Sarah Palin's Extreme Makeover

Doggone! Turns out putting lipstick on a pit bull can be a very expensive proposition! Seems that turning a hockey mom into a pit bull attack dog is way more expensive than most of us might have imagined.

First were all those fancy clothes - about $150,000 worth more or less. I never realized you could spend that much on clothing for one person, but it seems I am naive and pretty much out of the loop on what constitutes 'suitable clothing' and what that costs. Besides, we are told that not all of the money was spent on Sarah, but some went for husband 'Iron Dog Todd' and their children - maybe $20,000 or so.

My wife and I estimate that we spend on the average, less than $500 a year on clothing for the both of us - but then again, I guess we're probably just miserly and overly conservative. I'm very humbled. I'm gonna check to see if I can start spending more so I can get more mainstream on these sorts of things.

But that's not all. Sarah's makeover cost another $68,400 for makeup (damn, that lipstick sure must be expensive!), and then roughly $42,225 for hair styling. My goodness, all I can think is there sure must of been some god-awful tangles in those 'do's' of hers! Whoo boy!

But, that's still not all! The Republican National Committee is saying another 'less that $30,000' worth of clothing expenses for Sarah would show up in their latest campaign report. Maybe that was for undergarments, or panty hose or something.

Good gosh a-mighty! She was either one more horrendous wreck of a hockey mom to start off with, or they must have surely turned her into one more fancy gold-plated Pit Bull - or maybe a lot of both!

On the other hand the RNC tells us what makes her so attractive to the Republican base is that she's just your normal small-town regular gal, down to earth and just like everybody else. Yeah, buddy.

Sarah's running mate, John McCain was belligerently defensive when reporters questioned him about her clothing expense. "What would you have the woman do?" he flared. "Walk out on stage in the all together?"

Then his eyes suddenly misted over and he seemed lost in some sort of reverie until Cindy McCain snapped her fingers sharply in front of his face several times.

Are Red States Hazardous to Your Health??

Could Red States be Hazardous to Your Health??

Short answer?

Well, hell yes! (Click on colored chart below to expand):

Recent studies now show that statistically, the Red State mindset leads to an unhealthy life style. I don't suppose this comes as any real surprise since conspicuous consumption is one of the defining hallmarks of Red Staters' doctrine.

But, to have it bourn out in statistical studies is sort of eye opening isn't it? Here's a chart of the data gathered by the United Health Foundation

(Maybe it's not called 'Lousy-Anna' for nothing!):

And, here's a down and dirty analysis:

(click on chart to expand)

Where is the outrage?

After over five years, many - most - Americans have turned against George W. Bush's 'War On Terror', (aka: 'War For Oil'). Most of us now know, or at least strongly suspect, that the real reasons for Bush's disastrous war had little to do with national security, and more about corporate interests, and particularly the oil companies'. Indeed, it hardly could have been otherwise, given both the President's and the Vice President's industrial-strength connections with the oil industry.

We now know or suspect, that corporate influence and corporatocracy were the real crusaders, and the movers and shakers for the war.

The Iraq War episode in our country's history desparately cries out for a thorough overhaul of the US political system. We need to GET THE MONEY OUT and pass some meaningful reforms - with major penalties against the buying of our elected officials. The present "Culture of Corruption" will ruin us all otherwise and it appears sooner rather than later.

Where were our political leaders when it counted? When our country could have had a truly democratic discussion BEFORE rushing off into a war which now everyone agrees is a supremely tragic mistake? Call me naive but it sure seems sort of late to hold that kind of discussion after the fact, with well over 4000 American military lives lost and still counting and no end in sight . . .

Were was the media suspicion? Where were those guardians of the public trust who are SUPPOSED to be suspicious of outrageous government claims? Where are those who were SUPPOSED to question all those specious political statements with NO TRUTH to them at all? Why aren't they now outraged and the royal hoodwinking we were all dealt out at the hands of the powers that be? Why were some, like Fox News such active, actual cheerleaders for the insanity?

Why is the public not outraged that the media so miserably failed, and some actually aided and abetted the forces of darkness? WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

There were all those claims - now shown to be baseless - which "proved" Saddam Hussein possessed WMD's. We were told if we didn't invade the sovereign third-world nation or Iraq, our next warning would be a mushroom cloud over some US city. It was all pure, unadulterated fear mongering balderdash and horse poopy from day one. Distortion and lies! In fact, it was all part of an orchestrated plan hashed out BEFORE the Bush administration even took office! Where is the outrage over those huge crimes?

The people in the Bush administration responsible for this should hang their heads in shame. In fact, I can think of several of them who simply should be hanged outright for their crimes against this nation, the world and humanity itself.

Our elected political "leaders" in both the Senate and House of Representative fell all over themselves to authorize Bush"s war. Only 23 senators had the courage to stand up and say "Hey! Wait a minute!". Only one single Republican Senator (Lincoln Chafee of RI) voted against the resolution handing George W. Bush virtually unbridled power to launch a preemptive * war against a nation with zero ties to the WTC attacks. (H.J. Resolution 114, 10/10/02).

