Archive for February, 2003

February 28, 2003

Dubya debates Saddam

President Bush and Saddam Hussein engaged in a debate. Following is a transcript of the debate:

Moderator: So, letís start with the big one: Should the US invade Iraq?

Bush: Absolutely. This guy is insane. I mean, look what he does to his people, his violations of weapons sanctions, he’s a threat to his neighbors, and his mustache is gay.

Hussein: Look, Iím not a threat to anyone you know, I mean I keep it local. UN Resolution 666 specifically states the Iraqi government may, at its leisure, kill as many Iraqis as is necessary, so long as those Iraqis are physically located within the borders of Iraq. Iím not a threat to anyone that anybody cares about. And the chicks dig the Ďstache!

Bush: That may be the case but the US has a long history of not minding its own business, particularly when it involves killing people. This guy tried to kill my dad, ferchrissakes. Plus, the French like him and that’s just creepy.

Hussein: Yeah, Iím really sorry about that trying to kill your dad thing. I dunno what I was thinking. I mean, itís not like I had a snowballís chance in the Muslim word for Hell of actually pulling it off.

Bush: What about the French thing?

Hussein: Look, I don’t know why the French like me. I mean, it’s not like I like them. I just want to be loved. And if you won’t love me, I’ll kill you, errr, I mean Iíll kill a few thousand of my own people.

Bush: So, you admit the French like you?

Hussein: I guess. But I donít really give a camelís ass about them. You want to invade the French together?

Bush: [in deep thought for a good 30 to 45 seconds] Iíll have to ask Karl. No wait, I looked it up yesterday. I donít have to ask Karl, Iím the President. That sounds like a good idea. Itís sure to increase my popularity and no one will really oppose it, except the French. Theyíre that way, ya know, always opposing stuff.

Hussein: So, shall I have my people call your people and begin drafting a UN Resolution authorizing the invasion of France.

Bush: Sure. But one question: Who would surrender first, the Republican Guard or the French?

Hussein: Thatís not funny.

Bush: Yeah it is. Actually, we donít need you involved. Weíll just invade France ourselves, we donít need no stinkiní resolutions.

Hussein: Heh, yeah right. We see where that got you.

Bush: Díoh! Ok, in an effort to make it not seem like weíre all unilateral and stuff, we can write it together.

Hussein: Cool! Wanna kiss and make up?

Bush: No. You tried to kill my dad.

Hussein: Iím sorry about that. Wanna hug?

Bush: Sure. Itís a small step towards peace between our nations.

Hussein: Youíre OK, Dubya. Can I call you that? Dubya?

Bush: No.

Hussein: Please, Dubya.

Bush: No, knock that shit off. [Leaves kind of annoyed] Yells: George is getting upset!

Moderator: Well, in a landmark move towards peace, Iraq and the US just agreed to invade France together. Back to you, Shep.

A matter of interpretation

Lots of yakking about the results of this here poll. The poll asks this question:

If George W. Bush runs for re-election in 2004, in general are you more likely to vote for Bush or for the Democractic Partyís candidate for president? (sic)

And 47% say: Yup.

The usual suspects line up to say it spells doom for the Bush administration, here, here and here.

But hereís the deal, 47% will vote for him over anybody else. Thereís no mention of specific Democrats or anything. Bush right now has 47% who will vote for him no matter what. So, heís only got to campaign for the 4%.

In fact, if you look at this poll, Bush beats all of the Democratic candidates.


Iraqis already surrendering. Or at least preparing to. Yup, this will be quick.

February 27, 2003

Political Board

I got an invite from OneManGang to attend the political message board. You can find it here. Check it, yo.

The greatest trick the devils ever pulled

Was convincing people to be happy about increasing taxes or levying new ones. And Joe Sullivan at the Metropulse buys it; hook, line and sinker.

Mr. Sullivan uses every trick in the happy to pay taxes handbook, including referring to Bredesenís cuts as draconian, that the state will be losing more than $1.2 billion in sales taxes , and the threat to higher education in particular.

First of all, the only thing draconian is the huge bloated toad that is Tennessee’s government. Second, it is irresponsible and misleading to state that revenue that has never been earned is a loss. Finally, the problem with our government is spending, not revenue.

Of course, a bigger concern is the Constitutional issue. As Bill Hobbs states: the Commerce Clause of the federal constitution . . . prohibits states from levying taxes outside their borders.

In addition, Mr. Hobbs tells us that with e-commerce amounting to less than 5 percent of total retail sales, it is increasingly clear that online sales taxes will not be the budgetary savior that states, ever eager to spend more money, are hoping for.

In summary: The proposal is illegal and it will not save the bloated toad.

Serve Justice

Halfbakered tells us the tale of a real piece of crap coming up for parole. Go there and take action to prevent this atrocity.

February 26, 2003

Gotta have faith

George Michael actually gets it:

George Michael is begging pop stars to abandon plans for an anti-war charity record because he says they do not know enough about politics.

