Search This Blog

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

Sometimes, Being 'Not Hillary' is Not Good Enough

~ Trump holding a basketball; speaking the secret language of blacks

Short posting today..

Loyal readers may have noticed we've hardly written on the President over the last few weeks

Well what is there positive to write about?

We're still waiting for those tax cuts last December to produce one new job for someone who's been long term unemployed

That was the promise wasn't it?  New jobs..
We're certainly not going to spend a single sentence here much less a full posting to 'celebrate' Trump's incessant pandering of blacks; a minority group that overall deeply despises him and will never support him in 2020

Don't know why he continually does it but it really is pathetic

About 95% of all blacks who voted in 2016 chose Hillary and that was in spite of her once calling black youths 'super-predators' and doing a skit where she said she was late because she was on 'black people time'

So what's the point of all this ass-kissing?  It's embarrassing
We're certainly not going to show the President any love over DACA - those illegals should be treated like all other illegals i.e. equally kicked out of the nation as quick as possible

We all know Trump will sign some kind of executive order keeping all those damn people in the nation once the Dems decide to call his bluff and not cave in on funding for the wall

Remember - every job someone here Illegally possesses is one less job a real American i.e. natural born or legalized immigrant is denied and we really don't give a damn at this point if people are here illegally by choice or not
We're certainly not going to write posts of fondness toward Trump for caving in to those disgusting, cretinous anti-gun zealots by supporting more background checks and other meaningless restrictions that wouldn't make a bit of difference to the school shooting killer had the ultimate new laws already on the books

Nope.. Trump just allows the continual slippery-slope erosion of the 2nd Amendment and all those pustules who bitch and moan and protest that people have the right to buy whatever weapons they wish will not be showing the Donald any love next election cycle
Essentially he is allowing God-Damn know-nothing liberal activist children to make public policy

They say children are the future.. Teach them well and let them lead the way..

Fine.. But for the present, those under 18 have little to nothing of importance to say so ignore them
The NRA sure has no reason to blindly trust and support him anymore

And a lot of Trump supporters like us will be seriously questioning how much like us is he really when its time to re-evaluate things

Trust us, just even considering taking that posture much less expressing it outwardly is a bit nauseating

And what is the other option -  A rancid Democrat in the White House?

Maybe this is why Trump is continually betraying his base; the core voters who supported him from Republican primaries up to November '16 victory
It's like a tale of two Trumps..

The Trump from Inauguration until Thanksgiving was absolutely wonderful..  In our eyes at least, the man could do no wrong policy wise and the only things we faulted him on was pandering to blacks and not genuinely attacking the media

The Trump from December to present?

Jeez!
All we can do is hope maybe things will change for the better once again, but who knows

On one hand, we are happy that today is the last day of that utter bullshit called Black History Month..

But since Thursday starts Women's History Month and we know Trump has constantly pandered to them vis a vis his wife.. um, we mean daughter Ivanka (she's more a First Lady than Valium-popping Melania), we can see another month of pathetic patronizing and placating
Just wondering what month is designated to the people that actually Voted for him..

You know.. white men of Western, Southern and Eastern European descent

Tomorrow's a new day and a new month

Let's think positive..   What other choice do we Trump supporters have?

To quote the Beatles:  "I've got to believe its' getting better.. A little better all the time (background vocals: "It can't get much worse")

Monday, February 26, 2018

~ Round 3: Tourney of Worst President Ever

~ Click to enlarge

The tournament to decide who is truly the Worst US President ever is proceeding quite nicely.. A couple surprises here and there and one controversial decision (Bush 41 over Clinton by a teeny-weeny speck) but mostly things are progressing in agreement with the general public..

Now things get really interesting..  Terrible leaders are directly going up against other Terrible ones meaning more debate, more controversy and more fun..

So let's see how the final 16 combatants fared...

 The first battle to see who reaches the Not-So-Great 8 is James Buchanan our 15th President vs Reagan who was our 40th..

J.B. was not a great President.. Not even a good one..  So the question is, was he even an average to mediocre one?

The only thing people really know about him was his administration was prior to Lincoln's and he was our nation's only bachelor President, which in this competition means nothing.

The nation was fracturing apart when J.B. was in office (1857-1861) and he did all he could to maintain peace which angered and alienated both North and South since by this point, both were really fed up with one another.
Buchanan's stance concerning secession was that it was illegal but it was also illegal for the government to intervene to stop it.  So its easy to see why he was so unpopular in his time..


