Wow. And I thought that the best part of this flick was Tom Hanks singing "Light My Fire".
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, February 22, 2025
Cast Away (2000 film) Deep Dive
Wow. And I thought that the best part of this flick was Tom Hanks singing "Light My Fire".
Redesign of Stage Zero
For the nerds out there, here you are. By the way, this guy is nerdy, but he isn't white.
Friday, February 21, 2025
A question on the issues of the day
2/21/25:
Bird flu my buns.
2/4/25:
Bird flu? Schmerd flu. Give the chickens some masks. That will fix em up just like it worked for COVID.
Bird flu my buns.
Looks like the bird flu missed Mexico and is only impacting us here in America. What are the odds!
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) February 21, 2025
American living in Mexico heads to the grocery store to show you their eggs. Completely packed full of eggs and a dozen eggs is only $2 in US Dollars
“Eggs on eggs on eggs on… pic.twitter.com/lOqlFxhctT
2/4/25:
Bird flu? Schmerd flu. Give the chickens some masks. That will fix em up just like it worked for COVID.
DEI must die
An argument was actually put forth that DEI is merit, and that the merit is theirs. That's how the social justice warriors justify what they're doing. But this is 180 degrees out of phase with the truth. The truth is that they're enforcing quotas, which is illegal. In addition, they are trying to make true merit ILLEGAL and IMMORAL. Totally Orwellian.
United Airlines pledged to have 50% female and minority pilots this decade.
— John LeFevre (@JohnLeFevre) February 20, 2025
These groups represent less than 10% of the applicant pool, so it is IMPOSSIBLE to achieve this without lowering standards.
And it's also illegal. pic.twitter.com/paIgYdhgON
The opportunity is now
The GOP never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
These institutions are like a vampire, and the only way to kill off the vampire is with a wooden stake to the heart. This is what is being proposed, a wooden stake to the heart of the pinko project.
The Answer To 1913 Is 2025: 3 Charts That Show Why The Income Tax, The IRS And The Federal Reserve Should All Be Abolished https://t.co/DpPqI7JLPi
— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) February 21, 2025
P.S.:
8:50 AM:
It should be noted that an audit isn't really possible because the Democrats ( and their willing accomplices in the GOP ) obviated that possibility when they allowed funding to be approved without any means to make an audit possible. DOGE has stated that already, and added that almost $5 trillion of spending cannot be traced. Without any traceable means of determining where the money went, there can be no audit.
Of course, that fact will make an excuse possible. Just like when the GOP folds under pressure every time. Carville blamed Trump for the spending on COVID, but it was the Democrats that pushed for lockdowns and shutdowns. It was the Democrats who pushed for the spending needed to recover from the damage that the lockdowns and shutdowns caused. After getting the GOP to do their bidding, the Democrats ( like Carville ) then blame the GOP and Trump for what they caused.
In a sense, Carville is right. If the GOP had resisted the COVID madness, there wouldn't have been the spending. At some point, the GOP has to stop being afraid, and step up to the plate and get it done. All Carville is really doing is trolling the GOP for its weakness.
Thursday, February 20, 2025
Glen Campbell - Wichita Lineman
2/20/25:
Going to edit this because the video isn't there anymore, so I'll replace it with Rick Beato's analysis of it. He has a very high opinion of the song.
See the video below as the replacement for the originally embedded video.
Originally posted 6.8.17, updated
8.8.17:
Glen Campbell has passed away. He was 81. In these videos, he looks so young. Life is short, don't you know.
the original post follows:
A hit song from the sixties. That was supposed to be the swinging sixties. Hmm. Pretty innocent time, if you ax me.
Yes, I like the song.
Kash Patel will be confirmed
Kash Patel vote in US Senate, with respect to FBI Director
Party line vote, looks like he will be confirmed. It is not yet official, but as of this writing he has 51 votes. That will be enough if it holds up.
