FROM THE MAKERS OF VOLKSWAGON

If there is one thing about me that those close to me know, it is that I love history. History is the study of humanity, and there isn't a creature alive on this planet that is more interesting than humans. The platypus comes in a close second...I mean, what is a platypus? It's not a duck, or a reptile, or a bird, or a poisonous snake, or a beaver, yet it shares attributes of each. It is a good thing scientists figured out how to classify the platypus (hey!, lets just make up a classification that only a platypus and one other creature "kind of" fits into!). Thank you scientists.


But as I was saying, I am a student of history. I love history of all sorts, from everywhere on the globe and all time periods. But one of my favorite periods is during the second world war. I don't love it because it was a war; war sucks and everyone with a brain knows it. But it is so interesting because it was a unique war. See, unlike most every war in human history, there really isn't much ambiguity when it comes to WWII. You had the good guys and the bad guys (and then there were the Soviets). You can look at just about any other war in history, especially in Europe, and make a case for either side. But in WWII, you had the ultimate bad guys: the Nazis.

Now, I know the title of this post says I "like Nazis". Of course I don't like them, but they were the perfect villain. You can actually hate them and feel good about doing so because they were so darned bad. If anyone wants to point to an example of how evil humanity can be when it really wants to, you can just point at the Nazis. And it didn't matter how many horrible things the Allies did in WWII, the Nazis were even worse. It was a case of moral relativism in action: relative to the Nazis, just about anything anyone did was moral.

So, I like the Nazis as a perfect villain, because it makes being objective about WWII rather easy compared to just about any other major war in history. Even in the American Revolution, you can see the British side of things if you are inclined to. But that is near impossible to do when it comes to the Nazis, unless you are some kind of hateful racist with an unhealthy obsession for sauerkraut. And of course, because of this uniqueness of the Nazis, they became the perfect analogy for anything evil...and eventually the object of fallacious arguments.

See, I rather don't like the "liberal" philosophy in modern politics. I put liberal in quotation marks because modern liberals aren't really liberal in the classical sense. They are just re-branded leftist progressives. Another term is Socialist. Something people like to latch onto in political arguments is comparing one side or the other to Nazis. Conservatives are called Nazis by the left because they share a few ideologies when it comes to national defense and national pride and, well, that's about it I think. The right likes to brand leftists as Nazis because both ideologies are socialist. However, comparing Nazis and liberals/leftists/socialist of American politics based on the Socialism connection is much like saying wolves and puppies are the same. Yes, they are both genetically similar. But you pet a puppy dog: you do not pet a wolf. One is playful, and the other is aggressive to the point of biting your face off.

I do like puppies, and most anyone does that doesn't just completely hate dogs (even President Obama loves dogs...preferably with ketchup). I may not like modern liberals' ideologies, but I would consider them puppies when it comes to comparing them with Nazi wolves. They share the roots of socialism, but there the similarities end. So the next time you get into an argument on the internets, invoke not Hitler or Goebbels, or the jackbooted thugs that did evil in their names. Instead, think of that leftist as a cute little puppy. A silly, stupid little puppy that doesn't know what it is yelping about.

What a Drag it Will Be Getting Old

Like Nancy Pelosi, I finally got around to reading The Affordable Care Act, and like the government, I’d like to exempt myself from it as well.  I didn’t bother reading it earlier because I was really hoping the Supreme Court would come through for me, so I know I am rather late to the party.  Based upon what I’ve seen tucked away in this law, here are some of the consequences I expect we will be seeing shortly as the implementation continues.

