, set in motion a chain of events that couldn't...or wouldn't be stopped and the carnage of World War I ensued. What are the chances of a similar miscalculation today? In the East China Sea between China and Japan? Between Iran and Israel? Or even between China and the U.S.?

His book looks very interesting...as I begin the run-up to 2014...it may be worth another look.


Monday, January 14, 2013

stream of consciousness

Wow, coffee is awesome...I was just having a stream of consciousness...
 
So why do liberals think the Defense Department is so filled with mismanagement and waste that there must be BILLIONS we can cut....but there are perfectly comfortable with giving control of our health care system over to the government?  Do they think that one set of government bureaucrats are any more efficient or smarter than another?  This is always a mystery to me, since the military is really outstanding at killing people and breaking things, which is exactly what they are supposed to do.  But really, has anyone been to the DMV lately?  Think government healthcare will be any more efficient?
Another interesting question...why do liberals think that morals and values of the 1950s are gone, gone, gone, but the economy should still be there?  What I mean is, liberals like Paul Krugman (another reason why the Nobel Prize has become a well-funded Crackerjack prize) thinks that if we only had the economic conditions of the 1950s things would be great!!!  You know 30% union members, lots of well-paying and low skilled manufacturing jobs, 90% marginal tax rates.  
 
WELL MORONS, cuz the past is gone and just like conservatives have to listen to how gay marriage, sexual liberation and "if it feels good, do it" are so awesome compared to those stone-age morals, so you will have to get over the fact that the days are long-gone when someone straight out of high-school could walk down to the steel mill, car plant or coal mine and start to work with no training or education.  Not to say that manufacturing is dead...but it's DIFFERENT and that by and large means non-unionized.  Which means....that's right, there is no such thing as life-long employment with a company any more.  Now, professionals such as myself realized this from the start of our career and have planned accordingly...building up our skills, experience, and training to maintain our relevancy in a constantly changing world. 
 
This is a MAJOR shock to tenured Marxist professors, professional union bosses and community organizers, but most Americans have reluctantly accepted the fact that there is no such thing as job security anymore, unless you make it for yourself.  However, since Marxist professors, union bosses, and community organizers are also on the endangered species list, I'm sure they will figure that out soon enough...I'm not saying I like it....my father worked for IBM over 33 years, my older brother worked for IBM for over 30...but I am kind of a dinosaur to have been with the same company for over 13 years.  I hope to do my 20...but who knows...and that's the way it is...but liberals...oh, so smarter than the rest of us liberals, seem stuck in the past economically.  I mean, they are "CITIZENS OF THE WORLD" so they should realize that low-skill jobs are going to go to the lowest bidder...first China...soon Indonesia or Vietnam...who knows after that.  
 
There are still some major manufacturing jobs (union too) that can't be outsourced, but liberals HATE these jobs because they are in the defense manufacturing industry, the oil and coal and natural gas industry...keeping in mind that solar cells can ALWAYS be made cheaper in China than Detroit..and of course, the aviation industry...until the NLRB screws up Boeing....
So, that's my Monday....argh...I won't even go into the whole liberal mantra of negotiation "Give me what I want or I will call you a meanie poopoo head...or take my ball and go home."  
 
It would be kinda funny to see Obama try and negotiate with Donald Trump though....Obamamy wouldn't know how to negotiate his way out of a paper bag...since he's never had too.....you know, community organizers don't protest...they go whining to their media buddies....oh, wait, didn't Obammy have a press conference today!?

Okay, over to decaf..............

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Curious and Depressing....Liberals or SWOs?

So, I started out my year with a very thoughtful post

Food for Thought


Because, well, I like to keep things real, and examine my assumptions about life and politics...but never bacon, because bacon's awesomeness is a given, constant, unchanging part of the universe...like Planck's Constant or Pi.............hmmm.......Pie.............