Wednesday, February 19, 2025
Maybe we need a government shutdown
11:53 AM:
This subject of public finance has me a bit perplexed. After reading glib stuff in the past that says that all you have to do is rollover the debt, it sounded simple. But what if that is not what happens? What I mean is, when paying interest on the debt, does any principle ever get paid? If not, then you cannot rollover the debt. You have to keep taking out debt in order to service debt.
Consequently, in order to keep from defaulting, you have to cut spending BELOW the level of revenue intake. This will allow payment on principle and interest. Then you can fund whatever can be funded on available tax revenues.
But I'm not clear on all that because I don't know exactly what happens, and what is meant by payment of interest on the debt. Therefore, if the above speculation is correct, you have to pay down principle and interest in order to keep the debt from rising. If you are at your limit, you have to pay off some of your debt on your credit card. The government's credit card has no limits. They just like to pretend that they do.
Ten to one I'm not making myself very clear here.
Let's just say we've got a big shit sandwich here, and everyone is going to have to take a bite.
1:19 PM:
This is nuts. You're going to need nearly all of that to refinance the debt that is rolling over soon. Plus you have to pay interest on the debt. Sending the money back to voters may be popular, but it just defeats the purpose of the entire exercise.
Maybe you could rollover the debt with the savings, and issue greenbacks to pay for the interest. Freeze the debt at current levels. Freeze future spending to revenue levels actually earned through income and actual work.
American Thinker: The federal government is funded through March 14. Will the Republican House and Senate pass a bill before that deadline? Over the years, Republicans have usually caved to Democrat insane demands rather than be held responsible for a government shutd...
This subject of public finance has me a bit perplexed. After reading glib stuff in the past that says that all you have to do is rollover the debt, it sounded simple. But what if that is not what happens? What I mean is, when paying interest on the debt, does any principle ever get paid? If not, then you cannot rollover the debt. You have to keep taking out debt in order to service debt.
Consequently, in order to keep from defaulting, you have to cut spending BELOW the level of revenue intake. This will allow payment on principle and interest. Then you can fund whatever can be funded on available tax revenues.
But I'm not clear on all that because I don't know exactly what happens, and what is meant by payment of interest on the debt. Therefore, if the above speculation is correct, you have to pay down principle and interest in order to keep the debt from rising. If you are at your limit, you have to pay off some of your debt on your credit card. The government's credit card has no limits. They just like to pretend that they do.
Ten to one I'm not making myself very clear here.
Let's just say we've got a big shit sandwich here, and everyone is going to have to take a bite.
1:19 PM:
This is nuts. You're going to need nearly all of that to refinance the debt that is rolling over soon. Plus you have to pay interest on the debt. Sending the money back to voters may be popular, but it just defeats the purpose of the entire exercise.
Maybe you could rollover the debt with the savings, and issue greenbacks to pay for the interest. Freeze the debt at current levels. Freeze future spending to revenue levels actually earned through income and actual work.
What's in a name?
A rose is a rose is an onion
The phrase above is from a Hemingway novel. It was turning a phrase from Shakespeare, and I thought I'd use it for this post. I need something to write about. Putting up stuff every day is not that easy sometimes. Anyway, this is about the words we use. I've been meaning to discuss the recent name changes. Particularly about the Gulf of Mexico, which is now being called the Gulf of America. Hence, the rose is a rose is an onion reference.
I lived pretty close to the Gulf, as we call it these parts. We don't use the whole phrase, just the word "Gulf". If you stand on the Seawall at Galveston, point East towards what looks like an ocean, and say "the Gulf", everyone will probably look at you like you're crazy. Sometimes words aren't even necessary. Everyone can see what it is and where it is. It's pretty danged big. If you fell off the Seawall and into the Gulf, everybody will know what you mean. You don't need the extra words.
There's an interstate called the "Gulf Freeway" in those parts. It isn't called the Gulf of Mexico freeway. Just the Gulf Freeway. Changing it to Gulf of America won't make any difference. Nobody uses the extra words. If you did, you'd get another funny look.
There's a building in Houston called the Gulf building. Or is it still called that? Let's say there used to be a building there called the Gulf building. It is or was the office for the oil company called Gulf. They had some gas stations once, which were bought out by Chevron. But there's still a few Gulf gas stations around. We don't call them Gulf of Mexico gas stations. I guess I made my point. A rose is a rose is an onion.
