It’s so cold (courtesy of the X Air Boss) that…
|
|||||
Hot Mic
Bloggers in Arms
BlogrollContinuous WavePaid to BlogReciprocating EnginesSmarter'n MeWingmen
OmakaseAmazon Search |
How Cold is It?By lex, on January 1st, 2010
January 1st, 2010 | Tags: Small Stuff | Category: Small Stuff
19 comments to How Cold is It? |
Targets of Opportunityblog advertising is good for you Credo"Sign on, young man, and sail with me. The stature of our homeland is no more than the measure of ourselves. Our job is to keep her free. Our will is to keep the torch of freedom burning for all. To this solemn purpose we call on the young, the brave, the strong, and the free. Heed my call, Come to the sea. Come Sail with me." -- John Paul Jones "Pardon him, Theodotus; he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature" --George Bernard Shaw, "Caesar and Cleopatra" "And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."--Friedrich Nietzsche "A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancour, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate."--Edmund Burke “You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”--General Sir Charles Napier "Μολὼν λαβέ" -- Leonidas "Blogito Ergo Sum" -- Neptunus Lex Amazon AssociateFor the Effort!Winnar! Subscribe CategoriesPagesTagsacademy
afghanistan
Araby
Blogging
buffoonery
culture
Defense Industry
economy
Flying
Friday Musings
geopol
Gratuitous slap
GWOT
Headlines
health care
History
iran
iraq
issues
libya
Media
Memory Lane
Military
Navy
norks
Oz
pakistan
piracy
politicians
politics
Politics and Culture
prc
pundits
science
sea stories
silliness
Small Stuff
SoCal
Tech Lust
technology
UAVs
UK
usaf
usmc
weapons
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2012 Neptunus Lex - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
I laughed out loud to this one. Of course, to be accurate, it should read “It’s so cold…I saw a politician with their hands in their own pockets.” Making others pay for their pet preferences is hardly a Democratic monopoly.
Have a happy New Year!
Come on Jim. Not fair to try comparing the real pros (Dems) to them pikers in the stupid party.
I seriously wish we had a political party that wasn’t trying to put their hands in my pocket. Sadly, the facts are stubborn: politicians of both stripes are happy to take from me to give to their pals.
The only exception in the last 50 years has been Reagan. I wish I could embed the image, but the table of real annual non-defense, non-interest spending increases looks like this:
- Eisenhower: 8.3%
- JFK: 8.7%
- LBJ: 6.6%
- Nixon: 9.8%
- Ford: 4.7%
- Carter: 3.3%
- Reagan: 1.0%
- Bush I: 4.4%
- Clinton: 2.9%
- Bush II: 5.4%
Check out the link above for more details and entertaining (painful?) facts. They are all eager to spend your money.
Presidents don’t make the budgets. Congress does. This would be better analyzed by observing two year cycles based on which party controlled Congress, or at least the House. Clinton’s low numbers trace directly to Republican control for most of his tenure, and Bush I was put over a barrel by Mitchell and the Dems (give us our tax increases or no money for Kuwait). Why was Reagan’s so low? Not only did he have a favorable Congress for much of his tenure, but he was willing to veto, veto, veto, and he had a principled understanding of the virtues of limited government to back up his actions. It had an effect.
I agree that it takes a team effort to rack up spending like these guys (except Reagan) managed to do. I think you hit it on the head when you said Reagan “had a principled understanding of the virtues of limited government.” That’s what makes him unique on this chart — not his political party.
xairboss, that just bought you an oyster loaf and a bottle of Dixie next time I’m in NOLA!
You’re on Byron. I can’t wait.
That is funny.
Hmm, I’m on my way to Barnes & Noble, might have to see what they have.
Care to list Senate Majority Leaders and House Speakers alongside for purposes of comparison and correlation?
Or is that irrelevant considering which branch has power of the purse?
That got a chuckle bordering on the guffaw. Thanks for that.
Noticed that Bush’s spending followed on the heels of declining percentages through several administrations following Carter. Might we not called that deferred maintenance come due? Not to mention a significant portion of that expenditure from a Congress (Post ’06) who was going to ‘show us the way’, and had its hands elbow deep in the collapse of FM2.
Key factor is how willing a given President was to use the veto (contrast Reagan with Bush 43). Newt makes the point that Congress requires a President with a strong veto pen. Only a couple times in recent history has it regulated itself alone (last time was during Newt’s tenure as Speaker).
El-oh-elled, I did!
However, I’d just substitute “politcian” for Democrats.
Mmm, not to quibble, but it should be “HIS hands in HIS own pockets,” or “HER hands in HER own pockets,” if we know the politician in question to be a woman. Otherwise, HIS. Using “their” is to surrender to the gender-neutral fascists who wish to render our language not only inaccurate but graceless.
Isn’t it the point of all totalitarian ideologically-driven civilizations to make life “graceless,” Zane?
Nothing but concrete gray Albert Speer-like edifices and all clad in equally drab clothing standing in the same lines for what little the Nomenklatura allows us ala that former workers paradise called E. Germany? The equality of shared misery? By these standards and objectives the use of nebulous, neutered terminology such as the term “theirs” makes perfect, exquisitely logical sense.
“Congress by the power of taxation, by that of raising an army, and by the control over the militia, have the sword in one hand, and the purse in the other. Shall we be safe without either? Congress have an unlimited power over both: they are entirely given up by us. Let him candidly tell me, where and when did freedom exist, wehn the sword and purse were given up from the people? Unless a miracle in human affairs interposed, no nation ever retained its liberty after the loss of the sword and the purse.” – Patrick Henry -
All smiles here.
Classic Oz rejoinder: “I’m so cold I can hardly pith”.
It’s -7 here in WI. And just so you know, we use the Rankine Scale here. It’s brisk by our standards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankine_scale
That is cold: “A scale of absolute temperature having the same degree increments as those of the Fahrenheit scale, in which the freezing point of water is 491.69° and the boiling point of water is 671.69°. [After William John Macquorn Rankine (1820-1872), Scottish engineer and physicist.] That is a ‘rank’ scale then: “Raised to a high degree; violent; extreme; gross; utter; as, rank heresy.”