The House of Representatives was not much better with the vote being 266 "yeas" to 133 "nays" with NO Republicans among the "nay" votes.

* "SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq;"

One would think that our elected leaders might have checked into this issue a bit more before handling over raw power to a President who acted more like a willful 5-year-old with a loaded gun instead of a wise and responsible leader. Honest Republicans who were hoodwinked into supporting this war should be up in arms and after the hides of everyone in Bush's administration responsible for this.

These bozos have set back the Republican Party 50 years at least.

Let us hope the Obama administration picks up the cudgel to deal out punishment where deserved. The world reasonably expects that. If we can not police our own house, how can we expect to 'police the world'?

So indeed, WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

Propaganda Rules of the Bush administration:

1. The truth is whatever you say it is;

Corollary 'A': If you say it enough times it is true by default;

Examples:

"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. "

～ George W. Bush, October 7, 2002, Cincinnati, OH

"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly Saddam can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

～ Condoleezza Rice, September 8, 2002, Washington, DC

" . . .inaction might provoke the sight of the first mushroom cloud on one of the major population centers on this planet’."

～ General Tommy R. Franks, the chief of the US Central Command, November 12, 2002

Corollary 'B': Obfuscation of the stupid is necessary;

Example:

"You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
～ George W. Bush

2. Braggadocio is very effective with the simple minded;

Corollary: Bellicosity is best!

Examples:

“If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he will be sorely mistaken.”
～ George W. Bush in a speech shortly after 9/11, referring to Osama Bin Ladin (over SEVEN years ago)

"wanted, dead or alive"
～ George W. Bush referring to Osama Bin Ladin on 3/20/2003

"bring 'em on"
～ George W. Bush, at a press conference in July, 2003 referring to Iraqi 'insurgents' who have since killed nearly 4000 Americans

Corollary: Cocky strutting and swaggering by a 'War President' impresses the Football watching, gun-toting wannabe Republican base;

Example:

Wearing a suggestive 'codpiece' and landing on an aircraft carrier off the California coast to declare 'Mission Accomplished!" - May 1, 2003

3. If you ignore it, it is not there;

Corollary: If you refuse to verbalize it, it doesn't exist;

Example:

Never saying the word 'recession' means there isn't one, in spite of the worst economic disaster in almost eighty years.


4. Denial is an effective dodge, even when the whole world knows you are lying through your teeth.

Corollary: The use of a supercilious smirk while lying tells everyone you are letting them in on the joke.

Example:

" We must recognize that government intervention is not a cure-all . . .the surest path to that growth is free markets and free people"

～ George W. Bush at the Manhattan Institute 11/12/08 referring to the economic crisis threatening the entire world, brought on by his administration's deregulation of the US financial system on behalf of 'free markets'.

Smeaganomics My Ass!

We've all heard the term 'Reaganomics' touted by Republicans as if it were some magical formula for economic success. Sorry folks, but it was anything but. In fact, 'Reagonomics turned out to be a colossal economic disaster. Called 'Voo Doo Economics' by George Bush I, but you might also call it 'Smeaganomics' since it's really mostly smoke and mirrors (smeag - pronounced 'schmeg'), designed by a a bunch of financial con men hired by a Hollywood actor had-been.

What people fail to remember is that during Ronald Reagan's tenure in office, our national debt ballooned from the $85 billion inherited from the Carter administration to $283 Billion when Reagan left office. That's a 333% increase. Reagan set 5 new national debt records. Then Bush I came in office and set two more new records in four years, leaving us with a (1) national debt of $399 Billion .

Apparently, Reagonomics consists mostly of borrowing money, not paying your bills, giving tax breaks to your rich friends and spending your way to economic success. Just try that on a personal basis and see what happens!

During that 'tax and spend' Democrat Bill Clinton's 8 years at the controls, the national debt was trimmed to a mere $18 Billion - or a mere 4% of the debt he inherited. Clinton balanced the budget and left a (2) surplus of $127 Billion for GW Bush to squander - which he immediately and gleefully did.

Under Bush II, our national debt stood at $1.017 Trillion just prior to the economic crash and before the current 'bailout' began. God knows where it now is. Just remember that as of September 30, 2008 it stood at an increase of 5650% over what George W. Bush inherited!!! And, that is only one of the bitter legacies this so-called president is leaving us.

But, that's paltry compared to the projected so-called 'bailout' costs which now stand at around an estimated $8.5 Trillion. Now we're talking about some real money here!

And don't forget that under Bush II, the investment wealth of Americans has been trimmed by nearly 50% - not incidentally also making our national debt chump change in comparison. Between the stock market and housing devaluations losses are now estimated at (3) $4.5 Trillion.

Can we even add it all up I wonder? Where do we go from here? Well, hold on to your bippy baby, because it's gonna be a (4) bumpy ride!