It was called the Gulf of Mexico for a long time. Why change it? But then again, why knock over statues and such? Some politicians decide to rename stuff, and that is what happens. I wish the politicians would just fix real problems. There was no real problem there, and changing the name doesn't change a rose into an onion. Know what I mean, Vern?
Beyond Ridiculous
"Less is more" doesn't necessarily work. The more speech the better MIGHT work if there's a geniune interest in listening.
If there are no words, then maybe you could use art. The art that comes to mind at this moment is this 60's song.
Tuesday, February 18, 2025
Jordan B. Petersen interview of a J6th defendant
What Really Happened on January 6th, Dr. Simone's personal story in her own words
I'm not familiar with her, nor do I watch much of Jordan Petersen's videos. Luckily for me, I wasn't in DC on J6th. It looks like these J6'ers have been treated very unfairly. Now these commies are screaming about how mean Trump is. What a crock.
International relations
2/18/25:
Via Free Republic: "The End of the Transatlantic Alliance"
A number of times I got reminded of a conversation I had when I was still doing Uber. I recalled writing a post, but I couldn't find it again when I was thus reminded of it. I don't think I looked all that hard. Anyway, I found it this time.
The political left in America loves to indulge the Europeans. In fact, they'd like to re-create America in the European image. Funny that they would do this when they won't fund the military to secure it. Neither will the Europeans fund their own militaries to secure themselves. I asked this German guy that very question. He could not say why they won't do anything about it even though they are worried about Russia. It all comes down to America to handle their security, but America has its own problems.
Trump wants the Europeans to fund their own militaries. There seems to be a reluctance to do that.
Seems like the Poles and the Swedes are funding their militaries. But these countries do not have the bulk of the population.
France seems interested in sending troops. Macron sounds a bit crazy to me. Macron is not Napoleon. Napoleon lost to Russia. As for Russia, I just don't see them as that big of a threat. Europe seems more like a nagging wife than an ally. It's like we should handle their problems for them. If Europe isn't prepared for war against Russia, what the hell does that have to do with America?
Europe wants to act as one, but cannot pull it off. They should have a defensive alliance, which is what NATO was originally. Now they want to expand eastward, and that sounds aggressive to me. For Europe to yield on Ukraine at this time is no defeat for Europe. The Russians wanted all of Ukraine, but they'll get a portion of it. Seems like a fair deal for peace. It's no defeat to take that deal.
3/11/19: Updated,
posted on 3.10.19
3.11.19:
The German guy was following the talking points of the media. The media has way, way too much influence in this country. There's not much that can be done about that, or so it is said. Did you know that only a handful of corporations control the media?
Yet, who benefits from that???? But the German guy was talking about Germany. I don't know that country, but if it is anything like this country, the media has got a strong grip on people over there as well.
The media is not our friend.
3.10.19:
On a recent Uber ride, I had a German on board. We engaged in a lively and friendly discussion about international relations.
His English was impeccable. Not even an accent. He could pass as an American. Nobody would guess that he is from Germany. His knowledge of history was first rate. Indeed, he impressed me with his knowledge, and I must say, that his may well surpass my own. But I won't be overawed by the guy, that is not the point. The discussion was interesting. Most interesting, indeed.
What did I learn?
There's a problem with our European allies. This needs attention. I hope somebody in Washington is on this, because if they are caught napping, we might have a problem.
He is concerned about a war with the Russians. What he said seems plausible.
It may well be nice if we could negotiate a peace with Russia, but if that fails, our arms will have to do the talking. He doesn't think the Germans are prepared for a war. I thought that odd, since they seem to be worried. They are more worried about the Americans than the they are about the Russians. But the Americans aren't interested in taking over their country. The Russians? If they are worried about the Russians, maybe they should be concerned about that as a possibility.
He mentioned the German's recent warlike history, and so there may be that. Nevertheless, if they are to remain independent, they need to be persuaded to increase their readiness. That's the big challenge that needs to be met.