Of course he was half right..  Not interfering..

In a way it is sad Buchanan was not President longer because then perhaps 600,000 Americans would not have been needlessly killed (1.5 million casualties during the War for Southern Independence when counting wounded and missing); their lives ruined just to free a group of deeply-unappreciative, uppity people
If you believe secession is unconstitutional as most have been taught, then you'd hate J.B. for not getting tough on the Southern states who were clamoring to break away.

And if you believe secession is protected by the 10th Amendment as we do, then you look at Buchanan as pathetic for not having the guts to admit as much while he meekly stepped aside from the controversy.

In addition the Panic of 1857 occurred under Buchanan where state banks had overextended itself by $7 in dollar value for every piece of gold or silver it was supposedly backed by and the whole economy collapsed upon itself and took many years to recover...

Now onto Reagan..
We have the ballooning of the National Debt to $1.5 Trillion by the time he left office and the Iran Contra Scandal where weapons were to be sold without Congressional authority to our enemies in Iran to come up with the covert funds to support the Nicaraguan Contras faction in their civil war...

The thing with Reagan is unlike Buchanan and really unlike most Presidents, he genuinely made the American people feel good about themselves and proud as Americans, especially after four dismal years under Carter.

He gave people Hope.. Genuine Sincere Hope..

Sure it was slogans and packaged expertly, like the "Good Morning in America" 1984 re-election TV ads but it actually worked because his policies allowed people to see improvement in their lives.
~ 1984 Election..  Reagan won the states in Red

When Reagan took office, true un-doctored unemployment was at 7.6%.  When he left office in 1988, the rate was at 5.5%

And when a President takes blame when an economy falters, he must get credit when it grows, and truth be told, generally speaking for most Americans the 1980s were a great period of economic prosperity.

So we have to give the victory to Buchanan.. His weakness and cowardice to take a stand one way or another propels him to the next round..
Next the battle between Gerald R Ford and George W Bush..  Rep vs Rep...

One served in office for three years, the other for eight..
~ Ford from his Michigan football days.. He's the non-colored guy on left

There really isn't much to say here... When you get a nation involved in two needless wars, including one on false premises of WMDs when it really was revenge for Saddam trying to kill Bush's father vs a man in Ford in inherited a moribund post-Vietnam economy from Nixon...

Well how can W. Bush not win this battle in a landslide.

We also resent among other things that during Bush's administration he signed into law the Bankruptcy Overhaul Act which made it increasingly difficult for people to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy at a time just a year or so before the recession hit full throttle so the banks and credit card lenders could be protected..
~ Proudly signing a law that hurt so many while further profiting so few..

At least Ford tried to take a stand in office.  New York City had gone bankrupt in 1975 and was asking the Federal Government for a bailout..  Yep that disgusting word was thrown about then too..

Ford said No and the NYC papers butchered him with bad press including the famous headline "Ford to NYC: Drop Dead!"...

Ford weakened to the pressure and caved in ultimately as it seems all Presidents do, but at least he made the attempt to draw the line

So as we said,  W Bush gets a sleepwalk landslide victory..

Harding v Eisenhower is also not even close..

The only reason Ike is even in the Not-So-Sweet 16 is because we felt McKinley was slightly better as President but in no way implied we thought Eisenhower was bad.

It was quite an accomplishment in fact to serve two terms in office during the heart of the Cold War and not send US soldiers into harms' way to die..  Not once..

So Ike is one of those Presidents that goes down as somewhat good meaning he has no place among the battle of the eight worst..
Harding.. He wasn't a 100% awful President i.e. he signed the first federal child welfare program, dealt with striking mining and railroad workers in part by supporting an 8-hour work day, and oversaw a 50% unemployment rate drop..

The problem with Harding wasn't his policies or how he acted in office but the numerous financial scandals involving those he appointed in key positions of power and prominence as thank-yous for election..

Harding wasn't the first or last to thank key contributors this way but most Administrations are not left with constant scandal and the breaking of the law as a result of the 'you scratch my back, I scratch yours' way of politics..
So Harding moves on in the tournament..
Now Ulysses S Grant is very similar to Harding.. a lot of financial and criminal scandals involving political appointees.   T

he difference of course being Harding was an educated man who held very modern views on blacks and Jewish people, even stating he believed they deserved a homeland where Palestine stood..