• Unlike in the Cuban system, rats in operating rooms will not be required to wear surgical garb.
• Instead of merely pulling the plug on grandma, they will go with the much more entertaining and lucrative Shooting with the Stars or Least Dangerous Game options.
• Much of the increased revenues needed to fund the new program will come from a nationwide lottery program titled Gambling For Your Life.
• While we won’t have to worry about back alley abortions anymore, we will need to worry about back alley appendectomies, back alley by-passes, back alley chemotherapy, back alley hip replacements…..
• All hospital TV sets will be required to continuously stream Sicko.
• Anesthesia will still be available for a nominal fee.
• We won’t have to worry about those pesky nurses waking us every hour to take our pulse and our blood pressure or our temperature. Of course, we also won’t have to worry about them changing our bedpans or our sheets or our hospital gowns…..
• Due to unexpected increases in the cost of birth control, the law suggests combatting teen pregnancy by using sex education programs to encourage bestiality.
• In order to qualify under the program, hospital emergency rooms must minimally be equipped with a saw, a blow torch and a bitin’-stick.
• To further fund the program, whenever a patient undergoes a surgical procedure, the government is allowed to harvest any ‘redundant’ organs to sell on the black market.
• Anyone living on a federal pension gets first dibs on the black market organs.
• We won’t have to worry about wealthy foreigners from countries with socialized medicine coming here and using our medical resources anymore.
• Anyone found praying on hospital grounds will be hit with the $25 prayer tax.  Muslims and other non-Christians are exempt.
• The head of the federal oncology treatment panel is Dr. Kevorkian.
• Given the expected waiting period to see a doctor, all babies will be born before the first prenatal visit, and most abortions will be scheduled when the baby is between 2 and 3 years of age.
• The Time Life series on Civil War and Down Home surgical techniques will sell out the first seventeen printings.
• Starting out with just a pocketknife, a Hoover and a dream, I expect to make a killing with my new chain of Liposuction/Cooking Lard Huts.
• Solyent Green will indeed be people.

Feds spend at least $890,000 on fees for empty accounts

If you are a federal worker on furlough this week — or an airline passenger delayed by federal furloughs — you might want to save your blood pressure and go read another story.
This one is about all the money the U.S. government spends on . . . nothing.

It is one of the oddest spending habits in Washington: This year, the government will spend at least $890,000 on service fees for bank accounts that are empty. At last count, Uncle Sam has 13,712 such accounts with a balance of zero.
They are supposed to be closed. But nobody has done the paperwork yet.
So even as the sequester budget cuts have begun idling workers and frustrating travelers, the government is required to pay $65 per year, per account to keep them on the books.
In this time of austerity, the accounts are a reminder of something that makes austerity hard: expensive habits, built into the bureaucracy in times of plenty. The Obama administration has spent the past year trying to close these accounts, with only some success.
“If anyone had kept open a bank account with no money, and was getting a charge every month, they would do everything they could to close it,” said Thomas A. Schatz of the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste. But, he said, the government hasn’t shown the same kind of urgency with taxpayers’ money.
“It’s just lack of attention to detail. And poor management,” he said. “And, clearly, the fact that no one gets penalized for paying money to keep the accounts open.”
The money spent on the empty accounts is a tiny fraction of the federal budget. But, in its own way, it is something special: Washington’s waste, a rare specimen of cost untainted by any reward.
The Pentagon once paid $435 for a hammer, after all. But at least in that case it got a hammer.
Here, when the money is spent, “there’s no benefit whatsoever,” said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who has joined Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.) in pushing the Obama administration to close these accounts faster.
Administration officials said they’re trying. Last year, the Office of Management and Budget urged agencies to crack down on these “zero balance” accounts. And this year, it proposed a wide-scale push for better oversight.
“We have worked with agencies to improve the timely closeout of grants,” Danny Werfel, the controller at the OMB, said in an e-mail. “Agencies have made noteworthy progress so far, with the number of zero-balance accounts falling by more than 50 percent since the end of fiscal year 2011.” Back then, the total was more than 28,000.
Here is how the government winds up spending money on nothing:
First, a federal agency gives a grant. It doesn’t just write a check; it creates an account within a large, government-run depository. The grantee can draw money from it. The agency that created the account is charged a monthly fee, which goes to the government depository and is used to cover the costs of operating it.
Then, at some point, it’s over. The money runs out. Or the grant’s time limit expires. The agency is given notice: It’s time to close the account.