Anyway, thus ensued some lively comments from a liberal....and a SWO..that's surface warfare officer to the unwashed masses...these are the navy guys not cool enough for flight school, smart enough to be a nuke, crazy enough to be a SEAL or crippled enough to go Supply Corps.... ....BTW in my 48 years of observation I have noticed that SWOs and liberals have a lot of similarities...they are often angry, bitter, and resentful.  Liberals from...well being liberals...and SWOs from saying "right full rudder" far too much while the air wing was sleeping in their racks, or stealing their women....

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Anonymous said...
Why do you insist on silly stuff like "democRATs"? I take no one seriously who uses terms like "repubturds," "liburals," "libturds," or must capitalize the "rat" in democrat. This sort of juvenile discourse is part of the reason this country is so f-----d up. And please do not say the other size does it as well...that is the sort of thing my 6 your old tells me.
Grouchy Historian said...
Sigh...another anonymous poster...actually I do it to be annoying...clearly it works...and it's pretty mild compared to some of the stuff from the democratic underground or the dailykos.

Oh, that's right liberals date all history, snark, and political sarcasm from Jan 20, 2009..the first year of the reign of Barrackus I...the liberal lord and savior

I just follow Alinsky Rule 5

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

Anonymous said...
So basically the defense is 1) it's annoying and 2) the other side does it -- and even worse. Sigh....
Grouchy Historian said...
Yup, it's my blog and I'll snark if I want to, snark if I want to...woooo wooooo
Anonymous said...
Indeed, so have at it. I do not find it annoying...just a bit curious and depressing, yet another sign of what is wrong with our politics.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AGAIN I say, liberals are SOOOO curious and depressed at what's wrong with our politics...........AFTER January 20, 2009.  WHY do I keep harping on this?  WELL, the only thing I hate more than turkey bacon (the devil's snack food) is hypocrisy...and liberals are LOADDDDED with it. 

Again, I refer you to Alinsky's Rules of Politics.

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

So, for your historical education again...I will do this slow...like MOBOARDS..if you remember those...like HO MO TO...which has also gone the way of TACAN point-to-points...but I digress again.....

For EIGHT YEARS liberals smeared, slimed and called George W Bush every name in the book -stupid, cowboy, warmonger, stupid, slimy oilman, stupid.  You get the point.  AND conservatives took it.  Not me, of course, I hit back. But W, by and large with a grace that Barry O could NEVER muster, took it and soldiered on..even after Algore and his buddies tried to steal the 2000 election...yes I said it, I believe it...and I will always believe it...this of course was the primary cause of liberal rage, rage and more rage, cuz W did not roll over and let Algore steal the election...like Romney probably let Obama steal (or at least buy) the 2012 election...but more on that later.....and liberals were enraged...after all if it worked in 1960 (perpetrated by the Chicago political machine of Richard Daley...my how history rhymes)..so for 8 years I had to listen to the never ending crap about how W was an "illegitimate president"...never mind that the Dems know a LOT about illegitimacy, causing so much of it with their social policies, but I digress.....

NOW, of course liberals can't muster intellectual points or arguments because they have nothing intellectual to say and their illogical and absolute absurdity have reached...well insane heights....take this headline from the MAIN (LAME) stream media:

 Jobless claims rise, but jobs market recovery intact

Claims tend to be very volatile around this time of the year because of the holidays and seasonal layoffs, making it difficult to get a clear picture of the labor market's health.  While claims increased last week, there was nothing in the data to suggest a deterioration in labor market conditions.
I mean, is this about the dumbest thing you've heard so far this year?  Ouch, it makes my head hurt to think about the level of absolute mental mast....argh, must behave...no, can't behave...mental masturbation that Reuters and Yahoo News have to go through to peddle this crap to attempt to cover Obama's behind and the crappy economy his POLICIES are creating.............it truly boggles my mind, okay it really doesn't, most of the media have their lips attached so tight that whenever Obama stops walking they have to do a cranial rectal extraction of Chris Matthews, Scott Pelley, Brian Williams...whoever.....