Grant was a West Point educated but otherwise ignorant, drunk failure of a man who worked in his father's store when war broke out, held slaves at one time and as General at one time expelled Jewish soldiers from his Army, an order later rescinded by Lincoln.

So this piece of shit will be going up against another piece of excrement Woodrow Wilson who got us involved in World War I even after campaigning the year before on the slogan 'He kept us out of war' to protect the banking and financial interests.
He also was the bastard responsible for pushing and signing into law the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 establishing the Fed as we know it which is systematically destroying the US economy from within.

The bankers had tried for 4 years prior to get it passed but Taft refused.. Wilson happily agreed since those same bankers contributed so much to his campaign..

Now most historians rank Grant as a terrible overall President while giving Wilson good marks..

We wholeheartedly disagree..
For as despicable and vile a person as Grant was to go along with being totally out of his depths as a President,  Grant's actions did not cost 116,000 dead and 204,000 wounded Americans in a span of just nine months of fighting..

That's the span of one life born into this world; That blood is on Wilson

In addition, what chutzpah to seek to dictate terms to the rest of Europe during the Treaty of Versailles when nations like France and England lost 12x as many men and their economies in shatters due to Kaiser's Germany.

Grant was in many ways among the worst Presidents in this nation's history but compared to Wilson, not as bad, so W.W. gets the 'W' here and moves on with the other garbage..


Now onto Coolidge v Teddy Roosevelt..

Here's two Presidents who one could say really did not deserve to be among the 16 worst if just ranking all Presidents 1 to 44 as a list.  

But as we said in our Round 1 posting, all the names were literally picked out of a hat to start, so with random chance you will end up with battles like this..

Coolidge was a popular President for his day because he was a refreshing change from the scandal plagued Harding administration (he died in office) and Wall Street didn't miss a beat as the Roaring 20's kept on what would seem forever..

He was a big proponent of laissez-faire government which means business runs itself and fixes its own messes with little to no need for government to step in.
Of course this philosophy proved to be a complete failure by 1929 but it was Hoover who took the brunt, not Silent Cal Coolidge who was already of office by almost a full year when the market plummeted.

He also as typical with the Republican economic mantra of the 20th and 21st century was pro-Big Business, anti-Union and as long as the Dow was going up there were to problems economically to worry about.

Teddy Roosevelt was Republican as well but he served two decades before Coolidge and overall did care very much for not just the wealthy but the everyday person as well by fighting against monopolies and trusts whenever he could.

He also was a keen environmentalist..
~ Teddy with environmentalist John Muir

In this battle, it is Coolidge that moves on in the tourney though to be fair, if he had competed against someone like Jimmy Carter or George W Bush, he would not have made it to the final round of Not-so-great 8

Now onto Mr Cherries n' Milk Zachary Taylor vs. Herbert Hoover..

Z.T. only served a year or so in office before dying and being replaced by Millard Fillmore in 1850

He like all the Presidents of the post Mexican War era had to battle to keep peace between the southern factions that wanted to secede and the northern factions what wanted to keep them in the Union for economic reasons..
But for Taylor's desire for peace, he certainly rocked the apple cart as the saying goes by pushing for California's entrance into the Union which upset the southerners deeply since it altered the 50/50 balance in the Senate and led to the ultimate Compromise of 1850.

All in all though, an insignificant Presidency..

There really isn't much competition between an ex Mexican War general who only served as President about 15 months vs a man in Hoover who held office for 4 full years and by the time he left in 1933, unemployment was at 25% and deep profound misery and fear swept the nation..

Hoover moves on..
And now to the heavyweight battles in our Round of 16..

The best way for us to evaluate these two Democrats is to ask a simple question:  If Bill Clinton was elected into office in 2008 and was currently serving his second term today, would things be better, worse or the same?

We honestly believe the country with the economy in particular would be in better shape if B.C. was currently in office versus B.O.

Clinton would never have wasted all his political capital in the first year or so in office pushing through his pet healthcare plan to the detriment of everything else..
In fact if one remembers, Hillary was in charge of a panel on health care back in 1993 but the administration felt there were bigger issues to address and to put healthcare first would be toxic.

Of course Hillary was in healthcare like in everything else a failure..

We honestly believe if Clinton was in office, there would have been job creating legislation pushed through Congress even if the opposition party tried to block it..  
There's be other job creating initiatives even by Executive Order if needed to get people working and not simply at McDonalds...

