Regardless of one's age, you simply should always plan ahead:
The local news station was interviewing an 80-year-old lady because she had just gotten married -- for the fourth time.
The interviewer asked her questions about her life, about what it felt like to be marrying again at 80, and then about her new husband's occupation. "He's a funeral director," she answered.
"Interesting," the newsman thought. He then asked her if she wouldn't mind telling him a little about her first three husbands and what they did for a living.
She paused for a few moments, needing time to reflect on all those years. After a short time, a smile came to her face and she answered proudly, explaining that she'd first married a banker when she was in her early 20's, then a circus ringmaster when in her 40's, later on a preacher when in her 60's, and now in her 80's, a funeral director.
The interviewer looked at her, quite astonished, and asked why she had married four men with such diverse careers.
Are you ready for this?
She smiled and explained, "I married one for the money, two for the show, three to get ready, and four to go."
My thanks to Mack E!
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
What the Left thinks
Amongst the chatter and noise of “Super Tuesday” the CIA announced that they had actually waterboarded three terrorists. This of course was hardly news after the ABC News interview with this retired CIA employee:
That our chattering class and those on the Left, consider such an effective means of obtaining information to be immoral is beyond me. But then the actions of people who claim to defend women’s rights but don’t seem to want to fight terrorists who will cheerfully hang women for raping a man is almost beyond me.
Note the “claim to defend” and “almost beyond.”
I have gradually came to the conclusion that the anti-war Left is basically willing to give lip service to certain things but when the rubber hits the road is unwilling to stand and deliver.
Women’s right’s, minority rights, freedom of speech…… rights that I, and I think most of us, hold dear, are merely things to be traded for peace, security and political power.
What the Left wants is control of our lives. They do not believe in freedom of speech, but rather your right to speak in agreement with them. So the protests against the war is not based on principle, but based on them believing they can negotiate with the terrorists. Giving up freedom of religion is not frightening to people who think that the most evil of religious type folks was Jerry Falwell.
They don’t believe that the radical Muslim terrorists really mean it when they say that all must obey Shari law because they have come to fruition in the hot house of thinking they are elite and they establish the rules for others.
I desperately hope that we can do enough to allow these people to keep themselves in blissful ignorance.
ABC News
In the first public comment by any CIA officer involved in handling high-value al Qaeda targets, John Kiriakou, now retired, said the technique broke Zubaydah in less than 35 seconds. …."The next day, he told his interrogator that Allah had visited him in his cell during the night and told him to cooperate," said Kiriakou
That our chattering class and those on the Left, consider such an effective means of obtaining information to be immoral is beyond me. But then the actions of people who claim to defend women’s rights but don’t seem to want to fight terrorists who will cheerfully hang women for raping a man is almost beyond me.
Note the “claim to defend” and “almost beyond.”
I have gradually came to the conclusion that the anti-war Left is basically willing to give lip service to certain things but when the rubber hits the road is unwilling to stand and deliver.
Women’s right’s, minority rights, freedom of speech…… rights that I, and I think most of us, hold dear, are merely things to be traded for peace, security and political power.
What the Left wants is control of our lives. They do not believe in freedom of speech, but rather your right to speak in agreement with them. So the protests against the war is not based on principle, but based on them believing they can negotiate with the terrorists. Giving up freedom of religion is not frightening to people who think that the most evil of religious type folks was Jerry Falwell.
They don’t believe that the radical Muslim terrorists really mean it when they say that all must obey Shari law because they have come to fruition in the hot house of thinking they are elite and they establish the rules for others.
I desperately hope that we can do enough to allow these people to keep themselves in blissful ignorance.
ABC News
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Everynow and then
you read a new word or phrase that immediately grabs you. No more of this "illegal alien" stuff that so disturbs those who would give our country away. Instead, William Katz from his blog:
Urgent Agenda gives us this wonderful new description:
Such they will remain for me in future discussions.
Urgent Agenda gives us this wonderful new description:
Excuse me, I mean intercultural sojourners.
Such they will remain for me in future discussions.
So you don't like either....