Therefore, since liberals cannot win an argument on facts, ergo, I am forced to conclude that they must argue like...girls...(yes I said that)...........

Liberals are all about emotion, self-esteem and what makes them feel or look good in front of other liberals.  AND of course, they KNOW in their excellent Ivy League educated brains that mankind can be perfected (a la the New Soviet Man---read Viktor Belenko's MiG Pilot about the joys of Soviet Communism...that he DEFECTED from....) by ONE more government program....ONE more instance of affirmative action or Title IX...clearly proving once again that liberals are as historically ignorant as they are economically deficient. 

AND of course here's how liberals argue:

1) Don't like Obama or his policies- You're RACIST

2) Don't believe that women should get free birth control and abortions paid for by taxpayers- You're MISOGYNIST

3) Use the phrase "illegal immigrant" instead of "poor oppressed undocumented worker"- you're XENOPHOBIC AND RACIST

4) Don't believe in higher taxes for social programs- You hate _______  insert
a) children
b) grandma 
c) women-{and you're misogynist) 
d) people of color {which of course also means you're racist} OR
e) all of the above.

Facts??? FACTS??? We don't need no stinkin facts???  Facts are whatever liberals say they are..unemployment at 7.8%??? Really, does anyone outside of Obama's Labor Department believe that?  But it doesn't matter cuz the NYTWAPOABCNBCBSCNNMSNBC media machine will parrot whatever their lord and master Obama tells them too....and, if you don't agree well...choose 1-4, rinse, repeat, call Media Matters, Call George Soros..whatever.

So...to answer your question..for the most part NO, NO, HELL TO THE NO, I have stopped trying to argue logically with 99% of liberals...mostly because they are not as smart as they think...not NEARLY as morally superior as they think...and since they consider me evil anyway, what the hell, I have been called worse by better people.

So for those 1% of liberals that I take seriously...I am happy to debate Obama's faults, Reagan's awesomeness, or the joys of cooking with bacon...for everyone else...well, have a big cup of Alinsky and we'll see you at the revolution................

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

The first book of the year...a fine little volume for Advent.

Ok, so it's way past Advent...yea, I get that.  However since it took me a few days to read through this, I  figured I would start my 2013 book reviews with this fine little volume by Pope Benedict.  Mind you...I approach anything theological written by a Pope with a great deal of trepidation since I know that my knowledge of Scripture and Catholic dogma is not the best...hey I said your Historian was Grouchy, not a good Catholic.

However, this book, weighing in at less than 150 pages, was just the perfect thing for a little Advent meditation without making my brain (or soul) hurt too much.  Part exegesis (ha, didn't think I knew what that was did ya??), part historical criticism and part comparative analysis, the Holy Father takes us on a journey through the Gospels of Matthew and Luke as they relate the story of the Incarnation, Annunciation, Birth and Presentation of Jesus.

Now, speaking as a historian, I really appreciated the depth and quality of Benedict's scholarship.  Truly one of the finest theologians of his generation, he is also a pretty darned good historian as well, seamlessly blending historiography and theology to show us how Jesus fit not only into salvation history, but secular history as well.  He takes a point-by-point approach, without being overwhelming, of showing how both Matthew and Luke approached the telling of the Christmas story to their respective audiences, using specific imagery and quotes from the Old Testament that would resonant with their readers. (side-note:  one of the greatest lessons I learned was that each Gospel was written for a specific audience- ergo Matthew for the Jews, Luke and Mark for the Gentiles...although Luke's Gospel was immediately followed by Acts.  And of course John...well, I'm not sure exactly who his Gospel was written for...maybe the hippies and twisted mystics of his day?)