We're not saying Clinton was a great President because if we did, he wouldn't be in the Round of 16, but we are saying he was an active do-something person especially when the polls showed a majority wanted X or Y..

Clinton was/is a people person.. He loved/loves interacting with others..
Obama is very academic and aloof (remember this tournament was written originally in 2014 when Obama was in office, thus everything is in present-tense).. a delegator who finds socializing to be degrading..  Its so hard to get anything done in a democracy with that mindset

And it really is amazing how inactive and hands-off he is to anything not involving the term 'Obamacare'

We all know the current lower unemployment is a sham but what makes it such is the academic manipulation of numbers to give the appearance things are getting better while the President sits on his hands or looks for ways to involve our military in needless and unwanted entanglement squabbles.
Now all the Bureau of Labor Statistics chicanery was started by the Clinton administration as they devised new methodology to figure unemployment so it wouldn't appear so high..

That said, as remarked before, Clinton was very active and in-control in office.  He wouldn't have just twiddled his thumbs and allowed a recession-depression to enter year 6 with annual GDP still at an anemic 2%.

Now would a Clinton Administration have pushed the Justice Department to prosecute those on Wall Street responsible for the crash, especially the heads of all the banks involved in those toxic mortgage and derivative schemes?
Would the NSA be running amok with their spying on US citizens without probable cause?

Would the Patriot Act have been extended while the Bush tax cuts been made permanent like the current incompetent?

Honestly its hard to say.. we'd like to hope.  But President Clinton loved Wall Street..  Really he was the first Democrat President to have such an open affinity and admiration for their avarice and greed.
And they rewarded him with hefty contributions especially the 1996 re-election..
It was during Clinton's administration that NAFTA was passed which destroyed thousands of American jobs sending them off mostly to Mexico and severely weakened US labor unions..

So we don't know how dramatically different or better Clinton would be if in office today..   We just feel it would be a more pro-active Administration in dealing with the problems being currently ignored and swept under the rug..

That E for Effort for Clinton is just enough to propel our current Commander in Chief into the next round..  "Victory" to Obama..

Lastly, the really Big battle of the Round of 16..  Nixon vs LBJ

In one corner we got the man who dramatically pushed and expanded our involvement in Vietnam vs the man who promised in 1968 he'd get us out and yet kept us in a full three years after the fact just to save face under a 'peace with honor' slogan..

Neither President seemed to care about the feelings of those who spoke out against the war

Their decisions to keep up the fight collectively contributed to a weakening US economy, higher inflation and in the case of Nixon, the decision to stop pegging our currency to gold, so to allow the money printing necessary to finance the war..
~ LBJ

For many people, who is better or 'worse' is simply determined by political affiliation..

Dems will never believe for a moment Nixon did more for the nation than LBJ and Reps with the passage of time can re-embrace Nixon as one of their own by rallying around the complex man..

They will point to his trip to China as a golden moment..

But when you consider in 2014, China owns over $1.27 Trillion in US debt meaning they own the US (we can't even publicly admit they manipulate their currency without fear of economic reprisal) and our own stock market goes up/down based upon their currency strength, GDP and other factors making us secondary..

Really how 'good' was Nixon's trip to China anyhow?
~ Nixon with James Brown

So ultimately we pick Nixon to be the 'winner' by a wiggle because at least as we see it, on domestic issues such as Civil Rights and fighting poverty, LBJ seemed to genuinely care..

We think LBJ was 100% wrong to force the Civil Rights Act of 1964 down everyone's throats without the slightest concern about real-world application but the bastard did do it with sincere intent

For Nixon, fair or not, it just never seemed a priority and in fact he seemed constantly in contradiction with himself. 

Nixon moves on in the competition..

So we finally reached our Not-So-Great 8

There are 5 Republicans, 3 Democrats and with the exception of Buchanan, all competitors are from the 20th century into the present..

Wonder who will make it into the Final Four of Failure?

Check back toward the end of the week to find out who advances..

Friday, February 23, 2018

What's Worse Than Relationship Cuckolds? Sportsteam Cucks

For those who follow MLB, you know (or should know) spring training games will begin this weekend in Florida and Arizona

So especially for those living in cold weather climates, that means spring time and more comfortable temperatures are not too far away

A long time ago yours truly used to follow my local baseball team near-religiously and with absolute loyalty

But as one gets older and truly understands the economics of the sport.. really all sports, committing oneself to one team is like being devout to a constantly lying, cheating, no-good rotten partner or spouse
No one wants to think of themselves as relationship cuckolds yet so many people voluntarily put themselves in the position when it comes to local sports teams.

