Saturday, April 30, 2011

The Spin Factory

It's being reported by state-run CNN that Gaddhafi's 28-year old son and a few of his grandchildren were killed in a NATO missile strike.

Two interesting twists immediately emerge.

First, this nugget of doublespeak from Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard, commander of NATO's military operations:

"NATO is fulfilling its U.N. mandate to stop and prevent attacks against civilians with precision and care -- unlike Gadhafi's forces, which are causing so much suffering."

That's at a press conference addressing killing some grandkids with a missile.

Okay...

But, interestingly, there's immediate doubt over this story.

"We don't believe this is true," said Abdul Hafiz Ghoga, deputy chairman of the Transitional National Council in Benghazi. "It is all fabrications by the regime in a desparate attempt to get sympathy ... This regime constantly lies and keeps lying."

Hmmm. I can believe NATO targeted the house of Gaddhafi's son. I can believe it a lot easier than a story about rebel woman getting raped by 15 soldiers, escaping - with barely a scratch - to immediately hold a press conference.

Of course, that story was presented as incorruptible fact from the moment it happened.

I guess it just depends which side you're on...

"It Gets Better"

As you all know, I - like every suburban white person under 45 - was relentlessly targeted by bullies growing up. Which I why I recently felt a lot of empathy for another victim, Exxon.

Try searching for "Exxon" and "windfall." All those results are political headlocks and titty twisters.

People are FURIOUS at Exxon because in the Q1 financial data, they reported a 10.7 billion dollar profit on 114 billion in revenue.

Okay.

I'll do the math. It's a 9.4% profit margin. For anyone remotely involved in business (read: not liberals) that's INSANELY TINY - especially by evil corporation standards.

There's a million dishonest ways to vilify them, though the most ridiculous is:

"profits are up 42%!"

WHO CARES!? That statistic is pure propaganda. Oil and gas sales are ALWAYS seasonal. It's still under 10% markup.

One way I like to unwind is by dominating people on Huffington Post's comment board. I mentioned how narrow Exxons profit margin was, and that - according to a believable estimate from Exxon - they only make 2 cents on every gallon. One guy, named "exflatlander" (wonder what he is now?) responded:

"Right. [that] assessment would have us all wonder who the heck is profiting from the remaining $3.30 a gallon (low estimate). Must be all those Indian gas station owners selling naan instead of pizza inside. : ) "

Doesn't that make you want to smash your head through a wall? This guy thinks gas appears at the station free of charge.

Let's say gas is $3.80. The TAXES average 41 cents. Exxon's profit averages 2 cents of that (gee, who should you be angry at?). The remainder is COST.

This idiot on Huffington Post (which one!?) somehow assumes there's no cost in taking goo from a mile below the surface of the earth and turning it into a liquid that not only makes everything in the world function, but is made available EVERYWHERE.

Of course, bullies aren't always the smartest.

Just wish they's grow up.

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Why There Will Be QE3

Phase 2 of the "Quantitative Easing" (read: "Savings Erasing") program is about to expire. There's a lot of chatter about whether or not there will be a 3rd one.

I think the answer is "yes." Here's why:

Bernanke

Monday, April 4, 2011

Eh

Not sure I want to waste time and energy on this, considering the low hits.

Sorry! Long story short, government spending is the problem! spending is the problem! You can't spend your way to financial success! That's not true anywhere but in liberal propaganda.

"Gee, I should take out a home equity loan to add on a home gym. That will help the economy!"

Why do people think this? It's a mystery. Anyway. Good luck - though you all deserve to die a fiery death for your utter ignorance and blind allegiance to the federal government.

Buy gold, buy silver, buy things that are worth something. Your dollars are meaningless and worth less each time Barry Hussein decides he wants to spend 500 billion on some bullshit the morons at Huffington Post think is "neat."

...remember, our biggest problem is the fact we don't have a train system that can take me between cities 20% faster than the alternative. IF ONLY WE HAD HIGH SPEED RAILS!!!

DERRRRRRR

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Libya - The Illegal Liberal War

A French/US led UN coalition began attacking Qaddafi's forces today in Libya. This is not only a huge mistake, tactically, but also a criminal action.

Side note to histrionic liberal readers: I remember George Bush. I know what he did. I was against invading Iraq before it was cool (incidentally, before we invaded). Along with a few thousand others, I protested on the streets of Washington. Like then, the media is gleefully on board with the current military strike and the public is generally ignorant of anything other than what's happening in sports. But they should care, because this all comes back, economically and politically.

