The Same Old Song and Dance



HRH JoanWalsh

 Thank you, Salon, for yet another fine example of the total cluelessness on the left. Not to pick on you exclusively, but I am sick of hearing the same line of BS by progressive twits. Their ignorance of fact is truly astounding, and their obsession with party politics is truly nauseating.  No matter how much of a burden is placed on the taxpayer, every ignorant decision out of Washington is broken down and analyzed as a political victory or defeat.

I feel I can speak for a vast majority of us when I say am sick and tired of the progressive spin on this. Their constant claim that Bush Tax Cuts had no positive effects are absolutely ridiculous.

For starters, the unemployment rate between 2001 and 2006 was between 4% and 6 %.  Even when the government-created and inflated housing bubble burst, and the disastrous government-assisted sub-prime mortgage scam brought down the economy, the unemployment rate never rose about 7.2%.  More people working means more taxes paid.

As far as tax rates and federal revenue, simply examine the historical data.  It clearly shows that more taxes were collected under Bush (2001 to 2008) than under Clinton (1993 to 2000).  Feel free to draw whatever conclusion you wish concerning tax rates and revenue.

Please try to understand this simple fact, Ms Walsh, before uttering another asinine syllable: The failure to raise tax rates does not create debt.  Only spending more than you have can accomplish that feat.

All who manage household budgets know this. Only in Washington can you find people who ignore this concept. These people are called Progressive, or Liberal, Democrats, and they all seem to share the bizarre belief that people have no right to keep what they earn.

Washington is very, very good at spending more than they have.  They have created a procedure that allows them to ignore the limits on the federal credit card.  It's called raising the debt ceiling, and they give themselves a credit line increase each and every year they exceed the previous limit.



These Democrats have redefined the "American Dream" and it now states that, although America is the land of opportunity and that anyone in this country can be successful, the Democrats reserve the right to determine exactly how successful you are allowed to be.

Today they have determined that $249,999.99 is the limit of one's success.  I wonder what that limit will be in the future.

Dickless Golfer to Tee it Up

There is a history of men trying to compete against women.  Admit it - we've all wondered about some of those Russian or East German Olympians over the years.  As far back as 1936, the Olympic Committee has put in place a procedure for determining the gender of women athletes. Any controversies have been resolved through chromosome testing and medical examination.

Now Linda Lawless has been given the right to compete against the ladies of the LPGA.  No longer will gender be based on chromosome makeup, but on the gender a person believes themselves to be.  The only response I can muster is....WTF?

The AP article refers to "...a lawsuit filed by a California woman who had her sex changed...." which is complete and total horseshit. This is not a woman. What we have here is a confused individual who has voluntarily mutilated himself.  He is genetically and physiologically a male who has surgically altered his external genitalia in order to convince his disturbed psyche that he is a female.

Looking back, all was good until Linda won a Women's Long Drive Competition in 2008.  Being a surgically-altered male, Linda was barred from competing next year, at which point he sued on the grounds that the event organizers were discriminating against him from entering the women's competition on the basis of his sex.  Did I mention that Linda is a man?  Dickless, yes, but technically a man.

Genetically speaking, human gender is determined at conception by the chromosome makeup, Y-Y being female, and X-Y being male. Just because you've cut off your junk doesn't "make" you a woman. It just means that now you're a surgically deformed and psychologically disturbed man.

There are some who claim to be women "trapped" in a man's body, and visa versa, but that's just so much horseshit.  What should be recognized as a psychological disorder now occupies a good deal of the social progressive's fight for Utopia.

Should a man, who lost his shmeckel in an unfortunate industrial accident (?) be forced to call himself a woman?  And there are those who naturally possess both sets of genitalia.  Is this not an entirely separate catagory?  No, the condition of being dickless is more a state of mind than anything else, especially a legal classification.

That being said, this may possibly be the goofiest looking sonofabitch to ever tee it up on either tour.  His face looks like my farts smell.  Matter of fact, he looks like he just smelled a fart - probably one of his own, and probably from his hand crafted man-vagina.  Being surgically crafted from his unwanted penis, what would you call the thing now?  A Vagenis?  A Peniga?  I would rather not know.

This could only happen in California.  What a totally messed up state - how do people live there?  The legal citizens, I mean...