McCain or Romney? What's a person to do?
Well, I recommend that you consider this. A primary is about selecting who you think can beat the person who you really dislike.
For me that's BHO and Billary. BHO would be a huge disaster, Billary would be a smaller disaster. Their policies will have us in a deep recession within a year, and being attacked while giving away what's good in western civilization.
I liked Rudy and Fred. They're gone. Huckabee is still around, although I don't know why. The two contenders are Romney and McCain.
I like Romney's background as a family man and the fact that he understands business. But I think he is too soft on immigration, and as a business man he has a natural tendency to compromise and cut losses in the belief that you can always have a second chance. That's wrong in this situation.
Compromising with the current crop of ME “leaders” is stupid, and in war you don’t always have a second chance.
And though it doesn’t bother me, my wife says he is too “pretty.” Now let me digress. Calling him “too pretty” has nothing to do with sex. It is a southern mountain and hill country expression meaning he doesn’t come off as “real.” That trait could hurt him in the GE very badly.
I like McCain because of his military experience. I served 10 years in Naval Aviation and this gives me a huge bias and admiration for what he did, and what he endured. I also like the fact that he isn’t afraid to go against the grain from time to time, and the fact that he says he was wrong on immigration and will secure the border. Will he? All I can do is wait and see.
I also believe that he will be strong on national defense and can run strongly against the peaceniks and the looney Left’s candidates on this issue. I also believe that he won’t accept dumb strategies that aren’t working and knows how to fire military leaders. I suspect the latter trait comes from Vietnam where 99.999999% of the lower ranks knew the strategy was BS and know that we have 58,000 dead because the “leaders,” if you can call them that, were too stupid to fight an all out war we could have easily won.
I don’t like McCain-Feingold, and regret his association with it. I didn’t like his association with “The Gang of 14” but am now glad we didn’t change the filibuster rules. And I am concerned over his tax polices, but here again he says he has changed.
Finally, I think he can beat either Billary or Hussein. And that folks is what this election is about because neither of them will fight the war that we are in.
Excuse me. I have to go vote for John McCain.
Well, I recommend that you consider this. A primary is about selecting who you think can beat the person who you really dislike.
For me that's BHO and Billary. BHO would be a huge disaster, Billary would be a smaller disaster. Their policies will have us in a deep recession within a year, and being attacked while giving away what's good in western civilization.
I liked Rudy and Fred. They're gone. Huckabee is still around, although I don't know why. The two contenders are Romney and McCain.
I like Romney's background as a family man and the fact that he understands business. But I think he is too soft on immigration, and as a business man he has a natural tendency to compromise and cut losses in the belief that you can always have a second chance. That's wrong in this situation.
Compromising with the current crop of ME “leaders” is stupid, and in war you don’t always have a second chance.
And though it doesn’t bother me, my wife says he is too “pretty.” Now let me digress. Calling him “too pretty” has nothing to do with sex. It is a southern mountain and hill country expression meaning he doesn’t come off as “real.” That trait could hurt him in the GE very badly.
I like McCain because of his military experience. I served 10 years in Naval Aviation and this gives me a huge bias and admiration for what he did, and what he endured. I also like the fact that he isn’t afraid to go against the grain from time to time, and the fact that he says he was wrong on immigration and will secure the border. Will he? All I can do is wait and see.
I also believe that he will be strong on national defense and can run strongly against the peaceniks and the looney Left’s candidates on this issue. I also believe that he won’t accept dumb strategies that aren’t working and knows how to fire military leaders. I suspect the latter trait comes from Vietnam where 99.999999% of the lower ranks knew the strategy was BS and know that we have 58,000 dead because the “leaders,” if you can call them that, were too stupid to fight an all out war we could have easily won.
I don’t like McCain-Feingold, and regret his association with it. I didn’t like his association with “The Gang of 14” but am now glad we didn’t change the filibuster rules. And I am concerned over his tax polices, but here again he says he has changed.
Finally, I think he can beat either Billary or Hussein. And that folks is what this election is about because neither of them will fight the war that we are in.