Me, I've got a long, detailed memory. Smeaganomics and Republican conservatism my aching ass!


(1) http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html
(2) http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/Work/102899.html
(3) http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/usa-loses-45t/2007/11/13/
(4) http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/well-great-depression-2-2011/story.aspx?guid={B28B49B5-EFD1-4941-B57E-A2BA1545BA09}&dist=morenews

A Short History of Fuggers

Many people think the word 'Fugger' and its derivatives are generic terms and do not realize the word is an actual family name - a family whose descendants exist to this day, though greatly dispersed and diluted.

The Fugger family originated somewhere near Augsburg, in Swabia (southern Germany). Their first mention is in 1357 when Hans Fugger was listed on the tax register in Augsburg. His eldest son Andreas became a successful merchant and bought up land and properties. He became so rich people referred to him as 'that damned rich Fugger'.

Andreas' son Lucas came along and hung out with Emperor Frederick III who granted a coat of arms with a golden deer on it. Naturally, folks then began calling him 'that silly damned deer Fugger'. Unfortunately, Lucas was more of the playboy type and went bankrupt, thereby becoming 'that broke damned Fugger'.

Hans' younger son Jakob was more successful, and chose a lily for his coat of arms, becoming 'a Fugger of the lilies'. Jakob became very, very rich, loaning money to Roman Emperor Maximilian I and later bribing the electors to install Charles V as Emperor. Charles repaid the favor by granting the family nobility and sovereign rights over their lands, and the right to coin their own money. They became known as 'those damned money-printing Fuggers' at that point. The successors of this branch remain to this day, primarily now operating mints for the US government I believe.

In 1514, Jakob bought up part of the city of Augsburg, and founded the famous 'Fuggerei' - almshouses for the needy which are still in existence to this day. Rent was, and still is only one Rheinischer Gulden per year (.88 Euros) plus three daily prayers for the owners: the Lord's Prayer, Hail Mary and the Niciene Creed. To qualify for residence in the Fuggerei, a person must be Catholic, indigent but without debt, and have lived in Augsburg for the two previous years.

However, visitors to the the Fuggerei today must pay two euros - more than twice the residents' annual rent. It's just the way those Fuggers have always done business.

Jakob's descendants married well, some into the wealthy and royal Hapsburg banking family of Austria & Hungary - and became 'those damned banking Fuggers'. They were so rich they financed wars for kings, countries and empires. A few people who did not always appreciate the way they did business sometimes called them 'those Goddamned banking Fuggers', or often, simply just 'those Goddamned Fuggers'.

Fuggers survive to this day. Indeed, many non-Fuggers are so awed by Fuggers they will do almost anything to become Fuggers themselves. And, even though they may be named something else like 'Richard B. Cheney' or 'George H. W. Bush', they are nonetheless certifiable, and real, total Fuggers. Thus you will find manifestations of Fuggers in many, many descriptions today, including, but not limited to:

Lawyer Fuggers
Banking Fuggers
Republican Fuggers
Democratic Fuggers
Corporate Fuggers
Greedy Fuggers
Religious Fuggers
Rich Fuggers
Stupid Fuggers
Silly Fuggers
Dirty Fuggers
Mother Fuggers
Other Fuggers

And, this is the literal truth, so help me God!

Richard Nixon Was a Very Smart Man

Richard Milhouse Nixon was a very smart man. True, he did a lot of things wrongly, and illegally. But, all the same he was smart enough to realize the best way to deal with a problem was (gasp!) first to recognize it and then to deal with it!

Nixon did not deny problems, nor did he ignore them in the hopes they would somehow, mysteriously, miraculously go away, or never be noticed. Nixon was in no way a denier. No sir, Mr. Nixon saw the problems, grasped them by the horns and dealt with them. He usually did a great job of it too. I am no particular fan of Nixon's, but I have to acknowledge he solved many problems, and the world is a better place for it today.

We saw ANILCA come in on Nixon's watch along with the acts setting up the EPA - the weapon of choice for the environmentalists of today. Nixon is also responsible for rapprochement with China, arms limitations, ending the Vietnam War and a myriad other good things beneficial to our citizens and the world at large. Would be that the current Republican bozos in charge were one tenth as smart as Nixon's group.

Would that they could claim even one tiny bit of success with their policies - but alas, there is none. None, zippo, nada.

And, not a prayer either. Today's birds are simply greedy, rapacious throwbacks to the despoil and pillage Republicans of the latter part of the nineteenth century and early part of the twentieth. Yes, the same ones who bought down the Great Depression upon our country and the world. But, they are very, very good at one thing, and that is to convince their followers they are doing what's 'best for everyone' when nothing could be farther from the truth.

And, those followers are today's sheep-like defenders of the 'Global Warming Myth' and the worst administration in the history of our great nation. They are the ones who characterize anyone who disagrees as 'socialists' and much, much worse - 'eco-terrorists' for example, painting all with the same brush. But the rest of us - the other 70% - are going to set things right again, and damned soon too - or it will be too late.