More proof that unions have outlived their usefulness

In December, strippers from the Lusty Lady won a battle against management when their maximum rate was restored to $27 an hour after having been cut $3 an hour. During a walkout, dancers banged on pots and chanted, “Two, four, six, eight, pay me more to gyrate!”

And now the unionized strip club is closed.


Here we go, again

Tennessee’s lawmakers who still aren’t convinced that the problem is the spending, stupid have now started developing a plan to tax internet sales. Itís even being drafted by Bill Clabough, of my hometown. Iíll start calling soon. You can reach him at (865) 983-1580 or (615) 741-2427. Or send him an email at

Thanks to LeanLeft for the link.

Update: LeanLeft posted at polstate. Bill Hobbs commented. Check it, yo.

Natural Selection

The US cannot guarantee the safety of human shields. Maybe it’s because our troops will be aiming at them. Or Saddam will kill them and place the bodies at military targets. These people are irretrievably stupid.


If you think relations with the UN are strained now, wait until Clinton takes over.

February 25, 2003

Not how I expected him to sound

I donít always agree with what he has to say, but he says it well. Oliver Willis is trying his hand at audioblogging. Give it a listen.

Update: Hehe, my comments disappeared. Which were: to watch the Uhs; and that the first part sounded like he was reading while the last part sounded like improv.

Blogger Bash

One week and counting. Me and the Mrs. will be there. Have we decided what time the festivities will begin?

You ever notice

There’s a lunatic fringe in politics. The left has one and the right has one. One observation about this is that the right wing fringe is automatically dismissed as looney, which is good. These are the new world order, living in mountain fortresses awaiting the revolution, fearing NATO black helicopter types. However, the lefty lunatic fringe is taken as more mainstream. You know, ELF, Blood for Oil, Selected not Elected, and SUVs are evil types. Just an observation.

February 24, 2003


How is Saddam a threat to the US? Apparently, he has unmanned aerial vehicles that are capable of unleashing chemical attacks.

Support H.R. 153

The Second Amendment Protection Act proposed by Rep. Ron Paul, this will:

* Repeal the waiting period/instant background check, which serves to compile a database of gun owners.
* Repeal the illegal semi-automatic weapons ban of 1994.
* Repeal the unconstitutional distinction of sporting arms, which enables bureaucrats to classify an arm as a destructive device at the whim of the Treasury Secretary.

Call your representatives and tell them to support it.

Maybe they heard Bubba

I guess in response to the fact that Knoxville is a vocal community, the local news radio station announced this morning that they were dumping Dr. Laura (and there was much rejoicing) for a new show that will be called Frank Talk, to be hosted by Frank Cagle (I think). The new show will be dedicated to discussing local issues, and I’m sure it’s just a matter of time before it turns into a show about fascists err downtown preservationists and UT football. It will debut next Monday (3/3) at 10 a.m. Right between Hallerin Hill and Rush Limbaugh.

Maybe it will be good, but I doubt it. Heck, our local television news never discusses anything important.

Why Bother

In France it’s illegal to insult the president. They have more in common with Iraq than oil. Thanks to Alex Knapp for the link.

The price of thanksgiving

The US has to actually pay Turkey to defend the world. To the tune of about $15B. Our tax dollars at work.

More Free Federal Fundsô in the making

Governors are asking Dubya to bail them out with some federal money. I hope Dubya tells them No. You make your bed, now lay in it. On a good note, Tennessee isn’t mentioned in the article.

February 23, 2003

The Gun Show Thing

I don’t really go to gun shows (shocking given how much I talk about guns though) and I donít have many guns (no need to, just need one for defense really). However, I did decide that I would buy a Bushmaster rifle to support them in their lawsuit (and AR15s are a blast to shoot, I used to own one). I priced the rifles on-line and expected them to run about $1,000. I get to the show, and the prices are jacked way up, like $1,400 plus, which Iím not willing to pay. I figure theyíre popular now for very morbid reasons (i.e., that sniper thing). So, I buy an upper receiver and plan on building my own. You can purchase a gun for like $1,400 but if you build your own (from Bushmaster parts) you can do it for around $600 (at least thatís what I figure). So, Iím still supporting Bushmaster (buying their parts) and getting a better deal. When I get it done, Iíll need a volunteer to fire the first shot because Iím aware of my mechanical inability. Any takers?

Until recently, I hadnít been to a gun show in like ten years. A lot has changed. The number of women there I found odd. There were several women (alone not with boyfriends) purchasing handguns. You go girls! Thereís also a lot more military stuff there these days. Before, it seemed that most stuff was hunting and antiques. These days, there were more AKs, ARs, and FNFALs, this is funny because the assault weapons ban of 1994 was supposed to make these go away. It didnít, it jacked up the price. I saw an M1 (I used to have one and paid $500 for it back in about 1990) going for $1,200. Guess I need to get back in the loop on this gun stuff.

How will you save us?

So, the Europeans criticize Bush for cutting taxes. I guess they’re concerned that the US won’t be able to afford to protect them anymore. Ok, actually they’re concerned that it will affect their economy. Apparently, we can’t act unilaterally in the world, or at home either.