We've written often in the past about the economics of professional sports - how thanks to revenue sharing,  teams that try financially enrich those who don't and do it for a 'greater good' just like how socialism-communism works where those who work hard financially reward those who don't

The system is so out of whack that for most teams, not a single fan need buy a ticket to see a game in any sport and the owner will still make a nice profit thanks to the even splitting of TV contracts, merchandising, etc.. followed by pocketing of local advertising revenue
This is why in pretty much every sport, there's really only a handful of teams that sincerely try to win and everyone else is in a perpetual state of rebuild

We came across an excellent article today in the New York Daily News -  Normally we despise that paper for how wretched it treats Trump but when it comes to the disgrace which is the economics of baseball, we give it credit for writing accurately and with brutal honesty

The article deals with the Tampa Rays, Miami Marlins and to a lesser extent the Pittsburgh Pirates

You don't have to be fans of any of those teams or know the names of any of the players mentioned below or even have much interest in baseball to find the following interesting and deeply sad..
"The three-team trade that brought infielder Brandon Drury to the Yankees and sent Tampa Bay Rays favorite Steven Souza Jr. to Arizona has served to further emphasize the tale of two teams in the same city — one loading up, the other stripping down — and the looming, much bigger problem in baseball called competitive balance...

Tune in to WDAE 620 AM, the local sports talk radio station (Tampa), and it’s a very different story for the actual hometown team here — nothing but outrage and disgust for the Rays, who are dumping payroll and trading away all their best players while at the same time holding out their hands for community support for a new stadium.
Yes, the Rays are now rivaling Derek Jeter’s Miami Marlins in South Florida when it comes to tanking. 

Over the past few weeks, the Rays have traded away their franchise player, Evan Longoria, last year’s most valuable Ray; Souza Jr.; their No. 3 starter Jake Odorizzi; their 27-homer leftfielder, Corey Dickerson; and allowed last year’s leading run producer (38 HR/85 RBI), Logan Morrison, and No. 2 starter Alex Cobb to leave as a free agents. 

That’s 115 homers, 311 RBI and 22 rotation wins gone, but more importantly to owner Stuart Sternberg it’s nearly $35 million in payroll off the books.
Like the Marlins and the Pittsburgh Pirates (who traded away their franchise player, Andrew McCutchen and No. 1 starter Gerrit Cole this winter), the Rays have essentially told their fans: There is no need to come out to the ballpark this season. We won’t be competing. 

But they have done it with an added wrinkle. A few days before the opening of spring training, Sternberg announced the Rays have settled on a site, in the historic Ybor City section of Tampa, for a new ballpark, and thus began his pitch to civic and business leaders for their support for the project.
Meanwhile, what no one is pointing out is that Sternberg will be getting upwards of $60 million in revenue sharing this year, in addition to $50 million in found money with the Rays’ share of MLB’s sale of BAMtech to Disney. 

That’s over $100 million for DOING NOTHING ... The same with Jeter in Miami. Over $100 million in free money...

It’s an absolute disgrace for baseball. For years, former commissioner Bud Selig insisted the only way to achieve competitive balance in baseball was for a payroll luxury tax as a spending prohibitive on the large market teams and revenue sharing as an incentive for the small market teams. 
And yet, because of teams like the Rays, Marlins and Pirates (the one team that has yet to sign a free agent this season), the payroll disparity is as huge this year as it’s ever been as these teams are taking their revenue sharing and BAM money and putting it in their pockets rather than spending it on players."

Yep..

Personally its why I no longer have any loyalty or personal attachment to any team when following a sport.
Every season I pick a team I wish to follow based on the talent and expectation that when I watch, there will be much more joy than aggravation

Won't waste time with re-builds.. Won't commit energy to watching inferior product while the homer-shill announcers act like everything is bright n' sunny

Nope, life is short so if its being 'bandwagon' then so be it..
Since sports franchises which are just privately owned businesses that use city names in their title to cultivate the illusion of civic pride and 'togetherness' don't care about the fan, the fan should not care all that much about them..

Or go ahead and be a sports cuck.

Some actually take pride in it.. Supporting a loser with 100% emotional investment

Year after year after year
Then again some men also get turned on watching their partner or spouse have sex with others and/or find eroticism in being spanked and verbally degraded by women

Yep, its a messed up world..