Searching for Answers

In the aftermath of the Boston bombing, the search for answers to the inevitable question, "Why" has begun and the answer is becoming clear: It's YOUR fault. YOU drove him to this! Well, you and "society." And by "society," they of course mean you.

And how did you do this? By watching boxing, by supporting him on welfare, by, well, existing.

 

The New York Times has given my favorite reason so far: He blew up the Boston Marathon because he was "angry that the world pictures Islam as a violent religion." 

Let me repeat that: He blew up the Boston Marathon because he was "angry that the world pictures Islam as a violent religion." 

It's YOUR fault, you Islamophobic cretins.

You can't make this stuff up.

So, in the interest of fairness, let me find a few more ways that society and you can be at fault for Boston, without having to look at the religion.

He was:

• Upset that the Red Sox/Patriots/Celtics/Bruins didn't win the World Series/Super Bowl/NBA Championship/Stanley Cup.
• Angry that Bill Belichick cheating gave the impression that Bill Belichick cheats.
• Practicing for the upcoming Russian/Chechen Moscow Bomb-a-thon.
• Overcome with loathing of people who think it's fun to run 26.2 miles.
• Upset that his welfare checks stopped coming.
• Bored, because seriously:What is there for a sober, bacon-free 26-year-old to do in Boston anyway?
• Looking for a professorship at an elite East Coast University.
• Trying out for that show, "Destroy Build Destroy." He just didn't get to the "Build" part.
• Tired of all the publicity and goodwill that New York gets just for being blown up on 9/11 and wanted to bring some of that to Boston.
• Educated at an elite prep school, so no wonder he hates America.
• Mad that all the guys were voted off American Idol.
• Trying to make Obama look good by giving him a bomber that didn't take a decade to hunt down and kill.
• Crazy mad that no one knows where Chechnya is.
• Jealous of all the attention mass shootings get. He wanted equal time for bombings.
• Hoping to force Congress' hand in enacting Common Sense Cookware Control.
• Desirous of meeting Diana Oughton, one of Billy Ayers' old girlfriends.
• Really not fond of Monday

Don't Let the Door Hit You Emigration Act.

People keep going on and on lately about how we have this immigration problem and the system is a mess and there are all of these illegal people running around being illegal and running around. And we aren't even sure who they all are. And a piece by Ann woman-that-scares-me Coulter takes it a step further. She says not only are illegals a problem, but it's legal immigrants that are a problem, citing how a rather lopsided amount of mass murders and the like are perpetrated not only by immigrants, but immigrant losers.

She made some pretty valid points for being a crazy person (well ok, she usually is pretty much right on most things, but I still think shes nuts). Namely, that educated hard working people seem to have a tough time immigrating here but complete losers get here so easily. And yeah, that does seem to be the case.

Ok, fine Ann. We have a total immigration problem. But that is small potatoes really. See, I look at it this way: we have tons of deadbeats and losers born in this country. No they aren't born that way of course, but they end up being that way through bad choices and a complete lack of personal responsibility. Kind of the way people end up eventually living in Cincinnati. Or Toledo. So, why should we care about the immigration of losers just adding a trickle to an already large volume of natural born losers? I mean, that's like turning off a water faucet when your house is already flooded. Yeah, you should do that, but it's not going to exactly fix the mess.

I think, instead of an immigration problem, we have an emigration problem. Now don't read that out loud, or it will sound redundant. We are literally (and by literally I mean figuratively) flooded with losers in this country. People who won't get a job, or keep a job by doing simple things like showing up on time or working when they are told to work. And they get to sit around collecting benefits merely because they exist.

I dunno about you guys, but I am pretty sure that wasn't something the founders envisioned, and I'd be surprised if they actually thought of those people as citizens. The founders were a bit vague on what constitutes a citizen exactly, as far as I can tell anyway. Look that up for me, I'm busy. Anyway, so I think there should be a law (I rarely say that) defining what a citizen is.