February 22, 2003

Whachu Talkiní ĎBout Oliver Willis?

OW has a post about Howard Dean and his 100% rating by the NRA. Apparently, Mr. Willis felt the need to apologize for a fellow Democratís stance on gun issues. According to Issues2002, most Americans agree that there is an absolute right to gun ownership. I also think the gun issue makes or breaks presidential candidates. There are many people who vote entirely based on the gun issue (and other issues too). I do. And hereís why: If a candidate opposes an absolute right to gun ownership, that candidate doesnít trust the people. Gun laws do not dissuade those who are inclined to break laws anyway. I cannot trust a candidate who doesnít trust me. Heck, Iím a helluva guy. After gun rights, I look at their philosophy on taxes, then their history of pork and big government. Often times, there is not an ideal candidate, so I pick the lesser of evils. If the Democrats want to get elected, they should view gun ownership as an absolute right. An acquaintance of mine owned a gun shop. He was very liberal in the Democrat sense of the word. But he voted Republican every time just because of the gun issue. Then heíd complain about everything the Republicans did, except the gun thing.

Democrats point out that Republicans kowtow to the NRA. My favorite exchange regarding the NRA and political candidates involves Gore accusing Bush of being in the pocket of the NRA :

ďI make my positions on what I think is right. Iíll make the decisions as to what goes on in the White House,Ē . . . Bush said: ďIíve never been a member of the NRA. Gore has been, if Iím not mistaken.Ē

And the supporters of gun control are hypocrites. Diane Feinstein, who has militantly supported various gun control measures, packs a pistol. Her message is clear: You canít keep and bear arms because youíre possibly dangerous to society. I, however, can because I know whatís best and Iím rich.

Iím not a member of the NRA. OW calls the NRA an extreme gun rights organization. Iím not sure what he means here. I assume extreme can mean one of two things: 1) they have an extreme ideology or 2) they take extreme measures with respect to an established ideology.

1 Ė Their position on the second amendment is not extreme. It is, in fact, shared with the majority. Current law also supports their position and that is undeniable (anyone who buys the collective rights model is a loon or just in complete denial of the facts). To deny that there is an absolute right to gun ownership is without merit and delusional; it is also, therefore, the extreme. If you want extreme pro gun positions, peruse some militia typesí websites. Scary stuff.

2 Ė The NRA does not take extreme measures. They have opposed some reasonable restrictions in the past and Iíve chided them for that. The NRA lately has become almost ineffectual. It is as if they assume defeat from the beginning on any gun issue and work to compromise to not make it so bad. Instead, they should become more vocal and more active. Not so reactive. Itís a pity. If they took extreme measures, Iíd likely support them. For example, when Charlton Heston held aloft the old flintlock and said from my cold, dead hands it wasnít extreme. If he had held aloft a Colt M4 with an 11.5 inch barrel, a collapsible stock, a 30 round magazine, a combat sling, a bayonet lug, a flash suppressor and a selector switch; that would have been extreme. And Iíd have supported him just because it would have shown he had balls. Now, the NRA is too moderate in an effort at public relations to appeal to the middle of the ground voters, I suppose.

The NRA is not extreme in either sense.

The Democrats need to change their collective position by acknowledging the fact there is an absolute right but that reasonable restrictions are not a threat to that right. For example, we donít need assault weapons banned (because the differences between an assault rifle and a hunting rifle are all cosmetic), sniper rifles banned (the only difference between sniper rifles and hunting rifles is the target), high capacity magazines banned (because I can do as much damage with 10 round magazines as I can with 30 round magazines), we donít need banning of specific calibers (you can be killed with a .22 or a .50), and we donít need registration that infringes on rights to privacy or that could lead to confiscation.

The gun crowd has historically opposed all gun laws under the assumption that give them an inch, theyíll take a mile. There is some truth to that since past registration in other countries has lead to confiscation. So, who can blame them?

Of course, I wonít vote for Dean because of his stance on other issues. But he did pass the first phase of my selection process, which is pretty gutsy for a Democrat.

February 21, 2003

Political Compass

It can be taken here. Yours truly is: Economic Left/Right: 5.12 Authoritarian/Libertarian: -2.21

Thanks to Oliver Willis for the link.

Dot this and dot that got a letter from telling them to knock it off. Wonder if they peruse over there at .gov.

That Didn’t Take Long

Just the other day, SKBubba told us about the 500 magnum. Now some Democrat wants them banned.

Courtesy of Curmudgeonly and Skeptical.


You could win $100. By trying to find it in Knoxville under the same restrictions as weapons inspectors. Good luck!

Oh Bother

Thought that BlogSpot Plus might have better permalinks. I was apparently just fooling myself.

Just Wondering

Instapundit has made a few references on his site about how it doesn’t generate much money. I was wondering why he doesn’t have ads. Also, what if he charged a fee (say $20) for a link. Would you pay $20 for the several thousand hits that it would generate? His link to me yielded about 4,000 hits in two days, as opposed to the 200 or so I’d usually get in two days.

It’s probably an integrity thing.