First, a word on the nature of the conflict. This is an armed rebellion against Qaddafi, contained in Libya. The UN has no jurisdiction, and the president of the United States has no constitutional power to send our country to war. While the media gladly echos the official reasoning that military intervention is to "to protect innocent civilians" (Example / Example), they simultaneously report that governments are considering weapons shipments to rebels and that, just today, "innocent civilians" lost a fighter jet.(!)
NBC News' Jim Maceda told the TODAY show that it was later revealed that the jet was one of those captured by the rebels. He said it was not clear if it was shot down by Gadhafi's forces, rebels on the ground by mistake or simply had suffered a mechanical failure. Source
To summarize, that's an "innocent civilian" fighter jet that was, incidentally, flying in violation of the UN Security Council resolution establishing a no-fly zone. Of course, the reporting doesn't address that obvious inconsistency - but rather echoes the same BS that Qaddafi is targeting "innocent civilians" rather than armed combatants.

From THE SAME article:

The strike came less than two hours after top officials from the United States, Europe and the Arab world agreed in Paris to launch a risky military operation to protect civilians from attacks by Gadhafi's forces.

...the aim of Western powers was to protect civilians.

The head of the rebel National Libyan Council, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, said the international community must act swiftly to protect civilians from Gadhafi's forces.

"We appeal to the international community, to the all the free world, to stop this tyranny from exterminating civilians."

"The international community is late in intervening to save civilians from Gadhafi's forces."

Meantime, hundreds of cars full of civilians headed out of the city, a Reuters correspondent said.
They have fighter jets!!!! Don't pretend you know what's going on over there given reporting like this.

It is MADNESS.

Qaddafi is putting down a rebellion. As recently as last week, our free press was issuing propaganda that Qaddafi had fled to Venezuela, was asking for a buy-out, and/or was pathologically delusional.

He seemed to be in complete denial about the protests against him, and that other big cities in Libya, particularly those in the east, had been taken by his opponents.

He simply rejected the notion that any walls were closing in on him. He denied he was besieged in the capital and said he would survive the current situation.

ABC News

What a wacko! Wait, he was right? Eh...

Actually, I don't care if he's crazy or not. I don't care if the rebels are good or bad. The reality is this whole conflict has been distorted from day one by the worldwide media. Information is missing and what we have is unabashedly biased. But now we are engaged in ANOTHER illegal/illegitimate war with another Muslim country. Hey, Democrats, can you say "hypocrisy?"

"Yes We Can!"

End of the world 2012? I think the Mayans overshot.

Friday, March 18, 2011

More Shitty News

Toilet paper and paper products predicted to rise 7% this year.

Source

According to the Keynesian left-wing media, this is mostly due to rioting paper towels and the Chinese deciding they want to take more dumps.

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Budget Nonsense

Barack Obama:

As a start, I called for a freeze on annual domestic spending over the next five years. This freeze would cut the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, bringing this kind of spending -- domestic, discretionary spending -- to its lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was president.

Let me repeat that. Because of this budget, this share of spending will be at its lowest level since Dwight Eisenhower was president.

The only way we can make these commitments [to education, etc.] is if the government starts living within its means.

This whole this is tragic and hilarious and ridiculous.

Obama wants to cut 400 billion from the deficit over the next 10 years. In other words, 40 billion per year. He says this is the most responsible budget since Eisenhower.

The deficit THIS YEAR is $1.65 TRILLION. Cutting $40 billion shaves off only 3% of THIS YEAR'S deficit. (The overall debt is $14 trillion). The total budget is $3.82 trillion, and revenue is $2.17 trillion.

I think it's funny that going $1.6 trillion dollars over the budget (9% of GDP, 76% MORE than income) is not only considered responsible, but AS responsible as Eisenhower, who - oddly enough - balanced the budget.


Here's the household analogy (all these number are proportionally scaled down from the federal budget):

Let's say I make $100k a year. I am currently $645k in debt. This year I WAS going to spend $176k, but decided to be Eisenhowerly and spend ONLY $173,720.

This way, over the next 10 years, I'm cutting out a total of $22,800 from what I want to spend. And I'll only be $645k + (10*$73.7k) =

$1,382,000.00 in debt.

But I DIDN'T spend that additional $22,800!!!

Now, IF I earnestly bragged about that, you'd think I was a fucking moron.

EDIT:

Also, the whole argument Obama presents is just rhetorical. He can cut discretionary spending to a tiny percentage without cutting ANYTHING - all he has to do is classify it as mandatory spending. The whole thing is huge a fraud.