Pope Benedict goes through each phase, as it were, of the infancy of Jesus and does so in a way that shows not only how He was the fulfillment of all the Old Testament prophesy, but that there was serious foreshadowing of his Passion and Resurrection even in his birth.  One example is that Jesus was laid in a manger, which was used to feed the oxen and other animals in the stable, being placed on what was essentially a feeding table clearly prefigures Jesus in the Eucharist for Catholics today.....pretty heady stuff from my point of view.

So, if you want a bite-sized introduction to the wonderful theology and writing genius of our current Holy Father...this is a great book. 
 

Monday, January 7, 2013

Exciting books of 2013.

Ok, so a small break from the snark.....getting back to routine after the Christmas break is hard...BUT there are some good things to look forward to in 2013.  NO, not more pontificating, bloviating speeches by our 44th President...I'm talking books here.  History books to be more specific...and there are some good ones coming in 2013 that I have been eagerly anticipating....in addition to the totally awesome stack I received for Christmas and my birthday.


I must compliment my +1 for her excellent mixture of volumes chosen.   I am really trying to broaden my understanding of the Revolutionary War, War of 1812 (more on that later) and the current conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Oh, and Monsters Hunting as well...okay, strictly speaking that is not a history book, BUT getting the first 3 books in a single volume for less than $20 on Amazon is too totally awesome to pass up.  So, on to the Grouchy Historian best books of 2013 (So far):

Rick Atkinson has written THE trilogy of the US military in Europe during World War II.  The first two volumes were absolutely magnificent, and I expect this one to be equally awesome.  Atkinson's ability to weave strategic, operational, and tactical history combined with his meticulous research will make these books the standard works on the U.S. Army in the ETO.  I would even go so far to say that this trilogy will become for World War II history what Shelby Foote's The Civil War:  A Narrative has become for Civil War history.
Max Boot is that rare combination of military historian, pundit, and military analyst that make his books and syndicated columns equally interesting to me.  An expert in "small wars", insurgencies, and guerrilla warfare, Boot is writing what will likely be the definitive history of guerrilla and irregular warfare throughout history.  I am particularly looking forward to his analysis of irregular warfare and the lessons that might be applicable to Western armies facing increasingly lethal Islamic insurgencies and terrorist actions in Africa and the Middle East.





Peter Tsouras, like Ralph Peters, is one of my favorite authors for specific genres.  While Ralph is an especially great grouchy critic of the US military and how it has conducted the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan and how Western socities are dealing with the Islamist threat in general, Peter has become the king of alternate military history.  Alternate history is probably my favorite fiction type...especially when it is done well.  Tsouras has edited some really fine anthologies of alternate military history, as well as authoring several of his own.  The Eastern Front in World War II has always been a particularly undeserved area of Grouchy Historian study, something I am trying to fix with several of David Glantz' marvelous volumes.  I am hoping that Tsouras' look at Stalingrad will offer some food for thought as I continue my study.

Well, that's about it...I am sure other excellent works of history will be published in 2013...but for now, given my extensive backlog and my revised goal of reading 33 books this year, I'd better get busy.

More books, less brain-numbing television...that's my plan......................Hey... is that Castle on TV?

Friday, January 4, 2013

Food for Thought

So your Grouchy Historian started his new year with an interesting...and, as always, anonymous post from a liberal...and a SWO...hmmm, they are both very testy types...mostly because they know deep down that brown shoes were so much cooler and got more babes, but I digress....
Anonymous said...
A "follower of Ronald Reagan" who is a military analyst for the government. So freaking typical. LOL. From: a slobbering liberal who sailed on frigates that took your P-3 Orion sonobuoy signals and actually made contact with the bad boys beneath the waves. IF you hate government why do you work for government? LOL. YES WE CAN. Black Shoe SWO.
First of all, I am not a "follower" of Ronald Reagan, I simply admire his political prowess, patriotism, and belief in America...only liberal DemocRATS deify their Obamassiah.   

