Friday, November 12, 2004

Re: Dumbester

I wouldn't be so sure, Fin...wouldn't put nothing past MM. But wouldn't that just be his way...going after someone that can't hurt him no more? I mean, Bush is essentially harmless to them now (the Left) -- since he can't run again -- but that won't stop them from crucifying him.

Of course, Bush CAN still hurt fixing the economy, winning the war on terra, killing their puppies, imprisoning their minority brethren, stealing from their grandparents, and single-handedly making sure that the air we breath closely replicates the exhaust of a '62 Duster...

W, unleash HELL'S minions!!!


And Gerry Mander as the Beaver ...

Keeping in mind that right now, at this very moment and stage of my life, where I pretty much want conservatives to win every debate, election and pissin' match ... and basically want libs driven out of the galaxy, and every one of their transgressions against humanity expunged from memory like so many UofM basketball records ... and seeing as how I can't stomach giving the libs any free ammo, this can't be a good thing.

And seeing as how the WSJ is in agreeance ...


RE: Dumb and Dumberer

Here's my prediction ... movie never gets "made."

It won't see light of day if it does get made. This is just bluster.

"Couldn't get a good script" [Script, ha!]

"Ran outta backers"

"VRWC quashed it"

"Dog ate my dogma"


UPDATE: To clarify, he's not serious about it. Also, he may make another piece of trash movie, but it won't be FH9/11-1/2.


Dumber and Dumbererer

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again!

Told ya they don't get it.


For the price of just one cup of coffee ...

From Frank J. at IMAO, in honor of Arafat's death:

" ... maybe we could start a charity to help the victims of Nobel Peace Prize winners. I know some people are still recovering from the Carter administration."

As they say, "Heh."

As they say, "Read the whole thing."


Thursday, November 11, 2004

The Corner

Great blogging going on here.


Re: What to do?

Finster, I think I touched on this in my previous post. Unless the people you have conservations with (or the Hollywood types) can be intellectually honest, if they can't carry on a rational, sober discussion of the issues, then we are not morally obligated to pay them any more heed than that pigeon that just left my window ledge (or the present he left me). That's what this bile comes across as so much pigeon excrement that it almost demands to be ignored.

So, I do. I really don't care what a bunch of highschool dropouts think about politics, so I don't listen to Mellencampy or Springersteen when they try to "educate" us. Just as I don't care what Rush Limbaugh thinks about music, movies or sports, I don't lend any credence whatsoever to what actors, directors, musicians and other hipppies say about the political machine.

As for your friend, he is more than welcome here, where he can learn the many ways we conservatives steal elections, suppress the Black vote, imprison helpless Arabs and steal Social Security money from shut-ins.


Re: They just don't get it

Here's the problem I think they have with religion. They certainly can't object to "Thou shalt not steal," et. al., so it must be something else. What the "else" is, is equally irrational, however. When you look at this recently posted e-mail to Jonah you get an idea of where they're coming from: Ashcroft, Bush and the rest of their minions have a secret plan to make their religion the national religion of America....and then the world!

It's all so conspiratorial that it's just comical. It's gobbledygook to the extreme, and it hearkens back to your original question, "They can't really think this stuff, can they?" They can't. That's my answer. Any intellectually honest, sane, sober, thoughful person cannot think -- and certainly can't demonstrate the point -- that Bush wants to convert the country. If they do think that, they have earned the same right to be heard and to be taken seriously as this pigeon that landed on my window ledge right now.


Shop Scotch

For those of you who don't quite know what to get me for Christmas. A little dram will do ya.

Page might take a while, be patient while I get loaded!


Dammit! The gig is up!

HT: InstaPundy ...

This is very clever!

: Link

Back to the theme of this site

Now that the election is over, maybe I can try to get my posts back to the main theme of this site ... the reason we started this thing. The whole "two guys trying to figure it out" thing.

(Yes, Ralphie baby, you've held up your end of the bargain with both volume and content.)

So I offer this up ...

I just recently got reacquainted with an old friend. Politics got brought up. We're on opposite ends of "sprectum." Now, when I read online the vile bilious vitriol of some on the left ... it sometimes upsets me, but I'm usually very detached, sometimes to the point of not caring.

But my recent conv. with the old friend has left me upset and incapable of moving on. Why? It has finally dawned on me.
Its personal. I "know" this person. When I read things online, I've always deep down felt that "they don't REALLY feel this way ... their trying to cause a stir." But, here in front of me is someone I know ... and the same crap is oozing out of various orifices. I guess I haven't thought that a "real" person feels these things ... at least so extreme.

So, I ask you Ralphie, how do I deal? How do I cope?

I know you are much better able to detach or compartmentalize than I ... you don't have near the problem I do with Hollywood types "ruining" movies, or musicians making their CDs unlistenable.

What advice can you give me?


RE: They just don't get it...

I concur, Ralphie.

And if I may add a little ... Can you explain to me what the libs don't like about people who use their religion as the sole basis or starting point for their decisions? What EXACTLY appears in the Ten Commandments that is so upsetting? Is it the don't murder thing? Honor your mother and father?

The cynic in me can find a couple things that probably runs counter to your garden variety lib, but when the "adult" me comes back ... I'm perplexed. WHAT is so bad?

You say your an atheist, non-believer or you suscribe to the cafeteria plan at your local church or synagogue? Great! I ask again, what part of "don't covet thy neighbors house" upsets you?