Excuse me. I have to go vote for John McCain.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Golden Oldies
Here is a web site that you may enjoy.
Patchy's Lost In The..
You know, looking at the play lists and thinking.... Can anyone tell me an instrumental that was a hit in the past 20 years???
Does that say anything about the "me generation?"
Patchy's Lost In The..
You know, looking at the play lists and thinking.... Can anyone tell me an instrumental that was a hit in the past 20 years???
Does that say anything about the "me generation?"
It is not that I think National Health Care
will be better. I don’t. But I also don’t think it will be worse. And I also think it is necessary. And I totally agree with Powerline’s comment regarding forcing people to purchase medical insurance.
If you don’t need insurance, or that is if you don’t think you need insurance, then why should you purchase it? And if you know you will be treated anyway… well a new set of spinners would look nice.
And isn’t that the base argument? People who think they don’t need it, don’t want it. And people who have it through their employer, or earn enough to be able buy it, don’t want the system changed because they believe they will have their taxes increased to pay for those who expect to be treated anyway.
So what we have now is a system in which;
1. The poor and those outside the system get free treatment.
2. Those who earn enough can purchase their own.
3. Those with certain jobs can purchase it through their employer at a discount.
4. Those 65 and older have Medicare.
So we need to pass National Health Care. The question is, how can we pay for it.
And the answer is…. a national sales tax. Simple, easy to administer and inclusive. With one stroke you bring in this pesky young’uns, as well as the Medicaid crowd that not only includes the non-employed poor, but includes the employed poor, as well as illegal aliens, dope dealers and others now living in the “gray market space.”
This is especially true of single young people, above all single men. They rarely become seriously ill, and they know that if they are unlucky enough to be in an accident or contract a serious illness, they will be treated anyway.
If you don’t need insurance, or that is if you don’t think you need insurance, then why should you purchase it? And if you know you will be treated anyway… well a new set of spinners would look nice.
And isn’t that the base argument? People who think they don’t need it, don’t want it. And people who have it through their employer, or earn enough to be able buy it, don’t want the system changed because they believe they will have their taxes increased to pay for those who expect to be treated anyway.
So what we have now is a system in which;
1. The poor and those outside the system get free treatment.
2. Those who earn enough can purchase their own.
3. Those with certain jobs can purchase it through their employer at a discount.
4. Those 65 and older have Medicare.
So we need to pass National Health Care. The question is, how can we pay for it.
And the answer is…. a national sales tax. Simple, easy to administer and inclusive. With one stroke you bring in this pesky young’uns, as well as the Medicaid crowd that not only includes the non-employed poor, but includes the employed poor, as well as illegal aliens, dope dealers and others now living in the “gray market space.”
The Religion of Peace
demonstrates again why we should view all claims about "peace" coming from its members with a great deal of suspicion.
Link to source article
That is just so seventh century as to be almost unbelieveable.
Unfortunately it is not. At least this 16 year wasn't stoned to death. Hanging, you know, is just so more humane. (sarcasm alert.)
Link to source article.
Yep. Just the people we want to have nuclear weapons and long range rockets.
Two Iranian sisters convicted of adultery face being stoned to death after the supreme court upheld the death sentences against them, the Etemad newspaper Monday quoted their lawyer as saying.
Link to source article
That is just so seventh century as to be almost unbelieveable.
Unfortunately it is not. At least this 16 year wasn't stoned to death. Hanging, you know, is just so more humane. (sarcasm alert.)
Zand-Bonazzi: Well, sadly this young woman was hung in public charged with adultery. The man with whom she had allegedly had sexual relations with was also arrested but he only received 75 lashes apparently and then freed!
However, in spite of the fact that her entire family pleaded, was condemned to death. Her parents had even specifically produced her birth certificate proving that she was 16 (proving that she's not an adult) and the ruling clergy of the town of NEKA (the town where she was hung) forged papers and insisted that in fact she was 22and that that was enough reason to hang her.
Link to source article.
Yep. Just the people we want to have nuclear weapons and long range rockets.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