I would have liked to have talked longer, but the ride was about 30 minutes, so it was all too brief.
Via Free Republic: "The End of the Transatlantic Alliance"
A number of times I got reminded of a conversation I had when I was still doing Uber. I recalled writing a post, but I couldn't find it again when I was thus reminded of it. I don't think I looked all that hard. Anyway, I found it this time.
The political left in America loves to indulge the Europeans. In fact, they'd like to re-create America in the European image. Funny that they would do this when they won't fund the military to secure it. Neither will the Europeans fund their own militaries to secure themselves. I asked this German guy that very question. He could not say why they won't do anything about it even though they are worried about Russia. It all comes down to America to handle their security, but America has its own problems.
Trump wants the Europeans to fund their own militaries. There seems to be a reluctance to do that.
Seems like the Poles and the Swedes are funding their militaries. But these countries do not have the bulk of the population.
France seems interested in sending troops. Macron sounds a bit crazy to me. Macron is not Napoleon. Napoleon lost to Russia. As for Russia, I just don't see them as that big of a threat. Europe seems more like a nagging wife than an ally. It's like we should handle their problems for them. If Europe isn't prepared for war against Russia, what the hell does that have to do with America?
Europe wants to act as one, but cannot pull it off. They should have a defensive alliance, which is what NATO was originally. Now they want to expand eastward, and that sounds aggressive to me. For Europe to yield on Ukraine at this time is no defeat for Europe. The Russians wanted all of Ukraine, but they'll get a portion of it. Seems like a fair deal for peace. It's no defeat to take that deal.
3/11/19: Updated,
posted on 3.10.19
3.11.19:
The German guy was following the talking points of the media. The media has way, way too much influence in this country. There's not much that can be done about that, or so it is said. Did you know that only a handful of corporations control the media?
Yet, who benefits from that???? But the German guy was talking about Germany. I don't know that country, but if it is anything like this country, the media has got a strong grip on people over there as well.
The media is not our friend.
3.10.19:
On a recent Uber ride, I had a German on board. We engaged in a lively and friendly discussion about international relations.
His English was impeccable. Not even an accent. He could pass as an American. Nobody would guess that he is from Germany. His knowledge of history was first rate. Indeed, he impressed me with his knowledge, and I must say, that his may well surpass my own. But I won't be overawed by the guy, that is not the point. The discussion was interesting. Most interesting, indeed.
What did I learn?
There's a problem with our European allies. This needs attention. I hope somebody in Washington is on this, because if they are caught napping, we might have a problem.
He is concerned about a war with the Russians. What he said seems plausible.
It may well be nice if we could negotiate a peace with Russia, but if that fails, our arms will have to do the talking. He doesn't think the Germans are prepared for a war. I thought that odd, since they seem to be worried. They are more worried about the Americans than the they are about the Russians. But the Americans aren't interested in taking over their country. The Russians? If they are worried about the Russians, maybe they should be concerned about that as a possibility.
He mentioned the German's recent warlike history, and so there may be that. Nevertheless, if they are to remain independent, they need to be persuaded to increase their readiness. That's the big challenge that needs to be met.
I would have liked to have talked longer, but the ride was about 30 minutes, so it was all too brief.
Cooking the books
This town (DC) needs an enema!
For 26 Years, The U.S. Government Has Been Cooking the Books https://t.co/7YblXdUKJO
— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) February 18, 2025
Monday, February 17, 2025
There is a saying that may be applicable here
It is a paraphrasing of something you might hear from time-to-time: "God looks after drunks, little children, and the United States of Anerica". Once you consider the mess we're in right now, you'd better hope that last group hasn't lost that one little bit of good fortune. Our luck may be running out.
The insanity of minting a trillion dollar platinum coin
2/18/25:
There was something that made me curious, and I looked into it. It turned out to be a dry hole. Nothing more to say on this subject for now.
Minting a trillion dollar coin
Comment:
Just when you thought things couldn't get any crazier, now this...
The original post on 1/8/13 follows
Rick Moran, American Thinker
But, I could have told you that already.