However, because I am thoughtful, introspective...and brutally self-critical, unlike most liberals, I thought.."Hmm, what if he's right..do I HATE government?"...liberals really like that phrase for some reason.  Then I reconsidered....and, as always, went back to the Constitution..liberals favorite thing...after guns, God, and bacon...ok, not really...
 We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Now, if one interprets that literally, one of the SPECIFIC purposes of the US Government is to provide for our defense.  And, I hope that my contributions as one of those bottom-dwelling defense contractors (NOT a government worker), contributes in some small way to that effort....just like my 11 years in uniform did.  Now I know liberals may interpret the "promote the general welfare" part of the preamble as tax the poop out of the rich and redistribute it to their favorite "poor" and minority groups, but I don't think that's what the Founding Fathers intended.

Which brings me back to the question-Do I have government?....NO, there are specific things the United States government must do...again they are spelled out in the Constitution.  However, do I think the government tries to do too much?  YES....do I think there are places to cut government spending...even in the defense realm?  YES.  I read somewhere that the US government has basically become an insurance company with an army....OUCH...that really hurts...because it's true!!

This, of course, is the debate this country must have...sooner or later....preferably sooner.  WHAT are the roles we want government to play...at the local, state and national level.  AND more importantly what are Americans willing to pay for them?

2013 offers some interesting possibilities...I hope an honest, open conversation about the financial direction of our country is one of them....but that's about as likely as a Stanley Cup playoff in 2013...............

Oh, and as far as SWO boy goes...I wonder what he's doing now? Working for the TIDES Foundation?  SEIU?  MoveON.org?   I wonder about anyone who describes themselves as a slobbering anything...hmmm

Anyone, an interesting way to start my year.........

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Happy 2013....or not....................

On my first day back to work, January 2, like many Americans, at least those who don't think WWE is real or the Kardashians are real celebrities (I still haven't figured out what their "talent" is beyond boobs, butts, and drama), I was trying to filter through the "analysis" and punditry and figure out what the last minute, middle of the night, "DEAL" that Obama and Congress made meant to ME.

Oh, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth, from both sides of the political spectrum...which immediately told me it was a good compromise...which in political speak pretty much means a crap sandwich that no one likes, but something their respective leaders can push through so they don't look like bigger buffoons than usual.

And of course, the sycophant, toady, lap-dog media immediately started their usual "Ohhhhh, isn't he dreamy" worship of Obama for pushing through tax increases on those evil, evil, rich people.

And Republicans started their usual navel gazing-"Why don't the media like us?" B.S. that always annoys the hell out of me.

BUT, what was really accomplished?  AND, ultimately, who got really screwed in this deal?  I mean besides the average American taxpayer?