Basically, if you are productive (which means you have a job or means of income) and don't use any government help past a certain amount of time, then you maintain your citizenship status. You also have to keep your nose clean when it comes to obeying laws. You don't have to be a model citizen, just not a complete parasite on society. If you can do all that, you'll reap all of the benefits of being an American citizen. 

However, if you get enough strikes or whatever, you lose your citizenship. And then you get deported, since you're a foreigner now. You'll get $10,000, a passport, and a plane ticket to the undeveloped country of your choice. Sorry, we don't want a developed country trying to send you back, you loser.

And immigration would be a snap. We could give everyone a chance. If they play by the rules, they get a citizenship. If they don't, or they lose their citizenship...they get deported back to where they came from. And no, they don't get the $10,000. I call this the Don't Let the Door Hit You Emigration Act.

Catchy name right?

Bombing Motivations

So the motivation of the bombers is what everyone pretty much guessed as soon as they heard there was a bombing: They were motivated by their religion of Islam. But it’s not nice to jump to conclusion, so we have to act all surprised.
Give me a sec…
But most Muslims are such nice people! How could this happen? Did we fail them somehow? Maybe it’s our fault for what our military has done to those countries overseas; they were so peaceful and nice before we got involved! Really, the Tsarnaev’s are the true victims here! Why did this have to happen?! Why?! Maybe if we change our ways, less people will fall victim to wanting to mercilessly blow up children.
Okay, I’m done. You have to wonder what the logic was here:
1. Blow up children proving you’re ruthless murderers who can’t be reasoned with
2. ??
3. Islam dominates the world
People wonder if these two were part of some larger conspiracy. It seems too stupid and pointless to be much larger, but of course I never got exactly what sensible thing 9/11 was supposed to achieve either.
And I know the left are going to want us all to learn something from immigrants turning against us, but are Muslims going to have some deep conversations about why if you hear an explosion, you can think “Muslim!” and usually be right? Anyone working on a solution to fix that?
And are we waterboarding Dzhokhar? I mean, I know we probably got all the information we needed out of him, but maybe he can work as a practice dummy for CIA agents who need more waterboarding training.

At Last Now We Will Have a Chance to Understand Them

While the individuals who allegedly perpetrated the bombing of the Boston Marathon had ties to militant Islam, the talking heads assure us that the reasons for the bombing certainly can’t have anything to do with militant Islam.  Talking heads would never lead us astray.  There must be some other, possibly deeply psychological, reasons for them to act out like this.  The real reason, I’m assured by my man in State, is some combination of these. 

·         They just hated Affleck and Damon so much.

·         They were inspired by the mysterious voices emanating from NPR.

·         It is just one more awful consequence of the sequester

·         They couldn’t find decent borscht or pirogi in Boston.

·         Increased taxes on vodka and cigarettes.

·         To make everyone aware of the hazards of dangerous assault cookware.

·         The community they grew up in was woefully unorganized.

·         No matter how hard they trained, they were unable to qualify to run.

·         When they were children, their parents forced them to practice the vuvezela while the other kids were playing baseball and training for marathons.

·         They were upset that Sandra Fluke still didn’t have birth control.  Her genes, and those of anyone choosing to mate with her, must not be passed on.

·         They were upset that the undocumented workers might get amnesty while they had to jump through all the hoops to get their citizenship.

·         Obamacare didn’t go far enough toward emulating the healthcare in Mother Russia.

·         Their High School track coach resisted their advances.

·         When they became teenagers, their mother refused to let them nurse any longer.

·         The mail order brides they ordered didn’t look at all like their photos, yet the brides still rejected them.

·         Boston’s gay marriage laws still didn’t allow brother to marry brother.

·         Russian chefs are underrepresented on FoodTV.

·         Their mother wouldn’t let them play violent video games. 

·         Boston drivers.

·         They went to Boston public schools rather than being properly homeschooled using Uncle Sid’s Guide to Homeschool Your Hellions.