There was something that made me curious, and I looked into it. It turned out to be a dry hole. Nothing more to say on this subject for now.
2/17/25, 11:48 AM:
You know things are bad when something crazy starts to sound like a good idea. As long as we're going bat guano crazy, why stop at a trillion? Why not mint one for the entire debt. Instead of creating debt, use the coin to back the greenbacks that will pay down the debt. At no interest.
You could mint rhodium coins. Those are the priciest metal on the markets these days. About 4k per oz. Maybe the Wizard has the answers.
2:07 PM
The Wiz says we're up that certain creek, and we have no paddle. He also says the Krugman is fulla sheet, main. It will be big bad inflation to do the coin trick. Aw, shucks.
10/6/21:
Update:
Minting a trillion dollar coin
Comment:
Just when you thought things couldn't get any crazier, now this...
The original post on 1/8/13 follows
To use that authority to backdoor the 17th and 18th trillion dollars of the national debt would be, according to Castle, "so far-fetched and so black helicopter-ish a type of methodology of trying to resolve something like this that I think the public would totally scoff at it."Comment: I repeat, how is this any different from what they are already doing? If this is crazy, then it all is.
But, I could have told you that already.
Fountain of youth
Evidently, the fountain has not run dry---yet.
If you read down the list, you've got some folks who came across on the Mayflower---I kid you not. Or they hit their heads on the rock.
According to the Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 17, 2025
Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security 🤣🤣 pic.twitter.com/ltb06VX98Z
Sunday, February 16, 2025
A new monetary policy needed
Most of what is proposed here is already in practice
What about the rest? All new debt is being used to create monetary expansion. Therefore, to stop this, and/or at least slow it down, begin to issue "greenbacks" in order to finance government.
We all are probably aware by now of the efforts to shrink government expenditures. But not all excessive expenditures can be removed all at once. An adjustment time is needed. Therefore, whatever can't be cut now, can be financed with greenbacks. One law may need to be set aside. It is the one that stopped Lincoln's financing the Civil War with greenbacks. The central banksters of that time put an end to that. Time to put an end to the banksters. If not a complete end, at least a sharp curtailment of their power.
In reality, the current debt will have to be serviced. To end it all in one fell swoop will risk outright rebellion. Even a curtailment of their power will be very strongly opposed. Once obtained, power is unwillingly given back.
Then, how to do this? Instead of allowing the Federal Reserve Bank to set interest rates, do the following: 1) Do not set the interest rates, allow them to float 2) by doing this, allow the market to set interest rates. How? Through the current Open Market operations. There will be an interest rate that will support current commodity prices. The market will seek that equilibrium point, and the interest rates will fluctuate according to market conditions. These conditions will not be entirely based upon a commodity like GOLD. Instead, as broad a collection of commodities as possible. These will make up an index, and the target price of that index will be the goal of policy.
But what happens to the Federal Reserve? Eventually, it will have to go. For the moment, it's services will have to be unwound. It's not clear how to work out how to remove ALL public debt. Therefore, some will have to stay until such time that it can be phased out. But no more debt should be issued. If there's a Federal deficit, it will have to be financed by greenbacks. NO NEW DEBT FINANCING through debt creation. Old debts will be serviced and paid off gradually. Interest payments will decrease over time as debt is retired.
Instead of supporting a debt servicing arrangement by setting interest rates, the rates will set monetary policy according to market conditions. There will be a gradual weaning off the debt creation scam that is swamping our financial structure. Eventually, the debt monster will lead to catastrophe, and will have to end at some point. The sooner the better, but people are going to have to get used to the idea. After all, most people don't understand how monetary policy works anyway. The public will support it if they are educated to understand how it works, and why it needs to change. It needs to change, because the banksters are stealing our freedom and sovreignty away from us. Interest expenses are tribute to their tyranny. End that tribute or lose all freedom.
Debt and the Constitution
The 14th Amendment to US Constitution, Section 4, with respect to public debt
A discussion is here in the "good old" Wikipedia.
The interpretation of this section is up to the Courts and to Congress, or so it appears.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)