Well, here are my bullet points on this whole mess...with maybe a wee bit of snark...
  • Obama got his tax increases...yup conservatives should be pissed that his whole 2012 campaign was based on lies, class envy, race envy (yup I said that), and more lies...and it worked...BUT, as we used to tell our son when he got caught in a lie, eventually, you will get caught.  EVEN Obama....when unemployment stays high, inflation starts kicking in, and the economy stays in the gutter...even stupid Storage Wars watching Americans will figure out that all those new taxes didn't do anything Obama promised they would...in other words screwing over those evil rich people did not help out anyone else...except the welfare folks on foodstamps and other entitlement receivers...you remember those pesky 47%....now 52% that Romney cruelly pointed out were going to vote for Obama no matter what to keep those gubment checks flowing...realistically, I think Republicans did OK...even Obama knew (although he lied about it) that if those evil Bush tax cuts expired EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN still with a job (important caveat in Obamaerica) would have their income taxes go up...not just the evil rich people.  Obama got as much as he could, but it could have been worse...after all, $400K?  Not to stoke that class envy, but would I take a hit as a conservative Congressman to protect the salary of NFL football players, Hollyweird types, and stupid Blue Staters who voted for Obama (remember 8 out of the 10 richest counties voted for Obama, so screw'em..welcome to 2013 morons).  So, the whole payroll tax hike will bite most Americans, but honestly, that was coming no matter what...gotta keep Grandma and the AARP happy, after all.
  • BUT, here's the big 800,000 pound gorilla in the room, that Obama and his buddies don't want to talk about...and if Republicans were half as smart and ruthless as I am--they would be talking about 24/7...OBAMACARE is going to run over this economy and country...period.  The additional $1T ..yes you read that correctly the NEW $1T in taxes from Obamacare that kicked in while everyone was arguing about $600-800B in new income taxes will ensure our country remains in, at best, anemic 2-3% economic growth (viv la Europe!) and 8-10% unemployment for the foreseeable future (much higher for young people and minorities--those same idiots that believed all the Hope and Change hype).  Oh, and all you hourly workers...especially retail, restaurant and other low-skill entry level jobs---well, hope you can survive on less than 40 hours a week, cause that's coming as well.  Business people are not stupid or sheep..so until the Obamabots get to implement their European socialized medicine...oh, and don't kid yourself, that's still the goal of all this...those low income, low wage folks will pay the price for Obamacare...the rest of us will see our premiums jacked up..but we'll keep some coverage....for now.....but HEY, there's free contraceptives and abortions...so hey, I guess all's well then....you can screw...just don't get sick....
  • Who I really feel sorry for is the poor bastard that comes behind Obama on January 20, 2017.  Although that new President could be a DemocRAT, history tells us it will likely be a Republican...who will have the godaweful task of taking the ATM card out of the hands of Congress, turning off the entitlement spigot...and telling the American people that the Emperor has no clothes and the good times are over.  Will America elect someone who can do this?  Or are we so far down the path of Rome, that we will elect Obama v. 2.0 to keep the good times rolling with more taxes, more free stuff and a general "Party hearty tonight, for tomorrow we pay the piper" attitude?  Darn fine question.  In any event, I hope someone has the balls to stand up to the "Poor and Elderly and Minority and Women and Children" industrial complex and tell the truth....yea, yea, and I want a pony, and a unicorn, and  a leprechaun.
 According to the last Congressional Budget Office estimate of the impact of unemployment on the deficit, a reduction of unemployment by only one percentage point starting in January 1995 and sustained through fiscal year 2000 would have netted the government $415 billion over those six years. Most of that would come from increased taxes paid by more people working and greater business profits ($315 billion). The rest would result from less money needed for unemployment insurance and other social programs ($32 billion), and less money spent on interest payments to service the debt ($68 billion--$23 billion in fiscal year 2000 alone).
I mean THINK about that...if you cut the unemployment rate in half...to where it should be...(by half I mean to about 5-6%...using the more logical U6 unemployment rate, not the BS number quoted by the Obamamedia and cooked up by the Obama-loving Labor Department)...you could almost eliminate the Obama deficits...AND if you repealed Obamacare...WOW, think of the possibilities?  Remember how all the DemocRATS love to talk about the Clinton budget surpluses???? Well we could have the Rubio surpluses of 2020??!!!  How cool would that be?

So, that's where we stand, I guess...my taxes have already gone up...thanks to the expiration of that payroll tax cut...so...guess that a couple hundred bucks less a month I have to stimulate the economy...you know buying groceries and frivolous things like that....and here's the FUN, SUPER FANTASTAFABULOUS part.....OBAMA WANTS MORE TAXES...yes, we have truly passed into the land of the absurd...yes, this is totally awesome.  Now, here's the fun part...watch what happens when the SH** hits the fan and we (all Americans) have to face the fact that Mediscare and Social Insecurity come up for {GASP} reform in  a few months....ONLY the hard core, loony left, union flacking idiots believe all's well and nothing needs to be done but RAISE MORE TAXES....for the rest of us...hard choices have to be made...does Obama have the vision and guts to make them......................don't bet on it..................