Are Ashcrofts prayer breakfasts THAT threatening to you? Their over danish for cripesake!


Wednesday, November 10, 2004

They just don't get it...and never will

The libs are dumbfoundedly clueless as to why they lost this election. All this talk about moral values is such a red herring, I want to chop down the largest tree in the forest with it (nod to Monty Python fans).

First off, look at the numbers. Twenty-two percent cited moral values as the main reason they voted one way or the other. Now, simple riffmatic demonstrates that, while the Left is carping on and on about Jesusland and waxing apocalyptic about separation of church and state, they are ignoring a full 78 percent of the voters that voted for reasons other than "moral values." Could it be that nearly 8 out of 10 voted as a referendum on the war and economy, like the mainstream press told us they would?!! Of course the MSM cannot cede this point, as to do so would be to admit that they were wrong: people really do approve of Bush's first four years in the White House.

Continuing with the numbers game, a full 20 percent of those that voted based on moral values voted for Kerry. Is that a large percentage? Either it is or it isn't. But it seems to me that if 20 percent is a small margin in this context, it must also be a small margin in the context of the 20 percent of voters in general who voted based on moral values in the first place.

Lastly (on numbers), isn't it conceivable that 20 percent of the electorate ALWAYS votes according to moral values? The numbers show that evangelicals voted in no greater numbers/proportions than they did in 2000. Those of us who don't hail from Jesusland...can't they, too, vote based on moral values? I happen to be the furthest thing from a born-again Christian, but I happen to believe that my moral values play a part in nearly every significant decision I make. Can't "moral values" also be trust, faith (not necessarily religious faith), honor, integrity...all of the virtues we hope our leaders will personify? Cannot "moral values" also be: Who do I believe has the right values to win this war against terror? Can't protecting one's family from murderous Islamists be a "moral value" of a sort?

Now, if Kerry had won, all we would be hearing now is how the election was a referendum on the war in Iraq. But, he loses, and the MSM trips over themselves trying to find excuses, rather than seeing the forest for the mandate-setting trees: "Protect us, W.," was the cry I heard on election day. "We trust you to wage this war; we don't trust your opponent."

Pride is preventing the Left from seeing things as they really are. It is evident to me that all the Left needs to do to be a credible party again is to come back to the middle a bit. Think and govern like Clinton pretended to think and govern for most of his presidency, and you will be a legitimate party once again, one worthy of being taken seriously.

But what WILL happen is the Left will screech uncontrollably farther to the left, the hate will become more pronounced, the hate-SPEECH will become increasing vitriolic, and the Michael Moores and George Sore-ass-Losers of the world -- those who should be villified for costing the Democrats this election -- will once again be canonized and proudly paraded out as the party's saviors.

And once again, liberals will be relegated to the realm of irrelevance, obscurity and mockdom. Meanwhile, we in the Red States will be thumping our Bibles and discharging our least as seen through the condascending, moral superior, rose(neck)-colored glasses of the righteous liberal elite.

Carry on, my wayward sons!


Say, that felt good!

I'd forgotten how good it feels to blog ... yeah, that's just about right!

I might do this again!

Ralphie! Is that you?! I'm coming towards the light! Ralphie!


The Ballad of Bloodthirsty Pacifism and Frog Massacree

From The Corner and Mr Derbyshire:

"There is nobody more bloodthirsty than a pacifist"

Love it! I shall add it to my list with "There is nobody more close-minded than a liberal."

Read the whole thing. Heh.

: Link

Strange but true

“Only 3 Democratic candidates for president – in U.S. History – Andrew Jackson, FDR & LBJ have received a higher percentage of the popular vote than did our man W in last week’s presidential election.”

If you click on the link, you'll see more "strange but true:" gays and lesbians for Bush.

: Link


A nice tribute.


"Attorney General Ashcroft's legacy is a complex one. In ordinary times, the accomplishments of the Department of Justice under his watch would be impressive. Violent crime is at a 30-year low, declining by 27 percent during the three-year period between 2001-2003. While a staunch supporter of gun ownership, Ashcroft also realized what many of his predecessors had not — that the way to stop violent crime is to enforce the gun laws that are on the books. Thus, federal gun-crime prosecutions are up over 75 percent in the last four years. In 2003 alone, more federal gun charges were brought than any prior year on record. The result was that 250,000 fewer gun crimes were committed in the last three years than in the prior three. Drug trafficking and human trafficking have been heavily targeted by the Justice Department, resulting in severe disruptions in criminal syndicates operating in both areas. The list goes on."

Click Link to read more:

: Link

Monday, November 08, 2004

Re: What's blue when red all over?

All colored in!
Originally uploaded by ralphphillips.
All colored in and final for 2004. What color do you see when you look at this map? I know what color liberals see.


More Jonah

Even though we're taking a respite following the election, others are carrying the torch:

"Look, I understand that the entire Popular Front of the Left lost — and big — last week. I understand they thought they were going to win. I understand that many of them believed all of the nonsense about Bush's being a fascist crusader and I understand that some actually believed P. Diddy's axiom that you should vote (Democratic) or die. (Although it should be self-evident that a man who chooses the name P. Diddy is not a man to take very seriously. Last time I checked, Henry Kissinger never contemplated calling himself "Special K.")

"But for those of you who think your grief and disappointment justify your pious nastiness and blame-shifting for your own failures: Do keep in mind that it is precisely such self-indulgence and arrogance that costs you elections."


: Link